Range-wide Status Assessment of Ho wellia aquatilis (water howellia) Prepared for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service By: Scolt Minccmoycr Montana Natural Heritage Program Natural Resource Information Svstcm Montana Stale Library July 2005 MONTANA Natural Heritage Program Range- wide Status Assessment of Howellia aquatilis (water howellia) Prepared for: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Grant Agreement: E-5-R- 15 By: ScoM Minccmoycr y O H T Aft A y% Natural Heritage ate "1»X), Natural Resource rai ObrarV X 5M^ l"'™™ 30011 System O 2005 Montana Natural Heritage Program P.O. Box 20 1800 • 15 15 East Sixth Avenue • Helena. MT 59620- 1 800 • 406-444-5354 This thx:uiicnt shoakl be cited as follows: Minccmoyer, S. 2005. Range-wide tfaiusasscssmcni of Howeitiaaifuaiilh iwncr hmv cilia). Report (o (he U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Moaiana Natural Heritage Program. Helena. MT. 21 pp. + appendices. .1 Executive Summary Hftweffia uqtunilr* A. Gray (water howellia) is an annual, aquatic plant endemic lot he Pacific Northwest region of (he United Stales, Listed as a threatened species undcrthc Endangered Species Act in 1994. itscurreni known distribution includes I be states of California, Idaho. Montana, Oregon and Washington. Al the time of federal listing under the HSA it was known from 107 occurrences in three states. Today. 2 1 4 presumed extant occurrences air kiown. occupying approximately 285 acres. The majority of occurrences are concentrated in ihree metapopi lat ions in the Swan Valley of wesi-cemra) Montana. Spokane Cointy. Washington and in western Washington, mainly on Fort Lewis Military Reservation. Thc federal government manages lands partially or entirely encompassing 32*i of extant occurrences, wiih one agency, the U.S. Fores Service, managing 5 7** of known occurrences. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service manages lands with 35 occurrences and the U.S. Department of Defense has 17 occurrences. In Montana, "checkerboard" land ownership in ihe Swan Valley complicates management with many occurrences occupying more than one ownership. Primary threats to water howellia are from changing water levels and invasive species. Consecutive years of droughi or exceedingly wet years may negatively affect populations if ponds remain drj oi if the) do not dry out enough to allow germination in the fall. Monitoring data has shown lhat populations have the ability to rebound following consecutive years of unfavorable conditions, though seed viability and germination rates are significantly reduced. Invasive species pose a serious and long-term ihrcal to water howellia. Introduced genotypes of Phtduris urutuiitmcca (reed canary grass) and Ins pscudacoms (yclk>w flag iris) are two of the largest threalstodaie. P. anlmEnacva is a potential threat to water howellia range- wide. In contrast. /. pmtdaronu has been a problem in water howellia ponds mainly in western Washington. Additional aquatic and riparian invasive species also pose threats on a more limited scale, though several have I he potential to more severely impaci water howellia in t he future. Monitoring programs have been implemented on the Flathead National Forest. Montana, Fort Lewis, Washington and forthe Idaho population, with several years of daia now available forthese populations. Additional monitoring programs si ill need to be implemented for other populations. Total population numbers for H&wctiia (u/tmfr/rj, aswith any annual species, are difficult lo estimate without quantitative survey data over many years. Approximately % of the known populations have only been visited once, and in many cases only presence/absence data is available due lo the difficulty of collecting accurate and precise quantitative data forihe aqualic species. If the sum of ihe minimum and maximum number of plants estimated at each occurrence are used asa basis forihe species total population, a range of 18,000-138.000 plants is derived. A sum of the median population si/c for each occurrence results in a figure of approximately 51.000 plants. The annual nature of ihe species in conjunction wit h its narrow ecological niche makes ii vulnerable lo long-term unfavorable weather patterns and climate change. In addition, the clustering of populations in just a few geographic areas also makes it more susceptible to regional and local influences. Invasion of ihe species* habiiat by non- native species is also a problem that most likely will continually need to be addressed. However, the majority of known populations occur on public lands providing the opportunity forthe implementation of conservation measures and strategies beneficial tothe long-term survival of the species. With im pie menial ion of management plans, continued monitoring and conservation protection of additional populations, delisting should bean achievable goal. in Acknowledgements This assessment was mudc possible by a giant from ihc U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Numerous individuals and organizations provided monitoring and occurrence data, including bin not limited tothc California Natural Divcrciiy Database. Idaho Conservation Data Center. Oregon Nainral Heritage Program. Washington Natural Heritage Program. Flathead National Forest and the Land Condition Trend Analysis Program ;* Foil Lewis Military Reservation. Thanks to Homing Stabiis for providing management information for Hum Creek Timber Company laid in relation to water howclliaaid to Karen Gray for providing additional information on the Idaho population. Thanks to Kathy Lloyd and Kathy Man in for diligently updating the Montana Natural Heritage Program's database of Montana water howclJia occurrences. Finally, thaiks to several reviewers who provided valuable input and com meats. IV Table of Contents Introduction I Species Informal ioi 2 Classification 2 Present Legal or Other Formal States 2 Description 2 Population Biology and Ecology 3 Geographic Distribution A Habitats 7 Laid Ownership 10 Potential Tkreats to Known Populations 1 1 Assessments and Recommendations 12 General Assortment of Treidsand Status 12 Status Recommendation 17 Liicrature Cited 19 Appendix A. H&n r etfict ttquatffis Occurrence Dal a by State and Element Occurrence Number Appendix B* Ainial Howeffia aquaiiiia Survey Daia by State and Element Occnrreice Number Appendix C. Howeffia aqiuttith Bibliography Appendix D. Global/State Rank Definitions Appendix E. Element Occurrence Rank Definitions List of Figures Figire 1. HoweUia aqttaulix plants 3 Figire 2. HoweUia aqtmUlin flowers 3 Figire 3. Distribution of HoweMa aquantis (extant and historical occurrences) 6 Figires 4-7. Howeffia aquviilis habitats 8 Figire 8. Idaho //. tHjmilifs pond dominated by Piutlari* ariindinacea and Aronl* calami* 12 Figire 9. Relationship between number of H. aquatili* populations observed (sampled) and number of plants estimated cack sample year. IS Figire 10. Sampling intensity of individual //♦ ^ha/*//* occurences si ratified by state and number of y care sampled 15 List of Tables Table I. Date of last observation of presumed cxiant ikwttciiccs of Htwelfut tujuatitis by tf ate and ownership 5 Table 2, Vascular plant species commonly associated with Howetfia aqtunith sites by sate 9 Table 3. Number of known Howeilia ttqtmitih occurences by year 13 Table 4. Ranking factors and assigned scores for the //. aqtmulis global siai us assessment 16 L Introduction Htrwcllia aqtmiHh A. Gray (water hDwcllia) is ;m annual, aquatic plant endemic lot he Pacific Notthwcsi region of (he United Stales, Listed as a threatened species indcrthc Endangered Species Act in 1994. iiscurrent known distribution includes I be stales of California, Idaho. Montana, Oregon and Washington. Its biology and ecology nuke it vilnerable to shon and long-term changes in climate and weather patterns as well as anthropogenic threats. Thorough stains reviews forthc species are out of date wii h the mod recent ones being completed by Roe and Shelly (1992) and I he U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1994). In addition, a drall recovery plan was prepared for the species in 1996 but never finalized and adopted by the U.S. Fish and Service (USFWS 1996). It 1994,aconscrvation strategy forthe species was finalized by Region 1 of the U.S. Forest Service covering all national forest lands in Montana. The purpose of this assessment is to compile and analyze current data on the known distribution, popilaiion ecology and management status of Httwcffia ttqtmiiiis. f ■ particular, population tirndsand current threats to the species are of particular importance in determining its current range-wide stains and whet her a change in listing stains may be warranted. II. Species Information A. Classification 1. Scientific Name: HmrelliaaqUatiEsA. Gray 2. Common Name: waicr howcllia 3. Family: Campaiulaccac (harebell family) 4. Type Description and Specimens Cited: Gray. Asa. 1379* Procccdiigsofthc American Academy of Ans and Sciences. 15:43-44. Tfumuts £ Joseph Howell $37* 1879. OregOl. Sao vies Island (Holotype: GH>. Probable Isotypcs at NY. Herbarium reference codes are from Holmgren and Holmgren (1990). 5. Size of Genus: How cilia is a roioiypic gcnis. B, Present Legal or Other Formal Statu 1. Global i. Legal Starts: Noie. ii. Heritage Raik: G3. (See Appendix D for Heritage Rank Definitions/) 2. National a. Legal Stains: Water howcllia is endemic to the United Slates. The species was listed as threatened uider the Eidaigercd Species Act on July I i. I994. Fig lie 1. tUtweUitt itqmtUiu plaits Figure 2. tioweUitnupiaUlix flow CIS 3, Similar Species: Calti/ticfo /w*f<*ro^/rW/*j (C&llitrichaccuei is vcgciutively similar to water lowclliaaad Tun id growing will it. However, the submerged! liicar leaves of tic Jailer species arc most often opposite and only rarely wlorled* Tic float iig leases are broadly ovale in coitrast to the lii car leaves of water lowcllia* Additioially,tbc flowers are axillary* aid ucoispicioisdic to the Jack of a corolla. li California. L*&ewr* Hmosa (Campaiulaccae) ivcursin similar habitats as water hrcwellia aid ii ihcsame geographic area. Howcvcr.lhc branching pattern atL. IhHOsa is different aid the leaves are shotierand not as linear. In M< >niuna 4 !