A Floristic Basis for the Management of Rare Plants and Their Communities in the San Jacinto Mountains, California

A FLORISTIC BASIS FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF RARE PLANTS AND THEIR COMMUNITIES IN THE SAN JACINTO MOUNTAINS, CALIFORNIA

A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Michael Paul Hamilton

May, 1983 © Michael Paul Hamilton 1983

Michael Paul Hamilton, Ph.D. Cornell University, 1983

Two adjacent but administratively distinct wilderness areas in the San Jacinto Mountains of Southern California were studied to assess the extent that recreational use has altered population of rare and geographically limited species. A system for determining rarity status was applied to a flora numbering 218 species, identifying 120 species as limited in distribution and abundance within each wilderness, or geographically restricted in their ranges. The relative endangerment of these species was determined by examining patterns of recreation related effects (e.g., trampling) and applied to the rare species inventory through a site-specific survey of trampling occurrences along trails, at campsites and at scenic points. The current management of each wilderness area was examined in light of these rare plant and recreation-conflict findings. A framework of policy goals and management actions was developed to create a basis for eliminating or minimizing the impacts to rare plant populations, and a species specific program of ongoing management with monitoring was proposed. A total of 157 site specific impacts from various activities of backpackers were noted among 79 species of rare plants. An BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Michael Paul Hamilton was born September 15, 1954 in Blue Island, Illinois, the firstborn of Kenneth and Val Hamilton. Always the naturalist, he entered college majoring in botany and zoology at California State Polytechnic University at omena, completing a Bachelor of Science in 1976 and going on to complete a masters there in 1979. From 1973 through 1979 Mike was a seasonal wilderness park aide for the California Department of Parks and Recreation in the San Jacinto State Park Wilderness. Virtually every summer and weekend of those seven years were spent in the San Jacinto Mountains. He entered the Department of Natural Resources at Cornell University in September, 1979, to earn a Ph.D. in studies of natural resources policy and planning and plant ecology as it pertains to wilderness management. He has taught a variety of courses including forest ecology, outdoor survival, wilderness management and backpacking, and is currently the resident di rector of the James San Jacinto Mountains Reserve near Idyll wild, California. DEDICATION

To Jetty Henderson for sharina his wilderness

-iii- ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

How does one begin thanking all of the people involved in my studying the San Jacintos over the past 10 years? Certainly kudos go out to the managers, staff and friends of the San Jacinto wilderness areas, particularly the staff people -- you all know who you are! To Larry Hamilton for facilitating my acceptance into Cornell, I OWE a debt of thanks. To my Chairman, Jim Lassoie for accepting me after Larry's retirement, for teaching me objec tivity with regards to Department politics, for being available for any of my needs, and far being a friend -- my special thanks. I thank Ted Hullar for his help, his enthusiasm for wilderness everywhere, and for sharing with me his time when most faculty could not get beyond his secretary. I can not possibly thank Charlie Smith for all he has done ••• these- cret handshake was particularly useful. My praise goes to Pe ter Marks. I've never met a more competent ecologist and nat uralist, his rigor was most necessary for my accomplishments. Field and lab assistance was a keystone to my study -- I generously thank Ken Berg, Paul Sheppard, Lisa Jackson, Abby White, Fred LaBue, Frank Padilla, the class of BIO 499, Jack Snavely, Rachel Reed, Janet Wise, Lisa Roig, Mike Hannigan, Nate Stehenson, Phil Dixon and others who played various roles in helping me to complete this study.

-iv- And finally, but not least, I thank my parents for their support, tolerance, and love. I owe them everything. Support for this study was diverse. Major funding was pro vided by a Mcintyre Stennis Grant to James Lassoie, and summer support by the Cornell Graduate School, California Department of Parks and Recreation and the u.s. Forest Service, San Bernardino National Forest. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH------ii

DEDICATION------iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS------iv

Chapter ~

I. INTRODUCTION ------1

Concepts of Rarity------5 Study Objectives------9

II. BACKGROUND ------11

The San Jacinto Mountains------11 Geography------13 Geology------13 Soils------16 Floristics of the San Jacinto Wllderness------19 Climate------23 Human Impact------24 Wilderness Management------28

III. METHODS ------31

Floristic Study------31 Phytosociological Study------32 Visitor Impact Study------34

IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ------37

Rarity Classifications------39 Phytosociology------53 Overstory Communities------57 Understory Communities------67 Recreational Impact Analysis------75 Visitation------77 Vegetation Trampling at Round Valley------81 Rare Plant and Planning for Rare Plant Management------88 Policy Goals------93 Policy and Management Actions------95 State Park Wilderness Area------95 -vi- u.s. Forest Service, San Jacinto Wilderness------102 Planning for Rare Plant Management in Wilderness ------106

V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ------112 Rare Plant Inventory ------113 Wilderness Policy and Management ------114 Rare Plant Management ------116 Conclusions ------116

Appendix A. THE ROLE OF SCIENCE IN WILDERNESS RESERVATION AND MANAGEMENT----- 118 B. SIMULATION MODEL FOR PREDICTING CAMPSITE VISITATION IN ROUND VALLEY------126 c. FLORISTIC SUMMARY OF THE SAN JACINTO WILDERNESS AREAS------138 D. DOCUMENTATION FOR THE RARE SPECIES OF THE SAN JACINTO WILDERNESS AREAS------147 E. RARE SPECIES CONFLICTS WITH RECREATION ACTIVITES------175

LITERATURE CITIED------182

-vii- LIST OF TABLES

Table Page 1. Explanations of Soil Family Associations Indicated in Figure 3------18 2. A Comparison Between California State and Federal Visitor Regulations in the San Jacinto Wilderness 29 3. Summary of Species Geographical Distribution and Growth Form------39 4. The R-E-V-D Coding System------44 5. Species Widespread Throughout Their Ranges But Rare in the San Jacinto Wilderness------48 6. Species Endemic to the California Floristic Province But Rare in the San Jacinto Wilderness Areas----- 49 7. Species Disjunct or At Limits of Range But Rare in the San Jacinto Wilderness Areas------50 8. Species Endemic to Southern California Occurring in the San Jacinto Wilderness Areas------51 9. Species Endemic to the San Jacinto Mountains (Including the Santa Rosa Mountains)------52 10. Examples of a Computer-Generated Gradient Nomogram Based on the Plot Sample Data------54 11. Tree Species Richness (Numbers of Overstory Species)-- 57 12. A Site Classification System Used to Describe Species Distributions Within the San Jacinto Wilderness Areas------62 13. Are of Each Dominant Plant Community------67 14. Shrub and Herb Species Richness (Numbers of Species)-- 75 15. Mean Monthly Overnight Use by Campground and Zones (8 Years)------78 16. Mean Mothly Dayhiker Use by Trailhead (8 Years)------78 17. Summary of Rare Species Conflicts (from Appendix D)--- 87 LIST OF FIGURES

1. A two dimension representation of relative rarity (Hardin 1977)------7

2. The San Jacinto Wilderness Areas and Vicinity------12

3. Soils of the San Jacinto Wilderness Areas------17

4. Floristic Regions Within the California Floristic Province------21

5. Distribution of Relict Species in California, Stebbins and Major (1965)------22

6. Campsite Locations Surrounding Round Valley Meadow------36

7. Categories of Geographic Distribution------38

8. Overstory Dendrogram Based on TWINSPAN Analysis------56

9. Elevational Profile of the San Jacinto Wilderness------58

10. Overstory Coverage Along an Elevational Gradient in the San Jacinto Mountains------60

11. Vegetation Map of the San Jacinto Wilderness Areas------66

12. Ordination Axis 1 of Understory Samples Plotted Against Elevation------68

13. Understory Dendrogram Based on TWINSPAN Analysis------69

14. Camping Zone Areas Within the U.S. Forest Service Wilderness------80

15. Overnight Visitor Use at the State Wilderness and Round Valley------82

16. Estimated Annual Visitor Use at Campsites in Round Valley------83

17. Species Responses to Increases in Campsite Use in Round Valley------85 -x- 18. Wilderness Management Objectives for the San Jacinto Wilderness Area, San Jacinto District (1980)------91

19. Resource Management Planning Approach for the California Department of Parks and Recreation------92

20. (a) Hidden lake, (b) Trichostema spp., (c) Trail Leading to lake------97

21. Gulley Erosion in Upper Tahquitz Meadow------103

22. Variables Used to Estimate Annual Use of individual Campsites in Sound Valley------137

-xi- Chapter I

INTRODUCTION

Are rare plants which occur within designated wilderness ade quately protected or preserved? Further, are wilderness managers properly trained to understand natural ecosystems so that they can "preserve its natural conditions" as the Wilderness Act implies they must? This thesis is concerned with the notion that wilderness cannot he adequately protected from the effects of physical degradation (overuse) and ecological isolation without precise, scientific knowledge about the organisms and processes which compose each wilderness ecosystem. This may seem intuitively obvious to an advocate of ecological research, but the situation persists that natural ecosystems (unmanipulated or without a history of human use) are managed not by biologists or ecologists, but by persons whose training and experience emphasize the use of wilderness for recreation.

Recreation managers insist that all nonmotorized activities in wilderness are inherently benign (Hendee et al. 1978). Based on this assumption, the dollars spent on wilderness man agement are concentrated on regulating the type, extent and intensity of recreation. Overuse is then defined as levels of recreation activities which either 1) reduce opportunities for solitude by visitors, 2) affect the landscape in ways which

-1------

visually detract from a visitor's perception of "naturalness" or, 3) depletion of the quality or abundance of features such as firewood, water, or campsites (Frissell & Stankey 1972). Hendee and Stankey (1973) would describe this orientation of management as an "anthropocentric" approach. The alternative to the anthropocentric approach is the "biocentric" approach to management, suggesting a concern by managers which is principally focused upon the species of wil derness. Regulations and activities which successfully reduce or eliminate effects on populations of species living within a wilderness could be considered biocentric management. It is rare to find examples of wilderness management that either emphasize a biocentric approach or which manage biocen trically as well as anthropocentrically. To manage from a biocentric approach creates several major constraints from a traditional manager's view .. First, the biocentric approach requires specialized, site-specific knowledge of the resource. Such knowledge is costly to produce within agencies that usual ly lack sufficient expertise to generate it. Secondly, the findings of such studies may risk direct conflict with the recreation objectives established for a particular wilderness. Consequently, the discovery of an endangered species or a critical habitat can preclude the use of a particularly popu lar camping or fishing area, a situation with which the public may not sympathize Thirdly, reconciling such a situation way require levels of regulation and enforcement that an under-

-2- -3-

budgeted agency may not be able to provide, and hence legisla tive appropriations might be considered necessary. The irony of recreation-oriented wilderness management is that the justification for preserving an area as wilderness has a long history of emphasizing the scientific and ecological values of the land rather than the recreational value. Although that history is relevant to the issue of wilderness management, I prefer to review the role of science in wilderness preservation later in this thesis (see Appendix A). In reality it is far simpler to assume that wilderness rec reation is benign on the scale of large areas found in many wildernesses. Overall, this might well be the Case. Trails and campsites disturb a minor fraction of vegetation and soil when compared to the total area of a wilderness. Rarely does this disturbance occur on greater than 5% of a given landscape (Cole 1981) Also, most wilderness lands in the United States occur in mountainous terrain where the ecosystems tend to contain few species and are often prone, historically at least, to high rates of natural disturbance such as fire, floods and/or landslides. Vegetation encountered by backpackers is often common and widespread in the region. However, Cole and Washburne's 1981 study identified envi ronmental degradation as the most serious management concern of wilderness administrators throughout the National Wilder ness Preservation system. It is becoming increasingly obvious that wilderness management, per se, must encompass environmen- -4- tal or resource management expertise and traditional recreation fields. Such a comprehensive management program night include an equal emphasis (and funding) between recreation management and resource management. Resource management should concentrate on ecological processes such as fire management as well as species level management such as rare and endangered flora and fauna (Cutler 1980). Wilderness management of rate species is a very recent de velopment. The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (94th Congress, 1st Session, House Document 94-95) mandates that all Federal agencies cannot jeopardize, through actions or decision-making, any species and their critical habitat once those species are formally declared threatened or endangered. The Act protects these species formally listed by this legislation, and does not include the thousands of species currently recognized as rare and threatened by such organizations as the Smithsonian Institution or the California Native Plant Society (Ayensu and DeFilipps 1978). The political process for "listing" a rare species under the Endangered Species Act is time consuming and costly, whereas rate species are being threatened by development at an exponential rate (Soule and Wilcox 1980)

Wilderness managers and other administrators charged with natural area preservation cannot rely solely upon the Endangered Species legislation to identify those species needing management solutions. Not only must additional natural diversity data bases be consulted, but managers and their staff -5-

should be trained in principles of species rarity and endan germent. Such training involves a certain amount of ecologi cal and systematic (taxonomic) theory as well as a practical background in sampling methods and resource management tools. 1 have coined the tern fioristic management as a subset of wilderness resource management that deals strictly with the botanical composition of an Ecosystem. My thesis will provide the theoretical and practical considerations for managing bo tanical resources including rare and endangered species, by using the San Jacinto Wilderness areas as a case example .. Equally important, but beyond the scope of this study, are the ecological and faunal components of wilderness resource man agement. I hope that this floristic basis of management will be applicable, in concept., towards management of these other critical resources the ecological and faunal components of wilderness ecosystems.

1.1 CONCEPTS OF RARITY The Endangered Species Act was written to provide regulatory powers for ensuring the survival and protection of rare species threatened with extinction. Under the Act, an endangered and threatened species is defined as follows:

Endangered Species: those species of plants in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of their ranges. Existence may be endangered because of the destruction, drastic modification, or severe curtailment of habitat or because of overexploitation, disease, predation or even unknown reasons. Plant taxa from very limited areas, e.g., the type localities only, or from restricted habitats usually are considered endangered. -6-

Threatened species: those species of plants that are likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion or their ranges. This includes species categorized as rare, very rare, or depleted. A tare species of plant is one that has a small population in its range. It may be found in a restricted geographic region, or it may occur sparsely over a wider area.

Obviously, a species which is endangered or threatened con stitutes a special case of rarity. Rarity does not imply en dangerment. Rarity may in fact be a successful strategy for plant survival under natural conditions. A rare species, according to Drury (1980) either " ••• occurs in widely separated, small subpopulations so that inbreeding among subpopulations is significantly reduced or eliminated, or is restricted to a single population." In this particular case, rarity should not be used synonymously with endangerment. White (1980) defines rarity as " ... a condition of relative numbers and distribution of populations and individuals; endangerment is the condition of being vulnerable to extinction.' A large body of literature does suggest that low numbers of individuals risk greater chances of going extinct (Terborgh 1974, Diamond 1975, Ayensu and DeFilipps 1978, Soule and Wilcox 1980, Frankel and Soule 1981, Shaffer 1981). Rareness and endangerment should nonetheless be considered independent until a population is faced with threats to the species reproductive fitness. Rarity spans a considerable range of conditions as described by Hardin in 1977 (Figure 1). He defines rarity as a two-dimensional space where a species comprises few individuals and/or few sites (populations). The former is a measure NOT 'RARE

(f) w 1:- /"' (J) RARE / rare/and / !oca!l~ · local abundant 0 MANY INDIVIDUALS

Figure 1: A two dimension representation of relative rarity (Hardin 1917) ..

of abundance or numbers of individuals, while the latter refers to the number of populations which exist. These two concepts are necessarily vague in that each might imply absolute values (such as geographic range of the species) or relative values within a defined boundary (e.g., wilderness boundary) Hardin's definition of rarity allows managers to consider several conditions in which a plant (or animal) species might be considered rare. On an absolute scale, the geographic

-7- -8- range or dispersion of all populations must be considered in determining the rarity of a species. Species with a wide dis tribution (e.g., covering an entire state) are less rate than a species with a range restricted to a single valley or mountain. A second attribute of rarity measures the abundance of populations and/or individuals within a species' geographic range. Obviously, species with few populations or few individuals are rarer than an abundant species. The distinction between numbers of populations and numbers of individuals is relevant to this concept of rarity, and each should be considered separately in any rarity assessment. Relative rarity, in contrast to absolute rarity, deals with species rarity relative to other species within a politically defined boundary. In this case, the biogeographic range of a species is not ccnsidered, rather a species' dispersion and abundance within a designated area. Nature preserves and wilderness areas have contrived boundaries, thus containing a subset of the regional flora and vegetation. The rarity or commoness of each species of an artificially bounded flora can be determined by sampling their abundances using standard methods in plant ecology. If rare species are going to be managed as tart of the effort to preserve natural Ecosystems, then the status of a particular species within the wilderness boundary is as important as the species' status throughout its biogeographic range. Where wilderness is concerned, there is a specific mandate to preserve natural conditions, including the survival of rare plant species. At a minimum, a wilderness management plan should include a list of threatened and endangered plants. Given the major assumption about recreational impacts, it is exceedingly tare for a wilderness management agency to survey for rare ,threatened and endangered species or to assess the status of other rare species •• So, are wilderness lands adequately managed to protect rare species from human effects?

1.2 STUDY OBJECTIVES In order to answer this question, a case study was examined. The San Jacinto Mountains are the northernmost portion of the peninsular range system in Southern California. Reaching elevations of over 3,300 m , the coniferous forest sections have been climatically, geographically and biologically isolated from the Sierran and Mexican ranges since Pleistocene times. Consequently, numerous species can be considered rare not only by the constriction and restriction of their habitats but also by a degree of endemic speciation that has occurred within several families of plants.

Two designated wilderness areas are located at higher ele vations of these mountains, one being managed by the State of California and the other by the u.s. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. They are contiguous and provide a unique opportunity for comparisons between two approaches at resource management and visitor regulation. Neither -10- administration has surveyed its lands for rare plants or animals, or for that matter, compiled a floral list of species occurring within its boundaries. The following summarizes the objectives of this research project.

1. To complete a floral inventory for both wilderness areas which includes a compilation of information on localities, range and relative abundance (using plot survey techniques).

2. To apply a series of rarity criteria (Federal Register 1976, California Native Plant Society 1980, Drury 1980, California Natural Diversity Data Ease 1981) to this flora and describe a set of plant species for special management consideration.

3. To characterize the nature of recreation uses in such a way as to determine conflicts between rare species and recreation impacts in the wilderness. Conflicts in this case will 1e defined as trampling, collecting pressures, and erosion which disrupts plant habitats.

4. To develop a set of policies and management activities for mitigating existing impacts as well as decreasing rare plant/recreation conflicts in the future.

5. To develop a set of useful criteria for applying to other wilderness and natural areas where the mainte nance of rare species populations is mandated. Chapter II BACKGROUND

2.1 THE SAN JACINTO MOUNTAINS The San Jacinto Mountains are located in a central position within Southern California, approximately 150 km east of Los Angeles. The western flank borders the town of Hemet -- and to the east, Palm Springs (Figure 2) These mountains are basically of southeast-northwest orientation separated from other ranges by a series of faults (Sydnor 1975). They are entirely within Riverside County at 33°50 N, 116045 W, and represent the northernmost portion of the peninsular range system of Southern California. For purposes of this study, only the high elevation (2,000m - 3,300 m) portions of Federal and State designated wilderness were considered.

-11- -12-

.Pigure 2: The Sa..n Jacinto liilder;ness Areas and Vicinity.

0 IC A u.S. For••t Servlc• Stetlon Ki~t.,. 1::. Campground c •• , .... )., ...... , 400 ""••' t::. WII -13-

2 • 2 GEOGRAPHY The San Jacinto Mountains occupy an area of approximately 115,000 ha, the highest elevation on San Jacinto Peak being 3,272 M. The northern and eastern escarpment, separating the San Jacinto Mountains from the San Bernardino Mountains is ex tremely abrupt, and is one of the steepest vertical drops in North America (Norris and Webb 1976). A 3,000 m drop in ele vation at this point can be experienced in less than 10 km. Nowhere near as precipitous, the southern portions are sepa rated from the Santa Rosa Mountains by the San Jacinto and Bautista faults. The west side composes a gentler series of ridges and plateaus descending to the emet and Perris val leys. The higher elevations are composed of a series of four "benches" or plateaus -- each the result of different geological periods of uplift and subsequent erosion. Three of these benches are included winthin this study. In successively increasing elevation, these three are 1) Tahquitz Valley, 2) Round Valley and 3) Little Round Valley/Marion Plats. Each supports a major riverine drainage as well as extensive meadows -- important ecological and recreational areas.

2. 3 GEOLOGY The San Jacinto Mountains occupy a unique position in the ge ology of Southern California mountain ranges. The Coachella Valley to the east lies on a piece of the earths crust called -14- the North American Plate, while the San Jacintos form the edge of the Pacific Plate. These "plates" slowly grind past one another, along extensive faults in the crust. Two of these faults, the San Jacinto fault and the San An dreas faults, enclose the San Jacintos. Pressure generated as these slices of the crust move past each other creates numer ous earthquakes along these faultlines, demonstrating that the San Jacintos remain in a period of early mountain building. The San Jacintos themselves are the oldest and highest part of a series of ancient igneous rocks that run from near Riverside, California, south through most of baja California -nearly 1600 km. This huge body of igneous rock, called granodiorite, is well-exposed from the village of Idyllwild to the summit of San Jacintc Peak, over to the upper terminal of the Palm Springs Aerial Tramway at Long Valley (figure 2). The rock is composed of interlocking crystals of quartz, feldspar, biotite (a kind of mica) and minor accessory minerals, giving the rock a light-colored granular texture (Sydnor 1975). Almost certainly, the area where Tahquitz Peak and San Ja cinto Mountain now stand was once covered with a shallow sea, probably supporting normal marine life. Liinestones and sand stones, evidence of this marine environment, existed as the "country rock" into which igneous rock has intruded. Through heat and pressure these sedimentary rocks were transformed into folded and tilted layers of marble and gneiss. Cutcrops of these metamorphic rocks show up well in China Canyon below -15-

the lower terminal of the tramway, and tend the color to Bed Tahquitz Peak in the high country. The probable source of the heat and pressure intense enough to deform these sediments was the emplacement of the San Jacinto pluton, a complex body of magma that worked its way upward from deep within the crust about 90 million years ago. Several stages of this intrusion are represented near the edges of the San Jacintos are found darker colored igneous diorites and gabbros, while the bulk of the mountains were formed by granodiorite. In the walls of upper China Canyon are thick white dikes (vein-like intrusions along fractures) set off against the darker gabbro. These dikes probably were the last portion of the magma to cool and crystallize. Nearby, diotite dikes pierce the granodiorite (Brown 1968). These periods of igneous intrusions resulted in large-scale earth movements that drastically changed the topography of Southern California. Since the close of the Mesozoic Bra (about 6E million years ago), the San Andreas fault has played a most important role in rearranging the San Jacintos. It seems likely that during this long span of time, the San Jacinto "block" of the earth's crust moved several hundred ki lometers north along the San Andreas fault with respect to the rocks on the other side. This motion pressed the San Jacintos against the "stationary" San Gorgonio block to the north. As a result, both mountain ranges have moved upward, with San Gorgonio Pass pushed downward between the two blocks. -16-

2.4 SOILS All of the soils within the study area are recently derived from granodiorite (mesozoic granitic batholith) - Soil devel opment is very poor, particularly at high elevations, and fre quent granodiorite rock outcrops supporting little vegetation predominate above 2900 m. Horizonation is very limited or no nexistent (Hanawalt and Whittaket 1976) and depth to bedrock is often under 1 in throughout the wilderness. Soil depth in the San Jacinto Mountains is a linear function of slope (Reteles 1980) and soil napping is generally a straightforward interpretation of topographic relief •• The nine primary family-level soil associations (Soil Survey Staff 1975) have been mapped in Figure 3, and are described in Table 1. Generally, slopes up to 60 can support a continuous overstory of trees, while slopes greater than this limit vegetation to shrubs, perennial herbs and grasses growing from cracks and fissures. According to Hanawalt and Whittaker (1976), the litter coverage on all slopes increases with elevation but decreases near the summit due to low productivity. Interestingly, organic matter content in measurable soils also increases with elevation all the way to the summit as deccomposition rates are less affected by decreases in productivity Gulley erosion is common in areas of high soil deposition, perpetuated to a great deal by past and present human activities, as well as fires. -17-

··~· "1~ ~..---.. .. ~. ·"" • ;:: ,··-""'"':···· .~i"~t"""'

Figure 3: Soils of the San Jacinto Wilderness Areas. ------, I I I TABlE 1 I I I Explanations of Soil Family Associations Indicated in 'l I Figure 3 I I I I I I Rs Rock outcrops predominate mountainous uplands and are j on 30 to 100~ slopes. Rock outcrops consist of con-I I tiguous bare bedrock (granodior:ite) wit-h less than I I 15% inclusions of soils capable of supporting vegeta I tion. I I I J LdG -- Lithic Ierortbents, Cool -- Rock outcrop complex pre I dominate mountainous uplands and are on 50 to 100% I I slopes. ~he dept~ to hard, unweathered rock is less& I than 1 meter. The profile is loam, sandy loam cr I I loamy sand with 50 - 80~ rock frag~ents. These soils I support £1~~§ jeffrey~ to g. ~Qff~~~ and are typi-i I cal in the 2070 m to 3000 m elevation range- & I I I LrG -- lithic xerorthents, -- Reck outcrop complex en 50 tot I tOO% slopes in the 1300 m to 2300 w elevation range.j I The depth to hard unweathered rock is less than 1 m.i I !he profile is loam, sandy loam or lcamy sand with 35 I to 80~ rock fragments. ~hese soils support g .• .£9...!!.!-1 ter1, .Q.Y§.££.!!§ £hrys.£1.s..t.i§, or g. EOnderosa[F. jef- I I freyi. t 'l i I DhG -- lithic Xerorthents -- Springdale Family -- Eubble & I land association. Earely reaching into the study I I area at the Strawberry Cienaga drainage, these soils! are typically talus of 50 to 100% slopes. lhese rub I ble lands consist of areas of detached rock fragments 'i (colluvium} which have accumulated on very steef to £ I extremely steep slofeS as talus. These areas support I little or no vegetation and are subject to freguent 1 I land slides. i l I DaG -- Wapi -- Pacifico Families -- Bock outcrop compl&x. I 'I Seils on 50 to 75% slopes. The Wapi family is a I I light yellowish brown gravelly loamy sand. Generally j supporting g. £..Q.Ylli£.!, .Q. chqsol_sfiis, _g. ponderosa, I or .Q. kelloggii. The Pacifico Fam£ly are similar inl I mcst respects except are better develofed, deeper j (0.5 m) with fine or very fine granular structure. I I Elevation ranges from 1700 m to 2300 m. I 'I I I OaF Pacifico -- Wapi families -- See DaG for detail. A I I I Dd.F Pacifico -- Preston families. Soils on 30 to 50~ I I slopes. Surface soils are a grayish brown loamy I j coarse sand, very fine or fine granular structure. f I Sutsoils {10 em to 50 em) are a yellowish brown loamy l coarse sand. Vegetation on these soils consist of P... I coulter]:, .Q • .fill.§.Qletis, or g • ..E.£!l~fia.(.P. ~1- -. I freyi. These soils are found between 1500 m and 2000 I m elevation. 1 i I l CoDE - Corbett -- Wapal families -- soils are 2 to 30% i I slopes at the 2070 m to 2900 m elevations, and typi-1 I cal of the shallow tench areas of Tahguitz Valley, i I Bound Valley and Little Bound Valley. Ihese consist& I of a dark grayish brown sandy loam with weak granular I structure. Subsurface soils are pale brown and olive i yellow gravelly loamy sand, single grain and loose. & l These sup~ort £4 jgff£g~, g. flexilis, and j. murr~- 1 .Y-911.9• Footing depths are as great as 120 em. J i & I WpF -- Wapal -- Corbett families -- soils on 30 to 50% j I slopes at the 2070 m to 2900 m elevation. Scil de- 1 I scriptions are similar to previous description. 1 I Depth tc rooting is 75 em to 120 em. o•erstcry vege- l tat ion varies from g. j_g,!geyi to g. fl§~ and £• J I .J!.Yf:raya n_g. 1 l '

2.5 FLORISTICS OF THE SAN JACINTO WILDERNESS The flora of California constitutes a diverse mixture of northern temperate arcto-tertiary and southern xeric (madre tertiary) floras. Endemism occur to a greater extent here than most other states in the United States (Raven and Axelrod 1978). The southern mountains, in particular, form a trans ition area for the major part of this overlap with the occu rence of elements of Mexican, Sierran, and Rocky Mountain floras The majority of the State and parts of Baja California form the California Elotistic Province. The high degree of endemism typical of the province is the result of a very div erse terrain, an equable climate throughout most of the Terti ary Period (Abrains 1926) and the development of a Mediterrane- -20- an (summer dry) climatic zone; all contributing to the survival of numerous relicts and newly-evolved species (Stebbins and Major 1965). The California Floristic Province contains 158 families, 878 genera and 5,046 species. Twenty-six genera and 1,517 species are considered endemic (30% of the species). The Province can be geographically divided into nine distinct floristic regions as illustrated in figure 4. The relative number of endemic species for each of these regions is also shown in Figure 4, with Southern California supporting the largest fraction- Stebbins and Major (1965) surmise that the extensive number of endeniics in Southern California is particularly a result of warm season precipitation, a favorable condition for the survival of relict species (Figure 5). The San Jac.into Mountains lie in a central position in Southern California, situated at the northernmost terminus of the Peninsular Range, and just to the south of the eastern transverse mountains. Being more recent geologically, the San Jacinto Mountains support fewer of the high elevation alpine and subalpine relicts more common on nearby Mount San Gorgonlo or San Antonio. They do, however, support elements of the Colorado (Sonoran-Mohavean) flora, and subalpine species known commonly from Mexico. The lack of a developed soil above 2700 m, thus creating a more xeric habitat, is a major reason for the relatively de- -21- I 120" 115"

42. NEVADA

34~

.... I 300 krn I_ ~.... 1~0 IT I I I I o 100 200 rni 120· _:_,r _ 115• 1 :;)a.JYJadn-tollitoiJnta~s The larger number in each region represents its area in km~; The smaller number indicates the number of endemics in 70 laige- and interme diate-sized genera. The area west of the hea vy line is the California Floristic irovince as defined in the text. From stebbins and Major (1965).

