ACTION PLAN FOR SENSITIVE PLANT SPECIES ON THE

CLEARWATER NATIONAL FOREST

by

Juanita Lichthardt

Conservation Data Center

March 1999

CONTENTS

CONTENTS.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................i

LIST OF TABLES ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................ii

LIST OF APPENDICES ................................................................................................................................................................................................ii

INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................1

ORIGINS OF RARITY IN THE CLEARWATER REGION ...................................................................................................................................2

PROTOCOL FOR DESIGNATING SENSITIVE PLANTS .....................................................................................................................................2

FOREST GOALS AND OBJECTIVES-SENSITIVE PLANTS ................................................................................................................................5

Forest Goals ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................5

Forest Objectives ..............................................................................................................................................................................................................6

PLAN OF WORK ............................................................................................................................................................................................................6

Rare Plant Survey ..............................................................................................................................................................................................................9

Needs .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................9

Action item .....................................................................................................................................................................................................................10

Rare Plant Monitoring ...................................................................................................................................................................................................10

Stewardship monitoring .................................................................................................................................................................................................10

Population monitoring ...................................................................................................................................................................................................11

Action items ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................12

Plant Community Survey and Conservation .................................................................................................................................................................13

Background .....................................................................................................................................................................................................................13

Action items ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................13

Protected Areas .............................................................................................................................................................................................................14

Background ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................14

Action items ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................14

Project and Planning Support ......................................................................................................................................................................................14

Needs .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................14

Action items ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................15

REPORTING ...............................................................................................................................................................................................................15

OTHER RESOURCES ...............................................................................................................................................................................................15

REFERENCES CITED ..............................................................................................................................................................................................16

i

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Conservation Data Center Ranks ..................................................................................................................................................................... 4

Table 2. Score criteria for abundance and distribution .................................................................................................................................................5

Table 3 Proposed five year activity plan and budget .....................................................................................................................................................7

Table 4. Sensitive plant taxa requiring survey work, in priority order .......................................................................................................................10

Table 5. Plant populations requiring stewardship monitoring ....................................................................................................................................11

Table 6. Plant population monitoring projects conducted on the Clearwater National Forest ...............................................................................12

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Sensitive plant list for the Clearwater National Forest (1999)

INTRODUCTION

This is a five year plan for the Sensitive Plant Program on the Clearwater National Forest. Sensitive plants are taxa of limited distribution on a global, state, or local level that are known to occur, or to have occurred, on the Forest. These rare taxa require special consideration in Forest planning and management in order to maintain populations throughout their current ranges. A list of Region I Sensitive plants and animals was first compiled in 1988, and was revised in 1991, 1994 and 1999 (Appendix A). A draft version of the 1999 list was available at the time this plan was written.

This Plan replaces the 1991 Action Plan for Sensitive Plant Species (Lorain 1991a). Its purpose is to define Forest goals and objectives for Sensitive plants and to propose a plan of work based on those objectives. Forest objectives for Sensitive plants provide the framework for proposed action items and corresponding budget allocations. A profile of each Sensitive plant species is included as an appendix to update information provided in the 1991 plan concerning the status of each species, and to provide training materials for Sensitive plant identification.

POLICY

Forest Service policy requires that the Agency maintain viable populations of all existing native plant species in habitats distributed throughout their geographic range on National Forest System lands (USDA Forest Service 1984, 2670.22). The Forest Service Manual (FSM) defines a viable population as one that has the estimated numbers and distribution of reproductive individuals to ensure the continued existence of the species throughout its existing range within the planning area (i.e., Forest; FSM 2670.5.22). Unfortunately, this definition confuses population viability with species viability. Also, it leaves to the manager the responsibility of deciding what number and distribution of individuals of a particular species constitute a viable population. A knowledge of the historical or existing range, among other things, is key to such a decision. Guidelines for assessing viability of Sensitive plant populations are available from the Regional Botanist.

