Index of Species Information

SPECIES:  Robinia neomexicana


Introductory

SPECIES: Robinia neomexicana
AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION : Pavek, Diane, S. 1993. Robinia neomexicana. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ [].

ABBREVIATION : ROBNEO SYNONYMS : Robinia luxurians (Dieck) Schneid. Robinia subvelutina Rydb. Robinia breviloba Rydb. Robinia neomexicana var. subvelutina (Rydb.) Kearney & Peebles SCS PLANT CODE : RONE COMMON NAMES : New Mexico locust New Mexican locust southwestern locust hojalito Una de Gato TAXONOMY : The currently accepted scientific name of New Mexico locust is Robinia neomexicana Gray. It is a member of the pea family (Fabaceae). Several varieties may be encountered in the literature; however, the maintenance of varieties is questionable due to intergradation of all forms [3,36]. LIFE FORM : Tree, Shrub FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS : No special status OTHER STATUS : NO-ENTRY


DISTRIBUTION AND OCCURRENCE

SPECIES: Robinia neomexicana
GENERAL DISTRIBUTION : New Mexico locust is found from the mountains of Trans-Pecos Texas north to southern Colorado and west to southern Nevada [29,36,42]. Its range extends from southeastern California to New Mexico and northern Mexico [3,11,53,56]. ECOSYSTEMS : FRES21 Ponderosa pine FRES23 Fir - spruce FRES34 Chaparral - mountain shrub FRES35 Pinyon - juniper STATES : AZ CA CO NV NM TX UT MEXICO BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS : 6 Upper Basin and Range 7 Lower Basin and Range 11 Southern Rocky Mountains 12 Colorado Plateau 13 Rocky Mountain Piedmont KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS : K018 Pine - Douglas-fir forest K019 Arizona pine forest K020 Spruce - fir - Douglas-fir forest K021 Southwestern spruce - fir forest K023 Juniper - pinyon woodland K031 Oak - juniper woodlands K032 Transition between K031 and K037 SAF COVER TYPES : 206 Engelmann spruce - subalpine fir 211 White fir 216 Blue spruce 217 Aspen 237 Interior ponderosa pine 238 Western juniper 239 Pinyon - juniper 240 Arizona cypress 241 Western live oak SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES : NO-ENTRY HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES : New Mexico locust grows in pure stands or as an understory species [26]. New Mexico locust is an understory dominant or codominant with Gambel oak (Quercus gambelii) under spruce-fir (Picea engelmannii-Abies lasiocarpa), white fir (A. concolor), and mixed-conifer forests [1,16,20,24,37,40]. It is a minor component in most riparian forest and scrubland community types within its range, and in one chaparral association (Arizona oak-yellowleaf silktassel-Emory oak [Q. arizonica-Garrya flavescens-Q. emoryi]) [8,51,52]. New Mexico locust is an indicator for habitat types or plant associations in the following publications: (1) Classification of the forest vegetation on the National Forests of Arizona and New Mexico [2] (2) A vegetation classification system for New Mexico, U.S.A. [19] (3) Forest habitat types in the Apache, Gila, and part of the Cibola National Forests, Arizona and New Mexico [24] (4) Forest and woodland habitat types (plant associations) of northern New Mexico and northern Arizona [39] (5) A classification of spruce-fir and mixed conifer habitat types of Arizona and New Mexico [40].

MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS

SPECIES: Robinia neomexicana
WOOD PRODUCTS VALUE : New Mexico locust wood is hard, heavy, and durable. It has been used for fence posts and fuel [34,36]. It is of little use as lumber due to its small size and limited distribution [34]. IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE : On disturbed sites, New Mexico locust offers good forage and cover for livestock and wildlife [39,45]. New Mexico locust is eaten by mule deer, bighorn sheep, Gambel's quail, chipmunk, and porcupine [56]. PALATABILITY : Both the flowers and foliage are preferred by cattle and deer [33,36]. Palatability of New Mexico locust in Utah is fair for cattle and horses and good for sheep [18]. NUTRITIONAL VALUE : New Mexico locust has fair energy value but usually has poor protein value (however, see below) [18]. New Mexico locust leaves comprised 0.8 percent of the total diet of mule deer in Arizona in June [54]. Protein and acid-detergent fiber were each 25 percent of the leafy material. Digestible dry matter was 39 percent of the leaves. COVER VALUE : In Arizona, New Mexico locust as a minor species with Gambel oak noticeably contributed to elk summer thermal cover in a ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa)-white fir overstory [7]. The cover value of New Mexico locust in Utah is rated as poor for pronghorn, elk, and waterfowl; fair for mule deer and upland game birds; and good for small mammals and small nongame birds [18]. VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES : New Mexico locust is cultivated for erosion control [32,34,36,45,56]. Caution is advised when using New Mexico locust in recreation areas because of its stout spines [32]. In San Dimas Experimental Forest, California, at an elevation of 500 feet (152 m), New Mexico locust bareroot stock was planted on road fills. Survival was 52 percent. New Mexico locust made the most rapid growth compared to all other species planted. It has been fully tested and is recommended for erosion control on sites at 500 to 6,000 feet (152-1,829 m) in elevation with deep soil and in full sun[32]. OTHER USES AND VALUES : New Mexico locust is cultivated as an ornamental [34,36,56]. The Hopi Indians have used it as an emetic and for treating rheumatism [36,56]. OTHER MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : New Mexico locust competes with conifer seedlings and saplings for moisture and light [26]. Because of its rapid growth and prolific sprouting, efforts are made to suppress New Mexico locust, especially after timber harvest [13,14,39]. Brush competition is usually detrimental to seedling or juvenile tree growth [10,26,30]. However, Coffman [10] showed that under adverse planting conditions, the highest establishment rates of planted Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) seedlings occurred under moderate or heavy cover of New Mexico locust and Gambel oak. Mechanical methods alone do not successfully control New Mexico locust [26]. Gottfried [26] tested combinations of mechanical and chemical control methods on New Mexico locust in central Arizona. There was no significant difference among the various treatments after 1 year. However, 4 years after the combination treatment of (1) cutting stems during dormancy, (2) painting stumps with 2,4-D, and (3) spraying sprouts with 2,4,5-T, stems were reduced from 104 to 9. Within 8 years of an 80-acre (32.4 ha) harvest of mixed-conifer forest in Arizona, 20 acres (8.1 ha) were covered by New Mexico locust. The New Mexico locust plants were treated with picloram; 86 percent of the plants were dead after 2 years [13]. Single applications of soil herbicides may not elminate New Mexico locust due to delayed recovery of plants and establishment of seedlings. Therefore, follow-up spot treatment is recommended [13]. In open ponderosa pine stands in northern Arizona, production values for New Mexico locust were 3 pounds per acre (3.4 kg/ha) [9]. Ffolliott [22] has developed models for predicting understory production in ponderosa pine or mixed conifer forests of which New Mexico locust is a component.