Figure 4: Floristic Regions Within the California Floristic Province.

pauperate, high elevation flora when contrasted to similar el evations in other Southern California mountains- Unfortunate ly, the San Jacinto Mountains are the only Southern California -22-

FltEOUI!NCY OIHR16VTION OF RI!I.ICTUAL \PECIE\ CALIFORNIA SIGNIFICANCE OF AVERAGE WARM - SEASON 14 . t·:; 40. SHDAOIIIG 10 12 PRECIPITATION (INCHES) 10 (APRIL TO SEPTEMSER, INCUJStVE :.· i 8 . i j:;-:~;;J,l-1$

~ 16-20

fiiirll 11-2S

D l6-l0

SO ICC »O M·i•, ~··~·-·~.~~·~·----~.~· \ • 10 lOG lDO JIIOb 2 ll )""

Figure 5: Distribution of Relict Species in California, Stel:bins and Major (1965}. -23- mountain range far which a complete flora has not been published. The only serious botanical survey was initiated by Harvey Hall, who collected vascular plants from the yellow pine zone to San Jacinto Peak from 1886 to 1889, publishing his monograph as the first accepted manuscript of California Publication in Botany (1902). Hall's survey of San Jacinto Mountain still stands as the most comprehensive flora of the San Jacintos that includes Strawberry Valley (Idyllwild) and Garner Valley. His field notes were particularly valuable to this study as he described collecting localities in close detail, which allowed for floral comparions almost 80 years later.

Other botanists have made investigations within the San Ja cinto Mountains, although none comprehensive, and few in the wilderness elevations. Parish, Zigler and Abrams were notable explorers in the region.

2.6 CLIMATE The climate in the San Jacinto Mountains is a complex pattern of regional and local factors (Bailey 1966, Whittaker & liana walt 1976, Harpel 1980). The regional climate is Mediterrane an, with mild winters and hot, dry summers. Typical of moun tain climates, the mean air temperature decreases with increasing elevation at the rate of 8.2 °C/1000 m. Thus, mean air temperatures at Palm Springs (100 m) will be 33°C in July while the long Valley Ranger Station (2600 m) experiences a mean temperature of only 20°C. -24-

Precipitation occurs primarily in the winter and fall as snow and rain, respectively. Unstable tropical air masses in frequently bring sunnier thunderstorm activities during July and August. The majority of precipitation is due to prevail ing northwestern frontal systems originating in the Gulf of Alaska. Average precipitation for the San Jacinto Peak area is 90 em with most of this falling as snow above 2800 m. High soil permeability in the upper elevations causes most of the rain to rapidly infiltrate, feeding several major springs of the middle elevations. The vegetational response to the rapid extremes in climate, topography and soils is highly distinct. These mountains in particular are acclaimed in showing an impressive elevational turnover in "life zones" or vegetation belts spanning the desert or "Scnoran" zone to a purported "arctic-alpine" zone (Merriam 1898, Hall 1902)

2.7 HUMAN IMPACT Obvious signs of aboriginal use of the San Jacintos persist today. The Cahuilla Indians, local to the foothills and de sert springs, used the midelevations for summer harvest of acorns, and the high elevations for hunting deer and furbear ing mammals (James 1969). The Cahuilla trails provided the basis for the existing trail system in the high country (Beck er and Birmingham 1981). -25-

Logging and ranching began in 1861 when subsidy lands owned by the Southern Pacific Railroad were either traded or sold to private interests. Strawberry Valley, or Idyllwild as it is now called, was the center for a short-lived logging operation in the region. Cattle ranching in Garner Valley was highly profitable for a long time. Prominent among the ranchers was Jim Weilman,, who for 30 years ran close to 1, 000 head of cattle into the wilderness. Several points in the wilderness now tear his name. Tahquitz and Round Valleys, and Skunk Cabbage Meadows (Figure 2) became summer range for fattening Wellaan's cattle. Much of the erosion that is observed on Tahquitz Meadow can be attributed to Wellman's cattle drives (J. Wellman, pers. comm.). The extensive series of hiking trails that cross the high country was built or improved from Indian trails by the Civil ian Conservation Corps in the 1930's. Concern over the pres ervation of the higher elevation forests prompted local organ izations to begin a campaign for protecting the mountains from logging activities. Already 'preserved' as the San Jacinto Forest Reserve (Leiberg 1878), this classification did not guarantee protection. After the U.S. Forest Service had con solidated its land into the newly formed San Bernardino Na tional Forest, local groups continued their political lobby ing, in the formation of the 5766 ha San Jacinto Mountain State Park in 1929. By 1937, the U.S. Forest Service and the San Jacinto State Park, independently of each other, formally -26- designated 14,540 ha of high elevation forests and. meadows as primitive area -- the predecessor of today's wilderness system. With the passage of the federal Wilderness Act of 1964 (Public law 88-577), the U.S,. Forest Service primitive area in the San Jacintos was tedesiynated the San Jacinto Wilderness. Encompassing an area of 9345 ha, the San Jacinto Wilderness is located entirely within the San Jacinto Ranger District of the San Bernardino National forest, in portions of T. 3,4 and 5 S, R. 2 and 3 E, SSBM. There are 333 ha of private land within this wilderness boundary. The total acreage is split into two distinct sections by the 5266 ha Mount San Jacinto State Park Wilderness Area. Federal management of this wilderness is primarily for primitive recreation activities, and will be discussed in the Section 2.8. In 1974, the State of California passed the State Wilder ness Preservation Act (Chapter 1.3 of the Public Resources Code) in order to identify, preserve and manage state park lands of wilderness character, consistent with definitions es tablished by the comparable federal Act. With passage of this legislation,, the Mount San Jacinto Wilderness State Park was formally designated as State Wilderness. This specifically identified 4000 ha of the State Park as Wilderness Area. This portion is 75% bounded by the San Jacinto Wilderness (feder al), and Agua Caliente (Cahuilla) Indian Reservation Approx imately 900 ha of State Park land were not designated as wil- -27- derness and comprise Stone Creek and Idyllwild Campgrounds located off State Highway 243 (figure 2). The most unusual feature of State Park Wilderness Area is the presence of the Palm Springs Aerial Tramway. This is purportedly the largest and longest single-lift passenger tramway. It was built by the Mount San Jaciato Winter Park Authority, an ad hoc State agency designed to administer the State revenue share bonds that were sold in order to finance its construction. Without going into detail, pressure to build the Tramway began in the early 1900's, from wealthy Palms Springs residents who saw a potentially profitable operation for Palm Springs tourists. Construction was completed in 1963. Considered a State concession, the Tramway has conveyed well over 3 million tourists into the heart of the State Park Wilderness. The Tramway was eventually seen as an incompatible use of State Wilderness as defined by the 1974 Act, so sections of land over which the Tramway gained access were declassified from wilderness status. Use of Either the State or Federal wilderness in the San Jacinto Mountains is now extensively regulated. The popularity of Idyllwild and the Tramway ensures high levels of wilderness use for both government agencies. A total of 30,913 campets registered for wilderness permits in the State wilderness during the 1976-77 reporting year, and an additional 4,682 applicants were turned away because their entry would have exceeded the area's regulated capacity (California State unpub- -28- lished report 1978). Cole and Washurne (1981) sent surveys to every manager within the National Wilderness Preservation System and reported that the San Jacinto Wilderness has the highest ratio of overnight visits per acre and per mile of trail among all the wilderness areas in the United States. Such excessive use has prompted managers of both wilderness areas to regulate extensively visitor use and behavior.

2.8 WILDERNESS MANAGEMENT Management of the Mount San Jacinto State Park Wilderness and the San Jacinto Wilderness prior to 1971 can only he tentatively described. Neither agency had developed a plan or set of regulations prior to this date. With the advent of a dual wilderness permit system, records of visitation were kept, as well as pertinent regulatory information and management plans. For purposes of this study, no attempt was made to interpret the early management accomplishments, except to state that by 1970, the case was gradually built for justification of more intense regulatory control over visitor use. The way in which each agency went about interpreting wilderness legislation and policy became somewhat divergent then.

The u.s. Forest Service was, and is, far more conservative when it comes to backcountry regulation (Table 2). Many of the traditional uses of wilderness are maintained, such as personal campfires and the option to camp wherever one desires. But campfires in this case are limited only to desig- -29-

I A J TAElE 2 I I & 1 A Comparison Between California State and Federal I I Visiter Regulations in the San Jacinto ~ilderness I j I I I I Regulatory Area State Park o.s. Forest Service! I ------& I i I Camping At specific Dispersed within speci- j I J:Osted sites. fied zones 200' from I i streams, meadows, trails.& I. & l Dogs Entirely Allowed if under I I tanned .. control of owner~ I ! I I Fires Entirely Allowed at specific I tanned. posted sites. I .A I' Allowatle 400 per 400 per night. 'a I overnight use night. I I I Hunting and Entirely Entirely tanned .. I 'I firearms tanned .. I I I I Permits Feguired at Bequired at all I I all times .. times~ & l I I Allowable No limit .. No limit except en J I day US€ Devil•s Slide Trail. a l I I No .. of Patrol 10. 3 .. J l 1 •A 4 Grazing l::y Not allowed. Allowed .. a horses i I § 'I Motorized Not allowed. Not allowed .. I I vehicles a I ! l Collecting nat Not allowed .. Not allowed .. A i ural otjects a I I nated sites and there is a quota on the maximum number of fires that are allowed per night in the wilderness. Dispersed -30- camping, although allowed, cannot occur close to streams, meadows, trails or other campers. In contrast, the State has completely banned campfires and summertime campers must find a specialized site, marked by a brown post, before they can pitch their tents. in addition, dogs are not allowed on State property. Another notable difference between these two agencies is in the level of manpower used to manage their respective areas. Two permanent and eight seasonal patrolmen manage the State Park Wilderness while only three seasonals are hired by the u.s. Forest Service to cover an area almost twice as large. Annual budgets for the State and federal agencies during the 1980 fiscal years were $120,000 and $45,000, respectively. These figures alone indicate that management, regulation and enforcement are expensive. Chapter Ill METHODS

Three levels of investigation were employed in the study of rare species of the San Jacinto Wilderness areas -- a floris tic study, a phytosociology study and a visitor impact study. Methodologies involved in each will be discussed as separate sections in this chapter. All field work was carried out during the summers of 1980, 1981 and 1982 Portions of the floristic survey were initiated prior to 1980, during the summer seasons of 1975 through 1978 by this author, under employment by the California Department of Parks and Recreation.

3.1 FLORISTIC STUDY Permission to collect specimens of all vascular plants within the study area was obtained from the California Department of Parks and Recreation and the San Bernardino National Forest. Specimens were collected throughout the wilderness areas (ex cluding the northern section of the San Jacinto Wilderness). Areas were checked repeatedly in different years as well as at different months during each growing season. Specimens were pressed and mounted on standard herbarium paper and deposited in the Long Valley Ranger Station at the top of the Palm Springs Aerial Tramway. Duplicate specimens were collected of -32- unusual and uncommon plants for deposit at the Rancho Santa Ana Botanical Garden Herbarium in Claretnont, California. Identification and nomenclature followed Munz (1974). The following information was gathered for each specimen. 1. location to nearest trail section 2. elevation 3. habitat 4. associated species 5. date of collection 6. general abundance (common, uncommon, rate) 7. noteworthy features Plants were collected if they were in fruit or flower, prefer ably with both features. Roots were obtained unless the plant was excessively large or woody. The locations of local populations were recorded on 7.5 minute u.s. Geological Survey maps and on aerial photography 6"=1 mile) provided by the U.S. Forest Service. Plants of wide distributions were described based on their elevational range and topographic distributions. Elevational limits of the abundant species were noted. When only single populations, or sparse populations of a particular species were encountered, an estimate of abundance was recorded.

3.2 PHYTOSOCIOIOGICAL STUDY A study of the overs tory community composition was conducted as a means of better describing the habitats for each of the -33-

rare plant species. Two hundred and forty-four, 1/10 ha plots were sampled to span the elevational and topographic-moisture range from mixed conifer-oak to limber pine woodlands. Each plot represented undisturbed communities with no history of logging or recent campsite use. On the average, ten plots were located in each of the 24 sections of land within the two wilderness areas,. Each plot was located arbitrarily, based partially upon its accessibility. When an area was chosen for a plot, a randomly selected direction was determined by spinning a pointer on a wheel. A random number between 0 and 100 was then generated, indicating how many paces to walk in the randomly chosen direction .• At that point, the lower right corner of a 20m by SOm plot was measured off and flagged. In all cases the long axis of the plot was maintained parallel to the topographic contour. Vegetation samples were collected by counting the number of individuals of all species within the 1/10 ha,. Due to the sparseness of understory herbs and shrubs, this was not a particularly time-consuming task. The tree stratum was sampled by measuring the diameter at breast height (1.3 m) and the width of the crown of each tree in two directions. The two crown measurements were then averaged for later conversion into percent coverage of plot. Ten individuals of each shrub and herb species were arbitrarily selected and the widest distance across the plants was measured, widest distances were averaged, and a single figure recorded for each plot. These -34-

measurements were recorded as linear widths and later squared in order to approximate the coverage area for each species. Soil measurements included an estimate of soil depth (depth to bedrock) and litter depth. The percent of the plot with exposed rock was measured, as well as an estimate of the percent of ground covered by dead wood. Site characteristics were measured including elevation, aspect, slope, location and general characteristics (e.g., ridgetop, riparian canyon, etc •. ). A 1/10 ha plot survey was taken at all localities for each of the rare plant populations discovered during the floristic survey. A numerical classification technique called two-way indicator species analysis (TWINSPAN; Hill 1979a) was applied to these samples to define the major overstory associations. Once the overstory types were defined, these communities were mapped onto overlays of color aerial photography (6"=1 mile). The areal extent of each community was determined using a planimeter.

3.3 VISITOR IMPACT STUDY The vigor of plants subjected to various intensities of physical trampling shows patterns related to the growth of each species tested. General trends in susceptibility to trampling by species of similar growth form have been documented by numerous investigators (willard and Marr 1970, Burden and Landerson 1972, Bell and Bliss 1973, Dale and Weaver 1974, Liddle -35-

1975, Cole and Shreiner 1981, Cole 1982) It would seem likely, by measuring the characteristics of trampled vegetation of various growth forms, one might rate the relative susceptibil ity to trampling a particular species might show -- especially where empirical data do not exist for a particular species. Such is the case for rare plants. Further, concern over the survival of rare plant populations suggests that experimental trampling studies should not be conducted; instead, common species of similar growth form are more likely candidates for these tests. The understory vegetation surrounding the sound Valley campground was studied to estimate the relative loss of biomass and abundance under increasing levels of campsite use. Found Valley is located within the State Wilderness and all campers are requited to camp within a designated brown post campsite. These campsites (Figure 6) are located near the Round Valley meadow (Figure 2), two miles from the Palm Springs Aerial Tramway. All campsites are occupied on week ends from May through September. Numbers of users for the campground were obtained from State Park records at ldyllwild. These data covered use for the 1972 to 1981 seasons. Group size for Sound Valley varies between one and 15 persons. Estimates of the dispersion of various group sizes to each campsite were made by noting weekend campsite use during the summer season of 1980. This estimate was then generalized by a short simulation model for the entire nine-year period (see Appendix B).

------36- t ..x N To The

Figure 6: Campsite Locations Surrounding Bound Valley Meadow-

Understory vegetation measurements were recorded at each campsite. These were diameter of campsite (average of four measurements), species coverage within the campsite (number of individuals and area of canopy), species coverage along the perimeter of the campsite and species coverage at the background or undisturbed condition. In addition to these trampling response studies, a thorough inventory of recreation impacts (trampling and erosion effects) was assessed for every species of plant defined as rare. Bare plants located alongside trails, campsites, scenic areas or disturbed meadows were identified and recorded. Chapter IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Two hundred and eighteen plant species were collected during the course of this study. The lowest elevation collected was 1890 m along the Deer Springs Trail (although not all areas at this elevation were surveyed) shown in Figure 2. A thorough survey was completed for the elevations between 2280 and 3300 m. The geographic range categories reflect naturally oc curring floristic divisions based upon mountain range limits. Table 3 presents a breakdown in numbers of species by growth form and by geographic range The subdivisions to each of these categories, "common" and "rare", reflect the plot sam pling estimate of distribution. If a particular species was encountered in five percent or less of the 244 plots, then it was designated as "rare". Presence in greater than five per cent of the plots indicated a "common" species. A list of the 218 species occurs in Appendix c. Additional information provided in that appendix includes habitat and rarity status within the wilderness areas.

-37- -38-

.. WIDESPREAD ...

t ~-.:· . . '.';"'i •·.';; <·.":·' ., •' . , ·.. ,\•' n (_:;.,.··· <·. "s;.; ,..,...... ' ')

+s CALIFORNIAN

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ENDEMIC

t DISJUNCT SAN JACINTO ENDEMIC

Figure 7: Categories of Geographic Distribution. -39-

TABlE 3 Summary of Species Geographical Distribution and Growth Form

Growth .Form Geographical Grass- Herbaceous Distribution like Trees Shrubs Perennials Annuals ~otal ------~-~~--~~ widespread Common 17 9 10 50 6 92 Bare 6 1 3 30 3 43 Californian Com men 0 1 3 8 0 13 Rare 1 0 0 9 0 10 South Calif .. Common 1 0 0 32 1 33 Bare 0 0 2 13 0 116 San Jacinto Commcn 0 0 1 4 0 5 Bare 0 0 0 3 1 3 Disjunct Common 1 0 0 0 0 1 Bare 0 0 1 0 1 2 -~------~---~------'IO'IAI.. 26 1 1 20 149 12 218 ---~--~------~------

4.1 RARITY CLASSIFICATIONS Several definitions of rarity have been discussed. It was em phasized that a clear distinction must be made between species rarity (the biological indicator of infrequent occurrence) and species endangerment (the relative chance of a species becoming extinct) Certainly, by the time a species is considered endangered, it has become tare. All rare species, on the oth er hand, are not necessarily endangered or threatened with en dangerment, but because of their relatively low numbers, a tare species stands a greater chance of becoming threatened or endangered (White 1980). -40-

Rarity can be described as one of three distinct populaticn abundance and distribution parameters according to Drury (1980) 1. The range of some species is restricted to isolated localities yet they occur in large numbers at each locality, (comparable to Hardin's 1977 definition of locally abundant). 2 Some species are found in very small numbers widely dispersed in each community where they grow; they occur in many suitable areas over their geographic range (sparse) 3. Some species occur as a few individuals at scattered localities, or are restricted to a small geographic area or a single population (rate and local, Hardin 1977). These three situations are typical of a number of plant species occurring in the San Jacintos, and throughout California. The first and third parameters create situations where species are most likely to be subject to effects that might cause endangerment. The mechanisms for causing populations to be distributed spatially and in abundance patterns suggested by the three parameters are numerous and complex, but severalmight be genetic (e.g., the founder effect, inbreeding sup-pression, shifts toward homozygosity), ecological (dependent on successional changes, climatic favorableness, loss of pol linator) , pathological (Frankel and Soule 198) or merely sta- -41- tistical (Freston 1964). Relictual species, in particular, were assumed to be more widespread and successful under historic conditions, but are now dependent on a very narrow set of microhabitat characteristics found only t the "refugia" where currently located. It is useful to think of measuring the rarity of a species from two scales one geographically based and one related to its local abundance and distribution. The former is a way of categorizing the extent of a species biogeographic range.. The categories of "widespread", "California endemic", "disjunct or limits of range", "Southern California endemic" and "San Jacinto endemic" are useful rankings implying increasing rareness .. The second set of categories emphasizes the rarity of a species within the management unit under consideration .. The "common" versus "rare" distinction (based upon the plot sampling survey) outlined in Table 3 and detailed in Appendix C, is a first attempt at deciding rarity within the management area. Two more explicit ways of describing, in ecological terms, this level of rarity are to estimate quantitatively relative abundance as an indicator of numbers of individuals, and to describe the distributional status of a species relative to the remainder of the flora. The way these latter two were accomplished was discussed in Chapter 3. In summary, rarity is the result of low numbers (abundance) and/or limited distribution. For management purposes, we can -42-

consider two levels for characterizing rarity -- the biogeographic distribution of a species throughout its range -- and the pattern of distribution and abundance within the management unit (wilderness in this case). Endangerment -- and the political classification of a par ticular species -- deals first with the issues of biogeograph ic rarity. Endangered species are typically of a very narrow range. A second consideration is the presence of a threat to the survival of the species of concern- The political process does not concern itself with the situation of a locally rare (and potentially or actually threatened) species when the sta tus of the species outside of the local area is not considered either rare or threatened. Under such situations (locally rare but not officially designated) it is solely the manager's responsibility to decide the fate of a plant under ques tion. The California Native Plant Society in conjunction with the California State Department of Fish and Game and The Nature Conservancy has developed a system called the California Natural Diversity Data Ease,. These data base managers have considered the problem of listing endangered species through the Federal Endangered Species Act, and developed a program for identifying, categorizing and cataloguing rare species and localities throughout the State (California Native Plant Society 1980). By identifying the status of each of the 1,372 plants whose rarity and endangerment warrant identification, -43- they can alert local, state and federal agencies of rare plant localities while developments are still in the planning phase. This cooperative agency keeps plant locality records and has computerized a county-specific listing of red-flagged species using the R-E-V-D Coding System. The system is outlined in Table 4. While every species of sensitive plant has been assigned a four-number R-E-V-D code, the California Natural Diversity Data Base has been divided into four lists •• These are:

1. plants presumed extinct, 2. plants rare and endangered, 3. plants rare but not endangered, 4. plants rare in California, but common elsewhere,

This system, covering such a diverse flora, is extremely effective. On a state scale, it deals with questions of rarity, endangerment and distribution where few others, except for small-scale data bases, have such a system for documenting the status of rare and sensitive plant taxa. The following rarity categories combine parameters of geographic range, within-wilderness abundance and distribution and relative endangerment. Five distribution lists were developed, patterned similarly to the California Native Plant Society lists. These are:

1. species widespread throughout their ranges but rare in the San Jacinto wilderness areas, -44- , I 1 I TAElE 4 l I J The B-E-V-t Coding System j a• j I I I B (Bar ity) I I 1 -- Bare, but found in sufficient numbers and I I distributed widely enough that the fOtential i I for extinction or extirpation is low at this I I time. I I 2 Occurrence confined to several fOfUlations l I or to one extended populaticn. I I 3 Occurrence limited to cne or a few highly i restricted populations, or present in such I •a small numbers that !t is seldom reforted. a 'J E (Enda.ngermen t) I I• 1 Not endangered. I a 2 -- Endangered in a portion of its range. I I 3 -- Endangered throughout its range. j I I v (Vigor) 1 •I 1 Increasing or stable in number. I 2 -- Declining in number. 'I I 3 -- Approaching extinction ox extirpation- I l I I D (D istr ibut ion) I 1 More or less widespread outside California- I •I 2 Eare outside California. I 3 Endemic to California .• 'j I j j I

2. species endemic to the California Elotistic Province (Figure 5) but tare in the San Jacinto wilderness areas, 3. species either disjunct or at their limits in their range but rare in the San Jacinto wilderness areas, 4. species endemic to Southern California occurring in the San Jacinto wilderness areas. -45-

5. species endemic to the San Jacinto Mountains (including the Santa Rosa Mountains). These lists are ordered by decreasing geographic range. Such a priority is useful for managers who must decide how to allocate management activities for rate plant preservation. Within each of these lists are hierarchical categories for the within-wilderness abundance/dispersion status and endangerment status for each species. The categories for abundance/disp ersion are: 1. widespread in Wilderness, found in greater than a 5% frequency, 2. widespread in wilderness, found in less than or equal to 5% fre quency, 3. greater than two populations, found in greater than a 5% frequency, 4. greater than two populations, found in less than orequal to5% frequency, 5. two or fewer populations. These categories are not merely academically contrived, but are based on the best divisions observed with the San Jacinto plants. This rarity classification fits the observed patterns of species abundance and distributions. The endangerment categories are listed as follows: 1. populations isolated from impact, 2. populations near impacts (usually), -46-

3. less than or equal to 50% of the populations are receiving impacts, 4. greater than 50% of the populations are receiving inpacts,

5. population is extinct or presumed extirpated. These categories also fit the observed situations that all of the rare taxa are currently experiencing. An impact in this case occurs if a trail passes through a population and individuals are clearly being trampled, if it is obvious that humans have collected or vandalized a population or have removed individuals for rock climbing, or if a human-caused disturbance to the landscape has created physical changes which affect rare plant populations. The extinction category was designed to include species identified by Hall in 1902 but presently extirpated. One hundred and twenty taxa were identified to be included on one of the five distributional lists described above. These species are presented in Tables 5 through 9, and include the rarity and endangerment status for each species. A subset of these lists indicating species whose rarity status is either of few populations/low numbers or two or less populations extant in the wilderness, is detailed in Appendix E. or each of the 27 rarest species, information is summarized on their morphological characteristics, geographic distribution, flowering phenology, habitat (including a gradient nomogram), wilderness distribution, endangerment and recommendations for -47- their management. Other elements of the flora not categorized as rare are characterized by community type in Appendix C. -48-

TAElE 5 Species Widespread Thrcughout !heir Banges But Bare in the San Jacinto wilderness I . fll • I 0 fll I l I c 0 fll i ro ro c c I ...-lt'll..-!f/l ..c 0 ::l ..j.) ::l .j..) !... fll • bO 3: .,.-~ '"0 0. () 0. () 0 Ol'll·..-!0-l-) ~ 1ru o ro o ro c c o ..c .-J ro z I'J-) a. o. a. o. .j..) o c ...-l w.ro E s 0·.-1 ..c - .. ::l ~...-! !... C....·.-!C....·.-IC.j..) > ru 0.>-l-)C ~-o~..C...-lOOO. l:)•.-lfllC ~>~>X•.-1 0::: ·.-1·.-1 z .j..) o·.-.o·.-~ .j..) ex: ~ ft..j.) ..j.) (\J C:::: fll () fll Lt""\ <1> li"' IJ) X • O:::"'O"'OCUC"O ocroc o ociJJ ro ro .-l ,..... u zoo.o 11<1> <1>0 (1) (1) ::l ::l ' W·.-IE·.-!l'll !... 1...·..-!bD !...!...O.O.S... IJ-) ·.-f +-) .j..) t... ..j.) c o.o.ooo !CU CU 0 0 fll fll CU·..-1 fllfllO.O. ,.... E ...-! ro . c c ...-! 1... (1) (1) • ::lO::lO. •0 •O::lCI:L "'0 "'0· 3 3 f-< Ia. s... o. e e-< ·.-f e-< ·.-f o. (l) •.-I •.-f (1) (1) • OC....0·.-4 • ..j.) •.l-)OC SPEC.IES 13: 3: u... u...... :! I.0.. 0...... :! t-' 0.. ------~---~~------Acer glatrum X X Allium :turlewii X X Anten.uaria rosea X Arenaria dcuglasii X X Aster alpigenus X X Calyptridium monandrum X X Car ex multicaulis X X carex multicostata X X Chimaphila menzisii X X Chi map hila umbel lata X X Dodecatheon alpinum X X Dodecatheon redo lens X X Eleocharis macrostachya X X Euphorbia palmeri X X Garry a fremontii X X Babenaria leuchostachys X X Baplopappus cuneatus X X Hypericum anagalloides X X June us kelloggii X X listera convallarioides- X X Mimulus floribundus "'{ X Osmorhiza chilensis X X Perideridia parishii + X X l?oa bolanderi X X Polygonum douglasii X X Poly podium hesperium X X Populus trichocarpa * X X Pyrola picta integra X X Pyr~la pi eta X X Borippa curvisiligua X X Smiliacina racemosa X X Stipa occidentalis X X 'Ihalictrum fendl er i X X -49-

1risetum Sficaturn X X Veronica peregrina X X ------~-~---~--~ + Listed by San Eernardino National Forest as sensitive. * C.N~P-~. listed.