■ .'■,.,.. ttii'ia. also in tbcCampaiulaccac.occuts in shallow watcrand drying mud around ponds and lakes in ibe valleys and on the plains, though i ts easily distinguished by its light blue to purplish flowers marked with white or yellow*. I). Population Biology and Ecology I. Reproductive Biology ind Phenology: How cilia aquatiii i ts an amual, reproducing eitircly by seed. Tic plant is predominantly a w liter am tal will gcrmiiatioi takiig place in tie fall and seedlings ovcr-wiitcring aid rrsuniug growth ii the spriig. Gemination of seeds occurs only wbei poids dry oit aid seeds are exposed to airtLesica l u 9(l, 1992 >. Tins, the popilotton si/e in a given year is affected by tie extent to wlkh I he pond dries out at tie end of the previous year Die in pan to tlisdepeidcicc. population size varies widely from year to year. Exceedingly wet years will detrimentally affect popilatioi sl*e tie lext year siice seeds will not geminate. Conversely, very dry years may also adversely impact populations if enough water is not preseit to sippott a ~good" popilatioi aid stbseqieit production of seed. Long-term seed viability is incenain tloigl it las been shown that seeds lyiig in the soil loigenhan eight months have decreased rates of gemination and vigor(Lcsica 1992). Tins, two or more consecitive years of exceedingly wci coiditioisordry coidiiions may lave a severe detrimental in pact on popilatioi sire due to tic decreased mmber of viable seeds. Monitoring data lion Montaia populations lave shown popilations rebound after two consecutive yearswith no plants observed. This provides some evidence it at asigiificait lumber of seeds reman viable for at Icasi three years, providing a bifkr against in favorable growing conditions in consecitive years. Water howcllia pmdnccsboth submerged, clctaogamous flowcixt flowers that do not open and arc self- pollinated) and emergent, chasmogamous flow-cis (floweret hat open and ullow r for pollination). Studies by Lcsica ct al. < J9HX)and Shelly and Mosclcy (198S) rcpon thai self-pollination appears to be the common means of fertilization and ibat out-crossing. I hough possible, is probab I y extremely rare. Plants begin growth in the spring. In low elevation poptlations in western Washington, this is typically early April and in western Washington and Montana by cariy May. Emergent Dowers bloom soon alien be stems reach ibe water surface and arc present from Jtne into August. Seed dispersal stalls in June from submerged flowers and extends unt il late summer from emergent rtowctslUSFWS 1996). Spread of seeds by waterfowl orothcr animals between ponds, I hough possible, has not been documented. 1967. Montana in 1973 and Washington in 1937 (U5PWS 1994. USFWS 1996. Shell) and Mosclcy 1998). At I be time of listing tnderthe Endangered Species Act. 107 total extant occurrences were known. These were foind in Montana (59). Washington (47) and a single occurrence in Idaho (USFWS 1994), Populations in California and Oregon were believed to be extirpated. Today, there are 2 14 total occurrences known from five Mates: California (6). Idaho ( 1 ). Montana ( 138). Oregon (l)and Washington (63). The majority of the occurences ate in three mctapopulai ions, one in the Swan Valley in western Montana, one in Spokane County in eastern Washington and ibe third in Pierce County in western Washington. 2. Genetics: Original isozyme studies by Lesica ct at. 1.1988) showed a very low level of genetic diversity within aid among poptlations. Additional isozyme work by Brunsfeld and Baldwin (1998) included California populations, iscd l he same IK loci as Lesica 1 1988). and five additional loci, and also did not delect any variation within or among poptlations. However, limited clloroplast DNA scqtcicc data aid Random Amplified Polymorphic DNA analyses do show some variation among populations. The interpretation and expectations for genetic variation for Howeltm aquaiilit as summarized by Brunsfeld and Baldwin ( J998)are, 'Tkcshoit generation time of the species should fottcra rapid generation of genetic diversity and rate of evolution. On the other hand populations are known to fluctuate in size leading to periodic bottlenecks and genetic drift in unfavorable years." E- Geographic Distribution I . Range: Howliia aqiunilh is a Pacific Northwest endemic known from northern California, western Oregon. Washington, northern Idaho and western Montana. The fin* collection of t he species was f mm western Oregon (Multnomah County), in a slough on Sauvies Island along the Columbia River near Portland in 1879. Subsequent collcci ions were made in Multnomah County in 1881. 1385 and l886.Clackamas County in 1892 and Marian County in 1926. A California population wasdtscovcrcd in Mendocino County in 1928. an Idaho population in California: In 1928. Alice Eastwood collected the plant near Howard Lake in Mendocino County. Surveys in 1979 and 1980 failed to relocate the plait. HowcvcMhc plant was again documented in the area in 1996 and it is currently known from six sues ib Mendocino County (USFWS 1994. Isle 1997, California Natural Diversity Database 2005). Idaho: The first collection of water nowellia from the stale was reported in Kootenai Couniy in 1892 near Spirit Lake. It is believed that the location information with this specimen is in error and surveys in the area have failed to locate any popilations(Shelly 1988). One population, occupying 3 ponds, in Latah County was discovered in 1967 and has been monitored annually from l999to2004lldakoConscrvation Data Center 2005. Gray 2005). Extensive surveys during 1994 and several other years have failed to locate any additional occurrences tUSFWS 1996). Montana: Bruce McCune made the fin* known collection of the species in the state in the Swan River Valley (Missoula Countyj in l978tMcCinc 1982). By 1986. only 13 total populations were documented. One year later an additional 39 occurrences were located in the general vicinity. This number remained fairly stable forseven years with only six additional populationsdtscovcred. In 1995 an additional 43 ponds were found to contain populations, bringing the total known occurrences to 101 inihcttatc. Since 1995, populations have been discovered in an additional 37 ponds bringing the total number of documented occurences to 138 in (he Swan Valley. Howcvcr,45 of ibe populations have lot been visited fornore lhan five ycat%and 27 occurences have oily been visited oice (Montana Natural Heritage Program Database 2005). Oregon: As noted above, the first known collection of the species occurred in 1879 from Sauvics Island. Multnomah County* A subsequent collection from the Island was made in 1886. However it has not been seen since then. Other historical collect ions occurred in 1892 in ClackamasCotnty and in 1926 in Marion County* It was long presumed that water howcllia was extirpated in the stale until a rcdiscovciy of I he species in 2002 on the William linlcy National Wildlife Refuge in Benton County in the west-central pan of the state (USFWS 1996. USFWS 1994. Oregon Natural Heritage Program Database 2005). Washington: In 1937. two collections of water howcllia were made on the west side of the Cascades, one in Thurston County and the other in Mason County (USFWS 1996), Noothercollcciiois were made until 1978. when a population was discovered in eastern Washington near Spokane. An additional population was discovered in 1980 in Clark County across (me Columbia River from the type locality. Many additional populations have been found since the |9S0's)n Spokane Cointy and on McChoid AirFonre Base and Fort Lewis Military Reservation in Pierce County . bringing the total number of presumed extant occurrences in the state to 68, including one new population discovered on Foit Lewis in 2004. Twenty-five of the Washington populations have not been visited for more than 10 yean* and 28 occurrences have only been visaed once (USFWS 1996. Washington Natural Heritage Program Database 2005. Wolford 2004). Table 1. Date of last observation of pa'sumed rxtaw ! occurrences of //. aquuiitix by state and ownership. State Ownership Pop. Totals by Ownership Dale of Last Observation (# of Populations) 2000-2004 1995-1999 1990-1994 prc-1990 1 aliform;i LSI S 6 2 4 Idaho Pnv.de I I Montana Plum Creek Timlvr i/ompanv 12 1 Plum Creek/State 1 1 Plum Civcfc/P rival c I ■ Private n nherl 3 2 1 State 2 2 INC I 1 : s: s 82 77 5 USFS/Plum Creek 19 10 9 USFS/Siate I I USFS/Othcr Private 16 I 12 3 1 Tc^on USFWS 1 1 Washington BLM 1 1 Ptivate 13 2 1 10 Stale 3 1 2 USDOD 17 17 : SI WS 34 21 13 Totals: 214 115 70 16 13 * Property willed to the National Audubon Society i Idaho Conservation Data Center Database 2005) Legend Extant Occurren<£$ Historical Occurrences Fl^ire 3. Distribution of Htructtiu atftiairfh (Extant and Historical Occurrences i 2. Historic a I Populations: Idutao: Sa>uti*r&. JM. 669. July 22, IK92. Kcpoitrd fnim Kootenai County. Vicinity of Spirit Lake. Flouting in stibulpine lake. Il ts believed that the location informal ioi associated with (bis collection mav be in error Attempts to relocate populations in ibe urea in 1**88 failed to ftnd any populations IUSFWS H96. Shelly and Mosrlcy J988> t Oregon: Multnomah Coanty. Saavirs Island (type locality). 1879. Las seen n 1880. However. a new population was discovered across the Columbia River it Clarfc County. Washington in 1980. - Thtxnos £ Jtrxeph Hotvell Ij7 Clackamas County. Lake Oswego. JS92. Not seen siice original collection. - HowcU s.n* Marion County, near Palmer's Woods and Salem. 1926. Last seen in 1935. - Thompson 4927, 4967 - J. C. Nelson 5075 -If.K Peek 15935 Marion County. Mission Bottom. learSalcm. 