Full ecoregional plan - Conservation Gateway

More documents

Recommendations

Info

15 18 Moderate to high elevation with large amount of cliff/steep slope/upperslope/summit/sideslope features; primarily acidic granitic with some acidicsedimentary, also high percentage of moderately calcareous bedrock; mainly till16 16,18 Primarily moderate elevation, some high elevation; very large amount of summits,upper slopes, sideslopes; over 90% calcareous with 60% strongly calcareous and30% moderately calcareous; mainly till17 15,16 Moderate to high elevation with some very high elevation; very large amount ofcliff/steep slope/summit/upper slope/sideslopes; Primarily acidic sedimentary withalso large areas of acidic granitic; primarily patchy with also large amount of till;18 5 Low to moderate elevation watershed dominated with sideslopes, coves/steepslopes/summits concentrated at Ossippee Mtns. Widespread flats and gentle slopeswith acidic granitic till. Dry flat-coarse grained sediments occur in relatively largepatches, particularly around Ossippee Lake.19 5,6 High elevation mountainous watershed; dominated by coves/steepslopes/cliffs/summits. Scattered areas of acidic granitic and acidicsedimentary/metasedimentary till.20 6,7 Moderate elevation watershed dominated by mountainous terrain esp. inPemigewasset, with acidic granitic till. Isolated patches of acidic sedimentary/metasedimentary and moderately calcareous till interspersed with wet/moist flats.Terrain less mountainous in Contoocook.21 ocean Low elevation and low relief dominated by flats and gentle hills; primarily acidicgranitic with acidic sedimentary, but also large percentage of moderately calcareous(38%); till with large amount of coarse and fine sediment22 2,3 Low elevation watersheds with widespread flats and gentle slopes with acidicgranitic and acidic sedimentary/ metasedimentary till, interspersed with dry flats withcoarse-grained sediments. Low gradient trunks with moderate gradient tribs23 4 Low elevation watershed dominated by gentle slopes with acidic granitic andsedimentary/metasedimentary till. Isolated, very small patches of moderatelycalcareous till and dry flats with coarse grained sediments (more common nearmainstem of the Merrimack).24 1, some ocean Low elevation watershed with low gradient rivers and streams on mostly acidicigneous and metamorphic bedrock(locally calcareous), some tidal in lower reachesREVISED 6/2003AQUA-RESULTS-17
Table 6: Size 3 Watershed System Summary DescriptionsSize 3SystemsPhysical DescriptionLow elevation watersheds dominated by gentle slopes and flats; on primarily acidic granitic bedrock with surficial till and some1 coarse sedimentLow elevation watersheds dominated by gentle slopes and flats; on primarily acidic granitic with large areas of acidic2 sedimentary, moderately calcareous and calcareous bedrock; surficial till and some coarse sedimentLow elevation watersheds dominated by gentle slopes and flats; on primarily acidic granitic bedrock with surficial till and some3 coarse and fine sedimentLow elevation watersheds dominated by gentle slopes with substantial areas of sideslopes;on a mixture of acidic sedimentary and4 acidic granitic bedrock with surficial till and some areas of patchy and coarse sediment.Low elevation watersheds dominated by sideslopes with substantial amounts of steep slopes and gentle slopes; on primarily acidic5 granitic bedrock with primarily patchy surficialModerate to low elevation watersheds dominated by sideslopes and steep slopes; on acidic granitic and acidic sedimentary6 bedrock with patchy surficial.Moderate to low elevation watersheds dominated by sideslopes and gentle slopes; on acidic granitic and acidic sedimentary7 