Forest Service policy recognizes the need for special planning and management considerations to protect the flora of lands under its management. Sensitive species requiring special management considerations are to be designated by the Regional Forester (FSM 2672.1 1). Management practices are to be developed and implemented to ensure that Sensitive species do not become threatened or endangered because of Forest Service actions. Management objectives for populations and/or habitat of sensitive species are to be developed (FSM 2670.22). No impacts are allowed to populations of Sensitive plants without an analysis of their significance to the viability of the population and to the species as a whole (FSM 2670.32). Objectives for protection of Sensitive plants are to be included in the Forest Plan (FSM 2672.32).

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) enforces the Endangered Species Act (ESA) which applies to all plants Federally listed as Threatened or Endangered, or those proposed for listing. Section 7 of the ESA directs Federal agencies to ensure that actions authorized, funded, or carried out by them are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any Threatened or Endangered species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of their critical habitats. Currently, no Federally listed or proposed plant species are known, or considered probable to occur, on the Clearwater National Forest, however, the Forest falls within the Section 7 consultation area for two listed species, Howellia aquatilis (water howellia) and Spiranthes diluvialis (Ute ladies tresses).

1ORIGINS OF RARITY IN THE CLEARWATER REGION

Rare elements of the flora of the Clearwater Mountains are related to the existence of unique habitats and to the relationship of the region to other major vegetation zones, most notably the Columbia plateau to the west and the boreal forest to the north. Calochortus nitidus and Haplopappus hirtus var. sonchifolius are regional endemics with ranges centered on the foothills and plateau lands to the west, and peripheral populations in the Clearwater Mountains. Other taxa such as Carex leptalea , Blechnum spicant, and Triantha occidentalis ssp. brevistyla are southern extensions of the boreal flora.

Biodiversity of the region is greatly enhanced by the unique environments of low elevation canyons of the Clearwater River and its major tributaries, which have a combination of abundant rainfall and moderate temperatures similar to that of Pacific coastal forests. This similarity is evidenced by a concentration of coastal disjunct plant species in these canyons, some of which are found nowhere else east of the Cascade Mountains. During past climatic changes, these canyons apparently served as refugia for plants requiring more abundant moisture (Daubemire 1975). Having been isolated from the main ranges of their species for millions of years, these disjuncts may be genetically distinct.

Six plant species found on the Clearwater National Forest- Cardamine constancei, Corydalis caseana hastata, Dasynotus daubenmirei , Lomatium salmoniflorum, Synthyris platycarpa, and Waldsteinia idahoensis- are endemic, or nearly so, to northern Idaho ¹. All have ranges centered within the Clearwater River basin. Two of the Clearwater endemics are associated with the grand fir mosaic mid-elevation mosaic of mostly grand fir (Abies grandis) forest, Sitka alder (Alnus sinuata) glades, and bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum) glades (Ferguson 1991). This forest ecosystem dominates the uplands separating some of the main refugium canyons. Its unique flora is thought to be related to a climate moderated by the influence of the canyons below.

PROTOCOL FOR DESIGNATING SENSITIVE PLANTS

A protocol was developed in 1998 for the designation and review of Sensitive plants in Region 1 and was used in revising the Region 1 Sensitive plant list (Appendix A; USDA Forest Service 1998). This protocol established an official linking of the list to the ranking system of the Natural Heritage Program/Conservation Data Center network, and introduced additional criteria related to habitat loss or degradation. In addition, non-vascular plants were placed on the list for the first time. The list is to be reviewed and revised biennially.

Under the new protocol, Sensitive plant species are divided into "Species at Risk" and

"Species of Concern". Species at Risk are classified into the following three types:

Type 1: Rangewide/National Imperilment: Threatened, Endangered and Proposed Species (USFWS)

These species are listed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as Threatened or Endangered, or proposed for such listing. Currently, no type 1 plants are known or suspected to occur on the Clearwater National Forest.

2

Type 2: Rangewide/National Imperilment: USFWS Candidate Species, and those ranked by the Natural Heritage Program network with global ranks of G1 to G3, T1 to T3, or GH, or National ranks of N1 to N3.

These are species designated by the USFWS as Candidates for listing under the ESA, or that have the specified global or national ranks as assigned by the Natural Heritage Program network. Ranking categories are defined in Table 1 (Master 1991).