TABlE 6

Species Endemic to the California Floristic Province Eut Bare in the San Jaciotc Wilderness Areas

Cl) 0 Cl) ! S:::Otfl I c c I • .C 0 ltfl • tl0:3·..-t IOtfl·..-fO~ lc o .c.-! ro c .-! l.c - -::l >-< tlO 3 Cl) tfl 0. ~·,.....Occo 1-l.C.-!000. a:; •..-f •...; C:::PIPINin 1'0m • IOt:tiSHI-'·IH 0 tt:tlrl>OOI-'•e»ltd ..... • 1 m s:nc tn I til m cnlt:si-'tO P.l lll o.c:::rttr ....·l NUIONI.O I t:1 1-' I 0 tJ Sll"'d I ...... aa::sm ot! 1 to to I to Po 1:1"PI I w. rt I 0 0 1-'·t.c:: I m I 0 t:rO I 0 ..... oNP. I j:l.I:J"(I)QI I r+ mo ..... I c...o t::sl--"1'1\* I OlH r+r+o I I 0 PIN I-' ..... U>' ...... I I ::Sri'" P·I-'·C: r1" tn til I or< I···· :E::El 1-3 ___,_ 1-'· ..... ::Po RARITY 1-'rt" I'U >< ..... i cre~preacthigh nos. 0.. Ill ' w , m tr1 Wide6pread, low nos. H o I 1 ::SH> ....,J >< Few l11 . t populations, high nos. m 0 I tn !):j 1>< z~ 1 Few p::>pulations, low nos. I I PJ I ~ 2 ;:!>'::S I lL.T.lor:: populations I H\.0 m ro I Ol I Ultn I . END 1'\NGE RMEWf ~ I so ______rt I Populations -1 Lit-ed I from impacts !:11 I Ol l Popu~ationsnear H I I>< I tions receive i.m pacts G . T . 50 % o f po p u l a- rt 1 t:J a tior)s receive impacts ro l Popu~ationextinct or til I ex tine t.i.on Ol nearing 1::1 I>< -51-

TABLE 8

Spc:cies Er.demic tc Southern California Occurring in the San Jacinto Wilderness Area

~'1 .. 0 VJ I I <::: 0 Ll} Cil Cil c := ,....;tl),....;tl) I ...C:: 0 ! ;::3..;..) ::::3..;..) !... \L~J • ~ ~ •..-~ "C! 0.. (.) 0.. 0 0 !o r.0 •..-~ o..;..) ~G.J orooro c 1 <::: 0 ...c::,..... Cil z II..;.) a. o.. o.. a...;..) o I <::: ,.....; w (1j s s 0 ·~ I,... ~ ~ :::1 :::E:!.-l !...... ,.; ..... •.-I c..;..) o::: o ro o o ·~ o ~11.:? ~ ~ ~ ~ (_:Jt/) C) ()) cv....,c ...... c; ...... ooa. '-' .,.; tl) s:: ~ > ~ > >< ·.-I cr;! ,,_f ·...-i :;:!! ..;..) 0·-I0•.-1 ())...., ~! ~ ~_,_}_,_}(\J ~ \ll 0 til L" ()) lt'l C) X 0::: !'7:l '<:' CJ (1J ccroc o ocru 1CUW,.-4r--tlf ZjOC.O nc.J

Adenostoma spars:.tcliua; X X Agropyr:or. r:arishii X X Alnus rhcmtifolia X X Arnorpha californica X X Arab is pulchra X X Arctostafhylos pringlei X X Calyptridium pyga:aeua: X X Chrysothamnus nauseosus X X Cordylanthu!: nevinii X X Coreth.r:ogyne filaginifclia X X Drat a cox:rugata saxosa X X Dudley a abrarnsii X X Erigeron l:x:everi jacinteus X I Erigeron foliosus corillei X I E.r:iastrum safphirinum X X Eriogonum _Farishii + X X Eriogonua: umtellatum X I Eriogonum wrightii X X Galium angustifolium * X X Galium pa.r:isbii X X Gilia leftantha X X Juncus martensianus * X I Keckiella torn at a X X leptadactylcn pungens X X lilium parryi * X X lotus oblongifclius X X Lupin us excutitus X X LUfiDUS for:mosus X I Mimulus longifloris X X 1 . . ' Monard.::lla .... ~no~aes X X t1oo.ar:della odor:atiss::.ma X X Noli;:.a parr:yi X X cxytheca emargir;ata * ;{ X Penstemon grinnellii X X l?enstemon labrosus X X Phacelia imtricata X X Philadel:fhis micro phyllis X X Potent ill a s axosa X X Bub us leuccdermis X X Salvia pachyphylla X X Selaginella asprella * X X Silene parishii X X Silene verecunda X X Sisyrinchium bellum X X lrifolium monanthum X X lrifo.lium variegatum X X Zauschneria ca.lifornica X X ------+ Listed by San Eernardina National Forest as sensitive. * C.N.P.S~ listed.

TAEIE 9 Species Endemic tc the San Jacinto Mountains (Including the Santa Rcsa Mountains}

I dJ dJ I g 2~ I .-irll.--lrll \. ,... 0 l :J .J-) ~ ~ s... I rll • bO 3 ,,..., 1-o 0.. (.) 0.. (.) 0 'o rfl.,..., o +' ~~(]) oro o ro s:: IS:: 0 .S:: .-! ('Q :zl.w 0. 0. 0.. o...w 0 wlro E E 0·'"" ::a: '1.--1 I- ~ ...... ~ .,.., c +' > ~ > X ·..-4 .w o·.-fo·.-~(J).;J '"""I.e0::: .-l ...... 0 ..-~0 0. ..,.I :;:: Cfl 0 Lf"' (!) Lf"' (]) <1'! - -+' +-> N ~') >< o:::-o-ororo ole ro s:: o 0 s:: (]) ! rei (\) .-l .-l II ::z:OO.O 11(]) (J)O j(J) ...... +) +) I- +) s:: IO.O..OOO !ro ro 0 o cn rll ro·..-4 I rll rll o.. o.. 1.-l E r-l ro s:: s:: .-l L !(]) OS:: SPECIES 1:3:3:t:x...tx...... J l'a. a. ,_j t:J 0... -~-----~------~------Galium angustifolium X X Beuchera hirsutissima * X X Bolodiscus microphyllus X X Borkelia bclanderi X X Ivesia callida x * X X Keckiella rcthrockii X X teptodactylon jaegeri x * X X Potentilla wheeleri X X Bibes nevadense X X X ------!richostema austromontanum X x Proposed federal listing. * c.N.l?.S. listing. -53-

4.2 PHYTOSOCIOLOGY

One of the objectives of this thesis is to provide methodolo gies for determining the rarity status of plant species occur ring within managed natural areas such as wilderness •• In the previous section I have defended the concept of determining rarity of species within a management area as well as through out a given species range. Estimating within-wilderness rari ty is straightforward if the plant populations are limited to a single or few distinct localities (such as with Ivesia calida on Tahquitz Peak or Trichostema austramontanum compactum at Hidden lake) There the method is to delineate the bounda ries of the populations and count the numbers of individuals. Fourteen species were assessed in this manner. In the situa tion where there are either (1) too many individuals within the populations to count directly, (2) many individuals scat tered over a wide area or (3) few individuals scattered over a wide area, then some form of sampling must be initiated to de termine if a particular species should he designated as rare or not. Sampling the vegetation of the San Jacinto Wilderness areas served two useful purposes. First, the sampling provided estimates of the relative abundance of each species at various elevations and topographic situations. Eased on 1/10 ha samples, the coverage and abundance of each species encountered were estimated. -54-

TABlE 10 Example cf a Ccmfuter-Generated Gradient Nomogram Eased on Plot SamflE Data -55-

A program was written by Phil Dixon to process expediently these species specific "maps" of abundance-distribution data. These data were then converted to the dot matrix graphical format. Secondly, this type of sampling created a way of describing the general overstory and understory vegetation. As mentioned in Section 3. 2, the data were summarized using TWINSPAN (Hill 1979a), a classification program based on reciprocal averaging ordination (Hill 1973). The program mathematically weights the differences between species importance values within each sample and cuts the entire group of samples into two "distinct" groups. The same process occurs once again for each of the two groups, and so on for as many "levels" as one specifies. This artificial classification can then be tested by examining the similarities between those plots the program has indicated as a type. The results of this procedure for the ten overstory species is shown in Fig- ure 8. The resulting overstory communities classification was used as part of the habitat description for localities of rare plants. In addition, these communities could be delineated on color aerial photographs and mapped. -56- . I LIMBER PINE I II II II II IS II 11 II LIMBER PINE I LODGEPOLE PINE ~ II u II H II n .... i LODGEPOLE PINE H WHITE FIR II II 1111 II II 1111 G LODGEPOLE PINE

I Ulllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll llllllllllllllllllllllllll llllllllllllllllll

F SUGAR PINE c WHITE FIR 1111 11111111 ....

JEFFREY PINE E WHITE FIR CANYON OAK

II II II II II II uu

JEFFREY PINE 0 WHITE FIR

II II II II II II 1111 C INCENSE CEDAR + IIIIIIUI!IIIllll llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll PONDEROSA PINE I COULTER PINE SLACK OAK B CANYON OAK I I SIJGAR PINE f II II u II IIH I I II A SUGA!l PINe.------~··- .. ' " - - ·--·· ·------

244 plots

Figure e: Overstory Dendrogram Eased on TWINSEAN Analysis- -57-

4.2.1 OVERSTORY COMMUNITIES An overstory was definded as woody vegetation of height exceeding two meters, or when the stem diameters at breast height exceeded 15 em. Ten species of overstory vegetation occur within the wilderness, eight conifers and two oaks. Thorne (1976) considers this overstory to be somewhat depauperate, compared to the greater richness of the transverse and Sierran mountain ecosystems- In general, these species occur in combinations of two or more throughout the elevation gradient of the study area (Table 11 and Figure 8).

TAElE 11

Tree Species Bichness (Numbers of Overstory Speciesj

------~---~---~--~- ELEVA'IION HABITA'I (in feet} Wet North East/West South Bidges -~-~-----~------~-----~~-~--~-~--~-~--~-~--- 10,500 - 10,804 0 1 2 2 2 10,000 10,499 2 2 2 2 2 9,500 - 9,999 3 2 2 2 2 9,000 - 9,499 La 5 5 5 5 8, 50 c - 8,999 4 4 5 J 5 8,.000 - 8,499 6 ...~ q 3 3 ?,SOC - 7,999 4 2 6 6 N... D... 7,000 - 7,499 6 2 5 6 N ... n ... 6,500 - 6,999 -c; 2 6 1 N... n... 6,000 - 6,499 N.. r: .. --':l 6 6 N.D .. ------~------~~--- N.D. = Not Sufficient Data 1 faot = 0 ... 30 48 m

The elevational profile (Figure 9) identifies the sequence of turnover in overstory composition within both wilderness 1<1 P· - \Q PONDEROSA PINE ~ JEffREY PINE COULTER PINE 1'1 UMBER PINE JEFFREY PINE WHITE FIR LODGEPOLE SUGAR PINE (!) LODGEPOLE PINE PINE WHITE FIR INSENCE CEDAR >~ LIMBER PINE I SLACK OAK ...JU) :l§l I SUGAR PINE SLACK OAK \,() -E GRAMIUOID MEADOWS RHODODENDRON SILENE CAREX MEADOWS tx:1 <- a:= CAREX CEANOTHUS RUBUS KECKIELLA LILIUM 1-' !;jg o= OXYRIA ER/OGONUM CEANOTHUS ~--= PENSTEMON SARCODES (!) (!)U) en= RANNUNCULUS ERIOPHYLLUM CASTILLEJA W(/) 0::= PEO/CULAR/5 LUPINUS < CAL VPTFI!DIUM CORDYLANTHUS BROMUS ><( w:: CASTANEA SYMPHIORCARPOS Ill O:: TRISETUM IT z= ::.= llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllfUIIIIIllllllllllllll I II I I I I lllllllllllllll P 11111111II IIIIII I r:=ttlllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllUIIlll[llllllllllll11111111111111 II I111111 UllliiiUIIUtlllllllllllllllllllll O 11.000

t:l ~ ;;~:;::~:~r.~ Ill ~ :: (\ • ' ;);.;;.. ;.e:< 1-' - = :t{. ·,., ft h. ~...~.-~~:~J-- U- - "<· ..1\r.,.. .Sf"'~!:t;. :;;["" ~ § .,__ ;~·", ~--.. f. ~\'.4~ ' tc1 10.000 0... ::: ...... ·~ .~,,... .t:, H 0 >,'i~~:i~:l-..~-~~ 0 = z (/J = ~~li'~~·~~ ·~ Hl <(Z - o,., ti... I-~;¥:~ t~·· ...J ;:;: = .~, l~.}!';z:. .'~

1-' ~··;:~- ·~ ~· 0 r- = -r.":..#,- t.~i-j:~i~-~f~ (!) o z •,; ·.·~:. _ ., .. iii~.r ;;;.,'::::-.'!-. .;,'> 9,000 ~ f? · .,,, ·., ,..·~<· •·· ...... (~ ·r1J~ ;i~~1 ... ~ l.< () ::E ' . ..:-;·:_ ~::\·-;:,• . 'l.'f- ·~·'..1 :\1 ,..,., -:..~l.f::o D 0 :: ·· ... ,.,. ' .. •:>f·.·'~ •d.'" ..~!,\•"' = I z 1- - ''· ~ .:;,!!- r+

lE: .... GRANITIC FAUL TBLOCK 0(/) SECOND TERRACE PRIMARY TERRACE 1-' zZ THIRD TERRACE c.u c:::2 ([) §-·· . H ~t: I I a::.D THIN TO DEEP, COURSE SOIL b oz SANDS NO HOR!ZINATION m u.O NO SOILS Ul THIN ORGANIC LAYER HIGHLY PERMEABLE oo SANDS AND GRAVELS SEVERAL MASSIVE GRANITIC OUTCROPS SOME METAMORPHIC OUTCROPS Ul Z...J<( - GRANITIC OUTCROPS ...Jo(/) -59-

areas. A more accurate portrayal of elevational sequencing of these species is shown in Figure 10. Ordination of the sam

ples using DECORANA (Hill 1979b) suggests elevation as the principal complex environmental gradient to which dominant patterns of vegetation are corresponding. Previous investigators of the San Jacinto Mountains (Hanawalt and Whittaker 1976, Thorne 1979, Paysen et al. 1980) and of other mountain ranges supporting similar species composition (Whittaker and Niering 1965, Messell 1979, Feet 1981, Remme and Knight 1981), describe this pattern of elevational turnover as both a continuous gradient of stochastic phenomena based on individual plants responding to environmental conditions (Figure 10), and as discrete communities. These observations have long been noted by ecologists, and fan the basis for the life zone concept (Merniani 1898, Hall 1902) The second ordination axis of the San Jacinto samples indicates another complex gradient of topography and moisture. Peet (1981) and others have attempted to develop a single scalar which incorporates the physical variables of soil moisture, slope, aspect, and solar beam irradiation. The success of such a system varies, and for purposes of this investigation, a simple site classification (Table 12) was applied with reasonable success. The overstory vegetation can be subdivided into three major types: low elevation mixed conifers and oaks, middle elevation pine and fir and high elevation pine woodland,. Each of these can be divided as follows: -60-

ABCO - Abiesconcolot PI.Mli - finus ::::m;;::w;m.a CADl!: - Caloced*"us decurren~ rrcc - .L:.. coultc.r-i Q.UK~ QUCrl - Quercus chtysolepis PlFL - ~ flexilis QUKE - ~ Kelloggii PIJE - L· Jeffreyi PlLA - ~ lambertiana PIPO - L. ponderosa

PI PO,

3 AX IS 1 "1oo

High Elevation

1. limber pine woodland

2. mixed limber pine (Pinus flexilis) and lodgepole pine (~. murrayana) forest 3. mixed lodgepole and white fir (Abies concolor) forest 4. lodgepole pine woodland

Middle Elevation

5. mixed sugar pine and white fir flats

6. mixed Jeffrey pine (~. jeffreyi) , white fir and canyon oak (Quercus chrysolepis) forest -61-

7. mixed Jeffrey pine and white fir forest 8. incense cedar (Calocedrus decurrens) ravine forest

Low Elevation 9. sugar pine (P. lambertiana) flats

10. mixed conifer (~. ponderosa, ~· coulteri, P. lambertia-

na) and oak (~. kelloggii, Q. chrysolepis) forest The limber pine woodlands all occur above 3050 m and are localized an the extensive gracitic ridges and steep slopes •• These trees grow from crevices and between the massive boulders without the benefit of any soil. Increment corings suggest ages in excess of 2, 300 years, giving them the distinction of the oldest living things in the San Jacintos, and possibly in Southern California. This type occurs on the summits of San Jacinto, Jean, Marion, Folly and Cornell Peaks (Figure 2)

The mixed limber pine, lodgepole pine forests occur narrow between 2925 m and 3110 m on intermediate slopes, upon al- luvial benches. Neither species is particularly dominant over the other, as this type is a transitionary association between the limber pine woodlands and lodgepole pine woodlands. Ibis mixture occupies the largest area of the high elevation conifer forests. The lodgepole pine woodland is perhaps the most unique of all the communities described here, a fact noted by H. H. Whittaker during his work in the San Jacintos (pers. comm.). Interestingly, lodgepole pines typically are a successional -62-

r------, I I I TABlE 12 ! j I 1 A Site Classification System Used to Describe Species 1 1 Dist~itutions Within the San Jacinto Wilderness Areas I I I I I I Wet I J Habitats include meadows, springs, riparian drainages, I 1 vernal ponds and impoundments which are either perma- I 1 nently or seasonally wet at the sutstrate surface or t f near the surface.. I 1 a t North Facing I I Habitat includes sites where the aspect ranges from I J northwest to northeast, slopes are less than 60~, and I 1 site rockiness is less than 75%. Soils are generally J 1 developed and cool, retaining snow for longer periods I 1 of time than all ether habitats. I I J I East/West Open 4 J Habitat includes sites where aspect ranges from north- I I east to slightly southeast and northwest to slightly I I southwest. Bockiness is less than 75%. Sites tend to 4 I be open, experiencing much sunlight, and dry. Slopes & I are usually less than 60%. i I A 1 South Facing i I Habitat includes sites where aspects range from greater I I than southeast through southwest. Bockiness is less I I than 75" and slopes are less than 60%.. Sites are very I I hot in summer and these sites are the first to lese I I snow. I I i I Bidges I I Habitats where soils are nonexistent or marginally cc- i I curring and site rockiness is 75~ or greater. Slopes I I can exceed 60~-- Sites are bot, xeric and exposed.. I I l I ______...4

species, rapidly invading disturbed sites after fire and becoming dominant for generally less than 200 years when it is either replaced by other conifers (fir or spruce) or the area again burns (Romme and Knight 1981, Peet 1981). The lodgepole -63-

pine woodland located in Marion fiats (west of Jean Leak and between San Jacinto and Marion Peaks) consists of widely spaced and exceedingly ancient individuals approaching 1600 years. The slope in this area is almost flat, due in part to being the oldest of the erosional benches described in the geology section ( 2. 3). Soils are not developed at all and the surface consists of sands and gravels. Little organic litter accumulates and the site is highly xeric due to the permeability of the substrate. Widely scattered Carex spp. and Calyptridium constitute the meager understory. Fire scars on some of these lodgepole pines were dated using increment corings, and an average fire frequency suggests intervals exceeding 300 years. This highly stable community might clearly be considered a "climax" type. The middle elevation types occupy the majority of the study area and greater than half of the State Wilderness recreation use; all of the U.S. Forest Service recreation use occurs within these middle elevation types In several areas of the wilderness are found very flat rock surfaces, often one to five hectares in size. Depressions caused by decomposing granodiorite fill with sand and eventually provide suitable substrate for invasion by sugar pine and white fir .• These sugar pine and white fir forests are interesting in that they clearly illustrate the tolerance of both of these conifers for survival in an exceedingly harsh habitat. ------

-64-

Jeffrey pine is the dominant conifer of the middle elevations, approaching heights of nearly 200 feet. Jeffrey pines and white firs appear on a variety of slopes, soil types and aspects within this community. This type is clearly a fire frequent system, as multiple scars on the Jeffrey pines suggest presuppression frequencies as regular as 30 years- White fir appears to have amply benefited. from the continued fire suppression the u.s. Forest service has provided over the wilderness since 1930. White fir is a fire intolerant species which grows more rapidly and produces a much larger seed mast than any pines, and pervasively invades the open and fertile Jeffrey pine stands. Given a situation completely lacking fire, white fir can and does dominate other conifers (Conrad and Radosevich 1982). Such is the case on some sites in the San Jacintos, especially iz: the cooler, northfacing slopes where white fir is particularly successful. On the hotter, southfacing slopes and in the "fire chutes" (historic sites of past catastrophic wildfires that begin in the lower elevations and spread upward along these natural corridors) , canyon oak (Quercus chrysoles) becomes a significant component of the Jeffrey pine/white fir forest. Incense cedar dominates the mixed conifer forests of cen tral or northern California and Oregon, but in the dry south- era mountains it only persists as a ravine species. Al- though limited in the San Jacintos, these are one of the largest conifers and appear to be amply protected from fire by -65- thick bark, exhibiting fire scars - These great trees can tap into the mountain aquifers and as such are frequently found 50 to 100 meters from the canyon bottoms.

Very little "low elevation forests" occur within the study area proper. Two types were encountered frequently enough to warrant descriptions. These are the sugar pine flats and a mixed conifer/oak type The former is identical in all respects to the midelevation sugar pine white fir flats, except that white fir is lost as a component. The latter is a mixture of ponderosa pine, Coulter pine, sugar pine, canyon oak and black oak. Figure 11 is a vegetation map of dominant plant communities which are summarized from more detailed mapping from aerial photographs. Table 13 identifies the relative hectarage of each association,. Not all of the associations could be adequately determined on the aerial photography, so their hectarage was added to the next most similar association (e.g., Jeffrey pine/white fir/canyon oak = Jeffrey pine/white fir). -66-

ARCO - Abies concolor c Carex dominated meadow ·CADE ~ Calo~edrus decurrens g = graminoid dc:minatcd meadow PIQu- Pinus murrayana D disturbed meadow PICOU- P. coulteri PilL -~P. flexilis PtJE -·P. Jeffreyi PILA P. lambertiana PIPO P. ponderosa

Pigure 111: Vegetation Map of the San Jacinto Wilderness Areas. -67-

TABlE 13 Area of Each Dominant Plant Community

------~------~--~-- Fcrmaticn Communities Hectares ------~------~--~~----- Wetlands Disturbed 9 Willow / azalea .10 Sedge 20 Graminoid 30 Cedar 1 cottonwood 40 Woodlands Liml:er pine 55 lodgepole pine 100 Sugar pine 546 limber 1 lodgepole pine 610

Forests Lodgepole pine 1 white fir 418 Coulter pine / ponderosa pine / J:lack oak 1366 Jeffrey pine / white fir 2.200 ------~------~--~~~--~- TC'IAI 5464 ~------~-----~------~-~-~~--~~~-~--~-- Based on aerial photography interpretation.

4.2.2 Understory Communities

An analysis of the understory vegetation (below 1 m in height) using the TWINSPAN program failed to define a clear pattern of communities or associations. Applying ordination reinforced the obvious trend that vegetation responds most clearly to change in elevation (Figure 12). The variance, however, of sample placement across this elevational trend is greater than with the overstory vegetation, and suggests a certain independence of understory species in the way they respond to environmental conditions •. Consequently, the analysis of understory vegetation warranted a species-by-species study of -68-

population trends and so the gradient approach was used (Kessell 1975).

UNDERSTORY • • . . . • •,,,,, ,,,,,,, • ,,~@ §.,. Clii!:S .. ,,,,,'¥ ~.... ,,,,,,,\\ • • •. .• .. • .• ,,,,,,... 'ill . • ,,,,,,,,,~ c: . . .0 . ,,,,~ . . 0 •- ,,,,,,,... • -.. .-...... ,,,,, ... . • •> • • e: • I • • •{t\~''''''''~ • '''''''" • • CD ....~,,,,,,,"i. • •• • • • • .t't\\\'"' • • • • • ' - ' • 1,,,,,~- Co\ • • • • • • • • • • . ,,,,,,~ . .. . ''''''"'"' P<0.0002 •• • •• • • •

-·I I 100 200 3bo 400 500 600 axis 1 Figure 12: ordination Axis :1 of Onder story Samples Flatted Against Elevation. Fl.gure 14:: orctl.nat:i.on Axl.s 1 o.t unaerstory .::;ampJ.es .t:.l.Ol:l:ECl Against Elevation.

In general, the understory species can be subdivided into Four main groups to describe their overall characteristics. These groups are as follows:

1. shade tolerant plants, 2. plants of open slopes and valleys, 3. plants of rock crevices and outcrop, 4. wetland associated plants. -69-

wetland associated plants

CARE X BROMUS AGROSTIS Gl.YCE.RIA MUH!.ENSERGIA POTENTI!.l.A POt.YGONUM

Ill !IIIII !1111!111! II Hi 1111111111 II Ill lllll!lllll!lllllllllltllllllllll Plants of rock crevices CASTANEA ARCTOSTAPHYLOS GA!.IUM ·ZAUSCHNERIA I SI!.ENE 1111111111 IIIII Ill Ill II II !IIIII! !Ill ii 11111111111111!111111111111 Ill Ill Plants of Cfen slopes CEANOTHUS PIWNUS QUERCUS SYMPHIORCARPOS

Ullllllllllllillllll lllllllllllllllllllllllllllfllllllltllll!IUUIIII Shade tJlerant plants

$ILENE KECKIEt.LA PENSTEMON LUPINUS CORIMLORHIZA

148 plot~

Figure 13: Understory Dendrogram Based on TWINSFAN Analysis.

Shade tolerant specialists included Silene verecunda, Keck- iella rothrockii jacintensis, Penstemon labrosus, Corralorhiza -70-

maculata and Pedicularis semibarbata. These species and others could readily be seen beneath a dense overstory canopy, particularly white fir, but often under Jeffrey pine and lodgepole pine as well •• The densest overstory canopies occurred on moderate to level slopes, with moderately deep soils, so the associated understory species occupied sites of low rockiness, deep soils, thick litter layer and primarily northfacing slopes. Cover densities of these species rarely exceeded in 8 cm2 per 1/10 ha, and it was not infrequent to find few or no plants at sites of overstory canopy coverage greater than 80. The middle and high elevation open slopes offer one of the richest understories (outside of meadows and streamsides). This is also one of the few habitats where a prominent middle shrub and subshrub layer occurs. This middle strata is lack ing in the shaded habitats and in the high elevation woodlands (except where Chrysolepis sempervirens occurs). Abundant shrubs include Arctostaphylos~., Ceanothus cordulatus, Pru nus emarginata and Symphyiocarpos parishii. The richness of herbs (almost exclusively perennial) attests to an abundance of sunlight, a diversity of topographic and soil conditions and the high fire frequency which maintains a patch mosaic of dominant vegetation. Large boulders and granitic outcrops dominate the landscape of the San Jacinto Wilderness and provide a rather unique habitat for a set of plant specialists rooted into cracks, fissures and depressions in the granite. This habitat is stress- -71-

ful, the plants experiencing high maximum temperatures, very shallow soils and low water availability. Many of these plants possess adaptations to water stress very similar in physiology and function to desert species (Phillips 1982). These species are typically of low numbers and exclusively perennial, owing to the difficulty in becoming established on such an inhospitable location. Two of these species special izing on rocks are Ivesia callida and Leptodactylon jaegeri both endemics to the San Jacinto Mountains. Endemism appears to be more frequent within this type of community, owing per haps to the limited dispersal and the resultant isolation (McVaugh 1943, Murdy 1968) •• Species more common to the rock outcrop habit are Silene parishii, Zauschneria californica Dudleya abramsii, Arabis inyoensis, Potentilla wheeleri and Heuchera hirsutissima. The fourth group of understory plants is the most diverse, and unfortunately, the most subject to effects from human use. The wetlands constitute the most distinct group of species because their habit is so restricted due to the aridity of the San Jacintos. This group can be divided into several broad types based on the physiography of the landscape:

1. vernal pond, 2. riparian drainages, 3. high elevation meadows and springs, 4. middle elevation meadows and springs, 5. disturbed meadows. -72-

Each of these types shares the common attribute of having a more or less perennial water supply. This supply may seasonally fluctuate and at times become totally subsurface •• But the annual predictability of abundant water provides the necessary condition for the establishment of this distinct vegetation. A vernal pool is a seasonally wet, often shallow basin which collects water from an intermittent source such as snow melt or winter rains,. These basins predictably dry out for a period of time, but often the layer of clay which initially traps the water maintains a high moisture content relative to a surrounding arid landscape. Vernal pools are relicts of a wetter period and most often support relictual and endemic plants which are well adapted to the seasonal drought, but are entirely isolated from other wetland habitats (Earbour and Major 1977). Hidden Lake (Figure 2) is just such a pool, and is the only natural body of water in the San Jacinto Mountains. It is located one mile from the Palm Springs Aerial Tramway and receives high levels of day use. Eight species occur here, and nowhere else in the mountains, and one species, Trichostema austromontanum compactum, is endemic to the site. Hidden lake is seasonally filled by snow melt, and often dries up by early August. Water levels never exceed two meters as an overflow outlet is present on the eastern side. -73-

Five major riparian areas drain the southern, eastern and western slopes of the wilderness. The north fork of the San Jacinto River drains the western flank. The Strawberry Creek drains the south flank, and Willow Creek, Tahquitz Creek and Tamarack Creek drain the eastern side, as well as most of the heavily used recreation areas. During the winter and spring months, these streams carry great quantities of water and flooding often occurs. By summer, the small creeks are dry and the volume of the larger ones decreases.

