DOCSLIB.ORG

Central Pine Barrens Comprehensive Prescribed Fire Management Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Central Pine Barrens Comprehensive Prescribed Fire Management Plan CENTRAL PINE BARRENS COMPREHENSIVE PRESCRIBED FIRE MANAGEMENT PLAN January 2021 Prepared by the Central Pine Barrens Joint Policy and Planning Commission Science and Stewardship Program Bob Panko - Fire Management Specialist Polly Weigand – Science and Stewardship Program Manager Shaun Ziegler – Senior Ecologist _____________________________________________ Central Pine Barrens Joint Policy and Planning Commission 624 Old Riverhead Road Westhampton Beach, New York 11978 Signature Page The Commission’s mission is “to manage land use within the Central Pine Barrens to protect its vital groundwater and surface water and the region's vast and significant natural, agricultural, historical, cultural and recreational resources for current and future Long Island residents”. As part of this mission the Commission is facilitating a collaborative and adaptive prescribed fire program to which the goals include planning, implementation and monitoring for the purposes of specifically improving ecosystem health as authorized by Central Pine Barrens Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP, Section 7.6.9). This Plan is a guideline to achieve these goals and assure compliance with the State Environmental Quality Review Act (Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law). I certify this Plan as accepted by resolution of the Central Pine Barrens Joint Planning and Policy Commission. ________________________________________ _____________ John W. Pavacic Date Executive Director Central Pine Barrens Joint Planning and Policy Commission i Acknowledgements First and foremost, the Central Pine Barrens Joint Planning and Policy Commission wishes to recognize that the development of this Central Pine Barrens Prescribed Fire Management Plan and Program has been made possible thanks to contractual funding provided from the New York Environmental Protection Fund as dedicated by the New York State Legislature to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Lands and Forests’ Forest Health Program for southern pine beetle prevention and suppression. We also wish to recognize the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYS-DEC) Region 1 and the Albany Central Office staff especially Rob Cole, Forester within the Forest Health Unit. Rob provided the leadership and laid the groundwork that resulted in the dedication of the funds which in turn helped advance timely and collaborative prescribed fire operations within the Central Pine Barrens for the purposes of ecological health improvement, southern pine beetle resilience and wildfire risk reduction. In addition to this leadership, this plan would not be possible without the extensive knowledge and expertise regarding land and fire management that was sourced from regional partnership. The NYS- DEC’s Unit Management plans and Prescribed Fire plans for the Long Island Pine Barrens State Forests were key references in preparation of this Plan. We especially recognize the work of NYS-DEC Forest Ranger Bryan Gallagher. Ranger Gallagher has been the rock of Central Pine Barrens prescribed fire leadership, planning, organization, coordination, training and implementation throughout the past two decades and he continues every day in this leadership role as a key interagency partner. He is also the author of many of the Unit Management Plans and was always available for consultation about aspects of this Plan. John Wernet, Regional Forester of NYS-DEC Region 1 and Nate Hudson, Southern Pine Beetle Incident Commander, NYS-DEC Forest Health Unit have both also been integral in the development and implementation of hazard maps related to southern pine beetle that resulted in the development of prescribed burn and vegetation pretreatment plans identified within this greater plan and program. We also recognize Andrew F. Windisch and his work “A Preliminary Wildfire History for The Long Island Central Pine Barrens” published by his employer of the time, The Nature Conservancy, in September 1994. This work was, and still is, a landmark chronology of wildfires that occurred in the Central Pine Barrens from 1931 until 1994. Without his work the details of this important fire history would likely have remained lost. Similarly, The Nature Conservancy (TNC) is recognized for its past fire management work in the Central Pine Barrens that helped create the foundation this Plan was designed to build upon. We especially recognize the work TNC conducted in digitizing the Windisch fire history maps and in creating a very accurate digital plant community map in the mid 2000’s. Both of those products were invaluable in creating this Plan. Thanks are extended to Christine A. Purpura, GIS Specialist, NY State Department of Environmental Conservation Albany, NY who provided Suffolk County wildland fire occurrence data from 1995 to 2020 that, combined with the Windisch report enabled us to incorporate 90 years of wildfire history analysis in the Central Pine Barrens in this Plan. Finally, this Comprehensive Prescribed Fire Management Plan could not have been created without the support of the Suffolk County Water Authority and specifically the Administration and Information Technology staff that enabled collaborative remote workplace connectivity for the plan preparers and reviewers throughout the Covid-19 Pandemic of 2020. ii Table of Contents Signature Page ............................................................................................................................................... i Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................... ii Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................................... iii Table of Figures ............................................................................................................................................ iv Table of Tables ............................................................................................................................................. vi Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................... vii 1.Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 1 2.Ecological and Historical Background ........................................................................................................ 5 2.1 Location - Regional Extent .................................................................................................................. 5 2.2 General Descriptions of Ecosystem Drivers and Modifiers................................................................. 6 2.3 Human Land Use ............................................................................................................................... 14 2.4 Vegetation, Wildlife, and Natural Communities Classification: ........................................................ 19 2.5 Ecological Justification for Fire Management ................................................................................... 23 2.6 Pine Barrens Fire and Disturbance Ecology ...................................................................................... 24 3.Weather, Fire History and Fuels .............................................................................................................. 30 3.1 Weather Pattern and Fire History Analysis ....................................................................................... 30 3.2 Fuel Models and Distribution ............................................................................................................ 39 4.Management Alternatives to Prescribed Fire .......................................................................................... 53 5.Legal Considerations ................................................................................................................................ 58 6.Planning and Implementation Considerations ........................................................................................ 61 6.1 Collaborative Landscape Management: ........................................................................................... 61 6.2 Pre and Post Treatment Plans ........................................................................................................... 62 6.3 Prescribed Fire Plan Scope, Development, Coordination and Components .................................... 64 7.Strategies for Prioritizing Prescribed Fire Management.......................................................................... 71 8.Fire Management Units ........................................................................................................................... 74 Rocky Point Fire Management Unit (FMU) ............................................................................................. 77 Brookhaven FMU .................................................................................................................................... 92 Manorville - Calverton FMU .................................................................................................................. 104 Dwarf Pines FMU .................................................................................................................................. 121 Southampton
Load more

Recommended publications
  • S T a T E O F N E W Y O R K 3695--A 2009-2010
    S T A T E O F N E W Y O R K ________________________________________________________________________ 3695--A 2009-2010 Regular Sessions I N A S S E M B L Y January 28, 2009 ___________ Introduced by M. of A. ENGLEBRIGHT -- Multi-Sponsored by -- M. of A. KOON, McENENY -- read once and referred to the Committee on Tourism, Arts and Sports Development -- recommitted to the Committee on Tour- ism, Arts and Sports Development in accordance with Assembly Rule 3, sec. 2 -- committee discharged, bill amended, ordered reprinted as amended and recommitted to said committee AN ACT to amend the parks, recreation and historic preservation law, in relation to the protection and management of the state park system THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM- BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: 1 Section 1. Legislative findings and purpose. The legislature finds the 2 New York state parks, and natural and cultural lands under state manage- 3 ment which began with the Niagara Reservation in 1885 embrace unique, 4 superlative and significant resources. They constitute a major source of 5 pride, inspiration and enjoyment of the people of the state, and have 6 gained international recognition and acclaim. 7 Establishment of the State Council of Parks by the legislature in 1924 8 was an act that created the first unified state parks system in the 9 country. By this act and other means the legislature and the people of 10 the state have repeatedly expressed their desire that the natural and 11 cultural state park resources of the state be accorded the highest 12 degree of protection.
