SPECIES CONSERVATION STRATEGY
For
PECK’S PENSTEMON
Penstemon peckii
12/1/2009
Author
MARET PAJUTEE is the District Ecologist/Botanist, Sisters Ranger District, Deschutes
National Forest. Mailing Address: Sisters Ranger District, PO Box 249, Sisters, OR
97759, email: mpajutee@fs.fed.us. Phone: 541 549-7727.
U.S. Forest Service Region 6
and USDI Bureau of Land Management, Oregon and Washington
2
SPECIES CONSERVATION STRATEGY
For
PECK’S PENSTEMON
Penstemon peckii
Signature Page
This document will be used to guide management decisions for this species
during project planning and in project specific NEPA decisions until further notice.
/s/ John Allen
John Allen, Deschutes National Forest Supervisor
12/3/2009
Date
/s/ Jeff Walter
Jeff Walter, Ochoco National Forest Supervisor
2/2/2010
Date
/s/ William Anthony
William Anthony, Sisters District Ranger
12/4/2009
Date
/s/ Slater R. Turner
Slater R. Turner, Crooked River Grasslands District Ranger
2/2/2010
Date
3
4
Table of Contents
Disclaimer .................................................................................................................................... 7
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 9
Conservation Strategy Summary ................................................................................. 13
Action Plan ......................................................................................................................... 15
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 17
Purpose ..................................................................................................................... 17
Management Status................................................................................................... 18
Systematics ............................................................................................................... 19
Species Description ................................................................................................... 19
Look-Alikes ................................................................................................................ 20
Range ........................................................................................................................ 21
Distribution ................................................................................................................. 23
Metapopulation Areas ................................................................................................ 27
Reference Conditions- Historic Abundance .............................................................. 29
Current Abundance - Survey Coverage ..................................................................... 30
Land Manager/Ownership ......................................................................................... 31
BIOLOGY AND ECOLOGY ..................................................................................................... 32
Habitat ....................................................................................................................... 32
Habitat Summary ....................................................................................................... 35
Life History................................................................................................................. 36
Visibility/Blooming Period .......................................................................................... 37
Pollination .................................................................................................................. 37
Flower Color Polymorphism ....................................................................................... 38
Dispersal Mechanisms............................................................................................... 39
Seed Longevity/Viability ............................................................................................. 39
Seedlings ................................................................................................................... 41
Evolutionary and Genetic Considerations .................................................................. 43
Disturbance Ecology .................................................................................................. 45
Response to Fire .................................................................................................... 45
Flooding ................................................................................................................. 47
Ecological Influences on Survival and Reproduction ................................................. 48
CONSERVATION ....................................................................................................................... 51
Population Trends...................................................................................................... 51
Management Tools- Monitoring Results .................................................................... 53
Prescribed Fire ....................................................................................................... 54
Prescribed Fire and Jackpot burning...................................................................... 54
Subsoiling .............................................................................................................. 55
Logging Effects ...................................................................................................... 56
Transplanting- ........................................................................................................ 57
Mowing ................................................................................................................... 57
Grazing .................................................................................................................. 58
Threats ...................................................................................................................... 60
Fire Suppression .................................................................................................... 60
Timber Harvest....................................................................................................... 62
Habitat Fragmentation ............................................................................................ 64
5
Permanent Habitat Loss ......................................................................................... 65
Interspecific Competition and Successional Changes............................................ 65
Recreational Activities ............................................................................................ 66
Invasive Plants ....................................................................................................... 67
Hydrologic Alterations ............................................................................................ 68
Land Exchanges .................................................................................................... 69
Grazing .................................................................................................................. 69
Seed predation ....................................................................................................... 71
CONSERVATION STRATEGY ............................................................................................... 72
Goal 1: Ensure long term species viability ................................................................. 72
Strategy la: Select and Maintain Protected Populations ......................................... 72
Strategy lb. Continue to Survey for Protected Populations .................................... 76
Strategy lc. Continue to monitor the biological condition of Protected Populations.76
Strategy ld. Compile Management Recommendations for Protected Populations 76
Goal 2: Develop a set of maintenance and restoration methodologies ..................... 77
Strategy 2a. Continue Monitoring in Managed Populations .................................. 77
Strategy 2b. Establish biological condition of Managed Populations...................... 79
Strategy 2c: Develop Management Treatment Monitoring Plans ........................... 79
Goal 3: Continue work with scientists to learn more about seed and seedlings ........ 79
Strategy 3a: Work with the Berry Botanic Garden to continue seed accession. ..... 79
Strategy 3b: Continue the Seed Bank Viability Study ............................................ 79
Strategy 3c: Continue the Seedling Study ............................................................. 79
Goal 4: Increase the public awareness and willingness to protect Peck’s penstemon
on private lands. ........................................................................................................ 80
Strategy 4a: Explore opportunities to share information and encourage partnerships
to protect Peck’s penstemon on private lands ........................................................ 80
Strategy 4b: Develop a Landowner Contact/Voluntary Conservation Program ..... 80
Strategy 4c: Cooperative Surveys with Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs .... 80
Strategy 4d: Survey Sisters City Park. ................................................................... 80
Measurable Outcomes that Indicate Conservation Goals Have Been Achieved .... 81
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................. 82
References and Bibliography ............................................................................................... 83
Appendix 1 Populations of Peck’s Penstemon............................................................... 86
Appendix 2 Protected Population Selection Criteria...................................................... 90
Appendix 3: Sensitive Plant Monitoring Example ........................................................... 92
MAPS, TABLES, and FIGURES
Map 1- Distribution of Peck’s penstemon......................................................................................22
Map 2- Distribution of Peck’s penstemon by Fifth Field Watershed..............................................24
Map 3- Distribution of Peck’s penstemon by Sixth Field Watershed.............................................25
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Peck’s Penstemon Distribution by Fifth Field Watershed................................................23
Peck’s Penstemon Distribution by Sixth Field Watershed.............................................. 26
Peck’s Penstemon Populations on Private Land.............................................................31
Frequency and Characteristics of Flower Color Morphs................................................. 38
Distribution of Peck’s penstemon by Fire Regimes........................................................ 46
Figure 1 Life History of Peck’s penstemon....................................................................................36
Figure 2 Ecological Model of Peck’s penstemon seed..................................................................50
6
DISCLAIMER
This Conservation Strategy was prepared to compile the published and unpublished information
about Peck’s penstemon. This strategy does not represent a management decision by the U.S.
Forest Service (Region 6) but rather offers best scientific guidance for decision makers. The
strategy is implemented by individual NEPA decisions during projects and through the
Deschutes and (Crooked River National Grassland) Ochoco National Forest and Prineville BLM
Botany Programs.
Although the best scientific information available was used, it is expected that new information
will arise. In the spirit of continuous learning and adaptive management, if you have new
information that will assist in the conservation of this species, please contact the Sisters Ranger
District or the Interagency Special Status Species Conservation Planning Coordinator in the
Portland Oregon, Forest Service Region 6 and OR/WA BLM Offices. Please see the Deschutes
National Forest website (http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/centraloregon) or the interagency website
(http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/) for contact information.
7
8
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PURPOSE
The purpose of this conservation strategy is to
summarize existing knowledge regarding the biology,
ecology, and threats to Peck’s penstemon, Penstemon
peckii, and identify management strategies to ensure
long term species viability for the plant.
This species is of concern because it is an endemic plant
with a highly restricted distribution. Over 98% of the
known global population is found on lands managed by the
Forest Service.
Desired outcomes of this strategy that may indicate that the
goals of the Conservation Strategy have been achieved are:
1) The species is removed from the Regional Foresters
Sensitive Species List because of the widespread health
and vigor of the global population, or 2) the Oregon
Natural Heritage Information Center list rankings change
from “3- vulnerable to extirpation or extinction” to “4 apparently secure”.
BACKGROUND
Peck’s penstemon (Penstemon peckii Pennell), is an herbaceous perennial plant species in the
Figwort family (Scrophulariaceae). It is a regional endemic, found only in seasonally moist
habitats in open forests along the east flank of the Cascade Mountains in Central Oregon, in
Deschutes and Jefferson Counties. Peck’s penstemon is restricted to an area of approximately
485 square miles centered near Black Butte on the Sisters Ranger District of the Deschutes
National Forest. Approximately 247,000 plants are known to exist.
Most life history characteristics of Peck’s penstemon equip this species to grow and propagate
like many other more common plant species.





It is a perennial plant with the ability to spread vegetatively.
It is an insect pollinated plant which also has the ability to self-pollinate.
It produces abundant seed.
It is a polyploid (4n) plant which appears broadly adaptable, particularly to disturbed sites.
It is best adapted to open full sun habitats, low vegetative competition, and disturbance by
periodic fire or flooding.
 It is tolerant of limited disturbances which mildly scarify the soil.
Other life history characteristics of Peck’s penstemon are unusual. Some of these traits may
explain why the species is rare.
 It has flowers which occur in a variety of colors. This is called flower color polymorphism.
9





Seven different flower colors have been observed.
Color morphs have different
characteristics in terms of bloom time, seed production, and pollinator preference.
The seed has no specialized mechanisms for dispersal. Gravity, water and possibly ingestion
by small mammals are the means of seed dispersal.
The seed requires abundant moisture to germinate but the plant exists in dry semi-arid
forests.
Preliminary studies have shown seeds to persist in the soil for at least 15 years though long
term seed viability still remains uncertain. Seeds can remain dormant through one or more
cycles of suitable germination cycles.
Self-pollinated flowers produce fewer seeds than insect-pollinated plants.
Seedlings are rarely seen, so the combination of conditions that allow seed germination and
survival may be rare.
MANAGEMENT STATUS
Peck’s penstemon is designated by the Forest Service as Sensitive and is a Bureau Sensitive
species for Bureau of Land Management (BLM). It is listed by the U.S Fish and Wildlife
Service as a Species of Concern and is considered threatened throughout its known range by the
Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center (List 1 - taxa that are threatened or endangered
throughout their range or are presumed extinct) with Global Rank G3 and State Rank S3. These
rankings indicate the plant is considered vulnerable to extinction or extirpation due to a restricted
range, relatively few populations, recent and widespread declines, or other factors.
RANGE AND HABITAT
The definitive extent of the global range of Peck’s penstemon has not yet been determined.
Peck’s penstemon is documented from only the Sisters Ranger District on the Deschutes
National Forest, the Crooked River National Grassland on the Ochoco National Forest, the
Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs Reservation, and on private lands, all in Deschutes and
Jefferson Counties. It is suspected to occur on the Prineville District of the BLM.
Unsurveyed suitable habitat exists on the Deschutes National Forest, Crooked River National
Grassland on the Ochoco National Forest, the Prineville District of the BLM, Confederated
Tribes of Warm Springs Reservation, and private lands in the following watersheds: Lower
Lake Creek, Lower Fly Creek, Lower Whychus Creek (formerly Squaw Creek), Stevens Canyon,
Carcass Canyon, and Candle/Jefferson Creek Watersheds.
Most of the global population of the plant (70%) is associated with the Metolius River
watershed. Within its overall range, Peck’s penstemon has a patchy distribution. The greatest
concentrations of penstemon populations are found at the lower end of watersheds on level
ground with relatively high water retention characteristics.
Peck’s penstemon habitat is often seasonally wet and includes meadows and open or partly
shaded areas of forests, often dominated by ponderosa pine, at elevations between 2,600-4,000
feet (occasionally as high as 4,900 feet). Many of the sites where the species occurs are
intermittent or ephemeral stream channels, and inactive floodplains. The species is also
10
associated with high water tables and meadow habitats and may also occur in recovering,
manmade habitats associated with seasonal run-off such as ditches, skid trails, and dirt roads.
THREATS
The biological requirements of successful germination of the plant’s seed are hypothesized as
being the species’ weak link. Threats to the long term conservation of the species include: fire
suppression, timber harvest, habitat fragmentation, permanent loss of habitat, inter-specific
competition and successional changes, recreational activities, invasive plants, hydrological
alternations, land exchanges leading to habitat alteration, grazing, and seed predation by insects.
CONSERVATION ELEMENTS
Application of the 1992 Conservation Strategy and Action Plan
The 1992 Conservation Strategy for this species included both an Action Plan and management
guidelines. Many action items have been accomplished and the guidelines have been applied.
Accomplishments:
 Hundreds of projects have been done in areas where Peck’s penstemon occurs and
plants have been protected or managed according to the guidelines.
 Management Treatment (or Effectiveness) Monitoring Studies have been done to
better understand the effects of common forest management activities including:
prescribed fire, logging and thinning, mowing, subsoiling for soil restoration, grazing, and
hydrological projects.
 Surveys were done in watersheds where known populations were under-represented.
 New populations have been selected for conservation to aid in long term species
viability in under-represented watersheds and to compensate for populations that have lost
the benefits of Federal management in land exchanges.
 Spatial data on the plant has been transferred to Geographical Information System (GIS)
to aid in project analysis and species conservation.
 Emergency conservation techniques such as transplanting have been tried and
monitored.
 A large seed collection from across the range of the plant was completed and is in frozen
storage at the Berry Botanic Gardens Rare Plant Seed bank.
 Scientific studies involving genetic diversity and seed bank longevity of the plant have
been done.
 The known global population has more than doubled since 1992. Systematic project
surveys have located over 96,898 more plants and the range of the plant has been
significantly expanded to the east although the plant is still known to be a narrow
endemic.
 Populations have been resurveyed to assess their biological condition and determine
needed management actions, especially related to the reintroduction of fire, recreation
management, and invasive plant control.
11
Justification for Conservation Strategy Revision
Although the Conservation Strategy has worked fairly well, revision was necessary for the
following reasons.
 Population changes. In the past 17 years new plants have been found and population
boundaries have changed. This affects where protective guidelines are applied. Over
96,898 plants have been discovered since 1992.
 New management information. New information from Management Treatment
monitoring studies needed to be summarized.
 Changing Trends. There have been a number of trends which needed to be examined in
relation to the global population. These include: large scale changes in habitat due to
wildfires, invasive plant expansion, and land exchanges.
 Insufficient Monitoring. Although some Management Treatment Monitoring Studies
have been done, additional studies of management treatment effects on Peck’s penstemon
are needed. Relatively few management treatment (or effectiveness) monitoring studies
have been followed for more than a couple of years so long term results are lacking.
Funding project monitoring that extends past one or two years is difficult.
A high priority information need is a study on how newer forest thinning prescriptions
and new logging equipment affect the plant. Only one large scale study of logging
effects has been completed. It involved clear-cutting and selective large tree removal,
techniques which are seldom used today.
The challenge of funding and the long time periods required for logging/thinning projects
present extra difficulties for monitoring. For example, the only study of logging effects
on Peck’s penstemon was initiated in 1980. Many units were not cut until 1989. Due to
the long time period and changes in personnel, the original data was misplaced and had to
be relocated in 1990 when a Botanist was hired for the District and a Sensitive Plant
Program was created for the Deschutes National Forest. Plots were finally relocated and
monitored again in 1993. The study took 13 years and cost over $25,000 to complete.
Today’s vegetation management projects are also often subject to long delays because of
analysis time, appeals, and litigation. However, additional studies regarding the effects
of logging are needed and are proposed in this document. Studies on the impacts of other
management actions on the plant are also needed.
12
Conservation Strategy Summary
Four goals were identified to aid in the conservation of Peck’s penstemon populations and to
protect the plant’s genetic diversity. These goals were based on the existing knowledge of the
plant’s ecology and distribution as well as conservation biology principles. Strategies were
developed to implement these goals. Key to the strategies is adaptive management of a set of
geographically distributed populations across the plant’s global range and the ability to develop
and test new management tools.
Two sets of populations were identified: 1) “Protected Populations” which are managed for the
benefit of the plant with proven management tools and 2) “Managed Populations” where
experimentation and some loss of plants are allowed within specified parameters. New
populations are put into the “Managed” category until this strategy is updated.
Goal 1: Ensure long term species viability by managing a set of populations throughout the
species range using proven techniques in order to maintain existing genetic variance and
reproductive success.
Twenty nine “Protected Populations” were selected. These populations occupy an
estimated 2,780 acres and contain approximately 144,542 plants. This represents 59% of
the global population.
Any manipulations of the habitat in these areas should be designed to specifically
maintain, enhance or restore these Protected Populations. Permanent loss of habitat
should not be allowed. If permanent loss of habitat is unavoidable, an appropriate
replacement population should be identified from the pool of “managed” populations.
Loss of individual plants is restricted. Habitat enhancement treatments employed will be
those that have been shown through effectiveness monitoring in “Managed Populations”
to have successfully achieved the desired results.
Goal 2: Develop a set of maintenance, enhancement and restoration methodologies through
experimentation in Managed Populations when evidence of population decline or lowered
reproductive vigor appears to be related to habitat degradation.
The remaining known populations are designated as “Managed Populations”. In these
populations management treatment (or effectiveness) monitoring studies will be initiated
to establish how to diminish the most important threats and management conflicts to
Peck’s penstemon habitats. Loss of penstemon plants during these studies is allowed. If
permanent loss of habitat is unavoidable, it should be mitigated by enhancing other
populations with proven management techniques. New populations are put into the
“Managed” category until this strategy is updated.
13
Goal 3: Continue work with scientists to learn more about Peck’s penstemon seed and
seedling survival.
The Berry Botanic Garden seed bank should be supplemented with additional seeds from
new outlier populations. New outlier populations have been located far outside the
previous seed accessions and may represent important genetic diversity that should be
collected. The collection serves as an important reserve of genetic material should
populations be destroyed or the species becomes endangered at some future date.
The seed longevity study has been ongoing for 15 years and tested the hypothesis that the
seed’s longevity in the soil is part of the explanation for why the plant is rare. The study
has shown seeds to be viable at least for 15 years and can remain dormant through one or
more suitable germination cycles. Valuable information can be gathered by continuing
this study and the more recent study on seedling survival.
Goal 4: Increase the public awareness and willingness to protect Peck’s penstemon on
private lands.
Many Peck’s penstemon sites are known or suspected to occur on private lands or the
Tribal Reservation of the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs. Private landowners are
not aware that their lands contain a rare endemic species. Conservation of the species
could be improved on a voluntary basis. There are many opportunities for education
programs and partnerships in management.
14
ACTION PLAN * CONSERVATION STRATEGY
Goal 1: Maintain Genetic Variance & Reproductive Success
TARGET YEAR
Strategy la. Select and maintain Protected Populations
Ongoing
Strategy lb. Survey in under -represented watersheds
and at the edge of the plant’s range
Ongoing
Strategy lc. Continue to monitor the biological condition
of Protected Populations
2010-2015
or as needed
Strategy ld. Compile management requirements for
all Protected Populations and integrate into project planning
2008 and
Ongoing
Goal 2: Develop a Set of Maintenance, Enhancement and Restoration
Methodologies
Strategy 2a. Continue monitoring in Managed Populations
Ongoing
Strategy 2b. Monitor the biological condition of Managed Populations
2010 -2015
Strategy 2c. Develop Management Treatment Monitoring Plans
Ongoing
Goal 3: Continue work with scientists to learn more about Peck’s penstemon seed and
seedling survival.
Strategy 3a. Work with the Berry Botanic Garden to continue
seed accession
2010
Strategy 3b. Continue the Seed Bank Viability Study
2012
Strategy 3c. Continue the Seedling Study
2009
Goal 4: Increase the public awareness and willingness
to protect Peck’s penstemon on private lands.
Strategy 4a. Explore partnerships
Ongoing
Strategy 4b. Develop a Landowner Contact/Voluntary Conservation
Program in partnership with interested Conservation Groups
Ongoing
Strategy 4c. Provide information to the Confederated Tribes of Warm
2010
Springs and assist in cooperative surveys for the northern extent of the plant
Strategy 4d. Assist the City of Sisters with survey for the plant
in the City Park
15
2010
16
INTRODUCTION
The National Forest Management Act and Forest Service policy require National Forest lands to
be managed to maintain viable populations of all native plant and animal species. A viable
population is defined in the Forest Service Manual (FSM 2670) as “a population that has the
estimated numbers and distribution of reproductive individuals to ensure the continued existence
of the species throughout its existing range within the planning area.” Plant populations need to
be adequately distributed throughout their range to ensure genetic diversity which allows
populations to adapt to change.
Besides those species listed as Threatened or Endangered under the Endangered Species Act, the
Forest Service has recognized the need to apply special management direction to the rare flora
and fauna on the lands it administers. Species recognized by the Forest Service as needing
special consideration are designated as Sensitive by the Regional Forester (Region 6 Regional
Foresters Special Status Species List for Sensitive Vascular Plants January 2008). Policies
require that management of sensitive species “must not result in a loss of species viability or
create significant trends toward federal listing” and specifies the development of management
strategies to achieve conservation objectives. Federal management for this species also follows
the Oregon/Washington BLM Special Status Species policy.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this conservation strategy is to summarize existing knowledge regarding the
biology, ecology, and threats to Peck’s penstemon, Penstemon peckii, and identify
management strategies to ensure long term species viability for the plant and meet agency
policy objectives.
This species is of concern because it is an endemic found only on approximately 485 square
miles. Over 97% of the known global population is found on lands managed by the Forest
Service. Federal management of this species follows Forest Service Region 6 Sensitive Species
policies and/or Oregon/WA BLM Special Status Species Policies. This strategy outlines a
management approach to be used by Region 6 Forest Service and/or Oregon BLM to avoid
actions that may cause a trend towards federal listing of the species under the Endangered
Species Act, and to preclude a loss of species viability.
This strategy considers all known federal populations of Peck’s penstemon and provides
guidance for management of new populations yet to be discovered. It does not apply to private
lands; however, it may be used as a reference by willing private landowners interested in
conserving the plant.
This update of the strategy incorporates new information from several important studies
accomplished since 1992 regarding the plant’s genetics, seed longevity, and response to timber
harvest activities. It also includes information from management treatment (or effectiveness)
monitoring, and updated survey information. Also discussed are changes in the condition of
some populations due to land exchanges, floods, fire suppression, and a series of large wildfires
from 2002 through 2006, including the 90,000 acre B&B Complex wildfire, the largest wildfire
in Deschutes National Forest history.
17
MANAGEMENT STATUS
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists the plant as a “Species of Concern” which was
formerly a Category 2 Candidate for listing as Endangered or Threatened. The term “Species of
Concern” is defined as:
“An informal term referring to a species that might be in need of conservation action.
