USDA Forest Seruice General Technical Report S E-I I March 1977 Conference on Endangered P in the Southeast PROCEED Betula uber May 11- 13, Asheville, North Caro Forest Seruice - U. S. Department of Agriculture Sou theastern Forest Experiment Stat ion Asheuille, North Carolina Conference on Endangered Plants in the Southeast PROCEEDINGS May 11- 13, 1976 Asheville, North Carolina Sponsored by Southeastern Forest Experiment Station USDA Forest Service University of North Carolina -Asheville Citation: USaA Forest Service 1977. Conference on endangered plants in the southeast proceedings. USnA For. Sew. Gen, Tech, Rep. SE-11, 104 PO Southeast. For. Exp, Stn,, Asheville, N. C. BMECTIVES OF THE 68NFEEMCE .................... James D, Perq DEFINITION AYD CUSSIFICATZOM OF ENDANGEBD ar.liD TENED PUNT SPECIES (I) ................. James F. Nadthews DEFINITION AND CUSSIPICATION OF ENBANGEWE) AND ATENED PUW SPECIES (11) ................. Thomas M. fillen A WVIEW OF Tm EWDANGEWD SPECIES ACT OF I973 ........... James D, WJ1Li;azns and Gail S, Baker TE ENDARGEMD AND T ATENED PUm PROG U,S, FISM AND WILDLIFE SewecE ................ Gail S, Baker and Bruce mcBryde ............... PEBEML AND STATE PRW ON ENMHGEWB PUNTS .......... FranZ;; B. Barick EXPLOITATION OF ENITDANGEmD PUNTS AHD THEIR MBLTATS ........ Jerv McCollum R0U OF FISH Am WILDLIFE SERVICE CB%a@EBS;IIMG ENWNGEMD FWM ....................... Vernon 6, Henq A 60mWkT APPROACH TO THE PROTECTION OF ENMNGEmD SPECIES .... Charles M. Parrish IIE Tm STATE HATURBL BERLTAGE PRW ................ Robert M. Chipley NAWUL AWAS IN "XI AAPPAUCHIAN SECTSOM UGISTEWD WITR "li" SSCSICXEW OF RECAN PBMSTERS ............... Keith A, Argow NING DISTRIBUTION, ..................... Roy 8, Clarkssn a-APREmSSmPORT . , . , . , , 75 Robert Kra% ENBANGEmD SPECIES - QUESTIONS OF SCIENCE* ETM96S AKD UW e r m s s 81 J, Frank McCormick SPECIES BIOLWY: DEFINITION, DIWCTIOM, DATA AMD DECZSIBMS~~coea~eo*~e~mrs~~ro~~~~~~r88 J, R, Massey and Paul D, Whitson NAWI"bPIL AmA CUSSIElCATfON SPS"SlH: A STANDASDIZATION SCBm e~~o~~~~~e+~e~a~a~~ersm~~~~e95 Albert E, Radford COWEmNGE OM ENDANGEWD BUmS EN THE SOUTHEAST . 102 6, R, Naggle OBJECTIVES OF THE CO4P9%I?ERENGE James D, Perry-11 It is obvious from the program that this conference is not an attempt to derive another list of plants which are endangered in one way or another. Rather, it is an effort to arrive at some ways of standardizing our screening procedures and research priorities. It is generally agreed that we must strength- and broaden our knowledge of plant di~tpibutisns~sf habitat preferences, of population dynamics, and of species biology in general. Although we all have some built-in notion of what species are rare or endangered in our areas, we need so-me workable definitions to use in elassifyiag these, and the first tvvo papers coneern this. Subsequent papers explore federal and state legislation affecting our actions and the question of propagation and c ornrnercial exploitation of endangered plants, such as the Venus' fly-trap. In the second session, five papers concern preservation sf sufficient suitable habitat--naturalareas or even whole communities--and on what bases such areas may be considered worthy of preservation. The remain- ing papers present research needs, dealizrg with what botanists should do to expand knowledge of specizs biology and distribution. This is a pressing need of professional foresters and othzrs who manage public Lands. In order to manage public lands in such a way as to preserve areas critical to given species, field personnel need to know what these species are and what their requirements are. In addition, field personnel may lack the time or training to identigy plants limited in distribution, An efficient means of inventory, storage, and retrieval of inforrnati~nis needed, Some of the questions we must face, and hopefully reach some consensus about, are: I) How rnay we categorize endangered species in a realistic and consistent way from state to state so future legislaticn will have teeth in it? 2) What are the best ways to preserve rare, endangered, and endemic species? 