Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Plants Specialist Report

Home , Aliciella sedifolia, Astragalus ripleyi, Chrysothamnus greenei, Geum rossii, Heterotheca villosa, Neoparrya lithophila

Threatened,

United States Endangered and Department of Agriculture Sensitive Plants

Forest Service Specialist Report Rocky Mountain Region

CP District-wide Salvage (CPDWS) Project

Conejos Peak Ranger District, Rio Grande National Forest Conejos and Rio Grande Counties, Colorado

____/s/ Mary Beth Davis______Date ___July 10, 2017___

Submitted by: Mary Beth Davis, Rangeland Management Specialist/Botanist Saguache Ranger District, Rio Grande National Forest

Contents Contents ...... 2 Relevant Laws, Regulations and Policies ...... 3 Federal Laws ...... 3 Forest Service Direction ...... 3 Policy ...... 3 Methodologies and Analysis ...... 3 Project Area ...... 3 Assumptions Made ...... 5 Descriptions of Alternatives ...... 5 Alternative 1 – No Action ...... 5 Alternative 2 – Proposed Action ...... 5 Alternative 3 – Limited Action ...... 5 Affected Environment and Existing Conditions ...... 6 Species Considered for Analysis ...... 6 Environmental Consequences ...... 8 Direct and Indirect Effects ...... 8 Alternative 1 – No Action ...... 8 Action Alternatives – Effects Common to All ...... 8 Management Actions to Reduce Effects to TES Plants...... 9 Comparison of Alternatives ...... 9 Cumulative Effects ...... 9 Conclusions and Compliance with Regulatory Direction...... 10 Appendix A. Sensitive Plant Species Descriptions--Species Known to Occur on the Rio Grande National Forest ...... 13 Appendix B. Sensitive Plant Species Descriptions--Species Not Known to Occur on the Rio Grande National Forest ...... 17 References and Literature Cited ...... 22

Relevant Laws, Regulations and Policies Federal Laws Endangered Species Act of 1973 (as amended): All activities or programs authorized, funded or carried out, in whole or in part, by Federal agencies in the United States or upon the high seas (50 CFR 402.02). Both programmatic and project level proposals are considered to be actions subject to the Endangered Species Act. The endangered species act requires that “…all Federal departments and agencies shall seek to conserve endangered species and threatened species...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.” Forest Service Direction Policy Forest Service Manual 2670: “Manage habitats for all existing native and desired nonnative plants, fish, and wildlife species, as well as threatened and endangered species, and to develop and implement management practices to ensure that species do not become threatened or endangered because of Forest Service Actions.”

Forest Service Manual Rocky Mountain Region (Region 2) 2670.32: Integrate available scientific information, including Regional species evaluations, species and ecosystem assessments, and conservation strategies, into Forest Service planning and implementation; Conduct appropriate inventories and monitoring of sensitive species to improve knowledge of distribution, status, and responses to management activities, coordinating efforts within the Region and with other agencies and partners where feasible; Analyze and manage for sensitive species in groups and habitat complexes, when feasible, to realize efficiencies and ecological soundness of multi-species and ecosystem management approaches.

1996 Rio Grande National Forest Plan, as amended

Methodologies and Analysis This biological evaluation is being prepared for the proposed CP District-wide Salvage Project EIS and complies with Forest Service Manual (FSM) 2600-2016-1 direction effective August 23, 2016. The objectives of a Biological Evaluation are 1) to ensure that Forest Service actions do not contribute to loss of viability of threatened, endangered, proposed, or sensitive plant and animal species, or contribute to loss of viability of threatened, endangered, proposed, or sensitive plant and animal species, or contribute to a trend towards Federal listing under the Endangered Species Act, and, 2) to incorporate concerns for sensitive species throughout the planning process, identifying opportunities for enhancement and reducing any potential negative impacts. The species addressed in this document are from the August 23, 2016 Rocky Mountain Region Sensitive Plant list and include only those species known or suspected to occur on the Rio Grande National Forest. The threatened, endangered and proposed species considered in this document were confirmed through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (http://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/). Project Area The project analysis area is comprised of approximately 332,000 acres, which is almost the entire Conejos Peak Ranger District portion of the Rio Grande National Forest in Conejos and Rio Grande Counties. Legal

description for the proposed project area is: T 32 N, R 3-7 E; T 33 N, R 3-7 E; T 34 N, R 3-7 E; T 35 N, R 2-5 E; T 36 N, R 2-5 E; T 37 N, R 3-5 E, New Mexico Prime Meridian.

Most of the 332,000 acres is not being considered further for project activities due to topographic, geographic or management area emphasis (wilderness, wild and scenic, riparian areas, etc.). Exclusionary criteria was applied and the area proposed for activities is approximately 18,000 acres (17,000 salvage harvest activities, 1,000 acres of hazardous fuels reduction). The project area is the specific boundary evaluated for direct, indirect and cumulative effects.

Figure 1. CP District-wide Salvage Project vicinity map.

Assumptions Made Two assumptions were made in the analysis of this project’s effects on TES plant species: 1. Use of project design features will minimize or reduce direct and indirect impacts to resources. 2. Fens and wetlands will be avoided during project activities and no proposed actions will occur in these delicate, unique habitats. These assumptions were based on specific project design criteria for resources (TES plants, wildlife, hydrology, soils, wetlands, riparian areas and fisheries) that will minimize or eliminate potential detrimental effects to these resources based on proposed project activities. Descriptions of Alternatives Alternative 1 – No Action Under the No Action alternative, no salvage harvest, reforestation or hazardous fuels reduction activities would occur. Natural processes would continue across all proposed treatment areas except where approved management activities are already occurring. No additional disturbance would occur from salvage harvest activities; however, some small sales, firewood gathering and removal of hazard trees near developed sites may still occur. Grazing livestock and wildlife would continue to have impacts on vegetation as well as dispersed recreation activities such as camping, hiking, biking and off-road vehicle use. Current populations of invasive plant species will continue to be monitored and treated, as possible, and new populations will continue to be introduced by typical vectors such as wildlife, permitted and recreation livestock use and recreation activities. No additional monies or activities to control invasive species will be authorized by salvage timber harvest activities. Alternative 2 – Proposed Action The Proposed Action alternative proposes the salvage of dead and dying spruce trees from suitable areas across the district. Hazardous fuels treatments would occur to modify fuels arrangements adjacent to private property and administrative sites within the area affected by spruce beetle mortality. Salvage harvest activities would occur on up to 17,000 acres and hazardous fuels treatment would occur on up to 1,000 acres. Activities are anticipated to begin in the summer of 2018 and occur over a 10-15 year period. Timber harvest activities are associated with this alternative, such as temporary road building and subsequent rehabilitation, log skidding and decking, etc. An adaptive implementation process for individual project implementation is proposed for both Alternatives 2 and 3. The implementation checklists provide for additional feedback prior to implementation in order to ensure protection measures and design criteria are appropriate for individual projects based on field verification and any review of new information or changed conditions. For a full description of the adaptive implementation process and activities proposed under Alternatives 2 and 3, see the EIS for the CPDWS project on file at the Conejos Peak District Office, Rio Grande National Forest. Alternative 3 – Limited Action This alternative is similar to Alternative 2 in that salvage of dead and dying spruce will still occur as well as hazardous fuels treatments. However, these actions would be limited by specific project design criteria and lynx habitat protection elements. Alternative 3 proposes to treat 1,000 acres for hazardous fuels but proposed salvage acres would be reduced based on the aforementioned criteria. Approximately 8,500 acres would be treated using salvage harvest activities though that number is subject to further decrease based on field verification of criteria. Again, activities would be expected to begin in summer of 2018 and continue for 10-15 years. The adaptive implementation process is also proposed for this alternative.