Type 3: Regional/State Imperilment

All species currently tracked by a state Natural Heritage Program are included if

they meet at least one of the following risk factors:

A. Habitat loss or detrimental alteration has occurred or is occurring.

B. Negative impacts to the habitat are occurring because the species occupies highly unique habitats or is ecologically highly specialized, and is thus inherently vulnerable to human management activities.

Species of Concern are specific to each Forest and are not included on the Regional list.

Type 4: Forest Species of Concern

These are species suspected of being at risk of extirpation at the planning area level (i.e., Forest). They are recognized at the Forest Plan level, in order to meet the requirement of NFMA to maintain the viability and distribution of all species within the planning area. These are species that:

A. meet the ranking criteria for Types 2 or 3, but are not threatened by management activities, or

B. have a total score of 8 or greater based on abundance and distribution score (Table 2), or

C. are at risk on the Forest from one or both of the risk factors identified above under Type 3: Regional/State Imperilment.

Impacts to these species are typically addressed through National Environmental

Policy Act (NEPA) analysis for a given project, as needed.

Global, national and state rankings assigned by the Natural Heritage Programs Network are revised as new information becomes available. It is important that National Forests in Idaho provide updated information on Sensitive plant species to the Idaho Conservation Data Center (CDC) on an ongoing basis, based on inventories and monitoring being conducted. These data can then be used by the CDC to revise their rankings as needed.

3

Table 1. Conservation Data Center Ranks (Master 1991).

_________________________________________________________________________________

Each rank (1-5) is preceded by a geographic indicator. Subspecific taxa have an additional

trinomial indicator which refers to the global rank of only the subspecific taxon.

Indicators:

G = Global rank Indicator; denotes rank based on rangewide status of the species.

T = Subspecific (trinomial) rank indicator; applied after the global rank for subspecific taxa

(e.g., G5T2).

N = National ranks indicator; applied to a taxon based only on its populations or

occurrences within the borders of a nation (including Alaska and Hawaii for the U.S.)

S = State rank indicator; applied to a taxon based only on its populations or occurrences

within the borders of a state.

Ranks:

1 = Critically imperiled globally because of extreme rarity (typically less than 6 occurrences, less than 1,000 individuals or very few remaining acres) or because of some factor(s) making it especially vulnerable to extinction.

2 = Imperiled globally because of extreme rarity (typically 6-20 occurrences, 1,000-3,000 individuals, or few remaining acres) or because of some factor(s) making it very vulnerable to extinction throughout its range.

3 = Rare or uncommon (typically 21 to 100 occurrences or 3,000-10,000 individuals) throughout its range; or found locally, even abundantly, in a restricted range (e.g., in a single state or physiographic region); or vulnerable to extinction throughout its range because of specific factors.

4 = Widespread, abundant and apparently secure globally, though it may be quite rare in parts of its range, especially at the periphery (typically more than 101 occurrences and more than 10,000 individuals); some cause for long-term concern exists.

5 = Demonstrably secure, widespread and abundant globally; although it may be quite rare in parts of its range, especially at the periphery.

_________________________________________________________________________________

The Forest webpage provides summary profiles for all Sensitive plants on the Clearwater National Forest. Included are descriptions of the plant and its habitat, its distribution, pertinent aspects of its ecology, and perceived threats. Threats are often projected based on what is known about the ecology of the species. Local distribution information has been updated from the 1991 Action Plan. Together, these profiles comprise a guide to Sensitive plants on the Forest and should be useful in setting priorities and developing training sessions. Information on biology of these species is beyond the scope of this plan. Managers will need more in-depth information available from Management Plans, research papers, and unpublished reports. The best way to find this information is through the CDC's Source Abstract (SA) database.

4

Table 2. Score criteria for abundance and distribution (USDA Forest Service 1998)

_________________________________________________________________________________

Abundance (based on number of occurrences1) on the National Forest

Extremely rare (5 or fewer populations)......... 9

Rare (6 - 20 populations) ..................................6

Common (> 20 populations) .............................0

Distribution (Rangewide)

Local endemic.................................................... 6

Regional endemic............................................... 4

Disjunct ...............................................................3

Peripheral ............................................................2

Widespread ..........................................................0

____________________________________________________________________________________

1 Usually equivalent to a population.

FOREST GOALS AND OBJECTIVES-SENSITIVE PLANTS

Goals and objectives for Sensitive plants are not included in the current Forest Plan. The following Forest goals and objectives are being proposed as part of this Action Plan. Goals have their basis in Forest Service policy and are designed to maintain viable populations of Sensitive plants throughout their current ranges on the Forest. From these goals, a number of objectives were developed which specify the activities required in the short term (i.e. within the life of the Forest Plan) to meet Forest goals.

