Astragalus ripleyi

Barneby

Ripley's Milkvetch

G3Vulnerable Found in 1 roadless area NatureServe Explorer →
G3VulnerableGlobal Rank
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.129822
Element CodePDFAB0F7N0
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryVascular Plant
Endemicendemic to a single nation
KingdomPlantae
PhylumAnthophyta
ClassDicotyledoneae
OrderFabales
FamilyFabaceae
GenusAstragalus
Other Common Names
Ripley's milkvetch (EN)
Concept Reference
Kartesz, J.T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. 2nd edition. 2 vols. Timber Press, Portland, OR.
Conservation Status
Rank MethodLegacy Rank calculation - Biotics v1
Review Date2019-07-25
Change Date1997-05-13
Edition Date2002-10-29
Edition AuthorsJ. A. R. Ladyman
Range Extent1000-5000 square km (about 400-2000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences21 - 300
Rank Reasons
Astragalus ripleyi is a regional endemic found only in Conejos County, Colorado and Taos and Rio Arriba Counties, New Mexico. About 42 reported occurrences with a total of approximately 4,500 individuals existed as of May 1997. In September 2002, the total number of occurrences have increased to approximately 38 in New Mexico and more than 50 in Colorado. However some of these occurrences may not be extant (see threat information). There are no known protected occurrences.
Range Extent Comments
Astragalus ripleyi is known from Taos and Rio Arriba counties in New Mexico and Conejos County, Colorado. The total range is approximately 975 square miles, an area approximately 65 miles long by 15 miles wide, along the volcanic rim of the San Luis Valley, from near Monte Vista, Colorado to Tres Piedras and Questa, New Mexico (Lightfoot 1995). Within its range it is locally abundant in some years. However, it has a patchy distribution and is not found in all potential habitat. Its distribution is consistent with it being a substrate endemic associated with the San Juan volcanic field (Tweto 1978).
Occurrences Comments
In September 2002, the total number of occurrences have increased to approximately 38 in New Mexico and more than 50 in Colorado. However some of these occurrences may not be extant (see threat information).
Threat Impact Comments
Some of the possible threats to A. ripleyi include widespread fire suppression, grazing especially by domestic sheep, competition from invasive weed species and activities such as off road vehicle traffic and logging that contribute to soil disturbance, soil compaction, and soil erosion. Agricultural conversion and urban development has likely impacted some populations in the past and may in the future.

A history of widespread fire suppression within A. ripleyi range may have had a negative impact on available habitat and thus abundance because it grows in forest and woodland clearings and is likely excluded by mature tree canopy closure.

Astragalus ripleyi is very palatable to all herbivores. Arthropods, rodents, wildlife such as elk, deer and rabbits, and livestock such as cows, sheep, and goats all browse upon it. Livestock grazing appears to be a significant threat due to the obvious palatability of the stems and the observed grazing activity at Astragalus ripleyi sites (Naumann 1990, Lightfoot 1995). Because of the large size of cattle and elk these large mammals have a heavy impact on any plants that they eat. The fact that Astragalus ripleyi frequently grows in the center of a shrub where they are protected from large herbivores has been cited as evidence of either livestock or elk grazing pressures (Naumann 1990, Lightfoot 1995, Burt 1997, S.L. O'Kane pers. comm. 2002). With no grazing pressure plants grow taller than 3 feet high (Weber 1955). Herbivory is likely to cause a decline in seed production because Astragalus ripleyi does not compensate for vegetative loss with new growth (Burt 1999). However, reproduction and recruitment is likely not paramount to the survival of this long-lived perennial and populations may persist in the presence of seasonal-rotational livestock grazing. There is no information on the palatability of Astragalus ripleyi to bighorn sheep. Astragalus ripleyi is palatable to domestic sheep, which eat plants down to the ground and domestic sheep may be more detrimental to long-term survival than either cattle or elk (Braun 1988, Lightfoot 1995). One report indicated that arthropod herbivory was more of a threat than livestock and wildlife herbivory, but was only based on one year of data (Burt 1997). Subsequent studies indicated that all herbivory, especially by rodents, could be equally detrimental and that environmental conditions were important in determining the degree of injury to a population (Burt 1999).

Invasive weed species are another significant threat. Interspecific competition is a problem, especially with yellow sweet clover and white clover (Naumann 1990, G. Long pers. comm. 2001). Populations have declined in size, or been eliminated, at sites that have been invaded by sweet yellow clover and white clover (G. Long pers. comm. 2002).