1977. - Reported by W. Blubni The Marion and Clackamas County sites arc in areas thai lave largely been developed (Shelly and Mosclcy 1988), Washington Mason County, small lake aboul 20 miles nonk of ShcUon. 1937. Last seen in 1937. - WJ.EyerJam 1211 Thurston County, roadside pond in or near Millcrsylvania Stale Park. 1937. Last seen in I937IUSFWS 1996). -J. RudJs.n. 3. Additional Survey Areas: Idaho: Extensive searches in northern Idaho in June 1988 did nix result in ihe discovery of any new populations(Shcllyand Mosclcy 1983). Moniaia: 437 ponds searched in Montana between 1987 and 1991 in Flathead. Lake and Missoula Counties (Roe and Skelly !992.Schussberger and Shelly 1991. Shelly 1989). Oregon: Intensive surveys failed to lelocate any occurrences nearthe historical collections (USFWS 1996). F. Habitats The dominant habitat for Howellia aouoiifh is small, vernal, freshwater wetlands and ponds with an annual cycle of filling with water and drying up late in the season (Figures 4-7 r These vernal ponds and wetlands usually fill with wateroverthe fall, winter and early spring, bui then at least pan iully dry up tow aids I he end of the growing season. Depending on annual patterns of temperature and precipitation the d tying oft he pond may be complete orpaitia) by the fall. These sites are usually shallow and less than one meter in depth, although water kowetlia is sometimes found it waier up lot wo meters deep (USFWS 1996k Additionally. a few occurrencesof water kowcllra are found in oxbow slougksand surrounding marshy areas such astkose on the Swan River Oxbow Preserve managed by The Nature Conservancy in Montana and the type locality in Oregon. Across its range* Noweilia i/qttairli* occmts at elevations as low as tkree meters in Washington to 1372 mctcra in Montana. Howellht aquatilis ponds are lypically surrounded at least in part by forested vegetation. Tree species vary across (kc range of waier howellia. tkougk usually include some broadlcaf deciduoustrees. In Montana. Ptyruin.\ mViiracYMyja (black cottonwood) is commonly associated and loa lesser extent. Pt*§mht* rrwrnrfiwdpi (quaking aspen) and Betultt papyrifcra (paper birch). In eastern Washington. Popuhu trfmuhndex is an associate and Froxums latifoTut (Oregon ashj is commonly associated with the populations in the western pan of tke state. A variety of deciduousshrubs and kerhiceous species are commonly associated with water howellia occurences, two of tke most common being Carex fi?Mc urns (inflated SCdgC) and Pftafttris aMHtiitmcea (reed canary* grassj. The latterspecies being probably of mainly introduced origin. Table 2 lists species commonly associated witk water howellia occurences by stale. 4. Extant Sites: Howellia uauajiiin occurrence data is provided ii Appendices A and B. Flgircs 4-7. Howeitia aquatititt habitats* *: \' Figtrc4. Condon Creek. Montana water Figure 7. Lindbergh Lake. Montana water how clJia howcllia poid (unknown EO #) p 0ttl j ( £Q #JJ) Bottom surfaces of the poods and wetlands isually consm of organic sediments underlain by consolidated clay 1USFWS IWi). In Montana, soil anils ii l be Swan Valley are comprised of Cryochcpts. Eutraborulfsand Eutrochrejxs from parent materials ofclaycy alluvium and clayey coLluvium (Sicily and Mosclcy I9SSL Soils on I lie 87.000 acre Foil Lewis Military Reservation are generally composed of nutrient poor, wcll-d railed glacial till (Clegg and Lombardi 2000). Figure 5. Lindbergh Lake. Montana water howcllia poid, SlaplcytlW^aid Reeves |20G] | in the Swan Valley of Moilana slows specific conductance readings (mm <30 UjS/cm to 400 ^iin will most ponds below 150 |xS/cm. Measarcmentsof pH ranged from 6_2 to 7.X will most m cast re meats between 6.5 and 7.5. Tic geneful conclusion dmwn fiom these data Is that water howcllia prefers freshwater ponds close to neutral. Priono Slaplcy's analysis of tie basil morphology of water low cilia ponds in tie Swan Valley, most ponds were considered io be closed under present climatic conditionstShaplcy and Lesica I997(. However, 12 of 34 poidsstudied wereobserved to have spill poiilsoccipicd frequently cioigh to maintain some channel morphology and that intcrpoid exchange of surface watcrdtring wet periods appeared to be more common thai previously supposed. Tabic 2, Vascular plan species com hob I y associated with Howellia aquttiilh sites by sate. This is n> H meant to be an exhaustive list of all vase a Jar species recorded at Howeffiv aquatUix sites. Data is derived from Heritage Program clement occurrence records. Gilbert (2002). Gilbeit and Lombattii ( 1999) and Shelly aid Mosclcy f 1988), Species CA II) MT OR WA Abirx grandis X X AbirX Uixiocarpti X Acer mac M*ph\i turn X Acorux caitotttu X Ahsma pianta&o-ntpiatica X X X Alma incana X X Altrpccttrux twi[tuili\ X X X Amelawchicr alnifoiia X CuUihichc hcterttphvifa X X X Callilrichc \Ui£ritiii\ X Cawx obnt/pla X Corcx serrai&dera X Cawx spp. X Carex vesicaria X X X Cicuta tf*rttfih/iti * Cornus xUrtonifero X X X Cralae&tts drmgiaxh X *D&cfytix fchutteradi X Eic&charis pafuxlris X X X X Epi/obium ortfi&nenxe X fciftaxeltrm lluvialifc X X Fraxinus laiijtma X Gtvccria btrrfolis X X Gt \ccritt ffttta X X Glycerin jfrancfis X G\\C€ria accidentairx X X */r/r pxcttdacomx X JumfKMX ctmmtums X Lttrix rtccidcnhiiis X Lcmmt minor X X Lent tut S|>p * X Lrinicera invfrfucrttta X Ludni^ia pafuxlrix X X Si cut ha ajvensis X X M \Mtriix faxa X X *ilf voxotix xcorjNoiitcs X X fVuphar pwiyjicptiiiim X Ocrutttthc sarmcrtitrsa 1 ■ X *PftaI&jix artiodirmcca X X X Phitadcfpfttts tcwisii X Phxxitctirfrtts m fu Satin X Pice a cn^cimattrtii X X Pirmx cottUrrta X X Pirmx [Mtmicr&stt X X X Species CA in Ml OH U A Pttlxfcttmfflt eweimunt X Ptr/m/us trcmuiiHdes X X Poftuius irichacttrjMi X X PoIattto&etoH &tx/m incus X PoI&ItUT^cUm tittltirii X X Polanurfi cton mrdwsus X Polanto&eton pusiilus X *Pruttus ttvium X PraAJntufjffl menrjexu X X Pyrus fuse tt X Ramtitnttus tiuuutilis X X X X Ha nu ttcu/us Jta belia ris X X Ra itu nenfus fUmtmuia X X Rhumnu* ainiffriia X Satis hcbhiattti X Sah.x drumnumdiatta x 1 1 1 Salix lasiandra 1 X Safix spp. X X Stunt suave X X X *Se>ia>tum dutcantttra X X SfKtrfianiwtt enter sunt X X X SfHtrfittttiunt minimum X X Spiraea tkw&tttsii X SvmpfafFfcttrfNfs a/bus X X T\[>htt spp* X Utricularia vtdfiacis X X X Ve rttnica u"ag ttiiis - auiutlica X Vcrtrnica scutclUita X X x non-native species G. Land Ownership The federal government manages lands thai completely or pan tally encompass 82* of known ffiiy ciiiti ni;iuiuti\ sites (sec Table 1 ) One agency alone, (be U.S. Forest Service (USFSh manages lands thai cncomjxiss 57* or 1 24 of the (oial populations. In addition, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Scrvicc(USFWS) manages lands wheic another 35 populations occur. All of (he USFWS occurrences, except the Oregon population. occirin Washington. Also in Washington. 17 populations occipy lands owned by the U.S. Department of Defense (McChord AirFoice Base and Fon Lewis). State agencies in Montana and Washington manage lands wiih another seven populations. Tnc remaining 15* of populaiionsoccuron a variety of privaicly owned lands. However one poptlation occurs on a Nature Conservancy Piesen c in Montana, tnc Idaho population occuison properly willed to the Audubon Society i IDC DC database 2005) and 33 occurrences in Montana occirpanialty or entirely on Plum Creek TimbcrCompany lands. In Montana. 41 populations cross ownership boundaries with many of these occupying bock Flathead National Forest lands. Plum Creek TimbcrCompany lands or other privately owned tands. Land ownership in the Swan Valley . when: all the Montana populations occir. is 10 largely in a "checkcrboaiti pattern" of Nai ioaal Fores, sale lands. Plum Creek Timber Company and other private lands, resulting in pan from I be Railroad Land Grants in the late 1800b. H. Potential Threats to Known Populalions I. Human Land Use: A valid y of land uses still pose potent iiil threats to Hoi titia aquali/h across its range, including activities related to limber harvesting* land development, recreation, military activities, and grazing. A total of 67 occurrences in Montana and Washington occur partially or wholly on private lands that afford little or no protection from human impacts. Development of some of these private lands in I he Swan Valley of Montana and Spokane County. Washington is si ill a possibility thai could adversely affect not only populations on l hose lands bui also populations on adjacent public lands. On Foil Lewis Military Reservation, signs have been erected around all water howcllia ponds noting ihe presence of a federally threatened wciland plant. Also, military opcrationsdo not generally occur in wetland habitats so direct impact to water howcllia populations from military activities is not currently a problem. However. I rampling of the drawdown zone, particularly in ihe Dailman wetland population, has been observed and is believed to be caused primarily by duck huntcra (Gilbert and LombanJi 1999. Clcgg and Lombardi2000|. In ihe pasi, timber harvest in <: and related activities have been documented in and adjacent to water howcllia ponds in the Swan Valley, including removal of ovcrsiory trees, road building and even deposition of logging slash in (he water (Shelly 1988. Shelly and Mosclcy I988.USFWS 1994). Timber harvesting impacts on Howliia aqaaiith on USPS lands in ihe Swan Valley have been minimized with adoption of 300 foot protective buffers around occupied ponds as recommended in ihe Conservation Strategy (USDA Forest Service 1994, 1997). Measures to exclude cattle from ponds have also been implemented on the Flathead National Forest. Plum Creek Timber Company has implemented a water howcllia management plan on iis lands I hat provides ptx*cction to this species. The plan calls for following all Montana Streamside Management Xonc(SMZ) laws and Best Management Practices. For occurrences thai aren't regulated under ihe SMZ law. Plum Cirek calls foi 'implementation of a no equipment zone or l hat activity should lake place when the ground is frozen to minimize soil impacts and sedimentation. The plan also calls for protection of water howcllia sites by incuision fmm cattle. 