    [Show full text]
  • Parks Attendance Summary
    Parks Attendance 8/29/2012 3:37:13 PM Summary Search Criteria: Region: -All- From Date: 1/1/2011 To Date: 8/28/2011 Group By: None Park Name: -All- IsStatistical: No Category: -All- Reg Costcenter Attendance -ALL- Allegany Quaker Area 423,970 Allegany Red House Area 500,778 Lake Erie St Pk 75,666 Long Point Marina 56,030 Midway State Park 82,880 Battle Isl Golf Course 22,209 Betty And Wilbur Davis State Park 12,756 Bowman Lake St Pk 40,515 Canadarago Boat Lnch 18,903 Chenango Valley St Pk 124,247 Chittenango Fls St Pk 30,551 Clark Reservation 34,530 Delta Lake St Pk 158,574 Fort Ontario 96,717 Gilbert Lake St Pk 79,082 Glimmerglass State Park 98,066 Green Lakes State Park 633,669 1 of 8 Herkimer Home 10,744 Lorenzo 25,265 Mexico Point Boat Launch 14,201 Old Erie Canal 16,916 Oquaga State Park 24,292 Oriskany Battlefield 3,446 Pixley Falls State Park 24,124 Sandy Island Beach 33,793 Selkirk Shores 53,235 Steuben Memorial 438 Verona Beach State Park 153,719 Allan Treman Marina 115,237 Buttermilk Falls St Pk 116,327 Canadaigua Btlau Ontrio 37,866 Cayuga Lake St Pk 93,276 Chimney Bluffs 86,443 Deans Cove Boat Launch 11,572 Fair Haven St Pk 230,052 Fillmore Glen St Pk 92,150 Ganondagan 22,339 H H Spencer 24,907 Honeoye Bt Lau 26,879 Indian Hills Golf Course 19,908 Keuka Lake St Pk 69,388 Lodi Point Marina/Boat 23,237 Long Point St Pk 33,257 Newtown Battlefield 17,427 Robert H Treman St Pk 158,724 Sampson St Pk 111,203 Seneca Lake St Pk 116,517 2 of 8 Soaring Eagles Golf Course 18,511 Stony Brook St Pk 118,064 Taughannock Falls St Pk 328,376 Watkins Glen St Pk 381,218 Braddock Bay 28,247 Conesus Lake Boat Launch 18,912 Darien Lakes State Park 52,750 Durand Eastman 18,704 Genesee Valley Greenway 21,022 Hamlin Beach State Park 221,996 Irondquoit Bay Boat Lnch 27,035 Lakeside Beach St Pk 50,228 Letchworth State Park 407,606 Oak Orchard Boat Launch 4,954 Rattlesnake Point 1,699 Silver Lake 17,790 Bayard C.
    [Show full text]
  • Weld County 2011-2013 Annual Wildfire Operating Plan
    WELD COUNTY 2011-2013 ANNUAL WILDFIRE OPERATING PLAN Prepared by: Weld County Office of Emergency Management Weld County Fire Chiefs’ Association Colorado State Forest Service, Fort Collins District Pawnee National Grasslands, Arapaho-Roosevelt National Forests This agreement is to remain in effect until the next Annual Operating Plan is modified and signed TABLE OF CONTENTS I. ANNUAL WILDFIRE OPERATING PLAN APPROVALS ............................................. 3 II. JURISDICTIONS / MAP ..................................................................................................... 4 III. AUTHORITIES FOR THIS PLAN ..................................................................................... 4 IV. PURPOSE ............................................................................................................................ 4 V. FIRE MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES ................................................................... 4 VI. RESOURCE LIST ............................................................................................................... 4 VII. WILDFIRE READINESS .................................................................................................... 5 A. Planning ................................................................................................................................ 5 B. Training ................................................................................................................................. 5 C. Equipment ...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Fire and Nonnative Invasive Plants September 2008 Zouhar, Kristin; Smith, Jane Kapler; Sutherland, Steve; Brooks, Matthew L
    United States Department of Agriculture Wildland Fire in Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station Ecosystems General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-42- volume 6 Fire and Nonnative Invasive Plants September 2008 Zouhar, Kristin; Smith, Jane Kapler; Sutherland, Steve; Brooks, Matthew L. 2008. Wildland fire in ecosystems: fire and nonnative invasive plants. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-vol. 6. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 355 p. Abstract—This state-of-knowledge review of information on relationships between wildland fire and nonnative invasive plants can assist fire managers and other land managers concerned with prevention, detection, and eradi- cation or control of nonnative invasive plants. The 16 chapters in this volume synthesize ecological and botanical principles regarding relationships between wildland fire and nonnative invasive plants, identify the nonnative invasive species currently of greatest concern in major bioregions of the United States, and describe emerging fire-invasive issues in each bioregion and throughout the nation. This volume can help increase understanding of plant invasions and fire and can be used in fire management and ecosystem-based management planning. The volume’s first part summarizes fundamental concepts regarding fire effects on invasions by nonnative plants, effects of plant invasions on fuels and fire regimes, and use of fire to control plant invasions. The second part identifies the nonnative invasive species of greatest concern and synthesizes information on the three topics covered in part one for nonnative inva- sives in seven major bioregions of the United States: Northeast, Southeast, Central, Interior West, Southwest Coastal, Northwest Coastal (including Alaska), and Hawaiian Islands.
