ILLUSTRATED FLORA OF EAST TEXAS - Brit - Botanical Research ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

strategy organized by the Conservation Fund and Renewable Resources, LLC (Limited Liability Company) and supported by a variety of Texas foundations, including the T.L.L. Temple Foundation, the Meadows Foundation, and the Houston Endowment (Conservation Fund 2004). It is hoped that such creative and positive partnerships will be more common in the future and contribute to conserving portions of the Big Thicket. While the creation of the national preserve and other protected areas were tremendous steps, when compared with the vast clearcuts and huge areas of loblolly pine monocultures, the preserved areas represent a tiny remnant of the once vast Big Thicket ecosystem. As described by Pete Gunter (1993), “Against this backdrop of massive, destructive change, the achievements of conservationists seem small indeed: mere green fly specks against an immense and growing industrial emptiness. The great long-term problem lies in lumber company policies. The real long-term solution must lie in having those policies changed.” Gunter, through research and discussions with representatives of the forest products industry, came to believe that significant changes in this area were occurring. He pointed to Temple- Inland, Champion International, and Louisiana-Pacific, at that time the three largest forest landowners in the Big Thicket region. According to the representatives he contacted, all three companies were either modifying or abandoning large-scale clearcutting as a basic tool in East Texas. Louisiana-Pacific, for example, was practicing “selective harvesting” or tree-by-tree removal, instead of destroying a whole forest. The other two companies had also created special programs. Champion International created a “Special Places in the Woods” program in which more than 1,600 acres (650 hectares) of unique woodland areas were set aside. Temple-Inland began a “Best Use Policy” that allowed bottomland forests to grow much longer than previously, and it set aside “environmental management zones” along streams in areas that are particularly rich botanically (e.g., Wild Azalea Canyons in Newton County— Sitton & Meyers 2000). Gunter compared the situation in 1993 with the view in the 1960s that “Every swamp was to be drained if it could be… and at the rate at which the pillage was proceeding it was only a question of time, not only until the Big Thicket lost its biological identity, but also until southeast Texas became a biological desert.…” Concerning the goal of preserving the biological richness of the Big Thicket, he indicated that: Though this goal has been only partly achieved, the moral is clear—it is infinitely better than what could have happened. Infinitely more hopeful, overwhelmingly more living. For those who have struggled, and will continue to struggle, to make it so, there is not only joy but a profound consolation. In a world where good causes often die and honest hopes lose themselves in sheer futility, something lasting and living has been actually achieved. People tried, and it mattered. Gunter (1993) concluded by saying, CONSERVATION IN BIG THICKET/INTRODUCTION 197 So there is a change: the beginnings, at any rate, of policies which will be kinder to the land, less destructive of soils, streams, and hardwoods. How far these policies will go towards sustaining forest habitats and the creatures that live in them remains to be seen. Hunters, environmentalists, proprietors and tourists need to understand that a change is taking place. They also need to remain skeptical. Understanding is essential; but so is the will to keep up persistent pressure. If eternal vigilance is the price of liberty, it is the price of ecology also. The situation today has changed again. Recently, for economic reasons, Champion International and Louisiana-Pacific, two of the largest timber companies in the area, have decided to withdraw from Texas. How new landowners will manage the vast areas now changing hands remains to be seen. A current bright spot in the overall conservation picture is the series of efforts being taken by Temple-Inland. Through their Conservation Forest program, numerous sites are being designated as warranting protection in four categories: rare ecosystems, wildlife management areas, distinctive sites (e.g., waterfalls, places of historical interest), or areas with endangered species. The Conservation Forest Team