Current evidence suggests that logging and firewood cutting per se is not harmful and are likely to open up potential habitat for Astragalus ripleyi. However, the ground disturbance associated with such activities may have very deleterious consequences. The root is particularly important for long-term persistence and soil erosion and activities disturbing the top centimeters of the ground surface, such as off-road-vehicle (ORV) recreation as well as logging, may be particularly detrimental. Active soil erosion is currently threatening a population in the Rio Grande National Forest (J. Burt pers. comm. 2002). A small occurrence has been reported growing in a small arroyo (Tonne and Sivinski 2000). It is likely that such populations would be especially vulnerable to erosive forces such as flash flooding.

Road building and road widening activities may also have had impacts on populations. Astragalus ripleyi was reported to be common along Highway 44 (Weber 1955) but few plants have been observed within the last decade (D. Erhard pers. comm. 2002, J. Burt pers. comm. 2002). In Colorado, only Federally listed species are protected on right-of-ways managed by the Department of Transportation (J. Powell pers. comm. 2002). In New Mexico, plants have been observed in areas with roadside construction (Braun 1988, R. Romero pers. comm. 2002). Road maintenance practices are not known to have directly impacted Astragalus ripleyi. Mowing is unlikely to have any short-term impacts. Yearly mowing during the growing season may eliminate viable seed production and so may have detrimental consequences over the long term. The impacts of herbicide use have not been evaluated. Sites with potential habitat that had been treated in the past with the herbicide, tebuthiuron, were surveyed and no plants were found at any of the sites (Braun, 1988). However, it was not known if plants were there before chemical treatment so no conclusions can be made. Some populations that occur in sagebrush associations may be periodically impacted by brush control operations (Sivinski and Lightfoot 1995).
Ecology & Habitat

Diagnostic Characteristics

Astragalus ripleyi can be distinguished from the two other tall sympatric Astragalus species by several characteristics. Astragalus ripleyi has more than 11 leaflets and the stipitate pods are laterally compressed. Astragalus lonchocarpus has 1 to 9 leaflets and the pods are dorsiventrally compressed(Barneby 1964, Spackman et al. 1997). Astragalus drumondii has dense, spreading pubescence and its pods are trigonous (triangular) in cross-section (Heil and Herring 1999). Astragalus lonchocarpus and Astragalus ripleyi have been mistaken for each other during field surveys.

