Full ecoregional plan - Conservation Gateway

More documents

Recommendations

Info

all portfolio examples of system 2_5 in the lowest landscape context category 5. Of the size 3systems, systems 3_8, 3_9, 3_10, and 3_13 are in the poorer condition, with the only example ofsystem 3_8, the Tauton, in the lowest category 5.Table 24: Middle Connecticut Portfolio Landscape Context By System And Portfolio CodeMiddle Connecticut EDULandscape Context Summary RankSIZESYS PORTCODE 1 2 3 4 Grand Total1 S1 1 1 2 4S1c 1 1 1 3S2m 1 4 3 4 121 Total 2 6 6 5 192_10 S1 1 1S1c 3 3S2 1 12_10 Total 1 4 52_11 S1 1 1 2S1c 3 3S2c 1 12_11 Total 1 4 1 62_12 S1c 1 1S2c 1 1 22_12 Total 1 2 32_17 S1 1 12_17 Total 1 12_5 S1c 1 1S2c 1 12_5 Total 1 1 23_14 S1c 1 13_14 Total 1 13_17 Sxc 1 13_17 Total 1 14 S1c 1 14 Total 1 1Grand Total 3 8 17 11 39The Middle Connecticut EDU portfolio examples range from landscape context 1 to 4, with thehighest percentage in category 3 (44%). The portfolio examples in landscape context category 1include 2 size 1 examples and the system 2_17 example in the upper West River watershed.Portfolio examples in landscape context category 2 include system 2_11 and 2_12. systemSystems 2_5, 2_10, and 2_11 include portfolio examples in the lowest category of 4.REVISED 6/2003AQUA-RESULTS-45
Table 25: Upper Connecticut Portfolio Landscape Context By System And Portfolio CodeUpper Connecticut EDU Landscape Context Summary RankingSIZESYS PORTCODE 1 2 3 4 Grand Total1 S1 1 1S1c 7 3 1 11S2c 1 1 2S2m 6 8 1 151 Total 14 12 2 1 292_13 S1c 1 1S2c 1 1Sxc 1 12_13 Total 3 32_14 S1c 4 1 5S2c 1 1Sxc 1 12_14 Total 5 1 1 72_15 S1c 2 1 32_15 Total 2 1 32_16 S1c 1 1Sxc 3 32_16 Total 1 3 42_17 S1c 4 4S2c 2 2Sxc 1 1 1 32_17 Total 5 3 1 93_15 S1c 1 13_15 Total 1 13_16 S1c 1 13_16 Total 1 13_17 Sxc 1 13_17 Total 1 13_18 Sxc 1 13_18 Total 1 13_19 S1c 1 1Sxc 1 13_19 Total 1 1 24 S1c 1 14 Total 1 1Grand Total 22 27 5 8 62Portfolio examples in the Upper Connecticut EDU range from 1-4, with the highest percentage incategory 2 (44%) or 1(36%). System types 1, 2_14, 2_15, and 3_19 have portfolio examples inlandscape context category 1. System types 2_13, 2_16, 2_17, 3_15and 3_17 have someportfolio examples in landscape context category 2. System types 2_16, 2_17, 3_18, and 3_16have portfolio examples in the lowest category of 4, although these 2_16 and 2_17 portfolioexamples are already coded Sxc.REVISED 6/2003AQUA-RESULTS-46
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 and 108: Table 5: Size 2 Watershed System Su
Page 109 and 110: Table 6: Size 3 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: Range in Landscape Context Ranking
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 165 and 166: KEY TO TERMS OF FEDERALLY LISTED SP
Page 171 and 172: Appendix 1.Lower New England/Northe
Page 173 and 174: Appendix 1Lower New England\Norther
Page 187 and 188:
Appendix 4.Lower New England\Northe
Page 189 and 190:
Appendix 5Lower New England\Norther
Page 191 and 192:
Appendix 5Lower New England\Norther
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?