Epilobium hirsutum - L.
Great Hairy Willowherb
Other Common Names: codlins and cream
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Epilobium hirsutum L. (TSN 27305)
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.160682
Element Code: PDONA060B0
Informal Taxonomy: Plants, Vascular - Flowering Plants - Evening-Primrose Family
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Plantae Anthophyta Dicotyledoneae Myrtales Onagraceae Epilobium
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: Kartesz, J.T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. 2nd edition. 2 vols. Timber Press, Portland, OR.
Concept Reference Code: B94KAR01HQUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Epilobium hirsutum
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: GNR
Global Status Last Changed: 22Mar1994
Rounded Global Status: GNR - Not Yet Ranked
Nation: United States
National Status: NNA
Nation: Canada
National Status: NNA (12Oct2016)

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
United States Connecticut (SNA), Illinois (SNA), Indiana (SNA), Maine (SNA), Maryland (SNA), Massachusetts (SNR), Michigan (SNA), New Hampshire (SNA), New Jersey (SNA), New York (SNA), Ohio (SNA), Pennsylvania (SNA), Rhode Island (SNA), Vermont (SNA), Washington (SNA), West Virginia (SNA), Wisconsin (SNA)
Canada British Columbia (SNA), New Brunswick (SNA), Nova Scotia (SNA), Ontario (SNA), Prince Edward Island (SNA), Quebec (SNA)

Other Statuses

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
U.S. States and Canadian Provinces

Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
Color legend for Distribution Map
NOTE: The distribution shown may be incomplete, particularly for some rapidly spreading exotic species.

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States CTexotic, ILexotic, INexotic, MA, MDexotic, MEexotic, MIexotic, NHexotic, NJexotic, NYexotic, OHexotic, PAexotic, RIexotic, VTexotic, WAexotic, WIexotic, WVexotic
Canada BCexotic, NBexotic, NSexotic, ONexotic, PEexotic, QCexotic

Range Map
No map available.

Ecology & Life History Not yet assessed
Help
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Delineation Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Viability
Help
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank)
Help
Disclaimer: While I-Rank information is available over NatureServe Explorer, NatureServe is not actively developing or maintaining these data. Species with I-RANKs do not represent a random sample of species exotic in the United States; available assessments may be biased toward those species with higher-than-average impact.

I-Rank: Medium/Low
Rounded I-Rank: Medium
I-Rank Reasons Summary: Epilobium hirsutum is a perennial herb that invades predominantly open, wet habitats. It is rhizomatous and has been noted to form dense monocultures which can replace native species. It currently has a disjunct range in the US, with both the northeast and the Pacific northwest invaded. Future spread seems likely, as new populations can be established from ornamental plantings and the species is increasingly being used as a horticultural substitute for purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria). Also, the species' extensive native range suggests broad environmental tolerances. Management can be achieved with herbicides suitable for aquatic environments, but the persistent seedbank may require a long-term effort.
Subrank I - Ecological Impact: Medium/Low
Subrank II - Current Distribution/Abundance: Medium
Subrank III - Trend in Distribution/Abundance: Medium
Subrank IV - Management Difficulty: Medium/Low
I-Rank Review Date: 25Sep2007
Evaluator: Gravuer, K.
Native anywhere in the U.S?
Native Range: Native to Europe, Asia, and Africa.
Africa: Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Morocco, Tunisia, Chad, Sudan, Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Burundi, Rwanda, Zaire, Angola, Zambia, Lesotho, South Africa (Cape Province, Natal, Orange Free State, Transvaal), Cape Verde.
Asia: Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Russian Federation (Ciscaucasia, Dagestan, Western Siberia), Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Mongolia, China (Anhui, Gansu, Guangdong, Guizhou, Hebei, Henan, Hubei, Hunan, Jiangsu, Jiangxi, Jilin, Liaoning, Nei Monggol, Ningxia [s.], Shaanxi, Shandong, Shanxi, Sichuan, Xinjiang, Xizang, Yunnan, Zhejiang), Japan (Honshu), Korea, Nepal, Pakistan .
Europe: Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom, Austria, Belgium, Czechoslovakia, Germany, Hungary, Netherlands, Poland, Switzerland, Belarus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Russian Federation (European part), Ukraine [incl. Krym], Albania, Bulgaria, Greece [incl. Crete], Italy [incl. Sardinia, Sicily], Romania, Yugoslavia, France [incl. Corsica], Portugal, Spain [incl. Baleares, Canary Islands]. (GRIN 2001)


