Bouteloua Curtipendula, B

AN ENVIRONMENTAL INVENTORY OF THE ROSEMONT AREA IN SOUTHERN ARIZONA

VOLUME I: THE PRESENT ENVIRONMENT AN ENVIRONMENTAL INVENTORY OF

THE ROSEMONT AREA IN SOUTHERN ARIZONA

VOLUME I: THE PRESENT ENVIRONMENT

Edited by

Ru'ssell Davis and Joan R.. Callahan

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

. INTRODUCTION . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . . iv

— CLIMATE OF THE ROSEMONT AREA, by William D. Sellers . . • • • . . 1

AIR POLLUTION, by Nic E. Korte and Jarvis L. Moyers • • • • • • • 7

HYDROLOGY OF THE ROSEMONT AREA, by David R. Hargis and John W. Harshbarger . . • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • . . . . 16

----- GEOLOGY OF THE ROSEMONT AREA,.by David R. Hargis and John W. Harshbarger. . . . • . . . . . . . • • • ••• • • • • 41

PALEONTOLOGY OF THE ROSEMONT AREA, by Dietmar Schumacher . . . . . 58

— FLORA AND VEGETATION OF THE ROSEMONT AREA, by Steve McLaughlin and Willard Van Asdall . .• ..• • • • • • • • • • • . . 64

— INSECTS OF THE ROSEMONT AREA, by Floyd G. Werner . . • • • • . . . 99

- MTVERTEBRATES (OTHER THAN INSECTS) OF THE ROSEMONT AREA, by Walter B. Miller...... 110

_ -FISHES, AMPHIBIANS,'AND REPTILES OF THE ROSEMONT SITE, by Charles H. Love and Terry B. Johnson • • • • • • • • • • . . . 116

INVENTORY OF THE BIRDS OF THE ROSEMONT AREA, by S . M. Russell, G. S. Mills, and J. R. Silliman . . • • . • • • • . . . 167

--MAMMALS OF THE ROSEMONT REGION , by Edward L. Roth . . . . . 195

— GAME SPECIES OF THE ROSEMONT AREA, by Charles R. Hungerford . . . 218

ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE ROSEMONT AREA, by Sharon S. Debowski* . . . . . 233

THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT OF SOUTHERN ARIZONA, by Robert L. Hamblin and Brian L. Pitcher . . . • • • • • • • • • . . . 234

ECONOMIC VALUE OF GRAZING IN THE ROSEMONT AREA, by Merton T. Richards and Phil R. Ogden . . . • • • • • • • • • . . . . 251

* See p. •▪

Page

RECREATIONAL USES OF THE ROSENONT AREA, by William W. Shaw, Charles R. Hungerford, and Merton T. Richards • • • • . . . 258

SCENIC BEAUTY OF THE ROSEMONT BASIN, by Terry C. Daniel and Linda M. Anderson ...... • • • • . 268

PERSONNEL • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . . 279 INTRODUCTION

Between 1 July 1975 and 28 February 1977 a team of University of Arizona faculty conducted an environmental inventory of the Rosemont Area under contract with the Anamax Mining Company. The Rosemont Area, as defined in this report, is an area of approximately 25 square miles located 30 miles SE of Tucson, Pima County, Arizona (Fig. 1). A series of photographs representative of the Area appears between pages 122 and 153.

Anamax is currently attempting to obtain title to the Rosemont Area (by means of a land exchange) , and the results of the present multi- disciplinary- study will be used -by the National Forest- Service in of an Environmental Impact Statement, as required by the National Environmental Protection Act. The information presented here is more comprehensive than that available for most environmental impact assess- ments; it includes all aspects of the present environment of a fairly extensive geographic area. Missing from this report, however, are the results of archaeological research conducted by the Arizona State Museum. This information will be submitted to Anamax as a separate report (see p. 233).

The original land exchange plans did not include Section 6 at the southwest edge of the study area (see Fig. 1), and the research contract specifically excluded the area east of Highway 83 and west of the ridge line. In most reports, information regarding these excluded areas was obtained primarily by extrapolation of data obtained from other parts of the study area. In certain cases, however (e.g., Hydrology), special attention to the excluded areas was considered necessary.

Volume II of this report will contain estimates of environmental impact and suggested mitigating actions. -64-

FLORA , AND VEGETATION OF THE ROSEITNT AREA

Steve McLaughlin and Willard Van Asdall

INTRODUCTION

The flora, the plant biota of a given region, and vegetation, the arrangement of the flora into plant communities, form the focal point of any environmental analysis or resource inventory. The types and condition of plant communities influence the microclimate and hydro- logical cycles and the distribution and abundance of animal species, and largely determine the resource potential of an area, including grazing, fiber, wildlife, and recreational resources.

The specific objectives of this study are to •

1) compile a flora of the study area; 2) examine the geographical affinities of the flora; 3) delineate and map the major plant communities of the study area; 4) examine the quantitative distribution of species and life forms in the major plant communities;

5) evaluate the significance of the study area to particular problems or research areas in the Southwest; i.e., attempt to evaluate the research potential of the study area. In order to understand observed patterns in the vegetation of the Southwest, it is first necessary to provide a brief background on the important factors influencing these patterns and to review some important historical trends regarding changes in southwestern vegetation.• Variation in vegetation on southwestern mountain ranges is generally related to climatic variation associated with changes in elevation (Shreve, 1915). In general, species occurring on southwestern mountain ranges are restricted at their lower elevational limits by low moisture and at their upper limits by low temperature. As elevation increases, temperatures decrease and precipitation increases, resulting in a gradation in vegetation from desert scrub to desert grassland to oak-juniper-pinyon woodland to pine forest. This basic pattern is modi- fied by several other topographic factors (Shreve, 1922). The base elevation of a particular range largely determines the lowermost type of community encountered. The mass and highest elevation of the range largely determine the specific elevational ranges of the communities.

-65-

Small mountains intercept less rainfall than do larger mountains and are subject to higher evaporation, resulting in higher community boundaries. Slope angle affects insolation and soil moisture. Steeper slopes generally have shallower soils and greater runoff. Aspect, the compass direction in which a slope faces, influences both temperature and moisture. South-facing slopes receive higher insolation, resulting in higher temperatures and greater evaporation. North-facing slopes at the same elevation are cooler and more moist than south-facing slopes. Shreve (1915) estimated that the climatic differences attributable to aspect are equivalent to about 1000 feet (or 340 meters) of elevation in the Santa Catalina Mountains. Exposure also has a significant impact on local climate and vegetation. Ridgetops are subject to much higher insolation and evaporation than canyon bottoms at the same elevation, and are therefore considerably dtier.

In addition to these several topographic factors, the substrate-- soils and parent materials--can significantly influence observed patterns in vegetation. The most striking contrasts are observed in the Ili Southwest when vegetation on limestone substrates is compared to vegetation on non-limestone, more acid substrates (hereinafter termed limestone communities and non-limestone communities). In the Santa Catalina '!" Mountains, Whittaker and Niering (1968) have shown that limestone communities, compared with communities on diorite, are more open, show an upward displacement in species distributions, and have a greater rep- resentation of species with Chihuahuan and Latin-American affinities, as well as showing other differences in relative abundances. Because limestone is an excellent aquifer, limestone vegetation is generally more xerophytic than non-limestone vegetation at comparable elevations. Certain species, such as Mortonia scabrella, appear to be restricted to limestone, indicating that chemical factors as well as physical factors are involved; Many species, although not restricted to limestone, are more common on limestone than on non-limestone.

There is relatively little elevational relief on the Rosemont study area. Elevations from 1340 m to 1920 m occur on the site, but most of the area lies between 1400 and 1700 m- Limestone substrates are common alone both sides of the ridge. In general, variation in vegetation on the site is attributable to variation encountered in 1111 aspect and substrate.

Throughout the arid Southwest, there has been a pronounced trend 1111 toward desertification. Desertification can result from either an increase in aridity in the climate or an increase in the xericness of the environmental complex, often brought about hy land management prac- tices, or both. Whatever the cause, desertification brings about a decrease in vegetational cover accompanied by an increase in runoff, erosion, and arroyo cutting. Within the elevational limits and cm- munity types found on the Rosemont study area, the following changes '!" in vegetation have probably occurred within the last 100 years: 1) grass cover in the desert grassland has decreased, with an accompanying 1111 -66-

increase or invasion of Prosopis juliflora, Acacia spp., and other woody plants (Glendening, 1952; Humphrey, 1958; Hastings, 1959; Hastings and Turner, 1965; Buffington and Herbal, 1965; Cable and Martin, 1973); 2) at their lower elevational ranges, oaks have been failing to repro- duce (Hastings and Turner, 1965); and 3) formerly open woodlands have been invaded by Prosopis, Juniperus monosperma, and several shrubby species (Hastings and Turner, 1965). Several factors have been impli- cated in these trends, notably climatic change, fire, and overgrazing.