Forest Goals:

* To maintain or improve habitat for Sensitive plants throughout their existing ranges on the Forest.

* To ensure that actions and programs involving the Clearwater National Forest do not 1) cause a plant species to be proposed for listing as Threatened or Endangered (FSM 2670.32) or 2) lead to the eventual extirpation of a plant species from the planning area (FSM 2670.22).

* To protect unique habitats of limited size and occurrence from degradation by Forest activities.

* To establish a program of monitoring and stewardship of protected areas (RNAs and SIAs).

5

Forest Objectives:

The rare plant program on the Clearwater National Forest has to this point been proactive, largely as a result of the 1991 Action Plan, Challenge Cost-share projects with the CDC, and outstanding work by District botanists. Consequently , a great deal has been learned about the distribution and habitats of Region I Sensitive plants since the writing of the 1991 Plan. This information base allows us to change our focus from primarily survey, to monitoring, management, and conservation planning. The following objectives are designed to maximize the probability of achieving the above stated Forest Goals for Sensitive plant species. They are intended to be general enough that they can be applied to future versions of the Sensitive plant list.

* Identify species for which viability in the planning area may be in jeopardy (FSM 2670.32).

* Identify species that may require habitat management or restoration in order to maintain current status.

* Conduct survey and monitoring to:

- characterize habitat and metapopulation structure

- evaluate the effects of past management activities, and natural disturbance events.

* As part of the National Environmental Policy Act process, review programs and activities through a biological evaluation to determine their effects on Sensitive plant species (FSM 2670.32).

* Coordinate and integrate the Sensitive Plant Program with other Forest activities including timber, recreation, wildlife, and broad scale planning and evaluation.

* In the event that a plant with Federal status is found on the Forest, consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on establishment of conservation agreements and conservation strategies.

* Inventory and assess the conservation status of unique habitats of limited distribution regionally.

* Establish a program of stewardship and monitoring for RNAs and SIAs.

* Report all rare plant survey results and monitoring activities to the Botany Program Coordinator and the Idaho CDC.

* Incorporate goals and objectives for Sensitive plants into the Forest plan revision (FSM 2672.32).

PLAN OF WORK

The five year action plan and budget (Table 3) for Sensitive plants is based on five categories of activity: 1) survey, 2) monitoring (both stewardship monitoring and population monitoring), 3) community survey and characterization, 4) protected areas, and 5) project and support planning. Action items where scheduled based on need and to be as efficient as possible (e.g., scheduling stewardship monitoring of an RNA to coincide with rare plant monitoring in the same area).

6

Table. 3. Proposed five year activity plan and budget.

* Plus 1 K from Nez Perce NF.

** Budget included under "Stewardship monitoring"

8

Rare Plant Survey

Numerous status surveys for Sensitive plants were conducted prior to and following the 1991 Action Plan. These were accomplished both by District botanists, and by the CDC under Challenge Cost-share agreements. Many additional populations were found by District personnel as a result of rare plant identification training, and by District biologists during clearance surveys. The result is a good foundation of range and habitat information for many of the current Sensitive plants. Additional status survey is needed primarily for species newly listed as Sensitive.

Status surveys begin with areas where a species is known and target habitats in which it is thought likely to occur. They are usually successful in defining core areas of distribution and core habitat. However, the area surveyed is generally much smaller than the area of potential habitat. Outlying populations in particular will likely be missed. For this reason, clearance surveys are needed whenever potential habitat occurs in a project area.

Needs: Eleven vascular, and six nonvascular species are new to the 1999 list (Appendix

A) and have not previously been the target of survey. Species profiles on the Forest web page summarize pertinent information about these plants including their distribution both globally and on the Forest. For some, good distributional information already exists because they have been tracked by the CDC.

