General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-22
The Northern Goshawk in Utah: Habitat Assessment and Management Recommendations

Executive Summary

Table E1 -- Proportion of the forests and woodlands in Utah in each potential vegetation type and the proportion of the forests and woodlands in Utah currently in different current cover types.

Potential vegetation typea		Current cover typeb
	Percent		Percent
White fir	7	White fir	6
Subalpine fir	17	Subalpine fir	8
Pinyon/juniper	50	Pinyon/juniper	51
Lodgepole pine	1	Lodgepole pine	2
Engelmann spruce	1	Lodgepole pine/quaking aspen	2
Ponderosa pine	5	Engelmann spruce	2
Quaking aspen	10	Engelmann spruce/subalpine fir	2
Douglas-fir	9	Engelmann spruce/lodgepole pine	4
		Ponderosa pine	4
		Cottonwood	1
		Quaking aspen	9
		Douglas-fir	2
		Douglas-fir/quaking aspen	6
		Gambel oak/big tooth maple	1
aPotential vegetation type: Defined as a classification system that integrates a variety of physical and biological components including climate, soil, geology and vegetation. These are identified by species indicative of similar conditions (Hann and other 1997) White fir = Abies concolor Subalpine fir = Abies Lasiocarpa Lodgepole pine = Pinus contorta Engelmann spruce = Picea engelmannii Ponderosa pine = Pinus ponderosa Quaking aspen = Populus tremuloides Douglas-fir = Pseudotsuga menziesii Pinyon/juniper = Pinus edulis/Juniperus oesteosperma bCover type: Defined as a plurality of one species or a mixture of two or more species in a particular forest or stand. Cottonwood = Populus spp. Gambel oak = Quercus gambelii Big tooth maple = Acer grandidentatum

Title: Executive Summary: Table E1 RMRS-GTR-22 - The Northern Goshawk in Utah: Habitat Assessment and Management Recommendations
Electronic Publish Date: May 26, 1999
Expires: Indefinite
Last Update: January 15, 2002

RMRS Publications | Order a publication | Contact Us