The vegetation of these drainages does not vary much from an elevational standpoint. Common species include Juncus mer tensiana, Mimulus quttatus, Aquilegia formosus, Veronica peregrina, Potentilla glandulosa and Rumex salicinifolius, Salix lasianda, although not of continuous coverage, intermittently dominates these streamsides throughout the wilderness. Lilium parryi is infrequent along most of the drainages to an eleva tion of 9000 feet.

Meadows occur where the topography becomes level and water spreads out at or near the surface. These soils tend to be too wet to support mature conifers. Meadows are important elements of the subalpine zone of the San Jacintos, being extensively used by wildlife and recreationists. The San Jacinto meadows are also the richest plant community -- 75 species occur in Tahquitz Meadow alone. Three "types" of meadows were identified, one dominated by Carex species (Round Valley, Little Bound Valley, Tamarack -74-

Valley and Wellinan's Cienaga), one dominated by graminiod

Species (Tahquitz Meadow, Little Taquitz and Skunk Cabbage) and an artificially disturbed condition caused by extensive gullying and drying which is dominated by Artemesia spp., Sym phoricarpos spp. and Gayophytum spp. (Upper Tahquitz Meadow,

Weilman Cabin and Upper Tamarack Meadow).

The Carex spp. dominated meadows are common at higher elevations.

The Tahquitz Valley meadows are not only graminoid dominated, but support many Carex spp., species, ferns, willows and many herbs. The possible extinction of from Tahquitz meadow is due in part to the current drying trend that this system is experiencing resulting from extensive gully erosion in Upper Tahquitz. A detailed description of this process is presented in Section 4.4.

This section has presented a description of the major associations of herbs and shrubs existing in the San Jacinto Wilderness. Table 14 summarizes species richness occurring within the range of elevations and major moisture-topographic conditions. Gradient nomograms were developed for each species using this same format. -75-

'IAElE 14 Shrub and Hert Species Eichness (Numbers of Species}

------~------~~-~-~~-~---~ ELEVA'IION HABIT A'I (in feet) wet North East/West South Iiidges ------______,._,.. ____ .,...... 10,500 - 10,804 6 3 4 2 2 10rOOC - 10,499 3 N .. D .. (1} 2 2 lL.. D, .. ( 1) 9,500 - 9,999 30 N .. r:. (5) N.. D. (1) 5 5 9,000 - 9,499 56 7 20 ~9 .2.1 8,500 - 8,.999 47 43 35 13 11 8,COC - 8,499 43 35 38 26 35 7,.500 - 7,999 75 36 42 49 N .. D. (4) 7,000 - 7,499 8 N.D.(4) N.D. (5) 17 N... D .. (3) 6,500 - 6 ,9 99 16 N.C.(5) N.D .. (13} 28 N .. D. (1} 6,000 - 6#499 N.D. (3) N.D .. { 11} N .. D .. (7} 17 N .. D .. (6} ------N.D. ~ Not Sufficient Data (numbers of spec~es currently recorded). 1 foot = 0.3048 m

4.3 RECREATIONAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

Wilderness managers have increasingly invested in significant research on the effects of wilderness recreation activities on frequently used sites such as lakeshores, along trail corridors, campsites, streaaisides and meadows •• Several excellent reviews of this literature are presented by Speight (1973), Liddle (1975) and Cole and Schreiner (1981). Site degradation was found to be a major concern by virtually all of the wilderness managers surveyed in Cole and Washburne's 1981 study of the National Wilderness Preservation System.

Long term studies are now showing trends that suggest that site degradation may become a permanent feature of some wilderness areas because rehabilitation rates have not been de- -76-

termined due to a lack of measurable natural plant and soil regeneration on most "closed" sites (Cole 1978, Stanley 1979) . This suggests that the fervor for which wilderness managers have been advocating the campsite rest rotation scheme (Hendee et al. 1978) way be unwarranted since such techniques can cause more extensive and permanent damage than by "sacrificing" (permanently using) a site. Site impacts are the result of mechanical crushing and digging by users and their pack stock. 1erriam et al. ( 19 7 3) and Cole ( 19 8 2) suggest that light use produces substantial lippacts and that further use produces porportionately fewer changes. These findings are corroborated by an extensive European literature specializing on the effects of trampling upon vegetation (e.g., Burden and Randerson 1972, Liddle 1975) It was surprising to note that out of all the wilderness impact and trampling literature reviewed for this study that only one study documented the effects of recreation activities on rare plant populations (Bratton and White, no date). My contention is that although wilderness management researchers discuss impacts in the light of preservation of pristine conditions, the perceived impact of overuse is nonetheless oriented at aesthetic considerations, rather than biotic preservation. Not that these studies are not performing proper biological investigations -- many are in fact good scientific studies that uncover interesting findings on the effects of -77-

trampling. However, it is rare to find a study that discusses the significance of these observed patterns of disturbance from an ecosystem perspective. This section documents the extent of visitor use and ap plies the findings of previous trampling research to identify levels of endangerment that populations of rare plants are currently receiving in the San Jacinto wilderness. This study does not address the effects of fire suppression on rare species as that would require an extensive examination of the role of fire within the San Jacinto Mountains -- necessitating the development of a fire history model which is beyond the scope of this thesis.

The following section will he divided into three parts: First will he a summary of visitor use statistics for trail corridors, campgrounds and certain campsites. Second, is a presentation of the results of a trampling survey conducted in Round Valley, illustrating a technique for estimating the relative susceptibility of certain species to increasing levels of campsite use •• And third, will be presented a summary of major rare plant--recreation use conflicts occurring currently within the State Park Wilderness and the U.S. Forest Wilderness.

4.3.1 Visitation Vistor use within both wilderness areas, prior to implement- ing wilderness permits, can only be estimated. When the -78-

Tramway opened in 1964, the long Valley Ranger Station kept a visitor register and the staff would tally these figures in log books. Obviously, not all visitors registered, and others took liberties when they did sign in, often exaggerating their party's size. State wilderness use apparently averaged in absolute numbers what it is today (30,000 users per year). Peaks in use were much higher, and in 1968 a record 1,100 campers spent the July 4th weekend in sound Valley. Today, this campground is limited to 250 users on 28 sites. Visitor use for the last eight years is presented in Tables 15 and 16.

TAElE 15

Hean Mo~tbly overnight Ose by Campground and Zones {8 Years)

JAN FEB lo!AR APR !'oilY JUN Jl'L AU(; ~FP OCT NOV DEC ------·--·--·-·····-·--·-·······-··~····-~·~------NW~-··~------·------ROUND VALLEY/ TAMARACK · ·• s14 520 904 586 751 3321 2851 2844 !041 !316 1264 553 DEER SPRINGS 34 43 12 33 268 255 259 262 173 88 119 28 LITTLE ROUND Z4 ll 27 62 133 317 505 509 502 145., 192 57 PEAK 24 ll 76 21 128 81 93 143 l4S o. 90 60 USFS ZONES 150 150 179 362 1564 3463 27~0 2634 1853 1520 968 277

806 737 1198 1064 2844 7437 6448 s:m 3714 3132 2633 1075

total • 37 .~80

TAEI.E 16 Mean Monthly Dayhiker ose ty Trailhead (8 Years) ------~~----Eg~----~~----~e~----~~!----~~~----~g~----~~§ ____ ?s~----Q~I----~2~----P~~------TRAM 529 707 668 574 442 1080 l€67 1149 430 760 ll59 751 HUMBER 236 244 250 691 1294 2342 2776 2527 1600 1289 1322 903 DEER SPRINGS 19 33 16 23 120 181 199 188 107 43 71 33 SEVEN PINES 0 0 0 0 18 17 32 18 30 0 0 0 MARION MT. 0 0 2 23 78 109 37 1~ 37 1 0 0 FULLER RIDGE 0 0 0 0 2 21 16 S 22 5 0 SOUTH RIDGE 0 0 0 0 4 25 5 4 2 3 0 0 SNOW C!\EEK 4 0 0 6 2 :JS 0 9 9 15 0 788 9S4 936 1312 1964 3777 4730 3908 2237 2110 2570 1687

tota 1 • 27 ,003 -79-

This use is divided between state and federal, and between overnight and day use. Table 16 presents the ditribution of use by trailheads and trail corridors. Not all trails receive the same use as accessibility and strenuousness of each trail can vary considerably. Campground use within the State Park Wilderness was rela tively easy to establish from the permit records, while site use within the National Forest Wilderness was much more diffi cult to estimate as campers are allowed to disperse within a designated zone (Figure 14). Only use at yellow-post or campfire sites were estimated. One problem encountered with visitor statistics was determining a yearly summary of use. These data were seldom tabulated by the managing agencies, or if so, they were couched within difficult to interpret computer printouts U.S. Forest Service files), or were discarded after only several years (State Park files). There apparently has not been a clear policy on how to deal with this information, and so success in determining a certain year's visitor use depended upon the manager in charge at the time. The value of these data for rare plant management is high, as the chance that a particular user will disturb a population increases with the number of people that travel past a given populations. A single footstep crushing a plant is not a significant event, but as the number of footsteps increases, the damage can become irreparable. I f-.;j (X) .... 0 \.Q I ~ I 1"1 (X) (1) I-' I ...... c::

:£! () ~·PI I-' E1 P•'U N (f) t; ·~-t::l !:'1.0 m rn N 1/) 0 :::s I!)

.... t-1

m 0 ~'1 PI til SCALE

:<.~ I,_ r+ t::.,... I •· !; .J lONE 80UNOARI('S r·1 !._..,•• ~.... ~- y· .r.···,.r ... l ::-•, .../;•" Ti"it'.l\_[, '" ¥ • .!. -·~~·--··--r·ruf· for~il-l 'JTHf.J•t-':;.

5 ...... •·•- ! ftfP~~IllfNl ~HH.t.U$

i}:.. .->f.:..~:O~-l~l\Vlt()fHNf~:~·.;~,fHH-i ;:

'!t:i.l ';;;·fi.Pt)S-1 !::!1l- (.J }{"-

~'! ((1 (!j Plateau /ln:~aCarnpin~J Zones n (jj

11~ t-;

....~ I' Cl (1i -81-

4.3.2 Vegetation Trampling at Round Valley

The literature, as well as direct observations, tells us that as vegetation continues to be trampled, the vigor and life expectancy of a particular species will be significantly shortened. Cole (1979) and Holmes (1979) suggest that certain growth forms (e.g., woody and herbaceous) are affected differently by the same degree of trampling, although ultimately the elimination of all vegetation will occur. To test this hypothesis, and to come to some generalizations about the San Jacinto vegetation, trampling events were reconstructed which occurred at each of the campsites in Round Valley •• Visitor use within this campground was obtained from State permit records (Figure 15) and a model was devised for calculating the annual number of users which occupied a given campsite since the site was developed. Mandatory site camping was implemented in 1974 to decrease the density of campers, and to remove use from near proximity of the meadow. Group size varied between one and fifteen persons per campsite, and the frequency of use of any particular site depended on its accessibility to the trail, to water and to the pit toilets. Large groups tend to be concentrated in a certain set of campsites because the rangers put them there. Other sites receive only occasional use because they are located as much as one-half mile from the Round Valley facilities. -82-

- >- - .E 3500 t'O 3000 ::>"'C •CD c: =...;... 3000 11:1 0= =--= Cf)- 2500 --- = c:: - I t fl'l fl'l 2!;00 ll'l ·;;- >:woo II§;] > ·- 2000 - .&:! .c: -en .!:l- ...c 1500 =... 1500 a:J CD > > 0 1000 u- = ! .::: >- !000 --= ::c c: -- -0 50!.1 ======Hill -=C) -- :E ===== :i 5,0 -- -- I>< _§§§Ea------===== I>< JfMAMJJASUNUu J~M MJJASU"

*10 ytJars (70·80)

Figure 15: Overnight Visitor Use at thE State wilderness and Bound Valley

A simulation model was written to take those variables into account, and the program is included in Appendix E. . The output of this program is presented in Figure 16, and the annual use per site statistics are separated by the overstory community where each occurs Moderate to heavy use sites show the typical characteris tics of a degraded organic layer, exposed mineral soil, lack of dead wood, lack of understory vegetation and often the ex posure of nearby tree roots. Light use sites (Figure 16, site G-11) may show only a portion of these chracteristics. The size of each campsite (area of vegetation removal) was linear- ly related to the number of annual users at that site. -83-

visitors;site/year

G E H

1• 180 11• 280 1< 400 1< 40 2< 420 12<80 2< 100 3< 440 13< 100 3< 100 4<500 14< 300 4<480 5< 600 15< 100 5< 100 6< 360 16< 50 6<500 1< 140 1 7• 75 7<25 8•380 18• 50 8<40 9<400 19< 85 10<420 20< 85

97 t N .Q4 • .. To ' 910 The

911 912 013

1" = 200 yd.

figure 16: Est:mated Annual Vis:tor Use at Campsites in Round Valley .. -84-

A useful way of looking at relative vegetation loss was to compare the fraction of a species coverage value remaining within a campsite with the normal coverage of that species away from the campsite disturbance. Only species whose populations were determined (by plot estimates) to be roughly constant over that distance (campsite center to undisturbed plot) could be assessed in this manner Five species were found to be distributed in the understory in regular enough densities to allow for campsite by campsite comparisons. These were Lupinus formosus, Gayophytum diffusum, Keckiella rothrockii, Symphoricarpos parishii and Pedicularis semibarbata. These species, when sampled in the sound Valley area at undisturbed sites, were noted to be relatively constant in their coverage densities. Each species had to occur near or in at least three campsites to be considered for analysis. Figure 17 shows the relative differences and similarities among the five species under relatively different levels of camper use at the Bound Valley brown post sites. The results suggest that: 1) all plants were reduced in coverage as the use at each site increased and 2) that the woody species (Keckiella rothrockii and Symphoricarpos parishii survived longer under increased trampling than did the herbaceous perennials (Lupinus formosus and Pedicularis barbata) or the annual species (Gayophytum diffusum). These data, although hardly comprehensive, support findings by Holmes (1979) that woodiness and perenniality allow plants

-84-

A useful way of looking at relative vegetation loss was to compare the fraction of a species coverage value remaining within a campsite with the normal coverage of that species away from the campsite disturbance. Only species whose popu lations were determined (by plot estimates) to be roughly constant over that distance (campsite center to undisturbed plot) could be assessed in this manner Five species were found to be distributed in the understory in regular enough densities to allow for campsite by campsite comparisons. These were Lupinus formosus, Gayophytum diffusum Keckiella rothrockii, Symphoricarpos parishii and Pedicularis semibarbata. These species, when sampled in the sound Valley area at undisturbed sites, were noted to be relatively constant in their coverage densities. Each species had to occur near or in at least three campsites to be considered for analysis. Figure 17 shows the relative differences and similarities among the five species under relatively different levels of camper use at the Bound Valley brown post sites. The results suggest that: 1) all plants were reduced in coverage as the use at each site increased and 2) that the woody species (Keckiella rothrockii and Symphoricarpos pari-survived longer under increased trampling than did the herbaceous perennials (Lupinus formosus and Pedicularis barbata) or the annual species (Gayophytum diffusum). These data, although hardly comprehensive, support findings by Holmes (1979) that woodiness and perenniality allow plants -85-

A Keckiella rothrockii B Symphoricarpos parishii C Lupinus formosus D Pedicularis semibarbata E Gayophytum diffusum

ill Ol ....ctl ill > 0 () 75 u ill ..0 '- :::1 -(jJ u -.,c .....; 50 r-0 - > .... ro E 25. r/) &-

Visitor Days per Year (X100)

Figure 17: Species Eesponses to Increases in Campsite Ose in Sound Valley. -86-

to be better protected from trampling effects than herbaceous or annual habits. These findings also support the notion that a major portion of the effects of trampling occurs with the initial use of a campsite, and the relative change in coverage over time decreases as the site continues to accumulate more use. What was surprising was the pronounced difference between those levels of campsite use which decreased the percent similarity by 0%. Although this could be an artifact of small sample size, the woody species required between 300 arid 400 visitor days of use per year while the herbaceous species were reduced by 50% after only 100 to 200 visitor days. The general trends elicited by this simple study provide additional knowledge about the relative resistance of San Jacinto flora to visitor impacts. Herbaceous vegetation experiences a rather rapid decline with a relatively small amount of trampling. Considering tb-at one trail corridor might convey upwards of 10,000 hikers during a single summer, it would only take a tenth of that figure stopping at a viewpoint or rest place to alter significantly the vegetation beneath their feet.

4.3.3 Rare Plant and Recreation Conflicts With the occurrence of 120 rare plant taxa in the wilderness, it is not unlikely to discover that certain populations are currently experincing human effects. The types of effects -87-

documented range from casual trampling along trails, concentrated trampling by backpackers at campgrounds and scenic areas, "crack-cleaning" by rock climbers, habitat modification due to overuse of meadows and nearby recreation activies. Appendix D documents species/effect observations and is divided into a State Wilderness and a u.s .. Forest Service list, and subdivided into impact categories Table 17 summarizes the number of species conflicts.

------, TABlE 17 ~• i I !' summary of Fare Species Conflicts (from Apfendix D) I 4 I I j I I ------~----~------j 'lype of conflict State Federal I ' I I ------~------30/2 I 'lrampling along trails 26/11 • I •I I 'lrampling in campgrounds and scenic areas 8;16 13/8 I I / j • Flants freguently Ficked I I 2/0 4 l by collectors 2/0 • •j Plants in close proximity 4 to imfacts 5/1 6/9 a i i I I Impacts due to rock clim- ' ting o;o 8/4 a i j I ------~-~------~~-~- (Geographically rare are indicated by the l I l I first number and critically rare by the second.) ! •I I -88-

Trampling impacts along trails constitute the largest number of individual impacts to rare plants. The State leads the u.s .. Forest Service with slightly more interactions, but the State wilderness supports more miles of trail. Campgrounds and scenic areas constitute the second highest level of interactions, and the highest in terms of individual plants crushed as a result of recreational use. It should also be noted that campsite and scenic area impacts occur because visitors are generally resting (not moving or carrying packs) and are then more inclined to pick or molest flowering plants within their visual range. Rock climbing constitutes a serious effect on rare plants because the sport actively encourages the removal of vegetation from cracks in the rock. Crack habitats are very limited, and reinvasion is very slow. Crevice species tend to be in low abundance, and thus experience greater degrees of endangerment as a result of these activities.

4.4 WILDERNESS POLICY AND PLANNING FOR RARE PLANT MANAGEMENT The development of a comprehensive and site specific data base of rare plant information has only limited value to a wilderness manager unless a clear set of policies is developed for suggesting management actions relevant to rare plant/recreation use conflicts. Policy development is in fact relevant to all aspects of wilderness management (Fish and Bury 1981). The wilderness acts (Federal and California) suggest policy -89-

guidelines, but the responsibility for interpretation and development of policy resides with the local agency such as the National forest, and often at the District level as is the case for the San Jacinto Wilderness. Similarly, the Area Manager at the Mount San Jacinto State Park sets policy for activities within the wilderness area which is subsequently approved as regulation by the State Park Commission in Sacramento. Within the San Bernardino National Forest, San Jacinto Ranger District, wilderness management policy has been developed and incorporated into a planning document called the San Jacinto Wilderness Plan and Environmental Assessment Report (1980). The report evaluates the environmental and social effects of four alternative management schemes for the San Jacinto Wilderness. This document only deals with the manipulation of visitor use patterns and opportunities to meet these objectives. The alternative plans for the wilderness are based on four major concepts: 1) to manage use primarily for resource protection, 2) to manage primarily to facilitate visitor use, 3) to manage using current practices and 4) a combination of these approaches. This latter alternative was officially accepted by the regional forester, and is the basis for current management. The plan deals with satisfying the objectives of this latter alternative #4, which emphasizes carrying capacity, dispersal of groups, group sizes, campfires and fragile heavy use areas. -90-

Resource impact analysis dealt only with the problems of compaction and erosion of soils, lass of ground cover, fuel wood depletion and water quality. Rare plants were mentioned once in the Environmental Assessment Report, with Ivesia callida and Leptodactylon jaegeri noted as being reported, but not verified on the ground. The management objectives of the San Jacinto Wilderness are summarized in Figure 18. Rare plants are not a part of these objectives other than in 14b, where the plan calls for a resource baseline. The Department of Parks and Recreation is currently in the process of generating resource inventories and policy guide lines for Each of their units. A Department document, Guide lines for Resources Documents (1980) describes the three-phased process of producing a resource inventory (Inventory of fea tures), developing a set of specific policies (Resource Ele ment) and the ultimate design of management programs (Resource Management Programs). This system has been mandated by the California Public Resources Code (Div. 5, Chapter 1), and becomes part of the general operations plan for each park unite Figure 19 summarizes the contents of each of these documents and identifies specific information needs, including rare and endangered plant and animal protection. The Mount San Jacinto State Park has begun developing these series of resource management documents, working with a regional resource ecologist and myself. This thesis constitutes -91-

The following objectives reflect intended conditions in the San Jacinto Wilderness Management direction aims at achieving these conditions

1. Insure an opportunity for solitude through improved dispersal of visitors.

2. Allow natural processes to shape the wilderness environement by manipulating visitor use patterns to meet acceptable resource standards.

3. provide, to the extent consistent with objectives 1 and 2 above, a wide range of visitor oppotunities and perception of freedom.

4. Accommodate the maximum number of visitors consistent with objectives 1 and 2 above.

5. Rehabilitate abused popular use areas to a state which approximates natural conditions and monitor to prevent degradation beyond acceptable limits.

6. Aviod adverse water, quality impacts associated with recreational use of wetlands and critical watersheds through manipulation of visitor use patterns.

7. Continue to produce water of a quality compatible with its beneficial use and in a quantity sufficient to meet non-consumption in-stream uses.

8. Seek natural distributions, numbers, end interactions of indigenous wildlife species, with special management consideration given, where appropriate, to the needs of "recovery" species.

9. Design and maintain a wilderness transportation system which will minimize recreational impacts to resources and provide adequate access to popular use areas.

10. Design and locate visitor use and administrative facilities aimed primarily at resource protection rather than user convenience.

11. Develop visitor information servies aimed at: a. Dispelling confusion between State and Federal Wilderness regulations, and b. Promoting wilderness "preparedness".

12.Actively coordinate with the Mt. San Jacinto State Wilderness concerning management policy and visitor use specifics, aiming at consistency whenever possible.

13. Insure that all administrativ activities, including special uses by permit within wilderness boundaries, are compatible with management objectives.

14. Collect resource and user data necessary tot a. Obtain information needed to achieve and monitor attainment of this plans objectives, and b. Acquire baseline resource knowledge needed to assess long-range natural changes in the wilderness resource knowledge and the wilderness resource and man's influence upon it.

Figure 18: Wilderness Management Objectives for the San Jacinto Wilderness Area, San Jacinto District (1980) -92-

RESOURCE DIVEl't'":i:ORY (Inventory of Feat~-es) / RESOIJRCE MA.'lAGE..~Nt POUCY RESOORa MANAaEt£N'l' AC't!ONS (Re~urce Element.) (Re:~ource Ma<''!a0ement ?:-ograa1)

The resource inventory provides a foundation of knowledge for the development of resource policies and resource management programs. This inventory is referred to as the inventory of Features (IF) .

Resource policy guides decision making and leads to resource management actions. The resource policy document is referred to as the Resource Element (RE), because it is one o several elements of the General Plan.

Resource management programs are organized actions to benefit resources. Each program addresses a specific resource need and can apply to more than one unit, or even all units of the State Park System. More commonly, they apply to a specific resource objective in a particular unit of the State Park System. Each it, therefore, say have a number of resource management programs in effect at one time. Possible programs Include, cut are not limited to:

geologic features protection ecosystem preservation and erosion control management water pollution control scenic resources protection air pollution control or rehabilitation forest insect and disease control rare and endangered plant and tire management animal protection wildfire prevention historic and archeologic tire ecology programs features protection fuel management exotic (weedy) species control marsh management

Not mentioned above are statewide emergency programs for protection of State Park System personnel an visitors. These include geologic hazard control, tree hazard control, noxious ous animal control, and insect vector control programs.

Figure 19:Resource Management Planning Approach for the California Department of Packs and Recreation -93-

the rare plant portions of both the Inventory of Features, and the beginning of the Resource Element. Certain Resource Management actions are proposed in this thesis, several of which were implemented during the summer of 1982. The U.S. Forest Service does not appear to have organized its resource management objectives in a manner comparable to the State Park. Both agencies in the San Jacintos are in a preliminary phase of resource inventory and policy development, and it is hoped that this thesis will significantly contribute to this process with regard to rare plant protection. Section 4.4.1 will identify a series of policy goals for rare plant protection and management, and then detail a series of policies for the specific management of the rare plant resources within the state and federal wilderness.

4.4.1 Policy Goals Rare plant populations constitute an important part 0± the wilderness and their preservation is specifically mandated by state and federal legislations. It is therefore important that conflicts with rare plant populations be minimized or eliminated where possible. It is also understood that interactions between recreationists and plants are impossible to avoid and that a certain amount of plant degradation is inevitable within wilderness. Considering that the rarity of plants can be hierarchically classified, and that certain species are spatially and numerically more or less rare than -94- others, the following goals for policy development should be considered.

1. Recreation conflicts with species of the most critical rarity category (Table 8 and 9, local and few populations, high endangerment) should he reduced to levels consistent with naturally occurring effects such as herbivore browsing and trampling and granivore predation. Additional studies should be conducted to examme populations and habitats outside of the boundaries of immediate recreation use.

2. Rare plants of limited distribution (Tables 7-9) within the wilderness should be considered for management action. Widespread species, unless a critical habitat is identified, can sustain higher levels of impact than localized or restricted populations.

3. Areas within the wilderness which support a concentration of rare species should be considered for protection over areas containing relatively few, or a single population, unless that population qualifies under goal 1 above.

4. Passive means of eliminating or reducing recreation impacts are preferable over direct regulation. Passive means include diverting trails and discouraging visitor use through education, removing campsites or campgrounds where tare plant conflicts are inevitable. -95-

5. Active or regulatory means of eliminating rare plant conflicts should be considered if passive means still threaten the survival of a critical rare species. Active means include limiting the numbers of users to a particular site and flaking access illegal, or fencing. 6. Public interpretation of rare species conservation should be encouraged and staff should be fully aware of rare plant conflicts and the goals of preservation management. 7. Regular monitoring of rare plant populations. should be considered to assess the effectiveness of management actions, and to determine the change in population status of particular species.

4.4.2 Policy and Management Actions

In order to protect selected rare plant populations within the State and Federal wildernesses from recreation related activities, a number of site specific policies and management actions are necessary. Eased upon the policy goals for rare plant management outlined in the previous section, the following actions are strongly recommended. These are divided between State and federal areas ..

4.4.2.1 State Park Wilderness Area 1. Hidden Lake supports a community of seven rare species, three of which are Southern California endemics, and -96-

Trichostema austromontanum compactum critically rare and endemic to the San Jacicto Wilderness. The following passive management actions are recommended for limiting the excessive damage this community receives from day users and campers (Figure 20).

* Remove the side trail which leads to the Lake off of the Hidden Lake Divide trail. * Modify the narrow "pass" into the lake by placing boulders and debris so that horse travel is obstructed. * Remove the Hidden Lake place name from signs and maps. Maps include the State Park brochure, the u.s. Forest Service trail map and the u.s. Geological Survey topographic map (San Jacinto Quadrangle, 7.5 min. series). * Delete the portion of the Tramway movie which emphasizes visiting the lake. * Discourage day use from Tramway users by Long Valley contact station personnel, and if the public still wants to day hike to the lake, provide interpretation about the sensitivities of the shoreline flora. * Begin monitoring day use to the lake, and increase the amount of ranger patrol along with on site interpretation. * Begin a population monitoring study of the sensitive taxa with the eventual goal of establishing critical -97-

(a. l

·~~,.7.-:c --"'-···· -~ . ·~~~~~... :_..:.-:7:;; ;2~;~,:.·:~; --- :i~~~-::~~-·

(a) :-J:..dd.en I.ali:E, (b) Tr::..chostema Sfp .. , (C) Lake -98-

periods of phenology, response to trampling and an estimate of visitor carrying capacity should visitor use limits become necessary.

2. Tamarack Valley and vicinity supports several rare taxa, most notably Antennaria rosea and Leptodactylon jaegeri with single populations located along the Ia- marack Junction Trail and several upper valley campsites. The following recommendations will minimize recreation interactions with these species. * Removal of Tamarack Junction Trail. * Relocation of the upper valley brown post site to be low the level of the upper pit toilet. * Removal of upper pit toilet.

3. The Deer Springs Campground and vicinity is an impor tant site for several species of rare plants, most no tably Lilium parryi and Listera convallarioides. Seri ous overuse of this campground has permanently converted 15% of the habitat for these species into a series of highly eroded and dissected dry benches. Although management has reduced the number of permissible campers to this site, persistent trampling in these sites helps maintain serious levels of erosion. The following actions are recommended to remedy this situa tion. * Closure of Deer Springs as a campground. -99-

* Removal of the Deer Springs place name from existing maps and publications. * Rerouting of the trail on the north side of the main stream crossing so that the trail avoids access into the disturbed areas- * Revegetation of this site can be accomplished by loo sening the compact soils with McClouds and shovels, burying detritus to add to the sail, developing a passive irrigation system by either diverting a small channel at by using a section of hose to create an artificial "spring_" The area should then be planted with native seeds from local annuals and perennials.