    [Show full text]
  • Station Fire BAER Revisit – May 10-14, 2010
    United States Department of Agriculture Station Fire Forest Service Pacific Southwest BAER Revisit Region September 2009 Angeles National Forest May 10-14, 2010 Big Tujunga Dam Overlook May 11, 2010 Acknowledgements I would like to express thanks to the following groups and individuals for their efforts for planning and holding the Revisit. Thanks to all the Resource Specialists who participated; Jody Noiron - Forest Supervisor; Angeles National Forest Leader- ship Team; Lisa Northrop - Forest Resource and Planning Officer; Marc Stamer - Station Fire Assessment Team Leader (San Bernardino NF); Kevin Cooper - Assistant Station Fire Assessment Team Leader (Los Padres NF); Todd Ellsworth - Revisit Facilitator (Inyo NF); Dr. Sue Cannon, US Geological Survey, Denver, CO; Jess Clark, Remote Sensing Application Center, Salt Lake City, UT; Pete Wohlgemuth, Pacific Southwest Research Station-Riverside, Penny Luehring, National BAER Coordinator, and Gary Chase (Shasta-Trinity NF) for final report formatting and editing. Brent Roath, R5, Regional Soil Scientist/BAER Coordinator June 14, 2010 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • III.B Regional Profiles: the Oneida County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee Was Divided Into 6 Regions for the Planning Update Process
    Oneida County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 10/29/2013 4:43 PM Part IIIB: Regional Profiles III.B Regional Profiles: The Oneida County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee was divided into 6 Regions for the Planning Update process. These regions were developed to ease travel times for meetings and to foster existing relationships between municipalities. The Planning Regions are shown on the following map. III.B1: Information Collected for Each Municipality: a) Hazards: Each Region met 4 times between January and June of 2013 in order to collect data and share concerns about hazards and potential mitigation strategies. The initial meetings in January of 2013 were dedicated to identifying and profiling hazards of concern. A summary of the Hazards of Concern collected across the Regions is shown in the Table III.B.1 below. The Table is divided into two parts. In the upper portion, we are showing the Very High and High concern levels for both natural and other hazards as ranked by the Regions. Natural Hazards are shown in blue. In the lower portion of the Table, we are showing only the ranking for the Natural Hazards of Concern. Page 1 of 115 Oneida County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 10/29/2013 4:43 PM Part IIIB: Regional Profiles Top 10 Hazards of Concern in Oneida County From Modified HAZNY in Oneida County HMPC Regions January -February 2013 Hazard Score Percentage Rank Concern Water Supply Contamination 521 100 1 Severe Storm 509 97.69673704 2 Ice Storm 500 95.96928983 3 Very High Tornado 488 93.66602687 4 Flood 482 92.51439539 5 Winter
    [Show full text]
  • Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- ERICACEAE
    Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- ERICACEAE ERICACEAE (Heath Family) A family of about 107 genera and 3400 species, primarily shrubs, small trees, and subshrubs, nearly cosmopolitan. The Ericaceae is very important in our area, with a great diversity of genera and species, many of them rather narrowly endemic. Our area is one of the north temperate centers of diversity for the Ericaceae. Along with Quercus and Pinus, various members of this family are dominant in much of our landscape. References: Kron et al. (2002); Wood (1961); Judd & Kron (1993); Kron & Chase (1993); Luteyn et al. (1996)=L; Dorr & Barrie (1993); Cullings & Hileman (1997). Main Key, for use with flowering or fruiting material 1 Plant an herb, subshrub, or sprawling shrub, not clonal by underground rhizomes (except Gaultheria procumbens and Epigaea repens), rarely more than 3 dm tall; plants mycotrophic or hemi-mycotrophic (except Epigaea, Gaultheria, and Arctostaphylos). 2 Plants without chlorophyll (fully mycotrophic); stems fleshy; leaves represented by bract-like scales, white or variously colored, but not green; pollen grains single; [subfamily Monotropoideae; section Monotropeae]. 3 Petals united; fruit nodding, a berry; flower and fruit several per stem . Monotropsis 3 Petals separate; fruit erect, a capsule; flower and fruit 1-several per stem. 4 Flowers few to many, racemose; stem pubescent, at least in the inflorescence; plant yellow, orange, or red when fresh, aging or drying dark brown ...............................................Hypopitys 4 Flower solitary; stem glabrous; plant white (rarely pink) when fresh, aging or drying black . Monotropa 2 Plants with chlorophyll (hemi-mycotrophic or autotrophic); stems woody; leaves present and well-developed, green; pollen grains in tetrads (single in Orthilia).