bedrock with till surficial.Low elevation watersheds dominated by dry flats, wet flats, and coarse sediment flats; on acidic sedimentary and acidic granitic8 bedrock with surficial primarily coarse sediment with some areas of tillLow elevation watersheds dominated by flats; on acidic granitic and acidic sedimentary bedrock with surficial till with some9 coarse sediment10 Low elevation watersheds dominated by gentle slopes and flats; on primarily acidic sedimentary bedrock with surficial tillLow and moderate elevation watersheds dominated by gentle slopes and flats; on primarily acidic sedimentary bedrock with11 surficial tillModerate to low elevation watersheds dominated by gentle slopes with substantial areas of flats and sideslopes; with acidic12 sedimentary bedrock with surficial till13 Moderate to low elevation watersheds dominated by sideslopes; on primarily calcareous bedrock with surficial till14 Moderate to low elevation watersheds dominated by gentle slopes; on primarily acidic sedimentary bedrock on surficial tillModerate to high elevation watersheds dominated by sideslopes with substantial gentle slopes and sideslopes; on acidic15 sedimentary bedrock with surficial till and patchy quarternary sedimentModerate to high elevation watersheds dominated by sideslopes with substantial steep slopes; on acidic sedimentary, calcareous,16 and moderately calcareous bedrock with surficial till and patchy quarternary sedimentModerate to high elevation watersheds dominated by sideslopes with gentle slopes and steep slopes; on primarily acidic granitic17 bedrock with surficial tillModerate to high elevation watersheds dominated by sideslopes and gentle slopes; on calcareous and moderately calcareous18 bedrock with surficial tillModerate to high elevation watersheds dominated by sideslopes and gentle slopes; on acidic sedimentary and acidic granitic19 bedrock with surficial till; some areas of locally moderately calcareous bedrockReach Level Classification: MacrohabitatsThe reach level macrohabitat analysis had 480 possible unique combinations based on uniquecombinations of their size class (4 classes) x elevation class (4 classes) x gradient classes (5classes) x chemistry classes (2 classes) and connectivity classes (3 classes). Distributions ofindividual attributes such as size, gradient, or chemistry can be reviewed by studying thefollowing figures:REVISED 6/2003AQUA-RESULTS-18
Page 1 and 2:
Lower New England - Northern Piedmo
Page 3 and 4:
TABLE OF CONTENTSCOVERINTRODUCTIONA
Page 5 and 6:
IntroductionEcoregional Planning in
Page 7 and 8:
AcknowledgementsEdited Version and
Page 9 and 10:
combinations based on surficial geo
Page 11 and 12:
Priorities and Leadership Assignmen
Page 13 and 14:
Portfolio SummaryA total of 1,028 s
Page 15 and 16:
each local population with respect
Page 17 and 18:
potential target list for future co
Page 19 and 20:
iteration ecoregional plans, specie
Page 21 and 22:
RESULTS FOR SPECIES *Modification t
Page 23 and 24:
documented in BCD making analysis v
Page 25 and 26:
PLANNING METHODS FOR ECOREGIONAL TA
Page 27 and 28:
sandy outwash and forested swamps a
Page 29 and 30:
and distribution pattern for each e
Page 31 and 32:
disproportionately large percentage
Page 33 and 34:
to that ecoregion alone. Those syst
Page 35 and 36:
Locating examples of patch-forming
Page 37 and 38:
systems. Conversely, high elevation
Page 39 and 40:
The minimum goals based on generic
Page 41 and 42:
Results for Terrestrial Communities
Page 43 and 44:
Table 6. Minimum conservation bench
Page 45 and 46:
• The National Vegetation Classif
Page 47 and 48:
of ecoregions, from the Northern Ap
Page 49 and 50:
How much larger than the severe dam
Page 51 and 52:
Scaling factors for Matrix Forest S
Page 53 and 54:
Roads are also source areas for noi
Page 55 and 56:
ungulates. We simply discussed thes
Page 57 and 58: conservation plan must be done to r
Page 59 and 60: position, its geology and its eleva
Page 61 and 62: this block, miles of streams, dams
Page 63 and 64: Connecting Area or Ecological Backd
Page 65 and 66: MATRIX SITE:NAME:STATE/S:SIZE:Total
Page 67 and 68: Block developmentTwo sets of ecoblo
Page 69 and 70: Table 12. A description of the elev
Page 71 and 72: There are 27 ELU types entirely mis
Page 73 and 74: Freshwater Ecoregions and Ecologica
Page 75 and 76: classes: size 1) headwaters to smal
Page 77 and 78: Figure 2: Watershed Aquatic System
Page 79 and 80: targets should also include conside
Page 81 and 82: have also not been extensively rese
Page 83 and 84: Table 5: Confidence Code1 High Conf
Page 85 and 86: TYPECHARACTERISTICSELU signatureSIZ
Page 87 and 88: Midreach streamentering large lakes
Page 89 and 90: Major stresses: Using the following
Page 91 and 92: Aquatic Systems Results for Lower N
Page 93 and 94: Figure 1: Ecological Drainage Unit
Page 95 and 96: IV. MiddleConnecticut3450 sq.mi.Riv
Page 97 and 98: Table 3: Fish and Mussel Distributi
Page 99 and 100: merrlowctcapeupctmidct3E-03100Nativ
Page 101 and 102: Figure 2: Size 2 Watershed SystemsR
Page 103 and 104: TWINSPAN RelationshipsThe hierarchi
Page 105 and 106: 13 and 14 split from 15-17 primaril
Page 107: Table 5: Size 2 Watershed System Su
Page 111 and 112: Figure 7: Reach Gradient ClassesREV
Page 113 and 114: Of these 480 possible combinations,
Page 115 and 116: Units supported the distinctiveness
Page 117 and 118: Condition ResultsGIS ScreeningSize
Page 119 and 120: Size 2 Watershed: Landscape Context
Page 121 and 122: Table 10: Size 2 Watershed Landscap
Page 123 and 124: Table 16: Dams on Size 2, 3,4 River
Page 125 and 126: Most of the dams in the analysis re
Page 127 and 128: shallow water fish spawning grounds
Page 129 and 130: Figure 11: Aquatic PortfolioREVISED
Page 131 and 132: Table 19: Size 3 Watershed System T
Page 133 and 134: Table 21: Portfolio Examples by EDU
Page 135 and 136: Range in Landscape Context Ranking
Page 137 and 138: Table 25: Upper Connecticut Portfol
Page 139 and 140: Table 27: Portfolio Size 2-4 Exampl
Page 141 and 142: 2_24 S2c Assabet River 5.45 18.03 S
Page 143 and 144: For the medium to large sized river
Page 145 and 146: tributaries of the Assonet, Namaske
Page 147 and 148: Threats AssessmentThe Core Team mad
Page 149 and 150: • Work with TNC Eastern Conservat
Page 151 and 152: GlossaryThese selective glossary en
Page 153 and 154: Ecological Land Unit (ELU):Mapping
Page 155 and 156: Integration: A portfolio assembly p
Page 157 and 158: Representativeness: Captures multip
Page 159 and 160:
Appendix 1Lower New England/Norther
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
KEY TO TERMS OF FEDERALLY LISTED SP
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Appendix 1.Lower New England/Northe
Page 173 and 174:
Appendix 1Lower New England\Norther
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Appendix 4.Lower New England\Northe
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
DRAFT LNE-NP Ecoregional Plan 9\20\
Page 199 and 200:
BibiliographyLower New England GIS
Page 201 and 202:
BibiliographyD.P. (compilers), 1994
Page 203 and 204:
Bailey, R.G., P.E. Avers, T. King,
Page 205 and 206:
Gerritsen, J., M.T. Barbour, and K.
Page 207 and 208:
Leopold, L.B. and Wolman, M.G. 1957
Page 209 and 210:
Pulliam, H.R., 1988. Sources, sinks
Page 211 and 212:
Steedman, R.J. 1988. Modification a
show all

Full ecoregional plan - Conservation Gateway

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?