Full ecoregional plan - Conservation Gateway

More documents

Recommendations

Info

DRAFT LNE-NP Ecoregional Plan 9\20\00CONFIDENTIALDoug Bechtel, Assistant Director of Science and Stewardship, NH ChapterAquatic Expert TeamGreg Podniesinski, Ecologist, PA Natural Diversity Inventory East (Co-leader)Mark Anderson, Director of Conservation\Regional Ecologist, ERO (Co-leader)Arlene Olivero, GIS Analyst, EROMark Bryer, Aquatic Ecologist, The Freshwater Initiative, TNCDavid StrayerJim KurtenbachRichard LangdonMike BoyerGIS and Data ManagementArlene Olivero, GIS Analyst, EROShyama Khanna, Ecoregional Information Manager, EROMeredith Hammon, Administrative Coordinator, EROAdditional expert advice and assistance provided by:Greg Low, Vice President for U.S. Conservation, HOJohn Cook, Northeast Regional Director, EROSteve Buttrich, former Director of Eastern Conservation ScienceBob Zaremba, former Director of NY Conservation Science, now Conservation Ecologist, ERODiane Vosick, former Conservation Science, HOMeg Connerton, Office Manager, MA Chapter3
BibiliographyLower New England GIS Data SourcesTransportation: Macon USA TIGER Transportation 1994 1:100K.Minor Road Bounded Blocks are based on primary highways, primary roads, secondary roads, local roads,railroads, utility lines, and major streams and shorelines from Macon USA TIGER 1994 1:100K.Major Road Bounded Blocks are based on primary highways, primary roads, and secondary roads from MaconUSA TIGER 1994 1:100K with major road class updates from Geographic Data Technology (GDT) 1997.Transportation Feature Types1. Prima ry highway with limited access: Interstate highways and some toll highways. Distinguished by the presenceof interchanges, access ramps, and opposing traffic lanes separated by a median strip.2. Primary road without limited access: Nationally and regionally important highways that do not have limitedaccess. Mostly US highways but may include some state and county highways that connect larger cities May bedivided or undivided and have multilane or single lane characteristics.3. Secondary and connecting road: Mostly state highways that connect smaller towns. Must be concrete or asphaltand are usually undivided with single-lane characteristics.4. Local, neighborhood, and rural road: Used for local traffic and usually have a single lane or traffic in eachdirection. Includes paved and unpaved roads.5. Waterbodies: Lakes and wide rivers.6. Railroads7. Major Utility Lines: Pipelines or Powerlines8. Airport runways, permanent fences, ski lifts9. Vehicle and non-Vehicle TrailsPotential Matrix Sites:For states in Lower New England (ME, NH, VT, NY, MA, CT, RI):Potential matrix sites are major road bounded blocks which met one of the following criteria1. Contain >= one 10,000 acre local road bounded block,2. Area of block is >= 5,000 acres with >= 75% natural land cover ANDa. Contains >= 20,000 acres of natural land cover ORb. Contains ( >= 80% natural land cover ) and ( >= one 2,000 acre local roadbounded block ) and ( managed area >= 20% or >= 4,000 acres )For states in the Piedmont (NJ, PA, MD, VA, DE, DC):Potential matrix sites are all major road bounded blocks > 5,000 acres with > 55%natural land cover.Managed Areas: Includes all managed lands with a conservation purpose, along with other large state orfederally managed lands greater than 500 acres. Sources include:PA - PA DEP 1:24K. State, county, federal, & private 1999.MD - MD DNR 1:24K. State, county, federal, & private 1999.DE DNREC Protected Lands 1:24K 1999.NJ DEP Natural and Historic Resources 1:24K 1999.VA - VA DCR 1:24K; VA Heritage 1:24K; VA DIGF 1:24K 1999.NY and Northern Forest Conservation Lands Coverage by TNC/Sweet Water Trust 9/98, scales varyMassGIS Open Space 1998, 1:24k.CT Managed Area coverage from Federal, State, Municipal, and Private coverages from CT DEP, various scalesRI Protected Land RIGIS open space coverages 1999, various scales.UCSB MAD 1:250K. Major federal & state lands; and USFWS National Wildlife Refuges, various scales.Land cover: EPA/USGS/Hughes MRLC 30 meter classified Landsat TM imagery. Omage dates 1991-1993.Draft for New England.Ecoregion boundaries and Subsections: TNC Eastern Conservation Science, based on USFS (Keys et al.)subsections and Natural Heritage Program data 1:1M.9/20/2000 CONFIDENTIAL DRAFT 1
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 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 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 197: DRAFT LNE-NP Ecoregional Plan 9\20\
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?