DOCSLIB.ORG

Powder River County Long Range Plan 2019.Docx

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Powder River County Long Range Plan 2019.Docx Powder River County Long Range Plan Broadus NRCS Field Office December 26, 2019 1 Contents I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................... 4 II. NATURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY ............................................................................................................................ 5 GENERAL INFORMATION ........................................................................................................................................... 5 COUNTY DEMOGRAPHICS ......................................................................................................................................... 5 AGRICULTURE DEMOGRAPHICS ............................................................................................................................... 6 CLIMATE ..................................................................................................................................................................... 6 GEOLOGY ................................................................................................................................................................... 7 SOILS .......................................................................................................................................................................... 9 LAND OWNERSHIP ................................................................................................................................................... 10 LAND USE AND COVER ............................................................................................................................................. 12 Mixedgrass Prairie ............................................................................................................................................... 12 Big Sagebrush Steppe .......................................................................................................................................... 13 Ponderosa Pine .................................................................................................................................................... 13 NOXIOUS WEEDS ..................................................................................................................................................... 16 WATER RESOURCES ................................................................................................................................................. 18 Groundwater ....................................................................................................................................................... 18 Surface Water ...................................................................................................................................................... 19 Water Rights ........................................................................................................................................................ 21 Impaired Streams ................................................................................................................................................ 22 Riparian Corridors ................................................................................................................................................ 23 LIVESTOCK................................................................................................................................................................ 23 FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCE................................................................................................................................ 24 Species of Concern............................................................................................................................................... 25 MINERAL RESOURCES .............................................................................................................................................. 26 AIR AND ENERGY ..................................................................................................................................................... 27 UTILITIES .................................................................................................................................................................. 28 III. CONSERVATION EFFORTS ....................................................................................................................................... 29 PARTNER CONSERVATION EFFORTS ........................................................................................................................ 31 Coalbed Methane Protection Program (CBM) ..................................................................................................... 32 Forest Understory and Wood Production Response to Ponderosa Pine Thinning Treatments in Southeast Montana .............................................................................................................................................................. 32 Cottonwood Regeneration Trials ......................................................................................................................... 32 WIS Station .......................................................................................................................................................... 32 Farm Service Agency (FSA) .................................................................................................................................. 33 2 Powder River County Weed District .................................................................................................................... 33 US Geological Survey ........................................................................................................................................... 33 US Forest Service ................................................................................................................................................. 33 US Bureau of Land Management ......................................................................................................................... 33 MT Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC) ....................................................................... 34 Montana State University Extension – Powder River County .............................................................................. 