4. Round Valley Campground is the heaviest use area within the State wilderness outside of Long Valley. Campsites have been placed in a variety of habitats and locali ties, each connected to a small side trail. These sites and trails are centers of erosion that effect the sediment loading of the meadow and Tamarack Creek. Slow revegetation rates suggest that site closure and relocation are inappropriate, yet erosion rates are ac celerating in the Valley. The following recommenda tions should stem these erosion rates and make it un necessary to relocate new sites •• * Campsites should be hardened by developing a perime ter of erosion bars and rockwork to lessen runoff af ter spring melt and during summer thundershowers. -100-

* Side trails should be consolidated where possible and erosion bars placed at frequent intervals, taking advantage of natural drainage patterns. French drains, using natural materials, should be considered where appropriate.

5. Disturbance in the form of camping and hiking can have serious effects on understory plants and rare species. A part of the function of the California Department of Parks and Recreation is public interpretation of natural resources and human impacts. A visitor education program should be developed, possibly with the aid of the Mount San Jacinto Natural History Association, which emphasizes the impact of recreation activities and the sensitivities of many San Jacinto species. A program of visitor interpretation can only operate when the interpreters park staff and volunteers -- are adequately trained in natural history, impact analysis and resource management. The following series of recommendations are basic steps and possible approaches to an educational program which includes park staff, park volunteers, and ultimately the park visitor. * A short field course (e.g., one week) can be administered by trained staff and outside experts to expose staff and volunteers to the natural history of the San Jacinto Mountains, with particular emphasis on rare species. -101-

* A second short course could be offered for seasonal and permanent staff on resource management and rare plant preservation. The regional resource ecologist and other experts could contribute to this program, and the representative volunteers or leaders from the Mount San Jacinto Natural History Association should be involved, as they contribute to management activities. * Appropriate interpretive displays at the Tramway, Long Valley and Idyllwild Ranger Stations, and some trailheads would contribute to public information on minimal impact hiking and camping, and the sensitive ness of indigenous biota. * Campfire programs in Round Valley, Idyllwild and Stone Creek can be oriented towards public sensitivi ty to rare species.

6. A cooperative agreement with local university expertise (e.g., at the University of California James San Jacinto Mountain Reserve) should be formalized to establish an on-going monitoring program of rate plant populations for study of existing impacts, implemented programs of rare plant management (e.g., Hidden lake) and potential impacts. Changes in policy or management activity, ordinarily not considered relevant to rare plant populations, should be reviewed in light of rare plant sensitivities. A planning and impact evaluation -102-

should be considered before any new activity or change in activity is -implemented. Outside consultation will be most likely to be necessary until the State provides the area with a resident expert.

4.4.2.2 U.S. Forest Service, San Jacinto Wilderness 1. Tahquitz Valley and Little Tahquitz Valley meadows are currently experiencing an accelerated period of erosion of the upper portions as a result of past, excessive grazing impacts (Figure 21). Records from the late 1890's describe a much wetter condition of these mead ows, and the presence of several species of plants which no longer exist. For example, one species, Ma axis brachypoda, a small orchid, has become extinct on the mountain as a result of these changes. Today, these eroding meadows continue to be disturbed by the presence of trails running through each of them. In Tahquitz Valley, the wilderness guard station and horse corral are located on the edge of the lower meadow. Grazing by recreation stock and u.s. Forest Service horses occurs at this point. All of these activities contribute to compaction and erosion in ways that have been well documented by previous researchers (Johnston and Braun 1979, Stanley et al. 1979). The following recommendations are suggested to reverse the drying trend of these two meadows and to maintain appropriate -103-

Uf?Gr Tahguitz Meadow. -104-

habitat for the 12 rare species found in them, and the meadow's rich flora of over 70 species. * Log checkdams should be placed within the deep gul lies of Upper Tahquitz and Little Tahquitz Valley to act as sediment basins for raising the water table. * Relocation of the tent bases and horse corrals, by at least 50 feet, from their existing location. * Removal of the Tahquitz to Chinquapin Flats Trail, including a portion of the Pacific Crest Trail, so that the meadows are avoided by foot traffic. * Elimination of all grazing from the meadows .. Not only are grazing impacts a concern, but exotic weeds have already been introduced from horse feces. 2. Dispersed campsites are the most prevalent form of site camping in the u.s. Forest Service Wilderness. many areas are reused from weekend to weekend, and in par ticular certain sites are repeatedly used, much in the way the yellow post sites are reused. These "sites" have all the disturbance characteristics of hardened sites and therefore constitute a permanent feature since regeneration rates are so slow. It is recommend ed that users be encouraged to locate and reuse these sites as they become erosionally stabilized, rather than develop a new site. There are over 18 species of rare plants located at vulnerable sites within the zones which campers have either already affected or are -105-

near to trampling in their campsites. Such a shift in camping emphasis would require the following .. * Hardening of existing popular sites using methods suggested for the Round Valley brown post sites. * Developing a zone map which includes these locations as well as the yellow post sites. 3. Botanical surveys should be contracted to establish site specific data on a small number of endemic rare species which occur within the wilderness but whose range outside of the wilderness is unknown. They are Ivesia callida, Oxytheca trilobata, and Leptodactylon jaegeri. These species are the rarest within the San Jacinto Wilderness and are known only from a few populations. It is important to know more about their pop ulations and habitat, particularly in the face of ecological changes occurring as a result of fire suppression, but it remains of critical importance to establish the role of fire and suppression on these very rare species.

4. A monitoring program for rare species populations, such as the cooperative agreement suggested for the State wilderness is also necessary within the U.S. Forest Service wilderness. This is particularly relevant to managing the changes in the Tahquitz meadows, and the placement of the permanent sites as mentioned in recommendation 2 above. -106-

5. A visitor interpretation program for the District Of fice in Idyllwild, and at certain trailheads should em phasize the sensitive vegetation and minimal impact camping. The u.s. Forest Service might cooperate with the State Park in developing common interpretive mate rials. 6. Rock climbing on Suicide and Lily Rocks encroaches on 11 species of rare plants, two of which are found only in the San Jacintos. The present status of these species appears to be stable, but it is obvious that extensive habitat at both locations has been eliminated by climbers who remove vegetation from cracks in the rock. It is strongly recommended that an arrangement be made to contract a survey of the "unclimbable" sections of these rocks, using rapelling techniques, to identify other populations unaffected by rock climbing. Such information would benefit the current efforts by the u.s. Forest Service to establish recreation management objectives for these two popular sites.

4.5 PLANNING -----FOR RARE PLANT MANAGEMENT IN WILDERNESS

Reconciling the conflicts inherent in preserving rare plant populations within an extensively used recreation area should become a relatively minor part of wilderness management once a framework of appropriate policies and management actions has resolved initial inconsistencies. The early phases of identi- -107-

fying conflicts after an adequate data base has been developed are relatively straightforward. The costs of correcting conflicts must certainly vary depending upon the situations encountered, but innovations on the part of managers can reduce costs by using work camps, and California Conservation Corps Volunteers can accomplish much of the necessary labor for trail rerouting and facilities alterations. During the summer of 1982, the management actions suggested in this thesis (sections 4.5.2.1 and 4.5.2.2) were considered by both agencies and resulted in a number of actions being in itiated, as well as planning for actions to be completed prior to peak seasonal recreation use in 1983. Within the State Wilderness, the removal of the Tamarack Junction Trail and the associated upper campsites was completed by mid-August, 1982. Revisions to the State Park map, including the removal of the Deer Spring Campground and the Bidden Lake place names, were submitted and new maps will be available by 1983. Minor trail construction at Bidden Lake and Deer Springs initiated in the fall of 1982. A program of park aid and volunteer naturalist training new includes rare plant considerations. The issue of removing the Tahquitz tent houses and the Tahquitz trail in the National Forest Wilderness is currently under review by the District Ranger. A positive response is anticipated. The system of checkdams for meadow restoration in Tahquitz Valley is proposed for completion before the end of 1983. Interpretive materials are going to be prepared for the ,---~~~--~~~~~~~~~~~~------~~~~~~-~------

-108-

State and u.s. Forest Service visitor contact stations for use during the 1983 season. The question of grazing in the meadows is now under review by the District Ranger, as is the issue of "site camping" as a supplement to the dispersed camping currently advocated. These actions, and the policies accepted by each agency, acknowledge the importance of the nontraditional wilderness values. But as important as modifying certain management activities and traditional wilderness uses, the value of incorporating rare plant management into the wilderness planning process provides numerous additional purposes, the most notable of these contributing to recreation impact management, environmental education interpretation, scientific research and timber and wildlife management. Resource management planning for rare plant preservation is a new idea, and few systems have been designed for this express goal (The Nature Conservancy 1972, Simmons . 1976, Herrmann and Bratton 1977, Pickett and Thompson 1978, Synge and Townsend 1979, Morse and Henefin 1981). Rare species management need not preclude multiple uses. Recreation impact management arid research is dependent upon the sorts of baseline information needed to establish rare species data bases and recreation conflict analyses. Soil mapping, surveys of understory vegetation densities at disturbed and undisturbed sites, response of vegetation to trampling and visitor use patterns are necessary information for -109-

predicting rates of site deterioration and revegetation -- all important parameters for maintaining visual quality for tackcountry recreationists (Boden and Ovington 1973, £erriam and Smith 1974, Bratton et al. 1978, James et al. 1979, Cole 1981). Interpretation of environmental resources is being viewed as increasingly important by federal and state land management agencies. Public education enhances the visitor's enjoyment of natural and cultural history of the park or wilderness, and attracts them to the facilities and attractions of the areas. Education can alert visitors to the positive and negative effects of environmental modification by interpreting relationships within the area, and very importantly, it can help obtain public cooperation in protecting and conserving natural resources. Scientists are often reluctant to invest time in studying wilderness ecosystems because they fear antagonism from managers and destructive changes wrought by recreation users (Cowen 1960). Wilderness ecosystems are little studied and thus do not provide an explicit base for many scientists' needs in research. This is implied for basic as well as applied research. A rigorous ecological data base and active rare plant management can redirect the negative effects of recreationists' use from sensitive areas, creating opportunities for studies. Also, the data needs for tare plant management can be a springboard for other ecological questions in such areas -110-

as plant/animal interactions, successional analysis, physiological ecology or phytosociology. Scientists working within wilderness can provide useful information for managers as well, contributing findings applicable to species management and recreation impacts (Bratton and White, no date). A critical need of scientists who study the problems of species rarity and loss of species diversity is for access to natural areas of various sizes which are relatively pristine and unaffected by human exploitation and development. Wilderness areas which develop rare plant management plans can be compared to other studied areas, facilitating the testing of such concepts as species/area (Diamond 1975, Diamond and May 1976), minimal population number (Shaffer 1981), extinction (Terborgh 1974) and successional dynamics relating to conservation (Grubb 1976, Pi.ckett and Thompson 1978). The testing of these theories may shed important light on the selection and management of natural ecosystems for preservation (Stone 1968, Houston 1971, Telfer 1971, Tans 1974, Adamus and dough 1978) and the critical global dilemma of loss of species through deforestation and development exploitation (Ehrenfeld 1976, Walton 1980, Norman 1981, Lovejoy and Oren 1981, Josephson 1982). I: Certainly if the wilderness management agencies would encourage universities to undertake research programs within managed wilderness, very useful information could be obtained for managers. In particular, wilderness areas can serve as environmental baselines (Franklin et al. 1972, Jenkins and Bedford -111-

1973, Cutler 1980, Stottlemyer 1981) for pollution levels, gene pools, timber stand dynamics, nutrient cycling and wildlife population dynamics. These uses mandate an aggressive monitoring program such as in the Great Smokey Mountains National Park (Hermann and Bratton 1977) where minimal monitoring needs include climatic, geologic, soils, hydrology, biotic inventory and historical use assessment. It should become obvious that developing a set of policies and programs for rare plant management serves as a beginning for an entirely new dimension in wilderness multiple use which realistically does not jeopardize or conflict with other established and traditional uses. Coordination of such efforts is best accomplished through cooperative arrangements between wilderness agencies and the universities and government institutions which stand to gain from using the scientific values of wilderness ecosystems .. Such nonconsumptive uses of federal and state lands are likely to persist as an enduring justification for wilderness as a land designation which is independent of economic influences common to lands whose management is dependent on a consumptive marketplace. Chapter V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The (Federal) San Jacinto Wilderness and the Mount San Jacinto State Park Wilderness provide unique examples of wilderness recreation management in a heavy use, urban setting. Each agency (U.S. Forest Service, California Department of Parks and Recreation) has independently solved its overuse problems of crowding and site degradation through an adaptive program of visitor regulation that has included mandatory use permits, overnight camping quotas and restrictions on campsite locations. Effective as these agencies have been in managing visitor densities and overuse, neither has addressed the problems of impacts on rare plants by recreationists. Rare plant issues have not been considered as a basis for wilderness management, even though there is a historic and scientific precedence for their inclusion as a part of site management. Consequently, numerous site specific and species specific impacts have resulted from the indiscriminate activities of backpackers and rock climbers in the San Jacinto Mountains. This study has examined three areas of resource management/visitor management relationships in the San Jacinto Mountains wilderness areas. Specifically these are:

-112- -113-

1. an inventory of vegetation and rare species throughout each wilderness, 2. a study of the policy and management of each wilderness and resultant patterns of recreation use, 3. an evaluation and recommended mitigation of the current trends in recreation-caused effects to the rare species identified in during the inventory phase.

5.1 RARE PLANT INVENTORY Two hundred and twenty-seven species of plants were identified and mapped within the contiguous wilderness areas of the San Jacinto Mountains •• Species whose distributions occur in very limited areas or are of exceedingly small population sizes were located and mapped. Species of more widespread distribu tion were sampled using a stratified random method, with one tenth hectare plots to assess their distribution and abundance along a range of elevational and topographic positions. A gradient nomogram format (Kessel 1979) was used to map these distributions for future reference. Several factors were used to determine if any particular species could be considered rare, as rarity in general assumes both limits in distribution and/or abundance. Assuming criteria adapted from Drury (1981) and the California Native Plant Society, 120 species of plants were identified as rare (Tables 5-9). This list was further limited to 27 species whose status was ''critically rare", re quiring immediate management attention. -114-

Endangerment was assessed as a range of influences upon a population of plants. Only trampling, collecting and direct physical destruction were considered, although clearly other factors such as fire suppression and/or air pollution could play substantial roles in affecting the vigor of a certain species.

5.2 WILDERNESS POLICY AND MANAGEMENT The state and federal agencies managing the San Jacinto wilderness areas are mandated by law to "preserve natural ecological processes," and to protect legislatively designated threatened and endangered species .• Each agency assumes that current recreation use in the San Jacinto Mountains has only insignificant effects on the status of rare species and natural succession, therefore active management need not be concerned with rare plant preservation. The management systems, however, are prepared to deal with these issues should conflicting evidence contrary to their established recreation policies become evident. Such is now the case. Extensive, and in some cases, significant impacts upon tare plants have been identified, spanning the range of user activities from casual trampling along trailsides to purposeful removal of vegetation to aid rock climbing and mountaineering. A series of policy goals, to be followed by policy actions, was presented to each agency so that a more equitable consideration of rare plant management could be implemented. These goals are as follows: -115-

1. Species of critical rarity, whose endangerment warrants immediate changes in recreation management, should be automatically considered in current management actions. 2. Rare plants of wider distribution and lessened endangerment need not be targeted for immediate management action, but must be considered in future decisions. 3. Concentrations of rare species should provide opportunities for fewer management actions, thus becoming a priority over single or few populations (unless considered in goal 1 above). 4. Passive means of reducing visitor effects are preferable over direct regulations on use. 5. Active means or regulations of visitor use for reducing visitor effects should only be considered, if passive means fail in the attempted management of critically rare species. 6. Public interpretation of rare species conservation should become a regular part of wilderness education programs. 7. A program of future monitoring of plant populations, possibly in cooperation with an academic institution, is recommended for future maintenance of these unique populations. -116-

5.3 RARE PLANT MANAGEMENT Two programs of management, designed for each management agen cy in the Sari Jacinto Mountains, were developed in order to either reduce existing impacts on critically rare species, or to entirely eliminate earlier effects. These programs are site specific in detail, and form the basis for a rare plant management program which attempts to equitably balance wilder ness recreation use with preserving the natural processes that regulate plant population dynamics. In general, the actions appropriate for accomplishing this goal include trail closure and rerouting, permanently locating campsites in noncritical sites, eliminating overnight camping in areas of high rare species richness, eliminating signs and place names which have historically directed recreation traffic into critical habi tats and establishing a responsive visitor education program in minimal impact camping In addition, a monitoring program is proposed for continuing to survey for new populations as well as determining the status of known populations.

5.4 CONCLUSIONS Management of wilderness areas in the United States has generally concentrated on the regulation of recreational use to control excessive crowding and physical degradation of popular areas. There has been a long tradition, supported by congressional and state legislation, for the maintenance of undisturbed or "natural processes' within the ecosystems being pre- -117-

served under the wilderness designation. However, few wilderness managers are equipped with adequate information, monitoring procedures, or qualified personnel to make an evaluation of the overall ecological effects of recreation. Consequently, limited populations and communities of locally or regionally rare plant species have experienced declines in abundance and vigor directly attributable to recreation-related activities and management decisions. Two adjacent and administratively distinct designated wilderness areas in the San Jacinto Mountains of Southern California were studied and found to support numerous rare species, most of which are affected and declining due to trampling and collecting. It is clear that wilderness managers must be willing to generate baseline information, survey for impacts and incorporate this ecological information into their management planning if they are to comply successfully with the mandate set forth in the enabling wilderness legislation. Appendix A THE ROLE OF SCIENCE IN WILDERNESS PRESERVATION AND MANAGEMENT

A waste an howling wilderness Where none inhabited But hellish fields, and brutish men That devils worshipped. -- Michael Wigglesworth, 1614.

From paranoia to animism, America's schizophrenic relationship with wildlands has been considered a uniquely North American cultural phenomenon (Nash 1973). The desire by Americans to preserve natural landscapes as wilderness grew from the roman tic writings of Thoreau and Emerson, and was reinforced by a variety of practical considerations varying from economic con servatism through an emotional dependency upon wildlands. But considering all of the rhetoric associated with the political muscle needed to convince the U.S Congress of the need to preserve wilderness, it is surprising to realize the extent that science, and scientifically founded arguments, were used successfully throughout the lobbying process. These arguments were highly practical, often economically based, and expressed as concerns by the scientists and silviculturalists of the needs to preserve stands of native undisturbed tracts. William Ashe, in 1922, was concerned that without the preservation of national forest types, facilitated by the management of forest preserves and wilderness,

-118- -119-

... the mental reconstruction of the primitive forest types and the determination of the quality site as a basis for developing the ideal stand test suited to this site will be most difficult.

He went on to add that,

The vestigial units (wilderness) 1) would serve as check plots for the forester; 2) would preserve basal forest data, of herbaceous as well as of ligneal species, for the biologist; 3) could be utilized as sanctuaries and breeding places for birds and small game; 4) would serve as recreational areas of special interest to the nature lover.

The Ecological Society of America, founded in 1915, was po litically active in its recommendations to Congress through its "Committee on Preservation of Natural Areas." Pearson(1922), in reference to requirements for multiple use of for- ested lands by the u.s. Forest Service, suggests " ••• such an area (wilderness designation) would also serve most admirably the interests of a large body of scientific workers." The committee, chaired by Victor E. Shelford, produced a 1926 pub lication Naturalist's Guide to the Americas, to broadly disse minate information concerning the remaining natural areas of the United States and Canada. Their interests spanned small natural reserves of unique ecological importance to support of wilderness designation of existing forest and desert lands. (The Committee on the Preservation of Natural Conditions later changed its name to the Ecologists' Onion in 1946. In 1950 it changed its name again to The Nature Conservancy.) Aldo Leo pold (1921) was an outspoken wilderness proponent who pushed the idea that " •.• Each biotic province needs its own wilder ness for comparatve studies of used and unused land." As -120- chairman of the Ecological Society of America, he remained firm in his position that all wilderness areas ' ••• have a large value to land science_ recreation is not their only or even their principal utility .•. " (Leopold 1949). Wilder ness, according to Leopold, was a model of ecological perfec tion -- a standard by which humankind could compare the extent of manipulations of landscapes. Not only was the Ecological Society of America involved in the politics of preservation, but also the famous Carnegie In stitute. Professor Harvey Hall, under the auspices of the Carnegie Institute, extensively traveled in Europe to study the various scientific forest preserves- His recommendations, published in 1929, included a rather foreboding prediction, " ••• as to danger of delay comes from the experience of Europe" to set aside areas for "complete reservation" in America He added that once reserves are selected that research begin im mediately upon protection. Interestingly, he cites forestry leaders in Europe remarking of a "grandiose experiment to cre ate a wilderness." Hall noted that "we need only to protect wilderness that we already possess." Virtually all of the wilderness advocates reinforced the values that wilderness provide to science; and ultimately to mankind. George Perkins Marsh, heralded the challenge that wan has " .•.• brought the face of the earth to desolation almost as complete as that of the moon," and adds, " These arrangements of nature are in most cases highly desirable to -121-

maintain, when such regions become the seat of organized com- monwealths." These ideas, expressed in his Man and Nature or, Physical Geography as Modified~ Human Action, published in 18614, emphasized the role that wilderness played in modify ing climatic cycles upon which humankind depended. John Muir was, as few people realize, a trained scholar in the physical sciences. Many of his writings were without poetic license, and all of his popular prose contained a wealth of adages suggesting sound ecological principles that few would refute today. Another principal player who blended scientific astuteness with a personal and emotional commitment to wilderness was George Marshall. His preservation advocacy succinctly ranged from defending the mental or psychological values of wilderness through the practical and scientific considerations (Nash 1966).

The Wilderness Act of 1964 (Public law 88-577) was the cul mination of years of debate, of political frustration by pres ervationists, over the process of wilderness designation. Passing the Act was not a simple matter. McCloskey (1966) details a process that took nine years of Congressional debate and 65 different wilderness bills,. The ultimate bill is a very unique piece of rhetoric. It attempted to combine a diverse range of disparate attributes and qualities in its definition of wilderness -- many of which are hotly debated today (Church 1977). Accordingly, the Wilderness Act defines wilderness as follows: -122-

A wilderness, in contrast with those areas where wan and his own works dominate the landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain. An area of wilderness is further defined to mean in this Act an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent im- provements or human habitation, which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions and which (1) generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man's work substantially unnoticeable; (2) has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation; (3) has at least five thousand acres of land or is of sufficient size as to make practicable its preservation and use in an unimpaired condition; and (4) may also contain ecological, geographical, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value.

It is instructive to note the priority given to the concept that wilderness is to be " ••• protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions and which ••. generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man's work substantially unnoticeable." The concept of ensuring solitude and opportunities for primitive (nonmotorized) recreation, although important, was considered by Congress as a secondary feature of wilderness character. It was the passing of the Wilderness Act that created a whole new set of forest management professionals specializing in the study and management of wilderness and its values. From the Act, there would appear to be a clear demarcation between the need for a science-based management scheme which emphasizes maintenance of natural processes and a parallel line -123- of management research which provides criteria for visitor use and experience within wilderness. Each would require a unique set of scientists dealing with, in the first case, the physical and ecological sciences, and in the second, with the sociological, psychological and economic areas. Unfortunately, this proposed equitability in research and management orientation does not yet exist. The National Park Service (1966), in its Mission 66 objectives has developed the policy that a much more intensive program of biological research is necessary for the management of the human effects upon natural processes in the federal parks and wildernesses. They have stated that

The normal pace of nature is slow, and the influence of man upon his environment is often indirect, obscure, and detached, and often not recognized in time to take preventable action .... Guesswork, rule of thumb and intuition are not good enough ••• The preservation 0± this irreplaceable (wilderness) resource requires precise knowledge and scientific procedure. (1966).

Daniel Beard, addressing the Sixth Biannual Wilderness Con ference (Sierra Club 1960), was speaking on the value of wil derness to science when he expressed the point that a "dis tinctive wildland or wilderness literature" is required to orient society to the values and conditions of wilderness detailed detailed the fact that "a real student of wilderness and there are very few -- will find it rather difficult to find data that can be used as a springboard of inquiry ••• " The concept of wilderness management came into its own soon after the passage of the Wilderness Act,. The U.S. Forest -124-

Service, National Park Service, and to a lesser extent, the u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service, began appropriating monies via the research divisions of each agency to produce studies to enhance the effectiveness of managing wilderness. No one would disagree that wilderness was set aside as a series of sizeable, undisturbed ecosystems. It most surely was the great size of wilderness, and the corresponding impression of stability that encouraged the wilderness researcher to concentrate more on the human side of management research, than on the ecological side. Surely the limited number of visitors, walking and horsepacking within wilderness could not force changes in ecosystems of significant extent to warrant extensive research. This attitude probably deemphasized ecological research in favor of concentrating on the sociological and recreational related research. Since recreation use was em the rise, the potential impact of crowding or overuse would appear to cause a pronounced effect on the recreationists. Wilderness ecosystems, on the other hand, would always be available for research, and were therefore a lower priority in the opinion of ecologists and wildlife researchers (Sierra Club 1960). Again this attitude was supported by the notion that smallscale recreation use could hardly cause anything but superficial and highly restricted impacts. Cowan (1960) summed up a view, held unfortunately by a minority, when he stated that,

In general, I have been surprised at how few people have appreciated the unique research opportunities presented by our existing preserved areas. Too much -125-

of our wildlife research today is ad hoc and superficial. Too much of our choice of research topics is conditioned by the easy availability of state and Pitman Robertson funds to management problems. Too frequently have we set a brilliant mind onto a cow path instead of steering it onto the high trails that lead into the wilderness behind us. To take a brilliant young student with a straight A average and put him to doing some plebian research task is a wicked waste of a good mind.

As a consequence, what we know of wilderness ecosystems, and the human effects upon them, is meager, scattered and greatly cvershadowed by an increasingly growing and sophisticated literature which collectively reports on a spectrum of topics dealing with wilderness and the human experience. Appendix B

SIMULATION MODEL FOR PREDICTING CAMPSITE VISITATION IN BOUND VALLEY

This appendix includes a copy of the FORTRAN program written by this author, Lisa Roig and Steve Swallow, for estimating annual visitor use at individual campsites surrounding the Bound Valley meadow. In general, this program takes the variables of campsite accessibility from the trail, proximity to water and allowable group size and divides the total recorded daily overnight use into a per campsite estimate of use. These variables are also randomized in patterns that reflect observed distributions during the past three summers (Figure 22). Daily use figures are summed for week, month and year. One hundred years of use were averaged for the length of time that each campsite has existed, and these figures used in the regressions presented in Figure 16.

