Description: This feature class contains goshawk threshold zones based on the TRPA definition of 500 acres (± 5 acres) of the best habitat surrounding a nest, including a ¼ mile radius around the nest tree. Threshold zones were delineated without regard to land owner or known project areas. The LTBMU goshawk habitat model and the author’s personal knowledge of each site were used to delineate habitat since time and funds for field visits were unavailable. Outside of the ¼ mile buffer high quality habitat was prioritized, followed by moderate quality habitat. Low quality habitat was excluded where possible. Where ¼ mile nest buffers overlapped, one threshold zone that included all ¼ mile buffers was made, equaling 500 acres, regardless of the number of nests. The one exception to this is the Hellhole territory. The combined overlapping ¼ mile buffers alone equaled more than 500 acres. In this case the threshold zone exceeds 500 acres and does not include habitat beyond the nest buffer. Only nests where the tree has been verified to be non-extant (Cascade Lake 1984B, and Angora Creek 1981B, 1981D, 1991C, 1992A, 1993C, 2001A, 2003A and 2004I) or where the nest tree is outside the TRPA boundary (not always the same as the LTBMU boundary) (Genoa Peak 1999D, 2003L and 2004L, and Martis Peak 2009F) were excluded from this shapefile.
Description: This is a shapefile showing occupied and emphasis habitat for willow flycatcher in the LTBMU. The emphasis habitat was derived by finding the areas where there was deciduous riparian veg adjacent to wet meadows larger than 14.9 acres. I used the LTBMU Riparian Vegetation layer for both of these because this layer is more accurate than CWHR. I also added the areas determined to be good habitat from the wifl hab assessment conducted in 2015. These areas were ground truthed to be good habitat, but most of them have not been surveyed. I further clipped all of these areas to within 5 miles of known detections and then clipped out non-FS lands. Even though this layer does not strictly adhere to the regional definition of emphasis habitat, I feel that it is more accurate, and therefore meets the intent.
Service Item Id: 65ef1554153c4df78ca4851b5a5585ea
Copyright Text: United States Forest Service, Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit, Shay Zanetti.
Name: Sierra Nevada Yellow-legged Frog - SuitableHabitat
Display Field: UTILIZATION
Type: Feature Layer
Geometry Type: esriGeometryPolygon
Description: Suitable habitat for Sierra Nevada Yellow-legged Frog on the Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit. Habitat is classified as "Utilized", "Utilized Potential", and "Utilization Unknown".
Service Item Id: 65ef1554153c4df78ca4851b5a5585ea
Copyright Text: Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit, Pacific Southwest Region, USDA Forest Service.
Original layer constructed by LTBMU GIS department, from data provided by Regional Office, May 2014.
Updated 6/9/2016 to include Jabu Lake, Lake Lucille, and Tamarack Lake as "Utilized", based on input from Sarah Muskoph and Shay Zanetti (LTBMU Ecosystem Conservation).
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Potential high elevation deer habitat areas within the Lake Tahoe Basin</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>