2. Natural Disturbances: Invasion of occupied water howcllia sites by dob- native species, particularly Phatarh arumEnaeva, has been a concent since the 1980V MostofihcP. arundinatea occurring in water howcllia ponds is presumed to be of non-native origin. P. rmfrfdjrjrKftf occunun many wetland and riparian sites in Idaho. Montana and Washington and has been documented in almost all Washington occurrences. I he Idaho location and many Montana water howcllia occurrences. In Montana. 20 of 68 ponds monitored by the Flathead National Forest are known to contain P. anintEnacva (Daves 2004). Monitoring of water howcllia ponds on the Flalhead National Forest does show aslight increase in the frequency of /*. anotdhtacea in the ponds from ihe initial monitoring year of 1998 but it has remained relatively stable the following five ycare (Davis 200*1). Conversely, monitoring on ihe Swan River Oxbow* Preserve in Montana by Lesica(l997) in the Pfuilaris- marsh ecotonc shows an increase in P. anotdotacca cover and a corresponding drop in //. aquati/ii cover over a nine- year period. Though studies such as Lcsica's do show that water howcllia is negatively influenced in the immediate area of dense P. andndmoraa duds, it is not known lo what extern i €tn*ndinoee€i will invade and form dense stands in water howcllia ponds in Montana. In Idaho. P. oru/tdhuicea has demonstrated the ability to completely invade and form dense Hands in watcrhowellia ponds. Clipping and 11 cicavatiug P. arutuitnacca in (tic Idaho ponds b on-going and water howcJHa was observed in 2004 in areas where P. atundifUKta was removed. Additional species that are invading and competing with water h owe Ilia in Idaho include Sitiamtftt thtJcotttura aid Acwttx coltmntt [Gray 20051 , Hid inn- :* :mm FigireK, Idaho Itowellia pond dominated by Phttlarh aruiuitnticea (taller, lighter colored grass along outer edges) and Acurux ru/umm (darter, shorter species in middle of pond). /rn/'irif.jiJiv.'MTiu-llow flag iris), another iOi- naiive species, has beet invading water h owe Ilia wetlands on Foti Lewis and appeals to be spreading rapidly in Shaver Kettle and (he Chambers Lake complex. In 2003. at eradication program was initialed by hand palling the specirs ti ihe majority of the Channels Lake complex. Results of (his effort are not yet available (Gilbert 2001. Wolford 2003), Tie possible introduction of a ktxriophxlhmi spp. i water milfoil* in the Dailman wetland has also been noted and is a cause far concern (Clegg and Lombard i 2000). Lyihntm sail carta tpurple loosest rifcj is another non- native wetland speciesihat may yet pose problems in waierhowellia ponds. Quick response and eradication measures should be lake n wtih these latter two species and any oi her new invasivesat alt waierhowellia sites. data have shown that seeds apparently remain viable for up lo three y eats A hough viability is probably substantially reduced (Lcsica 1^92). The potential for a severe reduction or eradication of (he species in a geographic area doescxisi during several years of conseciiive d might On Fori Lewis, unsuitable water levels art idcitificd asoieoftwo primary threats to waierhowellia populai ions, the other being wetland plant succession (Wolford 2003). III. Assessment and Recommendations A, General Assessment of Trends and Status Toial population numbers for Howtttia attttaiith+n&v*tih any annual species, are difficult to estimate without quantitative survey data over many years. There is a general tack of qualitative survey data for the majority of wirier howcllia occurrences. Approximately % of the known populations have oily been visited once and even ifthe population size was estimated during (hai sile visit. abtndance varies dramatically from year to year depending on climate and other factors. Accurate and precise measures or estimates of abundance are difficult to collect due lo (he aquatic nature of the plant. T hisamual variation and difficulty in collect ing acctratc survey daia means thai ft takes many years of data across I he range of the species to adequately climate population size. If the sum of I he minimum and maximum number of plants estimated at each occurrence are tsed as a basis for tie species total populai ion. a range of IB. 000- 138.000 plants is derived. A sum of the median popilation si/e for each occurrence results in a figireof approximitfely 51 ,000 plants. Range-wide population estimates derived from quantitative sampling data arc available by year in Figure 8* Long-term weather patterns also have a direct and potentially negative impact oi water howcllia. Consecutive years of drought or exceedingly wet years pose paiblems for water howcllia as previously mentioned. Moiitoring Since abundance varies widely year to year, a single estimate docs not provide very meaningful data about a pan icutar population. It faa. over 50 occurrences have only been surveved once and another 45 locations have 12 only been surveyed twice (Figure 9). One or two visits to an individual population do not piovide enough sample points to make an assessment ol that population s genera) si/c and importance to tie overall viability of the species. Another import ant aspect to consider is the number of individual occurrences. The number of known populations or occurrences, though not necessarily a good predictor of a species* viability ortrend. at least provides documentation about the species overtime. Ovcrthe past two decades, the numberof documented occurences has more than doubled from 72 in 1988 to214 in 2CMU. In the past foiryean* alone. approximately two-dozen new occurrences have been documented. It is not unrealistic to expect thai just as many new occurrences may be documented in the next four to five yean* if intensive surveys are conducted and weather conditions arc favorable to the species* biology. Table 3. Numberof known HowtlHa aqtmitiix occurrences by year. Year Occurrences Source I'Jgg 72 Shelly and Moselev 1988 |W0 76 Sehassbcrgcrand Shelly \ l *H) IW2 76 Roc anJ Shelly 1992 IW 79* ;si "us hw.i IWJ 107— /SIWS 19« a dense water Roe and Shelly 1992). Pond A (MT KO# 130) howellia population were deposited into foir was also observed id have ;■'■■■ plants in 1992 utoccupicd pods. Twoof these ponds and monitoring in 2001 docunented four plants, contained water at the time of the transplant and it is presumed never dried on. Sibscquen monitoring of these ponds the following two 14 4O0OD .35000 30000 i 25000 ■ CL O 20000 I £ 1S000 ■ 3 z 10000 5000 II- -120 i/*tA/vj ■ 100 O ^A ^^ f 140 SO o- o ■60 J> t ■ 20 \r :f >__ 1 j t :;n Estimates Populations Surveyed New Populations Figirc 9- Relationship bciwcei number of H. nquatiti* papa Jul lots observed (sampled > and number of plans estimated each sample year Not all populations are revisited each year aid many sampled populations do not have an associated quail Etuiivc measure of abundance. Also iieluded is the number of flew popu bikini found in thai givet year 60 n $ 50- u | 40- 3 a 8 30 ■ | 20- E I .0- n — 1 ■ CA ■ ID MT ■ OR WA " u - 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Years sampled Figirc 10. Sampling utensiiy of individual // ui/nuii/ii occurrences si ratified by sure und lunbcr of years sampled. 15 A semi-quantitative assessment was conducted using the approaches out lined by Regan , Master and Hammcrson (2004) and adaped by the Montana Natural Heritage Program for use in tanking animal species of concern (MTNH P 2004). Both of ihcscsimilarasscssnicnt methods assign points to factors such as number of occurrences. population size, area or range excent. (rends and threats. Some factors may not be used if data are missing or an estimate of the parameter is too uncertain. The points from the most pertinent criteria are added together to form a final score for the species. Lastly, a Heritage rank of 1 to 5 at a Global aid/or State level is assigned based on the final score. The miking criteria and scores assigned for the //. E Shon-terni Trend Stable E Threats- Severity Moderate B -0.75/-0.75 Threats- Scope Moderate io :.i^':. Threats- Immediacy Moderate to high Intrinsic Vulnerability Highly vulnerable A Not used/Not used Envimnmenta) Specificity Very narrow with key requirements scarce A Not used/Not used Initial Point Allocation 0/35 Score 3.25/2.5 Rank G3/G2 The assignment of the threat attributes of severity, scope and immediacy is still a mostly subjective process and as such is open to interpretation and discussion. The most apparent threats to the viability of the species appear to be from the high degree of environmental specificity, competition, loss of habitat due to weed invasion and from the species' own biology and large yearly fluctuations in population sizedue to dependence on favotable environmental conditions in the current and previous years. 16 B. Status Recommendations 1. NaturcScrvc: Tkc NatureServe Global Rank for water kowcllia was changed from a "G2"ioa "G3" m February * 2004(NaiureScrvc 2005). Results of this range-wide status assessment generally sipport (he "\i_!" rank, (hough (he species is sill close id a "C2" rank due to i he small anoint of occtpied habitat .the clustering of mos populations in tkrec mail population centers and the tkreat posed by invasive species. 