This may range from a need for periodic monitoring of populations and threats to the
species and its habitat, to the necessity for listing as threatened or endangered. Such
species receive no legal protection and use of the term does not necessarily imply that a
species will eventually be proposed for listing. A similar term is ‘species at risk,’ which
is a general term for listed species as well as unlisted ones that are declining in
population. Canada uses the term in its new ‘Species at Risk Act.’ ‘Imperiled species’ is
another general term for listed as well as unlisted species that are declining.”
(USFWS Website Glossary, http://www.fws.gov/endangered/glossary )
U.S. Forest Service -The plant is listed as “Sensitive” on the Pacific Northwest Region 6,
Regional Foresters Special Status Species List for Sensitive Vascular Plants (January 2008).
Sensitive Species are defined as those plant and animal species identified by a Regional Forester
for which population viability is a concern, as evidenced by significant current or predicted
downward trends in population numbers or density and habitat capability that would reduce a
species’ existing distribution (FSM 2670.5). Management of sensitive species “must not result in
a loss of species viability or create significant trends toward federal listing” (FSM 2670.32).
Bureau of Land Management -The plant is listed as “Sensitive” on the State Director’s Special
Status Species List for Sensitive Vascular Plants (January 2008).
The Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center (ORNHIC) is a part of the Information
Program of the Institute for Natural Resources at Oregon State University and maintains
comprehensive data bases for Oregon biodiversity in cooperation with the Forest Service and
many other agencies. In the March 2007 Report ORNHIC ranks the plant on List 1 (taxa that are
threatened with extinction) with Global Rank G3 and State Rank S3. The NatureServe/Natural
Heritage Ranking System defines these rankings as:
Global Rank G3 = Vulnerable-At moderate risk of extinction due to a restricted range,
relatively few populations (often 80 or fewer), recent and widespread declines, or other
factors.
State Rank S3 = Vulnerable- Rare, uncommon or threatened, but not immediately
imperiled, typically with 21-100 occurrences.
State of Oregon - The plant has no state status.
Private Lands- There is no legal or regulatory requirement for conservation of this species on
private land.
18
SYSTEMATICS/TAXONOMY
In the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service’s PLANT data base lists the following
classification:
Classification:
Penstemon peckii Pennell
Kingdom
Subkingdom
Superdivision
Division
Class
Subclass
Order
Family
Genus
Species
Plantae – Plants
Tracheobionta – Vascular plants
Spermatophyta – Seed plants
Magnoliophyta – Flowering plants
Magnoliopsida – Dicotyledons
Asteridae
Scrophulariales
Scrophulariaceae – Figwort family
Penstemon Schmidel – beardtongue
Penstemon peckii Pennell – Peck's beardtongue
SPECIES DESCRIPTION
Peck’s penstemon was described by Pennell in 1941 from his 1931 collection made “about 9
miles northwest of Sisters, Deschutes County, Oregon” and published in Notulae Naturae Vol.
71. Peck’s penstemon is classified under subgenus Penstemon, section Penstemon, subsection
Proceri and subgroup Attenuatus complex (Field, 1985). The subgroup Attenuatus contains 12
species of Penstemon whose center of diversity is in the Idaho batholith in the North Central
Rocky Mountains. Field (1985) notes that polyploidy (a condition where an organism has more
than two sets of chromosomes) is common in the Attenuatus complex and that hybridization and
the formation of polyploids has been important in the evolution of this genus.
Peck’s penstemon is a polyploid with a chromosome number of 4n. There are two narrow
endemic Penstemon species in this complex, Penstemon peckii and Penstemon washingtonensis.
Both these species are densely glandular-hairy, a characteristic that is not found in the remainder
of the Attenuatus complex.
Technical descriptions can be found on page 397 in Hitchcock et al. (1959), or on page 739 in
Abrams (1951), on page 697 in Peck (1961) and on page 254 in Meinke (1982). A key to the
genus and species can also be found in Hitchcock and Cronquist’s (1973) Flora of the Pacific
Northwest. Hitchcock et al.’s technical description is as follows:
Plants tufted from a slender, superficial, woody rhizome-caudex, mostly 2.5-7 dm. tall,
slender stemmed, glabrous below the glandular-hairy inflorescence, or the stem slightly
hirtellous-puberulent; leaves numerous, entire, linear or nearly so, up to about 7 cm. long
and 5 mm. wide, all or nearly all cauline, the lower petiolate and rather crowded, but not
forming rosettes, the others sessile and more distant; inflorescence of several fairly dense
and often approximate verticillasters; calyx 2-3.5 mm. long, the segments abruptly
pointed, with broad often erose scarious margins; corolla tending to be declined,
glandular hairy, pale purplish blue to white, 8-10 mm. long, the tube narrow, only 2-3
19
mm. wide at the mouth, the palate bearded; staminode bearded toward the expanded tip;
pollen sacs glabrous, subrotund or broadly ovate, 0.4-0.5 mm. long, wholly dehiscent,
becoming opposite and more or less explanate; capsule about 4 mm. long and seeds less
than 1 mm. long.
A brief non-technical description is as follows:
An herbaceous plant from 10-27” tall with dark blue to pale blue, pink to white tubular
and irregularly shaped flowers, about 1/3” long. All color phases may appear within the
same population. Leaves are about 3” long and 1/4” wide, and are attached directly to the
stem, sometimes forming a loose cluster near the base (undeveloped basal rosette of
leaves). Small gland-tipped hairs are located on the flowers and the flowering stem.
LOOK-ALIKES
Penstemon humilis
Penstemon peckii
Penstemon cinicola
Photos by Dr. Gerald D. Carr, Oregon Flora Image Project
Peck’s penstemon can be easily confused with two other penstemon species which occur in
Central Oregon. Peck’s penstemon is the only penstemon in the area that has glandular hairs on
floral parts and the flowering stem, combined with the characteristic of no basal rosette. The
problem with some look alikes arises when there are no flowering stems.
The lowly penstemon, Penstemon humilis has spatulate basal leaves and is found in dry
ponderosa pine habitats. Penstemon humilis also has glandular hairs on floral parts, but the
spatulate leaves forming a basal rosette will distinguish this common species from Peck’s
penstemon.
The ash penstemon, Penstemon cinicola has no basal leaves, recurved linear leaves, no glandular
hairs on the flowers or flowering stems, and is found in seasonally moist habitats near Bend,
Sunriver, and the Three Creeks Meadow area (with no apparent overlap with the distribution of
Peck’s penstemon). Both species have no basal rosette and both species have linear leaves on
20
the stem. Penstemon cinicola has recurved linear leaves. Peck’s penstemon does not. The
leaves on Peck’s penstemon are lax or straight.
Potential overlap of these two species may occur at the southern end of the range of Peck’s
penstemon. Surveyors should be cautious when plants that look like either of these species are
encountered in association with wet or seasonally moist habitats. In these cases it would be
necessary to wait until the plant flowers to determine whether glandular hairs are present.
RANGE
Peck’s penstemon is a regional endemic, found only in seasonally moist habitats in open forests
along the east flank of the Cascade Mountains in Central Oregon, in Deschutes and Jefferson
Counties. Peck’s penstemon is restricted to an area of approximately 25 miles by 19 miles or
485 square miles centered near Black Butte on the Sisters Ranger District of the Deschutes
National Forest. See Map 1- Distribution of Peck’s penstemon. Most of the global population
occurs on federal lands managed by the Sisters Ranger District.
Peck’s penstemon is the only endemic penstemon in Central Oregon. The center of regional
endemic penstemon diversity on the eastside of the Cascades is found in northeastern Oregon
and immediately adjacent in Washington where approximately 10 endemic penstemon species
are found (Meinke 1995).
The definitive extent of the global range of Peck’s penstemon has not yet been determined.
Peck’s penstemon is documented from only the Sisters Ranger District on the Deschutes
National Forest, the Crooked River National Grassland on the Ochoco National Forest, or on
private lands, all in Deschutes and Jefferson Counties. It is suspected to occur on the Prineville
District of the BLM, however the District Botanist believes the amount of potential habitat is
very small, possibly around 10 acres (Halvorson 2006, Personal Communication).
Unsurveyed suitable habitat exists on the Sisters Ranger District of the Deschutes National
Forest, the Crooked River National Grassland on the Ochoco National Forest, the Prineville
BLM, scattered private lands, and on the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs Reservation (see
discussion under Strategy 1b).
Two major extensions of the known range of Peck’s penstemon to the east have occurred since
the 1992 Conservation Strategy was written. In 2003, the plant was found 4 miles further east
than previously known on the Crooked River National Grassland associated with
intermittent/ephemeral stream channels in the lower Whychus Creek/Lake Billy Chinook
watershed. In 2006, a large population was found 5 miles southeast of Sisters in intermittent
channels associated with Melvin Springs in the Middle Whychus Creek/Deep Canyon
Watershed.
21
Map 1- Distribution of Peck’s penstemon
22
DISTRIBUTION
Peck’s penstemon distribution is closely tied to water and the plant is most often encountered
adjacent to water courses, seeps, moist meadows, high water tables, vernal pools, ditches, and in
areas of periodic flooding such as intermittent and ephemeral stream channels. Its distribution is
likely tied to dispersal of the seed by water and limited by the availability of soil moisture during
seed germination (Field 1985).
The northernmost population is located on the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs
Reservation near the confluence of Mariel Creek and the Metolius River, about 13 miles due
north of the summit of Black Butte. Additional habitat and undiscovered populations may exist
in this area. This location is not mapped and is not included in Map 1, 2 or 3.
The southernmost population is in a shallow draw of the upper reaches of the Whychus Creek,
8 miles southwest of the town of Sisters.
The westernmost population is on Windy Point in a remote draw of the Indian Ford watershed
approximately 10 miles west of Sisters on the McKenzie Pass Highway (State Highway 242).
This population consists of only 2 plants in an anomalous habitat, a steep rocky road cut draining
off the McKenzie Highway.
The easternmost population is in an intermittent channel in Carcass Canyon (formerly Squaw
Flat Canyon) approximately 10 miles east of Green Ridge.
All known populations of Peck’s penstemon are found associated with two rivers:
1) The Metolius River near Camp Sherman, and
2) Whychus Creek (formerly Squaw Creek) near the City of Sisters.
Most of the global population of the plant (70%) is associated with the Metolius River. The
majority of the global population is found in the Fifth Field watershed called the Upper Metolius
River. See Map 2- Distribution of Peck’s penstemon by Fifth Field watershed. Table 1 below
outlines the fifth field watersheds where the plant is found (Deschutes National Forest
Hydrology Data 2005).
Table 1. Peck’s Penstemon Distribution by Fifth Field Watershed
Fifth Field watershed River System
Percent of
(HUC)
population
Upper Metolius River
Metolius River
65%
Lower Metolius River
Metolius River
5%
Associated with Metolius River 70%
Whychus Creek
Whychus Creek
25%
Deep Canyon
Whychus Creek
3%
Lake Billy Chinook
Whychus Creek
2%
Associated with Whychus Creek 30%
23
Global
Map 2- Distribution of Peck’s penstemon by Fifth Field Watershed
24
Map 3- Distribution of Peck’s penstemon by Sixth Field Watershed
25
Within its overall range, Peck’s penstemon has a patchy distribution, with some large and some
small populations. Population sizes vary from 2 to 40,000, although many typical populations
have 1,000-2,000 plants. In general, the greatest concentrations of Peck’s penstemon
populations are found at the lower end of watersheds where slopes level out and soils contain
more fine particles capable of higher water retention characteristics. These areas are generally
found between the elevations of 3,400 and 2,800 feet. See Map 3- Distribution of Peck’s
penstemon by Sixth Field watershed.
Distribution of Peck’s penstemon is concentrated in certain subwatersheds (Sixth Field) of the
Metolius River and Whychus Creek and this can be seen in Table 2 below.
Table 2- Peck’s Penstemon Distribution by Sixth Field Watershed
Sixth Field watershed (HUC)
Percent of Global population
Associated with Metolius River
First Creek
23%
Headwaters Metolius River
11%
Canyon Creek
11%
Jack Creek
7%
Lower Fly Creek
4%
Cache Creek
4%
Abbott Creek
2%
Lower Lake Creek
3%
Upper Fly Creek
<1%
Associated with Whychus Creek
Lower Indian Ford Creek
11
Upper Indian Ford Creek
9
Lower Trout Creek
4
Deep Canyon
2
Stevens Canyon
1
Upper Whychus Creek
<1%
Middle Whychus Creek
<1%
Lower Whychus Creek
<1%
Three Creek
<1%
Carcass Canyon
<1%
Fourmile Butte
<1%
Geneva
<1%
26
METAPOPULATION AREAS
Meinke (1995) suggested that Peck’s penstemon exists in a series of more or less contiguous
metapopulations over its limited range. A metapopulation is a set or constellation of local
populations that are linked by dispersal (Forman, 1995).
Both the Draft Species Management Guide (Vrilakas and Kagan 1989) and initial Conservation
Strategy (O’Neil 1992) suggested there were three major areas of distribution where Peck’s
penstemon populations were clustered and that these areas may be partially isolated from each
other: 1) Candle and Abbot Creeks, 2) Cache, Lake, Jack-First, and Canyon Creeks and 3) Indian
Ford and Whychus Creeks. These areas can be viewed as metapopulations where local
populations may interact aided by water, gravity, wind, and pollinators.
New survey information has reshaped the boundaries of these metapopulation areas. Based on
our understanding of the plant’s distribution as of 2009, there are still three metapopulations of
Peck’s penstemon which are geographically isolated from each other. However the boundaries
of the areas have changed and grown larger in size than those described in the earlier discussions
above. Watershed names and boundaries have also changed. More plants have been discovered
and the range of the plant has been extended. It now appears that Peck’s penstemon populations
are clustered in the following areas:
1) The Metolius Basin from Abbot Creek to Cache Creek
2) Indian Ford and Whychus Creek
3) Fly Creek on the top of Green Ridge
The Metolius Basin from Abbot Creek to Cache Creek.
The heart of the Peck’s penstemon population is centered in the Camp Sherman area bounded on
the west by the 3,400 feet elevation mark, on the east by the Green Ridge, on the north by Abbott
Creek, and the south by Cache Creek subwatershed which wraps around the west and southwest
shoulders of Black Butte. An outlier to this description is the population on Mariel Creek on the
Warm Springs Reservation, reported in 1988 by Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs botanist
Richard Helliwell. It is likely that additional habitat and plants have a high probability of
occurrence to the north on the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs Reservation and the
northern extent of the plant has not yet been fully investigated.
Seven subwatersheds (Cache, Lower Lake, First, Metolius Headwaters, Jack, Canyon, and
Abbott) converge in an eight mile stretch along the Metolius River floodplain. Because of the
opportunities for mixing of seeds from these seven watersheds, one may speculate that this is a
very important sector for the genetics of Peck’s penstemon. Almost half of the global population
is concentrated here in just 3 subwatersheds: 1) First Creek, 2) Canyon Creek, and 3) the
Metolius Headwaters. The largest known population of Peck’s penstemon with an estimated
40,000 plants (Population #500055 – North Shackle) is found here associated with seasonally
moist soils and the ephemeral channels of First Creek.
Extensive surveys in 2004 located large populations of plants in broad, braided channels and
27
abundant small, moist meadows in the floodplain of Brush Creek, which links the Abbot Creek
area and Canyon Creek. Therefore, the perceived geographic isolation of the Abbott/Candle
Creek area as discussed by Vrilakas and Kagan (1989) and O’Neil (1992) is no longer true.
Indian Ford and Whychus Creek
The second group of plants is centered south of Black Butte, around the area occupied by the
Black Butte Ranch, a private resort and development. These populations are part of the Indian
Ford subwatershed. The Indian Ford subwatershed does not drain into the upper Metolius Basin
surrounding Camp Sherman, but rather flows east to join Whychus Creek. This geographic area
has the largest meadows on the Sisters Ranger District. The second and third largest known
populations are found in these meadows and in the adjoining forests (#500021 – Indian Ford
Creek, 15,500 plants and #500025 - Glaze Meadow, 10,500 plants).
Peck’s penstemon populations associated with Indian Ford and Whychus Creek are, for the most
part, geographically isolated from those in the Metolius Basin. The only connection between
these population centers would be achieved by insect pollinators and periodic flooding events at
the contact zone. The Cache Creek watershed populations and the Indian Ford populations occur
within 0.25 miles of each other, southwest of Black Butte (populations # 500018 - Black Butte
SW and #500022 - Cache Creek Lower). A floodplain occurs here that may periodically connect
these two populations and watersheds. King (1993) showed that at least one of the populations
in this area (# 500029 – Cold Springs Campground) is genetically distinct from other populations
sampled across the range of the plant (See Genetic Considerations).
A large population in this area (#500039 - Trout Creek Lower ) changed ownership from federal
to private during a land exchange, and after a large flood event the population diminished greatly
in size (see discussion under Disturbance Ecology). Disjunct populations of Peck’s penstemon
are located in the far eastern portions of this area, in Stevens Canyon, Fremont Canyon, and
Carcass Canyon, all part of the Lower Whychus Creek watershed. It is possible that the eastern
extent of the plant’s range may be extended on the Crooked River National Grassland and
Prineville BLM with further surveys.
Fly Creek on the top of Green Ridge
The third group of plants is found on the east side of Green Ridge in intermittent channels
associated with Lower Fly Creek, a tributary of the Metolius River and Lake Billy Chinook.
Four isolated populations exist here, and King (1993) showed that at least one of these
populations (#500048 – Fly Creek) is genetically distinct from other populations (See Genetic
Considerations).
Since Fly Creek is a tributary of the Metolius it is possible that some mixing of seed from this
area with the larger Metolius Basin metapopulation could occur where Fly Creek enters the
Metolius. However, the broad floodplain which once existed in the area was inundated by the
waters of Lake Billy Chinook, a reservoir created by the damming of the Metolius River with the
construction of Round Butte Dam in 1964. No populations are known to occur near Lake Billy
Chinook and likely habitat was probably lost under water during the creation of the reservoir.
28
REFERENCE CONDITIONS- Historic Abundance and Early Reports
The historic abundance of Peck’s penstemon is unknown; however assumptions can be made
about the historic availability of the plant’s habitat based on recent watershed studies.
The Metolius Watershed Analysis (USFS 1994) and the Whychus/ Sisters Watershed Analysis
(USFS 1998) recount that more frequent natural fires and the broad floodplains found before
European settlement in the Sisters/Camp Sherman area likely provided more habitat for Peck’s
penstemon than is found today. Historically, some burning by Native Americans may have also
occurred coincident with Peck’s penstemon habitat areas.
Both wildfires and periodic flooding created areas of bare mineral soil which the plant requires
for seed germination. Unrestricted floodplains allowed seasonal snow melt and periodic floods
to flow freely across the landscape. This created complex channels that supported riparian and
ephemerally wet forest areas, which are important habitats for the plant.
In the late 1870’s, homesteaders in the Sisters area began altering stream flows and floodplains
through stream channelization and water diversion, and changing forest structure by putting out
forest fires. By 1910 Forest Service fire lookouts were in place to detect and dispatch fire
fighters to suppress summer lightning fires. By 1912 all available water in Whychus Creek near
the city of Sisters was diverted for irrigation in the summer.
As settlement and development of the Sisters/Camp Sherman area continued, several large
habitat areas on private lands became cattle ranches and later housing developments or golf
courses (Metolius Meadows, Black Butte Ranch, Indian Ford Ranch). Traces of plant
populations can still be found in these areas.
The first recorded collection of Peck’s penstemon was by Cusick on July 16, 1901 on dry sandy
banks of Whychus Creek, 1 mile east of Henkle Butte. The plant was collected by Peck in July
of 1914 on “dry ground near Sisters” and described from a 1931 collection by Pennell from
“sandy woods 9 miles NW of Sisters”.
Three other herbarium collections, one at Oregon State University and two at California
Academy of Science, were misidentified or mislabeled causing the range of Peck’s penstemon to
be erroneously reported as far north as Mt. Hood in the early literature. The collection at Oregon
State University made by Lawrence from Tygh Creek, Wasco County on May 22, 1931 was
determined by Dr. Kenton Chambers at Oregon State University to be Penstemon humilis. The
collections at California Academy of Science made by the Van Dykes in the summer of 1929
were correctly identified but mislabeled for location. It is most likely that the collections were
made from the town of Sisters and Suttle Lake instead of Three Sisters and Cloud Cap,
respectively (Chambers 1979 personal communication noted in the 1989 Draft Species
Management Guide by Vrilakas and Kagan).
29
Current Abundance and Survey Coverage
Knowledge of the location and abundance of Peck’s penstemon has grown quickly as systematic
surveys began for the plant. However, extensive botanical surveys across the Deschutes, Ochoco
and other National Forests across Oregon for the past 16 years have not located the plant outside
the Metolius or Whychus Creek watersheds. The Prineville District of the BLM has surveyed for
the plant for about 18 years and never found it.
The first recorded large scale survey for Peck’s penstemon on the Sisters Ranger District began
in 1979 by Tom Pogson, 5 years after the plant was listed a Candidate Threatened Species in the
Federal Register on July 1, 1975. Pogson (1979) was one of the first to investigate misidentified
herbarium collections and suggested in his Survey Report to the Forest Service concerning the
Lake Creek Timber Sale that the range of the species might be much smaller than previously
assumed. Pogson did not attempt to count individual plants where they were abundant.
In 1985, Field estimated there were at least 20,000 plants and 20 populations of Peck’s
penstemon.
In the 1988 Oregon Natural Heritage Data Base field survey, no attempt was made to count
individual numbers. At that time they estimated that there were not more than 100,000
individuals of the species (Vrilakas and Kagan 1989).
During the first two years of the Sisters Ranger District Sensitive Plant program in 1990 and
1991, all proposed projects which contained potential habitat began to be surveyed and 51 new
populations were located. Each of these new populations was documented with agency Sensitive
Plant Sighting forms (forms on file at the Sisters Ranger District). Plants (clumps) were counted
at each site. Either actual counts or visual estimates of the population size were made. By
incorporating the counts made by Field (1985) and the site information on the Oregon Natural
Heritage Data Base element occurrence records and site records of the Forest Service, by 1992
estimates prepared for the Species Conservation Strategy rose to at least 150,100 total
individuals.