Hastings and Turner (1965) have reviewed the evidence for climatic change. Temperatime and precipitation records from the Southwest and elsewhere seem to indicate a general trend toward slightly warmer and drier conditions during the past 100 years. Arroyo cutting was initia- ted throughout the Southwest in the late 19th century, a process usually interpreted as indicating a deterioration in vegetation cover and an increase in runoff at about that time. The climatic change hypothesis is consistent with the observation that limits of species ranges have been moving upward.

Humphrey (1958) argues that the suppression of wildfires accompanying extensive settlement of the Southwest has been responsible for the invasion of woody plants into formerly open desert grasslands. Fire does appear to be somewhat effective in killing the seedlings of woody plants and suppressing shrub invasion in the desert grassland (Humphrey, 1949; Reynolds and Bohning, 1956). In an oak-juniper woodland community in the Santa Rita Mountains, a wildfire caused considerable damage and mortality to populations of Juniperus monosperma and Nolina inicrocarpa while affecting populations of Quercus emoryi and Q. arizonica very . little (Johnson et al. , 1962). To the extent that fires may have been frequent in the past, fire suppression could account for much of the invasion of woody plants into both grassland and woodland communities.

The overgrazing hypothesis states that the invasion of woody plants results from suppression of the grass cover which normally competes with shrub seedlings for soil moisture. The increase in mesquite (Prosopis juliflora) on slopes and ridges has often been attributed to cattle grazing, but the evidence ,is sometimes conflicting and thus difficult to interpret. In New Mexico, Potter and Krenetsky (1967) found that mesquite increased on grazed desert grassland range while decreasing on protected ranges. In similar studies in Arizona, mesquite has been shown to increase on both grazed and protected ranges (Canfield, 1948; Smith and Schmutz, 1975). Regardless of any influence grazing may have on invasion of woody plants, it certainly has a profound effect on the grass cover. With long-term moderate or heavy grazing, coverage of perennial grasses is decreased with concurrent changes in species composition. Long-lived mid and tall grasses decrease, while short-lived smaller perennial grasses and annual grasses increase (Canfield, 1948, 1957).

These three hypotheses regarding vegetation change are not mutually exclusive. Both a warmer and drier climate and overgrazing can act to -67-

deteriorate vegetation cover, increasing runoff and triggering arroyo cutting. A decreased cover of grasses, brought about by overgrazing, climatic change, or both, would decrease fuel loads, decreasing both the frequency and intensity of fires. These factors, acting alone or together, would all favor the increase of woody plants. The important point is that changes have occurred, and that these trends must be considered when evaluating present patterns in the vegetation.

METHODS OF STUDY

The flora of the study area was compiled from the plant collections of the authors and from the collections of other team members involved in this project. Floristic affinities were determined from Whittaker and Niering (1964), Kearney and. Peebles (1969), and Gould (1951).

To delineate community types, estimates of species abundances were obtained from 42 sites within the study area. These 42 sites were distributed throughout the study area in an attempt to sample as much of the diversity in the vegetation as possible. Location, elevation, slope angle, aspect, exposure, and substrate were recorded at each site, along with an estimate of species abundances on a scale from 1 to 10 for all woody plants. acid grasses. The square of the abundance rating represents an estima te of - cover; i.e., a rating of 1 was given to all species with an estimated cover of less than or equal to 1%, a rating of 2 was given to species with cover estimated at 1-4%, etc. Woody plants and grasses only were considered,because much information is available regarding the ecological responses of these plants to climate, topography, substrate, and grazing. In the field, woody plants and grasses can be recognized to species at almost all times of the year. The lack of ecological knowledge and identification problems make herbaceous plants other than grasses less suitable for delineation of community types.

This data was analyzed using the Bray and Curtis (1957) ordination technique.. A matrix of coefficients of community was calculated using as the coefficient C = 2w! (a + b), where a is the sum of the squared abundance estimates of the species at one site, b is the similar sum at a second site, and w is the sum of the lesser squared abundance estimates for ail species common to both sites. C thus can take values from 0 to 1. If C is high, then sites i and j are similar in their _species campositiont. The "distance" or dissimilarity between sites is calculated as 1 - C. For endpoints of each axis of the ordination, sites with a large intersite distance are chosen. To evaluate the influence of topography, the two sites chosen for the first, axis of ordination were a high-elevation north-facing slope and a low-elevation south- facing slope. Presumably, these sites represent the extremes in moisture conditions. To evaluate the influence of topography, the endpoints selected for the second axis were a steep limestone site and a riparian site. -68-

The vegetation map, prepared at a scale of 1 in. = 1000 ft., util-- ized five sources of information: 1) ground reconnaissance; 2) topographic maps; 3) geological maps; 4) black-and-white aerial photographs; and 5) color infrared aerial photographs.

Quantitative data on species composition was obtained using plots and belt transects. Plots one-tenth hectare in size (50 m by 20 m) were used on all slopes sampled. Belt transects 4 m wide by 200 m long were employed in the valley bottoms. All woody species rooted within a plot or transect were tallied to obtain density estimates. Coverage of woody species was estimated by the line-intercept method. Within the plots, 13 uniformly spaced 20 m lines were used. Within the transects, intercept was measured along the 200 m line running down the center of the transect. Since coverage is not a realistic measure of the abundance of stem succulents (i.e., cacti and ocotillo), no attempt was made to measure coverage of these plants. Similarly, it is not practical to determine density for many species of small suffrutescent life forms nor for herbaceous species, due to the difficulty in determining what constitutes one individual. Density was therefore recorded only for larger shruf)s and trees. Coverage of grasses and herbs was determined using the point-quadrat method. A sample of 1000 points was taken for every plot and transect. Three plots or transects were sampled in each community type recognized (see below). Sam- ple sites were subjectively chosen to demonstrate both the variation and similarities within each community type.

RESULTS: THE CURRENT SITUATION

The knawn flora of the study area is listed alphabetically by family in the Appendix. Nomenclature follows Kearney and Peebles (1969). In one year of collecting, 416 species in 256 genera in 75 families were found. These totals represent, respectively, 12%, 28%, and 57% of the species, genera, and families occurring in Arizona. These figures doubtless underestimate the actual flora, largely because spring annuals and perennials belonging to many families were poorly represented. The past spring in southeastern Arizona was quite dry, resulting in low densities or absence of many species that respond only to spring rainfall.

The geographical analysis follows the areal types recognized by Whittaker and Niering (1964). The distribution of species into these types is as follows: endemic, 5.1%; Madrean, 10.8%; Chihuahuan, 15.7%; Sonoran, 3 . 4%; Southwestern, 29.9%; Rocky Mountain, 2.2%; Western, 7.1%; Plains, 5.4%; Temperate, 2.9%; Latin-American, 14.5%; and introduced, 2.9%. Species with Southwestern, Latin-American, Madrean, and Chihua- huan affinities account for three-quarters of the total species, indicating a strong relationship with the floras of montane and central Mexico.

-69-

The ordination of the 42 sites sampled for community delineation is shown in Fig. F-l. Woodland sites, those with species of Juniperus., Ouercus, or Pinus, are generally scattered at the right side of the figure. All these sites have a northerly aspect. Grassland sites, which generally have a southerly aspect, are scattered at the left side

of the figure. Prosopis julif . lora was present on all grassland sites. Sites with both Prosopis and one or more species of Juniperus or Quer- cus, sites with vegetation intermediate between grassland and woodland, are scattered across the center of the figure. These sites often occupied topographically intermediate positions; i.e., east- and west-facing slopes, low-elevation north-facing slopes, and high-elevation south-facing slopes.

Sites do not separate into discrete clusters along the topographic gradient. The components of topography--slope angle, aspect, exposure, and elevation--occur in many possible combinations, and these combinations form a continuous spectrum of moisture conditions. Because each species has its own unique set of physiological requirements and environmental tolerances, and because each site is a unique combination of several species, sites can be expected to occur at all points alone this topographic/moisture gradient.

However, much of the overlap of woodland, grassland, and intermediate sites along this gradient can be attributed to grazing patterns, which are related to angle and aspect, distance to cattle tanks and salt licks, and pasture allocation (Cable and Martin, 1975). Cattle graze most heavily near tanks and salt licks and in valley bottoms; gentle slopes and open, south-facing siopes are preferred to steeper, north-facing slopes. Lightly-grazed, steep, south-facing slopes have a denser cover of mid grasses, notably Bouteloua curtipendula and Andropogon barbinodis, than do more heavily grazed but -otherwise comparable slopes. These grasses are more common on the more mesic north-facing slopes. Similarly, intensely-grazed, generally gently-sloping north-facing slopes show an increase in short grasses that are more common on the more xeric south-facing slopes; e.g., Bouteloua chondrosioides and Hilaria belangeri. Differences in grazing intensity are reflected primarily in these changes in grass cover and composition, and account for some of the similarity in the vegetation on slopes of dissimilar topography.