Not all of the plants on the previous version of the Sensitive list received status surveys. Some are rare and obscure enough to defy survey work (e.g., Botrychium spp.) and others are general enough in habitat to make systematic surveys unproductive (e.g., Cypripedium fasciculatum ). Such plants may only be found during clearance surveys or other activities.

Nonvascular species were added to the Region I list for the first time in 1999. Since so little is known about the status of lichens and mosses, listing was restricted to globally rare species. The list includes four rare mosses known from the Clearwater region: Buxbaumia aphylla, Buxbaumia viridis, Hookeria lucens, and Rhizomnium nudum and two lichens: Cladonia andereggii and Cetraria subalpina. C. andereggii is only known from a single collection in the vicinity of Sand Mountain, on the Palouse Ranger District-the only collection of this species anywhere in the world. Work on these nonvascular species is a high priority. The first step will be to learn as much as possible about their habitat requirements and field characters needed for identification.

Nine taxa will be given priority for survey work and status determination (Table 4). Although the vascular taxa are globally common, all are very rare on the Forest and highly susceptible to local extinction. These are some of the rarest Type 3 Sensitive plants. The single occurrence of Petasites frigidus palmatus is the only one known in the State. Most of these plants are associated with habitats that have received little attention, such as rock outcrops and meadows. They may occur in communities that are themselves rare. Some of these habitats are under imminent threat from aggressive exotics. In some cases it will be possible to couple plant surveys with inventory and characterization of unique communities.

Survey work for these plants will be difficult because of their rarity. The two Mimulus species are difficult to identify, but may be rare enough to make specimen collections inappropriate. For Triantha , voucher specimens must be taken to confirm the subspecies identification, although roots are not required. Because chemical tests are required for positive identification of Cladonia andereggii, specimens will have to be sent to a lichenologist for verification.

9

Action item:

* Conduct status surveys for nine priority species (Table 4) and others if need arises. Characterize habitat and population vigor and assess conservation status.

Table 4. Sensitive plant taxa requiring survey work, in priority order.

__________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

1 1=Typically 5 or fewer occurrences State-wide (Tablel).

2 On the Clearwater National Forest

3 Refers to imminent threats. Small populations are always in danger of extinction from stochastic factors.

Rare Plant Monitoring

As survey work added to an understanding of the habitats and distributions of rare plants on the Forest, emphasis of the Sensitive plant program moved to writing Species Management Guides and monitoring. Monitoring is usually necessary to address questions about optimum habitat, population trend, response to disturbance, and management needs. Monitoring can be done at various intensities and for different purposes. Monitoring level refers to the amount of time and effort spent and the amount of detail obtained. Monitoring intensity can be divided into three levels, level I being qualitative in nature, level II involving quantitative measures, and level III involving quantitative measures on marked individuals (e.g., demographic studies). Level-I monitoring may consist of simple visits to populations along with recording of observations and/or taking photos.

Stewardship monitoring: Populations of some of the rarer and more threatened species on the forest (Table 5) need to be revisited and evaluated for population vigor, threats, and habitat quality-especially those known to be subject to disturbance. This type of level- 1 monitoring is sometimes referred to as "stewardship monitoring". Calochortus nitidus, which is known from only three sites on the Forest, occupies grassland openings in forest which are severely threatened by several aggressive exotics. Known Botrychium populations are threatened by human use of old growth cedar groves for campsites and by site development for recreation or tourism; timber projects pose a threat to undiscovered populations. Any very small population is subject to local extinction and should receive some type of monitoring. (Cornus nuttallii is not included in Table 5 because it is already the subject of biennial demographic monitoring.)

10

Table 5. Plant populations requiring stewardship monitoring.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Species - Occurrence number

Botrychium simplex 001

Calochortus nitidus all

Carex leptalea all

Pentagramma triangularis 003

Polypodium glycyrrhiza 001, 002

___________________________________________________________________________

As used here, stewardship monitoring refers to a subjective evaluation of some entity of conservation concern, from the scale of a subpopulation to an entire RNA. A critical aspect is an assessment of imminent threats such as weeds or human disturbance, and, when possible, documentation of threats. Population size is generally estimated. Other observations related to the species' biology, such as pollinators or predation, are also very important. Stewardship monitoring may simply entail filling out a Plant Observation Form from the CDC to update an element occurrence (subpopulation or population).