In the past 16 years additional populations and expansions of known populations have continued
to be found. Population boundaries continue to be reconfigured. As of 2009, approximately 7080% of the suspected potential habitat for Peck’s penstemon on Sisters Ranger District has been
surveyed; however, it is likely that additional populations remain to be found especially on
private land in-holdings, in the eastern portion of the range on the Crooked River National
Grassland, along the lower Metolius River, and north on the Warm Springs Reservation. Even in
fairly well surveyed areas like the Metolius Basin new populations are often found. For
example, in the summer of 2006 four new populations and two population extensions totaling
849 plants were found along the Upper Metolius River corridor which had never been fully
surveyed.
As of 2009, the estimated global population of Peck’s penstemon is 247,000 plants.
30
LAND MANAGER/OWNERSHIP
At this time there are 100 documented occurrences of Peck’s penstemon. The majority of these
(89 populations, comprising 97% of the global population) are managed by the Sisters Ranger
District. Two populations are managed by the Crooked River National Grassland (0.3% of the
global population) and 9 populations (or 2 % of the global population) are on private land.
There is no legal requirement for the plant to be protected on private land, however at least 4 of
these populations are being managed for the benefit of the plant by the Nature Conservancy and
the Deschutes Basin Land Trust. This means at least 71% of the plants on private land are being
protected. See Table 3- Peck’s Penstemon Populations on Private Land.
Table 3- Peck’s Penstemon Populations on Private Land
Population Name
Owner
Estimated size
TNC
Metolius
Preserve The Nature Conservancy
1,300
(Protected)
Mariel Creek
Confederated Tribes of Warm 1000
Springs
Sisters City Park
City of Sisters
Unknown
Lower Whychus 2
Private Individual
203
Trout Creek Lower
Sisters School
1,109
(Protected)
District/Conservation
Easement Deschutes Basin
Land Trust
Metolius Preserve (Protected) Deschutes Basin Land Trust
1,755
Camp Polk (Protected)
Deschutes Basin Land Trust
185
Grassland Stevens Canyon
Private Individual
10 (unknown extent)
Carcass Canyon
Private Individual
500
TOTAL
6,062
(2% of global population)
The population at the Sisters City Park was affected by the installation of the city sewer system
infrastructure and its current status is unknown. The status of the population on Mariel Creek
owned by the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs is also unknown. Coordination with private
owners of the populations could be improved and is suggested (See Action Plan).
31
BIOLOGY AND ECOLOGY
HABITAT
Peck’s penstemon habitat is typically found in the band of forests that occur on the east slopes of
the Cascade Mountains, sandwiched between mesic mixed conifer forest near the crest and the
xeric juniper woodlands at lower elevations (Field 1985). The species grows in meadows and
open or partly shaded areas of forests, often dominated by ponderosa pine, at elevations between
2,600-4,000 feet (occasionally as high as 4,900 feet). Peck’s penstemon appears to require open
habitats for successful establishment.
Peck’s penstemon also requires wet site conditions for
at least a portion of the growing season to successfully
establish in this dry forest zone. This largely accounts
for its patchy distribution. It occurs in the mesic
ecotones of perennially wet sites, in areas of brief
seasonal moisture or in areas of periodic flooding.
Peck’s penstemon is a successful pioneer in secondary
successional habitats. Many of the sites where the
species occurs are in areas of low elevation, fluvial
influence, such as streambanks, overflow channels,
inactive floodplains and gravelly outwash deposits.
But the species is also associated with high water tables
and in the drying meadow habitats of topographic
depressions, springs, seeps and vernal pools.
Peck’s penstemon may also occur in recovering,
manmade habitats associated with seasonal run-off
such as ditches, skid trails, and dirt roads. Moldenke
(1980) reported that he observed large populations of
Peck’s penstemon on the private land in Camp
Sherman called Metolius Meadows which was being
Typical intermittent channel habitat for
developed for housing. His investigation into the land’s
Peck’s penstemon
history determined that this large meadow was managed
as a peppermint farm until 1973, then planted to barley in 1974, and laid fallow in 1975-1976.
He observed a large vigorous population there in 1980 and concluded that the population was at
the most 5 years old. There are a number of instances of recovering clearcuts or former timber
sale landings with high water tables containing vigorous Peck’s penstemon populations.
Soils where the plant is found are primarily sandy loams, loamy sands and occasionally
pumiceous loamy sands. Penstemon is closely associated with soils formed from tills deposited
in the valley bottoms; soils which tend to be finer textured and retain higher moisture contents
throughout the year. Field (1985) states that there is only one unique condition which may
explain its limited range and relative global rarity. She stated that Peck’s penstemon appears to
be primarily found in an area described by the U.S. Geological Service as Quaternary alluvium.
This geomorphologic type would hold more water than the surrounding areas of andesite and
32
basalt.
Later survey work has revealed that Peck’s penstemon can be found at considerable distances
outside this deposit. One may speculate that Peck’s penstemon is restricted to soils that are
either periodically wet or that have higher moisture retention characteristics, and further that its
restricted range may be related to the deep pumice fallout from either Mazama or Newberry
volcanoes in the adjacent landscapes outside the Sisters Ranger District. However, since these
conditions are all quite widespread there is really no good explanation for the plant’s rarity based
on habitat and its restricted range may be more tied to its ecology.
Soil tests examining soil structure, pH, phosphorous, extractable cations, total bases, soluble
salts, boron, sulfur, nitrogen, and organic matter proved negative in forming a correlation
between soils and the penstemon’s distribution (Field 1985, Moldenke 1980).
Peck’s penstemon occurs within two major community types, meadows and open forests. These
are described below:
Meadows (2% of Global Population)
Meadow communities where Peck’s
penstemon is found are closest to a type
described by Volland (1976) as a dry
meadow (MD19-11), which is a Cusick
bluegrass type. Volland’s type is
dominated by Cusick bluegrass (Poa
cusickii), slender wheatgrass (Agropyron
caninum), slenderbeak and threadleaf
sedge (Carex athrostachya and C.
filifolia), prairie junegrass (Koeleria
macrantha),
and
California
oatgrass
(Danthonia californica).
Glaze Meadow and Black Butte.
A large meadow population of Peck’s penstemon
The dry meadow association described by Volland occurs from 4,200-6,100 feet in elevation,
which is about 1,000 feet higher than most of the Peck’s penstemon meadows. In addition, no
Cusick’s bluegrass is found in any Peck’s penstemon sites. The dominant species in these
meadows are grasses, including Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis), Sandberg bluegrass (Poa
secunda), and bluebunch wheatgrass (Agropyron spicatum), along with all of the other
graminoids listed above.
Peck’s penstemon’s meadow habitat is difficult to characterize as a plant association due to the
absence of any sites in good condition. Historically, most of the areas were grazed, often
hydrologically altered with drainage ditches and planted. Idaho fescue, slender wheatgrass and
other native bunchgrasses make up less than 50% of the total cover (much of the cover is
composed of introduced pasture grasses, Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis) and Timothy
(Phleum pratense). In addition, these meadows are characterized by an abundance and diversity
of forbs. It is unclear if this is natural, or a result of past disturbance.
33
Forests
Ponderosa pine - (64% of Global Population) The most dominant forest type where Peck’s
penstemon is found is the dry ponderosa pine forest type (Pinus ponderosa/Purshia
tridentata/Festuca idahoensis- ponderosa pine/bitterbrush/Idaho fescue, CPS2-11) described by
Volland (1985) and the Oregon Natural Heritage Data Base (1989b).
Typical ponderosa pine
forest habitat for Peck’s
penstemon.
The vernal pool
population area is in the
Metolius Basin
This forest habitat type may have an open canopy of large, widely spaced old ponderosa pines, a
shrub understory dominated almost exclusively by bitterbrush, with Idaho fescue totally
dominating the forb layer. Populations can also be found in less open, younger ponderosa pine
stands. On eastern edges of the plant’s range it occurs in ponderosa pine/juniper forests with
both bitterbrush and sagebrush as common shrubs. A valuable indicator of Peck’s penstemon
habitat in pine dominated forests occurrence is Dusty Horkelia (Horkelia fusca) which often
appears as a companion plant. Why these two plants often occur together is unknown, but is
likely based on similar habitat needs.
Wet Mixed Conifer - (22% of Global Population) In the Metolius Basin, Peck’s penstemon is
also found in a Plant Association Group called “Wet Mixed Conifer”. These forest types are
often associated with the stream courses and intermittent channels. Wet Mixed Conifer forests
comprise 17% of forest vegetation in the Metolius Basin (Metolius Watershed Analysis Update
2004). This grouping of plant associations includes the Conifer Dry (CD) series and the most
productive sites in the Conifer Wet (CW) series. The Conifer Dry (CD) associations are climax
to Douglas fir and white/grand fir. The major early seral species is ponderosa pine. The Conifer
Wet (CW) associations occur on more moist sites and tree species include true firs, ponderosa
pine, Douglas-fir, western larch and lodgepole pine.
Dry Mixed Conifer – (11% of Global Population) A small portion of the global population
occurs in the Metolius Basin within the Plant Association Group called “Dry Mixed Conifer”
(USFS 2004). This grouping of plant associations includes moderate and low productivity
Conifer Wet (CW) series Plant Associations as described by Volland (1985). Tree species
consist of true firs (primarily white/grand fir), ponderosa pine, Douglas fir, western larch and
34
small amounts of other trees species. This is the common forest type in the Metolius Basin
comprising 39% of the forest vegetation.
A habitat summary is found below. Terrestrial and riparian plant associations listed are after
Volland (1985) and Kovalchik (1987) respectively.
Habitat Summary
Elevation: 2640-4000 feet’ (occasionally as high as 4900 feet)
Plant Associations:
Ponderosa Pine (Conifer Pine (CP) Series) including:
PIPO/PUTR- ARTR/SIHY CP-S1-12
PIPO/PUTR- ARTR/FEID CPS1-11
PIPO/PUTR/FEID CPS2-11
PIPO/PUTR-ARPA/FEID CPS2-17
PIPO/PUTR-CEVE/FEID CPS3-14
PIPO/SYAL- floodplain (riparian) CPS5-11
PIPO/CAPE-FEID-LALA CPG2-12
Wet Mixed Conifer (Conifer Dry (CD) and most productive of Conifer Wet (CW) series), often:
Mixed Conifer/SYAL/LIBO flatlands CDS6-12
Mixed Conifer/SYAL/forb CDS6-13
Mixed Conifer/SYAL/CARU CDS6-14
Dry Mixed Conifer (Conifer Wet (CW) Series), often:
Mixed Conifer/ARPA-CEVE/sedge-penstemon CWS1-13
Mixed Conifer/CEVE-CACH/PTAQ CWH1 -11
Meadow/Riparian, often:
Dry Meadow MD19-11,
Riparian ALIN-SYAL, SW22-11
Habitats: Recovering fluvial surfaces (streambanks, overflow channels, inactive floodplains), seeps,
springs, vernal pools (drying edges), draws, ditches, skid roads, dry or intermittent stream channels, moist
and wet meadows, forest openings and open forest.
35
LIFE HISTORY
Peck’s penstemon is a perennial that reproduces sexually by seed and vegetatively by rhizomes.
Vegetative shoots can be abundant and be mistaken for seedlings unless underground stems are
examined. This makes accurate and repeatable population counts difficult. Individuals are
usually counted as “clumps” of adjacent stems separated by an arbitrary distance of 6 inches or
15 cm. The life history of the plant is summarized in Figure I and further discussion is found
below.
Figure I- LIFE HISTORY OF PECK’S PENSTEMON
LIFE HISTORY STAGE
PENSTEMON PECKII
GRAVITY
SEED DISPERSAL
OVERLAND FLOW
RIPARIAN CORRIDORS
NO SEED DORMANCY
DORMANCY
LONGEVITY >15 YEARS
REQUIRES ABUNDANT
SOIL MOISTURE
GERMINATION
AND LIGHT
MOIST BARE GROUND
SEEDLING ESTABLISHMENT
OR DISTURBED GROUND
PERENNIAL
VEGETATIVE GROWTH
FORMS CLONES
INSECT POLLINATIED
SEED PRODUCTION
SELF COMPATIBLE
36
Visibility/Blooming Period
Peck’s penstemon is a semi-evergreen forb and can be seen at all times of the year. After the
fall or winter snows the leaves become less green (often reddish) and plants are less conspicuous.
Over its range, Peck’s penstemon flowers from early June until the end of August depending on
moisture and shade. Three populations occurring on a variety of sites were examined by Field
(1985) for variations in bloom time. Peak blooms for these sites were as follows: 1) open and
xeric site - June 26, 2) shade-partial shade and xeric site - July 10, and 3) partial shade and mesic
- July 24.
Pollination
Peck’s penstemon is an insect pollinated plant but is also “self-compatible” and may selfpollinate (Field 1985). Field established that self-pollinated flowers produced fewer seeds than
outcrossed plants. This strategy favors outbreeding and genetic viability; however changes that
adversely affect insect pollinators of Peck’s penstemon may also adversely affect the seed bank.
Field (1985) determined that during her study, Peck’s penstemon was pollinated primarily by the
bumble bee, Bombus flavifrons and the solitary bee, Osmia brevis. This differs slightly from
Moldenke (1980) who observed no bumblebees and stated that the primary pollinators were the
solitary bees, Osmia brevis and Osmia penstemonis. Field hypothesized that the plant’s
pollinators may vary from year to year, and may be sensitive to weather, and to population size.
Field noted that other bees, lepidopterons, and flies also infrequently visit Peck’s penstemon
flowers.
King (1993) noted that both Osmia species and the bumblebee Bombus flavifrons are generalist
pollinators, servicing many different plant species. According to Field (1985) the presence of
Osmia, its main pollinator, is directly proportional to the density of nearby lupines, and Osmia
frequents Peck’s penstemon more in the absence of other penstemons. This indicates that the
main pollinator of Peck’s penstemon does not even prefer the species. King speculates the lack
of preference of Osmia for Peck’s penstemon may be due to its small flower size, which is
almost 50% smaller that other sympatric penstemons such as Penstemon humilis or P. rybergii.
Kephart and Woodbridge (1994) examined the importance of insects to pollination and
reproduction of several sensitive plant taxa, including Peck’s penstemon. They observed at least
15 different species of insects visiting the plant, however over 80% of these insect foragers were
bees. They also found that insect pollination contributed significantly to successful reproduction
for the plant. In pollinator exclusion experiments where flowers were bagged and then examined
for seed set, they found both bagged and open pollinated inflorescences set some seed, however,
seed set was 5 times greater for open pollinated Peck’s penstemon plants.
37
Flower Color Polymorphism
One of Peck’s penstemon’s most unusual characteristics is that its flowers occur in a variety of
colors. Field (1985) studied this trait and by growing plants under uniform greenhouse
conditions was the first to conclude that the striking color polymorphism was tied to genetic
variability and not environmentally induced.
Field broke the plant’s flower color morphs into seven main categories and observed the
frequency of their occurrence in various populations and across the plant’s range. She also
studied many ecological aspects of the color morphs such as mean bloom dates, pollinator
preference, seed capsule production, herbivory, and fecundity. Some variation in these results
was seen between populations. Some results of her study are interpreted and summarized below
in Table 4- Frequency and Characteristics of Peck’s Penstemon Flower Color Morphs.
Table 4- Frequency and Characteristics of Peck’s Penstemon Flower Color Morphs
(summarized from Field 1985)
Flower Color Morphs
Frequency
Characteristics
White
0.4%
Rare color morph
Too infrequent to study
Light Pink
23.48%
Most common along with dark pink
Early bloom
Most preferred by pollinators
Produced more seed capsules
Heavy seed
High seed germination rate
Dark Pink
22.90%
Most common along with light pink
Preferred by seed predators
Small seed
Lavender
6.20%
Late bloom
Least preferred by pollinators
Least preferred by seed predators
Smallest, lightest seed
Lowest seed germination rate
Light Blue
15.81%
Earliest bloom
Preferred by pollinators
Heavy seed
Medium Blue
16.33%
Early bloom
Heaviest seed
High seed germination rate
Dark Blue
14.83%
Latest bloom date
Preferred by pollinators
Produced more seed capsules
38
Field concluded that complex interacting factors influence the success of various color morphs
including differential pollination and seed predation and that this varied from year to year and by
population.
Because of this data, O’Neil (1992) identified color polymorphism as an important factor
influencing long term species viability for Peck’s penstemon and used this characteristic as a
selection factor in choosing Protected Populations.
Dark Pink
Three of the seven Peck’s penstemon color morphs
Lavender
Light Blue
Dispersal Mechanisms
Peck’s penstemon seed has no specialized mechanisms for dispersal. It simply moves with
gravity, rather than being carried on the exterior of animals or by wind. Field (1985) speculated
that the seed may also be dispersed by water movement, a hypothesis that is strongly supported
by field observations and by the location of plant populations. It has been found that Peck’s
penstemon distribution can often be used as an indicator to the location of unmapped ephemeral
channels. Often these channels have not run water in years and may be difficult to recognize in
the field. Distribution of the seed may be limited to the immediate vicinity of the parent plants,
carried by seasonal stream channels, or be tied to flooding events or heavy rainfall.
Seed Longevity/Viability
Once Peck’s penstemon is pollinated, seed capsules are formed which contain approximately 50
seeds each. The entire inflorescence, which can have 20-70 individual flowers, could therefore
produce up to 3,500 seeds (King 1993). However, many flowers in forest areas are smaller and
produce far less seed. Collections across the plant’s range by the Berry Botanic Garden in 1992
found an average of 291 seeds per flower head, with a range of averages from 93-811.
Seed capsules begin maturing in late July to mid-August. Field (1982) found Peck’s penstemon
seed can be germinated and grown immediately after it is shed from the plant, needing no cold
treatment or dormancy. Up to 95% germinated easily.
39
In the 1992 Conservation Strategy, O’Neil proposed the hypothesis that Peck’s penstemon seeds
lose viability quickly in the soil and this might be a key to explaining the plant’s rarity. Dr. Ed
Guerrant at the Berry Botanic Garden was contracted to design and conduct a study of the
survivorship patterns of seeds in the soil as well as to collect a geographically representative and
genetically diverse sample of seeds for long term offsite frozen storage in the Berry Botanic
Garden Seed Bank.
In 1992, over 62,000 seeds were collected from 11 different populations across the known range
of the plant. Seeds were subjected to standard tests and were found to be amenable to ex situ
storage using standard techniques of drying and freezing the seed (Guerrant 1993). This seed
collection remains in frozen storage in the Berry Botanic Gardens Rare Plant Seed Bank. Seed
collection from new outlier populations is recommended. See Action Plan.
A portion of this seed collection was used for a seed bank survivorship study (Guerrant 1993).
In December of 1992, mixed seed lots were buried in small cloth bags protected by a wire mesh
cage, in the soil within the range of the plant, so that seeds would be subject to normal cycles of
moisture and temperature. Forty pouches were buried in each of 3 locations. Seed mortality
after 1 winter in the soil varied from 16-26%. Contrary to Fields findings, Guerrant found that
15 to 20% of the seeds in each bag had germinated in the dark. It was unclear if this was because
of a short exposure to light as they were dug and removed. Of remaining live seeds a high
proportion (66-77%) germinated. Seeds were removed from the soil again after 1, 2, and 4 years
in the soil. In 1996 a substantial number (53%) still germinated easily indicating that Peck’s
penstemon seed can survive in the soil seed bank for at least 4 years (Guerrant Memo 2005).
Because of the finite number of buried seed samples it was decided to wait to remove more
samples.
In 2007, a set of buried seed bags were pulled from the field and again tested (Guerrant and
Raven 2008). The number of seeds that remain physically whole and could potentially be viable
has remained remarkably constant over the 15 year study period, with over 50% of the seeds
remaining whole. After 15 years in the soil 29% of the seeds germinated. Of the seeds stored in
the freezer for 15 years 24% germinated.
(Graphs below from Guerrant and Raven 2008).
40
Guerrant and Raven concluded that these results clearly show that Peck’s penstemon seeds can
survive and germinate for at least 15 years in the soil and in frozen storage. An unexpected
phenomenon was discovered during the course of the study as the researchers found that seeds
which remained dormant through one or more germination trials sometimes germinated during a
later trial. They believe a number of the seeds which remained hard but did not germinate
through the first three germination trials could still be viable.
They surmised that this feature could provide an ecological advantage by staggering the
germination of a particular cohort over time and would appear to reduce the chances of
catastrophic loss if all viable seeds were to germinate at the first opportunity and then
experienced unfavorable conditions for seedling growth and survival.
This study disproves our original hypothesis that Peck’s penstemon seeds lose viability quickly
in the soil (O’Neil 1992) and creates more questions about what is going on within seeds and
why the species is rare. It is recommended that the seed survivorship study be continued.
Fifteen seed pouches per site remain buried so three future tests using 5 bags each could be
conducted. See Action Plan.
Seedlings
It has been a common observation of those studying Peck’s penstemon that although the plant
produces prolific seed, seedlings are rarely seen (Field 1985, O’ Neil 1992, King 1993). Because
of this fact, good observations on the time of seed germination and seedling establishment for
plants in the wild are lacking. However Field states that early autumn is the season that Peck’s
penstemon usually germinates in the field.
The key to the rarity of seedlings may be contained in a memo from Field (1982) where she
described that seedlings are very small and easily killed by drying. In 1980 and 1981 she found
no seedlings anywhere. In 1982, which was a considerably wetter year because of heavy
snowfall in the mountains, she found quite a few seedlings in one area. In her 1985 Thesis, Field
reported that in seventeen populations, three sites contained seedlings, nine did not and the rest
were inconclusive. During the seven year drought in Central Oregon from 1985-1991 no
seedlings were seen. In field surveys since 1991, Sisters Ranger District botanists have rarely
observed seedlings.
Field (1985) found that seeds would not germinate in the dark, but could germinate both on bare
ground and when covered by a thin litter cover, as long as sufficient light was present.
Germination was inhibited by lack of moisture, and the best germination rates for the plant were
achieved in 100% water saturated soils. Plants were essentially growing under standing water.
She also found indications that alleopathy may play an important role in seedling rarity because
germination of seeds was inhibited in soils collected under most common associates of the plant
including ponderosa pine, bitterbrush, greenleaf manzanita, pinemat manzanita, Idaho fescue and
the lowly penstemon, Penstemon humilis.