For a full description of the adaptive implementation process and activities proposed under Alternatives 2 and 3, see the EIS for the CPDWS project on file at the Conejos Peak District Office, Rio Grande National Forest.

Affected Environment and Existing Conditions The project area encompasses a wide variety of vegetation types from pine/fir woodlands and open, grassy meadows to high elevation Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir forests and rocky, alpine tundra. Elevation ranges from 8,300 – 12,950 feet. Table 1 provides the acreage by local vegetation type that comprises the entire project area. Local vegetation type was derived from the Region 2 Vegetation Integrated Resource Inventory Layer (R2Veg), which is the primary GIS layer mapping for vegetation in Region 2 (USFS 1998).

Table 1. Acres of Local Vegetation Types as defined by R2 Veg for the CPDWS project area. Local Vegetation Types Acres Alpine 19,613 Mountain Grassland 54,416 Mountain Shrubland 1,712 Aspen 9,941 Aspen – Mixed Conifer 47,157 Ponderosa pine 2,873 Spruce Fir 120,392 Riparian 24,831 Mixed Conifer – Cool Moist 23,984 Mixed Conifer – Warm Dry 4,990 Rock 16,685 Water 2,279 Pinon – Juniper 419 Other 2,312 Total 331,604

Species Considered for Analysis Threatened and Endangered plants are determined and listed by the USDI Fish and Wildlife Service (50 CFR §17). A review of the current FWS list confirmed that there are no reported records or suspected occurrences of threatened or endangered plants on the Rio Grande National Forest. Threatened and endangered plants in Colorado have unique habitats or ranges that do not occur on this Forest. There are also no plants proposed for listing or candidates for listing that occur on the Forest.

Documented occurrences of sensitive plants on the Forest came from Forest files, Forest Service personnel, pertinent literature and records from the Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP 2017). An evaluation was conducted on the remaining species on the current Regional sensitive species list to judge the likelihood of occurrence on the Forest. Local forest data and GIS data from the Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP 2017) were analyzed to determine known populations of sensitive species within the project area. Some field surveys were conducted for this project; however, the entire project area has not been surveyed for sensitive plants. Field verification for sensitive plant species and their habitat will occur under either action alternative based on the adaptive implementation process.

There are twenty-three sensitive plant species known to occur or with the potential to occur on the Rio Grande National Forest. Of those, there are documented occurrences of three sensitive species (CNHP 2017) and sixteen species were determined to have habitat that would fall within the elevational and distributional 6

ranges of the project area. There are four species that do not have habitat or known occurrences within the project area (highlighted in gray in Table 2).

Table 2. Region 2 Sensitive Plant species known or suspected to occur on the Rio Grande National Forest Species Habitat Known Potential to Occur Habitat in on the the RGNF Project Area

Stonecrop gilia gravelly, talus alpine slopes >11,700 feet Yes Yes Aliciella sedifolia Rydberg's golden columbine shady and moist canyons near riparian areas <8,500 feet Yes Aquilegia chrysantha var. rydbergii Missouri milkvetch Gambel oak communities on shale soils <8,600 feet No Astragalus missouriensis var. humistratus Aztec milkvetch Gambel oak communities on shale soils <7,500 feet No Astragalus proximus Ripley's milkvetch open ponderosa pine/ Arizona fescue <9,540 feet Yes Yes Astragalus ripleyi Winding mariposa lily desert flats <7,300 feet No Calochortus flexuosus Lesser panicled sedge calcareous wetlands < 9,600 feet Yes Carex diandra Yellow lady's slipper aspen/ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir forests 7,400-9,800 feet Yes Cypripedium parviflorum Gray's draba gravelly alpine slopes and fellfields 11,500-14,000’ Yes Yes Draba grayana Smith's draba rock crevices and talus slopes 8,000-11,000 feet Yes Yes Draba smithii Brandegee's buckwheat Volcanic soils containing bentonite clay, Elev. 5800 – 9600’ Yes Eriogonum brandegeei Chamisso's cottongrass peaty wetlands 10,500-12,500 feet Yes Eriophorum chamissonis Slender cottongrass fens, wetlands, & pond edges 8,000-12,000 feet Yes Eriophorum gracile Colorado tansyaster gravelly grassland slopes 8,500-12,500 feet Yes Yes Machaeranthera coloradoensis Bill's neoparrya rocky cliffs and rock outcrops <9,200 feet Yes Yes Neoparrya lithophila Degener's beardtongue pinyon-juniper woodlands and grasslands 6,000-9,500 feet Yes Penstemon degeneri Ice cold buttercup exposed alpine rock and scree slopes 12,000-14,000 feet Yes Ranunculus karelinii Arizona willow streamside meadows 10,300-10,700 feet Yes Yes Salix arizonica Sageleaf willow nutrient-rich birch (Betula glandulosa) fens and pond/river No Salix candida edges 8,900-10,040 feet Autumn willow wetlands 7,800-9,720 feet Yes Salix serissima Fine Bog-moss iron fens (pH < 5.8) 9,600 – 11,483 feet Yes Yes Sphagnum angustifolium Baltic Bog-moss iron fens (pH < 5.8) around 10,200 feet Yes Sphagnum balticum Lesser bladderwort fens, shallow ponds, lakes, and slow streams usually below Yes Utricularia minor 10,000 feet and often alkaline

Environmental Consequences Direct and Indirect Effects The entire project area was considered as the spatial context for this analysis. Both action alternatives are analyzed collectively as the proposed activities for each of these alternatives propose the same effects on sensitive plants and only differ in spatial area and extent in which they may occur. Some species will be dropped from further effects analysis because their specific habitat requirements are not found within the project “activity” area (areas proposed for treatment; approx. 18,000 acres) nor is the species or its habitat suspected to occur near roads or proposed temporary roads for the action alternatives. Alternative 1 – No Action Under the No Action Alternative, there would be no new impacts to sensitive plant species based on proposed activities. Therefore, under Alternative 1, there is a “no impact” determination for Region 2 sensitive plant species. Action Alternatives – Effects Common to All Alternative 2 – Proposed Action and Alternative 3 – Vegetation Management – Limited Action

Though they have never been found in the project area, there is overlap in the project area with potential habitat for the following species:

Aliciella sedifolia Aquilegia chrysantha var. rydbergii Carex diandra Cypripedium parviflorum Draba grayana Draba smithii Eriogonum brandegeei Eriophorum chamissonis Eriophorum gracile Neoparrya lithophila Penstemon degeneri Ranunculus karelinii (R. gelidus ssp. grayi) Salix serissima Sphagnum angustifolium Sphagnum balticum Utricularia minor

Direct effects could occur from proposed salvage activities causing plants to be burned in piles, uprooted, crushed/trampled or skidded off by logs. Indirect effects could arise from changes in nearby canopy cover of associated forest vegetation from tree removal or changes in litter and duff layers from tree-removal, pile- burning or movement of machinery. Indirect effects could also be caused by compaction of soil and the reduction in plant cover, which can lead to the introduction of invasive plant species, increase in erosion and impede plant establishment.

Most of these plants occur within specific and unique habitats (fens and wetlands, open, shale-based meadows, mesic, rocky crevasses) and not in spruce-dominated forests. Because activities associated with 8

the action alternatives will not occur in these areas (see project design criteria), the determination for the aforementioned sixteen sensitive species is “may adversely impact individuals, but not likely to result in a loss of viability on the Planning Area, nor cause a trend to federal listing”. With the implementation of the project design criteria and the pre-implementation checklist, effects to sensitive plant species are expected to be minor, of short duration or non-existent.

