MONTANA This **cover" page added by the Internet Archive for formatting purposes s 583.99 MlltdcL 1892 TAXONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC STUDIES OF Cirsium lonqistylum IN THE LITTLE BELT MOUNTAINS, MONTANA » U.S.D.A. FOREST SERVICE - REGION 1 LEWIS AND CLARK NATIONAL FOREST MONTANA STATE DOCUMEMTS COLLECTION COT IC 1992 MONTANA STATE LIBRARY 1515 E. 6th AVE. HELENA, MONTANA 59620 Lisa Schassberger Roe Montana Natural Heritage Program 1515 E. 6th Ave. Helena, MT 59620 Challenge Cost-share Project February 1992 I r*" (^^ r^. /^ Of ? tcme. ^^^iUi\i\ SUMMARY Cirsium lonqistylum is a perennial thistle that is endemic to central Montana. It is primarily known from Little Belt Mountains, where it is nearly ubiquitous within mesic to moist meadow and stream terrace sites. A summary of the status of this species can be found in Schassberger and Achuff (1991) and Schassberger (1991) . In 1991, Cirsium longistylum was removed from the Watch List of sensitive species for Region 1 of the U.S. Forest Service due to abundance. However, because it is a state endemic known from a limited area (albeit common in that area) , and may be threatened by a weevil introduced as a biological control agent (used in an effort to limit the spread of the introduced Carduus nutans) , it continues to be categorized by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as C2 (U.S. Department of the Interior 1990). Cirsium lonqistylum is also ranked by the Montana Natural Heritage Program (Achuff 1991) as an S3 species; "rare in Montana (21+ occurrences)." Morphological variation in some populations has led to questions about possible hybridization with other Cirsium species, and about the systematic status of C. lonqistylum. Numerous collections were made during the 1991 field season, and sent to Dr. A. Cronquist (Botanist, New York Botanical Garden) for review. Based on this material. Dr. Cronquist (1992) stated that he now felt that "C. lonqistylum was a "good" species of limited distribution in Montana." He also felt that "it probably hybridizes with C. hookerianum and possibly C. scariosum Nutt.", and that "hybrids were best identified in the field." Dr. Cronquist annotated the specimens from the population at Neihart as C. hookerianum Nutt., and they will be considered as such in the demographic studies. In light of the results of the morphological overview, it would be appropriate to use techniques of electrophoresis to support the hybridization hypotheses. Permanent plots were set up at three sites (Russian Creek, Kings Hill, Neihart) in 1990 to study life history characteristics of C. lonqistvlum. As stated above, the population at Neihart will now be considered as C. hookerianum. Changes in population numbers from 1990 to 1991 within study plots were found to be a result of: loss of plants which had flowered in the previous year, loss of plants at the rosette stage, and recruitment rates. Over this short period, population sizes and number of plants flowering fluctuated, but only further study will determine if this is normal for the species. At Kings Hill in 1991, disturbance of the soil by rodents eliminated previously established rosettes, but appeared to aid in the germination of seeds as evidenced by the numerous seedlings present. At Neihart, many plants (31%) were grazed, either lightly or heavily. How grazing ultimately affects the ability of these rosettes to reach maturity will be revealed through continued monitoring. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE SUMMARY i STATUS 1 FIELD SURVEY 1 TAXONOMIC STUDIES 1 INTRODUCTION 1 METHODS 2 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS 3 DEMOGRAPHIC MONITORING TRANSECTS 3 METHODS 3 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS 4 RECOMMENDATIONS 12 LITERATURE CITED 13 DEMOGRAPHIC MONITORING DATA 14 STATUS SCIENTIFIC NAME: Cirsium lonqistylum Moore & Frankton. COMMON NAME: long-styled thistle. FEDERAL STATUS: 02 FOREST SERVICE STATUS: None. In 1991, Cirsium lonqistylum was removed from the Watch List of sensitive species for Region 1 of the U.S. Forest Service due to abundance. FIELD SURVEY While making collections of C. lonqistylum for the taxonomic study in 1991, a brief survey of the Highwood Mountains was completed. The introduced species Cirsium arvense and C. vulqare were both present here, but C. lonqistylum was not observed. It