Utah native plants

Saturday, April 22, 2023

Stone's draba finally officially recognized as new to science

A plant species previously named in 1941 in honor of the late Dr. Bassett Maguire (botany professor at herbarium curator at Utah State University in Logan, Utah from 1931 until 1942 and then a curator and scientist at the New York Botanic Garden until his death in 1991) now once again is being recognized as having two infraspecific taxa based on recently published genetic studies (March 2023).

Plant species aren't necessarily named for the first person to make a plant collection of that ultimately named species. But in this case, Dr. Maguire along with Dean Hobson and Ralph Gierisch on June 2, 1936 made a high elevation collection in Cache County in the Bear River Range that they knew was a species of Draba in the mustard family, but without identification of the species within that genus:

Maguire 13687 deposited at the Gray Herbarium (Harvard University) subsp. maguirei

The genus Draba is sometimes referred to as "Whitlow grass" and other related variations but it is not a grass species.

In 1941, C.L. Hitchcock named this plant as a new species, Draba maguirei, with two intraspecific varieties: var. maguirei and var. burkei.

On July 7, 1995, Doug Stone with Frank "Buddy" Smith made a collection of a plant in the Monte Cristo Range similar to D. maguirei at an elevation that was 1800 feet lower then the 1936 collection and brought it to the attention of mustard expert Dr. Michael Windham:

Stone 1804 of subsp. stonei (note the premature var. designation and author names)

Windham collected it in 1997:

Windham 97-118 subsp. stonei (note the premature var. designation and author names)

This same plant, as it turns outs, was collected by the USU's Dr. Richard Shaw in June of 1983.

Shaw 3132 subsp. stonei (with a handwritten premature var. designation and author names)

Since var. stonei was never published (until published as subsp. stonei in March of 2023), the annotations of the name to the specimens above was premature; it was based on the same understanding of research that had already been largely conducted in the late 1990's, and sometimes specimen sheets make reference to unpublished or expected names. But, often there never is a publication of that name. The naming of a species however requires a publication that meets the minimum threshold requirements of the ICBN (International Code of Botanical Nomenclature). Just writing a proposed name on a herbarium specimen sheet (or "voucher") does not constitute a publication.

In May of 1999, USU's Dr. Mary Barkworth collected this later named taxon in Logan Canyon:

Barkworth 99.010 subsp. stonei at NYBG

Botanists Duane Atwood and Joel Tuhy separately also collected this same lower elevation plant in the 1980's before being described now as Draba maguirei C.L. Hitchc. subsp. stonei Windham via the recent publication. Until now, those plants (as well as those referenced above) have simply been classified as Draba maguirei var. maguirei.

Based on chromosome counts and analysis provided in a 2004 paper , Windham and Beilstein moved Draba burkei, previously named as a variety of D. maguirei, to the species level.

Oldest Draba burkei collection (May 1932, Box Elder Co.) by Melvin Burke (holotype)

It was thought that an analysis of plants still considered to be D. maguirei other than "burkei" was going to be made by 2005 based on initial conferences that I participated in relating to the Utah Rare Plant Guide (URPG) project. Preparations were being made going back as far 2003 to add "var." stonei to the URPG (with the same author assumptions, i.e. by Windham and Beilstein) but those efforts then were paused awaiting a future publication, which in 2023 has now finally happened.

Link to the publication: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36779544/. Full PDF. Citation:

Windham MD, Picard KT, Pryer KM. 2023. An in-depth investigation of cryptic taxonomic diversity in the rare endemic mustard Draba maguirei. American Journal of Botany e16138.

Saturday, February 18, 2023

Plants in the news: winter 2023

Invasive Tamarisk removal efforts:

From southern Utah, we have this recent story:

https://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/archive/2023/02/10/agl-local-nonprofit-woodturners-join-forces-to-rid-southern-utah-of-invasive-very-flammable-tamarisk-tree/

Tamarisk (also known as "Saltcedar" and by the scientific name Tamarix ramosissima) is found throughout the state of Utah and not just in southern Utah. It is a Class III ("contain") designated noxious weed in Utah, and is found in pretty much every county in the state. In the United States, where it is not native, it is now principally found in the western-central portion of the country and then down into Mexico. It chokes out other vegetation (and makes it very difficult to find a camping spot along rivers!). I don't recall reading an article before that focuses on its flammability like this article does.

