REVISING ALASKA’S RARE VASCULAR PLANTS TRACKING LIST TRACKING LIST Helen Cortes-Burns †, Matt Carlson *, and Brian Heitz † † Alaska Natural Heritage Program, UAA; * Biological Sciences Department & Alaska Natural Heritage Program, UAA

NatureServe’s Ranking Methodology S2 G2 Mertensia drummondii © Jo Overholdt ???

AKNHP Ranking Process: Overview Expert input Field data, USFS, NPSpecies, Arctos … Expert input Data compilation Taxonomic revisions Spatially explicit database (GIS) BIOTICS (statewide rare species’ database) Rank Calculator Conservation Ranks Rare Plant Field GuideData requestsstatus reports ✔ ✔ ✔ NatureServe review and changes

NatureServe’s Ranking Methodology Non-profit conservation organization Provides scientific basis for effective conservation action International network of partners Heritage Programs & Data Conservation Centers 50 U.S. states, Canada, Latin America and the Caribbean

NatureServe’s Ranking Methodology Objectives Transparency Repeatability Consistency among and between groups, and across borders NatureServe’s Rank Calculator Ranking ‘themes’ (3) Rarity – Trends - Threats Ranking factors (10) Help identify specific information gaps -- to direct efforts to increase our knowledge of the species and its status assessment

NatureServe’s Ranking Methodology Weighted factors and categories Premise: “Rarity is the most important, but not sole, influence on extinction probability” The weights assigned to factors reflect perceived influence on extinction risk R ARITY > T RENDS > T HREATS Population size Area of occupancy % occupancy area with ecological integrity Short term trends Rarity

NatureServe’s Ranking Methodology CategoryFactorFactor TypeWeightCondition RARITY Range Extent [disjunct taxa – multiple smaller ranges] Core1.0 Always use, if available. Area of Occupancy -area within the range that is actually occupied Core2.0 Always use, if available. Population Size -Estimated wild population for the entire range Core2.0 Always use, if available. # occurrences [# Elements of Occurrence (1km)] Core1.0 Always use, if available. # occurrences or % area with good ecological integrity Core2.0 Always use, if available. Habitat specificity Conditional1.0 Only if # occurrences AND area of occp. UNKNOWN

NatureServe’s Ranking Methodology Factor Category FactorFactor TypeWeightCondition TRENDS Long term Past 200 yrs Core1.0 Always use, if available. Short term ( years) Core2.0 Always use, if available. THREATS Threat impact (current threats due to anthropogenic actions – none if all occurrences are under protection) Core1.0 Always use, if available. Intrinsic vulnerability Degree to which intrinsic characteristics make it susceptible to natural or anthropogenic stresses Conditional1.0 Only use if Threat Impact is Unknown or Null.

Rank Calculator Form Change to return GRanks, NRanks, or Sranks: S change using dropdown; also affects Calculator Table Species or Ecosystem Scientific Name Ambrosia chamissonis Type (enter "infraspecies" for a T-Rank) Species Optional Information: Element ID global, national, or subnational Elcode Common Name Classification Vascular Plant COMMENTS (Place cursor in cell to see full text.) The Ranking Process

Rarity weight: 0.5 Rarity1 1Range ExtentD D = 1,000-5,000 sq km (~400-2,000 sq mi) c. 2,000 sq km, restricted to coastal areas in SE AK 2Area of Occupancy:C FILL OUT ONLY 1 OF FOLLOWING 3 FIELDS the 3 records from AK are distributed in clusters that would occupy 3 distinct 4 sq km cells Direct estimate (ecosystems) OR 4 km 2 grid cells (species) OR C C = km2 grid cells 1 km 2 grid cells (linear species) Rarity2 1Number of OccurrencesA A = distinct Eos 2Population SizeAC AC = individuals “rare”, “forming 1-2 sq m patches where found” 2 Good Viability/Ecological Integrity: B FILL OUT ONLY 1 OF FOLLOWING 2 FIELDS B Number of Occurrences OR B B = Very few (1-3) occurrences with excellent or good viability or ecological integrity FPercent AreaF F = Excellent percentage (>40%) of area with excellent or good viability or ecological integrity X 1 Environmental Specificity (opt.) B B = Narrow. Specialist or community with key requirements common coastal beaches (sand, beach meadows, by logs)