is possible that C. lonqistylum is associated with the calcareous soils of the Little Belt, Big Belt and Castle Mountains. The Highwood Mountains on the other hand, are volcanic centers that erupted shonkinite (similar to basalt, but greatly enriched in potassium) and other rocks about 50 million years ago (Alt and Hyndman 1986) . TAXONOMIC STUDIES INTRODUCTION: Several Cirsium collections from the Little Belt Mountains and the Sawtooth Range were sent to Dr. Arthur Cronquist (a specialist in the Asteraceae=Sunf lower Family) for verification in the winter of 1990-1991. The Sawtooth Range collection, Schassberqer (402) . NY, was verified as C. hooker ianum. However, of the two sent from the Little Belt Mountains (Schassberqer (403) , NY, Belt Park; Schassberqer (397) , NY, Thornquist Gulch) , Dr. Cronquist (1991) felt that the Thornquist Gulch collection "would seem to loe C. lonqistylum. " whereas the collection from Belt Park "looks to me like C. hooker ianum. " He went on to state that "I included C. lonqistylum, with some reluctance, in the single-volume flora for the Pacific Northwest, but I was uneasy about it then and I remain so now." Close examination by professional botanists of plants from the same population had often revealed a great deal of variability in the expansion of the involucral bract, a key character used in the identification of C. lonqistvlum. In the hopes that a more definitive conclusion might be reached, it was determined that a large number of specimens (preferably with duplicates) from sites across the range of the species should be sent to Dr. Cronquist for careful examination. METHODS: Collections of C. longistylum were made by the author from twelve locations in the Little Belt and Big Belt mountains, and one collection of C. hookerianum from the Sawtooth Range in 1991. Duplicates were taken at most sites, however, slow drying caused molding in some cases so that only five locations had one (or two) duplicate specimens. These specimens, along with three collected in 1990, and four (one Cirsium hookerianum from the Sawtooth Range, and three Cirsium lonqistylum from the Little Belt and Castle mountains) collected by Dana Field and Wayne Phillips (Lewis & Clark National Forest) were sent to Dr. Arthur Cronguist for verification in December of 1991. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Based on this material. Dr. Cronguist (1992) stated that he now felt that "C. lonqistylum was a "good" species of limited distribution in Montana." He also felt that "it probably hybridizes with C. hookerianum and possibly C. scariosum Nutt.," and that "hybrids are best identified in the field." Collections and subseguent annotations are as follows: Submitted as Cirsium hookerianum Nutt. Roe. Lisa, S. (464) 1991., NW side of Flesher Pass Field. D. (14) 1991., Sawtooth Range, Slide Rock Point Submitted as Cirsium lonqistylum Moore & Frankton Schassberqer. Lisa A. (403) 1990. Little Belt Mtns. Belt Park Annotated JAN 1992 by A. Cronguist as C. hookerianum Nutt. Schassberqer. Lisa A. (409) 1990. Little Belt Mtns., Hay Coulee Roe. Lisa. S. (465) 1991. Little Belt Mtns., Neihart Cemetery Roe. Lisa. S. (466) 1991. Little Belt Mtns., Harley Creek Possible hybrid (Cronguist 1992) Roe. Lisa. S. (467) 1991. Little Belt Mtns., Kings Hill Pass Possible hybrid (Cronguist 1992) Roe. Lisa. S. (468) 1991. Little Belt Mtns., Deadman Creek Roe. Lisa. S. (469) 1991. Little Belt Mtns., Birch Creek Roe. Lisa. S. (470) 1991. Big Belt Mtns., Duck Creek Pass Roe. Lisa. S. (472) 1991. Little Belt Mtns., Hay Canyon Roe, Lisa, S. (473) 1991. Little Belt Mtns., Onion Park Annotated JAN 1992 by A. Cronquist as C. hookerianum Nutt. Roe, Lisa, S. (474) 1991. Little Belt Mtns., O'Brien Park Schassberqer, Lisa A. (401) 1990. Little Belt Mtns., O'Brien Park Field, D. (13) 1991. Little Belt Mtns., Lamb Creek Field D. (16) 1991. Castle Mtns., Pasture Gulch Phillips H.W. 9910808-3) 1991. Little Belt Mtns. It is of interest to note that in general, the specimens determined as C. hookerianum came from habitats that were moist to wet, whereas the rest of the specimens were collected from more mesic sites. The exception to this rule is the collection from Kings Hill (a mesic site) that was determined as a potential hybrid. However, this site has been extensively disturbed by road improvement activities. In light of the results of the