Three sensitive species are known to occur within the project area: Astragalus ripleyi, Machaeranthera coloradoensis and Salix arizonica. Direct effects could occur from proposed salvage activities causing plants to be burned in piles, uprooted, crushed/trampled or skidded off by logs. However, during the pre- implementation field review and checklist process, if it is determined that there could be direct impacts to these populations due to proposed activities, maps of these areas will be provided with the appropriate mitigation based on the species conservation plan.

Indirect effects could arise from changes in nearby canopy cover of associated forest vegetation or changes in litter and duff layers from tree-removal, pile-burning or movement of machinery. Indirect effects could also be caused by compaction of soil and the reduction in plant cover, which can lead to the introduction of invasive plant species, an increase in erosion and impede plant establishment. Indirect effects may be monitored throughout the implementation process in the vicinity of these populations.

With the employment of the project design criteria and project implementation checklist with associated mitigation (as necessary), the determination for Astragalus ripleyi, Machaeranthera coloradoensis and Salix arizonica is “may adversely impact individuals, but not likely to result in a loss of viability on the Planning Area, nor cause a trend to federal listing”. Management Actions to Reduce Effects to TES Plants Project design criteria and the adaptive implementation checklist process are integral to the effects analysis and determination for sensitive plants. Per forest plan and FSM 2670 direction, site-specific evaluations and surveys for sensitive plant species will be conducted as project spatial data becomes available. The results of project-specific analysis may trigger additional mitigation during the adaptive implementation process based on the results of the field review.

The following project design criteria will be employed for both action alternatives:

Surveys for TES species will occur prior to project design; results of surveys will be incorporated into the project design and/or implementation per applicable Forest Plan Standards. If needed, additional conservation measures will be recommended to District Ranger for implementation on that project.

There are also project design criteria for hydrology and aquatic resources, soils and noxious weeds that also benefit rare plant species and their habitat. A complete table of project design criteria can be found in Chapter 2 of the DEIS. Comparison of Alternatives The two action alternatives are perceived to have the same impacts though the potential impacts to sensitive plant species will be less due to the decrease in effected acres in Alternative 3. Cumulative Effects The relevant past, present, and foreseeable future activities for consideration in cumulative effects analysis for this specific project area includes consideration of past timber harvesting/thinning and wood gathering, wildlife herbivory, grazing, recreation, roads and trails, and fire suppression and use.

There has been past timber cutting and wood gathering in the project area and there are current and foreseeable future plans for both of these activities neither of which specifically target sensitive species habitat. The spruce beetle outbreak in the Engelmann spruce is currently causing extensive spruce mortality and the subsequent opening of the forest might have a positive effect on early-seral sensitive species. Effects on sensitive plants from past big game grazing are not clear and they are not documented. Palatable, sensitive plants have likely evolved with wildlife over time, and there is no information to suggest that past, current, and foreseeable wildlife populations would be expected to have any appreciable effects on sensitive plants or their habitat. Additionally, livestock grazing has occurred in this area since the late 1800s and continues today. Effects on sensitive plants from past livestock grazing, if any, are not documented and are not well understood.

Roads and trails as well as dispersed recreation impact localized areas in potential sensitive species habitat. However, no new roads and trails are proposed in the project area and dispersed recreation use is mostly confined to designated routes (i.e., existing disturbance) and disturbance areas tend to be reused and are extremely small (i.e., camp sites, fire rings, etc.).

In the past, there has been widespread fire suppression activity, especially at the lower elevations and particularly in the last 50 years or so. Effects on sensitive plants from past fire suppression, if any, are not documented or well understood. Currently, and in the foreseeable future, there may be more use of prescribed fire to mimic natural fire regimes. This management action could open the canopy and increase crown base heights and have a potential positive effect on early seral sensitive plant species.

Conclusions and Compliance with Regulatory Direction

Table 3. Effects analysis summary for R2 sensitive plant species with potential habitat within the CPDWS Project area. Species Effects Analysis Applicable to all Action Alternatives

Aliciella sedifolia Though they have never been found in the project area and no Draba grayana specific surveys have occurred for these plants, there is overlap in Draba smithii the project area with potential habitat for these species. Direct Eriophorum chamissonis effects could occur from permissible activities causing plants to be Eriophorum gracile uprooted and/or crushed/trampled. Indirect effects could arise from changes in nearby canopy cover of associated forest Neoparrya lithophila vegetation from salvage logging activities or changes due to road Ranunculus karelinii building, use and skidding logs. Plant habitat could be effected by Salix arizonica removal of organic matter from the top layer of the forest floor and Salix candida an increase in bare soil. Indirect effects could also be caused by the Salix serissima introduction of invasive plant species from product harvest and Sphagnum angustifolium fuels reduction activities including pile burning. Cumulative effects Sphagnum balticum tied to other past, present, and foreseeable activities in the project area would be expected to be minor and short-term (project term is expected to be 1-15 years maximum).

The adaptive implementation process will be implemented prior to project design and implementation including conducting and disclosing field verification for TES plant species and habitat. If additional protection measures are necessary, they will be recommended to the DR at that time. With this adaptive process and project design criteria, effects to sensitive plant species are expected to be minimized, of short duration, or mitigated completely.

Table 4. Effects analysis summary for R2 sensitive plant species known to occur within the CPDWS project area. Species Effects Analysis Applicable to all Action Alternatives

Astragalus ripleyi These species are known to occur in the project area. However, Machaeranthera coloradoensis these species do not typically occur in spruce forests where Salix arizonica activities are proposed. However, direct effects could occur from permissible activities causing plants to be uprooted and/or crushed/trampled. Indirect effects could arise from changes in nearby canopy cover of associated forest vegetation from salvage logging activities or changes due to road building, use and skidding logs. Plant habitat could be effected by removal of organic matter from the top layer of the forest floor and an increase in bare soil. Indirect effects could also be caused by the introduction of invasive plant species from product harvest and fuels reduction activities including pile burning. Cumulative effects tied to other past, present, and foreseeable activities in the project area would be expected to be minor and short-term (project term is expected to be 1-15 years maximum).

Table 5. Determination summary for Region 2 sensitive plant species with known occurrences or the potential to occur within the proposed CP District-wide Salvage project area. Determination Species Alternative 1 Alternatives 2 & 3

Aliciella sedifolia NI MAII Aquilegia chrysantha var. rydbergii NI MAII Astragalus missouriensis var. humistratus NI NI Astragalus proximus NI NI Astragalus ripleyi NI MAII Calochortus flexuosus NI NI Carex diandra NI MAII Cypripedium parviflorum NI MAII Draba grayana NI MAII Draba smithii NI MAII Eriogonum brandegeei NI MAII Eriophorum chamissonis NI MAII Eriophorum gracile NI MAII Machaeranthera coloradoensis NI MAII Neoparrya lithophila NI MAII Penstemon degeneri NI MAII Ranunculus karelinii NI MAII Salix arizonica NI MAII

Salix candida NI NI Salix serissima NI MAII Sphagnum angustifolium NI MAII Sphagnum balticum NI MAII Utricularia minor NI MAII

A “No Impact” determination was made for all 23 species under Alternative 1. No new management actions would take place under this alternative and foreseeable future actions are expected to have negligible effects on sensitive plants. There are no current activities that are known to be detrimentally impacting documented sensitive plant species or their habitat. A “No Impact” determination made for Astragalus missouriensis var. humistratus, Astragalus proximus, Calochortus flexuosus and Salix candida for Alternatives 2 and 3 was based on the conclusion that potential habitat for these species do not exist in the higher elevations that occur within the analysis area for these Alternatives and therefore would not be impacted by any of the actions proposed therein. Foreseeable future actions within these habitats are considered negligible.