The ordination along the substrate gradient separates into two 1111 small clusters: a group of riparian sites and all the limestone sites. Those riparian sites separated out at the top of the figure are all at low elevations and are all severely overgrazed— The remaining riparian sites are generally scattered among the woodland sites. At higher 1111 elevations, the channels are all on slopes and lack a floodplain. The vegetation is similar in condition and composition to the adjacent north-facing slopes; therefore these higher elevation riparian sites 1111 do not separate from the woodland sites in the ordination. The limestone

70-

0 Grassland site 31 Woodland (with Prosopis) site Of Woodland (without Prosopis) site ()Riparian site 41 Limestone site

0 0

t 0 0 pal ti dien 0 0 0 al • 0

Gra • D O •al te 0 a 0 'oil dal a

tr I. bs Su • So • •

• 1 Topographic Gradient

r 17;' t's FIGURE F-1.

ORDINATION OF 42 SITES IN THE ANANAX

STUDY AREA, SANTA RITA MOUNTAINS

(For explanation of axes see p. 67) -71-

sites separate as a unit despite the wide variation in topography on which these sites occurred. Many features of species composition and physiognomy unite these limestone sites. The ordination of sites depicted in Fig. F-1 does not suggest any one clear answer to the problem of community delineation. Limestone communities and low-elevation riparian communities represent reasonable classification units; however, the topographic/moisture gradient could be divided subjectively into any number of community types for purposes of classification and mapping. The simplest alternative is to recognize just one break into two units: grassland and woodland. This is a practical alternative since the grassland/woodland distinction can be made fairly easily on aerial photographs. It is also the most ecologic- ally reasonable alternative. The populations of the major species, i.e., the oaks, junipers , mesquite, and grasses , are currently under- going considerable change in response to the factors considered above, notably climatic change and grazing. The finer the subdivision into units, the . more unstable those units are likely to be. For example, woodland could be broken down into Juniperus monosperma woodland, Quercus arizonica woodland, etc. A site on the Rosemont study area that would be labelled Juniperus monosperma woodland today would have been a Quercus arizonica woodland just 50 years ago (Hastings and. Turner, 1965, Plate 4a and 4b). The distribution of woodland as a broader type has undergone considerably less change. In other words, physiognomy appears to be more stable than species composition. Four community types, based largely on physiognomy and species composition, are therefore recognized for the Rosemont study area: woodland, grassland, limestone scrub, and low-elevation riparian gallery forest.

Fig. F-2 presents a vegetation map of the study area. Limestone communities were determined from geological naps. Ground reconnaissance confirmed that limestone scrub communities strictly occur on limestone substrates. Boundaries of riparian communities are based on the channel slope and the presence of alluvial terraces along the drainage, along with ground information on the occurrence of species typically found only in gallery forest communities (e.g., Celtis reticulata, Chilopsis linearis, and Julans pajor). Grassland and woodland communities were separated primarily by reference to the black-and-White aerial photographs.

With the exception of the boundaries between limestone scrub communities and grassland or woodland communities, distinct boundaries between Community types do not occur in the field. Therefore, place- ment of the boundaries between community types is necessarily arbitrary. However, the map ddes depict the basic relationships encountered in the field. Woodland communities are found on northerly aspects and extend down the drainages, where they merge eventually with the riparian gallery forests. The more xerophytic grassland communities occupy south-facing slopes at high elevations, ridge tops, and south-, east-, and west-facing slopes at the lower elevations. Most of the study area is thus mapped as a dendritic pattern of woodland communities super- imposed on a matrix of grassland communities with large islands of limestone scrub and narrow bands of riparian gallery forest. FIGURE F- 2 :

VEGETATION OF THE T 185 ROSEMONT AREA

Wood land

Grassland

Riparian

Limestone

One Mile -73-

Tables F-1 through F-4 present data on species composition and abundance for three communities each in the woodland, grassland, limestone, and riparian types respectively. Each table is arranged so that the most xerophytic and, often, the most overgrazed community is at the left of the table and the most mesophytic is at the right.

Much of the variation in, and characteristics of, the woodland community type are shown in Table F-1. Site W-3, a low-elevation, somewhat overgrazed area, is dominated by Juniperus monosperma, Pro- sopis juliflora, and Nolina microcarpa. Co verage of annual and short grasses is relatively high due to the grazing pressure, but mid grasses and herbS' predominate in the understory. Occurring at a slightly higher elevation, Site W-2 is dominated by .guercus emoryi. The lightly- grazed understory is dominated by dense, rich cover of tall and mid grasses, notably Eragrostis intermedia, Bouteloua curtipendula, B. gracilis, and Andropogon cirratus. Site W-1 is on a very mesic, steep slope close to the ridge top. The dominant trees are guercus arizonica, 'Juniperus deppeana, and Quercus emoryi. Shrubs are much more abundant here than at the previous two sites, with a corresponding decrease in grass cover. The relatively mesic nature of this site is shown by the occurrence in the table of two grasses characteristic of ponderosa pine forests: Poa fendleriana and Koeleria cristata. Another such pine forest grass, not shown in the table but preseht at W-1, is Sitanion hystrix.

Table F-2 presents data for the grassland cammunities. The heavily overgrazed site has high cover values for annual and short grasses and almost a complete lack of midgrasses. This site is typical of much of the grassland on the east end of the study area. Site G-2, with a

calcareous soil, is dominated by . Fouquieria splendens and Calliandra eriophylla. Tridens muticus and Bouteloua eriopoda dominate a moderately dense cover of mid grasses. These two grasses are abundant on all calcareous grassland sites. The dense stand of ocotillo may represent a recent invasion by this species. Site G-1 is an east-facing slope in excellent condition. Prosopis and Acacia constricts dominate a -sparse overstory. The understory is dominated by a very dense cover of Bouteloua curtipendula and Panicum hallii.

The limestone communities are depicted in Table F-3. Site L-3 is a relatively open community on the east side of the main ridge. This east-facing slope is dominated by Cercocarpus breviflorus, Opuntia engelmanni and Dasylirion, with a fairly dense cover of grasses dominated by Bouteloua curtipendula. This site is fairly representative of the limestone communities occurring on the east side of the ridge. These sites may have a rather dense stand of ocotillo. Site L-2 is a south-facing slope on the west side of the ridge dominated by Hortonia scabrella, Calliandra eriphylla, and Dasylirion. Aristida glauca is the most abundant grass in sparse understory. Also located on the west side of the main ridge, on a mesic, north-facing slope, Site L-1 has a dense and diverse cover of shrubs. Rhus choriophylla,

-74-

TABLE F-1. SPECIES COMPOSITION OF THREE WOODLAND COMMUNITIES A. Woody Plants

Site No. W-3 W-2 W-1 Elevation (meters) 1510 , 1580 1650 Slope (%) 28 32 53 Aspect (degrees) 320 353 342

Density Cover Density Cover Density Cover (plants (10 (plants (%) (plants (%) Species: /hec.) /hec.) /hec.)