Population monitoring: Most of the population monitoring that has been conducted on the Clearwater National Forest has been levels II or III, involving permanent plots. It has primarily been directed at comparing population trends (changes in density) among different habitats and between managed and unmanaged forest. Population monitoring in protected areas, such as Aquarius RNA, provide reference (i.e., "control") data that illustrate normal variation in density, which is important to any estimate of population vulnerability. Nine population monitoring projects have been initiated on the Forest (Table 6). Seven of these have been carried out as Challenge Cost-share projects with the CDC and have been reported on annually (Lichthardt 1998a). Continuation of seven monitoring projects-Aquarius RNA, Cornus nuttallii, Steep Creek, Cardamine constancei , Big Smith timber sale, Blechnum spicant, and Washington Creek campground (Table 6)-are specified as part of this five year plan. Markers for plots established for all of the projects in Table 6 remain in place and can be revisited in the future as deemed necessary.

Development of a rangewide monitoring strategy for Cardamine constancei has been proposed. C. constancei is a globally rare species frequently found in proposed logging units. It appears that fire may be an important part of its ecology, and some have proposed using fire or overstory thinning as management tools. C. constancei has significant populations on all three northern Idaho forests. A rangewide monitoring strategy would spread the cost of monitoring across the three forests, while providing compatible data from across the species' range. Development and implementation of a monitoring strategy are part of the five year plan (Table 3). Details of the design have not been worked out, but a hierarchical design is most likely in which detailed data will be collected at few locations and stewardship-type monitoring will be done at the most populations. An intermediate level, density plot method has already been established at four sites on the North Fork District (Table 6, #2) which would be worked into the design. In addition to monitoring the status of populations, this project will add to our understanding of the species' ecology and potential management options.

11

Table 6. Plant population monitoring projects conducted on the Clearwater National Forest (#s 1-7 as Challenge Cost-share projects with the Idaho CDC). Element occurrence numbers follow plant names.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Project District Plant species monitored Years of monitoring

____________________________________________________________________________

* Occurrence numbers 001, 002, 004, 005, 012, 016, 017, and 020.

Action items:

* Conduct stewardship monitoring of populations in jeopardy in Region 1 (Table 5).

* Continue demographic monitoring of Cornus nuttallii on a biennial basis.

* Continue monitoring of the Cardamine constancei population at Washington Creek campground, as specified in monitoring plan.

* Collect 5-yr, post-harvest data from monitoring plots in the Steep Creek timber sale.

12

* Monitor population plots in Aquarius RNA on the following schedule:

Cypripedium fasciculatum (91JL010): annually

Carex hendersonii (91JL008): Biennially for 3 years

Trientalis latifolia (91JL010): 2001 to coincide with revisiting Steep Ck. plots.

* Monitor Big Smith Carex hendersonii plots in 2000.

* Develop and implement a hierarchical method for monitoring the status of Cardamine constancei.

Plant Community Survey and Conservation

Protection of individual rare species represents a "fine filter" approach to conservation. A "coarse filter" approach is exemplified by the establishment of RNAs with examples of major habitat types and their entire complement of organisms. However, many communities that are incidental to the forest, such as moist rock outcrops and grass balds often contribute a disproportionately large part to the biodiversity of the forest, and are equally as deserving of protection as rare species. These habitats may be captured in protected areas, but are not usually targeted. Although unique habitats are not specifically protected by Forest Service Policy, they are important aspects of biodiversity because they represent unique assemblages of organisms, or rare seral stages.

Background: Sensitive plant survey has been successfully coupled with a study of rare communities in several Challenge Cost-share projects. An inventory of remnant western redcedar groves (stands over 1000 years old) resulted in three new observations of Botrychium, subgenus Botrychium (Lichthardt 1998b). Plant communities of the canyon refugia were characterized during an intensive survey for a suite of rare species (Lichthardt and Moseley 1994). Most other habitat and community work has centered on sites designated for biodiversity protection or interpretation (i.e., RNAs or SlAs).