A determination of “may adversely impact individuals, but not likely to result in a loss of viability in the Planning Area, nor cause a trend to federal listing" was made for Alternatives 2 and 3 for the following sensitive plant species: Aliciella sedifolia, Aquilegia chrysantha var. rydbergii, Carex diandra, Cypripedium parviflorum, Draba grayana, Draba smithii, Eriogonum brandegeei, Eriophorum chamissonis, Eriophorum gracile, Neoparrya lithophila, Penstemon degeneri, Ranunculus karelinii (R. gelidus ssp. grayi), Salix serissima, Sphagnum angustifolium, Sphagnum balticum and Utricularia minor.

The proposed actions for these alternatives could impact individual plants and/or potential habitat for these sensitive plants in the project activity areas. However, implementing any action Alternative would likely have a minimal, if any, impact on these plants by following the adaptive implementation process and employing project design criteria.

A determination of “may adversely impact individuals, but not likely to result in a loss of viability in the Planning Area, nor cause a trend to federal listing" under Alternatives 2 and 3 was made for Astragalus ripleyi, Machaeranthera coloradoensis and Salix arizonica. The proposed actions for these alternatives could impact individual plants and/or potential habitat for these sensitive plants in the project activity areas. However, implementing any action Alternative would likely have a minimal, if any, impact on these plants by following the adaptive implementation process and employing project design criteria.

Appendix A. Sensitive Plant Species Descriptions--Species Known to Occur on the Rio Grande National Forest

Aliciella sedifolia – Stonecrop gilia Distribution: This biennial, native forb is known only from a few sites in Colorado (Hinsdale and San Juan Counties) (CNHP 2009) and only on the GMUG, San Juan, and Rio Grande NFs. The known locations on the Rio Grande NF are from the Sheep Mountain and Pole Mountain areas. Habitat: Alpine environment on dry, rocky or gravelly talus of tuffaceous sandstone. Bare ground cover can be 98%. The known occurrences on the RGNF are above 12,900 feet. Flowering/Fruiting Period: July/August. Palatability/Animal Influence: There is no specific information on palatability of this plant but it is suspected to be unpalatable. There was no herbivory reported for the known locations on the RGNF. Associated Flora: Extremely sparse cover of Erysimum capitatum and Elymus scribneri. References: Anderson (2004a); Colorado Natural Heritage Program (2006; 2016); Komarek (2003); Weber and Wittmann (2001a; 2001b).

Astragalus ripleyi – Ripley’s milkvetch Distribution: An endemic, perennial forb of the lower San Luis Valley and northern New Mexico, it is known in Colorado only from Conejos County (CNHP 2009). The documented records on the Rio Grande National Forest (RGNF) are near the Conejos River and near Terrace Reservoir. Habitat: This plant exhibits a high degree of habitat specificity. It is typically restricted to volcanic substrates, in open-canopy ponderosa pine / Arizona fescue savannah. It is also found along the edges of mixed coniferous forest where Arizona fescue is dominant. Northerly aspects are more frequently represented than others, but populations have been documented on all aspects. Elevation range is from 7,730 to 9,450 feet with most populations occurring between 8,100 and 9,200 feet. Flowering/Fruiting Period: June-July/July-early August. Palatability/Animal Influence: Plants may be palatable to livestock, deer, elk, and rabbits. In areas receiving heavy grazing pressure, robust plants are found in the protection of shrub crowns. Burt (1997; 1998; 1999) reports herbivory on this plant by wildlife, livestock, and insects. Associated Flora: Chrysothamnus vaseyi, Chrysothamnus parryi spp. parryi, Eriogonum racemosum, Festuca saximontana, Muhlenbergia montana, Festuca arizonica, Artemisia carruthii, Koeleria macrantha, Poa pratensis, Pinus ponderosa, Pseudotsuga menziesii, Picradenia richardsonii, Heterotheca villosa, Chondrosum gracile, Elymus longifolius, Castilleja linariifolia, Artemisia frigida, Tetradymia canescens, Oxytropis lambertii, Gutierrezia sarothrae, Heliomeris multiflora, Orthocarpus purpureoalbus, Erigeron speciosus. References: Burt (1997; 1998; 1999), Colorado Native Plant Society (1997); Colorado Natural Heritage Program (1994; 2000a; 2009; 2010); Harrington (1954); Komarek (1994); Ladyman (2003); Lightfoot (1995); Naumann (1990); Spackman et al. (1997); Weber and Wittmann (2001a; 2001b).

Draba grayana – Gray’s Peak whitlow grass Distribution: This perennial forb is endemic to Colorado (Alamosa, Chaffee, Clear Creek, Gilpin, Grand, Huerfano, Lake, Larimer, Park, Pitkin, Saguache, and Summit Counties) (CNHP 2009). There are documented records on the Forest from the Sangre de Cristo Range near Blanca Peak (Alamosa County), Milwaukee Peak, and Cherry Lake (Saguache County). Habitat: This plant is found on gravelly alpine slopes and fellfields. The elevation range is from 11,500 to 14,000 feet. 13

Flowering/Fruiting Period: July-August/August-September. Palatability/Animal Influence: There is no information on palatability of this plant. The habitat makes it relatively inaccessible to most animals. Trampling by mountain goats has been reported. No foraging has been observed on Gray’s Peak whitlow-grass plants on the RGNF. Associated Flora: Draba crassa, Phlox condensata, Draba exunguiculata, Phlox sibirica, Draba fladnizensis, Phlox spp., Draba streptocarpa, Poa arctica, Eremogone fendleri, Polemonium viscosum, Erigeron spp., Potentilla spp., Eritrichum aretioides, Primula angustifolia, Festuca baffinensis, Rydbergia grandiflora, Festuca brachyphylla, Salix arctica, Geum rossii, Saxifraga cernua, Heuchera parvifolia, Sibbaldia procumbens, Hirculus serpyllifolius, Silene acaulis, Lidia obtusiloba, Silene acaulis ssp. acaulescens, Ligularia spp., Smelowskia calycina, Luzula spicata, Stellaria spp., Mertensia lanceolata, Thlaspi Montana, Muscaria delicatula, Trifolium dasyphyllum, Oreoxis alpina, Trifolium nanum, Paronychia pulvinata. References: Colorado Native Plant Society (1997); Colorado Natural Heritage Program (1994; 1998; 1999; 2009; 2010); Harrington (1954); Komarek (1994); Ladyman (2004a); Spackman et al. (1997); Weber and Wittmann (2001a; 2001b).