-126- -127-

...... -·-·"""" • ~. /1 T r I 1, C f,p ~. .:. <:; SU~\ED...... -.. -...... ---· ·--· ______c C lr.T::rc;. •;i•PlfiHL[S•DTMOJSl(lf·• llfH"Ivs.I•IITlALizE VARII\oLE$ c rct.•Gt [ ;:nCCisrON PI,t•d'•U~9•R,uGRPPf~or.ltLitCU~f.IY•STDt.. ------~:; T L r-:ri -i; :1 iiR~:LiY · ...... _ ...... _ ...• --.. -·-.. ·-·--·- f\ Y I f 5 ) • SST 1\ Y ( 2 9 l • 1\R R I \1 E I G 5) • S TCF' RP ( 29) • 2 r Z:. (' t 1 ~ r :1tl t, Gl P 7 l( • S T ·"- ... s.-("'.f9"f";-J:l'R''ifX(29T; .. i'~icfT's''f''(-291. ),NCAR/. (~2\, HICC.),~.,r.r,OAYI? ,3 0 !,CS!Z(I2 ),CHQ!Cf:(2 ,2

q c c c c c c c s 6 c E!QUATION c ;P·E r r •D Is r vi.if.(J,COL,ll:qClL :.o 0C:UP ( lCOL l ::•1 l7 00 27 HiOEX::l ,.3C ··· Mil~ini\Y, ol.. r ~~rcx-;·:·a ...... --·-·-----·-·- ~8 rc 19 27 corn 1~JuF: ...... -...... ______:::a T'1T~IO'l'

25 SYF•A ( IC:CL l :7.777 7 7 26 !STIItnLl~f.j777/ 27 <> 0t.'T PJUF" r. r. c i. za c c 2'i r· Ri r·i·r ··=·s·4····--- ...... ,.. _.., .. -...... _ .... ·--······-·~··--·······~·- ...... -...... _...... 3G 5 =1.1 f 01_! r.: ,, T 1.. ~ ...... ~. ·/~ ~0.~-·. ~ ..S.~'.~)>..~! T.~----1.:~~~-~~--.P..~_:: !.TB.N~ ... !f:J .... ~.. ! ..!.!..~~--: .. R..n.U. . .N.l? ~--~·····················-·········--- .~, 1.'/l.lLf"Yt,////) 31 FoR~ATI• o, 1 15x,t~VERA~E ~AOUPS:••I3,2x,•GROUPS ASSI~NEO:•• ;t I.:..,;..x, '/,CtHi\GE CAw.pE.p~:• ,13,2>', 'CAr~PtRS AS.:dGt.iOEtl=' ,n,2x, ~//olh~•"nAY WErK GHO~P GqQUP SITf" '• ...... ~. ;·s I Tr ...... ·s· I r t ...... P.R 6 xTiit.. T'v ...... c.dfi"~ ...... 'Ct"N G.T'i=i-·"nf.'";·-~ ...... --.. ·-· ..·--·- ~/•lOX•• NO,,, ·! , ...... · ·~ r i e: · ...... r:Jl.Jt~.·a r·p· .. ·······c.. x·p·r~-c--fl"Y ...... ,.. ~--- ····· ········- ...... , .. --·-·· .. ---····--.. ····-·· ..... -·-·-·--···-·····------·-· .. ··--···-··--···-·---·-·-·-- :::•r.clrssi\Ril ITY TO \·IATrR ~ll\llDAYS c ' • I 1 c rEAD Ir: 1\CCEsSIR!LTTY, PROXI~ITY TO W~TER AND CAPACITY c r,F Ell CI· i.tWPs Iff .FROtl sl'tt ... lriF GR~/\fT~"r~··o·A·tA ...... - ...... ·-·--·--·- c C rx I ST Vi:t'L f>f.lt\l'fhf ·rtst HiG f.fi)~i.;;Cxls'TAHf. si'ft's.. ··Ac·C'cR·nl't;iG···fi,)' ...... _ ...... _ C TO n:Eir< Cs!zE,PRC;x,t\rJr' 1\CC COtJ£s. THERE ARE 27 POssTf:LE C tot.t CCMAluJITLOrJS, 8Ur dr.JLT 17 111/~f HAVE REAL. SITES A~SOCIAttO C ...... ~I T}!_ 1) ;_f.~~.. ! ...... _ ...... ____ ...... _ .... - ...... _ .. ______...... ______c OATA Exr~T/a?*O/ ·n·n· ··q·4· "". ···z-·:··i ;··2 3 ··..-·· ...... ~ ...... _ ...... -...... _...... _ ...... --- ...... ,.. ··---···--··· ...... "...... - ...... ,. ~E11D• i'•~•P•.4 35 ACt;!Cl=A .56 f>kOY(fl:P 37 ··· ·· ··· csrtrcni·:s .38 r:l(yST(S,P•Al=l 39 Co·r\ T T~~ L t ····· ...... ·-··--·-··---...... ~ ...... ,w ...... _ ...... - ...- ...- ... ·~·------···-····--·· ...... - ...... ~-·--·-····"· ..

t Rf/\f IN STM!DARO DE\iiATIOr, oF fi01'-'!EER OF GROUPS FoR flit'i WEER c As rALCULIITED TN THE •AVER • PROGRA~ F'RO~ 10 YR. \.:!U:iE'f:NESS PERMIT c ..... R·r·c(i p·r:~·s ...... -...... --... -...... _. ___ ...... _..... -- .. --·-··------.. ·------·· ...... ~···-········--·----···· .. ····-·--·------·-· c 'H; .... u~ ··c:, o 'l(iEtK:r-g·~-44...... _____. -----...... - ...... ____... ____ ...... '+1 ~EAO ll• STAP{IY(!WrEKl ll FC\rnAt

so ' CCHTir;UF"...... ,...... _.. ______c:

n.E 'TrH:E"lC' LOOP IS USEr• TO IIE•RUtJ THE MODEL To !NVE:STTGATE: THE c ...... C '+4

., ...... , __., ...... ,~ ...... _.. ,, ...... _._____ .. ,_,______,______-129-

...... , ...... -····----...... _...... , ____ _ r (" sc 5l. 5;: OCCUP(tSliEl=O ~ (- .; ·. r: · T r ··1u r...... ------·-·-...... -.--.. ·----.. --...... --·· ~; ,~~-·r =o r...... , ...... ----.. .. -----··-·-.. c -._ ------·------·- c c P[(,!; ,,t.FKLY GR011P AsglGN:"iUJrs• .AFTER CRCUf5 tRARI\CrE'RlsTlts ARt c H:o•,,,. rr.P rHE wf"EK, E.EL!N r:crsiON 1400E:L ro ~siGN ,;Rnu"..§. TO c r {\: r :- r -rEs • · · ~~lin 61\Y"·-·ci~" ... usr-ro·n-·-r .. c'Hc AMP g-rr~ A'Rr-A'CCO;trl. A.Tt...,rJ ____ YEtf\!Y. c ...... -.,·---·------( c c rUO I r: .~t..f 1-\ l;u~~ , .. , r u · ~ to;_ r l r 2 , 1 x , r 3 , 1 x -~-- { 3 } · .. ·,. M·--·-··· ·-· .. ······------·····-·-·--·N·----.. ··---·--···-·-··-·--·· ,j, ""· .1 (' ( =.c.<.,nnuPsl ...... ' ...... --·--·-···"··---.. - .. _ r ______c c nc,,MP=NO. r.F CAliPERS T•JrAL FOp THE WE:tK r 9 0 c ~ ~ ~·~7 H!;[~~~~9H ~·o ~~~~·-a'F·-r;wa·uPTn------c M,R l vEt Il ..... r.~\,.l,.~..... !.f::.~ ...~~.Y ..... 9..~_QuF5 .. !.2...... f.\:.~.~_!.. yj:_!;l_ wH~RE l:F~IOAY, c :;,-:sr..TU!-<01\Y • , .ere •• ,. 7:THURSOAY c r. c ,Ci.!liiY A•.10 r.RM~i\Y t•Rf' .;JsT F,.,R STORAGE oF NCAMP AND GRoUp To c·L r ._. r ~JI\ T t: Rr"'QT~rG·-lN"-or:-r,r;-·quR(--TR-~N"·"ON'(;"f:-j:''O'R'-OUI\',e:-RONS OF TAt c ·, TCCHIIS TIC M.QI:)C~.~...... --·-·- ····----...... -·------

0J______~··~C~i~··~lr ,~Y <~w~£~E~K~l=~·~~~C~A~~~·P~------6.l ~.flf,11\Y(;if'EKt=GROUPg7 7 62 575 ''C,\'Af.l=t.ICI\RAY ( I'..I([K l 63 "Ki"'>JPS=GH 1\R 11 Y (fWEn ) ~T;-~TI\RIIY(TWEEKl 64 ' ...... -...... _...... _ c: ______C "1\f ,i)IHlL y CHoosE: Tf•E 1\11 ''~8ER nF GRI'IUPS FOR THE: WF'EK WI THIN T -··--c-·------~::-:-:..;.,-;f-11-:T~I:--O:-I-J-::O-:r=~r::-: 1:.._,E::-..;.1• 7f -;,,:...,.-, .;.,r.~.'~l ;;;o.;;;u-=f'~S~!~Z-E:~,.,.;;O~R~T~IA;;,;.;T-'w-riii"K...;,;,• ;,.;;"s""r..;A:;.,r;-.IIO!PA~.p.,;;;,;.-.,_.o~~. c 'l ~tnr:oNS ARE CfiLCULAT[O FROM 10 YEARS OF OATA FRO~ EACH r: · r ,.( . · r' j t: v · A" E · f Yr; ~· t t t 6 ... t6.. iii\R 'f'""T'R'R'c'U'6'H'otrt..... t'Hf""'y(4'="R~=e'iti-::c~A~un§o:-:t~- -130-

r. c: :, .. )6 u=fi•TOirJT(~Jl &7 1 '2':1~cU•lOO.oOlltlOCi.O/~To> ;a n::tJ2<3';;."r;:; T1H c Ll2q I ·· ::,<) . T F_ .L~. GC ,IJ. "'D.~.l ... 'J 2..~= +? :'JT._ . 8() M=IPI+Ul•~S U::ii-!OI~IT(· l U?9:1U+Il.D0/129.C0-CU~HYlll*(29.DO-OU~MYl...... _...... - ... - .... --·-···.. -· .. ----·-.. --·- ..... ·o:: u:t'cf;;;t b t i~ T( {.j'29f......

SU£1SCH::roh,TIU2"J)+1 -····· IF ca.Ge:.O.SnOJ .. - ...... _ ...... - ...... - .....- ... ····--·· .. ---····.. I c:" . t i:\ ; L T ~ a·~ 50 0 ., .... , S0 8 S CR ·: I U I r.J T t u2 9 .l . ,u.... ., -··-·············-···-

~ITfiiSIT~l:CHOICEt~UnsrR,ISITEl '37 IU:rT:2Y·ISITE _...... -...... ____ , .. ______.. ______... _.,..... __ c 6.2'ifo·-··t'i:io~i':f~"f[.t'F'T ...... _ ...... ae ...... b(i ... :cHOice::tiQOW,ISITEl 69 CHOICE

c j ,a· ·····c...... o.

···--··--···-·-···-······· .. --··-····-··-·-·····-····---··-·----

03 04 ;;::, ARRIVEII!=6 06 rF(0,GE.c.J~~o.5~o.o.Lt.J.96oMJ Ti"II.:,G[,Q,"'!iCO) 1\.1! t•Jt·l··:·y·· ··············-···---...... --..·-·- .. Ob ...... --... - ...... - ___ ...... ------·--..·----- 0? :1 r .r o 1 'T ! : P r...... c r t.D.GT" Jf sTfiY OF 2.3 DAYS FROM ~ ·2: :;LtJ ~·:.1 :.r.; l'vE•l/1/;E - ...... ------.. _l_lf :\Of_~_..f.!:_ __ .f.\.. t.,.~ ... 1}?.?.~ ...... - ...... '· I·'", (.;1[ F'T n..,_: 1 '3~~...... A.:~i0 c ...... ---.. ------c !:l r.· 4 n ii .. f'= i , i; iiCur;·s· ..... _.... _.. ______lC ll ''=(Pr+ur*"s u=ri~!Dlr·JT!Nl ::;TAYC1!=2 ;<= ru.G[.O,ncO.M,O.U.LT,0,83nOl -'S"t'A'Y1Ti=3- .. t r· ... ( u; G(·: IJ~e3 OJ .,\i-.5·:-~r;-cr·:-o... q:fao··, STA'~'

c ... il..... i;E·'A·N'-(;'ffo"UP'STIFOf:"Al3o1JT I r , f.1fo uP s· r 2 t <; s 0 TH AT""i'Rt:'Rt···--rc; c J\ s s r. ~EEK• eETW[[rt 13 AND 15 PEOPLE EACH c 3.04 ANn 3 TO ~ GAJU~S c 21 ,.·5 · 2:.: o= ( Pr'~u 1,;. u=o- Ir1 rr•T < ~; > 2:. no-:u-.-c'f:-cr:·Ha'tfT(iRl:HJP"( I ) =1 2<, I F { u ~ (, f ~ :J ~ iJ L0 ;·i'i T•ll•t+ODOl GROUPti):2 2s IF

GROUPS CHOOSE A siTE ~IITtl A CAPACIT't' THAT c PEGir: Ti•F" C.C::cisTON oo!CO~L...... c 11-"ATC~·c~i THE tr~ GROi.JP sit'::~ THE GRou? TAr.tO.ol GOTO 7000 c .. ···- ····--···-·-·--····-···--·--··-··--·--··----···--- .. f d .. i oCi c.·· ..f: i ~-G f!c Qp'S ...... ········ ········ ...... ············-··- G0T0 1000 !F.hE.urr, ---·--~·--····-··· .. ···· ... ·· .... - .. ·---- · ·s r c·-r:r·j\t,·:·a· ·· ...... _...... -.,~- ...... '" ...... ··-··-···-··--····-·-·········---··-···--··--······

... r·~· ···rGROui7fTi·:·r;e::·r3·T···GS"!·z·r·:·:s··············--···--··-··------·---·-·-·----··-····-··--····-··-·-· tF tGROUp(Il.~T.13) GSizE=2

r. c C rPCUF(!I 6EGINS TO CONsi~ER CAMPSITES FCR THEIR DEsiRABILITY• C ltlty Cr.N<;IotR PRO;

c ...... -...... ------·-·-·------su c c c r; .i c:: X l s T \ G$ r zt. ;·;:;·;-r; ;·-~--E;'r:··a·-;"i\'r~B"~"S"E:cTliW';t•

cc ~1Cr n~slt·N rHI5' 5 rGRT L''tPL It Rtis 6tEN c~ ··cocr···ktDs'"rl'.fAr!(""(j'F'""'W'Hn''R'£'fCi'Ht:-·c;;:r(i'iJp-"'- 1 c l 0::i .... -~ Le_~ f.:QY.. £'.:.~ ~-K_~Q._!.':'!:._s. ~T-~.~ ... Q.:~C E ~·- c c TFTSE:crrM.EG..ol soro <+3oo c c · r F THF- c~oup · rs ·cTifc;

cc:------~~~~~T-~-n~~~Tr~~~~~~~~~~~~r-~~rF Tf!E SITE. IS u~ 1 ottOP1EOe cHECK tf Ft)R PROXIMlff ANO r Ac_~-~§-~~Q..Lt::.l.!.!._• ____ c GOTO 4100 c 42QO IF IOCCUPIAAJ,(Q,Ql...... _. _____ , ...... -..... --..·------·------

c' IF THE SITe l!s srtLL occOp!ECh thEN Go to n~r::- rJ£)1!T SITE:•

c I < r. (A A) ; E ~ ; f)··-·G·o·'fi)"ii d Ofi ...... _____ ,______...... - ..... --·----- bl > oc Gi; c c r·c•: CI!FC~· Tl ·[ Pi~ OX' (~"flY"'"t;i:jo ·-~·cct'SS'""cocfe:s-·ro--f'("'£RM'INE: IF TR ---"C'-______SJT[ U~T['i CCt•SIO~I~~TICN IS THE OE:ST SITE: ;.li!lli.Afli..E:e r. 4100 l F ! PRox I tlll). f.. G. P. A_~J()~-~(':~ ( ~-~-'--~ ..~.~--~-~.~ .... ~~-§_-~-~-~-=.~------c -134-

c: ..... IF TH l!-; IC:' T! 'r st:Co;jj TI.v[ rf-RCL:GH f;Ot c'.i"'Fs fr£: COOP' ·:;;;Ht~j c 0 OF c THE' GRnL'P TM.... GG}Q .. ~.?..9 ..9 ...... -... -...... c c tHE CA PSIIF• IP(N SE:f "'HE c ll" tf.r;- !r.;COr.1TNG GROUP l'5 1\!:,StGNED ro 14 1 1 .. l ..... O!IY Tk£ £rTE BECAME CcC JPtEC SY THt:: H COMING_GROwP_<~§~R.~JY~ c ..~ ...... c AL50 rT'tit l;E:""rHE""t1CC0PAT r:·~· .. ·cm:;-e:· "f(f Flj[[ .. (.. dCC:l.fFi:i"fi' c c ~g ssrAv cAd, =sr·"'Y tIl >7 o~S.Y..e. c.I:\~J. =.~...... ·---...... ·-·-·-·----- ...... -...... --...... -..... ·--··----...... -·-·-·--· .. -· .. ·· c c c c ;a ...... _...... c ·y f!' THE:. S ITt "w·As· 'ASS IGN'tc·;-·pRT'i~T·"'THt'-·G·!rou·p·· .. It;iif(ilrM·ATio'~F c THE FIRST TWO W[[KS. SITE C~I\RACT[RISTicS•FOR _.~··· ANr THF , .•..•...... -..•.. c ...... _.... .-...... , .. ,_,, ...... ,...... ,.. __ ...... _,_ ... ---······----······-················-························--············· c GOTO sCOO 70 ~+Goo CONTINUE ______71 3GOO ·· ····-cc~J·~-i~luf~.Y.~ ...... _...... -...... -...... -...... _...... ______.. '12 2000

c tF····r·Rt···c;'FioliP···~i'As·· .. _...... ·c· .. ·rHE' .. F tCLc~·rNG .. ····rt: ... s.'fA.ft;~t:NTS" ... tHt:Ck·····ro· st·r··· IF IT WAS NOT C AS!IG~FO T0 A CA~PSITE ~N THE FIRST RUN• A Se:r:oND C 11SSIGI\!FO ON 11-'E Ftf\S1 c'itc!< OF CA~pt::ITE:S• 1HEN VARIABLE E~UALS 1)• C CHECK OF SITES IS STaRTEJ !SECTI~E .... ·r'Ht:"-·-----·-...... ·c ...... ······y·r:··A'FfF'·ir···rHt:""s't'C"oND ....'f.f(.AE"'·ff·:ft:"'Gif6'liP ..... ~.t''Mti'I'N's""i]'tlA·s·s·rr,-·r;;rrr; AS.<;IGNE'C TO THE DuMP lwiyH 1-AAND/\YS F'l~UAL TO C GRI'luP wiLL BE fR(""'C"O'M'P"""I.d.l'U'Cl)AC·t·u·A'LL'( ...... -_ ...... C. . . .. :V.A NC ;;IJ:~T;·... 'fHi:r$r"'GR·o·up·s· .... ·a·s.. s·n;rqe::r,- .. ·r-o ... V'\LLEYt OEE.PrR AND DEE'PER INTO THE t~ILDFRNESSt Af-.10 C GO UP yHE RFtoROS, C ~ILL Bt LOSy fD nLL KNOW~ ~1[0ERNtS5 ~~~A~EMENT c ....G.i'l'To ..... S''S'IlO"_ .. ,_._···-·----·---·-----...... ____ 73 ...... I 'P""l··,r~;·s·l~i'.f~-r·tf;·J-~·Ailitf~.. St'CTr;;:-nr;n· 7~ IF (ASSIGN•EQ.Ol SEcTrM=l ____...... · ...... ------.. --·-·------.... -...... - ... ··-··· r s ·-··· fF= ...... ,i\._<;-s fG.i\i ;r·a·~ ..crr- .. G'o to ... lT:>"iJ c 7& ~coo IF ti~tFR.Cr•2o.AND•INDFX·E~.Il PRINT 9oo.ARRivttli,TWEER.t, ,AcC

OS 86

...... -...... _, ______·--·---···--····---·----·----·------87 rPinr 9G:1. 33 F o,: ~-1 i, r 1 • • • 1 1.3 :.< 1 s 1 • s r r E: lf1 '~ i :1 11 '!' s ' • 2 x l , 39 P>< r :1 t ~"' i ·,·i·c; I') r efT rsttF_.;i)··;f~fr[:·(;·s- ;···-·------···--··-·----·--··-·------····-·-··-· 9() rOW'.:\T I' '1/•3X•S(I41'/'•"l>'ll g-y--- r ·~ I '' r 1) <.) ') I ( ~~ ~ r j c '" y ( r s rT r • t I1 () [ '( ) • I <:: I T E =1 ) • 5 92 '3"!2 rc,r;:A..~T t'+' !1X,"i!I4,10X)) )""·--·------····--·-·-.. --··---·--·-··------93 p ['1 r i 1 T g '-< 1 • ( c; j') r (: [ i I st t c:··; ri·-;-n'IT( =6";'1'6' 94 '5'33 g:.O rg:;,;:'J~ ·l~i:; ..~~2,AH .. ~--i .. ;·n:~-~~~•:x ,-;T~rr-r·~-.;-;roT--·--····----- 9o •·HP4' qq1, 1Cii0ICE:< !SITt. .1 l, !Sii'E::::ll ,15) 91 r R I ~~ t ''''' • r r.. .~ ,,, o 1\ r 1 r s I ' r • r 1, ot x 1 1 r s f Tr.:: t 1 • 1:: 1 <):J a··...---..!-.------9':3 ~ ~- f :.; ~ !:; :I~--~ gJ~ ..~ ·I f~H ~ ~--i-/rtiH-f-~¥s+t·i-~·i-i-;2.. ll'.l r R I • 1T 9 q 1 , ( C H •) I C r I t S IT> , 1 l , I'> I T E: 21 , 2 '5 1 Ul PR i 11r 9;,?·1 cr;.,~f·tor1Y 1 fsrt~:~ rtrot <"i· ..;·rsf'ff:?-1. 2~---- 02 F Ot·P~ 11 r < • + • • 3 x • <+ c r" 1 1 ox 1 > 03 PhlrJI t:;~!•rTE•ll•tSift.=26~'9) c T::;r,~= f r-: ~JS:CJ Tc ToTaL 7!1,::- :;;~j)O:;;·ys-r::fi'i'E:"i'i'CH..... STTt"'"r"o:"Ct."'rfc'R..,-CAIC~ '· IS USED '!'0 c ~UP';J ,,,;:; T"[ 1!Ur4p[R U I'lccx YE,..Rs. THIS OV(P.ALL SU~ c 1· '> T I._,,, T~ i' 'l ~L ,\r; "fli:Qri r s· JF. ·ust""'i(i.\'CtT"rtA~·-·ar.:r"r"ift·irsTrr(AV.~NO.'f'!-.- AND ~AXIfo'UM c vir::~r;y -•1·;Q "1·\YMfly .. \f1[ ~..;sEJ TJ KEE? rR-"CK OF rHt: MHit~\J~ lOR wRArf:lit~ ------,,----.,.,r~E.-::r,'n,_....,r,..,...t:c ·uuu.,·r ust. Ar t'•'c-r strt. O<.JRI!~b rRt rtN tEAP. Aut! !HE c THE ,,u.~r>>R 0>" I:\J[)~~-L(.)9,':~. I).! .. _,_RE~.~-~~~.. ~-_LHAT. __ 56l_!_§ THE ENO OF c ffJCEX LOr)P. c ..·-·---- .. ---· C'l F'f? l ·~T 9'1 I,( M,i(~jcj'i\ {( fSfT[.;f~jf)()(-j";""['~"fff:i:;:rii)";·r~rr-· 05 no sun rqrTE=l•'9 ().;, a 1 n r o L~ 1i-t r r s TT t. 1 = r l'l r s•. o-r t T s t Ti'' t + tl n No Ar 1 I s I Tt • I No Ex ! 07 r F < •1r. ~il'l .~ Y ( r-.; rTf"', I ~JDE X ) •l T • 'If rH-10 Y < ! '5 t TE) ) • ,,rrJ·~·nt rsrrr)=:;;;-iiuoi\Y( r.:;rtc";l;·i-otxT ...... ---·-·------·----.---- Qi} 1 FA· ( ''-tJIQ.; Y (IS! Tr, I~l()[X), G~~:·~.:\ ~-~Q.!l•. ~J.~.~.!.fJ.J __ ~~· xt-lf1Y(fSITEl=I1MJOIIY(ISITr.•I~l 0 r.X 0-3 ecn r.C'JTir:u£ c

1t 81)1 sCIJ• ( I'>rf[J:::'Htoi !!SI1t1t: L\rtlj/\ttts!lf:,!Nbtx!••Z 12 5tl. (1)1-;T r;.,·.H: ...... --...... ··---· c 13 r 0 11 'J 2 ; s r r r =1. ? .. ,...... - ...... _. _____...... -·------·--·-- .. -·.. ·•··· 14 t.lt3h;;;l; 'Jl".(wl 15 'J 1\ r· ·• C Y t t S [ I T J = t 8 F 1. 0 T A( S iT :) T ( ! <:: I T E l I • - 1 t c: FL._; ,\T , r o rrA 0 Y , I s tT c l 1 1 a aa ' ·• n FLo 'IT < r tlf M0 'f t Is IT e: > t l I n 6 8 8 1> lo srr:~ll ( C ISI TEl :O<;!JRT! Vfii·~·~D'!' < I.<;ITE l l _ '1 < rs r rt: i :s to~-ci-v< ISttf.i... ls'iJ'R.fftii'ff:fi ...... ______., ______17 s r.: rn 113 802 C0;1Tr, JC ...... _., .., .... ., ...... - ...... -.. --··-·----·------19 ?0

21 -136-

... ,._.,,,._,_,,,.,._.,,,,_,,,,.- ·••• ••••••W•''"'.. , ... ,,.. ,.,,,..,.,._, '' "''" "'''''"'''''"''"'''''' _,,,,,_,,,, "'''""

·· yi\:SYPAt······ ... &o''fcf···T9'1.~6 tStTE ..;·q-6·~r~-fii-·------·- l .. ----··------·-···-.. ·------···--··-.. - ... -·------·-...... - ...... --.. ·-.. ·---.. . RSypAIISITE1=1572l04.-11710.4l*AV~NO tiSITEl PR!~ 8• ~r E•R pi\( I•EI•RL F ISI El• ... . <;as 'FOflMA'fl"e····•C!ST( IS !TEl ·;·;·; 4·x·;-t2 ~ .. 7X·~·zrFfo·~.. rfi·; 3XiF·::;-; ·2r····...... _...... - ...... - .. 98'3 ·C:OnTtNUE · .. P'rffNT. 2.2'2 ...... ---·--... -...... - ...... -·--·-·-.. ·-·- ...... - ...

222 FOiiV.I\.T 1' 'tlO(lX•' t) l STOP ...... !:=.tl.L ____ ...... -.-· .. ____ ...... - .. --·------·--·····------·-·-----..... __ ...... - ...... -- -137-

Proximity to water increases prctal:ility

Fandom chance• of • Daily ..summation teing campsite to filled use yearly use l Eroximity to trail Trampling increases Regressicns probablity

Figure 22: Variables Used to Estimate Annual Use of Individual Campsites in Bound Valley. Appendix C FLORISTIC SUMMARY OF THE SAN JACINTO WILDERNESS AREAS

The following list summarizes the habitat and San Jac.into wil derness distribution of all plant species identified during the course of this study. The species are arranged alphabetically by family and include subspecies and varietal nomenclature. Habitat refers to the general characteristic of the ecological site of a particular species. For instance, a wetland habitat indicates species which occur on a substrate which is primarily wet during the growing season. Shaded sites characteristically have a dense overstory, with a general north facing aspect and tend to be cooler than open sites. Rocky ridges are always exposed sites, very xeric during the growing season and lack an organic substrate. Wilderness distribution refers to a species occurrence throughout both wilderness areas. (This list does not consider the range distributions of each species.) A tare species tends to be either sparsely occurring, in low numbers, or very restricted to several or a single locality. In general, if a species occurred in the 1/10 ha slot samples with a frequency of less than 5, it was designated rare. All other species were designated as common.