2. Federal Status: The Draft Recovery* Plan for//oi*W/;«^««/i^{USFWS 1996) listed thiee primary chieria that musi be met for delisting to occur. It slates that. "Delisting will be considered when all ihe following conditions have been met: 1. Management practices, in accordance with habitat management plans, have reduced and/or controlled anthmpogenic ih reals, thereby maintaining the species and its habitat integrity throngkout the currently known range on public lands in five geographic area** for ten y cure after the effective dale of the recovery* plan. Monitoring will demonstrate effectiveness of management plans. Management plans will be in place for. at minimum. the following occurrences: a. 67 occurrences in the Montana geographic area. b. 33 occurrences in the Spokane County. WA geographic area. c. 5 occurences ii ihe PierccCounty. WA. geographic area. d. 4 occurrences in tkc Clark County. WA. geographic area. e. 5 occurences in the Mendocino County. C A. geographic area. 2. Conservation of occurrences on lands not addressed in agency managemem plans, including (hose (hat are within meiapopulaiions as well as outlying geographic extensions, is icred. Coifim the Ioi"-icrm conservation measures are in place forthe occurrence in LatakCotnty. Idaho. 3. A post-lisiing strategy for monitoring (he species population dynamics is in place." Established monitoring prog rams on the Flathead National Forest, Montana and on Foil Lcwis/McChord Air Force Base in Pierce County. Washington have made great progress in meeting the objectives listed in la and Ic. Seven years of monitoring data are now available for 68 ponds from the Flathead National Forest's current monitoring strategy and on Foil Lewis. Washington for 15 ponds from monitoring conducted by the Land Condition Trend Analysis Program* In addition, annual monitoring of tkc Idaho population has been in place since 1999. Monitoring programs are not known to have been implemented in otkcrareasof tkc species* range. Two populations arc afforded protection by conservation organizations. The Swan River Oxbow population as pan of a Nature Conservancy Presence and the Idaho population is included in land willed to the Audubon Society. Othcrsignificam populationson private lands skou Id be protected as patt of the long-term conservation of the species. Updating and finalizing a recovering strategy should be a primary step in the move towards potato] delisting. Establishing criteiiaor conditions for delisting is not the primary purpose of tkis assessment. However, several recommended conditions for potential delisting are provided below: 1. Com in nation of monitoring programs on the Flathead National Forest, Montana. Fort Lewis/McChord Air Force Base in Pierce County. Washington and in Latah County, Idaho so that a minimum often ycare worth of data are available forthose areas. 2. Annual monitoring of populations in Mendocino Connty* California, the Latak County. Idaho and 8enton County. Oregon occurrences, t he occurrence on the Swan River Oxbow Preserve in Montana, and all 17 occurrences on public lands in Washington so that a minimum of 5 years of recent data arc available for I hose populations. Additionally, occurrences on private lands in Spokane County, Washington aid the Swan Valley. Montana should be moniiorcd to (he extent feasible. Similar monitoring net hods to those employed by ibe Flathead National Forest, Moniana and the Land Condition Trend Analysts Program 01 Fon Lewis, Washington appcarto provide a sound methodology for collecting quantitative survey data in a challenging setting with tnc requirement of limiting damage to tke species. These programs divide the sample ponds in thirds and quarters respectively and estimate tkc nimbcr of plants using one of fotr abundance classes in each section. A measure of the abundance of Photons anindinacvaamd other weedy species should also be incorporated into all monitoring programs. clustering of populations in just a few geographic areas also makes it more susceptible to regional and local influences. Invasion of the species* habitat by ion- native species is also a problem that most likely will continually teed to be addressed. However, the majority of known populations occuron public lands providing the oppoitunity for tic implementation of conservation measures and strategies beneficial to the long-term survival of I be species. Many additional populations occur on Plum Creek Timber Company lands in the Swan Valley of Moniana. which may provide additional opportunities for conservation. With implementation of management plans, continued monitoring and conservation protection of additional populations. delisting should bean achievable goal. 3. Management plans in place forall occurrences on federal lands across the range of the species, including control strategics for P. animSnacea and oi her invasive weeds, if needed. Control programs for/*, arundinat'ea and Iris pxeudaconu implemented on Fori Lewis. Washington and in Idaho consist primarily of hand pulling and/orclipping these and other invasive species. Similarcontrol measures should be taken across the range of water howellia wkcre invasive species arc encroaching into known water howellia habitat. 4. Implementation of conditions 2 and 3 as outlined in the draft recovery plan and listed above. If monicoring of populations as described in recommendations I and 2 above findsthat populai ions are stable thougk wit h large yearly fluctuations and management plans and conservation strategies are in place as recommended above, then delisting may be warranted. The annual nature of the species in conjunction wit h its narrow ecological nicne makes it vulnerable to long-term unfavorable weatker patterns and climate change. In add it ion , the Literature Cited Brunsfcld, 5J. and CT. Baldwin. 1998. Howeliitnuituiuti* genetics: not so boring alter all. to: Fori in on Research and Management of Ht>\vclliu tujmtuhx* TirnbnIL National Wildlife Refuge, Cheney, WA. March 24-25. Garden Press. 704 pp. on-line (http://207.l56 243 .8/emu/ih/indcx.php>. Idaho Conservation Data Center. 2005. ID CDC Database- February 25,2005. ID Dcpanmeni of Fish and Game. Boise, ID. California Natural Diversity Database. 2(X)5. Nat u ml Diveisity Database - February 6, 2005. Sacramento, C A. Clcgg,M.and A. LombanJi. 2000, Slalus iv port for water howellia (Howellia i/qttuiith} oi Fon Lewis, wa Report loihe Land Condition Trend Analysis Program. Fon Lewis, WA. Enviionmcnt and Engineering Inc.. Norfolk, VA. 19 pp. Davis, L. 2004. Flathead Naiional Forest. FY05 - year report of annnal monitoring icqiircments - annual monitoring of water howellia occurrences. Unpublished report. Flathead Naiional Forest. MT. Gilbert. R. 2002. Field report for water howellia surveys on Fort Lewis, WA. Report to the Land Condition Trend Analysts Program, Fon Lewis, WA. Environment and Engineering Inc., Norfolk. VA. 17 pp. Gilbert. R. 2001. Status report for water howellia (Howellut aquatitis) on Ion Lewis, WA. Rcpon to the Land Condition Trend Analysis Program. Foil Lewis, WA. Enviionmcnt and Engineering Inc.. Norfolk, VA. 9 pp. IslcD.W. 1997. Rediscover)* of water howellia forCalifornia. Fremontia 25(3): 29-32. Lesica, P. 1997. Spread of Phalaris arundimufti ad vciscly impacts l he endangered plant Hotocitta aquatilh. Great Basin Naturalist 57(4): 366-368. Lesica, P. 1992. Autccok>gy of the endangered plani //.'I'l'/u.i titiitutiiis; implications for management and reserve design. Ecological Applications 2(4): 411-421. Lesica, 1990. Habitat requirements, germination behavior and seed hank dynamics of Ht>wcUia aquaiMs in the Swan Valley, MT. Unpublished report totheUSDA Forest Service, Flai head National Forest. MT. Conservation Biology Research, Missoula. MT. 44 pp. + appendices. Lesica, P.. R.F. Lcary.F.W. Allendorf and D.E. Bildcrback. 1988. Lack of genetic diversity within and among popilationsof an endangered plant, tiowellia aquatitis. Consc nation Biology 2(3): 275-282. McCune,B. 1982. Noteworthy collections. Montana: Htrwtffia aquairfh. Madrono 29:123- 124. Gilbert. R. and A. Lombaidi. 1999. Status report for water howellia (Htrwcllia rrrafc Mciotfa 4165 03 5 5 900 AS2 30 B MT 33 LttdoercnLake FlameadNF Private MuoJa 4130 24 2 50 50 50 50 C7 MT 34 Lnobrrtfi lake F lame ad NF,f> mate Mssouia 4U5 03 2 60 60 60 60 C? MT 3ft Lmcftwffji Lake FlamtadNFPnvate Miioula 4 ISO 02 5 €00 233 50 B MT 36 Lndbertfi Lake FlamcadNF Private MHoUa 4100 05 2 20 120 70 70 BC MT 3? Indbertfi Lake FtatandM PhmCiffi. Umber Co kftssoula 4170 o : 8 375 152 100 B MT 38 Lnobertfi Lake Ftatwadt* Phmcifd Timber Co \'Lee«iUi 4130 ii 2 2 1100 551 551 Al MT 3Q LndberdTi Lake Flatiead NF.Ptum Creek Umber Co MssoUa 4100 05 2 20 1 200 610 6 tO A? MT 40 Lndberoti Lake Flatiead W PhmCiccii Timber Co kftssoula 4225 3 2 350 175 175 AC MT 41 1 ndberonLafce FiatradNF Prr-afc Mssouta 4015 10 t 65 55 55 55 C? MT 42 Lnobertfi Lake Hatvadt* Pmafc McioUa 3M\> 19 t 55 55 55 55 C? MT 43 Lnobertfi Lake f latir ad rtatonai F orr *i ktcsoua 4280 02 150 39 25 B MT 44 iflidxitfi Lake Flatiead Matonal F oresi l,*ssoula 4215 11 12 340 1SS 250 A MT 45 Lndbertfi Lake F latv ad Hatonal F orr *l ktssoua j. : ^:i ©8 13 500 217 200 A MT 46 l ml ir nil Lake FlatvadMatonalForesi UssoUa 4. : W 18 5 50 24 25 C MT 47 Lnobertfi Lake F latie ad rtaftona! F ore *i Usaoula 421& o : 12 350 165 175 A MT 43 Lnobertfi Lake F latv ad ttatonal F ore*i kftssouta 4215 04 12 250 101 75 B MT 49 Lnobertfi Lake FlatvadNFPrrvate k*s*oula 4150 5 6 to 2000 843 625 A MT 50 Lnobertfi Lake Flair ad t« Ptt.afc Miiouta 42Q5 13 1 750 750 750 750 A7 MT 61 Lndberoh Lake Finer ad t* Prr-afr WlSEOrJil 4435 Ol 2 20 120 70 70 BC MT 52 Krafl Creek Prrvate Muotfa 4010 18 2 20 200 110 no AC MT S3 Salmon Praine Fl,i1r;'jl\- F*i.*.