Download "An Invasive Species Assessment Protocol: Evaluating Non-Native Plants for their Impact on Biodiversity". (PDF, 1.03MB)
Provide feedback on the information presented in this assessment

Screening Questions

S-1. Established outside cultivation as a non-native? YES
Comments: This species is a non-native that is established outside of cultivation (Kartesz 1999).

S-2. Present in conservation areas or other native species habitat? Yes
Comments: Hairy willow-herb invades riparian areas, upland open habitats, upland partially open habitats (e.g. woodland edges), freshwater herbaceous wetlands, and salt/brackish marshes (Muenscher 1955, Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board 2003, Czarapata 2005, Wisconsin State Herbarium 2005, S. Erickson pers. comm. 2006).

Subrank I - Ecological Impact: Medium/Low

1. Impact on Ecosystem Processes and System-wide Parameters:Low significance
Comments: This species has been noted to form dense monotypic stands in wetland areas that can replace native species (Mehrhoff et al. 2003, Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board 2003, Czarapata 2005, S. Erickson pers. comm. 2006). If these stands differ from native populations in terms of density or vegetative cover, there is the potential for alteration of the wetland's hydrologic regime (WDOE 2003, Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board 2003).

2. Impact on Ecological Community Structure:Low significance
Comments: Predominantly invades areas already dominated by herbaceous species. However, the noted density of the stands it forms (Mehrhoff et al. 2003, Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board 2003, Czarapata 2005) may increase the density of these herbaceous communities.

3. Impact on Ecological Community Composition:High/Moderate significance
Comments: This species has been noted to form dense monotypic stands in wetland areas that can replace native species (Mehrhoff et al. 2003, Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board 2003, Czarapata 2005, S. Erickson pers. comm. 2006). It competes well with cattails (Czarapata 2005).

4. Impact on Individual Native Plant or Animal Species:Low significance/Insignificant
Comments: Although monocultures were noted to have negative impacts generally, no disproportionate impacts on particular native species were mentioned in the literature. The species with which E. hirsutum was reported to compete most strongly was purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), another exotic plant (Czarapata 2005).

5. Conservation Significance of the Communities and Native Species Threatened:Moderate significance
Comments: The undisturbed wet meadow habitat invaded by this species is uncommon over at least some of its invaded range (e.g. Rhode Island, Miller and Golet 2000). Invading an undisturbed high salt marsh on Puget Sound (S. Erickson pers. comm. 2006). It is also known to be problematic on at least one site owned by The Nature Conservancy (Richter 2000).

Subrank II. Current Distribution and Abundance: Medium

6. Current Range Size in Nation:Moderate significance
Comments: Well-established in the northeastern US, extending south to West Virginia and Kentucky and west to Illinois and Wisconsin (Kartesz 1999). Also established in Washington and Oregon since at least the 1960s. In Washington, infestations have been found in several disjunct counties and are suspected in many cases to be escapes from garden plantings (Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board 2003). Total generalized range occupies approximately 20% of continental US.

7. Proportion of Current Range Where the Species is Negatively Impacting Biodiversity:Moderate significance
Comments: Hairy willow-herb has been declared a wetland/aquatic noxious weed in WA (Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board 2003). It is also considered ecologically invasive in WI (Wisconsin State Herbarium 2005, Swearingen 2005). It also appears to have negative impacts in at least some parts of New England (Mehrhoff et al. 2003, Novick 2003).