34 American Bird Conservancy ................................................................................................................................. 34 Broadus Volunteer Fire Department (BVFD) ....................................................................................................... 34 IV: NATURAL RESOURCE CONCERNS AND DESIRED FUTURE OUTCOMES ................................................................... 35 Degraded Plant Condition ‐ Noxious Weeds ........................................................................................................... 35 Degraded Plant Structure and Composition and Sheet/Rill Erosion – Prairie Dogs ................................................ 35 Degraded Plant Condition – Wildfire Hazard; Inadequate Wildlife Habitat Continuity .......................................... 36 Streambank and Gully Erosion ‐ Little Powder River ............................................................................................... 47 Excessive sediment – Otter Creek ........................................................................................................................... 47 Other ........................................................................................................................................................................ 47 Prioritized Future Conditions ................................................................................................................................... 48 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................................. 49 APPENDIX..................................................................................................................................................................... 51 3 I. INTRODUCTION The Powder River County Long Range Plan (LRP) was developed by the Broadus Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) office and Miles City Area Office with input from the Powder River Conservation District (PRCD) and Powder River Local Working Group (LWG). The purpose of the plan is to provide natural resource status in the county, record resource issues according to input from local producers and conservation partners, and analyze potential to address resource issues between 2020-2030. The Long Range Plan may be updated annually to reflect changing resource conditions in the county, including resource issues that have been addressed and emerging resource issues. The vision of our Long Range Plan is to achieve local ownership of addressing conservation priorities in Powder River County, along with private and public land managers and non-governmental organization (NGO) partners. Taking the first step towards our vision, the NRCS and the PRCD hosted Local Working Group (LWG) meetings in February and March 2019 to gather input from stakeholders. Invitations to attend the meeting were sent to over 400 landowners in Powder River County, Powder River
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Systematic Studies of the South African Campanulaceae Sensu Stricto with an Emphasis on Generic Delimitations
    Town The copyright of this thesis rests with the University of Cape Town. No quotation from it or information derivedCape from it is to be published without full acknowledgement of theof source. The thesis is to be used for private study or non-commercial research purposes only. University Systematic studies of the South African Campanulaceae sensu stricto with an emphasis on generic delimitations Christopher Nelson Cupido Thesis presented for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in the Department of Botany Town UNIVERSITY OF CAPECape TOWN of September 2009 University Roella incurva Merciera eckloniana Microcodon glomeratus Prismatocarpus diffusus Town Wahlenbergia rubioides Cape of Wahlenbergia paniculata (blue), W. annularis (white) Siphocodon spartioides University Rhigiophyllum squarrosum Wahlenbergia procumbens Representatives of Campanulaceae diversity in South Africa ii Town Dedicated to Ursula, Denroy, Danielle and my parents Cape of University iii Town DECLARATION Cape I confirm that this is my ownof work and the use of all material from other sources has been properly and fully acknowledged. University Christopher N Cupido Cape Town, September 2009 iv Systematic studies of the South African Campanulaceae sensu stricto with an emphasis on generic delimitations Christopher Nelson Cupido September 2009 ABSTRACT The South African Campanulaceae sensu stricto, comprising 10 genera, represent the most diverse lineage of the family in the southern hemisphere. In this study two phylogenies are reconstructed using parsimony and Bayesian methods. A family-level phylogeny was estimated to test the monophyly and time of divergence of the South African lineage. This analysis, based on a published ITS phylogeny and an additional ten South African taxa, showed a strongly supported South African clade sister to the campanuloids.
    [Show full text]
  • Chloroplast DNA Rearrangements in Campanulaceae: Phylogenetic Utility of Highly Rearranged Genomes
    Central Washington University ScholarWorks@CWU All Faculty Scholarship for the College of the Sciences College of the Sciences 8-23-2004 Chloroplast DNA rearrangements in Campanulaceae: phylogenetic utility of highly rearranged genomes Mary E. Cosner Linda A. Raubeson Robert K. Jansen Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.cwu.edu/cotsfac Part of the Biology Commons, Botany Commons, Genetics Commons, Genomics Commons, and the Plant Biology Commons BMC Evolutionary Biology BioMed Central Research article Open Access Chloroplast DNA rearrangements in Campanulaceae: phylogenetic utility of highly rearranged genomes Mary E Cosner1, Linda A Raubeson*2 and Robert K Jansen3 Address: 1(Deceased) Department of Plant Biology, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210 USA, 2Department of Biological Sciences, Central Washington University, Ellensburg, WA 98926-7537, USA and 3Section of Integrative Biology and Institute of Cellular and Molecular Biology, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712 USA Email: Mary E Cosner - [email protected]; Linda A Raubeson* - [email protected]; Robert K Jansen - [email protected] * Corresponding author Published: 23 August 2004 Received: 02 April 2004 Accepted: 23 August 2004 BMC Evolutionary Biology 2004, 4:27 doi:10.1186/1471-2148-4-27 This article is available from: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/4/27 © 2004 Cosner et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Abstract Background: The Campanulaceae (the "hare bell" or "bellflower" family) is a derived angiosperm family comprised of about 600 species treated in 35 to 55 genera.