3) What research approaches do we need in order to establish priorities as time runs out 3 This conference was also enliisionrd as a means of communicating, so that we from various states can find out what those in other states are doing and the different problems being faced. L' Chairman, Departnlent of Biology, University of North Carolina at Asheville. DEFINITION mD CLASSIFICATION OF EMDMGERED I4ND "rNREATENETr PLmT SPECIES James F, ~atthews' Abstract -- Definitions and categories of classification for endangered and threatened vascular plants, as determined by the N,C. Endangered and Threatened Piant Committee, are de- tailed, along with the philosophical guidelines used in pro- ducing a primary list of rare species and a secondary list of endangered and threatened peripheral species. The definition and classification of endangered and threatened species is the heart oS any successful effort in conservation and protection. Ev- eryone interested in endangered and threatened species has probably been frustrated by plans, programs, definitions and lists which often compli- cate the situation rather than improve it. Me of the North Carolina En- dangered and Threatened Plant Cornittee (The Committee is listed at the end of this paper.) have felt this same frustration, aile meeting to prepare a report for a state-wide Symposium on Endangered and Threatened Biota in November 1975, we decided to make some decisions, right or wrong, to initiate positive action toward conservation and protection. We had to analyze those species to be included, define the categories and evaluate the current status of each species a91 in the context of the long range process of conservation, The full text of that Symposium is being published by the North Carolina State Museum of Natural Wistory and will be available through the Museum, What I want to do today is to discuss some of the definitions and cat- egories, and to give some of the philosophical concepts used in reaching decisions. First, it is important to recognize that each state cannot in- dependently develop a list of endangered and threatened species now that the Federal Government has published a list through the Smithsonian Tnsti- tution (1974) and through the Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service (1975). Every state list should be so carefully compiled that it would stand up in court, as it will be tested in the halls of the State Legislature. Inclusion of all the popular wildfEowers produces a list that cannot be defended, ends up being riddled, thus losing its veracity. How do you defend the query ""Bt the Federal List has only 88 species for our state and yours has 328, why the discrepancy?" Me were comitted to gen- erating a defendable primary list of species, realizing that many of the showy, dramatic, and peripheral species would be omitted, Because of this, we also developed a secondary list of endangered and threatened peripheral species, Developing different lists with the possibility of various levels of concern dictates different laws to govern each category, an aspect that will be discussed in a later paper, l~rofessorof Biology, University of North Carolina, Charlotte, N. C. 28223. Finally, we tried not to become fwalved in the futtle exercise of perserving names* As Core (1955) so aptly said it, "~2vescsitgis not merely subjective or superficiall It is the result sf fundamental discon- tinuity of genetic systems*" We wanted to reeognlze the diversity in the North Carolina flora as realistica15y as possible, Our basic reference was the Manual of the Vascular Flora --sf the Gas~lfnas(Radford -et -9a1 19681, and our noaenclature, for the most past, follows their interpretam tion, We included 9% species in the primary list, Some of' these are hy- brids, and same have infraspeeiffc designations, Chance hybrids were not included, but species of well documented ancient hybrid origin, such as Wright" cliff-break fern (Pellaea X Hooker) and the Tennessee bladder fern Q X tennesseensis Shaver) were included because they represent distinct species of no less concern than those derived by other mechanisms- Spontaneous hybrids, even though given a binomial name suck as Habenaria X andrewsii mite ex Mile sr X radfordii Ahles, however rare, were not included, especially since the parental gene pools are knom, In the infraspecific category, we wanted ts recognize any gene pool designated as a subspecies or variety which fit our criteria for species included on the list, ise, Mountain paper birch var , (Regel) FemaLd), The degree sf taxo is not as important as genetic discontinuity. Whether we, as taxonomists, call something a species, subspecies or variety is insignificant if we are eon- cerned with preserving unique genotypes, We accepted the Smithssnian definition of endangered and threatened as a working model, with same modifications: : An endangered species is one whose survival in North Caroli to be in serious jeopardy, Its peril may result from destruction or drastic modification of its specific: habitat, over-exploitation by man, disease, predation, or specific competitian due to natural successisn, h endangered species must receive protection, or extinction in North Carolina probably will follow, Threatened: A threatened species is me that may Eikeiy becone endangered if its habitat is not maintained, or if it is greatly exploited by man, These are sften quite rare in North Carolina and should be