The power of plants:

This recent piece:

https://www.abc4.com/community/hidden-history/black-history-month/crazy-plant-bae-brings-plant-therapy-to-black-community/

quotes a study indicating that " . . taking care of plants can aid in stress reduction, alleviate symptoms of depression, aid with memory retention, promote better self-esteem, and make us generally more productive and creative."

This article doesn't focus on locally native plants per se. But, the same idea can be applied to gardening with native plants and helping to protect ecosystems harboring our diminishing natural areas. So often those of us working in plant conservation are grilled with the question, "Why care?" [in reference to say a rare plant or to plants in general]. While there are so many excellent responses available to this usually mind-numbing question, this response is as good as any. They benefit us in so many ways (including the fact that we wouldn't exist without them!).

Some good news hopefully for Monarchs:

The winter Monarch count is up:

https://www.upr.org/utah-news/2023-02-06/monarch-butterfly-winter-count-shows-significant-improvement

By no means does this mean that Monarchs are out of the woods and all ongoing efforts must continue at warp speed. Monarch caterpillars only feed on milkweed species and so there is an incredibly important connection between Monarch species survival and native plants (and the adults who require nectar from flowering plants, preferably locally adapted native plants). Attempting to do as many things as possible to conserve Monarch butterflies is not a recent phenomenon. Scientists have been concerned about them for decades. They have been the poster child for the Union of Concern Scientists for a very long time. But, as with climate change, people were just largely not paying attention to their plight until relatively recently. Crisis management is how we respond to environmental issues.

Utah Legislature Tackles Wasteful Grass:

https://dailyutahchronicle.com/2023/02/07/langley-grass-utah-drought-water-usage/

Utah is extremely wasteful of its water resources and there needs to be a much bigger push with significant private landowner incentives to replace lawn grass. And, in fact, until relatively recently, in many homeowner associations and related neighborhood settings, owners were persecuted when trying to implement water-saving landscapes. An about-face is slowly starting to happen.

Using the desperate condition of the Great Salt Lake to address our poor water use practices is I suppose fine, but I agree with a quote in this article that it will not be enough by itself to save the lake. Golf courses should not be exempted from the legislation that is being currently discussed (but through lobbying efforts, which essentially corrupt good governance throughout our democracy, no doubt will lead to their exclusion).

Meanwhile, an encouraging development from last year that contradicts the long-held notion that front yards with native plants are just a bunch of weeds and must be immediately removed, is this change in Utah's Condominum Act which took effect on May 4, 2022. Some background:

https://utahhoalawblog.com/2022/06/01/new-2022-hoa-laws-and-what-they-mean-for-your-hoa/

Here's a link to the new Utah law:

https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title57/Chapter8A/57-8a-S231.html?v=C57-8a-S231_2022050420220504

Note from the above that now (Section 57-8a-231):

"(2) An association may not enact or enforce a governing document that prohibits, or has the effect of prohibiting, a lot owner of a detached dwelling from incorporating water-wise landscaping on the property owner's property."

Nice!

There is in addition to the above section, another reference to landscaping (under Section 57-8-8.1, also effective May 4, 2022 of the Condominium Ownership Act):

"(9) An association of unit owners:

(a) shall adopt rules supporting water-efficient landscaping, including allowance for low water use on lawns during drought conditions; and

(b) may not prohibit or restrict the conversion of a grass park strip to water-efficient landscaping."

See:

https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title57/Chapter8/57-8-S8.1.html?v=C57-8-S8.1_2022050420220504

In a country and particularly in a state that seems to be largely headed backwards towards a less enlightened time, this is a refreshing change in attitude (even if it is happening over the fear of the looming ecological catastrophe, severe human health impacts, and the impact to Utah's ski and therefore tourism industry, that would be the end result of a non-existent Great Salt Lake).

