When populations of Montana plant species of special concern were encountered, MTNHP field 

 survey forms were filled out and the populations were mapped. Information was recorded on 

 location, habitat (associated vegetation, landscape position, soils), demography (population numbers 

 and area covered), plant biology (phenology, vigor, reproductive success), and population trends. 



In the course of ecological and sensitive plant fieldwork, lists of the general flora of Carter County 

 ere compiled. The primary references used to key out plants in the field were Dom (1984, 1992) and 

 Great Plains Flora Association (1986). Specimens were collected when field identification was 

 difficuh, and as vouchers to document populations of sensitive and other notable species. Specimens 

 will be deposited at the herbaria of Montana State University (MONT) and duplicates will be sent to 

 the University of Montana (MONTU). An annotated floristic list of Carter County (Appendix C) was 

 compiled ft-om records of 1996 and 1997 BLM surveys, earlier MTNHP surveys of Custer National 

 Forest lands in the county (Heidel and Dueholm 1995), other MTNHP records, and from distribution 

 maps in Booth ( 1 966) which represent collections at MONT. 



Taxonomic Considerations 



Plant scientific names used in this report generally match those found in manuals of the Montana 

 flora (Booth 1950, Booth and Wright 1966, Dom 1984). However, we incorporate the taxonomic 

 treatments of Kartesz (1994) to maintain consistency with other states and current taxonomic 

 research. This means incorporating unfamiliar-sounding names for some dominant and indicator 

 species, particularly the grasses in the Triticeae (Agropyron, and Elymus in the traditional sense). 

 Thus, western wheatgrass, listed as Agropyron smithii in Booth (1950) and as Elymus smithii in Dom 

 (1984), becomes Pascopyrum smithii. For ease of communication in informal situations, use of 

 common names may be preferable for such controversial groups (A. Beetle, pers. commun.) Table 2 

 presents the synonymy for common dominant and indicator species encountered in Carter County 

 plant communities and these synonyms are listed in the headings of the plant association and 

 community type descriptions. Synonymy is also provided in the Carter County floristic list 

 (Appendix C) when a name is used other than those in the Montana floras (Booth 1950, Booth and 

 Wright 1966, Dom 1984). 



Table 2. Synonymy of dominant plant species in Carter County, MT. 



13 