Habitat

Astragalus ripleyi occurs in the the Great Basin and Coniferous Woodland sections of the Southern Rocky Mountain province (Fenneman 1946, McNab and Avers 1994). In Colorado, the habitat is generally open ponderosa pine-Arizona fescue savanna (Pinus ponderosa-Festuca arizonica association), in open-canopy pinon-juniper (PJ) woodlands with an Arizona fescue (Festuca arizonica) understory, and on the edges of closed-canopy ponderosa pine and mixed conifer forest (Lightfoot 1995). In New Mexico, habitat seems a little more variable and occurrences are frequently in shrub-dominated habitat such as pine-oak (Quercus gambellii) communities, pinon-juniper sagebrush, sagebrush communities, and Chrysothamnus viscidflorus meadows.
Astragalus ripleyi is often observed growing under the canopy, or amongst the stems, of shrubs such as big sage (Artemisia tridentata), gambel oak (Quercus gambellii), rabbit brush (Chrysothamnus sp.), and juniper (Juniperus sp.). The association with shrubs may be due to a favorable microclimate or advantageous soil environment for germination and seedling establishment. In addition, or alternatively, growing in the midst of shrubs affords protection from large herbivores and may be a consequence of current or historical grazing pressures (Naumann 1990, Lightfoot 1995, R.A. Sivinski pers. comm. 2002). In one severely overgrazed, very weedy Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus meadow that had apparently been planted with Agropyron cristatum in the past, Astragalus ripleyi plants were confined to large shrubs. The entire meadow appeared to be similar habitat but the plants were only in a few clumps. This observation, made in 1998 (Colorado Natural Heritage Program element occurrence records accessed in 2002), suggests that either some habitat modification is tolerated or that habitat is not strictly confined to the limited types described in the past (Naumann 1990, Lightfoot 1995). It is unclear as to how many years had past since the grass seeding took place and one may conjecture that the root systems were present prior to habitat modification and that the surviving plants are relics.
A noteworthy observation is that Astragalus ripleyi invariably grows in areas where plant species diversity is high (Braun 1988). Tree species associated with Astragalus ripleyi habitat are Abies concolor, Juniperus monosperma, Juniperus osteosperma, Juniperus scopulorum, Pinus edulis, Pinus ponderosa, Populus tremuloides, and Pseudotsuga menziesii. Associated shrub species include: Artemisia frigida, Artemisia nova, Artemisia tridentata, Chrysothamnus greenei, Chrysothamnus naseosus, Cercocarpus montanus, Potentilla fructicosa, Symphoricarpus oreophilus, Rhus trilobata, and Quercus gambellii. Associated forb species include: Antennaria sp., Aster bigelovii, Astragalus drummondii, Astragalus hallii, Astragalus lonchocarpus, Calohotus sp. Castilleja sp., Gutierrezia sarothrae, Heterotheca villosa, Hymenoxys odorata, Picradenia richardsonii, Erigeron sp. Eriogonum sp., Eriogomun racemosum, Linium lewisii, Melilotus sp., Melilotus officinalis, Gilia sp. Oxytrophis lambertii, Penstemon griffinii, Penstemon secundiflorus, Taraxacum officinale, and Vicia americana. Associated grass and grass-like species include: Agropyron cristatum, Agropyron trachycaulum, Agropyron smithii, Blepharoneuron tricholepis, Bouteloua gracilis, Bromus tectorum, Carex sp, Danthonia intermedia, Elymus elymoides, Festuca arizonica, Festuca ovina, Festuca thurberi, Koeleria sp., Muhlenbergia sp., Muhlenbergia filiculmis, Muhlenbergia montana, Oryzopsis micrantha, Poa fendleriana, Poa pratensis, Stipa sp., Stipa comata, and Stipa hymenoides.
Plants occur at elevations between at 5,459 ft to 9,360 ft (1,664m to 2,835m). This is a considerable extension from the 7,000 to 8,250 feet range reported by Barneby (1964). However, where elevation was reported, the majority of occurrences are between 8,500 and 8,999 ft. Plants are found on level ground to slopes of approximately 30% with the most occurrences occurring on slopes of 10% or less. Although it has been found on slopes facing all aspects, northerly aspects were most common among the occurrences where aspect was reported. This, and a tendency to find them in east-west trending drainages, may imply a preference for more mesic sites in otherwise relatively dry environments.

Astragalus ripleyi occurs exclusively on volcanic derived soils associated with the San Juan volcanic field (Erhard 1994, Lightfoot 1995). In New Mexico, the soils that overlay volcanic rock are generally loamy mixed soils. One report in New Mexico (USFW ACSS 1993, New Mexico Natural Heritage Program element occurrence records accessed in 2001) indicates that plants grow in loamy clays overlying granitic bedrock but the town-range-section information places the occurrence on volcanically-derived soils. The occurrence is most likely on soils derived from plutonic rocks that are characteristically medium- to coarse-grained granitic textured (geological code: Xp, Anderson et al. 1997). Soils on this geological formation may well appear "granitic" rather than "volcanic" in the field. The precision of the occurrence data was such that it may, alternatively, be on the adjacent Los Pinos geological formation (geological code: Tlp) that comprises volcaniclastic conglomerate interbedded with basaltic flows (Anderson et al. 1997).

Ecology

Astragalus ripleyi behaves as a long-lived individual that primarily allocates resources into survival of the individual rather than into reproduction (Burt 1997, 1998, 1999). It does not compensate for herbivore activity by producing more stems or leaves to replace those which are lost but tends to produce fewer reproductive organs and, presumably, builds up root stock reserves for subsequent years growth. The habitat of Astragalus ripleyi, namely in open savannahs and shrublands, open canopy ponderosa pine forest, and along the edges of closed canopy forests and woodlands, suggests that it is a mid-successional species. It rarely occurs in recently disturbed sites such as road cuts but is frequently found in areas that have disturbance, such as fire, recorded within a decade. It likely benefits from an intermediate disturbance regime and in pre-settlement times Astragalus ripleyi may have occupied habitats that were periodically opened up by fire (Naumann 1990, Lightfoot 1995).