Elks eat Yews and die:

We plant a lot of biological garbage in our yards and then we essentially block wildlife from lower elevation areas where for thousands of years they migrated during the winter. And now they end up being forced to eat whatever they can find in the foothills (instead of the valleys).

https://kjzz.com/news/local/19-elk-found-dead-in-utah-county-likely-from-plant-poisoning-wildlife-utah-yew-landscaping-animals-dwr

Yews (Taxus, a genus of coniferous shrubs and trees) have no place in Utah landscapes. Both Taxus baccata and the even more poisonous Taxus cuspida have nonetheless been sold in the nursery trade in Utah (and culvitated on both the University of Utah and BYU campuses since at least the 1950's) and are sometimes used as a hedge or border wall. One of these species is believed to be responsible for the death of these elk.

Yew poisoning is well known. For some references see:

https://extension.psu.edu/toxicity-of-yew-wood-and-roots

My recommendation: don't plant Yews! And "yank the yews" if you have them already in your yard.

Friday, May 20, 2016

Endangered Species Day 2016

(Note: this has similar, although not identical, content distributed on the UNPS listserv today)

It's here: Endangered Species Day 2016.

Occurring within Utah are 25 plant species that currently are listed under the Endangered Species Act (12 of those are designated as "endangered" meaning in danger of extinction, and 13 as "threatened" i.e. on verge of becoming endangered as defined in the ESA). The first species from Utah was federally listed in 1978 (Phacelia argillacea); the last in 2013 (prior to that, no species had been listed since 2001, a drought of some 12 years). No plant species from Utah have been designated absent legal action since prior to the year 2000.

In addition we have three candidate species, species found to be eligible for listing and formally designated as candidate species, but awaiting action. Candidate designation is very worthwhile but offers no protection.

There are many species worthy of designation that are imperiled; there should be many more designated than there are (we have well over 400 endemic vascular plant species that only occur in Utah, and over 10% of our 3,200 taxa of vascular plants alone are considered rare and many of those have a wide variety of imminent threats) but at the same time, we are grateful for the existence of the Endangered Species Act and look forward to the day when it is again revered, and its rules and regulatory intent are again implemented in the spirit that was intended by Congress.

We are also grateful for the work of the The Nature Conservancy in Utah who has to date worked to establish preserves in Utah that are currently helping to protect at least five federally listed plant species plus one (and possibly soon, two) species that should be listed.

TNC Utah Link:

http://www.nature.org/ourinitiatives/regions/northamerica/unitedstates/utah/contact/staff-listing.xml

We are also grateful for our many conservation and other partners, some of whom are mentioned here (see the "Private organization" section):

http://www.unps.org/PAGES/rare.html

We are also grateful for our rare plant committee and their exhaustive efforts to rate/rank/seek evaluations for Utah rare plants and publish their findings, and who have spent incredible amounts of time in so doing, mostly notably, Drs. Jason Alexander and Walter Fertig. We are incredibly fortunate to have them on our board and having taken numerous active roles within UNPS, just we are indebted to the prior similar work of most notably Dr. Duane Atwood, and also many others. It is through their efforts and all of the taxonomists/botanists that are their contemporaries as well as the vast number that are no longer with us that have painstakingly identified species and unique varieties that occur in the state/region that provides us with focus and direction for future conservation actions. To all of them, every resident of the state is permanently indebted.

More information about Utah rare plants

Monday, April 11, 2016

The Utah Listing Preclusion Model

An American Bar Association environment and energy resources section article (author unknown) is referring to Endangered Species Act (ESA) listing avoidance tactics in Utah as the Utah Listing Preclusion Model.

See:

Conservation Agreements and ESA Listing: the Utah Listing Preclusion Model

The approach is touted as one other states should use in certain circumstances to avoid listing under the ESA.

From the 2015 article:

"In the past five years, Utah species accounted for twenty-five percent of those where listing was precluded by an agreement. During this time period, no state has precluded listing for more species than Utah. Recent listing preclusions in Utah provide a valuable model for other states to consider when faced with a potential ESA listing."

Utah tactics in avoiding ESA listing using last minute and ill-conceived conservation agreements is a poor practice which, as feared, has set a very dangerous precedent.

Friday, March 25, 2016

Deseret milkvetch delisting deja vu

Utah's ESA listed Astragalus desereticus (Deseret milkvetch) is again in the news.