    [Show full text]
  • Floristic Quality Assessment Report
    FLORISTIC QUALITY ASSESSMENT IN INDIANA: THE CONCEPT, USE, AND DEVELOPMENT OF COEFFICIENTS OF CONSERVATISM Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) the State tree of Indiana June 2004 Final Report for ARN A305-4-53 EPA Wetland Program Development Grant CD975586-01 Prepared by: Paul E. Rothrock, Ph.D. Taylor University Upland, IN 46989-1001 Introduction Since the early nineteenth century the Indiana landscape has undergone a massive transformation (Jackson 1997). In the pre-settlement period, Indiana was an almost unbroken blanket of forests, prairies, and wetlands. Much of the land was cleared, plowed, or drained for lumber, the raising of crops, and a range of urban and industrial activities. Indiana’s native biota is now restricted to relatively small and often isolated tracts across the State. This fragmentation and reduction of the State’s biological diversity has challenged Hoosiers to look carefully at how to monitor further changes within our remnant natural communities and how to effectively conserve and even restore many of these valuable places within our State. To meet this monitoring, conservation, and restoration challenge, one needs to develop a variety of appropriate analytical tools. Ideally these techniques should be simple to learn and apply, give consistent results between different observers, and be repeatable. Floristic Assessment, which includes metrics such as the Floristic Quality Index (FQI) and Mean C values, has gained wide acceptance among environmental scientists and decision-makers, land stewards, and restoration ecologists in Indiana’s neighboring states and regions: Illinois (Taft et al. 1997), Michigan (Herman et al. 1996), Missouri (Ladd 1996), and Wisconsin (Bernthal 2003) as well as northern Ohio (Andreas 1993) and southern Ontario (Oldham et al.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vascular Flora of Boone County, Iowa (2005-2008)
    Journal of the Iowa Academy of Science: JIAS Volume 117 Number 1-4 Article 5 2010 The Vascular Flora of Boone County, Iowa (2005-2008) Jimmie D. Thompson Let us know how access to this document benefits ouy Copyright © Copyright 2011 by the Iowa Academy of Science, Inc. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uni.edu/jias Part of the Anthropology Commons, Life Sciences Commons, Physical Sciences and Mathematics Commons, and the Science and Mathematics Education Commons Recommended Citation Thompson, Jimmie D. (2010) "The Vascular Flora of Boone County, Iowa (2005-2008)," Journal of the Iowa Academy of Science: JIAS, 117(1-4), 9-46. Available at: https://scholarworks.uni.edu/jias/vol117/iss1/5 This Research is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa Academy of Science at UNI ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Iowa Academy of Science: JIAS by an authorized editor of UNI ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Jour. Iowa Acad. Sci. 117(1-4):9-46, 2010 The Vascular Flora of Boone County, Iowa (2005-2008) JIMMIE D. THOMPSON 19516 515'h Ave. Ames, Iowa 50014-9302 A vascular plant survey of Boone County, Iowa was conducted from 2005 to 2008 during which 1016 taxa (of which 761, or 75%, are native to central Iowa) were encountered (vouchered and/or observed). A search of literature and the vouchers of Iowa State University's Ada Hayden Herbarium (ISC) revealed 82 additional taxa (of which 57, or 70%, are native to Iowa), unvouchered or unobserved during the current study, as having occurred in the county.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Checklist of the Missouri Flora for Floristic Quality Assessment
    Ladd, D. and J.R. Thomas. 2015. Ecological checklist of the Missouri flora for Floristic Quality Assessment. Phytoneuron 2015-12: 1–274. Published 12 February 2015. ISSN 2153 733X ECOLOGICAL CHECKLIST OF THE MISSOURI FLORA FOR FLORISTIC QUALITY ASSESSMENT DOUGLAS LADD The Nature Conservancy 2800 S. Brentwood Blvd. St. Louis, Missouri 63144 [email protected] JUSTIN R. THOMAS Institute of Botanical Training, LLC 111 County Road 3260 Salem, Missouri 65560 [email protected] ABSTRACT An annotated checklist of the 2,961 vascular taxa comprising the flora of Missouri is presented, with conservatism rankings for Floristic Quality Assessment. The list also provides standardized acronyms for each taxon and information on nativity, physiognomy, and wetness ratings. Annotated comments for selected taxa provide taxonomic, floristic, and ecological information, particularly for taxa not recognized in recent treatments of the Missouri flora. Synonymy crosswalks are provided for three references commonly used in Missouri. A discussion of the concept and application of Floristic Quality Assessment is presented. To accurately reflect