198 INTRODUCTION/CONSERVATION IN BIG THICKET spearheads this effort, with the goal being to maintain the environmental qualities of the sites. This is not a wilderness approach—however, significant efforts are being made to be environmentally sensitive. Examples of areas now protected through this approach include Beef Creek Waterfall (Jasper County), Little Cow Creek (Newton County; only Texas site of the silky-camellia), a Navasota ladies’-tresses site (Jasper Co.), Peach Tree Village (Tyler County; largest remaining native prairie in the Big Thicket area), a pyramid magnolia site (Newton County), Scrappin Valley (Newton County), and Wild Azalea Canyon (Newton County). Fortunately, many of the sites of particular ecological interest are not good for growing timber (e.g., Catahoula barrens, saline prairies)—thus, setting aside such areas as Conservation Forests is a win-win proposition from the standpoint of both the company and conservationists. The company is also allowing many remaining native forest stands to naturally regenerate. These will still be working forests—trees will be harvested and the forest managed. But rather than being replaced by genetically improved loblolly pines, natural regeneration of a diversity of tree species will be allowed to occur. Further, in some areas the company is now replanting with native longleaf and also shortleaf pine. Such varied, environmentally conscious approaches are indeed refreshing and potentially quite important, particularly in light of Temple- Inland’s position as the largest owner of forest land in the state of Texas (over a million acres) (Stan Cook, pers. comm.). THE FUTURE <strong>OF</strong> THE BIG THICKET When one looks ahead at the future of Texas, it is easy to see a time when access to natural areas is even more important than at present. With rapid population growth and continued development in the state, there will be great demand by future Texans for parks, hiking trails, recreation areas, and other venues where they can escape the increasingly large and congested urban areas. The Big Thicket, with its proximity to Houston, one of the largest population centers in the state, has the potential of partially meeting this need. Likewise, the Big Thicket, with its rich diversity of habitats and large number of species, can serve as an important preserve of biological diversity. Increasing the size of the preserve to one that is both ecologically sustainable and appropriate for large numbers of potential visitors thus seems a wise investment for the future. The conservation status of the Big Thicket as of 2004 reflects some significant gains but still includes many unanswered questions and challenges. Managing a preserve of significant size takes substantial resources, which are difficult to obtain in times of increasing pressure on the federal budget. The fate of all the additional 10,766 acres (4,357 hectares) (approved but not acquired) of the Big Thicket National Preserve is still not completely settled, though federal appropriation of $3 million for fiscal year 2003 and $3.5 million for 2004 is allowing acquisition of some of the area (D. Fusco, pers. comm.). Perhaps more importantly, when considering the Big Thicket as a whole, various development pressures (urbanization, water diversion, etc.) continue to accelerate. The effects, which include fragmentation of habitats and modifications of hydrology, have potentially serious ecological consequences. Disturbingly, two recent dam proposals (enlarging the Town Bluff Dam which creates Steinhagen Lake and building Rockland Dam on the Neches River above Steinhagen Lake) could alter critically important water flows through Big Thicket National Preserve, inundate parts of a wildlife management area, and almost completely submerge Martin Dies, Jr., State Park, which protects examples of Big Thicket vegetation (Warchut 2003; National Parks Conservation Association 2004a). Possibly even more significantly, as mentioned earlier, Champion International and Louisiana-Pacific, are withdrawing from Texas with vast areas (more than 1.5 million acres) of the Big Thicket having either been sold or now for sale (National Parks Conservation Association 2004b). As a result, the buffering from development previously provided by timber company lands is in question. The large amount of land currently changing hands