Juniperus monosperma, 450 22.5 Prosopis juliflora 20 3.2 10 Quercus emoryi 320 33.0 18o 3.3 Quercus arizonica 30 .4 20 230 20.5 Pinus cembrioides 100 .2 Juniperus deppeana 8o 6.0

TOTAL TREES 500 26.1 350 33.0 590 30.0

Mimosa cLysocarpa 140 Acacia greggii 20 Garrya vtightii 210 1.7 Rhus choriophylla 20 .2 Rhus trilobata 430 .9

TOTAL FRUTICOSE SHRUBS 6o 660 3.8

No lira microcarpa 130 1.4 0 .1 410 2.8 Yucca shottil 70 .5 190 1.0 Agave palmeri 10

TOTAL ROSETTE SHRUBS 210 1.9 40 .1 600 3.8

Opuntia. engelmanii 60 20 60 Opuntia spinosior 4o 240 10 Opuntia chlorotica • 20 Mammillaria olivlae 10

TOTAL STEM SUCCULENTS 100 270

_75_

TABLE F-1. SPECIES COMPOSITION OF THREE WOODLAND COMMUNITIES B. Grasses and Herbs Site No. W-3 W-2. W-1 Species: Cover (%) Cover (%) Cover ($) Aristida adscensionis 4.6 Ili Panicum capillare .4 Setaria grisebachii 1.9 III TOTAL ANNUAL GRASSES 6.9 Hilaria belangeri 1.5 III Bouteloua chondrosioides .6 TOTAL SHORT GRASSES 2.1 IIII Aristida orcuttiana .1 2.2 Lycurus phleiodes .1 .9 - Eragrostis intermedia .14- 13.9 1111 - Bouteloua curtipendula 16.2 5.5 8.0 Muhlenbergia emersleyi 1.1 1.2 5.3 Bouteloua hirsuta . 1 Oil Bouteloua gracilis 5 .4 Andropogon cirratus 4.5 Koeleria cristata .2 1.1 Poa fendleriana 2.6 Ili Panicum bulbosum 1.1 TOTAL MID AND TALL • GRASSES 17.9 33.9 17.8 Ill TOTAL GRASS COVER 26.9 33.9 17.8 OTHER BERBS 22.8 23.1 20.2 TOTAL HERBACEOUS PLANT COVER 49.7 57.0 38.0 -76-

TABLE F-2. SPECIES COMPOSITION OF THREE GRASSLAND COMMUNITIES A. Woody Plants

Site No. G-3 , G-2 G-1 Elevation (meters) 1510 1400 1400 Slope (%) 16 28 27 Aspect (degrees) 139 120 317

Density Cover Density Cover Density Cover (plants ($) (plants ($) (plants W Species: /hec.) /hec.) /hec.)

Juniperus monosperma 20 10 1.1 Prosopis juliflora 1140 4.8 60 4.o

TOTAL TREES 160 4.8 70 5.1

Acacia constricta 100 1.2 50 .5 4o 1.7 Acacia greggii 10 60 Haplopappus tenuisectus • 10 .1 50 Mimosa dysocarpa 10

TOTAL FRUTICOSE SHRUM 110 1.3 6o 160 1.7

Agave palmeri 10 160 .1 10 Dasylirion vheeleri 10 .6

TOTAL ROSETTE SHRUBS 10 160 .1 20 .6

Mammillaria oliviae 10 Mammillaria aggregata 10 10 Echinocereus pectinatus 60 Edhinocereus fendleri 20 30 4o Opuntia engelmanii 120 180 110 Opuntia spinosior 10 10 Opuntia leptocaulis 20 Ferocactus wislenzii 30 Fouquieria splendens 1320 10

TOTAL STEM =mums 23o 1590 170 Calliandra eriophylla 7.2 19.5 3.6 Croton corymbulosus 2.7 2.0 Ktameria parvifolia .1

TOTAL SUFFRUTESCENT PLANTS 7.2 22.3 5.6 -.77-

TABLE F-2. SPECIES COMPOSITION OF THREE GRASSLAND COMMUNITIES B. Grasses and Herbs

Site No. G-3 G-2 G-1 Species: Cover (%) Cover (%) Cover (%)

Bouteloua barbata .5 Chioris virgata .1 Eragrostis arida -2:3 Aristida adscensionis 1.9 .1 3.7 Panicum capillare 1.0 .6 .9

TOTAL ANNUAL GRASSES 5.9 .7 . 4.6 Enneapogon desvauxii 1.2 Bouteloua chondrosioides 7.1 Hilaria belangeri 9.5 .1 .4 Bouteloua filiformis .3 Tridens pulchellus .2 Panicum hallii .2 9.8 TOTAL SHORT GRASSES 17.8 .8 10.2

Aristida ternipes .2 Sporobolus contractus 1.1 Leptochloa dubia .1 Aristida orcuttiana .1 Heteropogon contortus .4 Tridens muticus 8.2 Tridens grandiflorus .14. .2

. Bouteloua eriopoda 8.5 1.4 Bouteloua curtipendula 3.6 39.5 Bouteloua hirsuta .5 Aristida divaricata .3 loraurus phleoides .1 TOTAL MID AND TALL GRASSES 1.4 21.2 42.0

TOTAL GRASS COVER 25.1 22.4 56.8 OTHER HERBS 8.1 7.2 7.1

TOTAL HERBACEOUS PLANT COVER 33.2 29.6 63.9

-78-

TABLE F-3. SPECIES COMPOSITION OF THREE LIMESTONE COMMUNITIES A. Woody Plants Site No. L-3 L-2 L-1 Elevation (meters) 1650 1490 1550 Slope (%) 44 36 53 Aspect (degrees) 100 210 20 Density Cover Density Cover Density Cover (plants (10 (plants (%) (plants (10 Species: /hec.) /hec.) /hec.)

Quercus arizonica 40 2.0

TOTAL TREES 14.o 2.0 Mimosa dysocarpa 390 Haplopappus tenuisectus 6o Brickelia calif ornica 170 .1 Acacia angustissima 10 Ceanothus greggii 90 1.5 300 .3 970 5.9 Cercocarpus. brevirlorus 16o 4.3 loo 1.0 300 5.7 Rhus choriophylla 10 1.3 10 63o 13.8 Mortonia scabrella 3510 26.1 33o 9.6 Garrya wrightii 70 1.2 Rhus trilobata loo 4.1 Choisya arizonica 180 2.2

TOTAL FRUTICOSE SMUTS 890 7•2 3920 27.4 2880 42.5 Agave Palmeri 370 1.1 7o 20 Dasylirion wheeleri loo 1.9 48o 3.8 30 NOlina microcarpa 230 .6 700 2.4 Yucca arizonica 20 .3 Yucca shottii. 10 .11100.10.1.1■■•• TOTAL ROSETTE SHRUBS 470 3.0 4.4 780 2.7

Echinocereus fendleri 20 Ethinocereus pectinatus 10 Opuntia engelmanii 1160 33o Opuntia . spinosior 4o lo Fouquieria splendens 8o Mammillaria oliviae lo Opuntia chlorotica 10 TOTAL STEM SUCCULENTS 1230 43o 10 -79-

TABLE F-3. SPECIES COMPOSITION OF THREE LIMESTONE COMMUNITIES A. Woody Plants (Continued)

Site No. L-3 L-2 L-1 Species: Cover (f) Cover (f) Cover (f)

Thelesperma longipes 3.8 .4 Dyssodia acerosa .6 Croton corymbulosus .5 Dalea Formosa .3 Calliandra eriophylla 8.8 Gutierriezia lucida .6 2.1

WPM, SUFFRUTESCENT PLANTS 3.8 B. Grasses and Herbs

Panicum capillare 1.2 Arlstida adscensionis .7

TOTAL ANNUAL GRASSES 1. 9

Enneapoepn desvauxii -7 Bouteloua chondrosioides .6 Panicum hallii 1.9 Tridens pulchellus . 1 TOTAL SHORT GRASSES 3.2 .5 Bouteloua eriopoda .8 Leptochloa dubia -3 Muhienbergia monticola .8 Muhlenbergia emersleyi .3 .1 Eragrostis intermedia .1 .2 Bouteloua curtipendula 9.8 .5 5.9 Aristida &axles, .9 7.0 .6 Tridens muticus .9 .9 .2 Lycurus phleoides .6 .1 .1 Bouteloua hirsuta • -5

TOTAL MID AND TALL GRASSES 14.5 9.0 7.1

TOTAL GRASS COVER , 19.6 9.5 7.1 OTHER HMS 11.1 2.3 15.4

TOTAL HERBACEOUS PLANT COVER 30.7 11.8 22.5

-80-

TABLE F-4. SPECIES COMPOSITION OF THREE RIPARIAN COMMUNITIES A. Woody Plants

Site No. R-1 R-2 R-3 Elevation (meters) 1350 1380 1410

Density Cover Density Cover Density Cover (plants (10 (plants (%) (plants (%) Species: /hec.) /hec.) /hec.)

