rare plant communities in canaan valley, west virginia

More documents

Recommendations

Info

nearly circular monotypic communities that are clearly visible from aerial photographs. Severallarge colonies of the rare sedge, Carex cannescens, and one colony of C. atherodes occur in thecentral part of the valley. Associated species are those listed for other wet meadow types. Thiscommunity type is typically associated with floodprone areas of streams and rivers, and inassociation with the edges of beaver impoundments.Juncus Marsh/Wet Meadow. This type is usually dominated by common rush. It appears that itsoccurrence as a dominant or co-dominant species is often correlated with disturbance,particularly along streams and areas that have been heavily impacted by past ATV activities.Mixed Graminoid-Forb Wet Meadow (Fig. 8). This highly variable mixture of commongraminoid and forb species occurs on a variety of mineral soils and under different hydrologicregimes. It may occur in large expanses near streams and rivers, in abandoned fields withseasonally high water tables, or as meadows that occur as an intermediate wetland type betweenuplands and shrub or forested wetlands. Generally, forbs are more important on drier sites. Themost frequently occurring graminoid species include redtop, bluejoint grass, sedges such asCarex folliculata, C. lurida, C. scoparia, C. stricta, C. vulpinoidea, C. gynandra, Americanmannagrass, rushes (Juncus effusus and J. subcaudatus), rice cut-grass, and bulrushes (Scirpusatrovirens and S. atrocinctus). Prominent forbs and ferns include bedstraw (Galium obtusum),dewberry, bog goldenrod, grass-leaved goldenrod, flat-topped white aster, marsh fern(Thelypteris palustris), and cinnamon fern. The following are common mixtures of graminoidsand forbs that occur as definable communities:Carex-Leersia-Calamagrostis-Glyceria Wet MeadowCarex-Scirpus-Solidago-Aster Wet MeadowCarex-Solidago-Rubus Wet MeadowGraminoid Wet Meadow/Marsh (Fig. 9). This is one of the few wetland graminoid communitiesfor which there is some evidence of occurrence before logging (Core 1966). Some bluejointgrass communities were cut for hay by early settlers. This type is similar to the graminoid-forbmeadows but with a clear dominance of one or more graminoid species. A further distinguishingfeature is that graminoid meadows generally develop under wetter hydrologic regimes than themixed graminoid-forb type. They are also often associated with disturbed habitats along streamswhere overbank flooding is frequent and where beaver activity has resulted in sustained highwater tables. Wet meadows are often dominated by bluejoint, rice cutgrass, or a combination ofmany of the same sedges and grasses listed for Mixed Graminoid-Forb Wet Meadow. Severalrare species are typically found in these habitats (e.g. American mannagrass and and marshspeedwell Veronica scutellata). The following are common mixtures of graminoids and forbsthat often occur as definable communities:Calamagrostis canadensis Wet MeadowLeersia oryzoides Wet Meadow/MarshScirpus Wet Meadow/MarshBluejoint grass typically dominates meadows along streams where there is frequent overbankflow. Associated species are the same as those found in mixed graminoid-forb wet meadows.The Carex type occurs frequently throughout the valley. The most frequently occurring sedgesare Carex folliculata, C. scoparia, C. stricta, and C. vulpinoidea. Associated species are thosecited in other wet meadow types. The Rush type is usually dominated by common rush. Theoccurrence of this type appears to be correlated with recent disturbances, particularly along8
streams. Common rush is also a frequent dominant emergent species in bogs with a bryophytegroundcover.Comparisons of Plant Communities to Areas with Similar HabitatsThe rare wetland plant communities in Canaan Valley are not unlike those in other highelevationwetlands of the Allegheny Mountain Section. Table 3 and 4 list the major plantcommunities and dominant plant species of Cranesville Swamp (Robinette 1964), CranberryGlades (Edens 1973, Kokesh 1988), Big Run Bog (Weider e.t al. 1981, Muzika et al. 1996), andCupp Run and Laurel Run (Walbridge and Lang 1982). The most obvious differences among theareas are the presence of a species in only one of the six areas and the large number ofcommunities cited for Canaan Valley. Balsam fir is present only in Canaan, as is larch (Larixlaricina) in Cranesville Swamp. Of the 28 wetland community types and 32 communitydominants listed for the region, 26 and 31, respectively, are present in Canaan Valley. Therelatively large number of communities in Canaan Valley is in part related to the sheer size of thevalley. Canaan Valley is 5-20 times larger than any of the other areas, so a larger number ofcommunities would be expected, along with higher species richness. Spatial habitat diversityand complexity are also notable. The sheer number of habitats is related in part to (1) thejuxtaposition of acid sandstones and alkaline limestone, (2) the structural geology is associatedwith the eroded anticline, and (3) the history of human disturbance. Overall, there are manysimilarities among the plant communities. Very few dominant species and community typeshave been described for other wetland areas in the Allegheny Section that do not also occur inCanaan Valley.Management ImplicationsCompared to other areas in the Allegheny Mountain Section and nearby mountainous areas withextensive wetland habitats (e.g., Cranberry Glades), Canaan Valley has an extraordinary numberof plant community types. A comparably large percentage of these are considered rare inAllegheny Mountain Section, largely because they are wetland communities, and wetlandhabitats are limited in this region. Another habitat-related factor is the presence of GreenbrierLimestone as the surface geologic stratum, adding to the diversity of habitats. Also contributingto the rarity is the large number of northern species that are also uncommon because they are ator near the southernmost limits of their ranges. The comparatively high number of rare plantcommunities in Canaan may also reflect the level of detail at which the plant communities havebeen described and to the relative size of the Valley compared to other areas.The presence of this large diversity of communities, and the fact that many are relativelyrare on a regional or global basis should be given special consideration in the management of theValley’s natural resources. Management goals and practices should be developed that sustainthis diversity, and these should include management of important wildlife species (e.g., deer andbeaver), which can directly and indirectly impact rare communities, positively as well asnegatively.ReferencesAllard, H. A. and E. C. Leonard. 1952. The Canaan and Stony River Valleys of West Virginia,their former magnificent spruce forests, their vegetation and floristics today. Castanea 17:1-60.Brooks, M. G. 1957. Canaan Valley. West Virginia Conservation. 21:7-10.9
Page 3 and 4: (Photinia melanocarpa), and herbs s
Page 5 and 6: Because of these factors, balds are
Page 7: species such as small and large cra
Page 11 and 12: Vogelmann, H. W. 1978. Evaluation o
Page 13 and 14: Table 2. Plant communities cited in
Page 15: Figure 1. Map of Canaan Valley West

rare plant communities in canaan valley, west virginia

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?