BOTANICAL AND ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS

SPECIES: Robinia neomexicana
GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS : New Mexico locust is a native rhizomatous, small tree or shrub that grows from 3 to 26 feet (4-8 m) tall with a diameter of 4 to 8 inches (10-20 cm) [29,34,45,53,58]. It has a dense crown and thin bark [32,34]. New Mexico locust has many stout spiny branches with pinnately compound leaves that are 6 to 8 inches (15-20 cm) long [11,34]. Flowers hang in dense clusters [36]. The fruit is a hairy legume about 3 inches (7.6 cm) long containing several seeds [36,45]. RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM : Phanerophyte Geophyte REGENERATION PROCESSES : New Mexico locust reproduces asexually and sexually. It sprouts from stumps and root crowns [36,56]. New Mexico locust spreads by rhizomes, forming dense thickets [49]. New Mexico locust fruits open rapidly when mature [42]. Locust (Robinia spp.) seeds have impermeable seed coats and must be scarified [42,56]. Olson [42] and Vines [56] outline nursery methods for New Mexico locust propagation. Seed stored in a cool dry place remained viable 1 to 4 years, which indicates that a short-lived seedbank could exist [56]. SITE CHARACTERISTICS : New Mexico locust is common in canyons, along streams or arroyos, on terraces, talus slopes, and in coniferous forest understories [35,36,45,58]. It is found on gentle to relatively steep slopes on all aspects [24,28,57]. New Mexico locust occurs on a wide variety of soils, ranging from clays to sandy loams derived from volcanic or limestone parent materials [5,8,12,23,31]. Across its range, New Mexico locust is found between 4,000 and 9,150 feet (1,219-2,789 m) in elevation [23,28,39,48,56]. New Mexico locust occurs in semiarid continental climates with dry warm springs, hot moist summers, and cold moist winters [14,44]. Across its range, two major precipitation seasons exist, with 35 to 42 percent of precipitation falling as rain in July and August [28]. Average annual precipitation ranges from 15 to 30 inches (381-762 mm) [12,23,28,31,46]. Associated species not mentioned in Distribution and Occurrence are listed below. Associated trees are southwestern white pine (Pinus strobiformis), Chihuahua pine (Pinus leiophylla var. chihuahuana), and quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) [17,24,43,57]. Common shrub associates are Fendler ceanothus (Ceanothus fenderi), manzanita (Arctostaphylos spp.), silverleaf oak (Quercus hypoleucoides), mountain snowberry (Symphoricarpos oreophilus), and mountain-mahogany (Cercocarpus spp.) [6,9,28,52]. Other associated species are Arizona fescue (Festuca arizonica), mutton bluegrass (Poa fendleriana), and western yarrow (Achillea lanulosa) [12,23]. SUCCESSIONAL STATUS : Facultative Seral Species New Mexico locust is a seral species after overstory removal in southwestern coniferous forests [28]. After disturbance in mixed-conifer stands, New Mexico locust became dominant after 1 to 3 years of forb dominance [28]. New Mexico locust is shaded out when the conifers overtop it in 15 to 20 years [27,28]. SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT : New leaves of New Mexico locust begin growing in the spring. Flowers form April to July in the new leaf axils [36,56]. Fruits ripen September to October, and seeds disperse from September to December [42,56]. Leaves abscise in autumn [42].

FIRE ECOLOGY

SPECIES: Robinia neomexicana
FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS : Thin bark and moderate litter production probably make New Mexico locust susceptible to fire [32]. Horton [32] stated that the succulent foliage during the summer decreases the severity of fires in New Mexico locust communities. Postburn regeneration probably occurs via root crown and rhizome sprouting. POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY : Tree with adventitious-bud root crown/root sucker

FIRE EFFECTS

SPECIES: Robinia neomexicana
IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT : Fire probably kills New Mexico locust aerial stems and seedlings. However, the root crown can survive low- to moderate-severity fires [44]. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT : NO-ENTRY PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE : Surviving New Mexico locust root crowns and rhizomes sprout following fire [8]. From information about the rate of growth, it is probable that postfire recovery via sprouting is good [32]. Two years after a fire in north-central New Mexico, New Mexico locust, at a density of 240 plants per acre (593 plants/ha), had 295 sprouts per acre (729 sprouts/ha) with an average height of 15 inches (38 cm) [44]. Hanks and Dick-Peddie [28] evaluated the effects of elevation and exposure on 11 burns aged 3 to 80 years in south-central New Mexico. There was no trend in size or number of trees for New Mexico locust. New Mexico locust was nearly ubiquitous on burned sites below 10,000 feet (3,048 m) by postfire year 2 or 3. Potter and Foxx [44] looked at sprouting on a low-severity burn at postfire year 2; a moderate-severity burn at postfire year 17; and a high-severity burn at postfire year 100. New Mexico locust had the greatest number of sprouts per acre on the moderate-severity burn area at postfire year 17. In a pinyon-Utah juniper (Juniperus osteosperma) woodland in northwestern Arizona, shrubs were assessed at postfire year 20. The area had been seeded to introduced grasses. New Mexico locust occurred infrequently; the plants were assumed to be on-site survivors that had sprouted [15]. DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE : NO-ENTRY FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS : The use of fire to control New Mexico locust and improve conifer regeneration has not been tested [26]. Potentially, fires occurring more frequently than every 10 years would favor sprouting shrubs, such as New Mexico locust, over nonsprouting shrubs [59].