Celtis reticulata 25 .4 75 4.5 25 Juniperus monosperraa 25 1.7 25 .9 75 14.6 Prosopis juliflora 175 14.3 350 31.6 163 7.1 Chilopsis linearis 150 10.5 188 3.6 Juglans ma0or 2.9 2.1 Juniperus deppeana 13 1.5 Quercus emoryi 100 13.3 Quercus arizonica 13 5.7

TOTAL TREES 225 16.4 600 50.4 575 47.9

Acacia constricts 25 .2 Condalia spathulata 25 Condalia lysioides,, 38 .3 113 2.3 Hymenoclea monogyra 650 1.8 25 Anisacanthus thurberi 188 .2 25 Lycium pallidum 75 .8 75 .5 Haplopappus tenuisectus 2163 1.7 263 .1 Acacia greggii 788 7.5 225 1.9 13 .1 Mimosa biuncifera 213 .7 638 1.8 350 1.2 Senecio longilbbus 50 Lycium andersonii ,- 50 1.1 Ceanothus_greggii 13 Garrya wrightii 25 Rhus choriophylla 25 Rhus trilobata 63 1.4 Vitis arizonica 88 2.7 TOTAL FRUTICOSE SHRUBS 4165 13.2 1452 7.7 577 5.4

Opuntia spinosior 13 25 13 TOTAL STEM SUCCULENTS 13 25 13

Croton corymbulosus .1

TOTAL SUFFRUTESCENT PLANTS .1 -81--

TABLE F-4. SPECIES COMPOSITION OF THREE RIPARIAN COMKUNITIES B. Grasses and Herbs

Site No. R-1 R-2 R-3

Species: Cover (%) Cover (%) Cover (%)

Cenchrus pauciflorus .1 Bouteloua aristidioides 3.4 .7 Bouteloua barbata .6 ;1 Chloris virgata 1.9 .5 Tragus berteronianus .2 .1 Aristida adscensionis 1.0 1.2 .4 Eragrostis mexicana 1.3 .2 .3 Panicum capillare .5 .5 .3 Muhlenbergia fragilis .3 .5 TOTAL ANNUAL GRASSES 9.0 3.6 1.5 Bouteloua chondrosioides .3 Tridens pulchellus .2 Cynodon dactylon .8 2.1 Enneapogon desvauxii .8 .3 TOTAL SHORT GRASSES 2.1 2.4

Miahlenbergia porteri 1.7 Sporobolus airioides 2.0 Sporobolus contractus 8.3 2.3 .5 Panicum obtusum. .4 .2 .1 Setaria macrostachya 2.5 .7 .3

Leptochloa. dubia 1.2 1.2 1.9 Bouteloua curtipendula 5.3 1.1. 3.2 Bouteloua hirsuta .1 Aristida ternipes .3 Aristida divaricata .1 Panicum buibosum .1 Eriochloa lemmoni .1 TOTAL MID AND TALL GRASSES 21.5 6.o 6.3

TOTAL GRASS COVER 32.6 12.0 7.8 OTHER HERBS 21.7 23.7 17.2 TOTAL HERBACEOUS PLANT COVER 514..3 35.7 25.0 -82-

Mortonia, Ceanothus greggii, Cercocarpus, Rhus trilobata, and Nolina are all common and abundant. The sparse grass cover is dominated by Bouteloua curtipendula.

The riparian communities in Table F-4 represent a sequence of sites going up Barrel Canyon. Prosopis juliflora and Acacia Ereuii dominate L-1, the lowermost site. There is a relatively dense cover of annual grasses due to the intensive grazing in these communities. However, there is also a dense cover of mid and tall grasses at this particular site, with Sporobolus contractus, Bouteloua curtipendula, Muhlenberia porteri, and Sporobolus airioides. Farther up the wash at L-2, Prosopis and Chilopsis linearis daminate the overstory. The understory cover of grasses is in very poor condition,- with only a 6% coverage of mid and tall perennial grasses. At Site L-3 the channel has become considerably narrower, with oaks and junipers now dominating the overstory. The grass cover is in poor condition also. All three sites have a dense cover of herbs other than grasses.

In order to compare and contrast the community types, average values for each species in each type are shown in Table F-5. These values serve to describe abstract community types--they are not in- tended to represent the composition of any concrete community in the field. Trees characterize the riparian and woodland types; deciduous species are more abundant in the riparian forests, and. evergreen species are more abundant in the woodland type. Fruticose shrubs are the dominant life form in the limestone scrub type but are abundant also in the riparian type. Rosette shrubs are most common in the limestone and woodland types. Stem succulents and suffrutescent plants are common, only in the grassland and limestone scrub. Due to grazing patterns, annual grasses are abundant in the riparian and grassland types. Short perennial grasses are most common in the grassland, and mid and tall perennial grasses are characteristic of both woodland and grassland types. Herbs other thane grasses are most abundant in the more mesophytic riparian and woodland communities. In general, total coverage of herbaceous plants decreases from the /woodland to the grassland to the riparian to the limestone types.

SUMMARY Aft CONCLUSIONS

Four types of plant communities can be recognized on the Rosemont study area. Woodland communities are characterized by an overstory of evergreen oaks and junipers with rosette shrubs and a dense cover of grasses and herbs in the understory. Woodland occurs on north-facing slopes at most elevations and in the drainages at the higher elevations. Grassland communities have a sparse cover of woody plants with Prosopis, Acacia spp., ocotillo, and many Cactaceae and low shrubs. The campo.7 sition and condition of the grass cover is highly variable, but short grasses and annuals are generally more abundant here than in the woodland. Grassland occurs on ridge tops and xeric slopes. Limestone -83-

TABLE F-5. COMPARATIVE COMPOSITION OF COMMUNITY TYPES A. Woody Plants

Riparian Grassland Woodland Limestone Species : Dent Coves Den. Coy. Den. Coy. Den. Coy.

Juglans major 1.7 Celtis reticulata 42 1.6 Chilopis linearis 133 4.7 Prosopis juliflora 230 17.7 67 2.9 10 1.1 Juniperus monosperma 42 5.7 10 .4 150 7.5 Quercus emoryi 33 4.4 167 12.1 Quercus arizonica 4 1.9 93 7.0 13 .7 Juniperus deppeana 4 .5 27 2.0 Pinus cembrioides 33 .1

TOTAL TREES 467 38.2 77 3.3 48o 29.7 13 •7 Anisacanthu s thurberi 67 .1 Condalia 13rsioides 50 .9 Condalia spathulata 8 Hymenoclea monogyra 225 .6 Lycium andersonii 17 .4 Lycium pallidum 50 .4 Mimosa biuncifera 400 1.2 Senecio longilobus 17

Vitis . arizonica 29 .9 Acacia constricts 8 .1 63 1.1 Acacia greggii 1 342 3.2 23 • 7 Haplopappus tenuisectus 809 .6 20 .1 20 Rhus choriophylla 8 7 .1 217 5.0 Rhus trilobata 21 .5 143 .3 133 1.4 Garrya vrightii 8 70 .6 23 .4

Cea.nothus greggii 1 453 2.6 Mimosa dysocarpa 3 13 130 Acacia angustissima 10 Brickelia californica 57 .1 Cercocarpus breviflorus 187 3.7 Choisya arizonica 6o .7 Mortonia scabrella 1280 11.9

TOTAL FRUTICOSE SHRUBS 2065 8.8 110 1.2 • 211.0 .9 2563 25.7

*Den. = density in plants/hectare **Cov. = per cent coverage -84-

TABLE F-5A. (Continued)

Riparian Grassland Woodland Limestone Species: Den. Cov. Den. Cov. Den. Cov. Den. Coy.

Dasylirion wheeleri 3 .2 203 1.9 Agave palmeri 60 .1 3 153 .4 Nolina microcarpa 193 1.4 310 1.0 Yucca shottii 87 .5 3 Yucca arizonica 7 .1

TOTAL ROSETTE SHRUBS 63 . .2 283 1.9 667 3.4

Opuntia spinosior 17 7 97 17 Opuntia leptocaulis 7 Ferocactus wislizenii 10 Mammillaria aggregata 7 Mammillaria oliviae 3 3 3 Opuntia engelmanii 137 47 497 Opuntia chlorotica 7 3 Fouquieria splendens 443 27 Echinocereus fendleri 30 7 Echinocereus pectinatus 20 3

TOTAL STEM SUCCULENTS 17 663 153 557

Croton corymbulosus .1 1.6 • .2 Krameria parvifolia .1 Calliandra eriophylla 10.1 2.9 Da lea formosa .1 Dyssodia acerosa .2 Gutierriezia Iucida .9- Thelesperma longipes 1.3

TOTAL SUFFRUTESCENT PLANTS .1 11.8 5.6 -85-

TABLE F-5. COMPARATIVE COMPOSITION OF COMMUNITY TYPES B. Grasses and Herbs

Riparian Grassland Woodland Limestone Species: Cover e0 Cover (%) Cover (%) Cover (%)

Bouteloua aristidioides 1.4 Cemchrus pauciflorus t* Eragrostis mexicana .6 Muhlenbergia fragilaris •3 Tragus berteronianus .1 Bouteloua barbata .2 .2 Chloris virgata .8 t Aristida adscensionis .9 1.9 1.5 .2 Panicum capillare .4 .8 .1 .4 Eragrostis arida .8 Setaria grisebachii .6

TOTAL ANNUAL GRASSES 4.7 3.7 2.3 .6 Cymodon dactylon 1.0 Bouteloua filiformis t .3 Bouteloua chondrosioides .1 2.4 .2 .2 Enneapogon desvauxii .4 .4 .2 Tridens puichellus .1 • .1 t Hilaria belangeri 3.3 . . 5 Panicum hallii 3.3 .8