ecological and taxonomic relationships, new combinations are validated for two distinct taxa, Dichanthelium ashei and D. werneri , and problems in application of infraspecific taxon names within Quercus shumardii are clarified. CONTENTS Introduction Species conservatism and floristic quality Application of Floristic Quality Assessment Checklist: Rationale and methods Nomenclature and taxonomic concepts Synonymy Acronyms Physiognomy, nativity, and wetness Summary of the Missouri flora Conclusion Annotated comments for checklist taxa Acknowledgements Literature Cited Ecological checklist of the Missouri flora Table 1. C values, physiognomy, and common names Table 2. Synonymy crosswalk Table 3. Wetness ratings and plant families INTRODUCTION This list was developed as part of a revised and expanded system for Floristic Quality Assessment (FQA) in Missouri.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of the Oklahoma Native Plant Society, Volume 9, December 2009
    4 Oklahoma Native Plant Record Volume 9, December 2009 VASCULAR PLANTS OF SOUTHEASTERN OKLAHOMA FROM THE SANS BOIS TO THE KIAMICHI MOUNTAINS Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy May 1969 Francis Hobart Means, Jr. Midwest City, Oklahoma Current Email Address: [email protected] The author grew up in the prairie region of Kay County where he learned to appreciate proper management of the soil and the native grass flora. After graduation from college, he moved to Eastern Oklahoma State College where he took a position as Instructor in Botany and Agronomy. In the course of conducting botany field trips and working with local residents on their plant problems, the author became increasingly interested in the flora of that area and of the State of Oklahoma. This led to an extensive study of the northern portion of the Oauchita Highlands with collections currently numbering approximately 4,200. The specimens have been processed according to standard herbarium procedures. The first set has been placed in the Herbarium of Oklahoma State University with the second set going to Eastern Oklahoma State College at Wilburton. Editor’s note: The original species list included habitat characteristics and collection notes. These are omitted here but are available in the dissertation housed at the Edmon-Low Library at OSU or in digital form by request to the editor. [SS] PHYSICAL FEATURES Winding Stair Mountain ranges. A second large valley lies across the southern part of Location and Area Latimer and LeFlore counties between the The area studied is located primarily in Winding Stair and Kiamichi mountain the Ouachita Highlands of eastern ranges.
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist of Montana Vascular Plants
    Checklist of Montana Vascular Plants June 1, 2011 By Scott Mincemoyer Montana Natural Heritage Program Helena, MT This checklist of Montana vascular plants is organized by Division, Class and Family. Species are listed alphabetically within this hierarchy. Synonyms, if any, are listed below each species and are slightly indented from the main species list. The list is generally composed of species which have been documented in the state and are vouchered by a specimen collection deposited at a recognized herbaria. Additionally, some species are included on the list based on their presence in the state being reported in published and unpublished botanical literature or through data submitted to MTNHP. The checklist is made possible by the contributions of numerous botanists, natural resource professionals and plant enthusiasts throughout Montana’s history. Recent work by Peter Lesica on a revised Flora of Montana (Lesica 2011) has been invaluable for compiling this checklist as has Lavin and Seibert’s “Grasses of Montana” (2011). Additionally, published volumes of the Flora of North America (FNA 1993+) have also proved very beneficial during this process. The taxonomy and nomenclature used in this checklist relies heavily on these previously mentioned resources, but does not strictly follow anyone of them. The Checklist of Montana Vascular Plants can be viewed or downloaded from the Montana Natural Heritage Program’s website at: http://mtnhp.org/plants/default.asp This publication will be updated periodically with more frequent revisions anticipated initially due to the need for further review of the taxonomy and nomenclature of particular taxonomic groups (e.g. Arabis s.l ., Crataegus , Physaria ) and the need to clarify the presence or absence in the state of some species.