DOCSLIB.ORG

Penstemon Grahamii) and White River Beardtongue (P

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Penstemon Grahamii) and White River Beardtongue (P Conservation Agreement and Strategy for Graham’s Beardtongue (Penstemon grahamii) and White River Beardtongue (P. scariosus var. albifluvis) Prepared for State of Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration Uintah County, Utah Utah Public Lands Policy Coordination Office Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Rio Blanco County, Colorado Bureau of Land Management U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants July 2014 CONSERVATION AGREEMENT AND STRATEGY FOR GRAHAM’S BEARDTONGUE (PENSTEMON GRAHAMII) AND WHITE RIVER BEARDTONGUE (P. SCARIOSUS VAR. ALBIFLUVIS) Prepared for State of Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration 675 East 500 South, Suite 500 Salt Lake City, Utah 84102 Uintah County 52 East 100 North Vernal, Utah 84078 Utah Public Lands Policy Coordination Office 5110 State Office Building Salt Lake City, Utah 84114 Utah Division of Wildlife Resources 1594 W. North Temple, Suite 2110 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114 Bureau of Land Management Vernal Field Office 170 South 500 East Vernal, Utah 84078 Bureau of Land Management White River Field Office 220 East Market Street Meeker, Colorado 81641 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Utah Ecological Services Field Office 2369 Orton Circle, Suite 50 West Valley City, Utah 84119 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Western Colorado Field Office 445 West Gunnison Avenue, Suite 240 Grand Junction, Colorado 81506 Prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants 257 East 200 South, Suite 200 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 (801) 322-4307 www.swca.com July 22, 2014 Conservation Agreement and Strategy for Graham’s Beardtongue (Penstemon grahamii) and White River Beardtongue (P. scariosus var. albifluvis) CONTENTS 1. Background ...............................................................................................................................1 2. Goal and Objectives of the Agreement ......................................................................................3 2.1. Objectives ........................................................................................................................... 3 2.2. Benefits............................................................................................................................... 3 2.3. Involved Parties ................................................................................................................... 4 2.4. Authority............................................................................................................................. 5 3. Species Involved ........................................................................................................................7 3.1. Graham’s Beardtongue ......................................................................................................... 7 3.2. White River Beardtongue ..................................................................................................... 7 4. Distribution and Status of Graham’s and White River Beardtongues .......................................9 4.1. Biology and Ecology............................................................................................................ 9 4.1.1. Graham’s Beardtongue.................................................................................................. 9 4.1.2. White River Beardtongue ............................................................................................ 10 4.2. Monitoring and Research Histories ..................................................................................... 10 4.2.1. Distributional Surveys................................................................................................. 10 4.2.2. Habitat Modeling Research ......................................................................................... 11 4.2.3. Life History and Demographic Studies ......................................................................... 11 4.2.4. Taxonomic and Genetic Research ................................................................................ 12 4.2.5. Restoration and Transplant History .............................................................................. 12 4.2.6. Information Needs ...................................................................................................... 12 5. Conservation Areas .................................................................................................................15 6. Conservation Actions ..............................................................................................................23 6.1. Formation of a Conservation Team ..................................................................................... 23 6.2. Designation of Conservation Areas ..................................................................................... 23 6.2.1. On Federal Lands ....................................................................................................... 23 6.2.2. On Non-Federal Lands ................................................................................................ 23 6.3. Management of Conservation Areas .................................................................................... 24 6.4. Ecological Restoration ....................................................................................................... 31 6.5. Monitoring and Adaptive Management................................................................................ 32 7. Non-Federal Participant Responsibilities and Action Items.....................................................35 8. Federal Participant Responsibilities and Action Items ............................................................37 9. Funding Conservation Actions ................................................................................................39 10. Agreement Duration, Terms, and Conditions ..........................................................................43 11. National Environmental Policy Act Compliance......................................................................45 12. Federal Agency Compliance ....................................................................................................47 13. Agreement Modification..........................................................................................................49 14. Disclaimer and Limitations .....................................................................................................51 15. Literature Cited ......................................................................................................................52 i Conservation Agreement and Strategy for Graham’s Beardtongue (Penstemon grahamii) and White River Beardtongue (P. scariosus var. albifluvis) APPENDICES Appendix A. Maps 1–5: Graham’s and White River Beardtongue Conservation Areas under the Agreement Appendix B. Conservation Area Locations Table FIGURES Figure 1. Conservation Areas by land owner/manager, status, and unit. ............................................ 