REFERENCES

SPECIES: Robinia neomexicana
REFERENCES : 1. Alexander, Billy G., Jr.; Ronco, Frank, Jr.; White, Alan S.; Ludwig, John A. 1984. Douglas-fir habitat types of northern Arizona. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-108. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 13 p. [301] 2. Alexander, Robert R.; Ronco, Frank, Jr. 1987. Classification of the forest vegetation on the National Forests of Arizona and New Mexico. Res. Note RM-469. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 10 p. [3515] 3. Barneby, Rupert C. 1989. Intermountain flora: Vascular plants of the Intermountain West, U.S.A. Vol. 3, Part B: Fabales. Bronx, NY: The New York Botanical Garden. 279 p. [18596] 4. Bernard, Stephen R.; Brown, Kenneth F. 1977. Distribution of mammals, reptiles, and amphibians by BLM physiographic regions and A.W. Kuchler's associations for the eleven western states. Tech. Note 301. Denver, CO: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 169 p. [434] 5. Bojorquez Tapia, Luis A.; Ffolliott, Peter F.; Guertin, D. Phillip. 1990. Herbage production-forest overstory relationships in two Arizona ponderosa pine forests. Journal of Range Management. 43(1): 25-28. [11509] 6. Brown, David E. 1982. Great Basin montane scrubland. In: Brown, David E., ed. Biotic communities of the American Southwest--United States and Mexico. Desert Plants. 4(1-4): 83-84. [8890] 7. Brown, Richard L. 1989. Effect of timber management practices on elk. In: Tecle, Aregai; Covington, W. Wallace; Hamre, R. H., technical coordinators. Multiresource management of ponderosa pine forests: Proceedings of the symposium; 1989 November 14-16; Flagstaff, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-185. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 160-164. [11314] 8. Carmichael, R. S.; Knipe, O. D.; Pase, C. P.; Brady, W. W. 1978. Arizona chaparral: plant associations and ecology. Res. Pap. RM-202. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 16 p. [3038] 9. Clary, Warren P. 1975. Range management and its ecological basis in the ponderosa pine type of Arizona: the status of our knowledge. Res. Pap. RM-158. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 35 p. [4688] 10. Coffman, Michael S. 1975. Shade from brush increases survival of planted Douglas-fir. Journal of Forestry. 73: 726-728. [20417] 11. Correll, Donovan S.; Johnston, Marshall C. 1970. Manual of the vascular plants of Texas. Renner, TX: Texas Research Foundation. 1881 p. [4003] 12. Covington, W. W.; Moore, M. M. 1992. Postsettlement changes in natural fire regimes: implications for restoration of old-growth ponderosa pine forests. In: Kaufmann, Merrill R.; Moir, W. H.; Bassett, Richard L., technical coordinators. Old-growth forests in the southwest and Rocky Mountain regions: Proceedings of a workshop; 1992 March 9-13; Portal, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-213. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 81-99. [19045] 13. Davis, E. A.; Gottfried, G. J. 1981. Response of New Mexico locust and Gambel oak to picloram pellets. In: Western Society of Weed Science: 1981 Research Progress Report; 1981 March 17-19; San Diego. [Place of publication unknown]. [Publisher unknown]. 54-55. [7866] 14. Davis, E. A.; Gottfried, G. J. 1983. Picloram pellets control New Mexico locust sprouts on a cleared forest site in Arizona. Down to Earth. 39(1): 18-21. [6827] 15. Despain, Del W. 1987. History and results of prescribed burning of pinyon-juniper woodland on the Hualapai Indian Reservation in Arizona. In: Everett, Richard L., compiler. Proceedings--pinyon-juniper conference; 1986 January 13-16; Reno, NV. Gen. Tech. Tep. INT-215. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 145-151. [4754] 16. Dick-Peddie, W. A.; Moir, W. H. 1970. Vegetation of the Organ Mountains, New Mexico. Science Series No. 4. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University, Range Science Department. 28 p. [6699] 17. Diem, Kenneth L.; Zeveloff, Samuel I. 1980. Ponderosa pine bird communities. In: DeGraaf, Richard M., technical coordinator. Management of western forests and grasslands for nongame birds: Workshop proceedings; 1980 February 11-14; Salt Lake City, UT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-86. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 170-197. [17904] 18. Dittberner, Phillip L.; Olson, Michael R. 1983. The plant information network (PIN) data base: Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. FWS/OBS-83/86. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 786 p. [806] 19. Donart, Gary B.; Sylvester, Donell; Hickey, Wayne. 1978. A vegetation classification system for New Mexico, U.S.A. In: Hyder, Donald N., ed. Proceedings, 1st international rangeland congress; 1978 August 14-18; Denver, CO. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management: 488-490. [4094] 20. Dye, A. J.; Moir, W. H. 1977. Spruce-fir forest at its southern distribution in the Rocky Mountains, New Mexico. American Midland Naturalist. 97(1): 133-146. [7476] 21. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905] 22. Ffolliott, Peter F. 1983. Overstory-understory relationships: Southwestern ponderosa pine forests. In: Bartlett, E. T.; Betters, David R., eds. Overstory-understory relationships in western forests. Western Regional Research Publication No. 1. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University Experiment Station: 13-18. [3311] 23. Ffolliott, Peter F.; Gottfried, Gerald J. 1989. Production and utilization of herbaceous plants in small clearcuts in an Arizona mixed conifer forest. Res. Note RM-494. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 5 p. [10543] 24. Fitzhugh, E. Lee; Moir, William H.; Ludwig, John A.; Ronco, Frank, Jr. 1987. Forest habitat types in the Apache, Gila, and part of the Cibola National Forests, Arizona and New Mexico. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-145. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 116 p. [4206] 25. Garrison, George A.; Bjugstad, Ardell J.; Duncan, Don A.; [and others]. 1977. Vegetation and environmental features of forest and range ecosystems. Agric. Handb. 475. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 68 p. [998] 26. Gottfried, Gerald J. 1980. Control of New Mexican locust and the effect on planted ponderosa pine in central Arizona. Res. Note RM-386. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 6 p. [7182] 27. Hanks, Jess Paul. 1966. Vegetation of the mixed conifer zone; White Mountains, New Mexico. University Park, NM: New Mexico State University. 39 p. Thesis. [4632] 28. Hanks, Jess P.; Dick-Peddie, W. A. 1974. Vegetation patterns of the White Mountians, New Mexico. Southwestern Naturalist. 18(4): 371-382. [4635] 29. Harrington, H. D. 1964. Manual of the plants of Colorado. 2d ed. Chicago: The Swallow Press Inc. 666 p. [6851] 30. Heidmann, L. J. 1988. Regeneration strategies for ponderosa pine. In: Baumgartner, David M.; Lotan, James E., compilers. Ponderosa pine: The species and its management: Symposium proceedings; 1987 September 29 - October 1; Spokane, WA. Pullman, WA: Washington State University, Cooperative Extension: 227-233. [9422] 31. Heidmann, L. J.; Larson, Frederic R.; Rietveld, W. J. 1977. Evaluation of ponderosa pine reforestation techniques in central Arizona. Res. Pap. RM-190. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 10 p. [15883] 32. Horton, Jerome S. 1949. Trees and shrubs for erosion control of southern California mountains. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, California [Pacific Southwest] Forest and Range Experiment Station; California Department of Natural Resources, Division of Forestry. 72 p. [10689] 33. Hungerford, C. R. 1970. Response of Kaibab mule deer to management of summer range. Journal of Wildlife Management. 34(40): 852-862. [1219] 34. Johnson, Carl M. 1970. Common native trees of Utah. Special Report 22. Logan, UT: Utah State University, College of Natural Resources, Agricultural Experiment Station. 109 p. [9785] 35. Johnston, Marshall C. 1979. The Guadalupe Mountains--a chink in the mosaic of the Chihuahuan Desert?. In: Genoways, Hugh H.; Baker, Robert J., eds. Biological investigations in the Guadalupe Mountains National Park: Proceedings of a symposium; 1975 April 4-5; Lubbock, TX. Proceedings and Transactions Series No. 4. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service: 45-49. [16016] 36. Kearney, Thomas H.; Peebles, Robert H.; Howell, John Thomas; McClintock, Elizabeth. 1960. Arizona flora. 2d ed. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1085 p. [6563] 37. Krauch, Hermann. 1956. Management of Douglas-fir timberland in the Southwest. Station Paper No. 21. Fort Collins, CO: U.S Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 59 p. [8219] 38. Kuchler, A. W. 1964. Manual to accompany the map of potential vegetation of the conterminous United States. Special Publication No. 36. New York: American Geographical Society. 