8. Proportion of Nation's Biogeographic Units Invaded:Moderate significance
Comments: Approximately 21 ecoregions are invaded, based on visual comparison of the generalized range and ecoregions map (The Nature Conservancy 2001).

9. Diversity of Habitats or Ecological Systems Invaded in Nation:Moderate significance
Comments: Hairy willow-herb prefers open, wetland to semi-aquatic habitats. It invades riparian areas (ditches, stream banks, swales, lakeshores, and ponds), upland open habitats (pastures, waste lands, and gardens), upland partially open habitats (open woods, edges, and roadsides), freshwater herbaceous wetlands (wet meadows), and salt/brackish marshes (Muenscher 1955, Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board 2003, Czarapata 2005, Wisconsin State Herbarium 2005, S. Erickson pers. comm. 2006).

Subrank III. Trend in Distribution and Abundance: Medium

10. Current Trend in Total Range within Nation:Moderate significance
Comments: The first records of this species are from the northeastern seaboard in the mid-1800s (Mehrhoff et al. 2003). Since that time, the species has spread inland. Some sources believe that the westward spread of this front continues today (Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board 2003). In addition, the species was collected in the Pacific northwest for the first time in 1965 and appears to be spreading in WA (Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board 2003, King County Noxious Weed Control Program 2005, S. Erickson pers. comm. 2006).

11. Proportion of Potential Range Currently Occupied:Medium/Low significance
Comments: The extensive native range of this species (GRIN 2001) suggests that most of the US could potentially be occupied. When reliant on its own dispersal mechanisms, the species does not appear to spread extremely rapidly; it was established in the northeast 1829 but has not yet spread much beyond that region by biological means. However, it can establish new foci when planted in new regions as a garden ornamental (WDOE 2003).

12. Long-distance Dispersal Potential within Nation:High/Moderate significance
Comments: This species is occasionally sold as a garden ornamental. The Pacific northwest populations, first detected in the 1960s, are believed to have originated from ornamental plantings (WDOE 2003, Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board 2003). Sales could potentially increase in the near future, as gardeners reportedly consider this species a substitute for purple loosestrife (WDOE 2003), which is considered to be noxious in many states (Kartesz 1999). It also has wind-dispersed seeds (Shamsi and Whitehead 1974, Mehrhoff et al. 2003, Czarapata 2005).

13. Local Range Expansion or Change in Abundance:Moderate significance
Comments: The best recent documentation of local range expansion comes from Washington state, where the species was first found in one county in 1965 and has since been reported from at least four others (Rice 2005, King County Noxious Weed Control Program 2005). A population in undisturbed high salt marsh on Puget Sound was described as spreading "exponentially"; it was not visible in 1995 aerial photographs, but covered 20 acres by 2006 (S. Erickson pers. comm. 2006). One cause of this expansion could be increased sales of the plant as an ornamental, as gardeners reportedly consider this species a substitute for purple loosestrife (WDOE 2003). Spread from ornamental plantings is also believed to be resulting in local increase in the northeastern US (Czarapata 2005).

14. Inherent Ability to Invade Conservation Areas and Other Native Species Habitats:High/Moderate significance
Comments: Although it is most often found in open, disturbed areas, this species is clearly capable of spreading into undisturbed wet meadows (Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board 2003) and salt/brackish marshes (S. Erickson pers. comm. 2006).

15. Similar Habitats Invaded Elsewhere:Low significance
Comments: Hairy willow-herb is also established in Canada and Australia. In both countries, it appears to invade similar habitats to those invaded in the US (Scoggan 1978, Weiss 1998). In its native range, the species occurs in neutral to alkaline fen habitats (Shamsi and Whitehead 1974), but no reports of invasion of similar habitats in the US were found.

16. Reproductive Characteristics:High significance
Comments: Hairy willow-herb strongly exhibits the following invasive characteristics: it reproduces both vegetatively and by seed (Mehrhoff et al. 2003, Czarapata 2005), it has seeds that remain viable in the soil for three or more years (Blomqvist et al. 2004), it has quickly spreading rhizomes (Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board 2003), and it resprouts readily when cut (Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board 2003).