If Field is correct about germination usually occurring in early autumn (September/October), this
is often a period of dry sunny weather in the Sisters area and it is not uncommon for first winter
snows to fall on dry soils. A common folk expression describing the change of seasons in Sisters
41
is “snow on dust”. There is often no fall rainy season. This would be unlikely to create
conditions for a seed which prefers to germinate in standing water and stay moist until
established.
In October 2006, Sisters Ranger
District Botanists found seedlings in a
moist forest opening while monitoring
the survival of Peck’s penstemon in a
B&B Fire Salvage Timber Sale unit.
Because seedlings are so rarely found
in the field and because the issue of
how fire salvage may affect the plant
has been controversial, a study to
follow seedling survival was proposed.
Ecologist Reid Schuller was contracted
to design a monitoring study for the
area and at this writing two years of
Peck’s penstemon seedlings in a skid trail within a B&B Fire
Salvage Unit (Booth 128) October 16, 2006
data have been collected (Schuller
2007, 2008).
In the plots Schuller set up in June of 2007, more seedlings were found in skid trails than in less
disturbed areas. The density of seedlings in skid trails was more than twice as high as in less
disturbed areas adjacent to the skid trails. Adult plants were clearly more abundant in less
disturbed soil. The data was inconclusive on whether the seedlings would thrive and persist. A
total of 325 seedlings, juveniles, and adult plants were observed in thirty 5 x 20 meter plots.
Follow-up monitoring was recommended (Schuller 2007).
In July of 2008 after a winter of high snowfall and late snowmelt, the population size within the
plots had more than doubled to 763 seedlings, juveniles, and adults. Vigorous plant growth may
have made the detection of individual plants difficult, however Schuller thought his methods
were consistent and this was not a large factor. More than 5 times as many flowering
inflorescences were observed in 2008 than in 2007 with about 95% of the plants (mostly
juveniles and adults) producing flowers. Schuller observed that this suggests strong variability in
annual seed production. The relative abundance of flowering plants was greater in skid trails
than in less disturbed areas.
Schuller concluded that habitat manipulation to provide sustainable penstemon populations is not
to be ruled out as an option based on this data, however cautioned that other factors seem to be at
play such as substantial year to year variation in recruitment, individual vigor, and seed
production. Schuller hypothesized that there may be a germination “bottleneck” in the fall and
that “successful” years would come from late summer storms recharging soil moisture. He also
posed another possibility, that the germination is bimodal and occurs in ideal conditions in the
spring or fall. However, this window for germination and establishment doesn’t occur every
often. He surmised that with climate change, regional warming and drying could virtually close
this window by producing shallower snowpacks and /or earlier snowmelt so that soil moisture
conditions become offset from the plant’s phenology, resulting in longer periods of suboptimal
germination conditions (Schuller 2008. Personal Communication).
42
The probable role of the wildfire in this population surge is also a factor. It is recommended the
seedling study be continued to observe how these plants fare over time as competition from
vegetation increases. See Action Plan.
To summarize, it appears that Peck’s penstemon seeds need a combination of factors in order to
germinate and grow including: soil moisture, sunny open habitat, and lack of competition. This
combination of conditions occurs infrequently in dry ponderosa pine forests in most years and
may become even more rare if global warming trends continue.
Evolutionary and Genetic Considerations
It is hypothesized that most of the penstemon in the Attenuatus complex in which Peck’s
penstemon is found diverged fairly recently during the glaciations of the Pleistocene era (Clark
1971). When the glaciers of the Pleistocene receded they left behind large areas of disturbed
habitats that could be colonized by hybrids tolerant of disturbance.
King (1993) weaves the following theory regarding the rarity of this species. Peck’s penstemon
is believed to be a newly formed hybrid of the post-Quaternary era, and became a stabilized
species in the large disturbed habitats of glacial deposits left behind by retreating glaciers that
once occupied the Metolius River Basin. As the glaciers melted, Pecks’ penstemon evolved a
seed dispersal mechanism that took advantage of the wet climate, and colonized the alluvial
region. However, as the climate soon changed and dried, the seed dispersal mechanism and the
seeds special requirements for germination (discussed above) no longer allowed the species to
expand its range.
Pecks’ penstemon is a polyploid (tetraploid - 4n) species, meaning the base chromosome number
is 8, an evolutionary consequence of hybridization. It is one of fifteen known tetraploids in the
genus, five of which are in the Attentuatus complex of penstemon (Field 1985, King 1993).
Plants which are polyploids like Peck’s penstemon enjoy the advantages of excessive gene
duplication and are considered broadly adaptable in colonizing habitats (Clegg and Brown,
1983). In fact, some of the worst invasive plants are polyploid. Clegg and Brown (1983)
hypothesize that support for the wide adaptability of polyploid species is grounded in: l)
buffering against inbreeding because of fixed heterozygosity and 2) wide environmental
tolerance due to gene duplication and subsequent diversification. For Peck’s penstemon this is
fortuitous. Polyploids are often adapted to environments disturbed by human activities.
One of the greatest concerns regarding narrow endemic species is the potential loss of genetic
variation, which can result in reduced species adaptability and survival. Working with Dr. Ed
Guerrant, the Sisters Ranger District and others, King (1993) studied the genetic variation in
Peck’s penstemon. This was the first study of genetic variation in the plant using techniques of
enzyme electrophoresis to visualize and interpret different alleles present in genes that code for
enzymes. One way genetic variation manifests itself is in the existence of multiple alleles at
gene loci. King tested a subset of plants from 12 populations, grown from the large seed
collection compiled by the Berry Botanic Garden.
43
King found that genetic variation in Peck’s penstemon was quite high when compared to other
plant species. She compared the percentage of polymorphic loci she found in the plant with
other widespread plants and other endemics. The average percentage of polymorphic loci from
combined results of 449 plant species was around 50%, with widespread species showing an
average of 59% polymorphic loci and other narrow endemics an average of 40%. Peck’s
penstemon showed a percentage of 83% polymorphic loci. However, looking at another measure
of genetic variation she found that other endemic plants had 20% more alleles per polymorphic
locus than Peck’s penstemon.
King concluded from this comparison that it appears that Peck’s penstemon has an unusually
large amount of genetic diversity, in terms of polymorphic loci, especially considering its narrow
endemism. She cautioned that the effect of the population structure was not taken into account
in her study and that the role that genetic variation can play in perpetuating the capacity of a
species to evolve depends on how the variation is distributed and the patterns of gene flow.
A common tenet of conservation biology is that isolated populations or those on the edge of the
range are important to protect in order to conserve a full complement of genetic biodiversity
because they may have evolved in their isolation to become genetically different (Noss and
Cooperrider 1994). Theoretically, such genetic variant populations play an important role in the
face of stochastic environmental events or conditions that may threaten species survival. O’Neil
used this concept in selecting Protected Populations in the 1992 Conservation Strategy to insure
a geographically well represented set of populations would maintain a full complement of
resilient genetic diversity.
King (1993) agreed that the distribution of genetic diversity in Peck’s penstemon indicates
certain populations may be important in maintaining a healthy gene pool. She validated the
theoretical foundations of the 1992 Conservation Strategy by discovering that two populations on
opposite ends of the species range were genetically different than the rest of the species, based
on indices of genotypic identity. One population is at Fly Creek (#500048 Fly Creek) on the
northeastern edge of the species range, a part of an isolated metapopulation on the top of Green
Ridge. The other (#500035 Cold Springs Campground) is located in the southern portion of the
species range in the metapopulation area of Whychus and Indian Ford Creek.
Both of these populations were designated for conservation in the 1992 Conservation Strategy
and interestingly, both are the only areas where white color morph flowers have been observed.
44
Fire stimulated flowering in a Peck’s penstemon population near Brush Creek in 2004,
one year after the B&B Wildfire
Disturbance Ecology
Response to Fire
The belief that Peck’s penstemon is a fire-adapted species that benefits from the periodic fire
which is characteristic of historic eastside forests has been discussed for years (Moldenke 1980,
Field 1985, USFS 1998).
Field (1985) conducted experimental burns in shaded and unshaded plots of Peck’s penstemon.
In a fall burn, after recent rain, most adult penstemon plants survived the next growing season.
No data on fuels levels or fire intensity were presented. One of the effects of the burn was to
cause plants to spread vegetatively and increase branching. New plants from seed were found
only in the burn plots and control plots that were in full sun; no new plants from seed were
observed in shaded plots.
In the past decade, the importance of fire in creating and maintaining Peck’s penstemon habitats
has been observed in numerous situations. Many Peck’s penstemon populations have flourished
after low, moderate and even some high intensity burning during wildfires. After careful study,
many prescribed burns have been ignited in forests containing the plant and fire is now
considered the preferred tool for Peck’s penstemon habitat maintenance (see Management
Treatment Monitoring Results, Prescribed Fire).
45
Our improved understanding and mapping of fire regimes reveals that Peck’s penstemon occurs
in habitats which historically experienced a variety of fire return intervals.
A Fire Regime is a general classification of the role fire would play across a natural landscape in
the absence of modern human mechanical intervention, but including the influence of aboriginal
burning. Using the Fire Regime classifications developed by Hann (2001), and recent District
mapping (USFS 2004, using Pacific Northwest Variant developed by Evers), the following table
shows the distribution of Peck’s penstemon populations by fire regime.
Fire Regime
1
2
3a
3b
4
Table 5. Distribution of Peck’s penstemon by Fire Regimes
Fire Interval and Severity
Habitat Type
%
population
0-35 years, Low severity
Forests generally Ponderosa 64%
pine and very dry Douglasfir and white fir
0-35 years, Mixed and High True grasslands and mesic 2%
Severity
sagebrush communities
Less than 50 years, Mixed Dry mixed conifer forests
11%
severity (Low severity often
dominant)
50-100 years, Mixed severity
Wet mixed conifer forests
22%
35-100+ years, High severity
Lodgepole
pine,
aspen, 1%
western larch forests
About three quarters (77%) of the known population of Peck’s penstemon occurs in Fire
Regimes 1, 2, and 3a which were historically generally dominated by frequent low intensity fire.
These forest areas and grasslands are considered highly altered by missing many fire cycles as
suppression of wildfires began with European settlement (USFS 2004).
Using the concept of Condition Class, which measures the departure from the central tendency of
the natural (historic) fire regime (Hann 2001), most of these forests and grasslands are
considered to be in Condition Class 3. This means they have been significantly altered from
their historical return interval; vegetation composition, structure, and diversity are significantly
altered, and the risk of losing key ecosystem components is high.
However, it is interesting that about one-quarter of the plant’s population occurs in Fire Regime
3b and 4, which historically burned at much greater fire intensities, often killing forest stands.
These forests have missed far fewer fire cycles and are generally rated in a lower risk Condition
Class. Because the Sisters Ranger District has a steep rain gradient which influences vegetation
and fire regimes (USFS 2004), all of these Fire regimes can be found within 10 miles of each
other on the east slope of the Cascades and certainly interacted in a complex and variable way
based on weather patterns. Peck’s penstemon undoubtedly evolved with fire and in the past
decade has proven itself a fire-adapted species which survives and even thrives after fires.
46
The Metolius Basin, the stronghold of Peck’s penstemon, has been changed by eight large
wildfires from 1996 to 2003. This includes the B&B Wildfire, the largest fire in Deschutes
National Forest History (USFS 2005a). Over 50% of the Metolius basin burned between 1996
and 2003. About 26% of forest areas experienced stand replacement fire where more than 75%
of the trees are dead. About 11% experienced mixed severity fire where 25-75% of the trees are
dead.
About 16% of the known global Peck’s penstemon population was burned during these wildfires.
The burn severity to forests within populations varied. About 36% was stand replacement, 24%
mixed severity, and 41% low severity. These severity classifications describe effects to forest
canopy, not soil. Very little fire-induced soil damage was seen. Adding areas burned by
prescribed fires and wildfires, about 25-30% of the global population has been burned since
1992.
Peck’s penstemon has been observed to respond well to both wildfires and prescribed fires, often
increasing greatly in size by producing multiple stems, and plants are often larger in burned areas
from increased available moisture and nutrient release. Increased sun may also stimulate
flowering and pollinators have been seen to be prolific in burned, densely flowering populations.
Plants recover quickly from fire, sprouting within weeks (Glaze Monitoring data, 1992 and US
Forest Service Metolius Watershed Analysis Update 2004). A concern is the expansion of
invasive plant species which has been observed in both wildfire and prescribed fire areas.
Peck’s penstemon plants have been observed to be most prolific and largest where there is
abundant sun and moisture, such as some areas of stand replacement fire in the Abbott and Brush
Creek drainages burned by the B&B Wildfire of 2003. Invasive plant populations in this area are
also particularly problematic with a maze of stream channels and roads in a broad floodplain
spreading diffuse knapweed seed (called the “Little Montana” infestation).
Burning also appears to increase seed production. Seed collections by the Berry Botanic Garden
in 1992 found that a population of Peck’s penstemon which had burned in the Steven Canyon
fire in 1991 produced an average of three times more seed per plant than other populations across
the range. One flower head from Stevens Canyon produced 1,800 seeds, while the average
across the range was 291 seeds per plant. This information is anecdotal since seed was not
collected from the same population before and after the wildfire.
Flooding
Peck’s penstemon has close ties to habitats that are seasonally or periodically inundated with
water. The role of flooding in creating habitat for the plant has also been more closely observed
in the past decade as a period of drought lifted in Central Oregon and long dry channels flowed
water once more.
Several large flood events have occurred and increased our understanding of the disturbance
ecology of Peck’s penstemon related to flooding. In 1990, a large population of plants (#500039,
Trout Creek Lower) in ephemeral channels of Trout Creek had not experienced substantial flows
in about 15 years and was estimated to contain about 22,000 plants. In 1990, the plants observed
in the channel were atypical in size and appearance, forming dense large mats. Few flowering
plants were seen and pine needle duff was deep. In 1997, the ephemeral channels of Trout Creek
ran during a winter flood event and the majority of plants in the shallow channels washed away,
47
as the channels scoured and deepened. Pieces of plants were seen in the water currents floating
by. It is unknown whether some may have rooted where they came to rest. In the summer
following the flood, most plants which had occurred in the channel were gone, but some plants
were observed growing in new deltas of bare mineral soil. In 2003, a population census found
only 568 plants. The flood event revitalized the habitat by creating bare soil for plants to
establish but also killed many plants.
In July 2006, another population census was completed for the Deschutes Basin Land Trust to
assess effects of another large flood event in January of 2006 as well as thinning operations
adjacent to the channel, (Elliott 2006). The census found the population is making a recovery
with a total of 1109 plants as compared to the 580 plants found in the 2003 census, an almost
twofold increase. The percentage of plants with flowering stems dropped from about 50% in
2003 to about 30% in 2006. However, plant diameters observed in 2006 were twice as large as
plants seen in 2003. The 2006 census also showed a significantly higher number of the
population was composed of plants in the smallest size category. This was hypothesized to be
simply a reflection of a higher percentage of young plants as a result of higher recent seed
germination.
The Trout Creek Population is an example of how totally natural disturbances such as flooding,
which the plant needs to thrive, can also have significant short term, and possibly even long term
impacts to individuals in a population. It also illustrates why small populations can be
particularly vulnerable to extinction by stochastic events. In the 16 year interval between 1990
and 2006, 95% of the individuals in the formerly large Trout Creek population were lost.
However, the habitat of this population today is more conducive to plant reproduction and
seedling establishment than it was in 1990 because of it has more mineral soil and less pine
needle duff. The thinning which occurred adjacent to the channel area should also stimulate
flowering by providing additional sunlight.
Ecological Influences on Survival and Reproduction
The question of why Peck’s penstemon is rare has been extensively studied by Moldenke (1980),
and Field (1985), and is ongoing at the Sisters Ranger District. Management of this rare species
requires some understanding of what it is that naturally limits the success and distribution of the
plant. Managers can then begin to address what has been added or taken away from its
environment that may be damaging.
The five most important abiotic and biotic factors involved in the viability of Peck’s penstemon
are:
1. Abundant moisture
2. Light
3. Insect pollinators
4. Periodic fire
5. Periodic flooding
48
These factors are all tied to the successful production, dispersal and germination of the seed. The
biology of Peck’s penstemon seed and the combination of factors needed for germination and
survival appears to be the species’ weak link.
In examining the life history of Peck’s penstemon (Figure II) the central role of the seed and the
importance of some of these factors become apparent. The seed has no specialized mechanisms
for dispersal. It is neither carried on the exterior of animals or by wind, but simply moves with
gravity or is carried by water. Distribution of the seed may then be limited to the immediate
vicinity of the parent plants, or be tied to flooding events or heavy rainfall. Herbivory of the
seed capsules by rodents and deer has been observed. It is possible that the seeds may be carried
by animals in this way. Nothing is known about the viability of the penstemon seed in the gut of
these animals.
The seed has no dormancy requirements (Field 1985). This means that the seed doesn’t require a
complicated treatment to initiate germination. Under certain environmental conditions (closed
canopy forests with few flowering plants) the seed bank for Peck’s penstemon may become
depleted. Seed bank studies reveal that most seeds are found in the litter and surface layer of the
soil (Glass 1989). Pine needle litter and the litter of other shrub species associated with forest
populations of Peck’s penstemon are allelopathic inhibitors to seed germination (Field 1985).
The seed requires abundant moisture combined with light for successful germination (Field
1985). In fact, greatest germination success is achieved in water saturated soils (Field 1985).
Such seed germination requirements would naturally lead to limited distribution in an
environment that is primarily dry and forested.
Figure II summarizes these important factors again and shows more clearly the role that periodic
disturbances, such as fire and flooding, may have on Peck’s penstemon. Seed production is
directly related to plant vigor (Huenneke et al. 1986). Taller, many-stemmed plants produce
more seed. Periodic fire has a central role in increasing available light, nutrients, and moisture
for plant vigor, seed production and seed germination. Fire which reduces litter and shrub layers
may also reduce allelopathic effects on seed germination. Field (1985) established that moderate
fires that don’t kill the root crowns of parent plants promoted the growth of clonal plants and
promoted new plants from seed. No new penstemon plants from seed were found in shaded plots
that were burned.
The distribution of Peck’s penstemon along existing as well as abandoned water courses suggests
that the seed is dispersed by water. One may further speculate that populations of Peck’s
penstemon may become isolated between watersheds except where these watersheds converge in
suitable habitat or where periodic flooding events are significant enough to provide mixing of
seeds from different populations. Where populations are close enough (this distance is unknown)
insects will also provide movement of genetic material.
49
50
CONSERVATION
POPULATION TRENDS
In 1992, twenty-five Pecks penstemon populations were designated with “Protected” status. A
task of the 1992 Action Plan was to assess the biological condition of these populations. In
2005, twenty-four Protected Populations of Pecks penstemon were revisited to assess their
biological condition, re-estimate population size, detect threats, and identify management needs.
One Protected Population had changed ownership (see below). General effects to Managed
Populations were also examined by some site visits and past project reviews. Details are
provided below:
Most populations were stable or showed small changes, but several trends emerged. Trends fell
into these general categories:
1. Loss of the benefits of Federal management due to land exchanges.
2. Enhanced habitat and plant vigor due to wildfires and prescribed fires.
3. Reduced population size or localized extirpations because of changes to habitat due
to successional changes related to fire suppression, hydrological changes, invasive
plants, or damage from unmanaged recreation or new user roads.
Taken together these factors could be seen as a downward trend in the global population and
indicate the need for careful management actions to be taken.
 Loss of Populations under Federal Management. Since 1992 two populations have lost the
benefits of Federal management. Land exchanges will continue to impact the potential
viability of the plant and are difficult to mitigate. (See Threats- Land Exchanges).
Change in management/ownership of one Protected Population. One Protected
Population, Trout Creek Lower (#500039, 22,000 plants, 10% of Global population at the
time) changed ownership in a land exchange to Sisters School District in 1996. Because
of its large size and protected status, the Biological Evaluation regarding the effects of
this land exchange concluded that if the plant lost the benefits of Federal management
and the property was developed, the potential loss could be significant to the global
population of Peck’s penstemon. The site was under consideration for the Sisters City
Sewage Treatment Plant and adjacent landowners were also concerned about the loss of
open space afforded by National Forest management.
In general, the Forest Service does not hold Conservation Easements. The School
District partnered with the County and the Deschutes Land Trust to protect the area with
a conservation easement, which is held by the Land Trust. The property has been
machine thinned, generally avoiding using equipment in population areas and the school
is required to manage the area for the benefit of the plant and to preserve open space.
However, some small habitat areas have been lost during bike trail construction or altered
due to unmanaged recreation use by off -road vehicles.
51
Mitigation to compensate for the loss of the benefits of Federal management was directed
by the 1992 Conservation Strategy and required a replacement population be designated
as Protected. This Conservation Strategy update completes that task by proposing a new
Protected Population in the southern portion of the plant’s range (#5000158, Melvin
Spring). Also see section on Disturbance Ecology – Flooding regarding the flooding in
this area which scoured channels and washed away 95% of the individuals.
Change in management/ownership of one Managed Population. One small Managed
Population, Lower Whychus Creek 2 (#500059, 203 plants) changed management and
ownership in the Sokol Land Exchange in 1998. The biological evaluation regarding the
effects of this land exchange concluded that if the plant lost the benefits of Federal
management and the property was developed, the potential loss was not likely significant
to the global population of Peck’s penstemon because of its small size and many nearby
Federal populations. The area is in a Flood Plain Zone and is not currently planned for
development, however with increasing growth pressure in Sisters, many homes are being
built in similar areas and the future of the population is unknown.
 Beneficial Changes to Habitat by Wildfires and Prescribed Fires. About 25-30% of the
known global population has burned since 1992. This has been beneficial for plant vigor and
increased flowering however it has also created habitat vulnerable to invasive plant invasion.
(See Disturbance Ecology - Fire, Threats - Invasive plants, and Action Plan).
 Extirpations of Three Small Sub-populations. Three subpopulations totaling about 370
plants could not be relocated and are believed to be extirpated. Two were part of Protected
Populations and one was a portion of a Managed Population. Plants in the southern portion of
Allingham Meadow (#500007) appear to have been out-competed by meadow grasses.