The remnant cedar grove inventory underscored the rarity and degradation of these stands and reinforced the need for official protection. Several other habitats of limited occurrence remain largely unsurveyed and their flora has not been studied in detail. Work on wetland characterization has been initiated on the Palouse District and in RNAs.

Action items:

* Survey, characterize, and assess the conservation status of the following communities of limited occurrence, and their associated rare flora:

- montane grassland openings (balds),

- rock outcrops, and

- wetlands (primarily meandering streams and sedge meadows).

* Participate in a conservation strategy for remnant western redcedar groves in Idaho.

13

Protected Areas

Background: Eleven Research Natural Areas (RNA) and twelve Special Interest Areas (SIA) have been established on the Clearwater National Forest. One proposed RNA, Fenn Mountain, has yet to be established. Each RNA contains some unique habitat types. Aquarius and Lochsa RNAs also have significant rare species values.

Monitoring activities have focused primarily on Aquarius RNA. Baseline ecological monitoring of rare communities and plants has been initiated, and a draft Management and Monitoring Plan has been written. Also, broad-scale community monitoring was initiated in 1996 (Lichthardt 1997a). Intensive collecting of nonvascular plants has been done in Bald Mountain and Aquarius RNAs. All RNAs with some riparian or wetland components were visited in 1996 to inventory and characterize wetland communities (Lichthardt 1997b).

Although SlAs are designed primarily for public use and interpretation, several have very high biodiversity value and receive little human impact. Unlike RNAs, there are no official boundaries for SIAs on the Forest, although some have significant acreages. The Forest Plan states that SlAs "will be mapped and located on appropriate maps available for public use". Currently SlAs are only marked as a point location on the Forest Travel Plan. Legal descriptions given in the Forest Plan for some SlAs are not consistent with the acreage given and some do not coincide with the communities targeted for protection. Protected areas represent a significant investment. In recognition of this, all protected areas should be carefully documented, and stewardship monitoring should be conducted on a regular basis. An "RNA monitoring module" is available from the RNA program manager for this purpose.

Action items:

* Assist in the completion of an Establishment Record and in the NEPA process for establishment of Fenn Mountain RNA.

* Revisit community monitoring plots in Aquarius in 2001 (10-yr data).

* Conduct stewardship monitoring of one RNA per year using the RNA monitoring module.

* Review legal descriptions and establish boundaries for established and proposed SIAs, and update this information in the Forest Plan revision.

* Make recommendations for additions to the RNA/SIA network.

Project and Planning Support

Needs: In order to protect Sensitive plants and expedite Forest projects, the Sensitive plant program must be integrated into all Forest activities. For example, while timber projects most often affect forest understory species, recreational developments can be more destructive of habitat. It is critical that the weed control program be apprised of Sensitive plant locations. Maintenance crews need to be aware of Sensitive plants in campgrounds and recreation sites. Maintenance crews can even be instrumental in protecting Sensitive plants, for example, in the removal of dead material from diseased Cornus nuttallii.

Incorporation of the Sensitive plant program into broad-scale planning can help protect

critical metapopulations and habitats, and avoid conflicts with future projects in the area

14

under review. Useful tools for broad-scale planning include a rare plant GIS layer available from the CDC, and Conservation Strategies for specific species, groups of species, or habitats. Species Management Guides have been written for Mimulus clivicola (Lorain 1991b), Calochortus nitidus (Caicco 1992), and for a suite of species associated with the Clearwater Refugium (Lichthardt and Moseley 1994). Also, there is an updated Conservation Plan for Cornus nuttallii (Lichthardt 1997c). Conservation strategies are most urgently needed for forest understory species, which are those most often affected by projects.

Action items:

* Provide input to the Forest Plan revision, including goals and objectives for Sensitive plants.

* Write conservation strategies for Blechnum spicant , Botrychium spp., and

Cypripedium fasciculatum.

* Meet with EIS teams to discuss the strategies for Sensitive plant protection in areas under review.

* Conduct rare plant identification classes every third year.

* Conduct clearance surveys for Forest projects which may impact habitat of Sensitive plants.

* Provide assistance to personnel in wildlife, range, and recreation who are interested in working on Wildflower Week and on the development of interpretive materials related to the local vegetation.