morphological overview, it would be appropriate to use techniques of electrophoresis to support the hybridization hypotheses and delimit the range of the species. The collections denoted "Belt Park" in the list above were from the plot referred to as Neihart in the demographic monitoring studies. DEMOGRAPHIC MONITORING TRANSECTS During 1990, three permanent monitoring transects were established in what were thought to be populations of C. lonqistylum on the Lewis and Clark National Forest. As stated above in the taxonomic discussion. Dr. Cronquist (1992) annotated the Neihart population as C. hookerianum, and it will be referenced as such throughout the rest of the report. The purpose of these transects is to provide more detailed data on the life history and population dynamics of C. lonqistylum. Data on survivorship and reproduction are important for understanding the biology of plants with limited distributions, especially when attempting to ensure their long-term preservation (Palmer 1987, Massey and Whitson 1980). METHODS: The locations and the geographic details and methods used to establish the three plots are contained in a report by Schassberger and Achuff (1991). As in 1990, individuals were placed in size classes that appeared to best relate to age. Additional categories were added as necessary in 1991. These included: ? - Rosettes or plants that had been recorded in the previous year but were not relocated in the current year. When present, possible causes of disappearance are noted. Gone - Plants that were recorded as dead in the previous year, and which had decomposed or disappeared by the current year. (For example: Plants that had flowered in 1989, were recorded as dead in 1990 (dead flowering stalks were still visible) , and as gone in 1991 (when stalks and leaves had disappeared) . Grazed - Many of the rosettes, especially at the Belt Park site, had been grazed. It was thought that this might have an effect on the ability of the plant to produce and store enough energy to eventually flower. Information on grazing was recorded as follows. Grazed heavily - Plant was significantly reduced in size, at least two leaves had been removed. Grazed - Plants that had a leaf or portion of a leaf removed . Finally, general observations about the site and plants were noted where possible. As before rosette=individual that has only whorl (s) of leaves, flowering plants=individuals that are reproductive. Raw data (1990-1991) recorded for each site are provided in Section VI., Demographic Monitoring Data, pp. 14-23. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Plot data for the three sites are summarized in Table 1, p. 5 (Russian Creek), Table 2, p. 7 (Kings Hill), and Table 3, p. 9 (Neihart) . Portions of this information are also represented graphically in Figures 1, 2, and 3, pp. 6, 8 and 10, respectively. In the tables, population growth rate (negative or positive) was calculated as the change (+) in the number of individuals from year 1 to year 2, divided by the number of individuals present in the plot in year 1, times 100. Population sizes decreased at Neihart and Russian Creek from 1990 to 1991, and increased substantially at Kings Hill. The total number of individuals within the plots was reduced at Neihart by 26 percent and at Russian Creek by 33 percent between 1990 and 1991, while the number of individuals increased at Kings Hill by 54 percent during the same time period. In 1991, the density of plants varied from 0.18 TABLE 1. Summary of life history monitoring data for Cirsium lonqistvlum at Russian Creek, Little Belt Mountains, Lewis and Clark National Forest, 1990-1991. (Percentages are rounded up or down to the nearest whole number.) RUSSIAN CREEK (elevation 6520 ft) Plot radius 37 ft (11.3 m) Observation Date 1990/07/27 1991/08/01 Total # plants (dead or alive) observed 106 Total # live rosettes and plants of current year Percentage change from the previous year 107 72 -33X New recruits (as a percent of all plants) Density of live (plants/m ) 0.24 23 (32X) 0.18 # small rosette plants (percent of small rosettes) # medium rosette plants (percent of medium rosettes) # large rosette plants; (percent of large rosettes) total a plants at rosette stage; (percent of plants at rosette stage) # plants flowering; (percent of plants flowering) mean # of heads open or unopened per flowering plant + SD, n