Portions of the Upper Whychus Creek population (#500041) appear to have been invaded by
young lodgepole pine trees. Subpopulations at Graham Corral (#500030) appear to have been
trampled by user roads and parking in a horse camp. (See Threats – Fire Suppression,
Recreation, and Action Plan).
 Reduced Population Sizes and Loss of Habitat Quality due to Successional Changes
from Fire Suppression. Five large Protected Populations appear to show dramatic decreases
in the number of plants observed. Populations at Glaze Meadow in the forest portion of the
population (#500025), Stevens Canyon (#500069), Black Butte SW (#500018), Dry Creek
Bed (#500034), and South of Lake Creek (#500050) appear to have decreased in size by 4060% (number of observed plants). Part of this may be due to differences in surveyors and
counting methods. However, this trend was not seen consistently in other recounts and in
some cases it is clear that growth of competing vegetation displaced plants. Hydrological
changes may also be involved. Management treatments to benefit the plant are planned or in
progress for several of these areas.
 Reduced Population Sizes and changes to Habitat Quality due to Hydrological Changes.
One of the largest known populations unavoidably lost 95% of its individuals during a natural
flood event (Trout Creek # 500039). Before it changed ownership and management in a land
exchange, this population was identified as a Protected Population important to species
viability because of its size and location. Habitat quality has been improved by the flooding,
however the majority of individuals in the population were lost.
52
 Loss of Habitat Quality due to Invasive and Other Non-Native Plants. At least fifteen
population areas or 17% of the global populations are known to contain aggressive non-native
grasses or invasive plants, particularly spotted and diffuse knapweeds, which are competing
with Peck’s penstemon plants. Invasive plant expansion is particularly rapid in recent
wildfire areas, especially in the area of the 2003 B&B Wildfire in the Metolius Basin and the
2002 Eyerly Fire on Green Ridge.
A Regional programmatic Environmental Impact Statement has been completed establishing
new prevention, treatment, and restoration standards for invasive species (USFS 2005b). A
site specific sub-regional Invasive Plant Treatment Environmental Impact Statement for the
Deschutes and Ochoco National Forests that complies with these new standards is in
preparation and should be completed in 2009. This document will provide specific direction
on control of invasive plants and offer mitigation and Standards and Guidelines to conserve
Peck’s penstemon where the species are coincident. Manual removal of invasive plants is
ongoing. (See Threats - Invasive plants, and Action Plan).
 Loss of Habitat and Habitat Quality due to Unmanaged Recreational Use and New User
Roads. Several populations occur in campgrounds or dispersed recreation areas and revisits
show that parking areas, camping sites, and new user roads have expanded, increasing the
devegetation and compaction of the forest floor. This trend was particularly evident at Cold
Springs Campground (#500035) and Graham Corral (#500030) where portions of populations
appear to have been lost. Recreation funding to help manage increasing use in the Sisters area
has decreased over the past decade while the size of recreation vehicles, number of vehicles at
dispersed sites, and use of off road vehicles while camping has greatly increased. (See
Threats - Recreation, and Action Plan).
MANAGEMENT TOOLS- Management Treatment Monitoring Results
The need to conserve and manage Peck’s penstemon presently overlaps with many forest
management activities including: commercial timber harvest (including salvage), silvicultural
treatments, prescribed fire, dispersed and concentrated recreation, livestock grazing, wildlife
improvement projects, road management, trail building, and mining.
The distribution of Peck’s penstemon overlaps many land use allocations in the Deschutes Land
and Resource Forest Management Plan including: General Forest, Metolius Heritage, Metolius
Scenic, Metolius Black Butte Scenic, Metolius Special Forest, Deer Habitat, and the Glaze and
Black Butte Old Growth Areas.
Many populations are in Late Successional Reserves under the Northwest Forest Plan. All Late
Successional Reserve Assessments on the Sisters Ranger District identify Peck’s penstemon as
an old growth focal species representing many species with habitat requirements for open
canopied pine and dry mixed conifer forests and meadows, fire maintained habitats, patch
patterns, seasonally moist areas with high water table or channels. Populations also occur in
“Matrix” allocations of the Northwest Forest Plan.
A key part of the 1992 Conservation Strategy approach was designating Managed Populations
where various management activities suspected to be of benefit to the plant would be allowed
under certain guidelines. Management Monitoring Treatment Plans were required to track
53
effectiveness of various treatments. The results from Management Tool Monitoring experiments
are described below.
1) Prescribed Fire, Stevens Canyon Prescribed Burn and Wildfire 1991
This wildlife habitat improvement project also provided an opportunity to study the effects of
prescribed fire on Peck’s penstemon. The prescribed fire escaped control lines to become a
wildfire. Peck’s penstemon underwent both intentional prescribed burning and wildfire in the
Stevens Canyon populations (#500070 and 500071). The burning took place in the spring (April
13-29, 1991). No experimental plots were installed before the burn; however populations had
been described and studied before the burn. Portions of the population were excluded from the
prescribed burn because this was the eastern edge of the species range in a ponderosa
pine/juniper woodland, the area was very dry and unusually most plants were found growing
under the protective canopy of bitterbrush where they seemed to be taking advantage of the
microclimate afforded by the shrub.
Results
 Two months after the fire, vegetative clumps of Peck’s penstemon 4-8 inches in diameter
were seen.
 Average clump size increased from 6 before the burn to 8 eight inches in diameter after the
burn.
 By July, 80% of the population was flowering with an average of twenty flowering stems per
clump, many flowering stems were produced; most pre-fire plants had 1 flowering stem.
 Pollinators were prolific and active.
 Herbivory by rodents was prolific. By August 80% of seed heads were cut and removed by
ground squirrels seen carrying them through forest, possibly dispersing seed.
 Adverse effects to plants and habitat were noted in association with wildfire suppression even
with resource advice. Large trucks parked on habitat and fire lines destroyed some plants.
Conclusion: The population was greatly stimulated by both prescribed and wildfire as seen by
increase in plant density, vegetative growth, and flowering. Rodents may play an important role
in seed dispersal. Related effects of escaped fires and impacts of fire suppression need to be
considered when analyzing prescribed fire projects. Prescribed fire may be used as a
management tool in Protected Populations.
2) Prescribed Fire, Glaze Commercial Thin and “Jackpot burning”1992.
This study examined the effects of under burning a forest penstemon population under two
different fuel loadings. The area was a second growth stand of ponderosa pine which had been
logged over snow to protect the plant in 1989/1990. One fuel loading was “natural” fuels (the
existing fuel bed of needle duff and small branches associated with fire suppression), the other
was the natural fuels combined with the fuels from the partial canopy removal of the commercial
thinning operation, mimicking “Jackpot” burning which is often done as a fuels treatment.
Temperature packets were buried to detect temperature of the fire at the soil/duff interface under
fuel piles. The cool spring burn took place on March 13, 1992.
54
Results
 About 50 days after the burn, plants were re-growing and varied from small shoots to 6 inch
clumps.
 Pine needle duff was reduced by half. An average of 6 cm of needle duff remained after the
burn.
 No temperature packets melted, indicating the surface soil temperature did not reach above
125 degrees Fahrenheit.
 The number of Peck’s penstemon plants increased in both control and burned plots.
 Flowering stems increased by a factor of five on burned plants.
 Plots with higher fuels loads first appeared to have slightly smaller plants but differences
could not be detected after 2 months.
 A revisit in 2006, 13 years after the last monitoring visit, found the population in decline.
Duff depths had doubled and the number of plant clumps in the plots had declined from 260
to 189, a loss of 71 plants.
 In 1993 a year after the burn and several years after a thinning had occurred in the area, 154
flowering stems were observed, in 2006 only 4 flowering stems were seen.
Conclusion: Cool moist spring burns stimulate flowering of Peck’s penstemon, however, more
benefit to plant vigor was seen during the hotter drier burn at Stevens Canyon. Fuel
consumption of both slash and needle duff was low. Burning small concentrations of slash in
spring conditions is unlikely to harm plants. Prescribed fire and small jackpot burns may be
used as a management tool in Protected Populations.
In addition this study indicates that even only 14 years after the last fire, Peck’s penstemon
population vigor declined, as shown by decreases in number of individuals and flowers.
3) Soil Restoration by Subsoiling- North Shackle Project- 1993
Subsoiling (breaking up soil compaction with a winged implement that is pulled behind a tractor)
is a common management treatment for restoring compacted forest soils. Soil compaction in
moist soil is suspected to promote penstemon seedling recruitment in disturbed sites (see
Potential Threats section: Habitat Alteration - Timber Harvest). The long-term effects of soil
compaction on penstemon are unknown. Plots in this study were established in 1992, subsoiled
in 1993 and read in 1994.
Results
 Most plants survived the subsoiling activity which does not mix and till soil.
 The number of penstemon plants in subsoiled plots decreased by 21%, however, plants
produced more vegetative stems and increased in size.
 Cover of Peck’s penstemon increased by 48%.
 There was an 11% decrease in bitterbrush and forb cover.
 No invasive plants were detected.
Conclusion: Peck’s penstemon survives and appears to benefit from subsoiling as seen by
increasing plant size and stem production. It appears to be a good competitor against
bitterbrush and common forbs in subsoiled areas. Subsoiling may be used conservatively in
Protected Populations to increase potential habitat by subsoiling old roads and skidtrails if
needed.
55
4) Logging Effects- Lake Creek Study. The effects of clearcuts and
select harvest on Peck’s penstemon. 1993 (Moldenke 1980, Ingersoll
1993)
This is the only large scale, comprehensive, statistically robust study of the effects of harvest
activities on Peck’s penstemon. A set of study plots were established in 1980 on the Lake Creek
Timber Sale to monitor the effects of timber harvest activities on the plant. It was initiated 10
years before the Sensitive Plant program began on the District and through a complicated series
of events involving low timber prices, contract extensions, and companies going out of business,
the study area took up to 10 years to log. Ground base logging with rubber tire skidders were
used and large diameter pine were removed in both clearcut and select harvest prescriptions.
Because of the long time period involved and changes in personnel, the study data was misplaced
for a number of years and finally relocated in 1991. The study was contracted for remeasurement in 1992. The study was expensive, costing over $25,000 to design and took 13
years to complete.
Results
 The abundance of Peck’s penstemon declined significantly at all sites between 1980 and
1992.
 No Peck’s penstemon seedlings were seen at any site and juveniles were rare.
 Native vegetation cover and species richness also declined at all sites, strongly correlated to
the degree of soil disturbance.
 Common associates of Peck’s penstemon such as Idaho fescue and bitterbrush were less
tolerant of soil disturbance than Peck’s penstemon.
 Despite reductions in population size, flowering rates remained stable or increased, indicating
that reproduction may be stimulated by overstory removal. However since species fecundity is
dependent on several factors such as pollination, seed germination and seedling survival,
higher rates of flowering did not necessarily result in higher population recruitment.
Conclusion: There was no evidence that timber harvest using ground based equipment circa
1980-1990 stimulates expansions of Peck’s penstemon populations by reducing overstory cover
and creating open microsites. Detrimental effects of soil disturbance may outweigh any benefits
of reduced overstory cover. Timber harvest influenced all native vegetation on sites by reducing
cover and species richness correlated with degree of soil disturbance.
56
5) Emergency Salvage of Plants by Transplanting- Metolius Mountain
Bike Trail Project- 1992
Although trail routes have often been rerouted to avoid Peck’s penstemon plants, sometimes this
is not possible. The 1992 Conservation Strategy suggested that transplanting techniques be
investigated as an emergency tool.
Results
 About 111 plants were moved to a closed and subsoiled road from a trail construction area in
Camp Sherman in 1992.
 Plants were first recounted yearly and then periodically.
 Plant numbers and flowering success varied from year to year.
 Although over time many of the original plants died, the net number of plants in the road as of
2006 was 116, probably due to offspring from the original plants.
 Plants had an unusually high number of stem galls caused by insects.
Conclusion: Peck’s penstemon survives transplanting for a number of years. It is not
recommended but may be used in emergency situations in Protected Populations where plants
will be destroyed.
6) Mowing of Plants during Fuel Treatments- Underline Project- 1996
Mowing forest understory shrubs has become a popular method to reduce fuels before 1st entry
prescribed burns to reduce flame lengths, scorching of trees, and smoke. This is generally
accomplished with a flail mower towed behind a 4-wheel drive tractor. Mowing was monitored
in a managed Peck’s penstemon population in 1996.
Results
 Most plants (more than 99%) were unaffected by the mowing because the height of the
mower. They were too small and too low to be cut.
 A few plants were damaged by being driven over.
 Mowing reduced competition for Peck’s penstemon by reducing large decadent bitterbrush
shrubs.
 Mowing debris did not appear to form a solid mulch cover that might affect seedling
germination. Mulch cover was spotty and bare soil remained.
Conclusion: Peck’s penstemon survives mowing and may benefit from increased light and
reduced competition with decadent shrubs. Mowing may be used in Protected Population. Care
should be taken to insure mowing equipment is weed free to avoid introducing invasive plants.
57
7) Grazing Peck’s penstemon- Indian Ford Cattle Allotment 2007
The Indian Ford Cattle Allotment Management Plan was updated in 2007. Surveys before
grazing began in June 2007 showed plant density and vigor varied over the allotment and often
seemed associated with areas of periodic disturbance such as trail edges or openings. Population
numbers recorded in 2007 did not appear to have changed from counts in 1992 and about 3000
plants were estimated to occur. In several areas plants were of poor vigor and active insect
predation was noted. The insect predators observed included aphids, thrips, and moth larvae.
Because little quantitative data exists on grazing effects on Peck’s penstemon, three small
monitoring plots were installed to provide more information about the effects of grazing on the
plant. When the population was re-examined in August after grazing concluded, it was found
that grazing impacts to the plants varied. In forested areas that had deep pine litter and were
somewhat shaded, Peck’s penstemon was still present in large mats with small plants, relatively
undisturbed. For the most part, there did not seem to be much evidence of trampling or grazing
by cattle in these areas except for trails. Where plants were disturbed by cattle, Peck’s penstemon
was commonly seen sprouting out of cow pies (or up from beneath them) and flowering along
edges of cattle trails.
In areas where Peck’s penstemon was trampled or grazed, many of the plants were re-sprouting.
One monitoring plot was inadvertently set up in a travel route of the cows. There were about
30% less plants in this general area, or they were too impacted to be recognized. It is possible
that the concentration of plants in this area is maintained by the cattle trail which provides
disturbance.
Results
 Approximately 50% of the plants were affected by the cows, but this does not necessarily
mean that they were destroyed.
 Many plants were seen to be resprouting after grazing.
 Approximately 60% of the flowering stems on the plants were disturbed, trampled or browsed
by cows or other herbivores so that seed were not produced.
 The plants in shaded, forested areas where there were high numbers of plant clumps, were
least affected; however these areas had a low percentage of flowering stems before grazing.
 Peck’s penstemon appears to avoid dense areas of cheatgrass. Cheatgrass encroachment may
be coincident with historic or potential Peck’s penstemon habitat and may be exacerbated by
the disturbance caused by livestock.
58
June
Typical Plant Before Grazing
August
Typical Plant After Grazing
Conclusion: Peck’s penstemon survives grazing and in the short term, grazing may act as a
surrogate disturbance agent to maintain more open habitats for the plant. However, the
consumption of flowers (and seeds) may negate this as a benefit to species viability in the long
term because sexual reproduction, seedling establishment, and the potential for genetic diversity
are reduced. At least half of the flowers and seeds may be eaten in a given year and small young
plants are easily trampled. The plant’s genetic diversity may be reduced in the long term
without occasional opportunities for a portion of the population to freely reproduce. Invasive
plants and seed predation may also be exacerbated by grazing.
59
THREATS
Peck’s penstemon populations are threatened by two broad categories of adverse effects: a)
isolation caused by fragmentation of habitat and b) possible depletion of the seed bank by
depression of plant vigor, seed set, and seed predation. Even though successful sexual
reproduction in Peck’s penstemon as shown by seedling survival appears to be a rare event, it
remains an important part of maintaining the genetic diversity of the species over time.
Before a conservation strategy for the plant was developed, populations that occurred in activity
areas were either excluded from projects, unknowingly overrun by projects, or treated but not
monitored for effects. Except in recent years, opportunities to understand how our management
practices can affect the plant have not been taken. Although this species is predisposed to
thriving in periodically disturbed habitats, populations have probably been inadvertently lost.
For example, a population under closed canopy, without flowering parent plants may not have a
viable seed bank or experience conditions to germinate successfully. If a site treatment were not
designed to retain the parent plants the population could be lost.
Fire Suppression
The natural fire frequency throughout the majority of the range of Peck’s penstemon is estimated
to range from 0-50 years (See Disturbance Ecology, Fire). Suppression of wildfires has led to
forest canopy closure, increased shrub cover, and increased litter depths known to decrease seed
germination (Field 1985) and seed production (Huenneke et al. 1986) of Peck’s penstemon.
Historically, wildfires at frequent intervals probably maintained Peck’s penstemon populations
and its habitat in a condition ideal for abundant flowering, seed production and seed germination.
Fires created the open areas, free of competing vegetation that Peck’s penstemon requires for
maintenance and establishment.
It is not known at what fire intensity or fuel loading (type or amount) would be detrimental to
Peck’s penstemon since it has survived all types of recent wildfires well and flourished in areas
where fire intensity killed the majority of trees but did only low to moderate soil damage.
It is also unknown what frequency of fire intervals is most beneficial to Peck’s penstemon.
Factors such as canopy closure, soil moisture, and weather also affect population vigor.
However, monitoring in a second growth ponderosa pine forest population in the Glaze Meadow
area showed a strong decline in number of plants and flowering stems 14 years after a prescribed
fire in the area. See Management Treatment Monitoring Results- Prescribed Fire, Glaze
Commercial Thin and “Jackpot burning”.
The risk to Peck’s penstemon during wildfires is not the fire itself, but the activities involved
with fire suppression. Vehicle and equipment parking and the creation of safety zones and fire
lines with bulldozers can disturb or destroy portions of populations. Fire lines become areas at
high risk for invasive plant introduction and spread. Because of the need for public and
firefighter safety and legal priorities, this is sometimes unavoidable, even if resource advisors are
aware of population locations.
60
Portions of Peck’s penstemon populations
were bulldozed during the Cache Wildfire
in 2002 and during the Black Crater Fire
of 2006 as the wildfires raced towards
housing developments at Black Butte
Ranch and the Crossroads Subdivision.
In both cases, dozer lines were
rehabilitated with wood and surface
roughening.
Peck’s penstemon was seen growing back
into both dozer line areas. However, in
Cheatgrass invasion in rehabilitated dozer/fire line in the
2006 Black Crater Fire (one year after the fire). Peck’s
penstemon occurred in this area and is growing back but
its habitat is now highly degraded.
the case of the Black Crater Fire dozer
line, cheatgrass also invaded the dozer
line and has degraded the plant’s habitat.
Fire camps are often placed at local
schools or Rodeo Grounds which have invasive plant populations. Crews park and walk through
invasive plants and carry seeds into fire areas. Water sources and staging areas on some private
lands are also infested and vehicle tires can pick up seeds and spread invasive plants. Private
contractors may also have equipment yards or parking areas that have invasive plants and
contaminated equipment can arrive on fires.
Fire vehicles parked next to diffuse knapweed
populations at Sisters Middle School at the Black
Crater Fire Camp in 2006. Infested areas were
flagged off (yellow/black flagging) and pulled and
bagged by camp crews as soon as possible, however
seeds were likely in parking area soil.
Recommended mitigations to reduce the impacts of fire suppression to Peck’s penstemon
include:
 Avoid Peck’s penstemon populations during fire line construction when possible.
 Take measures to prevent or reduce risk of invasive plants when possible.
 Providing information on Peck’s penstemon habitat areas and invasive plants locations to
Fire Teams through Resource Advisors.
 Request weed washing stations be set up as soon as possible and request clean equipment
enter fire areas.
 Avoid placing fire camps, water sources, or staging areas on private or public lands
infested with invasive plants if possible.
 Survey Fire Camps as soon as possible (preferably before crews arrive) and flag off any
61






weed infested areas if possible. Pull and remove any invasive plants. Cover infested
high traffic areas with bark chips or gravel to reduce contact with soil seed bank.
Request all equipment used in Suppression Rehab is weed free.
Request suppression or Burned Area Emergency Rehab (BAER) or other special funding
for post-fire monitoring and control.
Monitor suppression structures such as fire lines, safety zones, drop points, fire camps,
and wash stations after the fire for important early detection of invasive plants in Peck’s
penstemon habitat.
If invasive plants are detected during post fire monitoring, initiate control measures as
soon as possible (hand pulling invasive plants is often the only available option).
Build awareness about the risks of invasive plants with private fire suppression industry
contractors and encourage their yards be kept free of invasive plants.
Work cooperatively with private landowners and County and State Invasive Plant and
Noxious Weed Coordinators to eliminate invasive plant populations on private lands used
for Fire support (fire camps, water sources, gravel pit staging areas etc).
Timber Harvest
Timber harvest is a threat to penstemon populations when the type of the treatment involves
heavy soil disturbance, heavy fuels are left behind the treatment, the timing of the treatment
ignores the condition of the population and plant phenology, or when a majority of the plants are
not preserved during the treatment. The potential for introduction of invasive plants on logging
equipment or support vehicles and the spread of existing invasive plants into newly disturbed
areas is also a risk.
Ground disturbing activities during timber harvest such as machine piling and burning of slash,
site preparation, machine skidding, and pulling line for large diameter trees can uproot adult
penstemon plants, reducing the population’s ability to reseed after the disturbance.
As discussed above, Ingersoll (1993) found that harvest activities which involve heavy soil
disturbance caused a decline in populations of Peck’s penstemon. Logging operations which
uproot and destroy parent plants can risk extirpation of the population when: 1) the whole
population lies within the treatment and 2) the seed bank is low because reproduction has been
depressed after prolonged canopy closure before harvest. Loss of populations on private timber
lands in this manner were reported by Pogson (1979). It is the hypothesis of this guide that
heavy ground disturbance in penstemon populations that are under closed canopy conditions
before treatment may fragment or permanently destroy the population because the soil seed bank
is low and conditions that allow successful germination and seedling survival may be rare.