-ite i an 34 SO :h 2 250 250 250 250 A7 MT 54 Efc Creek Flatiead NFfkan Creek Timber Co Mttotfa 3810 ZB 4 50 900 481 487.5 A MT 55 EfcCreek Flatiead NaionaJForesi Muotfa *H 20 11 9 25 600 278 200 A MT 56 Lnobertfi Lake Flatiead Natonal Fore*i k**sotfa 4310 05 9 75 35 27 C Appendix A - 2 9ttto ED* Name OvnMtnp County Elevaion(ri) SiiArr.?ir Mssoula 4100 26 2 20 200 110 110 AC MT 83 Hoimi i at* Pond * 7 F latv ad r* Pnva* Missoula 4100 3 4 200 88 75 B MT 84 Br tw*t Cree t.lindbrro i afcr Road t£ si Pond) FlaneadttatonaJ Foresi Mssoula 4020 03 7SO 145 75 B MT HI wmcM Creek Prr.afc Mssoula 3060 14 2 - -- - - U MT Bfc Elk Creek Pond 1-1 Flame ad rtatonal F oresi Vi^cpJii 4020 as 20 i ::■:■:: 302 300 A MT 87 ElkCreekPond 1-2 FlancadNalonaJ Forest Mssoula 4020 a2 25 i ::■:■:: 210 150 A MT 88 Elk Creek Pond 1-3 Hatvadr* pun Creek Timber Co Mssoula iwfc/l 12 2 i ::■:■:: 500 600 A7 MT 80 ElkCreekPond 1-4 FlatwadNFfUn Creek Timber Co Mssoula 4000 0.6 2 100 i ::■:■:: 550 550 A? Appendix A -3 Stole EO* Mnia Ownership County Elovaion(n) Siiftfao) Yetro visited ym Max Mean Median Rank MT M Piper Creek Pond* 1 F lame ad Natonal F ore si lake 34FW 1 3000 414 ISO A MT 01 Piper Creek Pond*2 Flamead Natonal Fores i Lake 3520 04 9 2CO0 347 ISO A MT 02 PiperCreekPondr3 Flamead Natonal Foresi Lake W20 02 8 200 63 25 B MT 03 Piper Creek Pond *4 Flat* ad Haicnat F ores i Lake 3 3 20 02 8 1000 191 75 37 MT 04 Piprr CreekPondrS F lame ad Mflvri F ore si Lake 3S20 OB 300 175 200 A MT 05 Piper Creek Pond r 6 F lat* ad Natonal Foresi Lake 3540 04 200 56 25 FJC MT 06 Piper Creek Pond f r Flatw ad Nalcnal Foresi tare 1^40 5 300 or 24 B MT 0? Piper Creek Pond *s FlaflYadNalcnalForeSl Lake 1MO 2 75 28 25 B MT 08 Piper Creek Pond *o Flamead NtfonaJ Foresi i .-i- - JS40 00 25 J00 128 ISO A MT *tf Pi;:?r ClerkPondi 10 Flamead Natonal Foresi Lake 3520 as 1000 238 1*0 A MT 100 Piper Creek Pond Ml Flamead Natonal Forest Lake 3580 02 2000 A-zi ISO A MT 101 Piper Creek Pond 1 2 Flamead Natonal Foresi 1 ,lr? 3*00 03 :*::■:■:: 478 150 A MT 102 Condon Creek Flamead Notorial Foresi MssoUa 3720 00 8 10 225 86 50 B MT 103 Condon Creek Flatvadrjatcnal Foresi MssoUa ■<:>:i 03 8 SO 13 D MT 104 Cill? Creek FlamradMatonal Foresi Lake 3340 OB 8 50 450 313 400 A MT 105 Ooo Creek Flatvad MalcnaJ Foresi Lake 3700 2B 1 50 50 50 50 C? MT 106 HolandLake FlatMdHrtDnl Foresi ktssoUa 4000 04 T 150 80 150 A MT 10 T Pierce Creek Flat* ad fjalcnal Faexl hdxioubi 4100 a2 7 150 70 50 B MT 108 U-024 pond in CHly Creek C l-J v. ■ Flamead Natonal Foresi Lake 3230 2:0 ^ 850 343 400 A MT LOO PondU*Qsr Flamead Natonal Foresi VISEO-Jn 4000 0.0 7 ISO 100 ISO B MT 110 Pond rrarmolCyoneiLake Flamead NF Plum Creek Umber Co Miss tula 4 ■ BO as 3 25 2 D MT 111 Pondu-53 Flamead Natonal Foresi Mssoufa 40 ?o a3 5 75 36 25 B MT 112 PondU-052 Flat* an rjaicral F oresl Mssoufa {700 a3 7 450 221 275 A MT 113 PondU-07 3 Flamead latfonl Foresi Lake 1&40 a2 8 150 58 50 C MT 114 Was Pond U- 32 Flat* ad r« Plum Creek Timber Co MssoUa 4180 as 2 200 200 200 200 B7 MT HE Wl* trial Creek Plum Creek Timberf.1T DNRC Lake 3180 ao 1 1500 1*00 1500 1500 A? MT m Porcupine Creek Flair ad r* MT DNRC Lake 3200 J 1 10OO I0O0 ICOO 1000 Al MT 117 Portupfcjm Creek Timber Co Mssouta 3000 a: 1 - - -- - U MT 120 NortiolCrtmeiLake Flame ad NF Plum Creek Timber Co Ussoufa MOO as 1 « » " » U MT 121 Norm olCjgnei Lake Flamead NF Private MssoUa 4040 13 1 - - - - U MT 122 NortiSK* oiCyonelLake Pun Creek Timber Company MssoUa 40 10 to 1 14 14 14 14 D7 Appendix A- 4 Stole EO* Nam* Owner snip County Elevaion (n) Siio3 2000 2000 2000 *7 MT 126 NortiolCj-tmeiLake FlatieadNF Plum Creek Umber Co Mssoula 4 ■ BO a4 13 13 13 13 O? MT 12? Not ti ol Cyojne i L ake FlatteadtJaaonal Fore si Mssoufa 4O00 ao - « - « U MT 12S Nortio1C|gneiLake Flat* ad rtatonaJ F oresi lAssouta 4000 18 - « - « U MT 12Q rJortiolCjoncHake Flatv ad Haional F oresi Ussouia 4040 as _ « .. _ U MT 130 R&ad 10161 PtrcltTranL^CTl Pond A) FlatieadFtatonalForesi Lake 3136 as 5 32 12 4 D MT 131 Beaver C#eek FlameadNatonal Forest Ussouia 4232 as 2 25 13 12-5 O? Ml ns Fate Cree* Hatwadrf- Pmm C«rk Timber Co Mssoufa 3600 as 60 50 50 50 C? MT 136 GladNCfcth F la tie ad Ualonal F an 1 Missoula 4225 a2 75 75 75 75 C7 MT 137 Glacier C#eek Hatv ad uatonaJF oresi MssoUa 4*^:i a2 2S0 260 250 250 A7 MT 138 Glacier Cfeek FlaticadrtatonaJ Forest UssoUa 4331 a? 6 5 5 5 O? MT 130 Glacier Creeh FlatvadMatonal Forest MssoUa 44 2Q as 3 3 3 3 D? MT 140 Condon Creek Flat* ad rtatonaJF oresi Lake (50O as 10 10 10 10 D7 MT 141 ■ . i] ■ Ffl .'■■.-■ iii' h ore ■ i MT Slat* Dr«C Lake 3218 as 300 300 300 300 A7 OH a .. Fmley MatoncC Wild)*: Fbtjor FJentan _ _ _ _ _ .. U VVA i rxnmani-HK Pcnit Dtslnun H*tt NRCA {Stale and C::ifUy?:. Spokane - as - » - - U \\A 2 FJiacfcwafcr blanch RNA RidoeteMNatonalWilcJileReftjge Clark to - - - -- - U VVA 3 C ir Is Road i Prr.a* Spokane ? 300 10 500 BOO s::o BOO A? VVA 4 Girts Road 2 Private Spokane 2320 as 500 500 500 500 AT VVA 5 Brett PottoJe Prrra* Spokane 2280 - 500 500 500 500 A? VVA 6 Came ron Road Pitvak Spokane - 10 - - - - U VVA 7 Jenrsnos Road Prfmfe Spokane 2320 zo - -- « » U VVA a Cross Track* 1 Pitnfe Spokane - 02 - -- - - U VVA Q Cross Tracks 2 Pitnfe Spokane - as - -- - » U VVA 10 Co** Tracks 3 Pffvafe Spokane - - - « - » U VVA 11 EaslFindfjlale Tumbull Material ttiklifcr Re \>jt Spofcanr 23O0 4.0 402 137 to B VVA 12 Across torn Keppte Private Spokane 2320 20 - - - - u VVA 13 East Campbell Lake Turnbul Halmd hYfenlr Rr fjcjt Spokane 2320 1.0 - - - - u VVA 14 Squirrel Vies Tifnbull Natonal vVlldhfc Retx* Spokane 2200 2:0 « » - » u VVA IS L 17 Pond Private Spokane 23O0 0.26 -- - - - u VVA 16 Andr rson Road Private Spokane - 10 - " - u Appendix A- 5 State EO* Nam* Ownararup County Elovaion(n) SUA (00) Yams vi si tad ym Max Uaxn Madia n Rank WA 17 Norti oi Weil Tritl lake Tumbuli Natonai wuir Re UtK Spokane 2300 10 I - » - » U WA 19 Pine Creek FVJASouti Tumbuli Maloneri wikfli* Re not Spokane 2300 1.0 4 o 1S8 S3 2 FJC VVA 10 Nortl F ee 8 la 1 on Turnbull NalonaJ wicfrie Retoe Spokane 22 SO 10 2 -- - - - D7 WA 20 tUTtxfl Pondss Tumbuli Nalonaf hYiklit Re fcjge Spokane 2«M - 3 ST 20 3 C WA 21 Tumbul Pond 21A Tumbuli Material VTIklt* Ret** Spokane 2 3 CO - 3 1 1 as zn WA 22 TiritHflPcntf ■ : Tumbuli Nalonal tYfldfek RetJOe Spokane 2300 - 2 - « - « zn WA 23 TiPrtiuiPond^3 Tutrix J1 Nalonal iVlhll* ReUQI Spokane 2 JOG _ 1 2 2 2 2 D? WA ZX TtrnMil Pond *£ TurfaJI Nalonal lYltfll Hn>:^ Spokane 2JOO _ 2 2 ISO 78 78 CT WA 25 Tumbufl Pond 30 Tumbuli Na tonal tYikfli* Reuae Spokane 2300 - 1 3 3 3 3 o? WA 26 Turnout Pond 21C Tumbuli Matonal hYfldMr Re Uflr Spokane 2300 - 1 -- -1 u WA 28 TumfeuflPondSi Tumbuli Natonai Wik*i* Reftjge Spokane 2JQ0 ~ 3 48 75 81 60 ^ c WA 20 Tumbuli Pond IB Tut nbult NalonaJ tYllclifc Re fcjgt Spokane 2300 ~ 1 1 I f i D? WA 30 TunbulPond2iB Tumbul NalonaJ VntcSfc Re ftjge Spokane 2J00 - 1 fi S 5 s O? WA 31 Tumbul Pond 3i Tumbuli Matonal hYiklit Re l*je Spokane 2J00 - 2 3 2 IS D7 WA 32 Tunbufl Pood 20 Tumbuli Na tonal Wlk*r* Retire Spokane 2?.m 10 3 2 7S 32 18 C WA 33 n»rtml Pond 12 Tumbuli Naional WMte- Re Uoe Spokane 2100 - 2 » « - « zn WA M TuntJUlPondlA Tumbuli NalonaJ W|k« Re tit* Spokane 2JS0 - 1 1 1 1 1 zn WA 3S Turnbull Pond 112 Turnbull Ml tonal n*Mlfe Re Uge Spokane 2J00 _ 1 3 3 3 3 D7 WA 36 mm:ul P::t)::^!i Tumbuli Ma tonal Vi'ifett* Re *>j* S pox am 2300 - 3 IS 8 7.5 D? WA 37 htoglakf Nft ButeauoHand r-lanaoemeni Spokane 2180 &Q 1 SO 50 SO 50 C7 WA 38 Tunbuil Ronci 107 Turnbull Natonal rtikiit Re uge Spokane 2J00 ~ 2 2 30 18 18 D7 WA 30 Fool We land FoMLe *ts Pierce 320 20.0 8 20 8SS 370 33 IS A WA 40 .-■ Mil i HmiK-'H FoHLc nis Pierce 340 - 8 100 17 c WA 41 FJenfcenWeland ForlLewte >MoCofd A» Force Base Pierce 320 10 8 8200 1847 720 A WA 42 Bkiooiar Pond FoMLeira Pierce 320 - 6 00 42 27.5 B WA 43 sivi.tr Kr lie Fori Le Ms Pierce 330 02 8 120 37 SO 1178 800 A WA 44 Trench We land FtJllLCftK Pierce 330 as 8 20 300 t77 20S A WA 45 M6 Chamber Sale Iht FoMLe kt* Pierce 316 2 8 72 28 its C WA 48 Mort) Chamber* ForlLr mi Pierce 315 &0 125 . J . : 4:: 758 470 A WA 47 Wesl Shaver Pond ForlleHft Pierce 3 IS 25 3~£ 822 857 78S A WA 4# Crone lAvih Fori Lew Pierce 340 40 020 1227 £ 4'e; j 2427.5 A WA 40 Joseph Marsh ForHevjs Pierce 350 1O0 7 42 1127 445 300 A WA 60 MKftfe Eat t Chambers Foti Lents Pierce 320 as 8 6 104 35 18. 5 B WA SI Daflman I axe FoMLeMS Pierce 320 4O0 « 30 SSS 300 312 A Appendix A - 6 9111ft ED* Nemo Owner mp County Elevaionfrt) Siie(ao) Years visited ym Max Moan Median Rank WA 62 Hamilton Lake For lie MS Pierce 320 ao 8 30 16 13 c WA 53 Chambers t asi FOiUfftt* Pie roe 320 1.0 a 22 1038 ♦>H6 113.5 A WA 54 rumbuJPond 13 tumbull Matonai Wikti* Retjoe Spokane 2J00 - t or? WA ss Turtafl Pond 83 Tumbull Ma tonal iVUdh* Rr Ugt Spokane 2«M - i 1 1 1 t O? WA £6 TllTT^UlPOIKlbJ tumbull Material hYikit* Rciw Spokane 2 3 tO - 2 3 2 1.E zn WA 57 TirrtoiU Pond 32 tumbull Matonai Wikii* Retjae Spokane ,'JIVI - 3 30 13 1 D WA 58 TunbuIIPond 138 tunbuii Matonai iVifcll* Re \rjr Spokane 2iOO _ 3 15 100 71 08 B WA so Tu/nbUllPond 130 tuinbUI Matonai tYlldUfc Re t*jt Spokane 2J0O _ 2 1 S 5 zn WA 60 lurntiUl Pond 117 Tumbull Matonai tYlkltfr Re Ujr Spokane 2300 - 1 3 3 3 3 07 WA 61 rirrmil Pc»:i Irt tumbull Ma tonal nlkflfr Re Ugc Spofcanf 2300 - 3 1 10 S 3 D WA 62 TunbuJI Pond 140 Tumbull Matonai wikSift Rcuor Spokane 2100 - 2 111 58 ■■>:> ^ H) WA 63 TUntMlPond 150 tumbull Nalonai Wlldi* Re Ugc Spokane 2^00 ~ 1 76 76 76 76 c? WA 61 PoNdcr Factory Private Thuritan 220 - 1 - - - - u WA 65 Campbell Lake NW Pnva* Spokane 2J40 - 1 7 7 7 7 D? WA 66 '.'JtllowKrll* 13' Division P'.iflr ForlltrtTl Pierce 300 - 5 100 420 ."Si 200 A WA 67 Sins tic Rood Nor fl WA 8 tite DNR Spokane 2 ifitt - 1 1S00 1500 1500 1500 A7 WA *s BumrllRoad WA S talc Dl JR Spokane 2400 &5 1 1£00 ISOO 1E0Q 1500 A7 WA - Tiar*xJ a|ca 1 1 FoMLtHH Pierce - - 1 - » » - U Appendix A- 7 Appendix B. Annual Howellia aquatius Survey data by State and Element Occurrence Number Appendix B. Annua) Howttiio aquutilh population estimates/conns by slate and Elcmcm Occurrence ntmbcr Only includes occurrences presumed 10 be extant. Data arc compiled from individual stale Nat ■ ml Heritage Programs, (he F Jul head National Forest's annual monitoring data and the Laid Trend Analysis Program at Foit Lewis. WA. Nuncrical values for Montana populations surveyed as pad of the Flathead National Forest's monitoring plan are derived from estimates of individuals ii sampling quadrats. Quadrats are assigned a value of 0= no plants found. Low = 1 io50 plans. Moderate = 50- MK) plants or High = >I00 plants. Final quantitative estimates fortius assessment