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    ISSN 1536-7738 Oklahoma Native Plant Record Journal of the Oklahoma Native Plant Society Volume 4, Number 1, December 2004 Oklahoma Native Plant Record Journal of the Oklahoma Native Plant Society 2435 South Peoria Tulsa, Oklahoma 74114 Volume 4 Number 1, December 2004 ISSN 1536-7738 Managing Editor, Sheila A. Strawn Technical Editor, Patricia Folley Technical Advisor, Bruce Hoagland CD-ROM Producer, Chadwick Cox Website: http://www.usao.edu/~onps/ The purpose of the ONPS is to encourage the study, protection, propagation, appreciation and use of the native plants of Oklahoma. Membership in ONPS shall be open to any person who supports the aims of the Society. ONPS offers individual, student, family, and life membership. 2004 Officers and Board Members President: James Elder ONPS Service Award Chair: Sue Amstutz Vice-president: Constance Murray Conservation Chair: Chadwick Cox Secretaries: Publicity Chair: Kimberly A. Shannon Publications Co-chairs: Tina Julich Sheila Strawn Treasurer: Mary Korthase Constance Taylor Past President: Patricia Folley Marketing Co-chairs: Board Members: Lawrence Magrath Paul Buck Susan Chambers Kay Gafford Photo Contest Co-chairs: Melynda Hickman Patricia and Chadwick Cox Monica Macklin Newsletter Editor: Chadwick Cox Elfriede Miller Librarian: Bonnie Winchester Stanley Rice Website Manager: Chadwick Cox Northeast Chapter Chair: Constance Murray Mailing Committee Chair: Karen Haworth Central Chapter Chair: Sharon McCain Color Oklahoma Committee Chair: Cross-timbers Chapter Chair: Constance Murray Suzanne
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist of the Vascular Flora of Page County, Iowa
    Journal of the Iowa Academy of Science: JIAS Volume 99 Number Article 6 1992 Checklist of the Vascular Flora of Page County, Iowa Barbara L. Wilson Let us know how access to this document benefits ouy Copyright © Copyright 1992 by the Iowa Academy of Science, Inc. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uni.edu/jias Part of the Anthropology Commons, Life Sciences Commons, Physical Sciences and Mathematics Commons, and the Science and Mathematics Education Commons Recommended Citation Wilson, Barbara L. (1992) "Checklist of the Vascular Flora of Page County, Iowa," Journal of the Iowa Academy of Science: JIAS, 99(1), 23-33. Available at: https://scholarworks.uni.edu/jias/vol99/iss1/6 This Research is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa Academy of Science at UNI ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Iowa Academy of Science: JIAS by an authorized editor of UNI ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Jour. Iowa Acaci. Sci. 99(1):23-33, 1992 Checklist of the Vascular Flora of Page County, Iowa BARBARA L. WILSON Route 1, Box 41, Hastings, Iowa The vascular flora of Page County, Iowa, was studied from 1987 through 1991. Seven hundred forty two species and four hybrids of vascular plants were found. A quarter of the flora consists of non-native species. Taxa not previously reported in Iowa include: Amsinckia intermedia, Brassica kaber, Cardaria chalapensis, Ca!lirhoe bushii, Carex mesochorea, E/eocharis xyridiformis, Euph()Ybia prostrata, Lactuca sa/igna, Leontodon autumna/is, Scirpus mucronatus, Sc/eroch/oa dura, and Vernonia arkansana.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Oklahoma Native Plant Record
    24 Oklahoma Native Plant Record Volume 20, December 2020 A FLORISTIC INVENTORY OF THE NATURE CONSERVANCY’S OKA’ YANAHLI PRESERVE, JOHNSTON COUNTY, OKLAHOMA Amy K. Buthod Oklahoma Biological Survey University of Oklahoma Norman, OK 73019 [email protected] Bruce W. Hoagland Oklahoma Biological Survey Department of Geography and Environmental Sustainability University of Oklahoma Norman, OK 73019 ABSTRACT This paper reports the results of a vascular plant inventory at The Nature Conservancy's Oka' Yanahli Preserve in Johnston County, Oklahoma. A total of 645 taxa in 109 families were collected. Three-hundred and ninety genera, 602 species, and 43 infraspecific taxa were identified. The families with the largest number of taxa were the Asteraceae with 91 taxa and the Poaceae with 89 taxa. Ninety non-native or naturalized taxa—14.0% of the preserve's flora—were found. Nine taxa tracked by the Oklahoma Natural Heritage Inventory were present. Nine vegetation types occurred at the preserve. Keywords: vascular, non-native, tracked, grassland INTRODUCTION AND STUDY reintroduction of fire to the landscape, the AREA management of invasive species, and the advancement of understanding of the Dedicated in 2012, The Nature Arbuckle-Simpson aquifer system. Conservancy’s Oka’ Yanahli Preserve was Oka’ Yanahli occupies 1,456 ha in acquired with the goal of conserving Johnston County in south-central biodiversity through land protection and Oklahoma approximately 25 km north of stewardship. The preserve includes two the city of Tishomingo (Figure 1). The miles along the Blue River, one of only two property is bisected by the Blue River, with free-flowing rivers in the state of Oklahoma.