Timber harvest activities which occur before yearly seed dispersal may lower the recovery rate
of the population if slash is not cleaned up. This is because there are known chemical inhibitors
for Peck’s penstemon seed germination in pine needle litter slash left behind timber harvest (see
discussion regarding alleopathy, under Seedlings). This indicates slash from timber harvest
activities should be burned or removed to benefit the plant.
Not all timber harvest has resulted in loss of penstemon plants or populations. Field observations
have shown that Peck’s penstemon tolerates select harvest, thinnings, overstory removals, and
62
even fire salvage that causes light ground disturbance and does not obliterate plants. When
parent plants are not uprooted, the species has been observed reseeding and proliferating in
adjacent bare soil areas and skid trails. It is speculated that silvicultural treatments which open
closed canopies, reduce soil litter, reduce vegetative competition, and retain penstemon parent
plants will benefit the species in forested habitats. These treatments have not yet been tested in
controlled situations and the effects of new logging equipment, which causes less soil
disturbance needs to be studied.
Field observations also support the notion that Peck’s penstemon can sometimes readily reseed
bare compacted soils caused by forest treatments, but this is highly dependent on soil moisture
(high water table or especially wet weather conditions). Several large Peck’s penstemon
populations are known from old clearcuts or landings with high water tables. Plants in
compacted skid trails have also been commonly observed. Standing water in the upper layers of
compacted soil may promote seed germination. Tillage of compacted soils in roads at Riverside
Campground (#500054- Riverside) resulted in new penstemon plants growing in the loose soil.
The majority of Peck’s penstemon plants survived subsoiling and increased in size at the North
Shackle Monitoring project described under Management Treatment Monitoring Results.
Recent salvage of fire killed timber has occurred in Peck’s penstemon habitat area under the
guidelines of this plan. Besides heavy ground disturbance which can uproot plants, the most
serious risks of this activity are the potential for invasive plant introduction and spread in the
disturbed soil. Preventing large future fuel loads by removing some dead trees is hypothesized to
provide long term benefits to Peck’s penstemon by allowing the future reintroduction of
prescribed fire in salvaged and replanted areas as long as the majority of plants are conserved,
but this has not been tested (USFS 2005a). Many portions of the B&B Fire Recovery salvage
were logged over snow and this greatly reduces ground disturbance and protects vegetation.
Monitoring in a B&B Fire Salvage Unit (Booth 128) in October of 2006 detected a proliferation
of seedlings in skid trails within the unit. Peck’s penstemon seedlings are rarely seen and a study
to follow the survival of the seedlings was designed and implemented by Ecologist Reid Schuller
(see Section on Seedlings). At this writing, the newly established plants have survived for 2
years, doubled in number, and are flowering at a higher rate than commonly seen (95%
flowering). Schuller concluded that habitat manipulation to provide sustainable penstemon
populations is not to be ruled out as an option based on this data, however cautioned that other
factors seem to be at play such as substantial year to year variation in recruitment, individual
vigor, and seed production. The role of the fire in stimulating this population surge is also a
factor. It is recommended this study be continued to observe how these plants fair over time as
competition from vegetation increases. See Action Plan.
Recommended mitigations to reduce the impacts of forest management and timber salvage
activities to Peck’s penstemon include:
 Minimize heavy ground disturbance.
 Limit use of heavy equipment in population areas.
 Use low impact equipment or hand thinning.
 Log over snow or frozen ground.
 Keep equipment on designated skid trails.
63
 Make sure equipment is clean (weed free).
 Keep landings out of population concentrations.
 Monitor after operations are complete to aid in early detection of invasive plants.
Habitat Fragmentation
Habitat fragmentation, the creation of unnaturally large distances or physical barriers between
and within plant populations, may in certain plant species decrease long term genetic viability.
This is particularly true for plant species which require insect pollination (instead of wind
pollination for example) in order to produce viable seed, for which self-pollination is not
possible and for which seed dispersal is limited. Isolated populations or patches may experience
what is known as inbreeding depression. This creates loss of genetic variance and eventually a
decrease in the species ability to adapt to broad range of environmental conditions or change.
Peck’s penstemon is an insect pollinated plant which is capable of self-pollination. However,
self-pollinated penstemon plants produce fewer seeds (see discussion under Pollination). Selfpollination of plants will not allow for outcrossing. Inbreeding depression could occur in outlier
populations which are too isolated to be productively visited by insect pollinators frequenting
other populations of penstemon. Inbreeding depression could also occur in populations that have
widely scattered, small patches of plants. These types of populations are less productive for
insects than large dense populations (Huenneke et al. 1986).
Peck’s penstemon may be partially shielded from the effects of inbreeding depression by the
fixed heterozygosity it enjoys as a polyploid (4N) species (Clegg and Brown 1983). King (1993)
concluded that because Peck’s penstemon contained such high levels of genetic diversity
compared with other endemic species that the threat of inbreeding depression was remote.
However, small isolated populations of the plant are more vulnerable to extirpation from
disturbances and 3 small sub-populations of the plant are known to have been extirpated since
1992 by severe soil disturbance or successional changes due to fire suppression.
What we need to be concerned about then is fragmentation between populations as well as
fragmentation within populations.
Isolation of penstemon populations at distances greater than that which would facilitate
outcrossing by insect pollination is considered undesirable for this species. Validation of this
distance needs to be researched in the literature. It is not known what degree of fragmentation or
what reduction of patch size would decrease insect pollination within a penstemon population.
Peck’s penstemon populations may be fragmented by any forest management activity which
destroys portions or whole populations of plants. They may also be fragmented by physical
barriers to seed dispersal. Certain of these management activities that have contributed to
population fragmentation are discussed below.
64
Permanent Habitat Loss
Construction of new facilities, material sources, parking lots, roads, and trails in potential or
existing Peck’s penstemon habitat fragments populations and permanently eliminates habitat for
the species. Several of the gravel pits and one clay pit on the Sisters Ranger District that lie in
old river or creek channels, or gravel outwash areas, also contain Peck’s penstemon. Most of
these populations were probably established during peak spring run-off periods or during
flooding events. Expansion of these gravel and clay pits or the establishment of new ones can
eliminate habitat and the plant populations that exist there. Expansion of the clay pit has been
proposed but is currently on hold.
Permanent loss of penstemon plants, sectors of populations or whole populations not only
contributes to overall fragmentation but also to permanent loss of genetic material. Permanent
loss of suitable or potential habitat for penstemon decreases the ability for new populations to be
found. Combined over the long term, these two types of permanent losses (loss of genetic
variance and loss of habitat) present the most insidious threat to the viability of Peck’s
penstemon.
Recommended mitigations to reduce the impacts of habitat fragmentation caused by permanent
habitat loss include:
 Avoid permanent habitat loss by avoiding or minimizing construction in Peck’s
penstemon populations.
 Maintain connectivity between population areas by protecting dispersal mechanisms such
as the integrity of intermittent and ephemeral stream channels.
Interspecific Competition and Successional Changes
Competition from other plant species may reduce plant vigor and reduce habitat for seedlings
within Peck’s penstemon populations. Meadow populations in full sun that are not grazed and/or
burned are most susceptible to this threat. Two small populations of Peck’s penstemon have
disappeared in the past decade, due to successional changes and species competition; one
disappeared in the deep grass of Allingham meadow and another in the southern portion of the
range, in a regenerating lodgepole forest growing in a former timber sale landing.
Closed forest canopies above existing populations of Peck’s penstemon decrease plant vigor,
flowering, and seed set and inhibit seed germination because of lack of light. Depauperate,
scattered patches of penstemon plants are a common field observation in such forest populations.
Long term shading may eliminate the species from the site.
Recommended mitigations to reduce the impacts of successional changes and interspecific
competition to Peck’s penstemon include:
 Reintroduce natural disturbances processes such as fire in populations areas when
possible, mitigating the potential for invasive plants to invade or spread using established
integrated weed management techniques (USFS 2005)
 Maintain the integrity of intermittent and ephemeral stream channels to allow flood
events in population areas.
65
Recreational Activities
The Deschutes Forest Management Plan (1990) allows for construction and upgrading of
campgrounds, facility complexes, trail systems, parking areas, and interpretive displays. Careful
planning of the types and locations of recreational developments is necessary to avoid habitat
loss, degradation, or fragmentation.
Unregulated dispersed camping sites, new user roads, and off highway vehicles can compact and
progressively devegetate larger areas each year and eliminate portions of Peck’s penstemon
populations. Unmanaged recreation in dispersed sites such as Cold Springs Overflow and
Graham Corral has been observed to be increasing each year along with progressive
devegetation. This has eliminated portions of Peck’s penstemon populations in these areas.
Unmanaged dispersed recreation activities, off-road vehicle use, and over crowded campgrounds
currently threaten Peck’s penstemon populations.
The historic placement of recreational developments near riparian areas coincident with the
natural distribution of Peck’s penstemon is an unfortunate reality. There are two areas of
concentrated recreation developments and use within the range of Peck’s penstemon: the Camp
Sherman area and the Black Butte Ranch area. Some of the largest populations of penstemon
were probably lost during recreational home building and golf course construction on private
lands of the Black Butte Ranch complex. Portions of these populations can still be found in
some backyards, along the edges of the golf course, and at Glaze Meadow on National Forest
lands.
Campgrounds, dispersed recreation sites, trails, interpretative sites, etc., introduce cumulative
disturbance factors which threaten penstemon plants. Threats include trampling or destruction of
plants by people, decrease in the density of the population by on-site fragmentation, introduction
of aggressive invasive plants, and simplification of plant species diversity and community
structure of penstemon habitat. These disturbances occur year after year and are cumulative.
Such disturbances may lead to widely scattered, isolated patches of plants such as can be
observed at the Cold Springs Campground. Such disturbances are speculated to lead to
unchecked seed predation on penstemon capsules (see Threats, Seed predation).
Recommended mitigations to reduce the impacts of recreational activities to Peck’s penstemon
include:
 Define and confine parking areas and roads in recreation sites with boulders, bollards or
other controls to minimize devegetation in habitat areas.
 Close and rehabilitate user created roads in habitat areas.
 Monitor dispersed camping sites in habitat areas and address problem areas as soon as
possible.
66
Invasive Plants (Noxious Weeds)
Invasive plants are non-native plants that can invade native plant communities causing longlasting management problems. Invasive plants can displace native vegetation, increase fire
hazards, reduce the quality of recreational experiences, poison livestock, and replace wildlife
forage. By simplifying complex plant communities, invasive plants reduce biological diversity
and threaten rare habitats. There is some indication that invasive plants such as knapweed can
exude alleopathic compounds, inhibiting the growth of other plants.
The spread of invasive plants has accelerated across the
range of Peck’s penstemon in the past decade. Surveys
and detection of invasive plant populations has
increased since 2002, aided by Burned Area
Rehabilitation Funding available after the large
wildfires in the Eyerly, Cache, Link, B&B, Black
Crater, and Summit Springs areas. Large expanses of
fire disturbed ground are ideal habitats for both Peck’s
penstemon and invasive plants, especially spotted and
diffuse knapweed, and in several areas they have been
observed occurring together, complicating invasive
plant control efforts.
Despite steady control efforts, largely by manual hand
pulling, invasive plants are increasing across the range
of Peck’s penstemon, especially in wildfire areas.
Herbicide use is proposed but not yet approved for
many severe infestations.
Prescribed fire, a preferred management tool in Peck’s
penstemon habitat can also introduce or cause the spread
of invasive plants.
Peck’s penstemon growing with diffuse
knapweed in the B&B Wildfire area
Invasive plant seeds travel along trails and roadways, picked up by hikers, vehicle tires,
equipment, and animals. They are also spread by wind and carried by seasonal water flows in
intermittent stream channels, much in the same way that Peck’s penstemon seed is spread.
Particular areas of concern are:
 The large floodplains along Brush Creek, in the Metolius Basin which provide connections
between central and northern Peck’s penstemon populations and are threatened by the large
knapweed population called “Little Montana”(because of its resemblance to knapweed
infested pine forests of Montana).
 The large complex of knapweed populations found along Fly Creek on the east edge of Peck’s
penstemon’s range. The area is difficult to access and invasive plants are spread from private
land in-holdings and along intermittent stream channels.
67
Recommended mitigations to reduce the impacts of invasive plants to Peck’s penstemon
include:
 Utilize prevention measures such as requiring clean equipment, using clean material
sources, minimizing ground disturbance, and controlling nearby invasive plant
populations which could be spread into Peck’s penstemon habitat.
 Prioritize control of invasive plant populations within or adjacent to Peck’s penstemon
habitat.
 Avoid prescribed fire or ground disturbance from other management activities in known
invasive plant populations, especially when coincident with Peck’s penstemon
populations.
 Monitor Peck’s penstemon populations more frequently if they occur near activities
which may introduce invasive plants, i.e. vegetation management, wildfires, prescribed
fires, popular recreation sites, major roadways, or grazing allotments.
 Raise awareness of invasive plant identification and risks with agency personnel and
contractors involved in prescribed fire, wildfire suppression, road work, recreation, and
vegetation management.
Hydrologic Alterations
Lowering of the water table, creation of barriers to natural overland flow and flood control may
threaten the ability of Peck’s penstemon to disperse seed and establish itself at new sites.
Hydrologic alterations by water diversions, channelization, and increased demands for ground
water by developments are most pronounced in the southern portion of the range of Peck’s
penstemon in the Whychus and Indian Ford Creek watershed area.
The Black Butte Ranch development draws water from the Indian Ford drainage above the Glaze
Meadow penstemon populations. Black Butte Ranch irrigation, holding ponds and residential
water use may contribute to the observed decrease in soil moisture at Glaze Meadow. Water no
longer sits on the soil surface in the meadows in spring. The artificial ponds in the meadow have
filled with water from nearby springs only a few times in the past decade. Seed germination in
wet soils for establishment of new plants may be impaired. It is not known how drying habitat
may affect plant vigor for existing plants.
Roads that create barriers to natural overland flow adjacent to penstemon population will also
create barriers to seed dispersal. Checking for proper placement of culverts where roads bisect
or are adjacent to penstemon populations can mitigate this problem.
Periodic floods may be an important contributor (second to wildfire) to the natural creation of
new penstemon habitat. Floods may also provide mixing and distribution of seeds between
populations that are otherwise isolated from each other under normal or drought conditions.
Many natural floodplains that are presently inactive also contain populations of Peck’s
penstemon. Any management or alteration of the watersheds that would decrease the frequency
and intensity of flood events would also impair genetic diversity and the founding of new
penstemon populations. Permanent construction within floodplains or destruction of floodplain
habitats would also be detrimental.
68
However, flood events can also scour channels and wash away individual plants causing
dramatic declines in individual plants. For example, in the 16 year interval between 1990 and
2006, 95% of the individuals in the formerly large Trout Creek population were lost due to
winter floods in intermittent stream channels which had been inactive due to drought for a period
of years. See Disturbances- Flooding.
Recommended mitigations to reduce the impacts of hydrological alterations to Peck’s
penstemon include:
 Avoid channelizing intermittent or ephemeral streams.
 Avoid permanent construction within floodplains.
 Check for proper placement of culverts where roads bisect or are adjacent to penstemon
populations.
 Work cooperatively to restore stream flows in Indian Ford Creek and Whychus Creek.
 Consider hydrological restoration of meadow habitats such as Indian Ford and Glaze
Meadow.
Land Exchanges
Because there is no requirement to protect Peck’s penstemon on private lands, when populations
lose the benefits of Federal management in land exchanges they may be vulnerable to permanent
habitat loss if these properties are developed. The Sisters/Deschutes/Jefferson County areas of
Central Oregon are some of the fastest growing communities in the U.S. Land exchanges are
proposed on the Sisters Ranger District every year.
Sometimes conservation options can be explored, as occurred with a large Peck’s penstemon
population included in the Sisters School Land Exchange. The population is now protected by a
Conservation Easement held by the Deschutes Land Trust.
Recommended mitigations to reduce the impacts of land exchanges to Peck’s penstemon
include:
 Avoid including Peck’s penstemon population areas in land exchanges if possible.
 If the exchange cannot be avoided, provide information and options for voluntary
protection or conservation easements through a local land trust such as the Deschutes
Land Trust.
Grazing
Intensive annual grazing of Peck’s penstemon by livestock is detrimental to plant vigor and seed
production when plants are eaten and are unable to flower or sexually reproduce. Heavy long
term grazing may destroy plants, fragment populations or eliminate them. Grazing intensity in
riparian areas coincident with Peck’s penstemon distribution exacerbates this problem. Peck’s
penstemon is known to be palatable to cattle, sheep, ground squirrels, and deer based upon field
observations. Flowering stalks seem to be the preferred portion of the plant that is grazed.
Light grazing is hypothesized to be beneficial, if the timing and duration of the grazing is
carefully planned and monitored. Benefits may be associated with the control of competing
vegetation and associated soil chipping by livestock.
69
The former Glaze Grazing Allotment containing the Glaze Meadow population (#500025) is an
early source of information on grazing effects on the plant. The Glaze Meadow population was
observed in 1989 by Jimmy Kagan and Sue Vrilakas during their development of the Draft
Species Management Guide. They reported:
“Much of the meadow is currently heavily grazed by cattle. Grazing has caused a major
disruption of flowering, fruiting, and reproduction, although the population has survived.
Management of this site would require cattle grazing to be removed from the entire
meadow. With grazing removed, it is estimated that Glaze Meadow would support the
largest population Peck’s penstemon.” (Vrilakas and Kagan, 1989).
Few flowering plants and very few vegetative plants were observed in Peck’s penstemon
meadow populations in the Glaze Cattle Allotment in 1992. Areas of intensive disturbance such
as the watering areas where cattle congregated were totally devegetated. The allotment was
closed in 1997, but rested for several years before the closure. A controlled underburn was
conducted within the main meadow in 1999. Since grazing ended the meadow population has
increased in size from 5,000 plants in 1992 to 8,000 plants in 2005. However, established
colonies of cheatgrass and other non-native plants persist in the meadow.
Several populations on the Crooked River National Grassland are also found in grazing
allotments. One cattle allotment on Sisters Ranger District containing Peck’s penstemon remains
open at Indian Ford and the Allotment Management Plan was updated in 2007. Population
numbers in the allotment have remained constant over the past 15 years. Results of monitoring
and a Management Treatment Study are described in detail above (Management Treatment
Studies- Grazing Peck’s penstemon).
Looking at the Indian Ford population before and after grazing in 2007, approximately 50% of
the plants were affected by the cows, but this does not necessarily mean that they were
destroyed. Many plants were seen to be resprouting after grazing. Approximately 60% of the
flowering stems on the plants were disturbed, trampled or browsed by cows or other herbivores
so that seed were not produced.
It was concluded that in the short term, grazing may act as a surrogate disturbance agent to
maintain more open habitats for Peck’s penstemon. However, the consumption of flowers (and
seeds) negates this as a benefit to species viability in the long term because sexual reproduction,
seedling establishment, and the potential for genetic diversity are reduced. At least half of the
flowers and seeds may be eaten in a given year and small young plants are easily trampled. The
plants genetic diversity may be reduced in the long term without occasional opportunities for a
portion of the population to freely reproduce.
Foraging by ground squirrels has also been observed on the plant in burned populations with
abundant seed stalks. Both deer and ground squirrels prefer the flowering stalks of penstemon,
however the intensity of deer and rodent grazing is usually light or spotty. It is unknown what
effect this may have on penstemon reproduction.
70
Recommended mitigations to reduce the impacts of livestock grazing to Peck’s penstemon
include:
 Consider establishing grazing exclosures to exclude a portion of the population from
grazing to allow flowering and seed production to occur in a portion of the population
every year.
 Periodically rest the allotment (1-2 years every decade) to allow free flowering and seed
production to restock the soil seed bank.
 Monitor allotments for invasive plants to provide early detection and control.
Seed Predation by Insects
There are insects that prey on Peck’s penstemon seeds within the capsules. One insect was
tentatively identified as a plumed microlepidopteron, Platyphila (Moldenke 1980). Another
insect identified as a “thrip” was noted also as a seed predator (Field 1985; and Moldenke 1980).
The sphecid wasp, Pulverro columbianus is known to prey on the thrips. In bagged
infloresecences, the thrip caused a lot of seed damage without control by the wasp (Field 1985).
Field (1985) measured the percent seed predation by the moth at three populations in the
Metolius Basin. Severe seed predation (over 50%) was observed at both the Camp Sherman
roadside and Riverside Campground penstemon populations. Low seed predation (~20%) was
recorded at the Metolius River Preserve. The Camp Sherman and Riverside populations are
disturbed meadow sites. The Metolius River site is an undisturbed meadow population. Field
(1985) concluded in her examination of insect pollinators and insect predators for Peck’s
penstemon that the rate of seed production between these three populations did not differ and
concluded that: “The conditions that support large populations of seed predators are not the same
that may support large populations of pollinators.”
The habitat conditions that control the capsule predator are evidently not present at the more
disturbed penstemon populations. Perhaps the factor or predator that controls the Platyptila is
not present because of lower plant species diversity and/or plant community structure at the
disturbed sites.
More research in this area is needed to separate out the effects of disturbance, plant community
structure and plant diversity on seed predation of penstemon. Identification of the insect that
controls the moth would also be beneficial in understanding this problem.
71
CONSERVATION STRATEGY
Four goals were identified to aid in the conservation of Peck’s penstemon populations and to
protect the plant’s genetic diversity. These goals were based on the existing knowledge of the
plant’s ecology and distribution, as well as conservation biology principles. Strategies were
developed to implement these goals. Key to the strategies is adaptive management of a set of
geographically distributed populations across the plants global range and the ability to develop
and test new management tools and situations.
Two sets of populations were identified:
1) “Protected Populations” which are managed for the benefit of the plant with proven
management tools and
2) “Managed Populations” where experimentation and some loss of plants is allowed as
described below. New populations are put into the “Managed” category until this strategy is
updated.
About the word “protected”- The term “Protected Populations” is a legacy from the last two
Conservation Strategies. These populations could also be called “conserved” or “managed for
the benefit of the plant”. The term “protected” does not imply these populations need a hands
off approach because the plant requires light disturbance, especially periodic fire, to survive and
thrive. The use of the term is continued in this document because it has become well understood
by Sisters Ranger District personnel who often deal with planning projects with Peck’s
penstemon conservation in mind, and the term is a well established part of the planning culture.
Goal 1: Ensure long term species viability by managing a set of
populations throughout the species range using proven techniques,
in order to maintain existing genetic variance and reproductive
success.