17 Figure 2. Adaptive management strategy for the Agreement. ........................................................... 33 TABLES Table 1. Graham’s and White River Penstemon Conservation Area Acres Protected Under the Agreement* ................................................................................................................... 15 Table 2. White River Penstemon Core Area Acres Protected Under the Agreement*........................ 19 Table 3. Reasonably Foreseeable Management of Penstemon Conservation Areas By Landownership and Conservation Unit............................................................................. 19 Table 4. Threats to Graham’s and White River Beardtongue and Associated Conservation Actions .......................................................................................................................... 27 Table 5. Conservation Actions and Funding To Date...................................................................... 39 Table 6. Conservation Actions Funding Under the Agreement ........................................................ 40 ii Conservation Agreement and Strategy for Graham’s Beardtongue (Penstemon grahamii) and White River Beardtongue (P. scariosus var. albifluvis) III Conservation Agreement and Strategy for Graham’s Beardtongue (Penstemon grahamii) and White River Beardtongue (P. scariosus var. albifluvis) 1. BACKGROUND In August 2013, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) proposed to list Penstemon grahamii (Graham’s beardtongue) and Penstemon scariosus var. albifluvis (White River beardtongue) as threatened (78 Federal Register 47590), and to designate approximately 82,873 acres as critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (as amended; 78 Federal Register 47832). The Proposed Rule describes potential threats that, based on a USFWS analysis, could impact 91% and 100%, respectively, of the total known populations of Graham’s and White River beardtongues. Many of the potential threats described in the Proposed Rule are related to energy development, particularly conventional oil and gas development and oil shale and tar sands development. Because a significant proportion of the species’ known occurrences are on state and privately owned lands, Uintah County, the Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA), other state agencies, and several private mineral landowners joined the USFWS in the development of the conservation measures described in this Conservation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Colorado Wildlife Action Plan: Proposed Rare Plant Addendum
    Colorado Wildlife Action Plan: Proposed Rare Plant Addendum By Colorado Natural Heritage Program For The Colorado Rare Plant Conservation Initiative June 2011 Colorado Wildlife Action Plan: Proposed Rare Plant Addendum Colorado Rare Plant Conservation Initiative Members David Anderson, Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP) Rob Billerbeck, Colorado Natural Areas Program (CNAP) Leo P. Bruederle, University of Colorado Denver (UCD) Lynn Cleveland, Colorado Federation of Garden Clubs (CFGC) Carol Dawson, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Michelle DePrenger-Levin, Denver Botanic Gardens (DBG) Brian Elliott, Environmental Consulting Mo Ewing, Colorado Open Lands (COL) Tom Grant, Colorado State University (CSU) Jill Handwerk, Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP) Tim Hogan, University of Colorado Herbarium (COLO) Steve Kettler, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Andrew Kratz, U.S. Forest Service (USFS) Sarada Krishnan, Colorado Native Plant Society (CoNPS), Denver Botanic Gardens Brian Kurzel, Colorado Natural Areas Program Eric Lane, Colorado Department of Agriculture (CDA) Paige Lewis, The Nature Conservancy (TNC) Ellen Mayo, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Mitchell McGlaughlin, University of Northern Colorado (UNC) Jennifer Neale, Denver Botanic Gardens Betsy Neely, The Nature Conservancy Ann Oliver, The Nature Conservancy Steve Olson, U.S. Forest Service Susan Spackman Panjabi, Colorado Natural Heritage Program Jeff Peterson, Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Josh Pollock, Center for Native Ecosystems (CNE) Nicola Ripley,
    [Show full text]
  • December 2012 Number 1
    Calochortiana December 2012 Number 1 December 2012 Number 1 CONTENTS Proceedings of the Fifth South- western Rare and Endangered Plant Conference Calochortiana, a new publication of the Utah Native Plant Society . 3 The Fifth Southwestern Rare and En- dangered Plant Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, March 2009 . 3 Abstracts of presentations and posters not submitted for the proceedings . 4 Southwestern cienegas: Rare habitats for endangered wetland plants. Robert Sivinski . 17 A new look at ranking plant rarity for conservation purposes, with an em- phasis on the flora of the American Southwest. John R. Spence . 25 The contribution of Cedar Breaks Na- tional Monument to the conservation of vascular plant diversity in Utah. Walter Fertig and Douglas N. Rey- nolds . 35 Studying the seed bank dynamics of rare plants. Susan Meyer . 46 East meets west: Rare desert Alliums in Arizona. John L. Anderson . 56 Calochortus nuttallii (Sego lily), Spatial patterns of endemic plant spe- state flower of Utah. By Kaye cies of the Colorado Plateau. Crystal Thorne. Krause . 63 Continued on page 2 Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights Reserved. Utah Native Plant Society Utah Native Plant Society, PO Box 520041, Salt Lake Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights City, Utah, 84152-0041. www.unps.org Reserved. Calochortiana is a publication of the Utah Native Plant Society, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organi- Editor: Walter Fertig ([email protected]), zation dedicated to conserving and promoting steward- Editorial Committee: Walter Fertig, Mindy Wheeler, ship of our native plants. Leila Shultz, and Susan Meyer CONTENTS, continued Biogeography of rare plants of the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada.