Page 1 and 2:
ILLUSTRATED FLORA OF EAST TEXAS
Page 3 and 4:
ALLDREDGE, LINDA & JACK BATTERBAE,
Page 5 and 6:
We would like to recognize and expr
Page 7 and 8:
ISSN 0833-1475 ISBN 1-889878-12-X S
Page 9 and 10:
“DEEP EAST TEXAS IS AN OLD, QUIET
Page 11 and 12:
Elray S. Nixon E lray Nixon was bor
Page 13 and 14:
ILLUSTRATED FLORA OF EAST TEXAS TAB
Page 15 and 16:
TABLE OFCONTENTS/ PAGE APPENDICES A
Page 17 and 18:
Hymenocallis liriosme
Page 19 and 20:
ILLUSTRATED FLORA OF EAST TEXAS OVE
Page 21 and 22:
4 INTRODUCTION/GEOGRAPHIC AREA OF E
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
10 INTRODUCTION/MAJOR RIVERS OF EAS
Page 29 and 30:
12 INTRODUCTION/PLANTS TREATED The
Page 31 and 32:
14 INTRODUCTION/GUIDE TO ARRANGEMEN
Page 33 and 34:
16 INTRODUCTION/GUIDE TO SOURCES OF
Page 35 and 36:
18 INTRODUCTION/GUIDE TO GEOGRAPHIC
Page 37 and 38:
20 INTRODUCTION/GUIDE TO ENDANGERED
Page 39 and 40:
22 INTRODUCTION/GUIDE TO GLOSSARY,
Page 41 and 42:
24 INTRODUCTION/GUIDE TO ABBREVIATI
Page 43 and 44:
26 INTRODUCTION/SUMMARY DATA ON FLO
Page 45 and 46:
28 INTRODUCTION/ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Kar
Page 47 and 48:
30 INTRODUCTION/AUTHORS’ NOTE Pre
Page 49 and 50:
32 INTRODUCTION/GENERAL GEOLOGY OF
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
46 INTRODUCTION/SOILS SOIL ORDER DE
Page 65 and 66:
48 INTRODUCTION/SOILS, EAST TEXAS B
Page 67 and 68:
50 INTRODUCTION/SOIL-RELATED GEOLOG
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
60 INTRODUCTION/SOILS OF BLACKLAND
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
66 INTRODUCTION/CLIMATE OF EAST TEX
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Forests define East Texas, and to a
Page 95 and 96:
78 INTRODUCTION/GEOLOGY OF PINEYWOO
Page 97 and 98:
80 INTRODUCTION/PRESETTLEMENT, EARL
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
88 INTRODUCTION/PRESETTLEMENT VEGET
Page 107 and 108:
90 INTRODUCTION/CURRENT VEGETATION
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
106 INTRODUCTION/POST OAK SAVANNAH
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
110 INTRODUCTION/GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Page 129 and 130:
112 INTRODUCTION/SOILS, FIRE, AND T
Page 131 and 132:
114 INTRODUCTION/SOILS, FIRE, AND T
Page 133 and 134:
116 INTRODUCTION/ PRESETTLEMENT, EA
Page 135 and 136:
118 INTRODUCTION/VEGETATION OF POST
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
124 INTRODUCTION/CONDITIONS TODAY O
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
128 INTRODUCTION/RED RIVER AREA are
Page 147 and 148:
130 INTRODUCTION/BLACKLAND PRAIRIE
Page 149 and 150:
132 INTRODUCTION/GEOLOGY OF BLACKLA
Page 151 and 152:
134 INTRODUCTION/PRESETTLEMENT AND
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
144 INTRODUCTION/VEGETATION OF BLAC
Page 163 and 164: 146 INTRODUCTION/FUTURE OF BLACKLAN
Page 165 and 166: 148 INTRODUCTION/FUTURE OF BLACKLAN
Page 167 and 168: 150 INTRODUCTION/CADDO LAKE LOCATIO
Page 169 and 170: 152 INTRODUCTION/CADDO LAKE FIG.84/
Page 171 and 172: 154 INTRODUCTION/PRESENT AND FUTURE
Page 173 and 174: 156 INTRODUCTION/BIG THICKET THE BI
Page 175 and 176: 158 INTRODUCTION/BIG THICKET GEOGRA
Page 177 and 178: 160 INTRODUCTION/NATURAL HISTORY OF
Page 189 and 190: 172 INTRODUCTION/SUMMARY DEFINITION
Page 191 and 192: 174 INTRODUCTION/PRESETTLEMENT AND
Page 201 and 202: 184 INTRODUCTION/HISTORY OF BIG THI
Page 207 and 208: 190 INTRODUCTION/CONSERVATION IN BI
Page 213: 196 INTRODUCTION/CONSERVATION IN BI
Page 217 and 218: 200 INTRODUCTION/ORIGIN AND DIVERSI
Page 245 and 246: 228 INTRODUCTION/CONSERVATION IN EA
Page 251 and 252: 234 INTRODUCTION/HISTORY OF BOTANY
Page 261 and 262: 244 INTRODUCTION/BOTANY IN NORTH CE
Page 263 and 264: 246 INTRODUCTION/BOTANY IN NORTH CE
Page 265 and 266:
248 INTRODUCTION/BOTANY AT UNIVERSI
Page 267 and 268:
250 INTRODUCTION/BOTANY AT TEXAS A&
Page 269 and 270:
252 INTRODUCTION/BOTANY AT TEXAS A&
Page 271 and 272:
254 INTRODUCTION/OTHER CONTRIBUTION
Page 273 and 274:
256 INTRODUCTION/CURRENT BOTANICAL
Page 275 and 276:
258 INTRODUCTION/BOTANICAL ART IN E
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
show all

ILLUSTRATED FLORA OF EAST TEXAS - Brit - Botanical Research ...

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

Delete template?

Save as template?