Burt (1999) reported a correlation between precipitation and number of stems observed at each site. The observations indicated an increase occurred between 1996 and 1997 and a net increase between 1996 and 1998. However, there was intervening decrease in population size between 1997 and 1998. This variation emphasizes the importance of multiple year monitoring. In addition, although precipitation is often ascribed to explain variation in population size, as measured by above-ground stems, the precipitation in 1996 and 1998 did not appear substantially different. It may be that the heavy snowfall in April was particularly important in stimulating stem growth in 1998. This observation suggests that it is not only total precipitation but also when precipitation occurs, and perhaps the form in which the moisture occurs, that is significant. Another factor to consider in interpreting the trend is that precipitation records are for the general region and local precipitation levels may differ.

There are no data on longevity of seed or seed bank dynamics. The degree of reported seed predation by insects is variable but may be a cause of significant seed loss in some years (Coles 1996, Burt 1997). Evidence of seed predation can be found in some herbarium specimens, for example collected by O'Kane (1996) at the University of Colorado Herbarium (COLO) that had "pin-prick" holes, most likely present prior to collection, in the legumes. There is no information on seedling ecology and the rates of recruitment and mortality are unknown. Few age and size class data are available but plants with large, robust and flowering stems one year will appear small and immature the next (Burt 1999). This observation makes casual comments on seedling presence difficult to evaluate.

No studies have been undertaken to determine the genetic structure of either range-wide or local populations. Studies undertaken on the Rio Grande National Forest collected some valuable demographic data over a period of three years (Burt 1997, 1998, 1999). Unfortunately only limited conclusions can be drawn as the data was not fully analyzed, but some deductions and inferences can be made. From observations made during this three-year study, it is clear that individuals do not follow a linear progression from seedling to non-reproductive individual to reproductive individual but may be reproductive one year, small vegetative plants the next, or may remain dormant for at least one year without any above ground stem (Burt 1999). From observations made on the Rio Grande and Carson National Forests (G. Long pers. comm. 2002, J. Burt pers. comm. 2002) it is likely that patches of Astraglus ripleyi roots lie essentially dormant under canopy cover and sprout when suitable conditions recur. For example, within a "couple of weeks" of a burn on the Carson Forest stems of Astragalus ripleyi were observed in areas where no plants were documented in the past (G. Long pers. comm. 2002). Astragalus ripleyi stems were likely from pre-existing root stocks because precipitation appeared to be inadequate for seed germination and no other annual species were observed in the burn areas. Although roots appear to undergo dormancy for extended periods, direct evidence is only available to support a dormancy period of two years. Plants tagged in 1996 did not reappear in 1997 but came up in 1998 despite there being a high amount of moisture in 1997 (Burt 1998).

Reproduction

Astragalus species are generally insect pollinated (Geer and Tepidino 1993) and Astragalus ripleyi appears to be no exception. Bees and ants have been observed on flowers and Burt (1997) reported that bumblebees (Bombus ternaries) were the most common arthropod visitor. As part of the same study Burt (1997) bagged flowering stems to exclude pollinators and these produced no fruits whereas the unbagged stems did. This may indicate some degree of self-incompatibility exists or that flowers up the same stem did not mature at same time. Although this observation provides indirect support for incompatibility in Astragalus ripleyi, because no hand pollinations were performed, the environment of the pollination bag may have caused sterility and cannot be completely discounted.

Astragalus ripleyi flowers from June into July. The earliest date flowers have been reported is June 5. Within a population, a high percentage, frequently on the order of 80 to 90 percent, of individuals produce flowers and pods (Romero 1992, CNHP and NMNHP element occurrence data). Fruits tend to be persistent on the plant through at least October (Lightfoot 1995). The patchy nature of its spatial distribution suggests seed dispersal may often be limited and localized around the parent plant. Seed dispersal has been speculated by ants, mice and other seed storers, tumbling dispersal of dried plants, and wind or water transport although little evidence has been documented for any particular mechanism (Braun 1988, Naumann 1990, Lightfoot 1995, J. Anderson pers. comm. 2002). Rodents cache fruits in small piles near plants (Burt 1999).