Total # rosettes observed to be dead Total # of rosettes not relocated presumed dead Total # dead or not relocated rosettes; (as a percentage of all live plants present in the previous year) Total # of plants that had flowered in the previous year and are now dead Total # of plants not \ relocated that had flowered the previous year and are presumed dead Total number of dead or not relocated (flowering and rosette) plants; (as a percentage of all live plants present in the previous year 26 (24X) 24 (33%) 23 (21%) 25 (35%) 20 (19X) 19 (26%) 69 (64X) 68 (94X) 37 (35X) 4 (6X) 16.4 + 8.4 n = 37 13 + 16.1 n = 4 1 19 20 (19%) 33 57 (53%) < Q g X Q_ LUco LUcc DCo o < CO DC O CM O O o 00 o CO o o CM sivnaiAiQNi dO d3gi/\inN CO UJ E CO o 2 Q 111 C/) UJ E CO O cc CD z QC UJ o CO m CO O cc * 5 O CO h- CO CO UJ ■ t: m CO O en UJ O cc CL o TABLE 2. Summary of life history monitoring data for Cirsium longistylum at Kings Hill, Little Belt Mountains, Lewis and Clark National Forest, 1990-1991. (Percentages are rounded up or down to the nearest whole number.) KINGS HILL (Elevation 7880 ft) Plot radius 15 ft (4.6 m) Observation Date 1990/07/30 1991/08/02 Total # of plants (dead or alive) observed Total # plants of current year plants recorded Percentage change from the previous year New recruits; (as a percent of all plants) Density of live (plants/m ) a small rosette plants; (percent of small rosettes) # medium rosette plants; (percent of medium rosettes) # large rosette plants; (percent of large rosettes) total # plants at rosette stage; (X of plants at rosette stage) # plants flowering; (percent of plants flowering) mean U of heads open or unopened per flowering plant + SD, n Total # rosettes observed to be dead Total # of rosettes not relocated and presumed dead Total # dead and not relocated rosettes; (as a percentage of all live plants present in the previous year) Total # of plants that had flowered in the previous year and are now dead Total # of plants not relocated that had flowered the previous year and are presumed dead Total number of dead or not relocated (flowering & rosette) plants; (as a percentage of all live plants present in the previous year) 205 113 174 54X 133 (76%) 1.7 2.6 31 (27X) 141 (81X) 37 (337.) 24 (14X) 13 (12X) 9 (5%) 81 (71X) 174 (100X) 32 (28X) 10.5 + 7.7 n = 37 0 (OX) 5 35 40 (35X) 26 72 (64%) < Q O a.3 — £ X CO CD w O z 5 o m E O tr < K w CO m LU O tr UJ OOOOOOOOOO OOCD^OsJOOOCD^OJ sivnaiAiQNi dO d3ai^nN TABLE 3. Summary of life history monitoring data for Cirsium hookerianum at Neihart, Little Belt Mountains, Lewis and Clark National Forest, 1990-1991. (Percentages are rounded up or down to the nearest whole number.) NEIHART (Elevation 6960 ft) Plot radius 15 ft (A. 6 m) Observation Date 1990/07/30 1991/08/01 Total # of current year rosettes and plants Percentage change from the previous year New recruits (as a percent of all plants) Density (plants/m ) # small rosette plants (as a % of al I plants) # medium rosette plants (as a % of all plants) a large rosette plants (as a % of all plants) # plants at rosette stage (7. of plants at rosette stage) U2 105 -26% 44 (42X) 2.2 1.6 42 {30X) 50 (47X) 54 (38%) 38 (36X) 22 (16X) 17 06X) 118 (83%) 105 (100X) # plants flowering (percent of plants flowering) 24 (17%) 0 (0%) mean it of heads (open or unopened) per flowering plant (1 SD, n) 14.6 + 5.8 n=24 Total # rosettes observed to be dead in 1991 Total # of rosettes not relocated and presumed dead 54 Total # dead or not relocated rosettes; (as a percentage of all live plants present in the previous year) 57 (40%) Total # of plants that had flowered in the previous year and are now dead Total # of plants not relocated that had flowered in the previous year and are presumed dead 17 Total number of dead or not relocated (flowering and rosette) plants present; (as a percentage of all live plants present in the previous year) 81 (57%) 10 < Q Ol lu H- LU Iv \ \ \ S N \ \ \ ooooooooo CD"<:l-C\JOCX)CD'^CsJ g i 2 O LU ^ 5 * i CO UJ m w O w Ol (/) o tr m CD cr 5 sivnaiAiQNi do a3ai/\inN 11 plants/m^ at Russian Creek to 2 . 