TOTAL SHORT GRASSES 1.6 9.8 .7 1.3

*t =trace (less than .05%) 86-

TABLE F-5B. (Continued)

Riparian Grassland Woodland Limestone Species: Cover (%) Cover (%) Cover (17) Cover ($) Eriochloa lemmoni t Muhlenbergia porteri .6 Panicum obtusum .2 Setaria macrostachya 1.2 Sporobolus airioides .7 Sporobolus contractus 3.7 .4 Aristida divaricata t .1 Leptochloa dubia 1.4 t .1 Bouteloua curtipendula 3.2 14.4 9.9 5.4 Bouteloua hirsuta t .2 t .2 Panicum bulbosum t .3 Heteropogon contortus .1 Tridens grandiflorus .2 Aristida orcuttiana t .8 Lycurus phleoides t .3 .3 Tridens muticus 2.7 .7 Bouteloua eriopoda 3.3 .3 Bouteloua gracilis 1.8 Andropogon cirratus 1.5 Koeleria cristata .4 Poo fendleriana .9 Eragrostis intermedia 4.8 .1 Muhlenbergia emersleyi 2.5 .1 Muhlenbergia monticola .3 Aristida glauca 2.8

TOTAL MID AND TALL GRASSES 11.2 21.6 23.2 10.2

TOTAL GRASS COVER 17.4 34.1 26.2 12.1 OTHER HERBS 20.9 7.5 22.0 9.6 TOTAL HERBACEOUS PLANT COVER 38.3 42.3 48.2 21.7 -87-

scrub communities are found on all limestone substrates. Riparian gallery forests occupy low-elevation washes and have a dense cover of primarily deciduous trees and shrubs. The understory is generally in poor condition due to the concentration of cattle activity in these sites.

The distribution and abundance of woody plants on the Rosemont study area appear to be related to topographic and substrate factors. Mesophytic evergreen species tend to be favored at higher elevations and on northerly aspects, while the more xerophytic, drought-deciduous trees and shrubs occur at lower elevations and on southerly aspects. Many of the shrub species of the area are most abundant on Limes tone. Although the distribution of grasses and other herbs can be related to these same factors, grazing intensity is also important. Sites G-3, W-3, and the riparian sites are all heavily overgrazed. Compared to the moderately and lightly grazed remaining sites, the heavily grazed sites show: 1) a decrease in total grass cover; 2) a 'decrease in the cover and diversity of mid and tall perennial grasses; and 3) an increase in the cover and diversity of short perennial grasses and annual grasses. Although the limestone scrub type has also probable exper- ienced a long-term- decrease in grass cover due to woody plant increase, climatic change, and overgrazing, this type may never have had a dense dover of grasses compared to woodland, grassland, or riparian gallery forest types.

Although the significance or research potential of any area is difficult to evaluate, a few pertinent comments about the Rosemont area can be made. The area is not pristine; but then most southwestern vegetation is disturbed to a degree. The area is neither more nor less overgrazed than most comparable areas. Mining activity and its associated disturbances, i.e., road building, timber cutting, and over- burden dumping, are probably relatively common here.

The area has been used in the study of vegetation changes in the arid Southwest. Some of the paired photographs in Hastings and Turner (1965) are from the study site or nearby. Since most of the area is ecotonal between higher-elevation woodland and lower-elevation grassland, the area has much potential for further investigation of the dynamic nature of these "boundaries."

The area has some biogeographic significance, particularly with regard to the limestone communities. The extensive limestone outcrops in the area are the westernmost occurrence of this substrate in southern Arizona. The associated communities are correspondingly the westernmost extension of a Chihuahuan flora and vegetation. At least 20% of the species occurring on'the limestone here have Chihuahuan affinities. On limestone outcrops in the Santa Catalina Mountains, to the north and slightly to the east, only approximately 10% of the species are Chi- huahuan (Whittaker and Niering, 1968). The vegetation on the limestone sites of the study area, with its characteristic dense coverage of a diversity of evergreen fruticose shrubs, rosette shrubs, and cacti, is abundant in Chihuahua and Coahuila and extends northward and westward -88-

into the mountains of southwestern Texas, southern New Mexico and southern Arizona to the Santa Rita Mountains on the Rosemont area. Many species and communities can best be understood by studying them at the limits of their distribution. In addition,. it is not well understood exactly why limestone favors this Chihuahuan type of vegetation. These are intriguing areas of potential research for the Rosemont area.

LITERATURE CITED

Bray, J. R. and J. T. Curtis. 1957. An ordination of upland forest communities of southern Wisconsin. Ecol. Monogr. 27:325-349.

Buffington, L. C. and C. H. Herbal. 1965. Vegetational changes on a semi-desert grassland range. Ecol. Monogr. 35:138-164.

Cable, D. R. and S. C. Martin. 1973. Invasion of semidesert grassland by velvet mesquite and associated vegetation changes. J. Ariz. Acad. Sci. 8:127-134.

1975. Vegetation responses to grazing, rainfall, site condition, and mesquite control on semidesert range. U. S. D. A. For. Ser. Res. Pap. RM-149, 24 pp.

Canfield, R. H. 1948. Perennial grass composition as an indicator of condition of southwestern mixed grass range. Ecology 29:190-204.

. 1957. Reproduction and life span of some perennial grasses of southern Arizona. J. Range Manag. 10:199-203.

Glendening, G. 1952. Some quantitative data on the increase of mesquite and cactus on a desert grassland range in southern Arizona. Ecology 33:319-328.

Gould, F. W. 1951. Grasses of the southwestern United States. Univ. Arizona Press, Tucson, 352 pp.

Hastings, J. R. 1959. Vegetation change and arroyo cutting in southeastern Arizona. J. Ariz. Acad. Sci. 1:60-67.

and R. M. Turner. 1965. The changing mile: an ecological study of vegetation change with time in the lower mile of an arid and semiarid region. Univ. Arizona Press, Tucson, 317 pp.

Humphrey, R. R. 1949. Fire as a means of controlling velvet mesquite, burroweed, and choila on southern Arizona ranges. J. Range Manag. 2:175-182.

. 1958. The desert grassland: a history of vegetational change and an analysis of causes. Univ. Arizona Press, Tucson, 74 pp. -89-

Johnson, D. E. , H. A. M. Mukhtar, R. Mapston and R. R. Humphrey. 1962. The mortality of oak-juniper woodland species following a wildfire. J. Range Mgmt., 75:201-205.

Kearney, T. H. and R. H. Peebles. 1969. Arizona flora. 2nd Ed. Univ. California Press, Berkeley, 1085 pp.

Potter, L. D. and J. C. Krenetsky. 1967. Plant succession with re- leased grazing on New Mexico range lands. J. Range Mgmt., 20:145- 151.

Reynolds, H. G. and J. W. Bohning. 1956. Effects of burning on a desert grass-shrub range in southern Arizona. Ecology 37:769-777.

Shreve, F. 1915. The vegetation of a desert mountain range as condi- tioned by climatic factors. Carnegie Inst. Wash. Publ. 217, 112 pp.

1922. Conditions indirectly affecting vertical distribution on desert mountains. Ecology 3:269-274.

Smith, D. A. and E. M. Schmutz. 1975. Vegetative changes on protected versus grazed desert grassland ranges in Arizona. J. Range Mgmt. 28:453-458.

Whittaker, R. H. and W. A. Niering. 1964. Vegetation of the Santa Catalina Mountains, Arizona. I. Ecological classification and distribution of species. J. Ariz. Acad. Sci. 3:9-34.