There is no evidence of hybridization between Astragalus ripleyi with other Astragalus species. The sympatric Astragalus lonchocarpus is closely related but no intermediates have been observed (Lightfoot 1995).
Terrestrial Habitats
Woodland - ConiferWoodland - MixedShrubland/chaparralSavannaGrassland/herbaceous
Other Nations (1)
United StatesN3
ProvinceRankNative
New MexicoS3Yes
ColoradoS2Yes
Plant Characteristics
Economic Value (Genus)Yes
Roadless Areas (1)
New Mexico (1)
AreaForestAcres
Cruces BasinCarson National Forest5,244
References (43)
  1. Allen, O.N. and E.K. Allen. 1981. The Leguminosae: A source book of characteristics, uses and nodulation. The Univ. of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI.
  2. Anderson, O.J., G.E. Jones, G.N. Green. 1997. Geologic map of New Mexico. USGS Open-file report OF-97_05, Digital database by G.N. Green and G.E. Jones. New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, US Geological Survey, Department of Interior, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA.
  3. Barneby, R. C. 1952. Pugillus Astragalorum XIV: Notes on Sect. Lonchocarpi. Leaflets of Western Botany. 6(9): 172-176.
  4. Barneby, R.C. 1964. Atlas of North American Astragalus. 2 Vols. New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, New York. 1188 pp.
  5. Bewley, J.D. and M. Black. 1982. The release from dormancy. In: Physiology and Biochemistry of Seeds in relation to germination. Vol. 2. p. 184-198. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
  6. Braun, R.P. 1988. Inventory of <i>Astragalus ripleyi</i> on the Carson National Forest. Unpublished manuscript.
  7. Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 1989. San Luis Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement - Draft. Unpublished Report. September. US Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Denver, Colorado, USA.
  8. Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 1991. San Luis Resource Area Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan. December. Unpublished Report. US Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Denver, Colorado, USA.
  9. Burt, J. 1997. The effects of grazing and fire on Astragalus ripleyi Barneby. Unpublished document. February 15. Submitted to the Colorado Natural Areas Program, Denver, Colorado, USA.
  10. Burt, J. 1998. Effects of grazing and fire on Astragalus ripleyi Barneby; summary of 1997 field work. Unpublished document. June 15. Submitted to U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Rio Grande National Forest, Colorado, USA.
  11. Burt, J. 1999. Effects of grazing and fire on Astragalus ripleyi Barneby; summary of 1998 field work. Unpublished document. March 15. Submitted to U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Rio Grande National Forest, Colorado, USA.
  12. Coles, J. 1996. Population trends in Astragalus ripleyi on Forest service Lands. Unpublished document. Colorado Natural Areas Program, Denver, Colorado, USA.
  13. Colorado Bureau of Land Management. 2004. State Director's Sensitive Species List, updated May 4, 2000. Colorado Bureau of Land Management, Denver Colorado. Available at http://www.co.blm.gov/botany/sens_species.htm (Accessed September 2002).
  14. Colorado Natural Areas Program. 2002. Internet site: http://parks.state.co.us/cnap/index.html. Colorado Natural Areas Program, Denver, Colorado, USA. [Accessed September 2002]
  15. Elzinga, C.L., D.W. Salzer and J.W. Willoughby. 1998. Measuring and monitoring plant populations. Bureau of Land Management Technical Reference 1730-1. US Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Denver, Colorado, USA.
  16. Erhard, D. 1994. Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Plant Guide, Rio Grande National Forest. Limited issue publication. US Forest Service, Rio Grand National Forest, Monte Vista, Colorado, USA.
  17. Fenneman, N.M. 1946. Physical divisions of the United States (map). US Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia, USA.
  18. Geer, S.M. and V.J. Tepedino. 1993. Breeding systems of the rare heliotrope milkvetch (Astraglus montii Welsh: Fabaceae) and two common congeners. In: Proceedings of the southwestern rare and endangered plant conference. Based on the conference held March 30-April 2, 1992. R. Sivinski and K. Lightfoot (eds). Misc. Publication No. 2. New Mexico Forestry and Resources Conservation Division, Energy, Mineral and Natural Resources Department, Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA.
  19. Goldsmith, F.B. 1991. Monitoring for Conservation and Ecology. Chapman and Hall, New York, New York, USA.
  20. Heil, K. and J. Herring. 1999. Astragalus ripleyi, (Ripley's milkvetch). In: New Mexico Rare Plants Home Page (Version 15 March 2002), New Mexico Rare Plant Technical Council, New Mexico Rare Plants, Albuquerque, New Mexico. Internet site: http://nmrareplants.unm.edu/reports/astrip.htm [Accessed September 2002].