were derived by assigning numerical values of 25, 75 and 150 for Low, Medium and High respectively and adding those numbent together to come up with a final population estimate for that year. In some cases, the midpoint of an estimated population range is provided. -l"=Site vtsli in isit that year and [)" = Site visit in which no quani iiaiivc survey data exists or was not available for this assessment. However, water howellia was observed during a a qualitative measure of abundance might exist, which no water how cilia was observed that year. stte EOI 1967 1970 1990 1962 1983 1984 1985 1986 \*£T 1^85 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1*9 E 199G 1997 1998 1999 3DC0 1*>0 1 2IC2 2003 2004 CA 1 75 ;o:: CA 2 25 CA 3 25 30 CA 4 200 3000 CA 5 10 10 CA 6 -1 -1 D 1 -1 30 50 too 300 -1 *ooo -1 -I -1 MT 1 BOG as 3S0 27 2S 2 50 100 300 75 25 200 MT 2 6500 ; j sj>:i -1 MT 3 6000 10 MT 4 *l -1 30 MT S 6000 sooo -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 MT | 6 2000 2000 1500 - SO 000 -1 25 50 450 450 225 350 MT 7 3&00 ■ 600 sso 1 &00 50 SO 300 *3Q MO 300 50 300 MT s 25O0 -1 ■ zoo 40 1 Sjvi -1 -1 -I -1 50 300 300 300 50 50 25 MT 550 -1 7S0 220 40 -1 150 17S 75 . : ;s 75 MT 10 250 -1 75 150 25 50 MT 11 150 -1 MT 12 450 16 35 260 -1 25 225 50 1 T& MT 13 12O0 *l 600 33 310 -1 25 300 225 300 175 150 MT 14 350 500 330 00 -1 150 150 150 50 150 MT 15 J00 50 150 ISO 150 3:;c ISO 300 150 MT | 16 400 1200 400 70 50 300 100 300 Appendix B - / Stat* EO* 19&7 1978 1980 1982 1583 19Bi 1985 19S6 19B7 198B *989 1«0 1991 1992 '952 1994 19 9 5 1996 1M7 I 1tt8 1999 2000 2O01 2Z02 20-3 2 2004 MT 17 11 15 MT 18 200 -1 25 25 450 450 450 325 MT 10 175 25 S2S 750 ooo 325 700 MT 20 5000 1000 -1 1250 100 210 -1 -1 -1 -1 50 175 300 2:^ 50 50 »o MT 21 -1 50 MT 22 200 750 8:: too 25 25 ISO 150 ISO ■ so ISO MT 23 300 3 4S0 20 110 • 1 2$ ISO 150 150 ■ 50 ISO MT 24 30 25 25 25 75 25 25 150 MT 25 25 110 15 225 325 200 25 325 MT 26 250 700 , 1200 1 BOO -1 25 300 300 175 200 50 200 MT 27 300 -1 2S0 200 105 -1 -1 -1 -1 25 225 325 300 325 1 450 MT 28 22S — i — MT 20 250 sso 150 165 -1 MT 30 1000 1000 15 -1 MT 31 160 MT 32 800 000 5 25 30 MT 33 50 • T MT 34 60 -1 MT 35 500 600 15 50 MT 36 120 20 MT 37 12 -1 100 50 3?5 300 225 MT 38 1100 2 MT M> 1200 20 MT 40 350 MT 41 55 MT 42 55 MT 43 22 2S 75 25 50 ISO MT 44 WO 105 3 25 300 300 325 200 300 325 MT 45 300 250 10 500 10 50 75 200 250 450 ITS 450 MT 46 50 40 3 25 MT 47 200 2S0 150 200 25 50 100 250 350 50 ■ 350 MT 48 250 200 20 20 50 50 175 100 150 25 1 175 MT 40 1750 2OO0 250 I00O 10 50 MT 50 750 t I Appendix B ~ 2 Stat* EO* 1967 1973 1980 1SB2 15B3 19Si 1985 1SS6 19B7 198B *989 1*?0 189 1 1SS2 *S92 19^4 15 3 5 1986 1987 I 1888 1999 2O0O 2O0t 2002 2D J 2 2004 MT SI 120 20 MT 52 200 20 MT 53 2S0 -1 MT 54 450 50 525 000 MT 55 too -1 25 . : ^:i 150 4 50 600 50 500 MT 55 27 10 75 75 50 25 50 MT 57 22 35 MT 58 30 MT 59 50 MT 60 50 20 MT 61 200 20 ISO 150 150 ISO MT 6? 100 250 125 150 200 4S0 MT 63 300 MT 64 100 -1 MT 65 100 MT *fc 50 -1 MT 67 s::o • T MT 68 50 50 MT 69 200 MT 70 300 -1 25 150 75 150 25 ISO MT 71 300 10 25 150 ISO 150 150 150 25 MT 72 i:i:o -1 150 300 300 300 75 300 300 MT 73 100 20 2S 300 300 300 300 50 MT 74 50 -1 25 2S ISO 150 50 150 50 MT 75 200 33 25 150 150 150 150 ISO MT 76 300 -1 25 50 4?5 450 435 :2S 550 MT ■: £000 20 MT 78 350 -t 75 75 75 150 25 ISO MT 70 1000 -1 75 25 25 25 25 ISO MT 80 i ::o: i 25 25 SO 25 50 25 MT 81 200 20 25 300 300 325 300 450 175 MT 82 200 20 MT 83 MO 150 MT 84 1 750 1 75 150 150 75 50 | 50 Appendix B -3 Stat* EC* 13&7 tS78 1980 1982 1583 l3Bi *98S 139b 1987 198B *989 1530 1991 1S92 *9*2 199J 1*99 1996 1997 I 1998 1993 2000 2O01 2Z02 200 2 2004 MT 85 -1 -1 MT 86 1000 20 100 300 225 175 300 300 300 MT A? IOOO so 2S 150 150 150 150 160 150 MT 88 1 000 MT 80 1000 100 MT OQ 3000 25 75 ISO 150 ISO 25 ISO MT 01 2000 • T 25 150 ISO 150 ISO ISO MT 02 200 25 25 75 150 25 MT 03 1000 so 25 75 75 150 150 MT 04 300 300 300 150 300 25 j 200 MT OS 200 25 2S 75 25 1 150 MT 06 24 150 100 300 ' 300 MT 0? 24 25 25 75 50 60 MT 08 300 -1 25 150 75 150 ISO 25 150 MT 00 1000 -1 150 150 150 150 ISO 150 MT 100 2000 • 1 75 ISO ISO ISO ISO ISO MT 101 3000 • 1 75 150 150 150 ISO ISO MT 102 10 25 25 50 50 100 200 225 MT 103 60 50 MT 104 100 50 450 450 450 4S0 200 350 MT 105 so MT toe 25 150 ISO 160 150 MT 10" 25 150 150 25 ISO 60 MT 108 &25 650 376 425 25 400 MT 100 25 150 150 75 160 150 MT i to 2 25 MT lit 50 75 75 25 25 MT 112 275 450 75 350 j 400 MT 113 75 25 75 25 1 150 MT 114 200 -1 MT HE 1500 MT 116 1000 MT 117 550 MT 118 1 1 1 1 <* 1 Appendix B ~ 4 Stat* EO* 1967 1978 1980 1 1982 15B3 19Bi 1985 1*Sb 19B7 1^8B *389 1*?0 199 1 1SS2 *S*2 19^4 15 3 5 1996 1987 I 1898 1393 3000 2^0 t 2C02 2C«3 2 200J MT 110 -1 MT 130 -1 MT 131 -1 MT 132 14 MT 133 -1 MT 124 -1 MT 136 :-o::o MT 136 13 MT 137 -1 MT 138 -1 MT 130 -1 MT 130 | 32 4 2 4 MT 131 36 MT 136 60 MT 136 75 MT 137 250 MT 138 5 MT 130 3 MT 140 10 MT 141 300 OR 8 -1 WA 1 -1 -1 WA 3 -1 1 -1 WA 3 soo WA 4 soo iVA 5 soo -1 WA 6 *k WA 7 -1 WA 9 -1 WA -1 WA 10 -1 WA 11 ■1 10 403 WA 12 -1 WA 13 -1 1 1 1 I 1 Appendix B ~ 5 Stat* EC* 1967 1973 1980 1982 1583 198i *98S 1S9b 19B7 1988 *989 1*90 199 1 1992 19*2 1994 1*95 1996 1907 1 1998 1999 2000 2O01 2C02 2C«J I 2004 VTA 14 -1 -1 ATA IS -1 WA 16 -1 WA 17 -1 WA 18 -1 2 156 iVA 10 -1 WA 20 3 57 WA 21 1 WA 22 WA 23 WA 24 150 WA 25 WA 26 WA 28 46 75 WA 20 iVA 30 WA 31 WA 32 75 18 2 WA 33 WA 34 WA 35 WA 36 15 WA 3? 60 WA JS 2 30 WA 30 -1 3)8 fc^:> 205 20 325 642 | -1 iVA 40 -1 4 too | -1 WA 4f -1 1D8S &200 370 300 1125 I -1 WA 42 -1 -1 00 B6 26 20 18 id WA 43 -1 800 120 1 200 800 i? v:: 400 1 -1 WA 44 -I 20 30 150 260 300 300 -1 WA 45 -1 72 20 1 3 61 -1 WA 46 -1 -1 706 3240 535 32S 405 305 -1 WA 47 *l -1 804 430 822 375 770 800 1 -1 WA 48 1 1 -1 -1 i s::o 12275 £860 M84 *3S5 020 J -1 Appendix B ~6 Stat* EO* 19&7 1978 1980 1982 1583 198i *98S 159b 19B7 1988 *9B9 1*90 199 1 1992 *9*2 199J 15 9 5 1996 1997 1 1998 1999 r Sb^ 2O01 2C02 200 2 2004 WA 40 -1 soo 42 300 112? 255 -I WA 60 -1 S3 104 25 10 12 6 -1 WA SI .1 30 374 85 250 49? 665 -1 WA 52 4 13 11 25 30 30 -1 WA E9 -I 01 i :: ?a 136 22 27 40 2 -1 iVA 54 WA iS 1 WA 66 3 WA 57 f 30 WA 68 100 08 15 WA «> 1 WA 60 3 WA 61 3 10 1 WA 62 111 WA 63 76 A A 64 -1 WA 65 7 WA 66 420 too 100 200 200 400 -1 WA 67 l£0C A A 68 iso:: WA Tian*xl «ra M -1 Appendix B ~ 7 Appendix C. Howelua aquatius Bibliography HOWELUA AQUATIUS BIBLIOGRAPHY Bruusfcld. SJ- and CX. Baldwin. 1998. Howellia uqmiuh* genetics: not so boring after all. In: Fonm on Research and Management of HowelUa aquariHs. Turnbull National Wildlife Refuge, Cheney, WA. March 24-25. \\ov*c)ha(Ho\ifliuf*tquafiiis)on Fon Lewis. Washington Natural Heritage Program. WA Dcpatimeni of Natural Resources in coordination with The Nature Conservancy of Washington. Bursick. R.J. 1995. Update: rcpoit on the conservation status of Howeiiia aqtutiiu'x in Idaho. Unpublished repon. Idaho Department of Fish and Game. Boise. S pp. Clcgg.M.and A. LombanJi. 2000. Status rcpoit for water howellia {Howellia aqttaulh} oi Fon Lewis. WA. Repott to the Land Condition Trend Analysis Program. Fon Lewis, WA. Enviionmcnt and Engineering Inc.. Norfolk. VA. 19 pp. Davis, L. 200i. Flathead Nalional Forest. FY05 - year repon of annual monitoring Retirements - annual monitoring of water howellia occurrences. Unpublished repoti. Flathead Nalional Forest. MT. Camon.J. 1999. Inveniory management plan for water howellia (Howellia aqtmulix) on Fort Lewis. Final Re pons. Washington Natural Heritage Program, WA Dcpatimeni of Natural Resources in coordination with The Nature Conservancy of Washington. Gilbert. R. 2002. Field repoti for water howellia surveys on Foil Lewis, WA. Repon to I he Land Condition Trend Analysis Program. Fon Lewis, WA. Environment and Engineering lie. Norfolk. V A. 17 pp. Gilbert. R. 2001. Status repon for water howellia {HoweUht m$naulis} on Fon Lewis, WA. Repon to the Land Condition Trend Analysis Program. Fort Lewis, WA. Enviionmcnt and Engineering Inc.. Norfolk, VA. 9 pp. Gilbert. R. and A. Lombaidi. 1999. Status repon for water howellia (Howellia aqtmtilis} oi Fon Lewis. WA. Report lothe Land Condition Trend Analysis Program. Fon Lewis, WA. Enviionmcnt and Engineering Inc.. Norfolk, VA. 25 pp. Griggs, FT. and J. E. Dibble. 1979. Status report. Won W/i« aquaiilh A.Gray, for the Mendocino National Forest. Unpublished report. Mendocino National Forest, CA. 12 pp. Camon.J. 1998. Endangered species management plan for water howellia. Washington Natural Heritage Program. Department of Natural Resources, Camon.J. 1995. Repon on the status in Washington of Howellia aquaiilh A.Gray. Unpublished report. Washington Natural Heritage Piogram,01ympia. 32 pp. Camon.J. 1992. Repon on the status in Washington of Howellia aquaiW a A.Gray. Unpublished report. Washington Natural Heritage Piogram,01ympia. 46 pp. Camon.J. andT. Rush. I99B. Definition of potential habitat and a monitoring plan for water IslcD.W. 1997. Rediscovery of water howellia forCalifornia. Fremontia 25(3): 29-32. Jokcna.J.D. 1980. Status report. Howellia aqttaiiih A.Gray, for the Mendocino National Forest. Unpublished report. California Slate University, Chico. IS pp. Lesica, P. 1997. Spread of Phalaris arututioat-f a advciscly impacts the endangered plant Howellia aquaiilh. Great Basin Naturalist 57(i): 366-368. Lesica, P. 1996. Monitoring Howellia aoaaiilix ai Swan RivcrOxbow Preserve: 1994 Final Report. Report loThe Naiurc Conservancy. Montana Field Office. Helena. MT. 6 pp. Appendix C I.csitii. P. 1995. Monitoring HoweiUa aauaiitis ai Swan RivcrOxbow Preserve: 1995 Progress Report Report loTbc NaiurcCoiscrvancy. Montana Field Office. Helena. MT. 4 pp. Leska. P. 1994. Monitoring Howettia aaaalitix ;ii Swat RivcrOxbow Preserve: 1994 Progress Report. Report loThe NaiurcCoiservancy. Montana Field Office. Helena. MT. 5 pp. Lcsica, P. 1994. Monitoring Hone/Ha aaualilis at Swan RivcrOxbow Preserve: 1993 Progress Report. Report loTbc NaiurcCoiservancy. Montana Field Office, Helena. MT. 4 pp. Lcsica. P. 1992. Autccotogy of ihe endangered plant Howeitia aaualifh: Implications for management and reserve design. Ecological Applications 2(4): 411-421. Depart meal of Fish and Game. Idaho Conservation Daia Center. Boise, ID. 8 pp. + appendices. Liclihaidi, J. and K.Cray. 2001. Monitoring of Howellia aqtuiiifix < water howellia) and iis habitat at (he Harvard- Palonse RiverFlood Plain Site. Idaho: Third-) car results. Idaho Department of Fish and Game. Idaho Conservation Data Center. Boise, ID. 8 pp. + appendices. Lichihaidt, J. and R.Moselcy. 