    [Show full text]
  • Tim Hogan University of Colorado Museum of Natural History Herbarium, UCB 350 Boulder, Colorado 80309-0350, U.S.A
    A FLORISTIC SURVEY OF THE BOULDER MOUNTAIN PARK: WITH NOTES ON ITS CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT (BOULDER, COLORADO, U.S.A.) Tim Hogan University of Colorado Museum of Natural History Herbarium, UCB 350 Boulder, Colorado 80309-0350, U.S.A. [email protected] ABSTRACT The City of Boulder Mountain Park sits in the eastern foothills of the northern Front Range of Colorado. Approximately 7000 acres (2800 ha) in extent, the study area is characterized by a foothills and montane vegetation and flora, predominantly of western North American distribution. Situated at the interface of the Great Plains and the Rocky Mountains, the flora of the Mountain Park is distinguished by a wealth of species with eastern woodland affinities, as well as a number of southern Rocky Mountain species endemic to the Front Range. Six hundred and ninety-eight (698) species of vascular plants in 426 genera and 100 families are documented in this survey. Twenty (20) of the plants are listed as Species of Special Concern by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program, with an additional 26 listed as sensitive by the City of Boulder Open Space and Mountain Parks Department (OSMP). Introduced non-native species constitute 21% of the flora (147 species), a figure that exaggerates their ecological role in the Park; less than a dozen introduced species are of serious concern in their impact upon native diversity. The Mountain Park is viewed by many as the crown jewel of the City’s OSMP system, and serves as a model for public land management across other open spaces in urban areas nationwide.
    [Show full text]
  • Inventory Needs and Areas of Botanical Significance on the Colorado Plains
    Inventory Needs and Areas of Botanical Significance on the Colorado Plains Susan Panjabi and Karin Decker March 2020 Inventory Needs and Areas of Botanical Significance on the Colorado Plains Prepared for Colorado Natural Areas Program Colorado Parks and Wildlife Prepared by Susan Panjabi, Botanist and Karin Decker, Conservation Ecologist Colorado Natural Heritage Program, a NatureServe Network Program at Colorado State University March 2020 Background The Flora of Colorado includes 2797 native vascular plant taxa (Ackerfield 2015). The Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP) maintains range wide and state wide rarity ranks (G1-G5, S1- S5) for all of these taxa, and “Tracks” the location and condition of 524 plant taxa that are ranked G1-G3 range-wide (globally), or if ranked G4 or G5, ranked S1 or S2 in Colorado. These are plants that warrant conservation attention in Colorado. Additionally, 78 Colorado plant taxa are assigned a Watchlist (W) tracking status by CNHP. These are plants that require additional research because the overall significance of the occurrences of these taxa in Colorado is unclear, usually because the plants are considered to be globally secure from a range-wide perspective (G4-G5), or because the plants are known to occur in areas where botanical research has been sparse. The T rank (T1-T5) is a trinomial rank that applies to the subspecies or variety of a species. For additional information about CNHP ranking and tracking status please see the Colorado Natural Heritage Program and NatureServe websites. Our analysis focused on tracked and watchlisted plants that occur on the eastern plains of Colorado (CNHP 2019).
    [Show full text]