Strategy la: Select and Maintain Protected Populations
This strategy focuses attention to maintain successfully reproducing populations of Peck’s
penstemon across its range on Federal land. Proven management techniques that benefit the
plant are utilized (see Goal 2).
The set of Protected Populations was chosen from the existing array of geographic and
morphological variation and is geographically distributed so as to promote pollinator outcrossing and maintain natural modes of seed dispersal.
72
Management Direction for Protected Populations:
Protected populations should be managed for the benefit of Peck’s penstemon.
Permanent loss of habitat within the protected population areas should not be allowed.
If permanent loss of habitat is unavoidable, an appropriate replacement population
should be identified from the pool of “managed” populations or mitigated by enhancing
other populations with proven management techniques.
Only incidental loss of individual plants should be allowed.
Manipulations of the habitats, forest or meadow will be designed to specifically
maintain, enhance or restore penstemon populations. Treatments employed will be
those that have shown through effectiveness monitoring in “managed populations” (see
Goal 2, Strategy 2a. Select Managed Populations) to have successfully achieved the
desired results.
New populations or replacement populations of Peck’s penstemon may be
recommended to be added to the set of protected populations by a Staff Botanist as
needed. Selection criteria should be met. Such changes must be approved by the
appropriate line officer and appended to this conservation strategy.
Selection of Protected Populations and Additions since 1992: Appendix 1 lists all
populations of Peck’s penstemon and designates a set of Protected Populations of Peck’s
penstemon.
The 1992 Conservation Strategy noted that the range of Peck’s penstemon was not fully
represented by the array of populations chosen in 1992 because appropriate populations were
absent or unknown in some areas. Surveys had not been completed. An identified strategy was
to continue to survey these areas and if additional appropriate populations were found, designate
them as “protected”.
As recommended in the 1992 Conservation Strategy, watersheds where Protected Populations of
Peck’s penstemon were under-represented or absent (in the Abbot Creek, Canyon Creek,
Jack/First Creek and Lake Creek) were surveyed and several new Protected Populations from
these areas were proposed for designation as “protected” (Davis Creek West- #500099- First
Creek watershed and NW of Brush Creek - #500157 - Abbot/Canyon Watershed). A new
population in the southern portion of the range (Melvin Spring- #500158) was chosen to replace
the Protected Population at Trout Creek which lost the benefits of Federal management in a land
exchange. Another newly found population which is the largest known population from the
southern portion of the range was also chosen because of its size, growth habitat, and unusual
habitat in a shaded ephemeral channel (#500172 – Adjacent to Whychus Pit). These
recommended additions are or should be included in NEPA documents for specific project areas
and require line officer approval.
73
In 2009:
 Twenty nine Federal populations have been selected as Protected.
 These populations occupy an estimated 2,780 acres.
 They contain approximately 144,542 plants on National Forest land.
 The known global population consists of at least 247,000 plants over 485 square miles.
 Approximately 59% of the global population is classified as Protected.
This compares to 1992 when:
 Twenty four federal populations were selected as Protected.
 These populations occupied an estimated 1,353 acres.
 They contain approximately 103,500 plants on National Forest land.
 The known global population consisted of at least 150,100 plants over 325 square miles.
 Approximately 68 % of the global population was classified as Protected.
Rationale for Designation of Additional Protected Populations
Besides the recommendation of the 1992 Conservation Strategy to add additional Protected
Populations in underrepresented watersheds, a number of other population trends have emerged
that indicate additional populations should be conserved (see Population Trends). Two
populations have been lost in land exchanges, three small subpopulations appear to have been
extirpated by successional changes or recreational use, and four large Protected Populations have
decreased in size by 40-60% probably due to fire suppression. Invasive plants are present in
17% of the global population and are rapidly expanding in large wildfire areas. Unmanaged
recreational use continues to increase and is devegetating several population areas.
Taken together these factors could be seen as a downward trend in the global population and
indicate the need for management actions to be taken. They also indicate the need for careful
management of more populations with proven management tools to ensure species conservation.
Selection Criteria for Protected Populations
The selection criteria used to choose Protected Populations are described below. The selection
criteria are also abbreviated on the right hand side of the table in Appendix 2 and summarize
how each population met these criteria. The selection criteria for the protected penstemon
populations represent factors which may be important in maintaining reproductive success and in
the preservation of the genetic diversity for this plant species. This approach elects to protect
visible indicators of genetic variance as well as habitat factors which promote genetic variability
(Huenneke et al. 1986). Electrophoretic evidence has shown that visual indicators such as flower
color morphs and geographical distribution are useful indicators of genetic diversity for Peck’s
penstemon (King 1993). See Evolutionary and Genetic Considerations. The selection criteria
also incorporate strategies for reproductive success.
1) Population Size and Density. Populations containing a large number of plants and populations
that are dense have been chosen over low numbers of plants and sparse or dispersed populations.
Population size studies have shown that the larger the population number, the greater the genetic
variation (Beardmore 1983). Insect pollinated plants such as Peck’s penstemon may experience
genetic isolation when plants or groups of plants are widely spaced (Huenneke et al. 1986).
Penstemon is capable of self-fertilization, a reproductive mode that Field (1985) determined
74
resulted in reduced seed set. Dense populations with large numbers of plants are more likely to
attract insect pollinators. Sparse populations are speculated to be more prone to self-pollination
(Huenneke et al. 1986). Conservation of large, dense populations is a strategy to increase
outcrossing between plants and reduce the probability of self-fertilization (Huenneke et al. 1986).
2) Geographic distribution of populations. Populations were chosen to represent the array of
geographic distribution present within the known range of penstemon. A set of Protected
Populations were chosen to span 6th Field watersheds. Since penstemon populations are
associated with riparian ecotones or high water tables and seed dispersal is assumed to occur via
water transport (Field, 1985), watersheds were chosen as the best geographic subdivisions. It is
speculated that populations between watersheds may be somewhat genetically isolated.
The distribution of Protected Populations is designed to include isolated “outlier” populations as
well as populations that may be close enough to each other to facilitate outcrossing by insect
pollination. At the lower ends of the watersheds, or where otherwise possible, Protected
Populations are spaced no more than one mile apart. Outlier populations may represent ecotypic
variation achieved in unusual habitats at the edges the range of penstemon.
3) Fragmentation of populations. Peck’s penstemon populations that are largely unfragmented
by habitat disturbance or unnatural barriers (roads) were selected over populations that are
fragmented. The larger the unfragmented area, the more important the population.
4) Plant Association and Habitat Diversity. Populations were chosen to represent as many of the
penstemon associated plant associations as possible. Emphasis was put on protecting those
populations in the core of the range of Peck’s penstemon in the most common plant association
type: Ponderosa pine/Bitterbrush/Idaho fescue (Volland 1985). At least one example of the other
penstemon associated plant associations was selected. Within these forest cover types, both the
meadow and forest habitat populations were represented.
5) Representation Flower Color Polymorphisms. When available, the information on flower
color polymorphism of Peck’s penstemon was used to select Protected Populations. All seven
color morphs were considered important indicators of genetic variation. Field (1985) established
that flower color differences are genetically determined (colors were consistent in greenhouse
progeny), are not a response to environmental differences and are not a result of hybridization
with co-occurring, closely related penstemon species (Penstemon rydbergii). King (1993) found
that two populations with the rare white color morph were genetically distinct from the rest of
the global population. It is probable that these color differences may be genetically tied to a
group of other genetic traits (See Flower Color Polymorphism). Of interest in the long term
viability of the species is of course the conservation of as much genetic adaptation to changing
environments and habitat differences as possible.
6) Population Plant Vigor. Populations that displayed unusually good plant vigor were
considered more important as Protected Populations than those populations which did not.
Robust, tall, many stemmed plants with flowering stalks were considered more important than
short-statured, few-stemmed, vegetative plants. Plant vigor is directly related to reproductive
success (Huenneke et al. 1986).
75
Strategy lb. Continue to Survey for Protected Populations in Under Represented Watersheds and at the Edge of the Species Range.
The definitive extent of the global range of Peck’s penstemon has not yet been determined.
Unsurveyed suitable habitat exists on the Sisters Ranger District of the Deschutes National
Forest, the Crooked River National Grassland on the Ochoco National Forest, the Prineville
BLM, scattered private lands, and the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs Reservation.
The primary areas of unsurveyed habitat are found in the following watersheds:







Lower Lake Creek,
Lower Fly Creek,
Carcass Canyon,
Stevens Canyon
Middle and Lower Metolius River,
Lower Whychus Creek
Candle/Jefferson Creek
Habitat in these watersheds should be mapped and surveyed opportunistically with project
surveys, by special funding requests, or with the help of skilled volunteers. Even if populations
are not discovered the survey will serve as a clearance for probable habitat. Surveyors should
note the following qualities accurately in the comments section of the agency site forms because
this additional information aids in the selection of Protected Populations.
- color morphs present in the population
- evidence of disturbance, human caused or natural
- threats such as invasive plants or unmanaged recreational activities
- plant vigor (visual assessment of plant height, clump size and flowering stems)
Strategy lc. Continue to monitor the biological condition of Protected
Populations.
Periodic inspections of each Protected Population should be completed at intervals of 5-10 years
or after major disturbance events such as wildfires or floods. It would be useful to compile these
inspections into a periodic status report to help track global trends for the species, as done in this
update. Areas where threats such as active invasive plant invasions or recreational impacts are
noted may need much more frequent visits. At each site the following information should be
compiled:
1) Agency Site Form, 2) Population map, 3) Identify insect pollinators at site if possible (at least
presence/absence), 4) Estimate plant density, 5) Check for seed predation if possible.
76
Strategy ld. Compile Management Recommendations for Protected
Populations and Integrate into Project Planning.
The key to the success of maintaining long term viability for Peck’s penstemon is understanding
how to enhance penstemon habitats to increase reproductive vigor and population size without
disrupting natural gene flow and insect/plant interactions.
Penstemon is an early successional species which requires periodic disturbances to maintain
optimum population size and reproductive vigor. Habitat attributes such as closed canopy, heavy
duff layers, or dense herbaceous and shrub layers will generally not be of benefit to the plant.
Protected Populations which demonstrate depressed plant vigor, flowering, seed set, seedling
recruitment or poor seed bank potential will require some form of active management. Where
penstemon habitat and penstemon population size and vigor appear to require management,
enhancement projects should be initiated and may be integrated into larger project plans as
opportunities arise. Where threats affect Protected Populations, they should be rated as priorities
for receiving needed remedies, including: invasive plant control, recreation management, or
prescribed fire.
Field inspection of all Protected Populations was completed in 2005 as part of this update.
Management recommendations and threats were noted and these field notes should be integrated
into project planning.
Goal 2: Develop a set of maintenance, enhancement and restoration
methodologies through experimentation in “Managed Populations”
when evidence of population decline or lowered reproductive vigor
appears to be related to habitat degradation.
Strategy 2a. Continue Monitoring in Managed Populations.
A set of penstemon sites are established for the purpose of vegetation management research and
monitoring. These are designated as “Managed Populations.” Each site is managed for the
enhancement of penstemon habitat with existing or experimental forest management tools
suspected to be of benefit to this species based upon the biological requirements of the species
and field observations.
New populations are put into the “Managed” category until this strategy is updated.
Management treatment or effectiveness monitoring studies should be initiated to establish how to
diminish the most important threats and management conflicts occurring in Peck’s penstemon
habitats on National Forest lands.
77
Management Questions: Listed in order of importance, the answers to the management
questions below would greatly enhance our ability to “manage habitats for Peck’s penstemon:”
? What logging methods can perpetuate healthy forest systems as well as increase plant vigor,
reproduction and the recruitment of new plants in Peck’s penstemon populations?
Information on newer logging equipment and its effects on the plant are needed.
? How long does Peck’s penstemon seed remain viable in the soil seed bank? Continue Berry
Botanic Study.
? How will the seedlings in the fire salvage unit fare over time? Continue the Seedling Study.
? What levels of livestock grazing can penstemon tolerate? Continue monitoring treatment
study in Indian Ford Allotment and consider a study on the Crooked River National
Grassland.
? What fire prescriptions best stimulate Peck’s penstemon to increase plant vigor, reproduction
and the recruitment of new plants? Continue to observe and document the response of the
plant to fire.
? What environmental and plant community structure factors contribute to insect seed predation
in Peck’s penstemon?
? What methods of plant propagation besides transplanting can be developed for Peck’s
penstemon when habitat loss is unavoidable?
? How have populations fared over time? Relocate and reread the permanent macroplots
established by Vrilakas and Kagan in 1989. (Note: The author made an attempt in 2006 to
relocate the 1989 plots established in Glaze meadow and forest areas. The plot markers were
last seen in the mid- 1990’s but now appear to have been removed or are buried under gopher
mounds or needle duff. A Metal detector should be utilized.)
Management Direction for Managed Populations
Managed populations include all Peck’s penstemon populations that are not protected.
Managed populations which can benefit from habitat enhancement because population
size, density, vigor and reproductive capability is low may be treated with a variety of
proven and experimental tools. Selection of management treatments will be made
based upon the opportunities present at the site and highest management needs.
The entire population should never be treated, so study design must always provide for
partial treatment. Accidental loss of individual plants or portions of these populations
is acceptable when experimental management treatment fails.
Loss of more than 20% of a population that exceeds 500 individuals is not
recommended.
Losses of individuals in populations less than 500 plants should not exceed 10%.
Permanent loss of penstemon habitat is not recommended, but where unavoidable may
be mitigated with enhancement or transplant techniques in adjacent habitat.
78
Strategy 2b. Establish biological condition and determine management
monitoring opportunities among Managed Populations.
Appendix 1 lists all known Peck’s penstemon populations. Those penstemon populations which
have not been designated as protected may be considered as Managed Populations. Populations
for which very little is known should be field inspected for possible management treatment
monitoring studies. Description of population density, reproductive vigor, plant community
structure, threats and management history or opportunities should be summarized.
Strategy 2c: Develop Management Treatment (or Effectiveness) Monitoring
Plans.
Management Treatment Monitoring Plans should be written for experimental treatments (see
outline for plan in Appendix 3). Management treatment monitoring involves tracking the
response of an element occurrence to on-site or off-site management treatments. The purpose of’
management treatment monitoring is to assess the effectiveness of management tools suspected
to be of benefit to the plant. The design of both the monitoring methods and the treatments
should be fashioned around the type of information that is desired.
Goal 3: Continue work with scientists to learn more about Peck’s
penstemon seed and seedling survival.
Strategy 3a: Work with the Berry Botanic Garden to continue seed
accession.
In 1992 and 1993, the Berry Botanic Garden collected a geographically representative accession
of seed across the range of Peck’s penstemon. New outlier populations have been located far
outside the previous accessions and may represent important genetic diversity that should be
collected. See discussion under Seed Longevity/Viability.
The seed collection stored at Berry Botanic Garden serves as an important reserve of genetic
material should populations be destroyed or the species becomes endangered at some future date.
Populations on the Crooked River National Grassland and the new southern populations in
Sisters are the top priority for seed collection.
Strategy 3b: Continue the Seed Bank Viability Study.
This study examines seed longevity in the soil and has been ongoing for 15 years (see discussion
under Seed). Fifteen seed pouches per site remain buried so three future tests using 5 bags each
could be conducted. These seeds should be tested at appropriate intervals to determine the end
point of seed viability. Coordinate with Dr. Ed Guerrant, Berry Botanic Garden.
Strategy 3c: Continue the Seedling Study.
It is recommended the study of seedlings found in a fire salvage unit study (see discussion under
Seedlings) be continued to observe how these plants fare over time as competition from
vegetation increases. Coordinate with Reid Schuller, Western Stewardship Science Institute.
79
Goal 4: Increase the public awareness and willingness to protect
Peck’s penstemon on private lands.
Many Peck’s penstemon sites are suspected to occur on private lands. Threats to these
populations are similar to those on public lands. Private landowners are often unaware that their
lands contain a rare endemic species. Conservation of the species could be improved on a
voluntary basis. There are many opportunities for education programs and partnerships in
management.
Strategy 4a: Explore opportunities to share information and encourage
partnerships to protect Peck’s penstemon on private lands.
This includes the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs Reservation, Deschutes Basin Land
Trust, and other landowners. Unsurveyed habitat exists in many areas on private lands.
Partnerships may allow additional conservation and awareness of isolated populations.
Strategy 4b: Develop a Landowner Contact/Voluntary Conservation
Program in partnership with interested Conservation groups.
The Nature Conservancy has shown that a voluntary conservation program with private
landowners can effectively achieve conservation for a species when land is outside the traditional
preserve assemblage. These programs are often coined “Registry Programs”. A representative
contacts the landowner by letter and then follows up with a personal visit. The representative
discloses the rare plant site, discusses rarity and the problems the species faces. If the landowner
is willing the representative encourages that they sign a voluntary agreement to “watch” the
plants and not knowingly destroy them. The landowner also agrees to notify the representative if
the property changes hands. The landowner is then given a certificate or plaque commemorating
their contribution to saving natural diversity, in this case Peck’s penstemon. Publishing their
contribution in a local paper or newsletter is additional recognition that is appreciated by some.
In partnership with community groups, the Sisters Ranger District could start a Central Oregon
Heritage Registry Program. Known penstemon sites on private lands could be protected in this
manner. The benefits include public education, good public relations with the Sisters community
and environmental groups, and conservation for the species.
Strategy 4c: Provide information to the Confederated Tribes of Warm
Springs and assist in cooperative surveys for the northern extent of the
plant.
The northern extent of the plant has not been determined and high probability habitat exists on
the Warm Springs Reservation. There are opportunities to assist the Tribes in cooperative
surveys for the edge of the plant’s range.
Strategy 4d: Offer Assistance to the City of Sisters with survey for the plant
in the Sisters City Park.
The small population in Sisters City Park provides an excellent opportunity for public education.
Portions of the population were destroyed during the installation of the city sewer however the
status of the entire population has not been determined. There are opportunities to assist the City
80
in cooperative surveys and educational displays about the plant.
MEASURABLE OUTCOMES THAT INDICATE CONSERVATION GOALS
HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED
Because Peck’s penstemon is a narrow endemic plant with a restricted and finite amount of
habitat, it is unlikely that population managers will ever be able to dismiss concerns about its
conservation. However, there are several outcomes that could be indicators that goals of this
Conservation Strategy have been achieved.
1. The species is removed from the Regional Foresters Sensitive Species List because of the
widespread health and vigor of the global population.
2. Heritage Program list rankings change from “3- vulnerable to extirpation or extinction” to
“4 = apparently secure”.
81
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This updated Conservation Strategy for Peck’s penstemon is the third version of a plan to protect
this rare endemic wildflower.
The first Draft Species Management Guide was prepared by Sue Vrilakas and Jimmy Kagan of
the Oregon Natural Heritage Data Base in 1989. Their approach and vision was invaluable in
structuring subsequent plans.
The second Species Conservation Strategy was written by Forest Botanist Cynthia O’Neil in
1992. It became the first approved Conservation Strategy on the Deschutes National Forest and
was accomplished in the second year of the Sensitive Plant Program on the Forest. The 1992
Strategy pulled together a tremendous amount of new information that surfaced as systematic
plant surveys began on a large scale. Cindi’s leadership and carefully reasoned approach on how
to integrate plant conservation and management activities has worked well for the past 17 years.
This third version of the Conservation Strategy again incorporates new information and studies
and including information from revisits of many populations to check on their biological
condition.
Many people have worked through the years to increase our knowledge of this enigmatic
wildflower, including the many seasonal crews who have searched to find new populations.
Special thanks to:
o Rob Huff, Russell Holmes, and the Regional ISSSSP program for funding and
counsel.
o Katie Grenier Forest Botanist for unfailing support.
o Heidi Suna for her mastery of field botany and technology.
o Bob Flores for his mentorship and support.
o Kathleen Cooper for careful field work and descriptions of many populations.
o The Native Plant Society and Dr. Stu Garrett for partnership projects, support,
and conservation leadership.
o Berry Botanic Garden, Dr. Ed Guerrant and Andrea Raven for partnership
projects and technical advice.
o Reid Schuller for monitoring work and counsel.
o Elizabeth King for important genetic research on the plant.
o Cheryl Ingersoll for completing the Lake Creek Study.
o Dr. Gerald D. Carr, Affiliate Emeritus Professor, Department of Botany & Plant
Pathology, Oregon State University for his beautiful close-up photographs of
penstemons under “Look Alikes”. These photos are part of the Oregon Flora
Image Project and can be viewed at:
http://www.botany.hawaii.edu/faculty/carr/ofp/dicot_genus_index.htm
*Note: All other photos are by Maret Pajutee or Heidi Suna
82
References and Bibliography
Abrams, L. 1951. Illustrated Flora of the Pacific States, Washington, Oregon, and California.
Vol. III: Geraniaceae to Serophulariaceae. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA. 866 pp.
Clark, D.V. 1971. Speciation in Penstemon. Ph D Dissertation, University of Montana.
Beardmore, J. A. 1983. Extinction, survival, and genetic variation. In C. M. Schonewald-Cox, S.
M. Chambers, B. MacBryde, and L. Thomas [eds.], Genetics and conservation, 125–151.
Benjamin/Cummings, Menlo Park, CA.
Clegg, M.T. and A.H.D. Brown. 1983. Genetics and Conservation. Chapter 13. The founding of
plant populations. p. 216-228. The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Co., Inc., Menlo Park, CA.
Elliott, Stacie. 2006. Follow-up Survey of Peck’s Penstemon at Trout Creek Conservation Area,
BI 410 Field Course Report. Sisters Ranger District Files.
Field, K.G. 1985. Ecology and genetics of Peck’s penstemon (Scrophulariaceae), a rare species
from the Oregon Cascades. PhD dissertation, Department of Biology, University of Oregon,
Eugene. 215 pp.
Forman, R.T. 1995. Land Mosaics, the Ecology of Landscapes and Regions. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, England. 632 pp.
Guerrant, E.O. 1993. Peck’s penstemon (Peck’s penstemon) Off-Site Seed Storage and Soil
Seed Bank Longevity Study. Report to the Deschutes National Forest, Challenge Cost Share
Program. Sisters Ranger District Files.
Guerrant, E.O. 2005. 9/30/05, Memo to Maret Pajutee, regarding Seed Longevity study.