    [Show full text]
  • Threatened, Endangered, Candidate & Proposed Plant Species of Utah
    TECHNICAL NOTE USDA - Natural Resources Conservation Service Boise, Idaho and Salt Lake City, Utah TN PLANT MATERIALS NO. 52 MARCH 2011 THREATENED, ENDANGERED, CANDIDATE & PROPOSED PLANT SPECIES OF UTAH Derek Tilley, Agronomist, NRCS, Aberdeen, Idaho Loren St. John, PMC Team Leader, NRCS, Aberdeen, Idaho Dan Ogle, Plant Materials Specialist, NRCS, Boise, Idaho Casey Burns, State Biologist, NRCS, Salt Lake City, Utah Last Chance Townsendia (Townsendia aprica). Photo by Megan Robinson. This technical note identifies the current threatened, endangered, candidate and proposed plant species listed by the U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service (USDI FWS) in Utah. Review your county list of threatened and endangered species and the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Conservation Data Center (CDC) GIS T&E database to see if any of these species have been identified in your area of work. Additional information on these listed species can be found on the USDI FWS web site under “endangered species”. Consideration of these species during the planning process and determination of potential impacts related to scheduled work will help in the conservation of these rare plants. Contact your Plant Material Specialist, Plant Materials Center, State Biologist and Area Biologist for additional guidance on identification of these plants and NRCS responsibilities related to the Endangered Species Act. 2 Table of Contents Map of Utah Threatened, Endangered and Candidate Plant Species 4 Threatened & Endangered Species Profiles Arctomecon humilis Dwarf Bear-poppy ARHU3 6 Asclepias welshii Welsh’s Milkweed ASWE3 8 Astragalus ampullarioides Shivwits Milkvetch ASAM14 10 Astragalus desereticus Deseret Milkvetch ASDE2 12 Astragalus holmgreniorum Holmgren Milkvetch ASHO5 14 Astragalus limnocharis var.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Species Assessment and Listing Priority Assignment Form
    U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE SPECIES ASSESSMENT AND LISTING PRIORITY ASSIGNMENT FORM Scientific Name: Penstemon scariosus var. albifluvis Common Name: White River beardtongue Lead region: Region 6 (Mountain-Prairie Region) Information current as of: 03/29/2012 Status/Action ___ Funding provided for a proposed rule. Assessment not updated. ___ Species Assessment - determined species did not meet the definition of the endangered or threatened under the Act and, therefore, was not elevated to the Candidate status. ___ New Candidate _X_ Continuing Candidate ___ Candidate Removal ___ Taxon is more abundant or widespread than previously believed or not subject to the degree of threats sufficient to warrant issuance of a proposed listing or continuance of candidate status ___ Taxon not subject to the degree of threats sufficient to warrant issuance of a proposed listing or continuance of candidate status due, in part or totally, to conservation efforts that remove or reduce the threats to the species ___ Range is no longer a U.S. territory ___ Insufficient information exists on biological vulnerability and threats to support listing ___ Taxon mistakenly included in past notice of review ___ Taxon does not meet the definition of "species" ___ Taxon believed to be extinct ___ Conservation efforts have removed or reduced threats ___ More abundant than believed, diminished threats, or threats eliminated. Petition Information ___ Non-Petitioned _X_ Petitioned - Date petition received: 05/11/2004 90-Day Positive:05/11/2005 12 Month Positive:10/26/2011
    [Show full text]
  • Demographic Modeling Informs Functional Connectivity and Management Interventions in Graham’S Beardtongue