Draba smithii – Smith’s whitlow grass Distribution: This perennial forb is endemic to Colorado (Alamosa, Archuleta, Custer, Las Animas, Mineral, and Saguache Counties) (CNHP 2009). There are documented records on the Forest from the Wagon Wheel Gap, East Willow Creek, Bellows Creek, Dry Gulch and Miner’s Creek areas of Mineral County and from Deadman Creek and Lake Fork of Crestone Creek in Saguache County. Habitat: This plant is found in rock crevices and talus slopes in the southern mountains. The elevation range is from 8,000 to 11,000 feet. Flowering/Fruiting Period: June to July. Palatability/Animal Influence: There is no information on palatability of this plant. The habitat makes it relatively inaccessible to most animals. No foraging has been observed on Smith’s whitlow-grass plants on the RGNF. Associated Flora: Urtica gracilis, Brickellia grandiflora, Erigeron compositus, Festuca arizonica, Heterotheca villosa, Artemisia frigida, Senecio atratus, Chaenactis douglasii, Cystopteris fragilis, Muhlenbergia montana, Apocynum androsaemifolium, Ribes montigenum, Holodiscus dumosus. References: Colorado Native Plant Society (1997); Colorado Natural Heritage Program (1994; 1998; 1999; 2009; 2010); Harrington (1954); Komarek (1994); Ladyman (2004b); Spackman et al. (1997); Weber and Wittmann (2001a; 2001b).

Machaeranthera coloraoensis – Colorado tansy-aster Distribution: This endemic, perennial forb of south-central Wyoming and western Colorado (Chaffee, Dolores, Gunnison, Hinsdale, La Plata, Lake, Park, Pitkin, Rio Grande, Saguache, and San Juan Counties) (CNHP 2009). There are documented occurrences on the RGNF in the North Clear Creek area, Grayback Mountain, and in the upper Park Creek drainage. Habitat: This low, prostrate, mat-plant is found on gravelly sites. It is known to grow on relatively barren slopes and ridges in mountain parks and rock outcrops up to dry tundra. Spackman et al. (1997) reports this plant occurring at 8,500 to 12,500 feet in elevation in Colorado. Flowering/Fruiting Period: July-early August/August. Palatability/Animal Influence: This plant probably is not at high risk from livestock grazing, based on field observations in Wyoming. It is suspected that the plant is probably somewhat unpalatable (Fertig 1994). Also, the sparseness of the habitat probably does not encourage animal use. There could be some risk of

trampling under heavy stocking conditions. No foraging has been observed on Colorado tansy-aster plants on the RGNF. Associated Flora: Festuca arizonica, Danthonia parryi, Elymus elymoides, Muhlenbergia filiculmis, Carex obtusata, Artemisia frigida, Phlox sp., Potentilla pulcherrima, Penstemon caespitosus, Eremogone fendleri, Pentaphylloides floribunda. References: Beatty et al. (2004); Colorado Native Plant Society (1997); Colorado Natural Heritage Program (1994; 1998; 1999; 2000a; 2009; 2010); Fertig (1994); Harrington (1954); Komarek (1994); Spackman et al. (1997); Weber and Wittmann (2001a; 2001b).

Neoparrya lithophila – rock-loving neoparrya Distribution: It is endemic to south-central Colorado (Chaffee, Conejos, Fremont, Huerfano, Rio Grande, and Saguache Counties) (CNHP 2009). There are documented records on the RGNF from the Elephant Rocks area. Habitat: This plant is known to occur on north-facing cliffs and ledges or shelves and cracks of the north face of late-Tertiary volcanic dikes, lava flows, and igneous outcrops. It appears to occur generally below 9,200 feet on the RGNF. Spackman et al. (1997) reports this plant occurring at 7,000 to 10,000 feet in elevation in Colorado. Flowering/Fruiting Period: May-early July/late June-September. Palatability/Animal Influence: There is some evidence of cattle grazing this species from the available literature. However, the habitat makes it relatively inaccessible to most animals (Anderson 2004b). No foraging has been observed on rock-loving aletes plants on the RGNF. Associated Flora: Pinus edulis, Sabina scopulorum, Sabina monosperma, Opuntia polyacantha, Echinocereus triglochidatus, Oryzopsis micrantha, Artemisia frigida, Rhus aromatica spp. trilobata, Eriogonum jamesii var. jamesii, Cercocarpus montanus, Chrysothamnus greenei, Gutierrezia sarothrae, Oligosporus dracunculus, Erigeron vetensis, Muhlenbergia montana, Pascopyron smithii, Stipa comata, Elymus elymoides, Ribes cereum, Chondrosum gracile, Poa fendleriana, Stipa hymenoides, Heterotheca villosa. References: Anderson (2004b); Colorado Native Plant Society (1997); Colorado Natural Heritage Program (1994; 1998; 2000a; 2009; 2010); Harrington (1954); Komarek (1994); O'Kane et al. (1988); Spackman et al. (1997); Weber and Wittmann (2001a; 2001b).

Salix arizonica – Arizona willow Distribution: This perennial, native shrub is a widely disjunct plant species documented in Arizona (from the White Mountains of east-central Arizona on the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest; and from the Fort Apache Indian Reservation). It is also known from Utah (from the Dixie National Forest; the Cedar Breaks National Monument; the Fish Lake National Forest; and from the Manti-La Sal National Forest). More recently, it was found in New Mexico (near Questa on the Carson National Forest and also on the Santa Fe National Forest). This species is most recently known in Colorado only from Conejos County (CNHP 2009) in the La Manga Pass vicinity. Habitat: Salix arizonica grows in subalpine seeps, wet meadows, and along streams. Dorn (2001) believes the elevation range is restricted to 10,300 and 10,700 feet on the RGNF. Flowering/Fruiting Period: June-July/June-August. Palatability/Animal Influence: Plants may be palatable to cattle, elk, deer, voles, beetles, and the caterpillars of butterflies (Arizona Willow Interagency Technical Team 1995). Associated Flora: Salix wolfii, Pentaphylloides floribunda, Salix monticola, Psychrophila leptosepala, Poa pratensis, Phleum commutatum, Carex utriculata, Deschampsia cespitosa, Geum macrophyllum, Swertia perennis, Clementsia rhodantha.

References: Arizona Willow Interagency Technical Team (1995); Colorado Natural Heritage Program (2009; 2010); Decker (2006a).

Sphagnum angustifolium - Sphagnum Distribution: A non-vascular, perennial moss species. CNHP (2009) shows it only from San Juan County but there are Colorado University herbarium records for Colorado from Boulder, Conejos, Lake, Park, San Juan, and Summit Counties. The documented record on the Rio Grande National Forest (RGNF) is below Schinzel Flats along Iron Creek (Conejos County). Habitat: It is typically restricted to iron fens (high concentrations of Fe and other ions); highly acidic (pH below 5.8 and often below 4.8). Elevational range is known from 9,600 to 11,483 (from Colorado University herbarium specimens). Flowering/Fruiting Period: spores are produced during [unknown at this time]. Palatability/Animal Influence: palatability is suspected to be low to non-existent. Associated Flora: Carex aquatilis, Eleocharis quinqueflora. References: Colorado Natural Heritage Program (2009, 2010); Weber (2001).

Appendix B. Sensitive Plant Species Descriptions--Species Not Known to Occur on the Rio Grande National Forest The following are detailed descriptions of Sensitive plant species suspected to occur on the RGNF. This list was derived from the R2 Sensitive Species list by selecting species with habitat affinity for the RGNF (personal communication with Dr. Barry Johnston, botanist). Then, the list was further evaluated for probable habitat affinity to the RGNF by evaluating relevant literature and databases.

Aquilegia chrysantha var. rydbergii This is a yellow-flowered columbine. Harrington (1954) says this plant occurs at 5,500-7,000 feet from central to southern Colorado. CNHP (2016) show county occurrence in El Paso and Fremont Counties. It is considered an infrequent species in canyons of the foothills (Weber and Wittman 2001a). Ladyman (2005) reports this species occurring at elevations between 5,200 and 8,500 feet. It grows in organic soils and has also been observed in gravel derived from granite parent material. Often found near the base of boulders on the canyon sides and floor, it may also grow on seep-fed rocky ledges. It also frequently grows along the edges of the active channel of perennial streams that may be slightly or considerably entrenched. Moist conditions appear to be essential for this species. It tends to grow in shady and moist areas on slopes above creeks, along the side drainages, and within the riparian area of perennial streams (Ladyman 2005).