2000. Ecological assessment of Howeitia aqUatiHs habiial .si I he Harvard- Palo use R iver flood plain silc. Boise. ID. Unpublished report. Prepared for ihe Idaho Department ol Parks and Recreation by the Idaho Department of Fish and Game. Idaho Conservation Data Center. 14 pp. + appendices. Lcsica. P. 199|. Monitoring HoweiHa aqualilix and Phalanx a naidinaeea & Swan RivcrOxbow Preserve: Progress Report. Unpublished report toThe Nature Coiservancy. 7 pp. Maura* M. 2002. Suuusof water howellia illtn- t'iiiti aquaiitix) and rccd canary gross [Phalaris anintEnacza) in water howellia ponds; 1998-2001. Flaihcad National Forest, MT. I l'siui, r. 1990. Habitat requirements, germiiatioi behavior and seed bank dynamics of Howellia ntjttalrlh in the Swai Valley. MT. Unpublished report lothc USDA Forest Service, Flathead National Foresi, MT. Conservation Biology Research, Missoula. MT. 44pp.+ appendices. Lcsica. P.. R.F. Lcaiy, F.W. Allendorf and D.E. Bildcrback. 1988. Lack of genetic diversity withii and among populations of an endangered plani. Haweilia aquatHix. Conservation Biology 2(3): 275-282. Lichihaidt, J. and K.Gray. 2005. Monitoring of Howellia aqttaltlis (waiCI howellia) and Lis habitat at the Harvard- Palonse RiverFlood Plain Site. Idaho: Fifth-year results. Idaho Department of Fish and Came. Idaho Conservation Data Center. Boise. ID. I0pp.+ appendices. Lichthardi, J. and K.Cray. 2003. Monitoring of Howellia aqtuitiih (water howellia) and its habitat at the Harvard- Palonse RiverFlood Plain Site. Idaho: Fourth-year results. Idaho Mantas.M. 2000. Stalusof water howellia tlltn- effia aqualitisj aid rccd canary j? rass {Phaiari* arant/inacea ) in water howellia ponds: 1998 and 1999, Swan Valley. MT; monitoring report. Flathead National Forest. MT. Manias.M. 1998. Historical vs. current conditions of upland forests surrounding Howellia aqtuitrfis habitats in the Swai Valley. MT. In: Forum on Research and Management of Howellia aqtmlMs. Tun ha II National Wildlife Refuge. Cheney. WA. March 24-25. McCanen,N.and R. Biliman. 1998. Water chemisiry r . nuirieii cycling, productivity and environmental factors affeciing plant commuiity structure in Haweliia aquatiUt ponds. In: Fonm on Research and Managemeui of Howe/Ha aqttatifh. Tirnbull National Wildlife Refuge. Chcicy.WA. March24-25. 1 1 pp. McCuncB. 1982. Noteworthy colleciioos. Montana: HoweMa aqualrth. Madrono 29:123- 124. Appendix C Reeves, D.M. 2001. Hydrologicconttolsonihe survival of water howellia (tfftrWJ/: 35860-35S64. U.S. FLsh and Wildlife Service. 1993. Endangered and threatened wildlife and ptants; Proposed listing of water howellia (Wm»r//«/ aqtmulis) as threatened. Federal Register 58(72): 19795-19800. Wocssncr, WAV. and B, Hcidel. 1999 and 2000. Preserving the function of unique wetlands critical to the survival of water howellia in the Swan Valley, MT. Progress Reports to the Montana Department of Environmental Quality, Helena. MT. Department of Geology, University of Montana. Missoula and the Montana Natural Heritage Program. WolfokLL. 200-1. Water howellia (Hmrclfta atftfaftfh) monitoring on Foil Lewis Military* Reservation field rcpon, 200i. Report lothe Land Condition Trend Analysis Program. Fort Lewis, VYA. Environment and Engineering Inc., Norfolk, VA. 22 pp. WoIfold,L. 2003. Water howellia monitoring on Fon Lewis, 2003. Report to lie Land Condition Trend Analysis Progium. Fon Lewis* WA. Environment and Engineering lie., Norfolk, VA. 17 pp. Appendix C Appendix D. Global/State Rank Definitions HERITAGE PROGRAM RANKS The international network of Nat ural Heritage Pmgrans employs a standardized making system todenote global (range- wide) and state status* Species arc assigned numeric rank* ranging from I to 5, reflecting the relative degree to which ihey are "at-risk" Rank definitions are given below, A lumber of factors ate considered in assigning ranks — the number si/e and distribution of known ^occurrences" or populations, population trends (if known), habitat sensitivity, and threat. Factoi* in a species' life histoty that make it especially vulnerable arc also considered (e.g.. dependence on a specific pollinator). GLOBAL RANK DEFINITIONS(NaturcServe 2003) Ct I Critically imperiled because of extreme rarity and/or 01 her factors making it highly vulnerable 10 extinction G2 Imperiled because of rarity and/or other factois making it vulnerable to extinction G3 Vulnerable because of rarity or restricted range and/or other factors, even though it may be abundant at some of its locations G4 Apparently secure, though it may be quite rare in parts of its range, especially at the periphery G5 Demonstrably secure, though it may be quite rare in parts of its range, especially at the periphery TI-5 InfraspeclflcTaxnD (trinomial) — The status of infraspccific taxa (subspecies or varieties) arc indicated by a pl T-rank" following the species* global rank STATE RANK DEFINITIONS 51 At high risk because of extremely limited and potentially declining numbctv extern aid/or habitat, making it highly vulnerable to extirpation in the state 52 At risk because of very limited and potentially declining numbcis, extent and/or habitat, making it vulnerable to extirpation in the state 53 Potentially at risk because of limited and potentially declining numbets, extent and/or habitat, even though it may be abundant in some arras 54 Uncommon but not rare (although it may be fare in pans of its range), and usually widespread. Apparently not vulnerable in most of its range, but possibly cause for long-term concern 55 Common, widespread, and abundant (although it may be rare in pans of its ranger Not vulnerable in most of its range COMBINATION RANKS C#C#orS#S# Range Rank— A numeric range rank (e.g.. G2G3) used to indicate uncenainty about the exact status of ataxon QUALIFIERS NR Not ranked Q 1} o est to nahlc taxonomy tbal may red ucc conservation priority — Distinctiveness of this entity as ataxon at the current level is questionable: resolution of this uncertainty may result in change from a species to a subspecies or hybrid, or inclusion of this (axon in another taxon, with the resulting taxon having a lower- priority (numerically higher) conservation status rank Appendix D X Presumed Extinct— Species believed to be extinct throughout its range. Not located despite intensive searches of historical sites and other appropriate habitat, and virtually to likelihood thai it will be rediscovered H Possibly Extinct— Species known from only historical occurrences, but may nevertheless Mill be extant: farther searching needed U L'nrankablc— Species cirrentK uiraikablc due to lack of information or die 10 substaniially confliciing information about siai us or trends HVB Hybrid— Entity not ranked because )i rcprescnisan intcispccific hybrid and not a species ? Inexact Numeric Rank — Denotes inexact numeric rank C Captive or Cultivated Only— Species at preseni is extant only in captivity or cultivation, or as a reintroduced population not yet established A Accidental — Species is accidental or casual in Montana, in oihcr words, infrequent and outside usual range. Includes species (usually birds or butterflies) recorded once or only a few times at a location. A few of these species may have bred on the one or iwo occasions they were recorded Z Zero Occurrences — Species is preseni but lacking practical conservation concern in Montana because there are no definable occurrences, although ihe laxon is native and appears regularly in Montana P Potential — Potential that species occurs in Montana but nocxtani or historic occurrences are accepted R Reported — Species reported in Montana bui without a basis for either accepting or rejecting ihe report, or the report not yet reviewed locally. Some of these arc very recent discoveries for which the progiam h;is not yet received first -hand information; others are old, obscure reports SYN Synonym — Species reported as occurring in Montana, but the Montana Natural Heritage Program does not recogni/e the (axon: therefore the species is not assigned a rank A tank has been assigned and is under review. Contact the Montana Natural Heritage Program for assigned rank B Breeding — Rank refers to the breeding population of the species in Montana N Nonbrccding— Rank refers 10 the non-breeding population of the species in Montana Appendix D Appendix E. Element Occurrence Rank Definitions ELEMENT OCCURRENCE RANK DEFINITIONS A- Excellent estimated viability/ccological integrity A? - Possibly excellent estimated viability/ecological integrity AB - Excellent or good estimated viability/ecological integrity AC - Excellent, good , or fair est i mated viability /ecological integrity B - Good estimated viability/ecological integrity B? - Possibly good climated viability/ecological integrity BC - Good or fair estimated viability/ecological integrity BD - Good, fair, or poor estimated viability/ecological integrity C - Fair estimated viability/ecological integrity C*} - Possibly Km estimated viability/ecological integrity CD- Fair or poor estimated viability/ecological integrity D- Poor estimated viability/ecological integrity D?- Possibly poor estimated viability/ecological integrity E - Verified extant (viability/ecological integrity not assessed) F- Failed to find F"? - Possibly failed to find H - H istorkal H?- Possibly historical X - Extirpated X? - Possibly extirpated U- Un ran tabic NR - Not funked Appendix E