RESULTS 



Throughout the course of this project, 50 additional records of 9 target species were located 

 (Table 1). Expansion of some previous Astragalus barrii occurrences was also revealed. An 

 overview of kno\vn sensitive species distribution in the study areas and surroundings is presented 

 in Figure 3, with the local and statewide distributions of individual species elaborated on maps 

 that accompany the text for each species. 



This report also incorporates background infomiation on five state plant Species of Special 

 Concern which were not found: Amorpha canescens, which was collected at a Forest Ser\'ice 

 ranger station in 1922 at what is belie\'ed to have been on the Ashland District (see text for more 

 information), Ceajwthus herbaceus, which is known in Montana only from one historic 

 collection on the District near Bloom Creek (not relocated), Cypripedium calceolus var. 

 parviJJorum, which is among the historic plant collections on file at the District Office, Mentzelia 

 nuda, also among the historic plant collections on file at the District Office, and Sphenopholis 

 obtusata var. major, which due to changes in nomenclature has been mistakenly applied to 

 Sphenopholis intermedia that is present on the District. 



Results are presented for each species in a status report format that presents both District and 

 statewide information. It includes status information, description, distribution, habitat. 

 Population biology, population ecology, land owoiership, and overall assessment with 

 management recommendations. This represents an expansion and update of infonnation from 

 Lesica and Shelly (1991), and from other status reports, monographs, and other projects as 

 revised through this field study. 



This survey has also documented a preliminary vascular flora of 443 vascular plant taxa, in 

 65 families (Appendix D.) The flora of eastern Montana is poorly known, and this preliminary 

 District flora is much larger than the preliminary flora compiled for all of Rosebud County 

 (Anon. No date). Although the study was far from thorough as a floristic baseline, many new 

 records for southeast Montana were located based on comparing the preliminary District flora 

 with the distribution information presented in Dom (1984). 