Based on the habitat and elevational distribution information, this species could occur on the RGNF.

Astragalus missouriensis var. humistratus Weber and Wittmann (2001a), in their Eastern Slope flora state that Astragalus missouriensis is common on the plains. Weber and Wittmann (2001b), in their Western Slope flora, do not recognize this particular variety. Harrington (1954) mentions Astragalus humistratus from southern Colorado and mentions one record from Archuleta County at 7,000 feet. CNHP (2016) show county occurrence information for Astragalus missouriensis var. humistratus in Archuleta and Hinsdale Counties. The Archuleta population (Pargin Mountain quadrangle) was described as occurring on north-facing slopes at 8,400-8,600 feet with Quercus gambellii, Wyethia arizonica, Allium acuminatum, Erigeron flagellaris, Eriogonum racemosum, Phlox caryophylla and Astragalus oocalycis (CNHP 2003). Two other Archuleta County populations are documented near the town of Pagosa Springs; one at 7,085 feet (Jackson Mtn. quadrangle and described as a grassy, dry, disturbed shale hillside) and one at 7,470 feet (Service Berry Mtn. quadrangle and described as a ponderosa pine / Gambel oak community) (CNHP 2003). This later occurrence was described in more detail as occurring on a disturbed roadside and along a horse trail in shales. The associated species were: Lesquerella pruinosa, Dugaldia hoopsii, Taraxacum officinale, Pascopyrum smithii, Artemisia ludoviciana, Eriogonum racemosum, Achillea millefolium, Mahonia repens, Astragalus lonchocarpus, Penstemon teucroides, and Carex heliophila.

The RGNF has limited Quercus gambellii communities and they are confined primarily to the northern and southern extremes of the Forest (Villa Grove and Chama Basin areas, respectively). The combination of this community type and shale soils is extremely rare to non-existent on the RGNF. Thus, there is a very low likelihood of this species occurring on the RGNF.

Astragalus proximus Harrington (1954) and Weber and Wittmann (2001b) describe this species occurring from La Plata and Archuleta counties at 6,000-7,000 feet. CNHP (2009) records show occurrences in Archuleta, Conejos, and La Plata Counties. The Conejos County record is a questionable specimen and it does not come from the RGNF. Documented occurrences appear to be mostly below 7,500 feet on clays and shales. One population

described southwest of Pagosa Springs (Chimney Rock quadrangle) described this species in a Pinus ponderosa / Quercus gambellii community adjacent to a barren shale area. The associated species were: Artemisia frigida, Artemisia ludoviciana, Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana, Aster glaucodes, Carex geyeri, Cercocarpus montanus, Chaenactis douglasii, Chaetopappa ericoides, Cirsium tracyi, Erigeron flagellaris, Eriogonum racemosum, Heterotheca villosa, Juniperus scopulorum, Koeleria macrantha, Mahonia repens, Maianthemum stellatum, Melilotus officinalis, Oryzopsis hymenoides, Pascopyrum smithii, Poa fendleriana, Pseudotsuga menziesii, Stipa comata, and Wyethia sp. The elevation was 6,600-6,700 feet. Decker (2005) reports Astragalus proximus growing on mesas, bluffs and low hills in sandy, often alkaline, clay soil in sagebrush and pinon-juniper communities from 5,400 to 7,500 feet. It has been reported from areas that are predominately covered by Melilotis species, a weed, and from other areas that have experienced some ground disturbance.

The RGNF has limited Quercus gambelii communities and they are confined primarily to the northern and southern extremes of the Forest (Villa Grove and Chama Basin areas, respectively). This species appears to occur below the elevation of the RGNF. In addition, the combination of this community type and shale soils is extremely rare to non-existent on the RGNF. Thus, there is a very low likelihood of this species occurring on the RGNF.

Calochortus flexuosus Harrington (1954) describes this species as confined to dry slopes and plains and documented in southwestern Colorado at 5,400-6,200 feet. Weber and Wittmann (2001b) mention this species occurring in desert flats in the Four Corners area. CNHP (2009) records show this species occurring in Montezuma, Montrose, and San Miguel Counties. In Colorado, Calochortus flexuosus is found on fine-textured soils (clay to sand) derived most commonly from the Mancos (Cretaceous) and Morrison (Jurassic) formations. The species appears to prefer clay loam soils but is also found on silty and sandy clay loams. Plant communities associated with Calochortus flexuosus in Colorado have been described as grasslands, desert shrublands, and open pinyon juniper woodlands. The range of elevation documented in CNHP records (2004) is 4,700 to 7,300 feet (Panjabi and Anderson 2006).

The RGNF probably does not have the habitat as described above and the elevation of the RGNF is higher than the typical elevational occurrence. Thus, the likelihood of this species occurring on the RGNF is extremely low.

Carex diandra This is a circumpolar species of wet, often calcareous, meadows and bogs (Hermann 1970). Harrington (1954) describes this species as confined to wet meadows and is documented in southwestern and northcentral Colorado at 7,400-9,000 feet. Gage and Cooper (2006) mention the elevational range as 6,100 to 9,614 feet in Colorado and Wyoming. Weber and Wittmann (2001a) mention this species occurring in subalpine willow carrs (i.e., a wetland meadow especially with willows). “On floating and non-floating moss mats, pond edges, and hummocks in open shrub and sedge meadows …. Soils often influenced by limestone” (Fertig 2000). CNHP (2009) records show this species occurring in Boulder, Eagle, Garfield, Larimer, Rio Blanco, and Routt Counties. The location and elevational life zone information is somewhat contradictory between Harrington (1954) and the other references. This species may occur on the RGNF but it has never been documented. Limestone wetland substrate habitat (i.e., fens -- calcareous wetlands) are rare on the

RGNF. There are some occurrences of travertine (CaCo3) in the Creede area and there is dolomite (CaMg

(CO3)2) in the northern Sangre de Cristo Mountains. Current CNHP records indicate that this species occurs west and north of the RGNF. Gage and Cooper (2006) mention an occurrence in the Great Sand Dunes National Park. 18

Cypripedium parviflorum Harrington (1954) mentions records of this yellow-flowered lady’s slipper from northcentral, central, and southcentral Colorado at 7,000-9,000 feet. Weber and Wittmann (2001a) mention this species occurring in aspen groves and lodgepole forests. Spackman et al. (1997) list the habitat as aspen groves and ponderosa pine / Douglas-fir forests at elevations between 7,400-8,500 feet. Mergen (2006) reports that this species is most often found on calcareous soils, but can occur on a variety of habitat conditions up to about 9,800 feet in Colorado. Mergen (2006) also reports one Colorado occurrence from 1971 at 12,683 feet (Las Animas Co.; San Isabel NF) but the habitat is listed as aspen and Douglas-fir (thus, elevation must be in error). CNHP (2009) records show this species occurring in Clear Creek, Custer, El Paso, Garfield, Jefferson, La Plata, Larimer, Las Animas, Montrose, Park, Pueblo, and Teller Counties.

Based on the habitat and elevational distribution information, this species could occur on the RGNF.