Subrank IV. General Management Difficulty: Medium/Low

17. General Management Difficulty:Medium/Low significance
Comments: Herbicide treatment with aquatic-suitable glyphosate (Rodeo) appears to afford the greatest management success. Herbicide can be applied to bundles of cut stems (Czarapata 2005). However, even with this method, regrowth from rootstocks may still occur and increase the resources needed to achieve effective control (Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board 2003). Mowing may prevent the addition of new seeds to the seed bank (Muenscher 1955), but regrowth can be a major issue with this method, as any stems intact to the first node can resprout (Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board 2003).

18. Minimum Time Commitment:Moderate significance
Comments: The seed bank of this species generally lasts at least 5 years (Blomqvist et al. 2004). However, it does respond to herbicide treatment, so repeated follow-up should be able to achieve control once the seed bank has been exhausted.

19. Impacts of Management on Native Species:Medium/Low significance
Comments: Because the recommended control method is to spray colonies with herbicide, some impacts on co-occurring native species appear unavoidable (Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board 2003). However, impacts can be reduced by bundling and tying stems, cutting above the string, and applying the herbicide to the bundle of cut stems, thus reducing the area sprayed (Czarapata 2005).

20. Accessibility of Invaded Areas:Low significance/Insignificant
Comments: Most of the invaded habitats should be relatively accessible. However, the ability of the plant to grow in semi-aquatic environments (Mehrhoff et al. 2003) may create some access problems, and its establishment via escape from ornamental plantings may lead to some populations being found on private lands.
Authors/Contributors
Help

Botanical data developed by NatureServe and its network of natural heritage programs (see Local Programs), The North Carolina Botanical Garden, and other contributors and cooperators (see Sources).

References
Help
  • Blomqvist, M. M., R. M. Bekker and P. Vos. 2004. Restoration of dtich bank plant species richness: The potential of the soil seed bank. Apllied Vegetation Science 6: 179-188. Internet supplement only.

  • Czarapata, E. J. 2005. Invasive Plants of the Upper Midwest. The University of Wisconsin Press. Madison, WI. 215 pp.

  • Douglas, G.W., D. Meidinger, and J. Pojar. eds. 1999. Illustrated Flora of British Columbia, Vol. 3, Dicotyledons (Diapensiaceae through Onagraceae). B.C. Minist. Environ., Lands and Parks, and B.C. Minist. For., Victoria. 423pp.

  • Griffiths, M. 1994. Index of garden plants: the new royal horticultural society dictionary. MacMillan Press Ltd, London. 1234 pp.

  • Kartesz, J.T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. 2nd edition. 2 vols. Timber Press, Portland, OR.

  • Kartesz, J.T. 1996. Species distribution data at state and province level for vascular plant taxa of the United States, Canada, and Greenland (accepted records), from unpublished data files at the North Carolina Botanical Garden, December, 1996.

  • Kartesz, J.T. 1999. A synonymized checklist and atlas with biological attributes for the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. First edition. In: Kartesz, J.T., and C.A. Meacham. Synthesis of the North American Flora, Version 1.0. North Carolina Botanical Garden, Chapel Hill, N.C.

  • King County Noxious Weed Control Program. 2005, August last update. KC Weed News: Weed Alert: Hairy willowherb found in King County. Online. Available: http://dnr.metrokc.gov/wlr/lands/weeds/kcweednews.htm#Bullet2 (Accessed 2005).

  • Mehrhoff, L.J., J.A. Silander, Jr., S.A. Leicht and E. Mosher. 2003. IPANE: Invasive Plant Atlas of New England. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT. Online. Available: http://invasives.eeb.uconn.edu/ipane/.

  • Miller, N. A. and F. C. Golet. 2000. Development of a statewide freshwater wetland restoration strategy. Phase 1: Site identification and prioritization methods. Department of Natural Resources Science, University of Rhode Island, for RIDEM Office of Water Resources.