    Conservation Genetics https://doi.org/10.1007/s10592-021-01392-9 RESEARCH ARTICLE Demographic modeling informs functional connectivity and management interventions in Graham’s beardtongue Matthew R. Jones1 · Daniel E. Winkler2 · Rob Massatti1 Received: 16 December 2020 / Accepted: 30 July 2021 © The Author(s) 2021 Abstract Functional connectivity (i.e., the movement of individuals across a landscape) is essential for the maintenance of genetic vari- ation and persistence of rare species. However, illuminating the processes infuencing functional connectivity and ultimately translating this knowledge into management practice remains a fundamental challenge. Here, we combine various population structure analyses with pairwise, population-specifc demographic modeling to investigate historical functional connectivity in Graham’s beardtongue (Penstemon grahamii), a rare plant narrowly distributed across a dryland region of the western US. While principal component and population structure analyses indicated an isolation-by-distance pattern of diferentiation across the species’ range, spatial inferences of efective migration exposed an abrupt shift in population ancestry near the range center. To understand these seemingly conficting patterns, we tested various models of historical gene fow and found evidence for recent admixture (~ 3400 generations ago) between populations near the range center. This historical perspective reconciles population structure patterns and suggests management eforts should focus on maintaining connectivity between
    [Show full text]
  • View Full Text Article
    U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE SPECIES ASSESSMENT AND LISTING PRIORITY ASSIGNMENT FORM SCIENTIFIC NAME: Penstemon grahamii COMMON NAME: Graham ’s beardtongue or Graham ’s penstemon LEAD REGION: 6 INFORMATION CURRENT AS OF: October, 2004 STATUS/ACTION: Initial 12-month Petition Finding: not warranted warranted warranted but precluded (also complete (c) and (d) in section on petitioned candidate species- why action is precluded) Species assessment - determined species did not meet the definition of endangered or threatened under the Act and, therefore, was not elevated to Candidate status ___ New candidate X Continuing candidate __ Non-petitioned X Petitioned - Date petition received: October 8, 2002 90-day positive - FR date: 12-month warranted but precluded - FR date: Is the petition requesting a reclassification of a listed species? ___ Listing priority change Former LP: ___ New LP: ___ Latest Date species became a Candidate: July 1, 1975 Listing priority changed to LPN 2 (69 FR 24882, May 4, 2004). N/A Candidate removal: Former LP: ___ ___ A - Taxon is more abundant or widespread than previously believed or not subject to the degree of threats sufficient to warrant issuance of a proposed listing or continuance of candidate status. ___ F - Range is no longer a U.S. territory. I - Insufficient information exists on biological vulnerability and threats to support listing. ___ M - Taxon mistakenly included in past notice of review. ___ N - Taxon may not meet the Act ’s definition of “ species. ” ___ X - Taxon believed to be extinct. ANIMAL/PLANT
    [Show full text]
  • Aquilegia Newsletter of the Colorado Native Plant Society “
    Aquilegia Newsletter of the Colorado Native Plant Society “. dedicated to the appreciation and conservation of the Colorado native flora” CONSERVATION CORNER PARTNERSHIPS An Introduction to the Bureau of Land Management’s Botany Program By Peter Gordon and Carol Dawson Editor’s Note: The goals of the Colorado Native Plant reflect Bureau priorities: (1) Managing healthy native plant Society are shared by many government agencies, as well as by communities, (2) Managing special status plant species, and (3) private organizations and individuals. Conservation of Managing non-native invasive plant species. This article will Colorado’s unique and special plant life cannot be accomplished focus specifically on introducing BLM plant conservation without their efforts. initiatives using a small selection of our special status plant This is the first in a series of articles highlighting the projects as examples. programs, goals, and accomplishments of our many partners. Eight of the 13 plant species in Colorado protected by the We begin with the Bureau of Land Management, manager of Endangered Species Act are found on BLM lands. This makes nearly one in every eight acres of land and habitat in Colorado. the collection of robust quantitative information regarding the Nationwide, the BLM (a part of the Department of the Interior) is location, life history, and status of these species very important. responsible for the management and conservation of resources In addition to its role in managing for Federally listed plant on 256 million surface acres, as well as 700 million acres of species, BLM designates sensitive species status for other rare subsurface mineral estate.