6 plants/in^ at Kings Hill. Much of the increase at Kings Hill was due to high seedling establishment in areas where rodent activity had substantially disturbed the plot. However, this same activity eliminated several of the larger rosettes that were present in this same section of the plot. Disturbance is beneficial to seedling establishment, but may eliminate rosettes before they mature to the flowering stage. Although the highest number of large and medium rosettes was observed at Neihart in 1990, only Russian Creek had flowering plants in the plot in 1991. At Russian Creek, flowering was reduced from 35 percent in 1990 to 6 percent in 1991. All of the plants that did flower in 1991 were recorded as large rosettes in 1990. The percentage of medium and large rosette plants increased in 1991 at Russian Creek, decreased at Kings Hill, and remained at nearly the same levels at Neihart in 1991. Casual observations by the author of sites across the Little Belt Mountains confirmed that there were fewer Cirsium plants flowering in 1991. This reduction in flowering could have been the result of climatic influences (May and June of 1991 were very wet and cold, or cyclical patterns of flowering. In 1991, observations on grazing and other impacts to plants were made at all three sites. At Russian Creek, none of the rosettes had been grazed, although three had dead leaves at the base and the vegetative portion of one was moldy. At Kings Hill, two of the rosettes were grazed lightly, while twelve had disappeared due to rodent activity. The highest amount of herbivory occurred at Neihart, due in part to its proximity to a seep used by cattle located approximately 0.1 mile south of the plot (pers. obs.). Here, 31% of the rosettes had been grazed, and the canopy cover of other plant species had been significantly reduced. How grazing ultimately affects the ability of these rosettes to reach maturity should be uncovered through continued monitoring. At Neihart, the negative growth rate was mainly due to the high loss of small, medium or large rosettes (54%) , and a 40 percent recruitment rate. Whereas at Russian Creek, the negative growth rate was mainly due to the loss of plants that had flowered in 1990 (35%) , and a 31 percent recruitment rate. Alternatively at Kings Hill, where 31 percent of the small, medium or large rosettes were lost between 1990 and 1991, and another 33 percent loss came from plants that had flowered in 1990, the recruitment rate (76%) was significant enough to offset these losses, resulting in a positive change in population size. 12 Population size fluctuations may be common for these species. Only further monitoring will yield information on population fluctuations. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that demographic monitoring be continued for at least two more years to better understand the life history characteristics of these species. In light of the results of the morphological overview, it would be appropriate to use techniques of electrophoresis to support the hybridization hypotheses, and delimit the range of the species. Although abundant locally, C. lonqistylum has a very limited distribution, and is still considered a C2 species by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (U.S. Department of the Interior 1990) . Land managers should be aware of this species presence with respect to any planning activities. 13 III. LITERATURE CITED Achuff, P.L. 1991. Plant species of special concern in Montana. Montana Natural Heritage Program, 1515 E. 6th Ave., Helena, MT. 2 0 pp. mimeo. Alt, D., and D.W. Hyndman. 1986. Roadside Geology of Montana. Mountain Press Publishing Company, Missoula, Montana. 427 pp. Cronquist, A. 1991. Letter of 11 March to Lisa Schassberger , Montana Natural Heritage Program, Helena, Montana, concerning annotation of Cirsium specimens from the Little Belt Mountains, Montana. Cronquist, A. 1992. Letter of 13 January to Lisa Schassberger Roe, Montana Natural Heritage Program, Helena, Montana, concerning annotation of Cirsium specimens from the Little Belt, Castle, and Sawtooth Mountains of Montana. Massey, J.R., and P.D. Whitson. 1980. Species biology, the key to plant preservation. Rhodora 82:97-103. Palmer, M. 1987. A critical look at rare plant monitoring in the United States. Biological Conservation 39:113-127. Schassberger, L.A. 1991. Report on the conservation status of Cirsium lonqistylum. a candidate threatened species. Montana Natural Heritage Program, Helena, Montana. 92 pp. Schassberger, L.A., and P.L. Achuff. 1991. Status review of Cirsium lonqistylum. U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Region 1, Lewis and Clark National Forest. Montana Natural Heritage Program, Helena, Montana. 