Eriogonum brandegeei Spackman et al. (1997) list the habitat as open sagebrush or pinyon-juniper stands with whitish to grayish soils from limestone to shale. It is found in the Dry Union Formation and lower members of the Morrison Formation at elevations between 5,700-7,600 feet. The reported record on the Rio Grande National Forest is from the South Park area on the Saguache Ranger District in 1947 by G.W. Kelly. According to O'Kane (1988), it is highly suspected that Kelly collected the plant in the Salida area but inadvertently listed South Park as the collection location. Repeated attempts to find the plant in Saguache's South Park have failed to find the plant or suitable habitat (O'Kane 1988; Anderson 2006). CNHP (2009) records show this species occurring in Chaffee, El Paso, Fremont, and Park Counties.

The combination of habitat and typical elevational occurrence for this species does not occur on the RGNF.

Eriophorum chamissonis Harrington (1954) mentions records of this species from central and southcentral Colorado at 10,500-12,500 feet. CNHP (2009) records show this species occurring in Eagle, La Plata, Pitkin, and San Juan Counties. Two records are reported on the San Juan NF (south of Silverton); one from 11,560 feet in a moss carpet of a peat fen, and another record from a peat bog at 11,840 feet. The associated plant community was Pedicularis groenlandica, Psychrophilia leptosepala, and Deschampsia caespitosa. Additional associated plant species were Angustifolium sp., Primula parryi, Carex canescens, and C. aquatilis. The parent material was granitic. The soil texture was peaty (Decker et al. 2006a).

The combination of habitat and elevation occurrence for this species could occur on the RGNF.

Eriophorum gracile Harrington (1954) mentions records of this species in swamps and bogs from northcentral, southcentral, and southwestern Colorado at 8,000-12,000 feet. Weber and Wittmann (2001a) mention this species occurring in quaking fens at the north end of South Park. Spackman et al. (1997) list the habitat as fens, wet meadows, and pond edges at elevations from 8,100-12,000 feet. Decker et al. (2006b) mention an occurrence in Gunnison County at 10,000 feet in shallow water and boggy ground adjoining the margin of a small lake; and an occurrence in San Miguel County at 11,140 feet in a fen near tree line. CNHP (2009) records show this species occurring in Boulder, Gunnison, Jackson, Las Animas, and Park Counties.

The combination of habitat and elevation occurrence for this species could occur on the RGNF.

Penstemon degeneri

Harrington (1954) does not mention this species. Weber and Wittmann (2001a) mention this endemic species occurring on the south side of the Royal Gorge. Spackman et al. (1997) list the habitat as pinyon- juniper woodlands and montane grasslands on coarse gravelly or rocky reddish soil with igneous bedrock. It is also found in the cracks of large rock slabs. The elevational distribution is 6,000-9,500 feet (Spackman et al. 1997). CNHP (2004) records show this species occurring in Chaffee, Custer, and Fremont Counties. One record on the Pike San Isabel NF (San Carlos RD -- Curley Peak quadrangle) described the site as follows: a high quality grassland with mixed forbs and patches of oak surrounded by ponderosa pine-white pine- Douglas fir open forest. Plants were found on the edge of forest and grassland. Associated taxa include: Antennaria, Oxytropis, Potentilla, Erysimum, Sedum, Geranium, and native bunch grasses. Habitat was a large montane meadow within montane forest and mostly in an ecotone between grassland and forest. The elevation was 9,050 feet. The combination of habitat and elevation occurrence for this species could occur on the RGNF.

Ranunculus karelinii (R. gelidus ssp. grayi) Harrington (1954) mentions a record of Ranunculus gelidus from Clear Creek County at 13,500 feet. Weber and Wittmann (2001a) mention R. gelidus confined to the highest peaks. Spackman et al. (1997) list R. gelidus ssp. grayi as occurring among rocks and scree on exposed summits and slopes at 12,000-14,100 feet. CNHP (2009) records show this species occurring in Chaffee, Clear Creek, Gunnison, Hinsdale, Lake, Ouray, Park, San Juan, and Summit Counties.

The combination of habitat and elevation occurrence for this species could occur on the RGNF.

Salix candida Harrington (1954) mentions a record of this species in cold bogs and marshy areas from western Park County at 8,600 feet. Weber and Wittmann (2001a) mention this species occurring in the Rawah Range and South Park. They further describe it as an inconspicuous willow growing in Betula glandulosa fens. Spackman et al. (1997) list the habitat as being on hummocks in nutrient-rich fens, and thickets at edges of ponds and on river terraces; often growing with other Salix and Carex species between 8,800-10,600 feet. Decker (2006c) states that this species is typically associated with fens, bogs, marshes, and other areas of permanently saturated soils where peat is present. These habitats often have high mineral content and alkaline pH and are characterized as “rich” or “extremely rich” fens. However, it is able to tolerate a range of variation in peatland conditions throughout its range. In Colorado, this species is typically found in calcareous, rich, or extremely rich fens between 8,900 to 10,040 feet in elevation (Decker 2006c). CNHP (2009) records show this species occurring in La Plata, Lake, Larimer, and Park Counties.

Nutrient-rich fens are not common on the RGNF. The combination of habitat and elevation occurrence for this species might be found on the RGNF. However, the only Betula glandulosa fens that I have found on the RGNF are confined to the Sangre de Cristo mountain range.

Salix serissima Harrington (1954) mentions a record of this species in boggy meadows in Boulder County at 9,000 feet. Weber and Wittmann (2001a) mention this species being very rare in mountain meadows with one record from the vicinity of Rocky Mountain National Park and one from Routt County (Weber and Wittmann 2001b). Spackman et al. (1997) list the habitat as marshes or fens with other Salix and Carex species at elevations between 7,800-9,300 feet. CNHP (2009) records show this species occurring in Custer, Larimer, Park, and Routt Counties.

The combination of habitat and elevation occurrence for this species could occur on the RGNF.

Sphagnum balticum There are only two verified locations in Colorado; one is on the San Juan National Forest at approximately 10,200 feet, and the other site was not specified by Austin (2009). This species appears to prefer the wet portions of acidic peatlands (iron fens) (Austin 2009).

Iron fens are not especially common on the RGNF. Iron fens occur in the Alamosa River drainage and acidic fens are found in the old mining districts on the Forest (e.g., Summitville, Creede, and Bonanza). These locations would be likely places to search for this species.

Utricularia minor Harrington (1954) mentions this species being found in shallow water with records from northcentral and westcentral Colorado at 5,500-9,000 feet. CNHP (2009) show occurrences in Boulder, Chaffee, Delta, Jackson, Mesa, and Montezuma Counties. Weber and Wittmann (2001a) mention this species being found in subalpine ponds and being very inconspicuous. Plants are differentiated into aquatic stolons with leaves and subterranean stolons with fewer leaves and more bladders. Neid (2006) states that this species is an affixed (as opposed to free-floating) aquatic species that grows in a variety of low-energy aquatic environments. It grows in shallow water (up to approximately 12 inches deep) with a penetrable substrate. It has been found between 8,200 to 10,900 feet in Colorado with most records below 10,000 feet within the montane zone. It is often found in open water microhabitat of alkaline fens and its habitat is patchy and discontinuous on the landscape.

Alkaline fens are not common on the RGNF. However, the combination of habitat and elevation occurrence for this species could occur on the RGNF.