    [Show full text]
  • Finding of No Significant Impact Canyon Rims (Indian Creek) Travel Management Plan
    May 2021 Finding of No Significant Impact Canyon Rims (Indian Creek) Travel Management Plan DOI-BLM-UT-Y010-2018-0220-EA Moab Field Office 82 East Dogwood Moab, Utah 84532 Phone: 435-259-2100 FAX: 435-259-2106 Canyon Rims (Indian Creek) Travel Management Plan Finding of No Significant Impact DOI-BLM-UT-Y010-2018-0220 I have reviewed the Canyon Rims (Indian Creek) Travel Management Plan Environmental Assessment (EA): DOI-BLM-UT-Y0101-2018-0220-EA. After considering the environmental effects as described in the EA, and incorporated herein, I have determined that Alternative C, as identified in the EA, will not significantly affect the quality of the human environment and that an Environmental Impact Statement is not required. I have determined that the Proposed Action, which is to designate a comprehensive off-highway vehicle (OHV) travel management plan (TMP) for the Canyon Rims (Indian Creek) Travel Management Area (TMA), is in conformance with the approved 2008 Moab Field Office Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan (2008 RMP) and is consistent with applicable plans and policies of county, state, Tribal and Federal agencies. This finding is based on my consideration of the Council on Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) criteria for significance (40 CFR 1508.27) regarding the context and the intensity of impacts described in the EA. Context The TMA that forms the basis of the Canyon Rims TMP contains 90,955 acres of Bureau of Land Management (BLM) managed lands. Approximately 273 miles of road were designated as OHV-Open in the Travel Plan accompanying the 2008 RMP; these previously-designated routes constitute the route inventory for the project.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 Summer Newsletter
    AMERICAN PENSTEMON SOCIETY— Http://PENSTEMONS.ORG TheNEWSLETTER Pe OF THE n AMERICAN st e m PENSTEMON a n iSOCIETY a c ESTABLISHED 1946 VOLUME 11 NO 3 SUMMER 2017 This picture shows the hillside and parking lot of the first stop on the North field trip, Monday June 5, 30 miles out of Vernal. THE PENSTEMANIAC | Vernal’sSUMMER altitude2017 | P isAGE 5,328’ 1 and this area is 3000’ higher. Photo by Andrey Zarkikh, courtesy of Catherine King. AMERICAN PENSTEMON SOCIETY— Http://PENSTEMONS.ORG Penstemon Adventure Table of Contents in the Uinta Basin Penstemon Adventure in the Uinta Basin ...............2 by Catherine King Recollections of Hell’s Hole Canyon ..................... 10 Editor’s note: we are grateful to Catherine Letter from the President ..................................... 11 King, author of this Article, for granting The Mystery of Penstemon Hesperius .................. 12 permission to allow The Penstemaniac to Final Project Report to American Penstemon reprint her article appearing in the Summer Society Special Projects Grants Program ....... 14 volume of UNPS’s Newsletter, SegoLily Update on key to Genus Penstemon on “Flora of Vol. 40 No 3. North America” Volume 17 ............................. 17 New Members ...................................................... 17 The American Penstemon Society 2018 APS Annual Meeting – Las Vegas NV ......... 18 (APS) has been hosting annual meetings Call for Seeds: APS 2017-18 ................................ 19 for decades, where penstemon lovers, Jackpot! Noel’s 5-Penstemon Discovery Day ....... 20 fondly known as “penstemaniacs,” gather American Penstemon Society Membership Form . 21 together to see penstemons growing in AmazonSmile .......................................................22 their native habitats. This year’s meeting 2017 APS meeting in Vernal Utah ........................23 was in Vernal, Utah and I admit to being APS Officers .......................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Colorado Rare Plant Conservation Strategy
    Plants have too long been hidden in plain sight. The prospect of continued threats to the nation’s plant life, coupled with the large proportion of the flora already at risk, argues that now is the time to bring plants out from COLO R A D O RA R E P L A nt the background, and to put the conservation needs of our nation’s flora COnsERVATION StrATEgy squarely into view. -Stein and Gravuer, NatureServe, 2008 Printed on recycled paper. BY: THE RARE PLAnt COnsERVATION InITIATIVE | MAY 2009 Plants are essential to both wildlife and humans through provision of key services such as food, shelter, fiber, and medicine ... protecting our wild flora goes to the heart of the human condition. Yet without focused conservation attention to the growing plight of the nation’s plant species, we are at risk of losing significant portions of our wild heritage, and the ecological resilience that comes with that diversity. -Stein and Gravuer, NatureServe, 2008 North Park phacelia © Frank Weston RECOMMENDED CITATION Neely, B., S. Panjabi, E. Lane, P. Lewis, C. Dawson, A. Kratz, B. Kurzel, T. Hogan, J. Handwerk, S. Krishnan, J. Neale, and N. Ripley. 2009. Colorado Rare Plant Conservation Strategy. Developed by the Colorado Rare Plant Conservation Initiative. The Nature Conservancy, Boulder, Colorado. 117 pp. AUTHORS Carol Dawson, Bureau of Land Management Jill Handwerk, Colorado Natural Heritage Program Tim Hogan, University of Colorado Herbarium Andrew Kratz, U.S. Forest Service Sarada Krishnan, Colorado Native Plant Society and Denver Botanic Gardens Brian Kurzel, Colorado Natural Areas Program Eric Lane, Colorado Department of Agriculture Paige Lewis, The Nature Conservancy Jennifer Neale, Denver Botanic Gardens Betsy Neely, The Nature Conservancy Susan Spackman Panjabi, Colorado Natural Heritage Program Nicola Ripley, Betty Ford Alpine Gardens COLORADO RARE PLANT CONSERVATION INITIATIVE MEMBERS David Anderson, Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP) Rob Billerbeck, Colorado Natural Areas Program (CNAP) Leo P.