78 pp. U.S. Department of the Interior. 1990. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; review of plant taxa for listing as endangered or threatened species; notice of review. Federal Register 50 CFR Part 17: 6184-6229. 14 DEMOGRAPHIC MONITORING DATA CATEGORIES R = Rosette Rs = small rosette, 1 whorl of basal leaves Rm = medium rosette, 2 whorls of basal leaves Rl = large rosette, > 2 whorls of basal leaves P = Plant that has bolted. Ph(x)= Plant with (x) number of open, flowering heads Pb(x)= Plant with (x) number of closed heads (involucral bracts completely enclosed flowers) Dead - a dead stem from the previous year * Ph(x)b(x)h(x)b(x) indicates a plant with more than one flowering stem per rosette Additional categories were added as necessary in 1991. These included: ? - Plants that had been recorded in the previous year but were not relocated in the current year. When present, possible causes of disappearance are noted. Gone - Plants that were recorded as dead in the previous year, and which had decomposed or disappeared by the current year. For example: Plants that had flowered in 1989, were recorded as dead in 1990 (dead flowering stalks were still visible) , and as gone in 1991 (when stalks and leaves had disappeared) . Grazed - Many of the rosettes, especially at the Belt Park site, had been grazed. It was thought that this might have an effect on the ability of the plant to produce and store enough energy to eventually flower. Information was recorded as follows. Grazed heavily - Plant was significantly reduced in size, at least two leaves had been removed. Grazed - Plants that had a leaf or portion of a leaf removed. Finally, general observations about the site and plants were noted where possible. i.e. moldy - mold was obviously present on leaves rodent mound - recent rodent nests, or tunnels were present For new recruits (or plants that were missed in 1990 but observed in 1991) direction and distance from stake and plant category are marked in bold type in the tables below. 15 Russian Creek (plot radius = 37') Direction from center stake (in degrees) 357 350 3A5 339 339 338 336 336 328 312 312 311 311 311 307 289 288 285 285 281 27V 279 272 272 264 264 264 263 259 259 258 256 256 256 256 256 255 255 254 253 253 253 253 252 251 248 248 246 246 246 245 244 243 242 242 242 238 238 238 238 236 233 232 231 223 222 220 220 210 210 Distance from stake (in feet in inches) 18' 5.5" 14' 0.5" 5- 8.0" 14' 10" 7' 10.5" 29. 6" 17' 3" 12' 4.5" 24' 10" 25' 9" 7' 22- 4.5" 19 4.5" 8' 10.5" 35' 9.5" 14' 7.5" 6' 3.5" 3' 11.5" 29' 3" 29' 5.5" 6> 11" 5« 4" 22' 6.5" 30' 3.5" 36' 18' 4" 17' 5" 24' 0.5" 13' 5" 11' 10" 15' 9.5" 22' 8.5" 13' 11" 13' 9" 11' 11" IT 3" 16' 5" 13' 1.5" 20' 23' 4.5" 22' 2.5" 19' 10" 19- 7" 12' 1" 11' 3" 18' 8" 11' 8" 19' 6" 19' 2" 12' 3- 17' 17' 1.5" 18' 1.5" 29' 21' 5" 19' 0.5" 28' 4" 17' 6" 16' 6.5" 3' 21' 8" 16' 9.5" 16' 4.5" 8" 1" IT 5.5" 11' 8" 11' 3" 11- 2" 8' 6" 12' 9" 1990/07/24 Plant 1991/08/01 Plant Rs ? Rm ? Rl Ph4b2 Dead Rl Rl dead leaves at base Rm Rm Ph9b6 Dead Rm Rm Rl Ph2b2 Rm Rm Rm Rm Rs Ph3 Dead Ph5b5 Dead Rl Ph2b10 Rm Rm Rl Rl Rm Rl Rl Ph7b5 Rl ? Rm Rs Dead Gone Rs Rm Ph15b30 Dead Ph8bl2 Dead Ph9b9 Dead Rs •> Rs Rs Rl Ph 16615 ? Rm Rm Ph5b4 Dead Rs Rl Rm ? Rm Rm Rs ? Rs ? Ph2b3 ? Rl Rs 7 Rs 7 Ph7b5 Dead Rl Dead Rs Rm Rm Rs Rm Rs Rm Rl Rn Rs Rs Rl Ph9b3h1b4 ? Rm Rm Rs RS PhSblO Dead Rs 7 Ph7b4 Dead Ph9bl6 Dead Rs Rm Rm Rl moldy Dead Gone Rl Rl Rl 7 Rs RS RS Rm 7 Ph6b4 Dead 16 207 207 192 189 186 185 185 177 174 172 172 170 169 167 167 166 165 162 162 160 158 151 151 150 150 U5 144 143 143 143 141 140 140 139 130 129 119 116 113 97 72 70 67 63 62 60 60 53 52 52 52 51 50 47 45 45 45 45 36 32 32 23 23 18 17 22' 10> 7" 16" 1" 17' 8.5" 28' 7" 36' 8" 29' 4" 21' 10.5" 28' 1" 37' 32' 10" Il- 8" ls' 34' 4.5" 17' 5" 35' 8.5" 23' 9" 35' 9.5" 25' 11" 30' 6.5" 33' 9" 37' 29' 32' 7" 18' 9.5" 34' 8" 19- 10" 20' 9" 17' 5.5" 25' 5" 24' 7.5" 29' 7" 32' 1" 17' 10" 11" 14' 3" 15' 7" 31' 2" 13' 5" 35' 7' 1" 27' 4" 29' 31' 6" 22' 10" 18' 4.5' 4' 10.5" 33' 5" 25' 4" 24' 6" 17' 8" 30' 11" 15' 11" 36' 9" 36' 5.5" 34' 10" 33' 5.5" 31' 3" 8' 3" 36' 10" 29' 3" 33' 7.5" 33' 5.5 28' 2.5" 27' 2" Ph9b8 ? Rl ? Ph5b2 Dead Rs Rm Rs Rm Rs 7 Rm Rl Rs Rm ? Rs Rs Rm Rm Ph8b9 Dead Dead Gone Rs Rs Rm Rs Rm ? Rl PhUblO ants, aphids present Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs ? Ph12b5 Dead Ph8b5 Dead Rl Rl Rs Rs Rs ? Rl Rl Ph9b4h5b2 Dead Rm Rm Ph11b12 Dead Rl Rl mold Ph7b5 Dead Rs Rm Rm Ph7b6 ? Ph15b7 Dead Rl Rl Dead ? Ph7b13 Dead Dead plant Ph23b11 Dead Rl Rl Rl Rm dead leaves at base Ph6b6 Dead Rm Rl Ph11b6 Dead Rm Rm Ph16b6 Dead Rl ? Rl Rm or Rl Rs Ph6b6 Dead Ph9b7 Dead Ph9b7 Dead Rl Rm dead leaves at base Ph4b5 Dead Rs Rs Ph12b5 Dead Ph4b1h1b2h3b2h4b3h4b2 Dead Rs Rs Rm Rm Ph6b3 ? 