    [Show full text]
  • Floristic Quality Assessment Signals Human Disturbance Over Natural
    Ecological Indicators 34 (2013) 260–267 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Ecological Indicators jo urnal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolind Floristic quality assessment signals human disturbance over natural variability in a wetland system a,∗ b c Jason T. Bried , Suneeti K. Jog , Jeffrey W. Matthews a Albany Pine Bush Preserve Commission, 195 New Karner Road, Albany, NY 12205, USA b Department of Natural Sciences, Northeastern State University, 610 N. Grand Avenue, Tahlequah, OK 74464, USA c Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t Article history: A common concern regarding the popular Floristic Quality Assessment (FQA) method is whether the Received 1 October 2012 site floristic quality scores change with natural temporal and site-specific variability. The more ignored Received in revised form 19 February 2013 question is whether this background variability will confound the index of human disturbance. Using non- Accepted 16 May 2013 forested seasonal wetlands in the northeastern United States, we tested if two common indices of site floristic quality (FQAI, Mean CoC) provide clear signals of site condition relative to gradients of wetland Keywords: area and surface water depth, and consistent signals across time of year (early vs. late growing season), Conservatism geomorphic setting (connected vs. isolated), and vegetation community type (pine barrens vernal pond, Ecological condition wet sedge meadow, shrub swamp). Mean CoC is the coefficient of conservatism (a qualitative estimate Human disturbance Monitoring of species’ sensitivity to human disturbance) averaged across the native and exotic taxa observed at a Seasonal wetlands given site, and FQAI is the traditional Floristic Quality Assessment Index where Mean CoC is multiplied Vascular plants by square root of taxa richness.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendices Section
    APPENDIX 1. A Selection of Biodiversity Conservation Agencies & Programs A variety of state agencies and programs, in addition to the NY Natural Heritage Program, partner with OPRHP on biodiversity conservation and planning. This appendix also describes a variety of statewide and regional biodiversity conservation efforts that complement OPRHP’s work. NYS BIODIVERSITY RESEARCH INSTITUTE The New York State Biodiversity Research Institute is a state-chartered organization based in the New York State Museum who promotes the understanding and conservation of New York’s biological diversity. They administer a broad range of research, education, and information transfer programs, and oversee a competitive grants program for projects that further biodiversity stewardship and research. In 1996, the Biodiversity Research Institute approved funding for the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation to undertake an ambitious inventory of its lands for rare species, rare natural communities, and the state’s best examples of common communities. The majority of inventory in state parks occurred over a five-year period, beginning in 1998 and concluding in the spring of 2003. Funding was also approved for a sixth year, which included all newly acquired state parks and several state parks that required additional attention beyond the initial inventory. Telephone: (518) 486-4845 Website: www.nysm.nysed.gov/bri/ NYS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION The Department of Environmental Conservation’s (DEC) biodiversity conservation efforts are handled by a variety of offices with the department. Of particular note for this project are the NY Natural Heritage Program, Endangered Species Unit, and Nongame Unit (all of which are in the Division of Fish, Wildlife, & Marine Resources), and the Division of Lands & Forests.