* Provide assistance to the public and to researchers interested in the Forest's rare flora for educational or scientific reasons.

REPORTING

The relationship of the Clearwater National Forest with the Idaho CDC has been essential in maintaining a dynamic information base of plant locations, habitat, and abundance that is independent from changing priorities, funding levels, and personnel. The extent of data available is due largely to contributions of Rare Plant Observation Reports by Forest Service botanists and field crews. It is important that all visits to Sensitive plant populations be documented and reported to the Botany Program Coordinator on the Forest and to the CDC.

OTHER RESOURCES

Other databases maintained by the CDC track established and proposed conservation sites, and monitoring projects. These have been utilized to a greater degree on the Clearwater than on other Region 1 Forests. The "Ecomonitoring" database does not contain monitoring data, but it specifies where the data are stored, and tracks monitoring projects State-wide. Data from monitoring projects conducted by the CDC are stored at the CDC office in the Department of Fish and Game in Boise. Another useful resource is the Source Abstract Database which contains both published and unpublished articles and reports related to Sensitive plants and communities on the Clearwater National Forest.

15

Appendix A

Sensitive plant list for the Clearwater National Forest, 1998

(In alphabetical order within type; an asterisk indicates taxa that were not on the previous version of the list)

_____________________________________________________________________________

1 F = forb or herb; FE = fern or fern ally; G = graminoid; T = tree; M = moss; L = lichen.

2 See text, Table 1, for meanings; ranks may have been revised since the list was approved.

REFERENCES CITED

Caicco, S.L. 1992. Calochortus nitidus Species Management Guide. Unpublished report for the Nez Perce National Forest on file at Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Conservation Data Center, Boise, ID. 31 p plus appendices.

Daubenmire, R. 1975. Floristic plant geography of eastern Washington and northern

Idaho. Journal of Biogeography 2:1-18.

Ferguson, D.E. 1991. Investigations on the grand fir mosaic ecosystem of northern

Idaho. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Idaho, Moscow. 255 p.

Lichthardt, J. 1997a. Initiation of long-term, stand-level monitoring of vegetation in Aquarius Research Natural Area, Clearwater National Forest. Unpublished report for the Clearwater National Forest on file at Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Conservation Data Center, Boise, ID. 16 p plus appendices.

Lichthardt, J. 1997b. Research Natural Areas on the Clearwater National Forest: a survey of aquatic and riparian plant communities. Unpublished report for the Clearwater National Forest on file at Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Conservation Data Center, Boise, ID. 9 p plus appendices.

Lichthardt, J. 1997c. Status and update of the conservation plan for Cornus nuttallii (Pacific dogwood) in Idaho. Unpublished report for the Clearwater National Forest on file at Idaho Department of Fish and Game Conservation Data Center, Boise, ID. 7 p plus appendices.

Lichthardt, J. 1998a. Monitoring of rare plant populations on the Clearwater National Forest: third annual summary report. Unpublished report for the Clearwater National Forest on file at Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Conservation Data Center, Boise, ID. 15 p plus appendices.

Lichthardt, J. 1998b. Inventory of giant western redcedar groves on the Clearwater National Forest. Unpublished report for the Clearwater National Forest on file at Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Conservation Data Center, Boise, ID. 11 p plus appendices.

Lichthardt, J. and R. Moseley. 1994. Ecosystem analysis and conservation planning for the Clearwater Refugium, Clearwater and Nez Perce National Forests. Unpublished report for the Clearwater and Nez Perce National Forests on file at Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Conservation Data Center, Boise, ID. 40 p plus appendices.

Lorain, C.C. 1991a. Action plan for sensitive plant species on the Clearwater National

Forest. Clearwater National Forest, Orofino, ID. 65 p.

Lorain, C.C. 1991b. Species management guide for Mimulus clivicola (bank monkeyflower) on the Clearwater and Nez Perce National Forests. Unpublished report for the Clearwater and Nez Perce National Forests on file at Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Conservation Data Center, Boise, ID. 16 p plus appendices.

Master, L.L. 1991. Assessing threats and setting priorities for conservation. Conservation Biology 5: 559-563.