17 Kings Hill (plot radius = 15 ' ) * The new (in 1991) small rosettes recorded between 250° and were in areas that had been disturbed by rodent activity. 200' Direction from Distance from center stake stake (in degrees) (in feet in inches) 359 10' 10" 357 7' 345 8' 337 10' 10" 306 8' 10" 306 5' 9" 306 4' 2" 296 7" 2" 286 3' 5.5" 275 13' 11" 274 14- 2.5" 272 13' 9" 270 13' 8" 269 12' 267 13' 1" 265 11' 11" 265 12' 7" 264 12' 2" 263 12' 10.5" 260 9' 6" 260 13' 10" 260 13' 10" 260 13' 10" 260 12' 10" 260 13' 3" 257 8' 9" 256 8- 10.5" 255 11' 2" 255 8' 6" 255 8' 3" 255 8' 1" 253 7- 9" 253 7' 9" 253 7' 9" 251 7' 8" 251 7- 7" 251 T 5.5" 251 T 4" 251 7' 4" 250 7- 9" 249 8- 3" 249 8* 2.5 249 8' 249 7' 8" 248 8' 2" 248 8' 2" 248 8' 1.5" 248 8' 0.5" 248 8- 0.5" 248 7- 11.5" 248 7' 11" 248 7' 10" 248 7- 10" 248 7' 10" 248 T 10" 248 7' 10" 248 7' 10" 248 7- 7" 248 7' 7" 248 7- 6.5" 248 T 4" 248 T 4" 248 T 3" 247 T 11.5" 247 7' 11.5" 1990/07/30 1991/08/02 Plant Plant Rm Rm grazed Pb9 Dead PhlbS Dead Ph1b9 Dead Rm Rs Rm Ph2b3h3b1h2b2 Dead Ph7b5 Dead Rs Rs Rm Rs Rl Rl PhlbSbl Dead Rm Rm Rill Rm Rm Rm Rm Rm Rs RS Rm Rm Rs RS Rs Rs Rm Rm Ph1b2 Dead Rl Rl Rs Rl Rl PhlbUblO Dead Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs RS Rs Rs Rs Rs Ph7bl5 Dead Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs 18 247 247 7' 11.5" "s 247 7« 10" Rs 247 7* 8" Rs 247 7« 8- US 247 RS Rs 247 7" 4.5" Rs 246 7' 9" Rs 246 7' 8.5" Rs 246 7' 8.5- Rs 246 T 8.5" Rs 246 7' 7.5" Rs 246 7' 7.5" Rs 246 T 7.5" Rs 246 7- 7- Rs 246 7' 5" Rs 246 7' 2" Rs 246 7' 2" Rs 246 7* 1" Rs 245 14' 7" Rs Rm grazed 245 13' 10" Rs Rm 245 13' 10" Rs Dead 245 11' 4" Rs ? 2U 13' 4" Rs 242 7' 2- Rs 242 7* 1" Rs 242 6' 7.5" Rs 242 6' 5" Rs 239 8' 10" R« 7 239 7' 11" Rm 7 239 7' 1" Rn 7 239 3' 10" Rm 7 237 10' 6" Rs 236 14' 3" Rs ? rodent nest? 235 14' 3" Rs ? " 235 13' 8" Rs ? " 235 12' 11" Rs ? rodent mound 235 11' Rs ? " 235 9' 6" Rm 7 " 234 8> 4" Rs 22(3 11' 0.5" RS 233 9' 9" Rs 233 9' 4" Rs 233 9' 1" Rs 230 9' 1.5" Rs 230 9' 0.5" Rs 227 12' 10" Ph10b26 Dead 226 14' 6" Ph1b7 ? 226 8' 7" Rs ? 222 13' 2" Ph3b9 Dead 222 12' 11" Ph1b3 Dead 222 11' 9" PhlbS Dead 222 11' 9" Rs 7 222 10' 8" PhlbS 7 222 8' 5" Rs 222 7' 11" Rs 221 12> 2" Rs 221 12- 2" Rs 221 12' 2" Rs 221 11' 4.5" Rs 221 6* 6" Rs 221 9' 5" Rs 7 221 8' 8" Rs Rs 221 7' 11" Rs 220 8' Rs 219 12' 3" Ph1b4 Dead 219 11' 8" Rm ? 219 11' 1" Rm 7 219 3' 8" PhlbS 7 218 14' 4" Rs 218 13' 8" Rl 216 10' 6" Rs Rs 212 IT 8" Rm 211 12' 9" Rm Rl 211 12' 6" Rm Rm 211 12' Ph1b8 Dead 210 13' 8" Ph5b24 Dead 19 210 12' 3" Rl Rl 209 9" 5" Rs 209 9- 5" Rs 209 9' 2" Rs 208 13' Rs Rffl 208 12' 4" Rl Rl 208 11 ■ 2" Rs 208 10' 10. S" Rs 208 10' 9" Rl ? 208 10' 9" Rl ? 208 10> 6" Rs 208 10' 6" Rs 208 10' 6" Rs 208 10' 5" Rs 208 10' 2" Rs 208 9' 9" Rs Rs 208 9' 8" Rs Rs 208 9' 6.5" Rs 208 9' 4" Rs 208 9' 3" Rs 208 9' 2" Rs 208 9' 2" Rs 208 9* 2" Rs 208 9' 2" Rs 208 9' 2" Rs 208 9' 1" Rs 208 9' 1" Rs 208 9' 1" Rs 208 9' Rs Rs rodent mounds 208 8' 11" Rs 208 8' 11" Rs 208 8' 6" PhlW Dead 207 13' 5" Ph1b7 Dead 207 12' 7" Rm ? 207 8' 7" Ph1b2 ? 204 13' 9" Rm ? 204 13' 4" Rl Rl 204 12' Pb4 Dead 204 9' 10" Rm 7 12' 3" 9' 5" 9' 5" 9' 2" 13' 12' 4" IT 2" 10' 10.5" 10' 9" 10' 9" 10' 6" 10' 6" 10' 6" 10' 5" 10' 2" 9' 9" 9' 8" 9' 6.5" 9' 4" 9' 3" 9' 2" 9' 2" 9' 2" 9' 2" 9' 2" 9' 1" 9' 1" 9' 1" 9' 8' 11" 8' 11" 8' 6" 13' 5" 12' 7" 8' 7" 13' 9" 13' 4" 12' 9' 10" 6' 1" 14' 5" 11- 11" 6' 7" 3' 8" 12' 11" 12' 10" 12' 10" 7' 2" 14' 10" 14' 10" 14' 10" 14' 9" 14' 7" 14' 6" 14' 2" 13' 6" 13' 11" 14' 4" 9' 10" 5' 10" 14' 8" 12' 8" 11' 3" 12' 7.5" 12' 5.5" 10' 13' 7' 10" 13' 7.5" 11' 7" 12' 5" 11' 10" 14' 8" 13' 10" 11' 5" 14' 7" 13' 8" 204 6' 1" Rm ? 203 14' 5" Rm Rs 203 11- 11" PhlbS Dead 203 6' 7" Rs Rm 203 3' 8" Rm Dead 201 12' 11" Rs 201 12' 10" Rs 200 12' 10" Rm Rl 197 7' 2" Rs Rm 195 14' 10" Rs 195 14' 10" Rs 195 14' 10" Rs 195 14' 9" Rs 195 14' 7" Rm ? rodent mounds 195 14' 6" Rs ? " " 195 14' 2" Rm ? " " 195 13' 6" Rm ? " " 194 13' 11" Rs 193 14' 4" Rl ? 