    [Show full text]
  • The Genus Vaccinium in North America
    Agriculture Canada The Genus Vaccinium 630 . 4 C212 P 1828 North America 1988 c.2 Agriculture aid Agri-Food Canada/ ^ Agnculturo ^^In^iikQ Canada V ^njaian Agriculture Library Brbliotheque Canadienno de taricakun otur #<4*4 /EWHE D* V /^ AgricultureandAgri-FoodCanada/ '%' Agrrtur^'AgrntataireCanada ^M'an *> Agriculture Library v^^pttawa, Ontano K1A 0C5 ^- ^^f ^ ^OlfWNE D£ W| The Genus Vaccinium in North America S.P.VanderKloet Biology Department Acadia University Wolfville, Nova Scotia Research Branch Agriculture Canada Publication 1828 1988 'Minister of Suppl) andS Canada ivhh .\\ ailabla in Canada through Authorized Hook nta ami other books! or by mail from Canadian Government Publishing Centre Supply and Services Canada Ottawa, Canada K1A0S9 Catalogue No.: A43-1828/1988E ISBN: 0-660-13037-8 Canadian Cataloguing in Publication Data VanderKloet,S. P. The genus Vaccinium in North America (Publication / Research Branch, Agriculture Canada; 1828) Bibliography: Cat. No.: A43-1828/1988E ISBN: 0-660-13037-8 I. Vaccinium — North America. 2. Vaccinium — North America — Classification. I. Title. II. Canada. Agriculture Canada. Research Branch. III. Series: Publication (Canada. Agriculture Canada). English ; 1828. QK495.E68V3 1988 583'.62 C88-099206-9 Cover illustration Vaccinium oualifolium Smith; watercolor by Lesley R. Bohm. Contract Editor Molly Wolf Staff Editors Sharon Rudnitski Frances Smith ForC.M.Rae Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2011 with funding from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada - Agriculture et Agroalimentaire Canada http://www.archive.org/details/genusvacciniuminOOvand
    [Show full text]
  • Mechanism of Ecological Succession
    Environmental Biology Prof.(Dr.) Punam Jeswal Head M.Sc semester IV Botany Department MECHANISM OF ECOLOGICAL SUCCESSION ECOLOGICAL SUCCESSION Ecological succession is the gradual and continuous change in the species composition and community structure over time in the same area. Environment is always kept on changing over a period of time due to - i) Variations in climatic and physiographic factors and ii) The activities of the species of the communities themselves. These influences bring changes in the existing community which is sooner or later replaced by another community developed one after another. This process continues and successive communities develop one after another over the same area, until the terminal final community again becomes more or less stable for a period of time. The occurrence of definite sequence of communities over a period of time in the same area is known as Ecological Succession. Succession is a unidirectional progressive series of changes which leads to the established of a relatively stable community. Hult (1885), while studying communities of Southern Sweden used for the first time the term succession for the orderly changes in the communities. Clements (1907, 1916) put forth various principles that governed the process of succession, and while studying plant communities, defined succession as ' the natural process by which the same locality becomes successively colonized by different groups or communities of plants. According to E.P. Odum (1971), the ecological succession is an orderly process of community change in a unity area. It is the process of changes in species composition in an ecosystem over time. In simple terms, it is the process of ecosystem development in nature.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Communities of New York State
    Ecological Communities of New York State by Carol Reschke New York Natural Heritage Program N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation 700 Troy-Schenectady Road Latham, NY 12110-2400 March 1990 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The New York Natural Heritage Program is supported by funds from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) and The Nature Conservancy. Within DEC, funding comes from the Division of Fish and Wildlife and the Division of Lands and Forests. The Heritage Program is partly supported by funds contributed by state taxpayers through the voluntary Return a Gift to Wildlife program. The Heritage Program has received funding for community inventory work from the Adirondack Council, the Hudson River Foundation, the Sussman Foundation, U.S. National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service (Finger Lakes National Forest), and each of the seven New York chapters of The Nature Conservancy (Adirondack Nature Conservancy, Eastern New York Chapter, Central New York Chapter, Long Island Chapter, Lower Hudson Chapter, South Fork/Shelter Island Chapter, and WesternNew YorJ< Chapter) This classification has been developed in part from data collected by numerous field biologists. Some of these contributors have worked under contract to the Natural Heritage Program, including Caryl DeVries, Brian Fitzgerald, Jerry Jenkins, Al Scholz, Edith Schrot, Paul Sherwood, Nancy Slack, Dan Smith, Gordon Tucker, and F. Robert Wesley. Present and former Heritage staff who have contributed a significant portion of field data include Peter Zika, Robert E. Zaremba, Lauren Lyons-Swift, Steven Clemants, and the author. Chris Nadareski helped compile long species lists for many communities by entering data from field survey forms into computer files.
    [Show full text]