Guerrant, E.O. and A. Raven. 2008. Peck’s penstemon (Penstemon peckii) off-site seed storage
and soil seed bank longevity study over a period of 15 years. Report for the Deschutes National
Forest. Sisters Ranger District Files.
Glass, S. 1989. The role of soil seed banks in restoration and management. Restoration and
Management Notes 7:1, p. 24-29.
Halvorson, Ron. 2006. District Botanist Prineville District, BLM. Personal Communication.
Hann, Wendel J.; Bunnel, David L. 2001. Multi-scale land and fire planning. International
Journal of Wildland Fire,10: 389-403.
Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest: an illustrated manual.
University of Washington Press, Seattle, WA. 730 pp.
83
Hitchcock, C.L., A.Cronquist, M. Ownbey, and J.W. Thompson. 1959. Vascular plants of the
Pacific Northwest. Part 4: Ericaceae through Campanulaceae. University of Washington Press,
Seattle, WA . 510 pp.
Huenneke,L.F., K. Holsinger, M.E. Palmer. 1986. Plant population biology and
the management of viable plant populations. Chapter 13, p. 169-183. in The
Management of viable populations: Theory, Applications, and Case Studies.
Center for Conservation Biology, Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford
University, Stanford, CA.
Ingersoll, Cheryl A. 1993. Trends in Penstemon peckii and Associated Vegetation Following
Timber Harvest, Lake Creek. Report prepared for the Deschutes National Forest on File at the
Sisters Ranger District.
Keck, D.D. 1945. Studies in Penstemon--VII. A cyto-taxinomic account of the section
Spermunculus. Amer. Midl. NAT. 33:128-206.
Kephart, Susan R. and Michael Woodbridge. 1994. Pilot Survey: the Importance of
Lepidopterans to the Pollination of Selected Sensitive Plant Taxa. Unpublished report, to the
Deschutes and Willamette National Forest, Western Spruce Budworm Spray Area Analysis,
Contract 43-04H1-30575.
King, E.G. 1993. Enzyme Electrophoresis and Conservation Biology of Penstemon peckii.
Analysis of the Distribution of Genetic Variation in a Rare Oregon Wildflower. Reed College
Thesis.
Meinke, R.J. 1982. Threatened and endangered vascular plants of Oregon: an illustrated guide.
Office of Endangered Species, Region 1, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, OR. 352 pp.
Meinke, R.J. 1995. Assessment of the Genus Penstemon (Scrophulariaceae) within the Interior
Columbia River Basin of Oregon and Washington. Eastside Ecosystem Management Project
Report.
Moldenke, A. 1980. A study of Peck’s penstemon conducted for Deschutes National Forest,
Contract number 53-04GG-0-02302, in the summer of 1980 by Chinook Research Laboratories,
Corvallis, OR. Unpublished document.
Noss, R.F. and A.Y. Cooperrider. 1994. Saving Nature’s Legacy. Island Press,Washington,
D.C., 416 pp.
O’Neil, C. 1992. Species Conservation Strategy for Penstemon peckii. Deschutes National
Forest Sensitive Plant Program.
Oregon Natural Heritage Data Base. l989a. Rare, threatened and endangered plants and animals
of Oregon. Oregon Natural Heritage Data Base, Portland, OR. ~4O pp.
84
1989b. Plant community classification of Oregon. Oregon Natural Heritage Data Base, Portland,
OR.
Peck, M.E. 1961. A manual of higher plants of Oregon. Binfords & Mort, Portland, OR. 936 pp.
Pennell, F.W. 1941. Notulae Naturae 71:12-13.
Pogson, Tom. 1979. Survey of Penstemon peckii in the Sisters Ranger District Deschutes
National Forest. Report prepared for the Deschutes National Forest. On File at the Sisters
Ranger District.
Schuller, R. 2007. Report prepared for the Deschutes National Forest on Seedling Survival. On
File at the Sisters Ranger District.
Schuller, R. 2008. Report prepared for the Deschutes National Forest on Seedling Survival. On
File at the Sisters Ranger District.
Schuller, R. 2008. Ecologist for the Western Stewardship Science Institute. Personal
Communication.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1990. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; Review of
taxa for listing as endangered or threatened species; Notice of Review. Federal Register 50 CFR
Part 17, 55:35 p. 6184-6229, February 21, 1990.
U.S. Forest Service. 2008. Regional Foresters Sensitive Plant List.
U.S. Forest Service. 1998. Sisters/Whychus Watershed Analysis.
Deschutes National Forest, Sisters, OR.
Sisters Ranger District,
U.S. Forest Service. 2004. Metolius Watershed Analysis Update. Sisters Ranger District,
Deschutes National Forest, Sisters, OR.
U.S. Forest Service. 2005a. B&B Fire Recovery Project. Sisters Ranger District, Deschutes
National Forest, Sisters, OR.
U.S. Forest Service. 2005b. Pacific Northwest Region Invasive Plant Program Final
Environmental Impact Statement, Pacific Northwest Region, Portland, OR.
Volland, L.E. 1985. Plant associations of the central Oregon pumice zone. U.S. Forest Service,
Pacific Northwest Region, Portland,OR.R6-ECOL-1O4-1985. 138 pp.
85
APPENdix 1 POPulATiONS Of PECK’S PENSTEMON
Current
Number
500007
500018
Old
Number
#007
#005
Population Name
ALLINGHAM
BLACK BUTTESW
2007
Totals
400
10000
500020
500021
#009
#011
SE OF COW
CAMP
INDIAN FORD CK.
1500
15500
managed
protected
500022
#012
CACHE CREEK
LOWER
2000
managed
500023
#013
ROAD 1012
TOLLGATE
1700
managed
500024
500025
500029
#014
#015
#017
INDIAN FORD
ROAD 11
GLAZE MEADOW
ABBOT CREEK
400
12500
3200
managed
protected
protected
500030
500031
500033
500034
#084
#083
#026
#028
GRAHAM CORRAL
SUTTLE TROA
VERNAL POOL
DRY CREEK BED
150
550
4300
4500
managed
managed
protected
protected
500035
#029
COLD SPRINGS
CAMPGROUND
1750
protected
500036
500037
500038
#031
#032
#033
CANYON CREEK
FISH
CANAL 16 #1
CANAL 16 #7
250
359
800
managed
managed
managed
500039
500040
#034
#035
TROUT CK
LOWER (PVT
DBLT)
CACHE CK
568
10000
private
protected
500041
#037
UPPER
WHYCHUS CK
15
protected
500042
500043
500045
#038
#040
#042
TROUT CK UPPER
JACK CK
RD 800
5750
1775
250
protected
protected
managed
500046
500047
500048
500049
#050
#051
#052
#039
RD 520 BB
RANCH
WINDY POINT
FLY CREEK
FIRST CK
1000
2
8000
5000
managed
protected
protected
protected
500050
#046
SOUTH OF LAKE
CK
5000
protected
86
Status
protected
protected
Current
Number
500051
500052
500053
Old
Number
Population Name
2007
Totals
Status
LAKE CK
ROADSIDE
METOLIUS EAST
SMILING RIVER
2
3000
4200
managed
managed
protected
RIVERSIDE
NORTH SHACKLE
1250
40000
protected
managed
250
managed
5000
protected
managed
500054
500055
#047
#048
#049
SPLIT
FROM
#007
#082
500056
#044
CACHE GRAVEL
PIT
500057
#043
ADJ TO
RIVERSIDE
500058
#054
LOWER
WHYCHUS 1
21
500059
#055
LOWER
WHYCHUS 2
203
500060
500061
500062
500063
500064
500065
500066
#056
#058
#059
#060
#061
#062
#063
LOWER
WHYCHUS 3
COLD BEAR 1
COLD BEAR 2
COLD BEAR 3
COLD BEAR 4
BRUSH CREEK
COLD BEAR 6
500068
#065
COLD BEAR 8
500069
#066
STEVENS
CANYON
500070
#067
500071
1500
2500
600
2000
100
2000
8550
15000
private
protected
managed
managed
managed
managed
protected
managed
proposed protected
1000
managed
STEVENS
CANYON BURN
500
managed
#068
STEVENS
CANYON BURN 2
900
managed
500072
500073
#069
#070
STEVENS
CANYON SCAB
BBR ENTRANCE
1500
100
protected
managed
500074
#071
UNDERLINE/COLD
SP
200
managed
500075
500076
500077
#072
#073
#074
DAVIS CREEK
HTH
METOLIUS RNA
HWY 20 S10-11
3290
2000
220
managed
managed
managed
500078
500079
500080
#075
#076
#077
HEAD OF THE
METOLIUS
MTN BIKE TRAIL
N GREEN RIDGE
25
15
500
managed
managed
managed
87
Current
Number
Old
Number
Population Name
500081
#078
INDIAN FORD
FOOT BRIDGE
500082
#079
METOLIUS REHAB
500083
#080
ROAD
1120/GREEN
RIDGE
500084
#081
ALLEN SPRING
CG
500085
#091
LOWER FLY
CREEK
500086
#089
INDIAN FORD
NORTH
500093
500095
#053
#087
UPPER FLY
CREEK
ZIMMERMAN PIT
500097
#090
TROUT CREEK
OVERFLOW
500098
#082
500099
500121
500122
2007
Totals
Status
650
managed
12
managed
3000
managed
319
managed
1000
managed
UNKNOWN
1000
2000
managed
managed
205
managed
INDIAN FORD
ALLOTMENT
3000
managed
#099
#094
#096
DAVIS CREEK
WEST
CAMP SHERMAN
LAKE CREEK
6000
232
2
proposed protected
managed
managed
500123
#097
N of NORTH
SHACKLE
50
managed
500124
#098
E of NORTH
SHACKLE
60
managed
500125
#092
JACK CREEK
DRAINAGE
2460
managed
500126
500127
#093
#010
DAVIS CREEK
EAST
MARIEL CREEK
950
1000
managed
private
500128
#008
INDIAN FORD
(NEAR PRIVATE)
1500
protected
500132
FOUR CORNERS
GUZZLERS
568
managed
500133
GRASSLAND
STEVENS
CANYON
(PRIVATE)
500134
FREMONT
CANYON
100
managed
500135
CARCASS
CANYON
500
private
10
88
private
Current
Number
Old
Number
Population Name
500135
CARCASS
CANYON
500151
S OF ROARING
CREEK (B&B)
500152
2007
Totals
Status
500
managed
15
managed
S OF FIRST
CREEK (B&B)
500
managed
500157
NW of BRUSH
CREEK
5000
proposed protected
500158
MELVIN SPRING
6000
proposed protected
500159
BRUSH CREEK
EAST
3800
managed
500160
500161
ABBOT CREEK
TRIB
1217-825 LOOP
200
30
managed
managed
20
30
400
managed
managed
managed
500162
500163
500170
500172
PRIVATE
#027
PRIVATE
PRIVATE
N OF ALLEN
SPRINGS
S OF ALLINGHAM
PIONEER FORD
ADJ TO
WHYCHUS/1514
PIT
TNC METOLIUS
PRESERVE
proposed protected
1300
private
185
private
UNKNOWN
private
1755
private
CAMP POLK
#01
SISTERS CITY
PARK
METOLIUS
PRESERVE
PRIVATE
500044
MERGED
WITH 066
#041
JACK CK TS
0500067
MERGED
WITH 066
#064
COLD BEAR 7
#086
INDIAN FORD
EXTENSION
0500094
MERGED
WITH 021
0500096
MERGED
WITH 023
9000
#088
COLD SPRINGS
EXTENSION
Total Global Population
89
246,998
Appendix 2 Protected Population Selection Criteria
Number
Population Name
Selection Criteria
Pop. total
Size
Density
0500007
0500018
0500021
0500025
0500029
0500033
0500034
0500035
0500040
0500041
0500042
0500043
0500047
0500048
0500049
0500050
0500053
0500054
0500057
0500060
0500065
0500068
0500071
ALLINGHAM
BLACK BUTTESW
INDIAN FORD CK.
GLAZE MEADOW
ABBOT CREEK
VERNAL POOL
DRY CREEK BED
COLD SPRINGS
CAMPGROUND
CACHE CK
UPPER WHYCHUS
CK
TROUT CK UPPER
JACK CK
WINDY POINT
FLY CREEK
FIRST CK
SOUTH OF LAKE CK
SMILING RIVER
400
10000
15500
10500
3200
4300
4500
RIVERSIDE
ADJ TO RIVERSIDE
LOWER WHYCHUS
3
BRUSH CREEK
COLD BEAR 8
STEVENS CANYON
1250
5000
1750
10000
15
5750
1775
2
8000
5000
5000
4200
1500
2000
15000
900
Geographic
Distribution
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Unfragmented
X
X
?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
?
X
X
90
X
?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Habitat
type
X
X
?
X
X
X
X
X
Color
Morphs
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Vigor
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Appendix 2 Protected Population Selection Criteria
Number
0500072
0500099
0500128
0500157
0500158
0500172
Population Name
BURN 2
STEVENS CANYON
SCAB
Size
Density
Geographic
Distribution
Unfragmented
Habitat
type
Color
Morphs
Vigor
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1500
DAVIS CREEK WEST 6000
INDIAN FORD
(NEAR PRIVATE)
1500
NW of BRUSH
CREEK
5000
MELVIN SPRING
ADJACENT TO
WHYCHUS
PIT/ROAD 1514 PIT
Selection Criteria
Pop. total
X
X
X
6000
9000
Red Text- Proposed for addition to Protected Populations in 2009
91
Appendix 3: Sensitive Plant Monitoring EXAMPLE
Sensitive Plant Monitoring Plan Deschutes National Forest
MANAGEMENT TREATMENT MONITORING PLAN: GLAZE CT JACK POT BURN
ELEMENT OCCURRENCE: Peck’s penstemon, Peck’s penstemon
SITE NAME: Glaze Meadow, forest population
POPULATION #: 015 (New number #0500025)
DATE PREPARED: November 21, 1991
PREPARED BY: Cindi O’Neil
UPDATED:
MONITORING SCHEDULE: Early August
FREQUENCY: Annually after treatment for 2-3 years, then reevaluate frequency.
MONITORING HISTORY: August 1990
DATA STORAGE: Data Stored in Lotus 1,2,3; GLAZE. Hard copy data on file at
Sisters RD in RWLWSB files and Deschutes supervisor s Office in Sensitive Plant
Monitoring Files.
ELEMENT OCCURRENCE MANAGEMENT GOAL:
To achieve long term species
viability by maintaining existing genetic variance and promoting reproductive success (Draft
SCS, IV. B. Goal 1). To develop a set of management tools for maintenance, enhancement and
restoration of Protected Populations when evidence of population decline or lowered
reproductive vigor appears to be related to habitat degradation (Draft SMG, IV. C. Goal 2). The
Glaze Meadow population of Peck’s penstemon was selected as a Protected and Managed
Population because of its biological importance for species viability and the existing
management practices occurring in the population.
DESCRIPTION OF CONDITION OF ELEMENT OCCURRENCE AT SITE:
Peck’s
penstemon occupies approximately 200 acres of ponderosa pine forest and adjacent meadow
habitats at Glaze Meadow. The patches of penstemon are concentrated in widely scattered areas
and population density within these patches ranges from moderate to low. A total of 3000 plants
are estimated to occur at this site.
The monitoring site lies under a second growth ponderosa pine/bitterbrush/Idaho fescue plant
association, PIPO/PUTR/FEID - CPS2-11 (Volland, 1985). Penstemon plants are primarily in a
vegetative state, show poor vigor (low height growth) and very few individuals are flowering and
producing seed. The majority of the understory bitterbrush layer is decadent or dead. The natural
fuel loading is comprised primarily of pine needle duff, dead bitterbrush with needle drape, and
grass foliage. The natural fuel loading is approximately 7.5 tons per acre, about one half of
which is in the fine fuel complex (less than 3” diameter). The remainder is in the 8-20 inch
diameter size class. Full bed depth averages .140 ft. Duff and liter layer depth is ~48 to 60
centimeters.
92
The site underwent overstory thinning of ponderosa pine in 1989. The basal area of the stand
ranged from 192 sq ft/acre to 228 sq ft/acre before treatment. The stand was thinned to 18 X 18
or 20 X 20 foot spacing with a resulting basal area reduced to 150 sq ft/acre. Trees were yarded
without tops and landings were machine piled. Tops and some of the branches were left on site.
Total fuel complex at the site has been measured at 27.88 tans/acre using planar intercept
methods (Brown, 1974).
This site is grazed by 75 cow/calf pairs in a two pasture allotment. The monitoring site is within
the Timber Pasture which receives use from June 11 to June 30 and then again from August 2 to
September 15 annually. Very little use is made of the forested areas of the allotment due to lack
of water and succulent forage. Light grazing was noted on Peck’s penstemon in August of 1990
in the monitoring area.
DESCRIPTION OF THREATS TO ELEMENT OCCURRENCE AT SITE:
Peck’s penstemon is threatened by canopy closure and allelopathic effects of pine needle
accumulations from long term fire suppression. Grazing by cattle at the site also threatens Peck’s
penstemon.
MONITORING OBJECTIVES AT SITE:
To determine the effects of jack pot burning natural fuels (existing fuels which have accumulated
as a result of fire suppression) and thinning fuels (additional fuels from the thinning treatment)
on population size, plant vigor and flowering of Peck’s penstemon.
LITERATURE REVIEW:
Field (1985) documented that canopy closure (shade) decreased flowering stems, numbers of
flowers per inflorescence, seeds per capsule and percent germination of the seed. The Glaze CT
thinning may increase reproductive vigor of penstemon plants by increasing available light and
moisture. Monitoring plots were not installed prior to thinning. This monitoring treatment study
will not attempt to measure the beneficial effects of opening the overstory tree layer.
Field (1985) documented that seed germination of Peck’s penstemon was significantly reduced
by aqueous extracts of ponderosa pine needles and twigs. Field (1985) also noted a significant
reduction in penstemon seed germination in soils collected from beneath ponderosa pine trees in
the field. Of all plant allelopathic relationships tested ponderosa pine produced the greatest
reduction in seed germination.
Suppression of fire has allowed unnatural canopy closure and litter accumulation at the Glaze CT
site. Although the thinning treatment has opened the canopy somewhat, it has created an
additional burden of ponderosa pine fuels. Natural periodic fire would serve to consume pine
needle litter and maintain open, sunny habitats for Peck’s penstemon. Field (1985) established
that moderate fires that don’t kill the root crowns of parent plants promoted growth of clonal
plants and promoted new plants from seed. No new penstemon plants from seed were found in
93
shaded plots that were burned. Seed production is directly related to plant vigor (Huenneke et al.,
1986). The taller many stemmed plants produce more seed. Fire in Peck’s penstemon habitat is
hypothesized as having a central role in increasing available light and moisture for both plant
vigor, seed production and seed germination (Draft 5MG,
1990).
However, heavy fuels accumulations may kill parent plants. Field (1985) did not document the
fire prescription, fire behavior or fuel loads in her test burn plots. The length of time Peck’s
penstemon seed remains viable in the natural environment is unknown. If the seed does not
remain viable for more than one or two growing seasons, penstemon populations that are
vegetative and non-flowering may not survive a hot fire.
MONITORING METHODS:
Nine, two-meter square macroplots were established in the Glaze CT Unit #1 on September 6,
1990. These plots were installed ____years after the completion of’ the thinning treatment. Each
macroplot was permanently marked with an aluminum capped stake at corner “A” (see
macroplot design attached). The number of the macroplot was stamped into the top of the cap.
Each macroplot was placed in areas where densities of penstemon plants were sufficient to
provide data points for monitoring ( the population was scattered), and also where percent
canopy closure and understory characteristics were similar. Macroplots were placed so as to
avoid sources of environmental variability, such as 1) areas where soils were scarified by heavy
logging equipment, 2) areas adjacent to edge ecotones like roads and forest edge, 3) areas where
large logs or piles of thinning slash where already present and 4) large openings in the forest
canopy that were not related to the thinning treatment.
The macroplots were divided into 16, .25-meter square microplots for ease in data collection.
Within each .25-meter microplot the following data were recorded:
 number of PEPE2 plants (as clumps no more than 6” apart)
 number of flowering stems (total, not per plant)
 the height in centimeters of’ the tallest stem of’ each PEPE2 plant (clump) present (there
could be more than one height record per microplot)
 percent cover PEPE2 in increments of 5%; 0-1% was recorded as “Trace”
 percent cover graminoids in increments of 5% , 0-1% was recorded as “Trace”
 percent cover forbs in increments of 5%; 0-1% was recorded as “Trace”
 A color photo was taken of each macroplot before the burn.
Three plots were selected as controls (Treatment C) based upon the team’s ability to effectively
keep these plots from accidental burn treatment. Of the remaining 6 plots three were randomly
selected as “natural fuels burn” (Treatment A) and the remaining three were selected as the
“thinning slash plus natural fuels burn (Treatment B). Thinning slash in the amount of ___lbs/sq
ft was artificially loaded unto the plots selected for Treatment B.
Treatment A: Macroplots:
Treatment B: Macroplots:
Treatment C : Macroplots #4, 5, 6
94
EQUIPMENT AND COSTS:
Equipment list:
9-aluminum stakes and numbered die set
36-12” nails to mark macroplot corners
hammer
meter-square plot frame quartered with string or wire.
Flags to help mark plants
Compass
Metric rule
Camera and film
Data sheets
Monitoring Costs
Total Initial Cost
Annual Cost
Equipment
Personnel, salary
1 GS-11 @ $180/day 720
180
1 GS-7 @ $105/day 420
315
1 GS-5 @ $70/day 210
140
Travel
100 (year 1) 60 (annual)
Total $1,938 (Year 1)
$720 (annual)
Literature cited
Brown, James. K. 1974. Handbook for inventorying downed woody material. U.S. Forest
Service General Technical Report INT-16. September 1974, 24 pp.
Field, Katherine G. 1985. Ecology and genetics of Peck’s penstemon (Scrophulariaceae), a rare
species from the Oregon Cascades. PhD dissertation, Department of Biology, University of
Oregon, Eugene. 215 pp.
Huenneke, L. F., K. Holsinger, and M.E. Palmer. 1986. Plant population biology and the
management of viable populations. Chapter 13, p. 169-183. in The management of viable
populations: theory, applications, and case studies. Center for Conservation Biology,
Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
95