    [Show full text]
  • Special Status Plant Species Report: 2018 Lease Sale Vernal Field Office, Vernal UT
    Special Status Plant Species Report: 2018 Lease Sale Vernal Field Office, Vernal UT Photo: Christine Cimiluca Christine Cimiluca, Botanist BLM Green River District June 18, 2018 Special Status Plant Species Report December 2018 Lease Sale Species Status Potential Occurrence and Parcels with Lease Stipulation or Habitat Type Suitable or Notice Applied Occupied Habitat Aquilegia atwoodii BLM Known only from Firewater None NA (Atwood columbine) Sensitive Canyon tributary to Desolation Canyon. Habitat is not present in the Project Area. Aquilegia scopulorum BLM Semi-barrens of the Green River None NA var. goodrichii Sensitive Formation, West Tavaputs (Goodrich columbine) Plateau. Habitat is not present in the Project Area Arabis vivariensis / BLM Pinyon-juniper and mountain None NA Boechera fernaldiana Sensitive mahogany communities, often in (park rockcress) sandy soil. Specimens seen are from Jones Hole and Dinosaur National Monument. Habitat is not present in the Project Area. Astragalus equisolensis BLM Duchesne River Formation in 105, 125 UT-LN-49 (Utah Sensitive (horseshoe milkvetch) Sensitive sagebrush, shadscale, Species) horsebrush and other mixed UT-LN-51 (Special Status desert shrub communities. 4800- Plants: Not Federally 5200 ft. Listed) UT-LN-89 (Horseshoe milkvetch [Astragalus equisolensis]) Astragalus hamiltonii BLM Habitat includes eroding slopes None NA (Hamilton milkvetch) Sensitive of the Duchesne River, Wasatch, and less commonly Mowry Shale, Dakota, and other formations in desert shrub and pinyon-juniper plant communities from 5,500 to 6,740 ft. Cleomella palmeriana BLM Mixed desert shrub communities. None NA var. goodrichii Sensitive Specimens seen are from the (Rocky Mountain Morrison Formation near Island stickweed) Park, Uintah County, Utah. Habitat is not present in the Project Area.
    [Show full text]
  • September 2017 Society News Northern Nevada Events Southern
    Volume 43 Number 7 - September 2017 Society News Northern Nevada October 5 – Rare Plants in Real Life: Case studies from a mine, a water pipeline, and Events a highway presented by Kris Kuyper, Biology Program Manager for EM Strategies. September 7 – Plant Colors…Beauty and Science all Around Us presented by Jim November 2 – Janel Johnson, NNPS Bishop, a California Native Plant Society President, will provide us with an overview Fellow. Here’s a taste of what to expect: of iNaturalist.org, a website to share your natural history observations and help others Plants offer endless, engaging beauty identify their contributions. in their many colors. There are the blooms of spring in our foothills, lovely desert and mountain wildflowers, the glorious leaves of autumn, and even the beauty of the universal Southern Nevada greens of leaves before they turn. There are interesting stories in all of that. Events Part of the story will be about the science: how do plant colors arise, how do September 11 – Nicole Hupp, ecologist conditions such as acidity change pigment with the National Park Service Inventory & colors, what purpose do they serve? The Monitoring Program, 6:30-7:30 pm. Meet interesting questions are endless (and not at the U.S. Geological Survey office at 160 all of the answers are known). You’ll gain North Stephanie Street in Henderson. Note some background that will enrich your that there is no meeting on Labor Day, understanding and appreciation of plant Monday, September 4. colors - the fact that plants provide us a key part of the visual means we use to see their Our program coordinator is Lesley beautiful colors, for instance - and you’ll have DeFalco.
    [Show full text]