. 1968. Vegetation of the Santa Catalina Mountains, Arizona. IV. Limstone and acid soils. J. Ecol. 56:523-544. APPENDIX FLORA OF THE ROSEMONT STUDY AREA

ACANTHACEAE ASCLEPIADACEAE Anisacanthus thurberi (Torr.) Gray Ascleyias asper.ula (Decne.) WoOdson Dicliptera (Vahl) Juss. Asclepias nummularia Torr. Asclepias nyctainifolia Gray AIZOACEAE Funastrum 112121.22hyliam (Engelm.) Standl. Trianthema portulacastrum L. BERBERIDACEAE AMARANTHACEAE Berberis wilcoxii Kearney Amaranthus albus L. Amaranthus Palmeri Wats. BIGNONIACEAE Brayulinea densa (Humb. & Bonpl.) Small Chilopsis linearis Cay.) Sweet Froelichia arizonica Thornber Gomphrena caespitosa Torr. BORAGJNACEAE Gomphrena nitida Rothr. Cryptantha sp. Hackelia ursina (Greene) Johnst. AMARYLLIDACEAE Heliotropium phyllostachyum Torr. Agave palmeri Engelm. IiIhospelatim cobrense Greene Agave shottii Engelm. Zephyranthes longifolia Hemsl. CACTACEAE Carnegia iyjantea (Engelm.) Britton & Rose ANACARDIACEAE Echinocereus fendleri (Engelm.) nmpler Rhus choriophylla Woot. & Standl. Echinocereus pectinatus (Scheidw.) Engelm. Rhus EisjaoaLLI Engelm. Echinocereus triglochidiatus Engelm. Rhus trilobata Nutt. Ferocactus wislizeni (Engelm.) Britt; & Rose Mammillaria aggregata Engelm.. APOCYNACEAE Mammillaria macdougalii Rose Haplophyton crooksii L. Benson Mammillaria microcarpa Engelm. Macrosiphonia brachysiphon (Torr.) Gray Mammillaria oliviae . Orcutt. Ot22att.a chlorotica Engelm. & Bigel. ARISTOLOCHIACEAE Opuntia engelmanii Salm-Dyck Aristolochia watsoni.Woot. & Standl. Opuntia leptocaulis DC. Opuntia plumbea Rose auntia spinos for (Engelm. & Bigel ) Tourney

• COMPOSITAE (Continued) CONVOLVULACEAE (Cpontinued) Melampodium leucanthemum Torr. & Gray pomoea coccinea L. Melampodium hispidum H.B.K. Ipomoea costellata Torr. Microseris linearifolia (DC.) Shultz Bip, Ipomoea , hirsutula_Jacq. f. Parthenium incanum Pectis filipes Harv. & Gray CORNAC EAE Pectis lonaipes Gray Garrya mlighLii Torr. Pectis 'prostrata Cay. Perezia nana Gray CRUCIFERAE Perezia thurberi Gray Arab is perennans Wats. Perezia wrightq Gray Descurainia pinnata (Walt.) Britton Pomp, -_,L11.1um gracile Benth. Draba petrophila Greene Sanvitalia aberti Gray Dryopetalon runcinatum Gray Schkuhria wislizenii Gray Erysimum capitatum (Dougl.) Greene Senecio long ilobus. Benth. Lesquerella gordoni (Gray) Wats. Solidago sparsiflora Gray Lesquerella purpurea (Gray) Wats. Stephanomeria pauc if lora (Torr.) A. Nels. Sisymbrium irio L. Thelesperma longipes Gray lisambrium linearifolium (Gray) Payson Tithonia thurberi Gray Streptanthus carinatus Wright Trixis californica Kellogg Thelypodium micranthum (Gray) Wats. Verbescina encelioides (Cay.) Benth. & Hook. Verbescina rothrockii Robins. & Greenm. CUCURBITACEAE Viauiera cordifolia Gray A odanthera undulata Gray _FA.eViL .2La. d'entata (Cay.) Spreng. Cucurbita digitata Gray TIKuiera longifolia (Robins. & Greenm. Blake Cucurbita foetidissima H.B.K. multiflora (Nutt.) Blake Xanthium saccharatum Wallr. CUPRESSACEAE Zinnia pumila Gray Juniperus deppeana Steud. Juniperus monosperma (Engelm.) Sarg. CONVOLVULACEAE Convolvulus incanus Vahl CYPERACEAE Cuscuta sp. Cyperus esculentus L. Evolvulus arizonicus Gray Cyperus fendlerianus Boeckl. Evolvulus pilosus Nutt. Cyperus flavus (Vahl) Nees Evolvulus sericeus Swartz Cyperus rusbyi Britton CAPPARIDACEAE COMPOSITAE (Continued) Polanisia trachysperma Torr. & Gray Bahia. absinthifolia Benth. Baileya multiradiata Harv. & Gray CAPRIFOLIACEAE Baileya pleniradiata Harv. & Gray Lonicera arizonica Rehder Bebbia juncea (Benth.) Greene Sambucus Mexicana Presl. Bidens bigelovii Gray Bidens leptocephala Sherff. CARYOPHYLLACEAE Brickelia californica (Torr. & Gray) Gray Drymaria sperguloides Gray Brickelia venosa (Woot. &'Standl.) Robins. Carminiatia tenuiflora DC. CELASTRACEAE Carpochaete bigelovii Gray Mortonia scabrella Gray Chrysothamnus nauseosus (Pall.) Britton Cirsium arizonicum (Gray) Petrak. CHENOPODIACEAE Conyza coulteri Gray Atriplex canescens (Pursh) Nutt. Dyssodia acerosa DC. Chenopodium fremontii Wats. Dyssodia pentachaeta (DC.) Robins. Chenopodium watsoni A. Nels. Erigeron concinnus (Taok. & Arn.) Torr. & Salsola kali L. Gray Erigeron divergens Torr. & Gray COCHOLOSPERMACEAE Erigeron flasellaris Gray Amoreuxia gonzalezii Sprague & Riley Eupatorium greuii Gray Gaillardia pinnatifida Torr. CO?1MELINACEAE Gnaphalium wrigh03. Gray Commelina erecta L. Gutierrezia lucida Greene Tradescantia pinetorum Greene Haplopappus gracilis (Nutt.) Gray Haplopappus heterophyllus (Gray) Blake COMPOSITAE Haplopappus tenuisectus (Greene) Blake Ambrosia confertifolia DC. Helianthus annuus L. Artemisia ludoviciana Nutt. Heterosperma pinnatum Cay. Aster arenosus (Heller) Blake Hytnenoclea monogyra Torr. & Gray Aster hirtifolius Blake Hymenothrix wiSlizenii Gray Baccharis glutinosa Pers. Lactuca serrfola L. Baccharis pteronioides DC. Machaeranthera tagetina Greene Baccharis sarothroides Gray Machaeranthera tephrodes (Gray) Greene Baccharis thesioides H.B.K. Malacothrix fendleri Gray