77 p. [1384] 39. Larson, Milo; Moir, W. H. 1987. Forest and woodland habitat types (plant associations) of northern New Mexico and northern Arizona. 2d ed. Albuquerque, NM: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southwestern Region. 90 p. [8947] 40. Moir, William H.; Ludwig, John A. 1979. A classification of spruce-fir and mixed conifer habitat types of Arizona and New Mexico. Res. Pap. RM-207. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 47 p. [1677] 41. Northington, David K.; Burgess, Tony L. 1979. Status of rare and endangered plant species of the Guadalupe Mountains National Park, Texas. In: Genoways, Hugh H.; Baker, Robert J., eds. Biological investigations in the Guadalupe Mountains National Park: Proceedings of a symposium; 1975 April 4-5; Lubbock, TX. Proceedings and Transactions Series No. 4. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service: 59-77. [16018] 42. Olson, David F., Jr. 1974. Robinia L. locust. In: Schopmeyer, C. S., ed. Seeds of woody plants in the United States. Agric. Handb. 450. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 728-731. [7741] 43. Pase, Charles P.; Brown, David E. 1982. Rocky Mountain (Petran) and Madrean montane conifer forests. In: Brown, David E., ed. Biotic communities of the American Southwest--United States and Mexico. Desert Plants. 4(1-4): 43-48. [8885] 44. Potter, Loren D.; Foxx, Teralene. 1979. Recovery and delayed mortality of ponderosa pine after wildfire. Final Report (Part I), Contract No. 16-608-GR, EC-291. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico, Biology Department. 33 p. [11748] 45. Powell, A. Michael. 1988. Trees & shrubs of Trans-Pecos Texas including Big Bend and Guadalupe Mountains National Parks. Big Bend National Park, TX: Big Bend Natural History Association. 536 p. [6130] 46. Ramotnik, Cynthia A.; Scott, Norman J., Jr. 1988. Habitat requirements of New Mexico's endangered salamanders. In: Szaro, Robert C.; Severson, Kieth E.; Patton, David R., technical coordinators. Management of amphibians, reptiles, and small mammals in North America: Proceedings of the symposium; 1988 July 19-21; Flagstaff, AZ. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-166. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 54-63. [7108] 47. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843] 48. Reynolds, Hudson G. 1969. Improvement of deer habitat on southwestern forest lands. Journal of Forestry. 67(11): 803-805. [16544] 49. Simpson, Benny J. 1988. A field guide to Texas trees. Austin, TX: Texas Monthly Press. 372 p. [11708] 50. Stickney, Peter F. 1989. Seral origin of species originating in northern Rocky Mountain forests. Unpublished draft on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT; RWU 4403 files. 7 p. [20090] 51. Szaro, Robert C. 1989. Riparian forest and scrubland community types of Arizona and New Mexico. Desert Plants. 9(3-4): 70-138. [604] 52. Szaro, Robert C.; King, Rudy M. 1990. Sampling intensity and species richness: effects on delineating Southwestern riparian plant communities. Forest Ecology and Management. 33/34: 335-349. [13783] 53. Tidestrom, I.; Kittell, T. 1941. A flora of Arizona and New Mexico. Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press. 897 p. [18145] 54. Urness, P. J.; Neff, D. J.; Watkins, R. K. 1975. Nutritive value of mule deer forages on ponderosa pine summer range in Arizona. Res. Note RM-304. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 6 p. [15854] 55. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1982. National list of scientific plant names. Vol. 1. List of plant names. SCS-TP-159. Washington, DC. 416 p. [11573] 56. Vines, Robert A. 1960. Trees, shrubs, and woody vines of the Southwest. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. 1104 p. [7707] 57. Wagle, R. F. 1981. Fire: its effects on plant succession and wildlife in the Southwest. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona. 82 p. [4031] 58. Welsh, Stanley L.; Atwood, N. Duane; Goodrich, Sherel; Higgins, Larry C., eds. 1987. A Utah flora. Great Basin Naturalist Memoir No. 9. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University. 894 p. [2944] 59. Wright, Henry A.; Bailey, Arthur W. 1982. Fire ecology: United States and southern Canada. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 501 p. [2620]


FEIS Home Page