Astragalus desereticus
(Ben Franklin, Utah Natural Heritage Program)

The Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) petitioned to delist it in on October 6, 2015 claiming to provide "new" information. (It unlikely that the information presented is particularly "new"). It is known that WAPA wants to put some kind of power line or transmission corridor through or near the mostly private/state owned property where this species grows. Based on that petition, the FWS has decided to review it further. See:

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Findings on 29 petitions
(81 FR 14058 14072 published March 16, 2016)

The species has been listed as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act since October 20, 1999. Through early March of 2016, the rare plant committee of the Utah Native Plant Society continued to rank it as "High" conservation priority (there is only one higher priority ranking).

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) had already formally decided to recommend the species for delisting in 2011. So why has it remained listed? (A question for taxpayers to ask, now that FWS will be spending more time on an expensive re-review in light of the positive finding.) In any event, the FWS has made a positive 90-day finding meaning that they will now review this again and come out with another finding one year from now.

In doing so, the FWS must assess current known residential construction as a result of suburban sprawl and road widening threats. It is inevitable that these impacts will occur, and this severely edaphically restricted species has nowhere else to go. Further there is essentially no federal lands ownership involving its habitat (perhaps a tiny amount on Forest Service lands reportedly recently found, but almost all private and state).

And extensive surveys should be conducted this year, since to my knowledge the species has not been surveyed in recent years. What has the effect been in recent years involving record high average temperatures? Are there other new threats or impacts?

The very delisting petition itself represents an imminent threat to the species. Given that the petitioner presents a threat to the species, the delisting petition has to be in large part viewed in that light.

Also given that no plant species are being listed in Utah in favor instead of "conservation agreements" even when the FWS itself proposes to list them, then no species should be delisted absent some sort of very significant, long-term conservation agreement as well. (And long term does not mean 10 or 15 years.) In this case, the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources is a significant owner of its habitat. There have been past agreements, but as protector of our wildlife (which should, but rarely does, include plant species), they should be jumping at this opportunity to enter into an appropriate 25-year minimum conservation agreement, or better yet, providing a conservation easement that will permanently protect at least 80% of the existing known habitat without surface disturbances including power transmission corridors that end up being corridors which encourage invasive species and increase recreational impacts. And cattle grazing is a continued threat as well.

Here's the text from the PDF relating to this latest FR notice published on 3/16/2016 (see link above):

"We received a petition dated October 6, 2015, from Western Area Power Administration requesting that Deseret milkvetch (currently listed as threatened), be delisted under the Act due to new information. The petition clearly identified itself as such and included the requisite identification information for the petitioner, required at 50 CFR 424.14(a). This finding addresses the petition. Finding Based on our review of the petition and sources cited in the petition, we find that the petition resents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action (delisting) may be warranted for the Deseret milkvetch
(Astragalus desereticus), based on a lack of threats under any of the five listing factors. However, during our status review, we will thoroughly evaluate all potential threats to the species, including the extent to which any protections or other conservation efforts have reduced those threats. Thus, for this species, the Service requests information relevant to whether the species falls within the definition of either an endangered species under section 3(6) of the Act or a threatened species under section 3(20), including
information on the five listing factors under section 4(a)(1) and any other factors identified in this finding . . . "

Even if the FWS decides ultimately to delist the species, they would still be required to monitor the species for an additional five years following the delisting date. To what extent FWS would have the funding or personnel to conduct that required monitoring is unknown.

More information:

USFWS ECOS species profile for Deseret milkvetch

Astragalus desereticus on the Utah Rare Plant guide:

http://www.utahrareplants.org/pdf/Astragalus_desereticus.pdf

or access via:

http://www.utahrareplants.org/rpg_species.html

Utah DNR UCDC Deseret Milkvetch page

Delisting a Species: Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act

Wednesday, February 24, 2016

Cactus poachers: we are watching you

An excellent article on a longstanding topic appeared in The Atlantic on February 22, 2016:

Busting Cactus Smugglers in the American West: How undercover agents infiltrated the global black market for cacti (by J. Weston Phippen).

The first letter in the genus name, i.e. in the scientific name otherwise properly referred to in italics although with some misspellings, should have all been capitalized in the article. Overall however it is a well-written piece, although with a less than satisfactory ending in terms of what happened to the smugglers that were caught red-handed.