11 III 111 III 11111 III R 1111 III II Ili II II II IL IL II IL RI vat ill III Ilia

EPHEDRAC EAE GRAMINEAE Ephedra trifurca Torr. ....At2c2I2c 22gon barbinodis Lag. Andropogon cirratus Hack. EUPHORBIACEAE Andropogon hirtiflorus (Nees) Kunth. Acalypha neomexicana Muell. Arg. Aristida adsensionis L. Croton corymbulosus Engelm. Aristida divaricata Humb. & Bonpl. Ditaxis neomexicana (Muell. Arg.) Heller Aristida Rlauca (Nees) Waip. Euphorbia albomarginata Torr. & Gray Aristida hamulosa Henr. Euphorbia bilobata Engelm. Aristida orcuttiana Vasey Euphorbia ekstipulata Engelm. Aristida pansy Woot. & Standl. Euphorbia heterophylla L. Aristida purpurea Nutt. Euphorbia hirta L. Aristida ternipes Cay. Euphorbia hyssopifolia L. Aristida wri&htii Nash Euphorbia indivisa (Engelm.) Tidestrom Bouteloua aristidoides (H.B.K.) Griseb. Euphorbia pediculifera Engelm. Bouteloua barbata Lag. Euphorbia prostrata Aiton Bouteloua chondrosioides (H.B.K.) Benth. Euphorbia revoluta Engelm. Bouteloua curtipendula (gichx.) Torr. Euphorbia strujlifclia Pers. Bouteloua eriopoda Torr. Euphorbia stictospora Engelm. Bouteloua filiformis (Fourn.) Griffiths Jatropha macrorhiza Benth. Bouteloua gracilis (H.B.K.) Lag. Manihot angustiloba (Torr.) Muell. •Arg. Bouteloua hirsuta Lag. Tragia nepetaefolia Cay. Bouteloua radicosa (Fourn.) Griffiths Tragia stylaris Muell. Arg. Cenchrus pauciflorus Benth. Chloris virgata Swartz FAGACEAE Cottea paypopharoides Kunth. Quercus arizonica Sarg. Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. Quercus emoryi Torr. Elyonyrus barbiculmis Hack. Quercus , oblongdfolia Torr. Enneapozon desvauxii Beauv. Quercus palmeri Engelm. EragrostL.s arida Hitchc. Eragrostis chloromelas Steud. FOUQUIERIACEAE Eragrostis intermedia Hitchc. Fouquieria splendens Engelm. Eragrostis lehmanniana Nees Magrostis megastachya (Koel.) Link GERANIACEAE Eragrostis mexicana (Hornem.) Link Erodium cicutarium (L.) L'Her. Eragrostis superbus Peyn GRAMINEAE (Continued) GRAMINEAE (Continued) Eriochloa lemmoni Vasey & Scribn. Tridens muticus (Torr.) Nash Festuca octoflora Wait. Tridens pulchellus (H.B.K.) Hitchc. Heteroposponcontortus (L.) Beauv. Hilaria beIanseri (Steud.) Vasey Hilaria mutica (Buckl.) Benth. HYDROPHYLLACEAE Koeleria cristata (L.) Pers. Phacelia arizonica Gray Leptochloa dubia (H.B.K.) Nees Phacelia crenulata Torr. Leptoloma conatum (Schult.)Chase Lycurus phleoides H.B.K. JUGLANDACEAE Muhlenbergia emersleyi Vasey Juglans major (Torr.) Heller Muhlenbergia fragilis Swallen Muhlenbergia slauca (Nees) Mez. LABIATAE Muhlenbergia longiligula Hitchc. Hedeoma dentatum Torr. Muhlenbergiamonticola Buckl. Hedeoma hyssopifolium Gray Muhlenbergia porteri Scribn. Hedeoma nanum (Torr.) Brig. MuhlenbeWa ripens (Bench.) Hitchc. Marrubium vulgare L. Panicum bulbosum H.B.K. Salvia subincisa Benth. Panicum capillare L. Stachys coccinea Jacq. Panicum hallii Vasey Trichostema arizonicum Gray Panicum obtusum H.B.K. Piptochaetium fibriatum (H.B.K.) Hitchc. LEGUMINOSAE Poa fendleriana (Steud.) Vasey Acacia angustissima (Mill,) Kuntze Scleropopn brevifolius Phil. Acacia constricta Benth. Setaria grisebaehii Fourn. Acacia p.eggii Gray Setaria macrostachya H.B.K. Acacia millefolia Wats. Sitanion hystrix (Nutt.) J. G. Smith Astragalus arizonicus Gray Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers. Astraplus nothoxys Gray Sporobolus airoides Torr. Astragalus nuttalianus DC. Sporobolus contractus Hitchc. CalliandratrioftyILIBenth. Sporobolus cryptandrus (Torr.) Gray Calliandra humilis Benth. Stipa lettermani Vasey Cassia absus L. Trachypogon secundus (Presl.) Scribn. Cassia bauhinioides Gray . Tragus berteronianus Schult. Cassia leptadenia Greenm. Triaachne californica (Benth.) Chase Cassia leptocarpa Benth. Tridens grandifiorus (Vasey) Woot. & Standl. Cracca edwardsii Gray LEGUMINOSAE (Continued) LILIACEAE (Continued) Crotalaria pumila. Ortega Yucca arizonica. McKelvey Dalea albiflora Gray Yucca elata Engelm. Dalea formosa Torr. Yucca shottii Engelm. Dalea nana Torr. Dalea pogonathera Gray LINACEAE Desmanthus cooleyi (Eaton) Trel. Linum lewisii Pursh Desmodium batocaulon Gray Desmodium neomexicanum Gray LOASACEAE Desmodium rosei Schubert Mentzelia asperula Woot. & Standl. kahana flabelliformis Kearney Mentzelia pumila (Nutt.) Torr. & Gray Galactia wrightii Gray Krameria parvifolia Benth. LORANTHACEAE Lotus greenii (koot. & Standl.) Ottley Phoradendron comae Trel. Lotus oroboides (H.B.K.) Ottley Phoradendron flavescens (Pursh) Nutt. Lug inns, brevicaulis Wats. Mimosa biuncifera Benth. MALPIGHIACEAE Mimosa dysocarpa, Benth. Janus is sracilis Gray Parkinsonia aculeata L. Petalostemon candidum Michx. MALVACEAE Phaseolus acutifolius Gray Abutilon parvulum Gray Phaseolus hetero2;hyllus.Willd. Anoda cristata (L.) Schlecht. Phaseolus metcalfei Woot. & Standl. Gossypium thurberi Todaro

Prosopis iuliflora (Swartz) DC. Hibiscus , coulteri Harv. Psoralea tenuiflora Pursh Sida neomexicana Gray Rhynchosia texana Torr. & Gray Sida physocalyx Gray Robinia neomexicana Gray Sida xlocumbens Sw. Tephrosia teasel la Gray Sida sEinosa L. Sphaeralcea laxa Woot. & Standl. LILIACEAE Anthericum torreyi Baker MARTYNIACEAE Calochortus kennedyi Porter Proboscidea parviflora (Wooton) Woot. & Dasylirion wheeleri Wats. • Standl. Mil la biflora Cay. Nolina ....rr iicL.oc...sua Wats. NYC TAGINAC EAE POLEMONIAC EAE Allionia incarnata L. Gilia multiflora Nutt. Boerhaavia coccinea Mill. Gilia sinuata Dougl. Boerhaavia erecta L. Gilia thurberi Torr. Commisaaus scandens (L.) Stand 1. Linanthu (Gray) Greene Mirabilis long_iflora L. comatus (Small) Weatherby . POLYGALACEAE Oxybaphus linearis (Pursh) Robins. Polygala obscura Benth. Polxgala reducta Blake OLEACEAE Fraxinus velutina Torr. POLYGONAC EAE Erio,gonum abertianum Torr. ONAGRACEAE Erioaanum deflexum Torr. Gaura coccinea Nutt. Eriogjonum polycladon Benth. Gaura gracilis Woot. & Standl. Eriogonum wrigl-itii Torr. Oenothera caespitosa Nutt. Rumex altissimus Wood Zauchneria latifolia (Hook.) Greene POLYPODIACEAE OXALIDACEAE Bommeria hisyida (Mett.) Underw. Oxalis amplifolia (Trel.) Knuth. Cheilanthes feei Moore Oxalis metcalfei (Small) Knuth. Cheilanthes fendleri Hook. Oxalis stricta L. Notholaena sinuata (Lag.) Kaulf. Pellaea atropurpurea (L.) Link. PAPAVERACEAE Aremone platyceras Link & Otto. PORTULACACEAE Portulaca corona to Small PHYTOLACCACtAE Portulaca mundula Johnst. Rivinia humilis L. Portulaca parvula Gray Portulaca suffrutescens Engelm. PINACEAE Talinum auranticum Engelm. Pinus cembroides Zucc. Talinum paniculatum (Jacq.) Gaertn.

PLANTAGINACEAE PRIMULAC EAE Plantag purshii Roem. & Schult. Androsace occidentalis Pursh

111 111, Ili 1111 III III Ili III II III it IL VII EL

RANUNCULACEAE SAXIFRAGACEAE Anemone tuberosa Rydb. Fendlera Impicola Gray Clematis drummondii Torr. & Gray Heuchera saguinea Engelm. Thalictrum fendleri Gray SCROPHULARIACEAE RHAMNACEAE E2.211-11212. intl&E'2 Gray Ceanothus re ii Gray ELEAEstya antirrhiniflora Humb. & Bonpl. Condalia lycioides (Gray) Weberb. Mimulus guttatus DC. Condalia spathulata Gray . Penstemon barbatus (Cay.) Roth Penstemon dasyphyllus Gray ROSAC EAE Penstemon parryi Gray Cercocarpus breviflorus Gray Cowania mexicana D. Don SELAGINACEAE Vauquelinia californica (Torr.) Sarg. Setlagirla ru incola Underw.

RUBIACEAE S OLANAC EAE Bouvardia sjaberrima Engelm. Chamaesaracha coronoptus (Dunal) Gray Galium wrightii Gray Datura metelo ides , DC. Houstonia rubra Gray Lcium andersonii Gray aa.um pallidum Miers. RUTACEAE Nicotiana Dunal Choisya arizonica Stndl. Physalis fendleri Gray Ptelea ALIgatutaliE Benth. Solanum douglas“ Dunal Thamnosma-texana (Gray) Torr. Solanum elataanifolium Cay. Solanum rostratum Dunal SALICACEAE Populus fremontii Wats., ULMACEAE Salix ii Ball Celtis pallida Torr. Celtis reticulata Torr. SANTALACEAE Commandra pallida A. DC. UMBELLIFERAE SpermollRis echinata (Nutt.) Heller SAPINDACEAE Sapindus saponaria L, VERBENACEAE Aloysia wri htii (Gray) Heller VERBENACEAE (Continued) Verbena biplupSifida Nutt. Verbena gracilis Desf. Verbena neomexicana (Small) Gray

VIOLACEAE Hybanthus verticillatus (Ortega) Baill.

VITACEAE Vitis arizonica Engelm.

ZYGOPHYLLACEAE Kallstroemia aalifornica (Wats.) Vail Kallstroemia grandiflora Torr. Larrea tridentate (DC.) Coville Tribulus terrestris L.

:11 1111 1111 1111 1111 1t II