-138- -139-

Hatitat wilderness Distribution ------~--~--~-~--~~~~~ S - Shade tolerant c - Common, sampled in > 5~ of p~ots 0 - Open slopes and valleys B - Bare, sampled in ~ 5~ of Elots E - Bock crevices ~ - Wetland

------~~-~----~-~---Wilderness Habitat Distribution ------~-~---~-~----~------ACEBACEAE Acer glabrum var. diffusurn

AGAVACEAE Nelina parryl 0

AMARYLLICACEAE Allium burlewii 0

APIACEAE Osmcrhiza cbilensis S B Perideridia parishii ssf. latifolia W B Sanicula graveolens 0 c Sphenosciadium cafitellatum S c Tauschia parisbii 0 c

ASCLEPlADACEAE Asclefias califcrnica 0 c

ASPIDIACEAE Athyrium fillx-femina var.californicum Q c cystopteris frag~lis w c

ASTEBACEAE Achillea millefclium var. lanulosa W c Antennaria rcsea S B Artemisia dracunculus 0 c Artemisia ludoviciana ssp. ludoviciana 0 c Aster alpigenus ssp- anderscnii W B Chryscthamnus nauseosus ssp. bernardinus 0 R Cirsium californicum 0 B Corethrogyne filaglnifolia var. glomerata o B Erigercn treweri var. jacinteus 0 B -140-

Erigeron foliosus va~. covillei R Eriophyllum confertiflorum var .• confecti- c flcrum o c Gnaphalium palustre w R Haplopappus cuneatus R c Eieracium horridum R c Hulsea vestita ssp. vestita o c Senecio triangularis w c Solidago californica o c Stephanomeria virgata c

BE'IOLACEAE c Alnus rhombifolia

EORAGINACEAE c Cryptantha circumscissa c

ERASSICACEAE B E Aratis inyoensis B Aral::is pulchra 0 S,B B Drata corrugata var. saxosa c Erysimum capitatum 0 Rorippa curvisiligua var. orientalis w R

CAl?BI.FOllACEAB 0 B Lonicera interrupta w c Samtucus caerulea c Symphoricarpos farisbii o,s

CABYOPBYIIACEAE Arenaria douglasii o,w B Silene parishii var- viscida E c Silene verecunda ssp. platyota s c

CHENOPODIACEAE Chenopodium desiccatum var. lefto- c phylloides c Chenopodium fremontii 0 c

CRASSDIACEAE Dudleya abramsii B

CUPRESSACEAE Calccedrus decurrens c -141-

CYPEBACEAE Carex hetercneura iW c Carex hoodii c Carex lemmonii w,o"' c Carex maripcsana w,o c Carex multicau1is 0,.11 R Carex multicostata s,w B Carex nebrascensis w w carex rossii S,B c carex subfusca iii R carex teneraeformis w B Eleccharis macrcstachya "' R

EQUISE'IACEAE Eguisetum laevigatum c

EBICACEA:E Arctostaphylos Fatula ssp. platyphylla 0 c Arctostaphylos fringlei var. drupacea 0 c Arctostaphylos pungens 0 c B Chimaphila menzies~~ s Chimafhila umbellata var. occidentalis 0 R Pterospora andrcmedea s c Pyrcla picta forma aphylla s R Pyrcla picta ssf. integra s B Pyrcla secunda tv B Rhododendron occidentale w c Sarcodes sanguinea o,s B

EUPHO.BEI ACE AE Euphortia palmeri 0

FABACEAE Amorpha californica 0 B lotus crassifolius w,o R Lotus nevandensis 0 B lotus oblongifolius iii R Lupinus excubitus var- austromontanus 0 c lupinus formosus var. hyacinthinus o,s c Lupinus latifclius var. farishii w c Trifolium mcnatbum var. grantianum i c 11 Trifolium variegatum "'

FAGACEAE Chrysolepis sem~ervirens 0 c Quercus chrysol~pis 0 c Quercus kelloggii 0 c Quercus turtinella spp. turbinella 0 c -142-

GlBBYACEAE Garrya fremontii O,R R

GBBlNIACEAE Geranium richardsonii c

BIDBOPHYILACEAE Pba~elia imbricata spp. imbricata o,w c

BYPBBICACE.AE Hypericum anagalloides B

IIiiDACEAE Sisyrincbium bellum B

JONCACEA:E Juncus kelloggii B Juncus macrandrus c Juncus mertensianus var. duranii c tuzula comosa c ll!IIlCElE Honardella lancsolata 0 E Monardella linoides ssp .• str: ict a 0 c Monardella odoratissima ssp~ australis O,.B c Salvia pachJpbylla 0 B Stachys rigida SSf. rigida w c ~richostemma austromontanum ssp- compactum W R t:ti.IlCElE Calochortus invenustus o,s B lilium parryi w R Smilacina racemosa var. amplexicaule w B Veratrum californicum w c

!lLVACElE Halacbothamnus marrubioides 0 c

ONAGBACEAE Epilobium adenocaulon var. parishii w c Epilotium angustifolium ssf. circumvagum w c Epilotium brevistylum w c Ecilotium crlaterrimum w c -144- -145- -143-

r Potentilla gracilis spp. nuttallii c Pctentilla saxosa R Potentilla wheeleri var. rimicola B Prunus emargioata c Rubus leucodermis varM ternardinus B Bubus parviflorus c

BUBIACEAE Galium angustifclium spp. gatrielense O,R c Galium angustifolium SPf· jacinticum O,R c GaliuJI parishii R c Kelloggia galioides s,w c

S A. LI C ACE A E Populus trichocarfa var. trichocarpa B Salix lasiolepis var. lasiolepis c

SA.XIFBAGACEAE Heuchera hirsutissima R c Philadelphus microphyllus ssr. pumilus R Ii Bibes cereurn O,R c Bibes montegenum s,w c Ribes nevadense var. jaegeri i c Bites roezlii O,R c

SCROPHUlABIACEAE Castilleja chro~o~a R,O c Castilleja miniata i c Cordylanthu~ nevinii 0 B • Keckiella rothrockii spp. jacintensis o,s c· Keckiella ternata ssp. ternata 0 B : c l Mimulus cardinali~ ti Mimulus floritundus w B i Mimulus guttatus ssp. guttatus c Mimulus longiflcrus ssp. calycinus B" £ w.. s c .. ' Mimulus pilosus ~ ' Mimulus primuloides var. pilosellus w c : Mimulus rubellus O,R,W c : Pedicularis semibarbata o,s c Penstemon bridgesii B,O c Penstemon grinnellii ssp. grinnellii B c : Penstemon labrosus c,s c:: Veronica peregrina ssp. xalapensis i cs: ...... " B SELAGlN:ElLACEAE B Selaginella asprella B C B Selaginella watsonii B c c -146-

SOlANACEAE c Nicotiana attenuata 0

ORTICACEAE c Ortica holosericea

VIOLACEAE c Viola macloskeyi

VISCACEAE c Arceuthcbium abietinum Parasite Farasite c Arceuthobium ca~Fylopodum pauciflorum Parasite c Phoradendron bolleanum ssf. c Phoradendron villosum Farasite

Appendix D

DOCUMENTATION FOR THE RARE SPECIES OF THE SAN JACINTO WILDERNESS AREAS

-147- This appendix summarizes plot sampling data, impact assess ments and management recommendations for 27 rare species. These species are of very limited distribution and or abun dance within either wilderness area, and are thus considered a priority for management action. A gradient nomogram is pro vided for each species.

= Greater than 300 individuals per 1/10 ha;

or log 10 or greater cm2 per 1/10 ha

= 99 - 300 individuals per 1;10 ha; or log 5 to 10 cm2 per 1/10 ha

~ = Eewer than 99 individuals per 1/lO ha; or log 5 or less per cm2 per 1/10 ha -148-

A~ela~~hier palLida Greene.

Serv iceoerry.

o-::SCRiPr IQ:l Shruos 1-3 or more m. tall, wi.th :-isid erect to spread· in~ t:lran::hes; bark ..!ark-brown to ttray; lvs. oval to elltpci::al or rounded, to~entulose or puberulent.on both sue-faces the low·:!r usually ?aler than the upper, the blaJes 2-4 em. lon;, 1.5-2.5 c.n. wide, acu~e to rouncU.Ih at ap~x., wl th r -9 pairs of lateral veins, entire or coothed co or oelow the m1Jjle; rao~es oory~boae, 2-4 em. lon!. ll-6 rl.d.; sepal.s lanoeolate, 2·3 111111. LOll&; petJls 3-:;1 rnm. Lon';, oval or obovate; styles raoatl.y 3-'~; frult sut:l3lobose, ll-5 mm. ln dian1. (Mu:t: 1974).

Palo:nar H-.s., Cwyamaca :-Its., San Gabrial. Mts., iCarn an

P~ENOL)GY July co October

ALL~ZR~~SS ~~ST~IBUf[0N One popuLatlon tozated in rocks alon~ anj above fahqultz· Creek aoove C3ranba.

Elevation Habitat WET NORTH EAST/WEST SOUTH RIDGES 10,500 ·10,804

10,000. 10,499

9,500 • 9,999

9,000. 9,499

8,500. 8,999

8,000- 8,499

7,500· 7,999

7, 000 • 7,499

6,500- 6,999

8,000· 6,499

-149- -150-

SCIENri~I: ~'~E Calyptridiu~ py;~a~u~ Parish BX R;db.

CO~MON ~'HE Pyg~y Pussy Paw•. oa:s:RrPrro~ Oiffu.:~e annuaL; st-e.ns 1-2.5 c:n. hi;;h; lvs. nost.Ly basaL, spat.u\.ate, 5-10 mm. len._;; fls. few in one-sided race:nes; bracts ovate, sca:-i.ous, aa:-ly deciduou.s; padicels 1-3 :n:n. ton:;; caps. ovoid, pointed, ca. 4 mm. lon,g; seeds ~lack, s:nooth, ca. 0.4 mm. Lon; :Mur~z 19!4).

G~oog~p~rc DI5TRIBurro~ Dry to moist sandy or 1ravellY pLaces, 7,00J to !1,000 ft.; San Bernarjino and San Ja~into Mcs.; se. Slerr"a ~evada.

P~!~OLJG! June to July.

~ILD~RNESS DtSTRIBU[ION One population at HLdden Lake. END\NGSRHENT SL~nificant tramplinl from hikers along shoreline of Hidden Lake. :-IAN.\GC:HENT RECOi1HEND.\T!ONS Si~nif'i.cantly reduce tra:npLin& pressures :see t~lCt). Elevation Habitat WET NORTH EAST/WEST SOUTH RIDGES 10.,500 ·10,804

9,500 • 9,999

9,000- 9,499

8,500. 8,999

8,000· 8,499

1,500- 7,999

7,000· 7,499

6,500· 6,999

6,000· 6,499 -151- -151-

:n!Llanth2S ;ovillei ~axon.

~nizo~e snort, ~reepins, appressed-p~leaceous; fronds f:aw to many. 0.5-.:l d:n talL: Hripes brown :>r purplish, wlt.h s:nall paLe.- s~ales; blades oblona to

vccasional individuals occur widespread in rocks tnrauJhout the wilderness.

So:ne i:npact.s r ... a~ ... ock cli:nberz ln Ll. ty RacK and Suicide Rock.

Elevation Habitat WET NORTH EAST/WEST SOUTH RIDGES "10,500 ·10,804

"10,000 • 10,499

9,500 • 9,999

9,000- 9,499

8,500- 8,999

8,000· 8,499 7,500· 7,999 • 7,000. 7,499

6,500· 6,999 •

6,000· 6,499

-152- C<'li:napnila u.11:>elLJt.a ('~.1 va,-. o.::cidentalis (.~ny.:lb.l Blake.

P i p l s s;:: ;,; ;J , P r i :1 ~ P. ' s P l u·n e .

:J::SCRI?r [Q!i :lt:=11s Hou::.ish, 1. 5-3 d:n. hi5h; leaves in whorls of 3-3, o~\.an::eoLate, 3-T em. Lon,;, s:?:-rat~, :nostly yi!llow-green beneath; pejun~les 11oscty 6-3 em. long; petals ciLia late, plnk, 5-:i :nm. Long; ::aps. 6-f tnm. ln dia:neter ( Mu n z 1 9 74 ) .

Gi::OO'\.\P:!!C DL3TRHlUflOX San J1

WILD~R!i~SS DtSTRI9UfiQ~ ~ound at one locality adjacent to th~ fuller Rld5e Trail near Deer Sprin3s.

E~O\NGZRMENr rnls hLghly se:retLve speJles Ls found nea~ a sarles of out~rops lnterspersed near Chrysolepls and as such Ls rarely dncounter-ed by Dackp~Jk•rs. EnJanjerment Ls tneref?re hi;hLy Li~i~ed to one or few LndL~iduals.

~AH\GS~E~r RE~O~~E~D~T[OH5 ~one at this tL~e other than fu~ure ~onitorin& of t.nL! :~peci•!S. Elevation Habitat WET NORTH EAST/WEST SOUTH 10,500 ·10,804

10,000. 10,499

9,500 • 9,999

9,000. 9,499

8.500- 8,999

8,000· 8,499

1,500· 7,999

7,000· 7,499

6.500· 6,999

6.000· 6..499

-153- -154-

SCieNHnc N.\'IE Euphorbia palmeri En1elm.

CO:

G!OGRAP~tC O[S!RISUTION ~t. Pinos to Laguna Mountains; to U~ah, Ariz.

PH!NOI..OG~ June to Au?,ust.

? llit.OERN~3S !H3!RIBUC!ON rwo populations Located near WeLl:nan• s Ci.ena~a and one on the Fuller Ridge.

SND.\1lG;!;i\MENf 6oth popuLations overlap onto trails where a ~ertain amount of mechanical cruchin3 has occurred.

l1AN.\G!:-t ENl' RECOMMEN DA. T IO !iS :-lonitorin! of populations. :-1 Elevation Habitat WET NORTH EAST/WEST SOUTH RIDGES 10,500 ·10,804

10,000·10,499

9,500 • 9,999

9,000- 9,499

8,500. 8,999

8.000· 8,499

e 7,500- 7,999

i 7, 000. 7,499

7 8,500· 6,999

6.500- 6,999

6,000· 6.499 -155-

s;;IS:irFr: :-1>.:-IE ::iarrya fre:nontii Torr.

CO'I;-\ON ;H:-\E r"re:nont.' s Sllk Tassle.

D:!:SCRLPfiJ:-1 :!:rect shrub 1. 5-.3 m. taU, ~he young twi.gs trigos~; lvs. oblang-ellip:L~al to -o~ate 2-5 c~.Lang, usually taper ing at the ends, ~labrous to sparingly pilose beneath, plane on mar~ins; petioles to aa~ 1 am. Long; male oat ~ins solitary :>r clustered, Si.!llple or lax, 7-20 am. 1.on3, yellowish; female ~··3 c:n. long or :nore l.n frui.t; fruit 5 m:n. ln :1ia,neter, globose, almost black to pur plish, sub~labrous ::-~unz 197ij).

CC:OG~ ~PH IC D LSTR I3U riO:.! :1o un ta ins of Rl 11 er-s Ld e Co, , Or an ;e Coun t.y, San DL ego County; central Cal.ifor-nia to '.iashin,!t.on.

P'EtWl.JGY Ja!'luary to ApriL ~[l.O!R:.!ESS DtSTRIBUrto~ Sparse vegetation alons the FuLLer Ridge, along the Oevil's Stide Trait and ou~ on South Ridge.

ENDANCSR'lENr Insl~nifLcant l~paots aLong the F\.tller Ridge and O

'1AN\G2~ENT RECO~:-IEND~TIO~S Uane. Habitat Elevation RIDGES WET NORTH EAST/WEST SOUTH 10,500 -10,804

10,000- 10,499

9,500 • 9,999

9,000. 9,499

8,500· 8,999

8,000· 8,499

1,500· 7,999

1, 000. 7,499

6,500- 6,999

6,000· 6,499 -156-

s.::u:att:"\C 1H"'E Holodis.::us mi.::rophyUus RyJb. var. :serioeus L.ay.

COMMON 9AME SmaLL-leaved HoLoJis.::us.

0~5CRIPr!O~ Lf. blades villous aoove, white siLKY ~eneath, spread ing, bushy, 0.2-2 m. hi3h; i.nf'l.. viLLous, 2.5-3.5 e:n. !.on~; sepal.s 1-1.5 mm. ton6; petals 1. 5-2 mm. lon6; :::ar p~ls viLlous, 1 mm. lonz {Mu:tz 197~).

GC:OQR!\P:HC D£STRI3UfiON 5a."' Ja.::into Mt;s.; L. Calif. PH!NO!.OGY Ju:1 e to AU6U5 c.

R!L.O~RN::SS DtSTRISUriON Scattered populations in Marion rlats, Tahquitz Paak.

Eim.\NGS:R.·H:~>H Onty easuaL i:npaets by :-o.::k eli:nbers.

HANAG!~ENr RECOMMEND\TIONS Monitoring. Elevation Habitat WET NORTH EAST/WEST SOUTH RIDGES 10,500-10,804

10,000- 10,499

9,500 - 9,999

9,000- 9,499

8,500. 8,999

8,000• 8,499

7,500· 7,999

7,000· 7,499

8.500· 6,999

000· 6,499 -157-

s::EtHFIC ti.\"'E !vesia ;::allida :aalll R{dll. C0:1:10N NA'1E Tahqult.z Rook R.::.se. DSS::RIPfl0:-1 Ste:ns 2-5 om. lono;, spreading; inroa:;e hi!"sut:.e and flnely glandular th:-ou:;hout:.; lvs. 2-3 c:n. ton_;; lflts. 5-il i)airs, 2-3 m.n. ton,;; ::y;ne .:>pen 1-5 ru.; ft.-tuoe oa. 2 mm. wide; bract.let'.s l.ance-linear, sepals Lan~eo late, 2.5-3.5 mm. Lon;; petals equalling sepals; pis~its ll-5 (Munz 197~). G:!:O

?:iENOl.OGY Juty-.\UiUSt. 'tl!t.OZRNE:SS O!STR!9UriON Two known localities on the Tanqul.tz Rid;oe. EID\NGER"'ENT Type locaLity is wLthin 100m. or the South Ridge Trail. The second population is wel~ away fro.n potential impacts.

~.\!UG;:;'4E:!Ir REC:0'1MEl'IO.\TIONS Monitoring of e~istln& populations as welL as expanded su~vey along the dese~t jivide. Elevation Habitat WET NORTH EAST/WEST SOUTH RIDGES 10,500 ·10,804

10,000·10,499

9,500 • 9,999

9,000- 9,499

8,500. 8,900

8,000· 8,499

7,500- 7,900

7,000· 7,499

6,500· 6,999

6,000· 6,499

6.500- 6,999

6,000· 6,499

-158- CO:-t~ON ;H.:1E Kallogg' s Wire-grass. o;::s;:;Rr?riON AnnuaL, 1.5-'t em. tall: lf. blades 5-20 mm. long, Linear setaceous; paduncLes 5-many; heads 2-5 mm. Ln diam., 1-3 fld.; bracts 2, ovate, ea. 1.5 mm. tvng, hyaline, ofl..en tin~ed in red; fls. subsasslle; perianth segms. 4 or :5, ere:::t to appressed,· 2.5-3.5 :run. ton1, subequal, lan.::eo late, + acute and acicular, reddish with green opaque ~ilribsT stamens 3: caps. oblonz to eLlip~ic-ovoid, blunt to e:uarginate, brown to reddish; style becomina a beak on the caps; seeds ribbed len6thwise and lineolate crosswise (Munz 197q),

GE:OGil.A.Pil IC DCS!RISUTION Many plant co:nmunities; scattered throughout cismontane and :nontane s.· Calif; co S.c.· P;it:NOf..JGY May to July.

Wif..DER~SSS DIS!RI3Ut!O~ One population at Hidden f..ake. END.\NG::t1ENr Si,;;niftcant t.rampl.in.; i:npacts to this populat:.ion a:-e occurring due to day hiking visits t.o ~ldden f..ake. M.II.NAGC:'IENr RECQ:~MEND.\!toNS Significantly decrease the tra:npt in?; pressures :see text). Elevation Habitat WET NORTH EAST/WEST SOUTH RIDGES 10,500 -10,804

10,000. 10,499

9,500 • 9,999

9,000. 9,499

8,500. 8,999

8,000· 8.499

7, 000. 7,499

6,500· 8,999

6,000· 6,499

-159- -160-

SCISNTI!IC N~~E LLstera aovallarioides (Sw.l rorr.

COA~ON ~l~E TwayblaJe.

DESCRIP1ION Slender, 1-3 dm. high, pubes~ent abo~e the Lvs.; lvs. oval or roundish, 3-5 c:n. lon¢; fls. 6-12, greenisn; sepals and petals Linear to linear-lan~eolate 3-~ mm. lons; lip ~-11 mm. long, :~arrowly auneace-obovate, retuse, with rounded lobes on each side of a short triangular claw·:Munz 1974). GSOGiUP;U::AL DtSTRI3UriON :-tontane coniferous forests; San Jacinto M:s., San Bernardino Mts., Sierra Nevada to ALaska, Atlantic Coast.. P:H:NOL.OGY Jane to August. ~ILDERN~SS D!STRISUCION One known locality along the Northfork San Jacinto River. END,\NG':.RMEIIf Casuat tl"a.11pt1nis near second st.ream crossing along the Seven PLnes Trail. MAN1Gi~ENT RECOMMENDATI03S CasuaL monitoring. Elevation Habitat WET NORTH EAST/WEST SOUTH RIDGES 10,500 ·10,804

10.000. 10,499

9,500 • 9,999

9,000- 9,499

8,000· 8,499

7,500· 7,999

1, 000- 7,499 -161-

SC!t:Nr!::'IC N.l.~E Mi:nulus ton:;iftorous ('lur.t..) ::irant Ssp • .::aly::inus (!:ast.w.) Munz.

C0:~:-10;.1 :a:-tE Rock Monkey Flower-.

O::SCR!Pr!O:i t.vs. oblon~-elliptic to ovate ot Lan::eoiate, yellow green and glabrous abowe, ~landular-pubescent beneath; calyx-tu~e with a more inflated throat; corolLa li~ht lemon-yellow, the tube usuaLLy weLl-eKserted (Munz 19 rq >.

G~OGl\P~IC D[SlRI3U!ION Rocky places; mts. of ne. San OLeao Co. to Little San Bernardino Mts. and e. San ~aoriel Mts. ?!E!l'JLO'::'f april to J•Jly.

~It.D~RNESS DtSTRIBUriON One population on Sulcide Rock. END1N

MAN~GC.:--lE!H REC0:-1'!El'JO,\TIO:I5 :-!onitor- known population and survey f'or additional populations. Elevation Habitat WET NORTH EASTI WEST SOUTH RIDGES 10,500 ·10,604

10,000 ·10,499

9,500 •9,999

9,000- 9,499

8.,500· 8,999

8,000- 8,499

7,500- 7,999

7, 000- 7,499 •

6.500· 6,999

6.000- 6.499

-162- ...i l- ·~-..... , • \ 'l l 1 1 Poa boLanderi Vasey.

DSSCRI?r !Oil Slender annuals, culms 2-5 dm, high; sheaths glabrous; bLades relatively short and broaJ, abruptly acu~e; spi· Kelets usuaLLy 2-3 fld.; glu:nes relatively l:'lroad; lemmas gl<.brous u.·e,.ll:. for web, scabriduLous on keel. and rarely on sides, the inter:nediate nerves very faint (Munz 197!!).

GZOG~\P~Ic orsrarsurro~ Occasional in Rad Fir F.', San Jacinto Mountains, uore co.nmon further n.; co Wash.

P:!::NOLJG'! July c.o Au~ust.

~ILu~RN~ss orsraraurrow rahquitz Meadow. C:IW.UlG::R:-tENr rro

MAtl.\GS~~Ei'li "EC0:-1:-IEND.\TI:l:-15 !!elocate Tahqui.t:z: Trait, close to upper campsites; monitor population. Elevation Habitat WET NORTH EAST/WEST SOUTH RIDGES 10,500 •10,804

10,000-10,499

9,500 ~ 9,999

9,000- 9,499

8,500· 8,999

8.000· 8,499

1',500- 7,999

7,000· 7,499

6,500· 6,999

6,000· 6,499

-163- -164-

SC!C::Hr~·rc :H:-tE Poly~onum dou&lasi.L Greene var. dou,;lasil.

CO.~~ON N!\:-IE Dou.;las• ;{not.w~

ENOANGiR~ENf None.

Elevation Habitat NORTH EAST/WEST SOUTH RIDGES 10,500 ·10,804

10.000·10,499

9,500 • 9,999

9,000- 9,499

8,500. 8,999

8,000• 8,499

7,500· 7,999

7,000. 7,499

6,000- 6,499 -165-

PoLy;>odiu:n herperiu:n !~axon. Po l.y;>od iu:n.

Rhizome ca. 5 mm. thl~k, densely paleaceous with ovate accutninate scales 3-3 :nm. ton3; fronds ratner close, :nostly 1-2 d~. lons; stripes ca. as lang as blade, straw colored,. naked; blade!. deltoid·oJlon,; to oolon4-Jinear, pLnnatlfld nearly to the naked rachis; seims. narrow-ob long to oval., obtuse roun~ed, crenate to crenate-serru late; veins ;nostLy t'.wice-forked, t.ra:ul.ucent; sori round-o~al., nedial (Munz 197q).

~ontane coniferous forests, San Jacinto H~ •• San Bernardino :-!t.s., Sierra Nevada; c.o ALas;c.a, S. Dakota, New MeL, L. Calif. )ILDSRNZSS DtSTSIBurroa ~ldespread, wideLy spaced individuals in rock crevices throughout the higher elevations.

END.\NGSi\:1ENr Occasional contact by rock cli:nbers otherwise no endan germent.

Elevation ·Habitat WET NORTH EAST/WEST SOUTH RIDGES 10,500 ·10,804

10,000-10,499

9,500 ~ 9,999

9,000- 9,499

8,500· 8,999

8,000· 8.499

7,500· 7,999

7,000· 7,499

6,000· 6,499

-166- Populus tri.:nocarpa !. lr .:;.· Var. ~:.richocarpa. SC ENtr::-I: N.\'IE

CO.~lo\O:i ti.\;~E alae\< CottvO'.IOOd. rree 30-5J m. tall with ~road open crown, i.hc bark 6ray OE3CRIPCI::l:1 ish furrowed with a!e; lvs. ovate, finely serrate, ~:.run cate or cordate at the base, acute t.o suoacuminate at apex, dar-k ~reen abo·1e, pale and so.newnat glaucous beneath, 3-7 c.11. l.on>!, on terrete petioles 2-i.l c;n. ton~: s~:.a;nens 10-SJ; caps. subg.loi:>osa, 4 m:n. t.hLck, pu~escent (Munz 19711).

G~OG~.\PniC DCSTRIBUr!ON Cts;nont.ane to ALaska, w. :~ev.

P~::N~t.JGY rebruary to A;lr it. WIL.P::!UC:SS Dtsrrn:surro:t In the higher el.e11ati.ons, one population is Lo.::ated above strea:n fro:n Caramba.

EltO<\NGitR:-\ENT None.

MAN\Gt::otEtH RECO:~c-tEND!\!ION3 ~onitorin:J. Habitat Elevation RIDGES WET NORTH EAST/WEST SOUTH 10,500 ·10,804

10,000 ·10,499

9,500 • 9,999

9,000. 9,499

8,500· 8,999

8,000· 8,499

7,500· 7,999

7,000· 7,499

I},500· 6,9P9 .

6,000· 8,499

-167- PotentilLa saxosa Lemmon ex Greene. ' Ro~k Five-fin~er.

L<>w cesoi.tasa oerenn·ial. with thick woodv caui!X; st.e:ns SCENrFIC N;\:.tE Pyrola secunda L.

CO~~'!ON 1!.\"\E One-slJed Wintergreen. Rootstocks long, creepi.n~;oauJex woody, oranohin:;; lower o~s:RrPr r::>N bracts lanoeol.ate, ciliate; lvs. shinin-s, el.lip:;i.c to o;tate, crenate-s;:-rate, che ol.ades 2-5 c;n. lon:;, on petioles usually so:newhat shorter; soapes 5-15 om. hi~h; bracts of the 1-slJed infl. ciLiate; calyx-lobes ovate, obtuse, ca. 1 mm. ton:;, ciliate-serrulate; ~etal.s colon;,

"'.~ J G::OG:lAPIHC OtSTiUBIJ'riON lolontane coniferous F.·; San Jacinto Mcs., San Bernardino ~~s.; Sierra N~vaJa to ALaska, Attanti~ Coas~. Eu~asia.

PHEtlat.OGt July to Saptembe~. WILDERNZSS O!STRIBUIION One tocality alon; a spring/creek on the Fuller Ridge. END\IIGER:>IEMI' Population crosses the Fuller Rid;e Trail at one point. El ~AN'C~~ENf RECO~~END\TIONS ~onitorin; f'or population cnan3es. Habitat Elevation RIDGES WET NORTH EAST/WEST SOUTH 10,500 ·10,804

9, 10,000. 10,499

9,1 9,500 • 9.999

8,: 9,000-9,499

8,1 8,500· 8,999

7,! 8,000· 8,499

1,1 1,500· 7,999

6, 1, 000. 7,499

6, 6,.500· 6,999

6,000· 6,499

-168- SCI::~lriS'IC !H.'~E llanun-::ulus eschscholtzli Schlecht. var. :>xynct.us (Jr"ay) Jeps.

CO:~'iOl< :·a:~E Uplne Buttercup. OE:SCR!PrlOll Perennial; caudex 1.5-3 em. Lon;;, 5-12 mm. chick, usu ally br~~=hed; lf. sinuses snd lobes rounded or aotuse, ~he ~iddle lobe of the basal lvs. usually ~ntire; sci pular lf. bases persi.st.ent, thickened: ste.ns ereot or decumben~, 4-15 c;n. ton,, scapose; sepals yeLlow, t.i.n~ed lavender, j!;labrous or sparsely nairy, 4-d mm. long; petals 5, yellow, cuneate-obova~e, 7-ll mm. Lon~, 5-10 mm. broad; sta!llens 20-'40; aks. in ovoid head, each oblonl·Obovoid, ~labrous, ca. 1.5 mm. l.on.3;, the beak: sLender, rather straisht, ca. 1 mm. l.on~: receptacle glabrous (Munz 1974). GEOGRAPHIC OtSTRI3UCIOll ~igh elevation in rock crevices; San Jacinto and San Bernardino Mt.s., White Mts.; t.o Modoc Co.

p,H;NOt.OGY July to Au.:;ust. '-IILD.:::ur:.ss Dt3T!!t3Ur!O:-I .Sln;le popuLation ocourrin~ with Oxyria on San Ja:.:into Peak. E::10.\NG'2:1\.~E!IT Casu.1J. tra:npt in~· due to hiker-s on the Peak. MA:i\Gi:::1ElH RE:co:~:~ENDo\T!::lNS Contlnul!d :nonitoring of known populatlon and additional. sur"veys ror other populations. Elevation Habitat WET NORTH EAST/WEST SOUTH RIOG£S 10,500 ·10,804

10,000. 10,499

9,500 • 9,999

9,000- 9,499

8,500· 8,999

8.000· 8,499

7,500- 7,999

7,000· 7,499

6,500· 6,999

6,000· 6,499

-169- -170-

s;::t::lrrif!: !il.ME Rorippa ~urvisi.Liqu3 (dooX:.l Bassey.

CO:HWN :.1,\ME Vernal Watercress.

D!~CRIPfiON A~nual or Diennial, 1albrous, the stems diffusely branched, 1-3m. ton~: lvs. plnnatel.y divi.'ied into usu ally acute, toothed or entLre lanaeoLate to oblong lobes; the low~r Lf.-blades 2-3cm. lon1, with s~mewnat shorter p:!tiotes; cauline lvs. gradually l"eiiulled and subsesslle; pedi~els ~ostly 1-2 mm. lonz: sepals 1-l mm. long; petal~ somewnat shorter; sLLlques linear, terrete, Ulu.ll.J.y ~urved, 6-10 mm. J.ons, l-1.5 mm. thick; style less than 1 mm. ton3; seeds brown, ca. 0.5 mm. ton;;, fLneLy ceLlular-reticulate ~Munz 191~}.

GC:OG~~P:Uc Dtsnraurro~ Cl.s:nontane Calif.; t.o tower CaLif., Rocky Mt.s.

P!iEilOt.OGY Al)ril to OctoDer.

~!t.DERH~SS DCSTR!BUriOH ~L~den t.ake.

E:-!O:HIG::R~'iEHr SL;nit'icant du~ to tra:npling by visitors.