This activity has been going on of course for decades. A limited number of obsessed folks in Japan/Asia are another big source of the problem, but Europe typically has produced some of the worst offenders (Germany, Austria, Russia, etc.). They come over and take whatever they want and don't care whether they are in a national park or not. Note from the article that they even lifted a plant right out of Utah's Arches National Park, probably a Sclerocactus parviflorus.

It isn't just foreigners that do this; there are avid domestic cactophiles acting alone or sometimes in groups that make periodic raids on Utah cacti from time to time as well.

Usually the foreigners are smarter than this, and will simply put seeds (it is not okay to take them from without permit much less from rare/sensitive plant species or federally listed species; different rules may apply depending on the species) and parts of dug up plants into envelopes or small boxes and simply mail them out to themselves. Private couriers like FedEx/DHL/Airborne used to be pretty popular historically and was the more common method which then typically avoided customs completely. Stuffing plant parts into cereal boxes with respect to some of the activity noted in the recent article and caught on a video camera: not so smart.

These people are terrorists, just of a different sort. To be only levied a small fine after being caught red-handed however is hardly going to discourage this activity; if anything it will encourage this behavior. People like this should frankly at a minimum have their passports revoked indefinitely, or for at least some very long period of time and made to pay multi-thousand dollar fines.

We should all be outraged at this flagrant and ignorant behavior. It must stop.

To cactus smugglers: you are being watched. There are video and surveillance cameras in places that you might not expect. We will work to ensure you are caught and that fines are increased.

To anyone who thinks they can collect just seeds and that it is just fine: wrong. Stop. Check the laws of the state and country you visit. You cannot move plant parts on Utah highways without a permit. You cannot take seeds much less parts of plants from our national and state parks and from other protected areas. You cannot take seeds or plant parts from federal lands without a permit from an appropriate federal agency.

What can you do?

Become aware of laws relating to the collection of plant materials. For starters, see:

Laws and Utah native plants

If you see suspicious activity in national parks/monuments or in state parks, report it immediately to local officials. If a federally listed species, report that activity to the US Fish & Wildlife Service (if in Utah, to the Salt Lake City office). Take pictures if possible including areas that seem to show obvious signs of digging, tire tracks, etc. and provide those to the appropriate land managing agency. If you can't determine easily who that is, e-mail the information to the Utah Native Plant Society:

unps@unps.org

Monday, February 15, 2016

Lions and penstemons deserve equivalent consideration

Few understand that the the U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) is global in its intended scope; it is about the entire planet, and a new way of thinking about it.

And that's one of the things that makes it one of the most intelligent and forward-thinking laws that this country has ever passed. The listing of the African Lion in December of 2015 illustrates how it often is a law that recognizes what is important, even if our direct enforcement options are relatively limited.

Will we continue to lead the way in this regard? And will we protect our own "African lions" as well?

Listing a species under the ESA brings it the attention and potential action that may help lead to significant voluntary and other conservation actions. Unfortunately when it comes to listing plant species in the United States, the question as to whether or not a species occurs on federal lands is given considerable weight by the USFWS and becomes a factor in their decision as to whether to list. As the listing of the African Lion demonstrates, this thinking is wrong.

It matters not where a species occurs in determining whether it is ultimately deserving of protection. It matters, yes, in terms of assessing threats. But it is not relevant with respect to whether direct enforcement or other regulatory restrictions would apply. Rather, the indirect benefits to listing are huge. The FWS also appropriately recognized this with respect to the endangered lions of Africa and India.

But this is also true with species such as Utah's Penstemon flowersii which in part was denied the listing it deserved because of inadequate regulatory mechanisms, because it mostly does not occur on federal lands. That is precisely one of the reasons why it should have been listed.

Through the initial efforts of the Utah Native Plant Society (and others) in identifying it as one of our most "extremely high" species of conservation concern in the state of Utah, and subsequent very significant the efforts of The Nature Conservancy, there is hope for the also magnificent P. flowersii, and which again illustrates the many benefits of recognizing a species that needs our attention.

More information:

African Lions Finally Gain Endangered Species Act Protection (Scientific American article by John R. Platt published December 21, 2015

December 21, 2015 FWS press release

Lions Are Now Protected Under the Endangered Species Act (also FWS)

Utah native plants