The Ranking Process Trends 0.3 Trend/Threat 2Short-term Trend UU = Unknown 1Long-term Trend UU = Unknown Threats 0.2 1Threat Impact UU = Unknown mainly on/near USFS managed coastal beaches … X 1 Intrinsic Vulnerability (opt.) BC BC = Moderately vulnerable to not intrinsically vulnerable Restricted range and habitat  somewhat vulnerable to major catastrophes

The Ranking Process Calculated Rank S2?Always review the calculated rank. Assigned Rank* S1S2Adjusted Rank Rank Adjustment Reasons Assigned Rank Reasons The rank oscillates from S1 to S2 when one manipulates the factor- values slightly (e.g. vulnerability and pop size)  compromise on S1S2. Same as 2008 rank. Rank Author Cortes-Burns, Helen Rank Date 27-Apr-2011 Enter Ctrl ; for today's date. Rank Calculator Internal Notes

Artemisia senjavinensis Papaver Rob Lipkin Papaver maccounii Cochlearia Stacy Studebaker Changes to date

Notable deletions to date 2008 scientific name 2008 S, G ranks new scientific name Arnica lessingii ssp. norbergiiS2 G5T2QArnica lessingii Artemisia tilesii ssp. unalaschcensisS3 G5T3QArtemisia tilesii ssp. tilesii Draba kananaskisS1 G1QDraba juvenilis Betula papyrifera var. commutataS2 G5T5environmental variant Ranking of additional taxa Scientific name Eritrichium chamissonis ? Tanacetum bipinnatum ssp. bipinnatum ? Bidens tripartita? Others?

Taxonomic changes to date 2008 scientific name 2008 S, G ranks 2011 scientific name 2011 S rank Arabis calderiS2 G3G4Boechera calderi Not reviewed Arabis codyiS1 G5Boechera lemmoniiS1S2* Draba lonchocarpa var. vestita S2? G5T3 D. lonchocarpa might be incorporated into D. nivalis Not reviewed Draba paysoniiSR G5D. novolympicaSR Thlaspi arcticumS3 G3Noccaea arctica Not reviewed Agoseris aurantiacaS1 G5A. aurantiaca var. aurantiacaS1S2* Agoseris glaucaS2 G5A. glauca var. dasycephalaS3* Cirsium eduleS1 G4C. edule var. macouniiS2* Stellaria dicranoidesS3 G3Cherleria dicranoides Not reviewed * (2011) Ranks obtained using the Rank Calculator; pending expert input SR Species reported but without persuasive documentation

Next steps 1.Finish gathering population location data 2.Delimit records as ‘Elements of Occurrence’ (NatureServe’s conservation unit). 3.Calculate ranks for all 2008 tracked species [April - May 2011] 4.Receive input on new ranks from experts 5.Compile information  Re-assess ranks 6.Produce a final list of tracked species and ranks [Fall 2011] input needed!

Future directions Upload all records into BIOTICS Serve “fuzzed” rare plant data online Update the Rare Plant Field Guide [ongoing] -70 rare vascular plant taxa -Project funded by the BLM Develop and implement an ‘Annual Data Exchange System’ -Similar to AKEPIC, records would be received, quality controlled, and uploaded within a year of receipt …. Eco-regional ranks?

Ranking of additional taxa

Special thanks to Dave Murray (UAF), Rob Lipkin (Lazy Mountain Biological Consulting), Carolyn Parker (UAM), and Bruce Bennett (Environment Yukon) for providing invaluable taxonomic advice Acknowledgements We are grateful to the many people that contribute information on Alaska’s rare plant populations, among others: UAM - ARCTOS Carolyn Parker, UAM Mary Stensvold, USFS Brad Krieckhaus, USFS Mike Duffy Stacy Studebaker, Kodiak NWR Artemisia globularia var. lutea Funding support: the Bureau of Land Management, Alaska and the Alaska Natural Heritage Program, UAA