:4AN.\C2:'1ENi RECO:~'iE:IO:\TtONS Si.-;nU'icantly redu;:e tra:npling p!"es.sur-es ( .s.u tut). Elevation Habitat WET NORTH EAST/WEST SOUTH RIDGES 10,500 ·10,004

10,000. 10,499

9,500 • 9,999

9,000- 9,499

8,000· 8,499

7,500· 7,999

7, 000. 7,499

6.500· 6,999

6,000· 6,499 -171-

SCIS~TI?IC N'~E Ru~us Leuaoder~is Dougl. 11 r.· • l.· var. bernardinus (lreene) Jeps.

CO~~ON ~~~E ~estern Raspberry. DSS·:Rr.Pr!0:-1 Stems to ca. 2 m. tong, arched and branched, rootl.n?; at tip, with heavy, wilitisn bloo,n at Least when younl, the prickles :nany; ;Jri:nocane Jvs. 3-5 f';:,l.iate, the lf'ts. ovate to al.:nost lanceol.ate, the terminal "7-9 em. !.on3, irresul.arl.y doubly sharp-serrate; f'Ls. :nostty 3-r, 7-10 mm. across, the pedicels, fL.-tuba and sepals ~ stipi• tate-glandular; fr. fi.r:n, dark iJUr"pLe to yei!ow-red, depress.)d globose, to ca. 1. 5 em. ln d ia:n ( Mun z 1974).

GS~G~lPHIC DtSTBISUfiON Dry flats and sLopes; yellow pine F.; Paloaar Mts., San Bernardino, San Jacinto and San Gabriel Mcs.

P:iENOLOG'! June to July. ~ILD!RN~SS DtSTRIBUTION One locality on the n. side of the Fuller Ridge.

E:-iD\NG!R:!EtH N?ne.

Elevation Habitat WET NORTH EAST/WEST SOUTH RIDGES 10,500-10,804-

10,000·10,499

9,500 • 9,999

9,000- 9,499

8,500. 8,999

8,000· 8,499

7,500- 7,999

7. 000 • '1,499

8,000· 8,499

-172- SCtE:Ht? IS Nl..'IE Sa~codes san6uinea Torr.

C0:-1!-ION :H>IE Sn:>w Plant. Plant mostly 1.5-3.5 d;n. high; lvs. 2-3 em. 1on5, cili D2.5CR!Prr:JN ate, the shorter lower an.1 broader than the upper; sep als lance-ovate, 10-15 :nm. !.On$; corol.la sl.i,;htly lon ger; caps. 1-2 Cln. Ln dia:n. Olunz 197'0. Santa Rosa and San Jacinto M:s. to Oregon. G~OG~AP~IC DtSTR!BUfiON

?:-lSNOL::lC'! May to July. ·.rtde!Spread and scattered up to 10,00::1 feet. ~It.DERN~SS DtSTRI3U[!ON Casual t.ramptin; and collecttn~, especially l.n heavy use areas.

MANlG~~ENT RECO~HENDATIONS Pu~lic education within heavy use areas shouLd discourage collectinl; monitorin~. Elevation Habitat WET NORTH EAST/WEST SOUTH RIDGES 10,500 ·10,604

10,000. 10,499

9,500 • 9,999

9,000- 9,499

8,500. 8,999

8,000· 8,499

7,500· 7,999

7,000. 7,499

6,500· 6,999

6,000· 6,499

-173- -174-

Trichost.~:ua aus:;.r.:~:nontanucn !..ewis Ssp. ~o11pa::t.U

G::OGRAP~IC DtS!RIBU!ION Drying ed;es of meadows, Montane Coniferous F.; San Jaeint.o :its. July-September.

G ~ILD!RN£SS DtSTRIBU!IO~ One population at Hidden Lake.

E:ND·\!m·::a:iEIH OccasLonatly sel"ious trarnpl ing i:npa::ts due to day use. p :UlUG~.iEN! RECO~MENOATIONS Redu::e tl"a'llpl ing i:npaots (see textl. il Elevation Habitat WET NORTH EAST/WEST SOUTH RIDGES 10,500 ·10,804

I 10,000-10.499

9,500 • 9,999

9,000. 9,499

8,500. 8,999

8,000· 8,499

7,500· 7,999

7.000· 7,499

6,500· 6,999

6,000· 6,499

6,500· 6,999

6,000- 6,499 Appendix E RARE SPECIES CONFLICTS WITH RECREATION ACTIVITIES

This appendix presents a list of plant species and locations where a variety of negative interactions (mostly trampling) occur within both the State Wilderness and the u.s. forest Service Wilderness. The trail sections, campgrounds and scenic areas are indicated by place names listed in Figure 2. The category "able" indicates the particular geographic distribution list on which a species appears (Those lists are incorporated into Section 4.2) A "+' adjacent to a

~ ~into iildernes~ ~-S- forest ~vice)

1. Trampling of Bare Plants Near irails

------~~---~~---~------~~---~-~---~------Sl?EC.IES iABlE iBA.II. SECiiON ------~-----~------~~~------Arenaria douglasii 5 Willow creek crossing Mimulus floribundus 5 Willow Creek Crossing Osmorhiza chilensis 5 Skunk Cabbage irail Stipa cccidentalis 5 Tahguitz Eidge Trail + Veronica peregrina 5 Willow Creek Crossing Boschniaka strobilaceae 6 Angel's Glide + Eriogonum saxatile 6 south Bidge Trail sarcodes sanguinea 6 Devil's Slide and others Amorpha californica 8 Caramha Trail Arctostafhylos pringlei 8 Caramha Trail Arabis pulchra 8 Widespread near trails Cordylanthus nevinii 8 Willow Creek Trail Corethrogyne filagini£olia s Various trails Draba currugata 8 South Ridge Trail

species' name indicates that the plant is considered highly limited in its distribution and/or abundance within the wilderness areas. -175-

Erigeron foliosus 8 Various trails Eriastrum sapphirium 8 Caramba Trail Eriogonum parishii 8 Seven Pines Trailhead Eriogonum umtellatum 8 Tahguitz Trail Eriogonum wrightii 8 Various trails Gilia leptantha 8 caramba Trail Leptodactylon pungens 8 Various trails Lilium parryi 8 Willow Creek crossing, Devil' s Slide Lupinus excutitus 8 Caramba Trail, Willow creek ~rail Lupinus formosus 8 Various trails Monardella lincides a Various trails Penstemon grinnellii 8 Various trails Penstemon labrcsus a Various trails Salvia pachyphylla 8 Caramba Trail Silene verecunda a Various trails · Sisyrinchium bellum 8 Strawberry Trail Horkelia bolanderi 9 Willow Creek ~rail Keckiella rothrockii jacinteus 9 Various trails ------

2. Trampling of Bare Plants in campsites and Scenic Areas

------SPECIES TABLE lOCALITIES

------+ Aster alpigeneus 5 Tahguitz, Sku n.k Cal::bage + Bodecatheon alpinum 5 Tahguitz, Skunk Cabbage + Eleocharis macrostachya 5 Tahguitz + Hal:enaria leuchostachys 5 Tahguitz, Skunk Cabbage + Smilacina racemosa amplexicaule 5 Tahguitz Thalictrum fendleri 5 Tahguitz Zone, Skunk Cabbage 2o.ne Arabis inyoensis 6 Tahguitz Peak, Suicide + Eriogonum saxatile 6 Tahguitz Peak, Suicide Sarcodes sanguinea 6 Various zones + Malaxis trachypoda 7 Tahguitz Erigercn folios us 8 caramta .Eriogonum umi::ellatum 8 Vai:ious zones + June us mertensianus a Tahguitz Lilium parryi 8 Willow Creek Skunk Cal:hage Penstemon labrosus 8 Various zones Silene verecunda a Various zones zauschneria californica 8 Various zones Galium angustifolium .9 Vai:ious zcnes Horkelia bolanderi 9 Various zones Keckiella rothrockii 9 Various zcnes Ribes nevadense 9 Reeds, iillow Creek Tahguitz ------177- -178-

peaks + Potentilla wheeleri 9 iahguitz Peak area ------~---~------~------~------SPECIES ------~~-~~-- Sarcodes sanguinea 6 Devil's Slide# Meadow zones Lilium parryi 8 Devil's Slide, iillow creek ------~------~------~-~-~

4. Impacts to Rare Plants caused by Rock Climbing Activities

------~------~-----~~~'!ABLE lOCALITIES ------SPECIES + Happlopappus cuneatus 5 Lily Beck, suicide Triseteum spicatum 5 Lily Bock Arabis inyoensis 6 Lily Bock + Eriogonum saxatile 6 suicide + Dudleya atramsii 8 suicide Draba co.rrugata 8 Lily Bock Galium pa.rishii 8 Lily aock, Suicide + Potentilla saxosa 8 suicide Silene parishii 8 Lily Bock, Suicide Zauschneria californica 8 Suicide Heuchera hirsutissima 9 Lily Bock Leptodactylon jaegeri 9 Lily Bock ~--~--~------~-~------~~

5. Potential Impacts Due to Activities Close to Bare Plant Populations

------~----~------~--~------~-~--~~ SPECIES '!ABLE lOCALI'I'I'E.S ------~-----~------~~--~--~------~-~~-----~~--~--~- + Acer glal::rum 5 Tahquitz Peak + Perideria parishii 5 Tahquitz Meadow + Polygonum douglasii 5 Beeds Meadow + Amelanchier pallida 6 Tahquitz creel + Cheilanthes covillei 6 Tahquitz Peak, Suicide Eriastrum densifolium 6 Caram.ta Alnus rhombifolia 8 Lower drainages + oxytheca emarginata 8 Desert Divide, caramba Galium parisbii 8 Widespread in rocks lotus cblongifclius 8 Willow Creek tieucheta birsutissima 9 widespread in rocks + Holodiscus microphyllus 9 Tabquitz Creek + Ivesia callida 9 Near south Bidge Trail -179-

State Park Wilderness Area 1. Trampling of Bare Plants Near 1rails

~------SPECIES 'I ABlE 1EA.Il SECTION ------~------~------+ Antennaria rosea 5 Tamarack Chimapbilamenzisii 5 Fuller Bidge + Chimnphila ~mbellatum 5 Fuller Bidg~; + Euphortia palmeri 5 Angel•s Glide + Garrya fremonti 5 Fuller ridge + Hypericum anagalliodes 5 Angel's Glide Mimulus floribundus 5 Hidden lake Divide osofrhiza chilensis 5 long Valley Pyrola picta integra 5 Several Pyrola picta aphylla 5 Marion Mt .. + Smilacina racemosa amplexicale 5 Fuller Eidge Ihalictrum fendleri 5 long Valley, Bound Valley + Circium californicum 6 Deer Springs 1rail Monardella lanceolata 6 Deer Springs Trail + l?yrola secunda 6 Fuller Bidge + Sarcodes sanguinea 6 Several Chrysothamnus nauseosus 8 Long Valley Cordylanthus nevinii 8 Bidden lake Divide Draba corrugata 8 Hidden lake Divide + Erigercn treweri 8 Bidden lake Bidge Eriogomun wrightii 8 Several Galium angustifolium 8 Several + Keckiella turnata 8 Deer Springs ~rail Leptoda~tylqn pungens 8 Long Valley Lupinus formosus 8 Several Monardella linoides 8 Several Mcnardella odortissima 8 Several Penstemcn grinnellii 8 Several Penstemon latrcsus 8 Several l?hacelia imbricata 8 Several Philadelphis microphyllus 8 tong Valley Salvia pachyphylla 8 Hidden lake Divide Silene verecunda 8 Several Zauschneria californica 8 Several Horkelia bolanderi 9 Angel's Glide Keckiella rothrockii jacinteus 9 Several Bibes nevadense 9 long Valley ------~------~------~-----~---~----~~------181-

2. Trampling of Rare Plants in Campgrounds and Scenic Areas

----~------~------~~~------~--~----~~----~------~----~~ SPECIES 'I ABlE lOCALITIES --~~------~--~--~---~------~~----~~------~-~~---Allium l::uelewii 5 Bound Valley + Antennaria rosea 5 Tamarack Valley + Aster al~igeneus 5 Wellman's Cienaga + Carex multicostata 5 Round Valley + Dodecatheon al~inum 5 Round Valley, Wellman's Cienaga + Dodecathean redolens 5 Little Bound Valley + Eleocharis macrostacbya 5 Bidden Lake + Habernaria leucostachys 5 Round Valley, Deer springs + Hypericum anagalliodes 5 Hellman's Cienaga + Juncus kelloggii 5 Hidden lake + Poa l::olanderi 5 Tamarack Valley + Borippa curvisiligua 5 Hidden Lake stipa cccidentalis 5 San Jacinto Peak Trisetum specatum 5 Bigh elevation peaks Arabis inyoensis 6 Cornell Peak Calyptridium parryi 6 High elevation peaks + Potamagetum diversiflorum 7 Hidden Lake + Calyptridium pygmaeum 8 Hidden lake + Juncus mertensiana 8 Deer Springs, Hidden lake Lilium parryi 8 Wellman's Cienaga• Deer Springs Silene parishii 8 High elevation peaks + Sisyrinchium bellum 8 Deer Springs, Hellman's Cienaga Bibes nevadense 9 Bound Valley + Trichostema austromontanum 9 Hidden La.ke ------~-~-----~~------

3. Bare Plants commonly Picked by Osers

-----~~~-~------~----~-----~~------~-~------~~--~-SPECIES 'I ABLE lOCALITIES ~------~--~------~------~--~---~-~~-~~--~ Sarcodes sanguinea 6 Various places Lilium parryi 8 Deer Springs ---~~------~------~-----~------~------~------~-~----

4. Potential Impacts cue to Activities Close to Rare Plant Populations

---~------~------~-~------~--~-SPECIES '!ABlE lOCAtiTlES ~~~~------~------~------~------~-----~-~~~---- + CalyFtridium monandrum 5 Deer Springs ~rail + Carex multicaulis 5 Round Valley + Perideridia parishii 5 Wellman•s Cienaga + oxyria digya 1 S~n Jacinto Peak + Banunculus eschschcltzii 1 San Jacinto Peak Galium parishii 8 Widespread in rocks + Lotus ctlongifclius 8 Bidden Lake Divide Trail Widespread in rocks Selaginella as~rella 8 Wellman's Cabin Trifoliu~ variegatum 8 Beuchera hirsutissima 9 Widespread in rocks + Bolodiscus micrcphyllus 9 Marion .Flats Leptodactylo~ jaege~i 9 cornell Eeak, Bidden Lake ------+ Species determined as rare within the wilderness boundaries by their occurrance in 5~ or fewer of the plot samples4 LITERATURE CITED

Abrams, 1. "Endemism and Its Significance in the California Flora." Proceedings of the International Congress of Plant Science 2 (1926):1520-1523.

Adamus, P.R. and G.C.Clough. "Evaluating Species for Protection in Natural Areas." Biological Conservation 13 (1978) :165-178.

Ashe, w.w. "Reserved Areas of Principal Forest Types as a Guide in Developing an American Silviculture." Journal of Forestry 20 (1922):276-283.

Ayensu, E.S. and B.A. DeFilipps. Endangered and Threatened Plants of the United States. Washington: Smithsonian ,Institution and the World Wildlife Fund, 1978.

Bailey, H. The Climate of Southern California. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1966.

Barbour, N. and J. Major. Terrestrial Vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley Interscience, 1977.

Becker, S. and J. Birmingham. The San Jacintos: A History and Natural History. Historical Commission Press, 1981.

Bell, K. and L.C. Bliss. "Alpine Disturbance Studies: Olympic National Park." Biological Conservation 5 (1973) 1:25-32.

Boden, R.W. and J.D. Ovington. "Recreation Use-Patterns and Their Implications for Management of Conservation Areas. " Biological Conservation 5 (1973) 4:265-270.

Bratton, S.P.; M.G. Hickler; and J.H. Graves. "Visitor Impact on Backcountry Campsites in the Great Smokey Mountains." Environmental Management 2 (1978) 5:431-442.

Bratton, S.P. and P.S. White •• "Rare Plant Sites and Recreation Visitation on Mount LeConte." Gatlinberg, Tennessee: Uplands Field Research Laboratory, Great Smokey Mountains National Lark. (Unpublished manuscript.)

Brown, A.B. "Geology of a Portion of the Southeastern San Jacinto Mountains, Riverside County, California." M.S. thesis, University of California, Riverside, 1968.

Burden, R.F. and P.F. Randerson. "Quantitative Studies of the Effects of Human Trampling on Vegetation as an Aid to the Management: of Semi-Natural Areas." Journal of Applied Ecology 9 (1972): 439-457. -182- -183-

California Native Plant Society. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (and supplements) Special Publication No. 1, 1980.

California, State Of. "The Status of the California Wilderness Preservation System and the Secretary for Resources Recommendations for Additions to the System." (Unpublished report to the Governor and the Legislature). 1978.

Church, w. "The Coming of the New Deal." Journal of Forestry 75 (1977) 7: 388-389.

Cole, D.N. "'Estimating the Susceptibility of Upland Vegetation to Trailside Alteration." Journal of Applied Ecology 15 (1978) : 281-286.

_____ . "Managing Ecological Impacts at Wilderness Campsites: An Evaluation of Techniques." Journal of Forestry (February 1981): 86-89.

_____ • "Wilderness Campsite Impacts: Effect of Amount of Use."Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station Research Paper INT-284, 1982.

Cole, D.N. and E.G.S. Schremer. "Impacts of Backcountry Recreation: Site Management and Rehabilitation." u.s. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station General Technical Report INI-121, 1981.

Cole, D.N. and R.P. Washburne. "Problems and Practices in Wilderness Management: A Comprehensive Summary of a Survey of Management in the National Wilderness Preservation System and Likely Additions." llissoula, Montana: u.s. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, 1981. (Unpublished draft.)

Conrad, S.G. and S.R. Radoseuch. "Post Fire Succession in white Fir Vegetation of the Northern Sierra Nevada." Madrona 29 (1982) 1:42-56.

Cowen, . "Science and the Wilderness." In Proceedings of the Sixth Biennial Wilderness Conference. Berkeley: Sierra Club, 1960.

Cutler, M.P. "Wilderness Decisions: Values and Challenges to Science." Journal of Forestry (February 1980) : 74-77. -184-

Dale, D. and T. Weaver. "Trampling Effects an Vegetation on the Trail Corridors of North Rocky Mountain Forests." Journal of Applied Ecology 11 (1974): 767-772.

Diamond, J.W. "The Island Dilemma: Lessons of Modern Biogeographic Studies for the Design of Natural Reserves." Biological Conservation 7 (1975): 129-146.

Diamond, J.M. and R.M. May. "Island Biogeography and the Design of Nature Reserves." In Theoretical Ecology Principles and Applications. By R. M. May. Philadelphia: Sanders, 1976.

Drury, W.H. "Rare Species of Plants." Rhodora 82: 3-48.

Ehrenfeld, D.W. "The Conservation of Non-Resources." American Scientist 64 (1976): 648-656.

Fish, B.C. and R.L. Bury. "Wilderness Visitor management: Diversity and Agency Policies." Journal of Forestry (September 1981): 608-612.

Frankel, O.H. and M.E. Soule •• Conservation and Evolution. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1981.

Franklin, J.F.; R.E. Jenkins; and R.M. Romancier. "Research Natural Areas: Contributors to Environmental Quality Problems." Journal of Environmental Quality 1 (1972) 2: 133-139.

Frissell, S.S. and G.H. Stankey. "Wilderness Environmental Quality and the Search for Social and Ecological Harmony." Proceedings. Society of American Foresters. Hot Springs, Arkansas, 1972, pp. 170-183.

Gribb, P.J. "A Theoretical Background to the Conservation of Ecologically Distinct Groups of Annuals and Biennials in the Chalk Grassland Ecosystem." Biological Conservation 10 (1976): 53-76.

Hall, H.M. "A Botanical Survey of the San Jacinto Mountains." University of California Publications in Botany 1 (1902): 1-140.

Hall, H.M. 1902. Unpublished field notes.

Hanawalt, B.B. and R.H. Whittaker. "Attitudinally Coordinated Patterns of Soils and Vegetation in the San Jacinto Mountains, California." Soil Science 121 (1976): 114-124. -185-

Hardin, J.W. "Vascular Plants: Introduction." In Endangered and Threatened Plants and Animals of North Carolina. Edited by J.E. Cooper, s.s. Robinson and J.B. Funderburg. Raleigh, N.C.: North Carolina State Museum of Natural History, 1977, pp. 55-63.

Harpel, J.A. "A Preliminary Floristic Study of the Mosses in the San Jacinto Mountains." M.S. thesis, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, 1980.

Hendee, J.C. and G.H. Stankey. "Biocentricity in Wilderness Management," Bioscience 23 (1973) 9: 535-538.

Hendee, J.C.; G.H. Stankey; and R.C. Lucas. Wilderness Management. u.s. Department of Agriculture :Forest Service Miscellaneous Publication No. 1365, 1978.

Herrmann, B. and S.P. Bratton. "Great Smokey Mountains National Park as a Biosphere Reserve: A Research Monitoring Perspective." Research/Resources Management Report No. 23, u.s. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Atlanta, Ga., 1977.

Hill, M.D. "Reciprocal Averaging: An Eigenvector Method of Ordination." Journal of Ecology 61 (1973): 237-249.

_____ • TWINSPAN - A FORTRAN Program for Arranging Multivariate Data in an Ordered Two-Way Table ~ Classification of the Individuals and Attributes. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell Ecology Programs, Ecology and Systematics, Cornell University, 1979a.

______. DECORANA - A FORTRAN Program for Detrended Correspondence Analysis and Reciprocal Averaging. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell Ecology Programs, Ecology and Systeinatics, Cornell University, 1979b.

Houston, D.B. "Ecosystems of National Parks." Science 172 (1971): 648-650.

James, H.C. The Cahuilla Indians. Banning, Cal.: Malki Museum Press, 1968.

James, T.D.; D.W. Smith; E.E. MacKintosh; M.K. Hoffman; and P. Monti. "Effects of Camping Recreation on Soil, Jack Pine, and Understory Vegetation in a Northwestern Ontario Park." Forest Science 25 (1979): 333-349. -186-

Jenkins, R.E. and W.B. Bedford. "The Use of Natural Areas to Establish Environmental Baselines." Biological Conservation 5 (1973) 3: 168-174. -186- Johnston, R. M. and R.W. Brown. Hydrological Aspects Related To management of Alpine Areas. Ogden, Vt.: u.s. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Banger Experiment Station, 1979.

Josephson, 1. "Why Maintain Biological Diversity?" Environmental Science and Technology 16 (1982): 94-97.

Kessell, S.R. Gradient Modeling: Resource and Fire Management. New York: Springer Verlag.

Leiberg, J.B. "San Jacinto National Forest Preserve." Ninteenth Annual Report of the u.s. Geological Survey 20 (1878) 5: 455-478.

Leopold, A. "Wilderness and Its Place in Forest Recreation Policy." Journal of Forestry 19 (1921) 7: 718-721.

______. ~ Sand County Almanac. New York: Oxford University Press, 1949.

Liddle, M.J. "A Selective Review of the Ecological Effects Human Trampling on Natural Ecosystems." Biological Conservation 7 (1975) : 17-36.

Lovejoy, I.E. and D.C. Oren. "The Minimum Critical Size of Ecosystems." In Forest Island Dynaics in Man-Dominated Landscapes. Edited by R.L. Burgess and D.M. Sharpe. New York: Springer Verlag, 1981.

Marsh, G.P. Man and Nature Or Physical Geography as Modified by Human Action. New York: Charles Scribner, 1864.

McCloskey, N. "The Wilderness Act: Its Background and Meaning." Oregon Law Review 45 (1966) 4: 288-321.

McVaugh, B. "The Vegetation of the Granite flatrocks of the Southeast United States." Ecological Monographs 13 (194 119-166.

Merriam, C.F. Life Zones and Crop Zones of the United States Washington, D.C.: u.s. Department of Agriculture Bullet; IX, 1898. -187-

Merriam, L.C. and C.K. Smith "Visitor Impact on Newly Developed Campsites in the boundary Waters Canoe Area." Journal of Forestry 72 (1974) 10: 332-334.

Morse, L.E. and M.S. Henifin. Rare Plant Conservation. York: New York Botanical Gardens, 1981.

Munz, P.A. ~ Flora of Southern California. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974.

Murdy, WA. "Plant Speciation Associated with Granite Outcrop Communities of the Southeastern Piedmont." Rhodora 70 (1968): 394-407.

Nash, R. Wilderness and the American Mind. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973.

Norman, C. "A Threat to One Million Species." Science 214 (1981): 1105-1107.

Norris, R.M. and R.W. Webb. Geology of California. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1976.

Paysen, T.E; J.A. Derby; H. Black; V.C. Bleich; and J.W. Mincks. ~Vegetation Classification System Applied Southern California. u.s. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station General Technical Report PSW-45, 1980.

Pearson, G.A. "Preservation of Natural Areas in the National Forests." Ecology 3 (1922) : 284-287.

Peet, R.K. 'Forest Vegetation of the Colorado Front Range." Vegitation 45: 3-75.

Phillips, D.I. "Life Forms of Granite Outcrop Plants." American Midland Naturalist 107 (1982) 1: 206-208.

Pickett, S.T.A. and J.N. Thompson. "Patch Dynamics and the Design of Nature Reserves." Biological Conservation 13 (1978) 27-37.

Raven, P.H. and D.I. Axelrod "Origin and Relationships of the California Flora •• " University of California Publication in Botany 72 (1978) : 1-133.

Reteles, J.G. "Order Three Soil Resource Survey of the San Bernardino National Forest." U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. (Draft report.) -188-

Romme, W.H. and D.H. Knight. "Fire Frequency and Subalpine Forest Succession Along a Topographic Gradient in Wyoming." Ecology 62 (1981) 2: 319-326.

Shaffer, M.I. "Minimum Population Sizes for Species Conservation." Bioscience 31 (1981) 2: 131-134.

Shelford, V.E. Naturalist's Guide to the Americas. Ecological Society of America, 1926.

Sierra Club. The Meaning of Wilderness to Science Proceedings of the Sixth Biannual Wilderness Conference Berkeley: Sierra Club, 1960.

Simmons, J.B.; R.I. Beyer; P.E. Brandham; G.l. Lucas; and V.T.H. Larry. Conservation of Threatended Plants. New York: Plemun Press, 1976.

Soule, N.E •• and B.A. wilcox. Conservation Biology. Massachusetts: Sinaver Press, 1980.

Speight, M.C.D. "Outdoor Recreation and Its Ecological Effects •• " Discussion papers in Ecology 4. University College, London, 1973

Stanley, J.T.; H.T. Harvey; and R.J. Hartesveldt. Wilderness Impact Study. Berkeley: Sierra Club, 1979.

Stebbins, G.I. and 3. Major. "Endezaismn and Speciation in the California Flora." Ecological Monographs 35 (1965): 1-35.

Stone, E.C. "Preserving Vegetation in Parks and Wilderness." Science 150 (1965) : 1261-1267.

Stottlemeyer, J.R. "Evolution of Management Policy and Research in the National Parks." Journal of Forestry (January 981) : 16-20.

Sydnor, R.H. "Geology of the Northeast Border of the San Jacintc Pluton, Palm Springs, California." M.S. thesis, University of California, Riverside, 1975.

Synge, H. and H. Townsend. Survival or Extinction. Rew, U.K.: Benthan-Moxon Trust, Royal Botanical Gardens, 1978.

Tans, W. "Priority Ranking of Biotic Natural Areas." The Michigan Botanist 13 (974) : 31-39.

Telfer, E.S. "Establishing and Managing Natural Areas." The Forestry Chronicle 47 (1971) 3: 138-140. -189-

Terbough, J. "Preservation of Natural Diversity: The Problem of Extinction-Prone Species." Bioscience 24 (1974) 12: 715-722.

The Nature Conservancy. Preserve Management Manual. Arlington, Va.: The Nature Conservancy, 1972.

Thorne, R.F. "The Vascular Plant Communities of Southern California." In Plant Communities of Southern California -- -- Edited by 3. Latting. Special Publication No. 2. Berkeley: California Native Plant Society, 1976.

____ • "Montane and Subalpine Forests of the Transverse and Peninsular Ranges." In Terrestrial Vegetation of California. Edited by N. Bartour and J. Major. New York: John Wiley Interscience, 1977.

United States Department of Agriculture Soil Survey Staff. Soil Taxonomy: ~ Basic System of Soil Classification for Making and Interpreting Soil Survey. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook No. 436. Washington, D.C.: u.s. Government Printing Office, 1975.

Walton, S. "Bailing Out the Ark." Bioscience 30 (1980) 8: 553-556.

Wentworth, T.R. "Vegetation on limestone and Granite in the White Mountains, Arizona." Ecology 62: 2: L469-482.

Whittaker, R.H. and W.A. Niering. "Vegetation of the Santa Catalina Mountains, Arizona: A Gradient Analysis of the South Slope." Ecology 46 (1965) 4: 429-480.

White, P.S. Reports on Rare, Threatened and Endangered Vascular Plants: Discussion and Guidelines." Research/Resources Management Report No. 33. Gatlinburg, Tenn.: u.s. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Southeast Region, Uplands Field Research Laboratory, 1980.

Willard, B.E. and J.W. Marr. "Effects of Human Activities on Alpine Tundra Ecosystems in Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado." Biological Conservation 2 (1970) 4: 257-265.