193 9' 10" Rs Rs 185 5' 10" Rs 184 14' 8" Ph4b12 Dead 182 12' 8" Rs 182 11' 3" Rs 181 12' 7.5" Rs 181 12' 5.5" Rs 177 10' Ph5b4 7 175 13' Rm Rm 167 7' 10" Rl 7 165 13' 7.5" Rs 163 11' 7" Rs 162 12' 5" Ph3b3h4b2 Dead 162 11' 10" Rm Rm 159 14' 8" Rs 159 13' 10" Rs 159 11' 5" Rs 155 14' 7" Rl Dead 155 13' 8" Rm Rm 20 155 150 150 150 150 142 139 130 128 104 98 66 45 40 21 10 8 7 5 5 5 5 3 3 3 2 2 12' 4" 3' 2" 3* 1- 3* 1- 3' 5' 8" 8' 7" 12' 5- 13' 10" 6' 1" 5' 3" 13- 2- 12- 5" 5' 5" 14' 4" 11' 10" 11' 10" 12* 14' 11" 13' 8" 13' 6" 11' 11" 13' 8" 9' 7" 9' 7" 12' 2" 12' 2" Rm ? Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Ph5b4 Dead Rl Dead Rs Ph6bl0 Dead Phlb17 Dead Rm ? Rs PhlbS ? Rl Dead Rm Rffl Rs Rs RS Rl ? Pb5 Dead Rs Rm Rm ? Rs Rm Rm 7 rodent hole Rm ? Rm Rm Rm ? 21 Neihart (plot radius = 15 ' ) Direction from Distance from center stake stake (in degrees) (in feet in inches) 360 10' 10" 360 8< 8- 360 8- 7" 359 14' 8" 359 11' 6" 359 6> 1" 354 9- 5- 352 12' 9" 352 10' 0.5" 351 12' 10" 350 9- 10" 349 10' 11.5" 349 10' 0.5" 346 13' 4.5" 342 7' 4" 342 6' 6" 341 15' 341 6' 10" 340 11' 3" 340 11' 2" 340 7' 6" 339 10' 8" 339 5' 8" 339 5' 7" 335 14' 6" 335 11' 2" 335 8' 335 7' 8" 335 7' 335 6' 11" 335 6' 11" 335 6' 11" 330 14' 4" 330 8' 330 5' 9" 329 12' 3" 320 14' 8" 318 14' 7" 314 10' 5" 290 4' 7" 285 13' 5" 284 13' 2" 284 11' 7" 279 11' 6" 279 10' 10" 268 14' 4" 264 12' 9" 264 11' 1" 260 13' 3" 260 10' 1" 255 13' 2" 255 11' 4" 252 13' 9" 252 13' 7" 252 12' 7" 252 11' 6" 251 V 9.5" 250 12' 7" 250 12' 5" 250 12' 2" 247 12' 2" 246 11' 4" 232 13- 7" 220 10' 10" 219 13- 9" 219 13' 7" 218 11' 7" 210 10' 1" 1990/07/31 Plant 1991/08/01 Plant Rs Rs Rm grazed Rs 7 Rl Rm ? Rl Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Ph8 Dead Rs Rs Ph10b3 Dead Rs 7 Rm Rm Rffl ? Rs ? Rl Rl Ph5b2 Dead Rs ? Rl Rm Ph19b3 Dead Rs ■> Rm Rm grazed Rm Rm " Rm Rm " Rs " Rs » Ph14b2 Dead Dead Gone Rl Rl grazed Rl Rl Rm Rm grazed Rm ? Rs Pb4b2 Dead Rm Dead died in 91 ' PhIO Dead Ph2b4h15b2h3b3 Dead Rm Rm grazed to 2 leaves Rm Rm grazed Rs Rm Rm grazed Rs Rm grazed Rm Dead Rs Rs Rm ? Rm Rm grazed Rl Rl Ph7b2 ? Rl ? Ph9b3 ? Rs Rm ? Rl ? Rm ? Rm ? Rs Rm grazed Rs Rs ? Ra Rm Rl Ra Rm Rm grazed 22 210 210 210 210 207 203 201 201 201 201 201 193 193 188 188 188 181 176 175 175 175 174 168 168 163 163 163 162 162 162 157 157 152 151 151 150 U2 U2 142 139 124 124 124 115 115 115 110 107 107 107 102 92 91 90 90 79 70 69 69 69 55 55 51 51 51 50 48 48 47 47 44 43 43 43 41 32 32 9' 9" 9' 6" 2« 9" 2' 9- 9' 4" 2' 9" 7- 5" 5' 7" 5' 7" 4' 7" 2' 5" 9' 7" 4' 5" 15' 14' 11" 14' 5" 12' 7- 6- 14' 11" 14' 3" 14- 13' 11" 12' 3" 12' 3" 14' 5" 11' 9- IV 7.5" 14' 9" 14' 11" 14' 4.5- 11' 6" IV 6" 5' 6" 6' 4" 6' 4" 14' 2- 13' 8" 10" 9" 10' 8" 14' 3" 12' 10" 7' 2" 3' 7" 14' 10" 12' 4" 7' 1" 15' 14' 7.5" 4' 3" 2' 4" 8' 6" 6' 4" 4' 5" 4' 3' 9" 7' 4' 10" 10' 7' 1" 7' 1" 14' 2" 6' 9" 13' 8" IV 1" 10' 6" 10' 5" 13' 8" IT 4" 13' 9" 5' 4" 12' 6" 13' 2" 12' 11" 6' 11" 6' 9.5 12' 4" 12' 4" Rs Rm " Rs Rm " Rl ? Rs Rm Rs grazed Rl ? Rm ? Rm ? Rm ? Rm Rl grazed Rl ? Phl2b2 Dead Rm Rra Rs Rs grazed heavi ly Rs ? Rs Ph8b4 Dead Rs Rn Rm grazed heavily Rs ? Rm grazed Rm ? Rs ? Rs 7 Rs Rs Rs Rs 7 Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs grazed Rs " Rs RS Rs Rs Rl Rl Ph13b3 ? Rs Rm grazed Rm Rm Ph17b5 7 Rm Rm Rl Rl Ph8b3 Dead Rl Rm grazed heavily Rm ? Rl Rm grazed heavily Rs Rl 7 Rl Rl Rl Rl Ph9bl Dead Rs Ph8b2 Dead Ph5blh5b4 Dead Rs Rs Phlhlhlhlhl ? Rs Rs Rs Rs Rs Rm ? Rl Rm dead leaves present Rs Rs ? Rl ? Phl4b6 Dead Ph6b6 ? Ph3b2 Dead Dead Gone Rs ? Rs 7 Rs 7 Rs Rs Rs Rs Rm grazed Rs Rm " 23 32 30 31 31 28 27 27 23 23 20 19 19 16 16 11 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 11' 10" 12' 3" 12' 1" 5- 5" 12' 5- 12' 9" 12" 7" 14' 9" 14' 9" 11' 4" 12' 3" 6' 6" 7' 10" 1" 12' 10" 8' 6" 8' 7' 7' 6' 9" 6' 7" 6' 3" 5' 11" 9' 6" 8' 2" 9' 9" 9' 4" 8' 6" 8" 2" 13' 9" 11' 3" 11' 6" 10' 8" 11' 7" 10' 11" 9' 5" 6' 11" 6' 11" 6' 5" 12' 7" 10' 10" 9' 8.5" 9' 8" 9' 4" Rs Rs Rm ? Rm Rl Rm 7 Rs Rm Rm Rm ? Rs Rm grazed heavi ly Rs Rm " " Rl ? Rs 7 Rm ? Phllbl ? Rm Dead Rs Rm Rs Rs Rs Rs ? Rs ? Rs Rs Rn Rl Rm Rm Rs ? Rm Rm grazed Rm Rm Rm ? Dead Gone Rl Rl grazed heavily Rm ? Rm Rm grazed heavi ly Rl Rl Rm ? Rm ? Rm ? Phl5b3 Dead Rm ? Rm ? Rm 7 Rm 7 Rm Rs Rm Rs Rs Rl Rl MONTANA STATE This "cover" page added by the Internet Archive for formatting purposes