CP District-wide Salvage Project TES Plants Report July 2017 References and Literature Cited

Anderson, D.G. 2004. Gilia sedifolia Brandeg. (stonecrop gilia): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/giliasedifolia.pdf [10/2013]

Arizona Willow Interagency Technical Team. 1995. Arizona willow conservation agreement and strategy. U.S. Forest Service, Intermountain Region, Ogden, Utah; US Forest Service, Southwest Region, Albuquerque, New Mexico; National Park Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Denver, Colorado; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Mountain-Prairie Region, Salt Lake City, Utah; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southwest Region, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Beatty, B.L., W.F. Jennings, and R.C. Rawlinson (2004, January 30). Machaeranthera coloradoensis (Gray) Osterhout (Colorado tansyaster): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/machaerantheracoloradoensis.pdf [May 18, 2006].

Burt, J. 1997. The effects of grazing and fire on Astragalus ripleyi Barneby. Unpublished document. February 15. Submitted to the Colorado Natural Areas Program, Denver, CO.

Burt, J. 1998. Effects of grazing and fire on Astragalus ripleyi Barneby; summary of 1997 field work. Unpublished document. June 15. Submitted to USDA Forest Service, Rio Grande National Forest, CO.

Burt, J. 1999. Effects of grazing and fire on Astragalus ripleyi Barneby; summary of 1997 field work. Unpublished document. March 15. Submitted to USDA Forest Service, Rio Grande National Forest, CO.

Colorado Native Plant Society. 1997. Rare plants of Colorado. Colorado Native Plant Society, in cooperation with the Rocky Mountain Nature Association, Estes Park, CO.

Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP). 1994. Rare, Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species Overlays and Accompanying Reports.

Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP). 2004. Colorado Natural Heritage Program Rare Plant Guide Codes and Definitions. Accessed via the World Wide Web at http://www.enhp.colostate.edu/rareplants/codes/html [July 11, 2012]

Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP). 2006. (Online). Available: http://www.cnhp.colostate.edu/index.asp. [March 4, 2010]

Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP). 2013. Colorado Rare Plant Guide: Cryptogramma stelleri (Gmel.) Prantl. (Online). Available: http://www.cnhp.colostate.edu/download/projects/rareplants/list.asp?list=master [October 22, 2015]

Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP). 2016. (Online). Available: http://www.cnhp.colostate.edu/index.asp. [August 2016]. Including associated GIS files.

Decker, K. 2005. Astragalus proximus (Rydberg) Wooton & Standley (Aztec milkvetch): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/astragalusproximus.pdf

CP District-wide Salvage Project TES Plants Report July 2017 Decker, K. 2006. Astragalus missouriensis Nutt. Var. humistratus Isely (Missouri milkvetch): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/astragalusmissouriensisvarhumistratus.pdf

Decker, K. 2006. Salix arizonica Dorn (Arizona willow): A Technical Conservation Assessment. Report prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project. Fort Collins, CO. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/salixarizonica.pdf

Decker, K. 2006. Salix candida Fluegge ex Wild. (sageleaf willow): A Technical Conservation Assessment. Report Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project. Fort Collins, CO. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/salixcandida.pdf

Decker, K. 2006. Salix serissima (Bailey) Fern. (autumn willow): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/salixserissima.pdf [Accessed January 12, 2013].

Fertig, W. 1993. Field survey for Cleome multicaulis, Cymopterus williamsii and Sullivantia hapemanii in north-central Wyoming. Unpublished report prepared for the BLM, Casper District by the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, Laramie.

Fertig, W., C. Refsdal, and J. Whipple. 1994. Wyoming Rare Plant Field Guide. Wyoming Rare Plant Technical Committee, Cheyenne, WY. USGS Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center: Jamestown, ND. Available at http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/distr/others/wyplant/wyplant.htm.

Fertig, W. 2000. Status of Many0Stemmed Spider-Flower (Cleome multicaulis) in Wyoming. Prepared for the Bureau of Land Management, Wyoming State Office, Laramie.

Flora of North America Editorial Committee. 1993. Flora of North America North of Mexico. Vol. 2, Oxford University Press.

Gage, E. and D. J. Cooper. 2006. Carex diandra Schrank (lesser panicled sedge): A Technical Conservation Assessment. Report prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project. Fort Collins, CO. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/carexdiandra.pdf

Harrington, H.D. 1954. Manual of the Plants of Colorado. Sage Books. Denver, Colorado.

Hartman, R.L. 1992. Report on the status of Sisyrinchium pallidum, a candidate species. Status survey prepared for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Rocky Mountain Herbarium, Laramie, WY.

Komarek, S. 1994. Flora of the San Juans – A Field Guide to the Mountain Plants of Southwestern Colorado. Kivaki Press, Durango, CO.

Komarek, S. 2003. Plant species of special concern survey form submitted to the Colorado Natural Heritage Program, Boulder, Colorado.

Ladyman, J.A.R. 2003. Astragalus ripleyi Barneby (Ripley’s milkvetch): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/astragalusripley.pdf [April 2, 2010]

CP District-wide Salvage Project TES Plants Report July 2017 Ladyman, J.A.R. 2004. Draba smithii Gilg ex O.E. Schulz (Smith’s draba): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/drabasmithii.pdf [April 26, 2005].

Lightfoot, K. 1995. Status Report on Astragalus ripleyi Barneby. September 26. Unpublished document. Forestry and Resources Conservation Division, Santa Fe, NM.

Mergen, Daryl E. 2006. Cypripedium parviflorum Salisb. (lesser yellow lady’s slipper): A Technical Conservation Assessment. Report prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project. Colorado Springs, CO. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/cypripediumparviflorum.pdf

Moore, L. and S. Friedley. 2004. Sisyrinchium pallidum Cholewa & Henderson (pale blue-eyed grass): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/sisyrinchiumpallidum.pdf [10/11/2015].

Naumann, T. 1990. Status Report for Astragalus ripleyi. Unpublished report. June 29. Colorado Natural Areas Program, Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation, Denver, CO.

Neid, Stephanie L. 2006. Utricularia minor L. (lesser bladderwort): A Technical Conservation Assessment. Report produced for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project. Fort Collins, CO.

O’Kane, S.L.Jr., D.H. Wilken, and R.L. Hartman. 1988. Noteworthy Collections of Aralia racemose, Astragalus humillimus, A. sericoleucus, Atriplex pleiantha, Crepis capillaris, Cryptantha weberi, Dithyrea wizlizenii, Ipomopsis congesta ssp. crebrifolia, Lomatium bicolor, Mentzelia densa, Neoparrya lithophila, and Rumex verticillatus. Madrono 35 (1)72-74.

Panjabi, S.B. Jennings, J. Coles, C. Dawson, M. Minton, A. Kratz, and C. Spurrier. 1997. Colorado Rare Plant Guide. Prepared for the Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Forest Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program.

Spackman, S., B. Jennings, J. Coles, C. Dawson, M. Minton, A. Kratz and C. Spurrier. 1997. Colorado Rare Plant Field Guide. Prepared for the Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program.

USFS. 1998. R2VEG Region 2 Integrated Resource Inventory Task Performed by Rio Grande National Forest. Inventory completed in 1998; inventory verification and updates occur annually.

USDA, NRCS, 1999. The PLANTS database (http://plants.usda.gov). National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70874-4490 USA.

USFS, 2003. Region 2 Sensitive Species Evaluations. (http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/evalrationale/index.shtml ). Rocky Mountain Region. Lakewood, CO.

Weber, W.A. and R.C. Wittmann. 2001. Colorado Flora, Eastern Slope. Third edition. Colorado Associated University Press, Boulder, Colorado.

CP District-wide Salvage Project TES Plants Report July 2017 Weber, W.A. and R.C. Wittmann. 2001. Colorado Flora, western slope. Third edition. Colorado Associated University Press, Boulder, Colorado.