  21. Isely, D. 1998. Native and naturalized Leguminosae (Fabaceae) of the United States (exclusive of Alaska and Hawaii). Monte L. Bean Life Science Museum, Brigham Young University; MLBM Press, Provo, Utah. 1007 pp.
  22. Kartesz, J.T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. 2nd edition. 2 vols. Timber Press, Portland, OR.
  23. Leigh, J.H. and M.D. Holgate. 1979. Responses of understorey forests and woodlands of the southern tablelands to grazing and burning. Australian Journal of Ecology. 4: 25-45.
  24. Lesica P. 1995a. Demography of <i>Astragalus scaphoides</i> and the effects of herbivory on population growth. Great Basin Naturalist 55(2): 142-150.
  25. Lightfoot, K. 1995. Status report on <i>Astragalus ripleyi</i> Barneby. September 26. Unpublished document. Forestry and Resources Conservation Division, Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA.
  26. Martin, W.C., and C.R. Hutchins. 1980-1981. A flora of New Mexico. 1980, Vol. 1; 1981, Vol. 2. J. Cramer, in der A.R. Gantner Verlag, K.G., Vaduz, Liechtenstein. 2591 pp.
  27. McNab,W.H. and P.E. Avers. 1994. Ecological subregions of the United States: Section descriptions. Administrative Publication WO-WSA-5. U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. Washington, DC, USA.
  28. Naumann, T. 1990. Status Report for Astragalus ripleyi. Unpublished report. June 29. Colorado Natural Areas Program, Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation, Denver, Colorado, USA.
  29. Romero, B. 1992. Astragalus Report. Internal USDA Forest Service Document. 8/28/92. Tres Piedras Ranger District, Carson National Forest, New Mexico, USA.
  30. Sivinski, R. and K. Lightfoot. 1992. Inventory of rare and endangered plants of New Mexico. New Mexico Forestry and Resources Conservation Division, Energy, Mineral and Natural Resources Department, Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA.
  31. Sivinski, R. and K. Lightfoot 1995. Inventory of rare and endangered plants of New Mexico. Misc. Publication No. 4. New Mexico Forestry and Resources Conservation Division, Energy, Mineral and Natural Resources Department, Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA.
  32. Spackman, S., B. Jennings, J. Coles, C. Dawson, M. Minton, A. Kratz, and C. Spurrier. 1997. Colorado rare plant field guide. Prepared for Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by Colorado Natural Heritage Program.
  33. State of New Mexico. 1998. "Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of New Mexico", under Section 1, Section 9-10-10 NMSA 1998, Plant Endangered Species Act, as revised, NMFRCD Rule No. 91-1, December, 1991.
  34. Tonne, P. and R. Sivinski. 2000. State Land Surveys 1999-2000. Unpublished document. New Mexico Forestry and Resources Conservation Division, Energy, Mineral and natural resources Department, Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA.
  35. Tweto, O. 1978. Geologic map of Colorado. US Geological Survey, Denver, Colorado, USA.
  36. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Assistant Colorado State Supervisor (USFW ACSS). 1993. Memorandum to Chief, Endangered Species/Environmental Contaminants, Region 6. Subject: Report on San Luis Valley Interagency Field Trips, July 6 and 8, 1993.
  37. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1990. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants. Federal register 55(35):6190. February 21.
  38. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1996. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; review of plant and animal taxa that are candidates for listing as endangered or threatened species. Federal Register 61(40):7596-7613. February 28.
  39. U.S. Forest Service (USFS). 1989. Implementation plan for the management of <i>Astragalus ripley</i>i on the Carson National Forest. February 1989. Unpublished document. Carson National Forest, Tres Piedras, New Mexico, USA.
  40. U.S. Forest Service (USFS). 1993. Region 2 Regional Forester Sensitive Species List, 1993. Available at http://roadless.fs.fed.us/documents/feis/data/sheets/summspd/tes_supp/r2_ssspecies.pdf (Accessed September 2002).
  41. U.S. Forest Service (USFS). 1996. The Revised Land and Resource Management Plan for the Rio Grande National Forest. Record of Decision. November 7, 1996. Unpublished Document. Rio Grande National Forest, Monte Vista, Colorado, USA.
  42. U.S. Forest Service (USFS). 1999. Decision notice and finding of no significant impact - November Analysis Area. June 18. USDA Forest Service, San-Juan-Rio Grande National Forests, Conejos Peak Ranger District, Monte Vista, Colorado.
  43. Weber, W.A. 1955. Additions to the Flora of Colorado, II. Univ. of Colorado Studies, Series in Biology, No. 3: 65-108 (v. p 92).