  • Morton, J.K., and J.M. Venn. 2000. The Flora of Manitoulin Island and the Adjacent Islands of Lake Huron, Georgian Bay and the North Channel. Third Edition. University of Waterloo Biology Series No. 40, Waterloo, Ontario. 376 pp.

  • Muenscher, W. C. 1955. Weeds. The MacMillan Co., New York.

  • Novick, C.M. 2003. Invasive plant species of Massachusetts. Greater Worcester Land Trust. Available: http://www.cyberonic.com/~gwlt/invasive.html. (Accessed 2005).

  • Plants for a Future. 2001, February 2002 last update. Plants for a future database. Available: http://www.ibiblio.org/pfaf/D_search.html (Accessed 2005).

  • Rice, P.M. 2005. Invaders Database System. Division of Biological Sciences, University of Montana, Missoula. Online. Available: http://invader.dbs.umt.edu (Accessed 2005).

  • Richter, S. 2000. Hairy willow herb (Wisconsin). Global Invasive Species Initiative listserve digest #063. Online. Available: http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu/listarch/arch063.html (Accessed 2005).

  • Scoggan, H.J. 1978-1979. The flora of Canada: Parts 1-4. National Museums Canada, Ottawa. 1711 pp.

  • Shamsi, S. R. A. and F. H. Whitehead. 1974. Comparative eco-physiology of Epilobium hirsutum L. and Lythrum salicaria L. I. General biology, distribution, and germination. Journal of Ecology, 62: 279-290.

  • Stuckey, R.L. 1970. Distributional history of Epilobium hirsutum (Great Hairy Willow-herb) in North America. Rhodora 72: 164-181.

  • Swearingen, J. 2005. Alien plant invaders of natural areas. Plant Conservation Alliance, Alien Plant Working Group. Available: http://www.nps.gov/plants/alien/list/ (Accessed 2005)

  • Swink, F., and G. Wilhelm. 1994. Plants of the Chicago Region. Morton Arboretum. Lisle, Illinois.

  • The Nature Conservancy. 2001. Map: TNC Ecoregions of the United States. Modification of Bailey Ecoregions. Online . Accessed May 2003.

  • USDA, ARS, National Genetic Resources Program. 2001. Germplasm Resources Information Network - (GRIN). [Online Database]. National Germplasm Resources Laboratory, Beltsville, Maryland.URL: http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/index.pl. (Accessed 2005)

  • Washington State Department of Ecology (WDOE). 2003, October 28 last update. General information about Hairy Willow-Herb (Epilobium hirsutum). Washington State Department of Ecology, Water Quality Home. Online. Available: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/plants/weeds/willowherb.html (Accessed 2005).

  • Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board. 2003. Written findings of the State Noxious Weed Control Board. Online. Available: http://www.nwcb.wa.gov/weed_info/contents.html. (Accessed 2005).

  • Weiss, J. 1998. Epilobium hirsutum. Archives of Aliens-I listserve. Online. Available: http://indaba.iucn.org/archives/aliens-l/wwwmsgs/April-July98/00000030.htm (Accessed 2005)

  • Wisconsin State Herbarium. 2005. Wisconsin state herbarium vascular plant species database. Available: http://www.botany.wisc.edu/wisflora/. (Accessed 2005).

Use Guidelines & Citation

Use Guidelines and Citation

The Small Print: Trademark, Copyright, Citation Guidelines, Restrictions on Use, and Information Disclaimer.

Note: All species and ecological community data presented in NatureServe Explorer at http://explorer.natureserve.org were updated to be current with NatureServe's central databases as of March 2019.
Note: This report was printed on

Trademark Notice: "NatureServe", NatureServe Explorer, The NatureServe logo, and all other names of NatureServe programs referenced herein are trademarks of NatureServe. Any other product or company names mentioned herein are the trademarks of their respective owners.

Copyright Notice: Copyright © 2019 NatureServe, 2511 Richmond (Jefferson Davis) Highway, Suite 930, Arlington, VA 22202, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. Each document delivered from this server or web site may contain other proprietary notices and copyright information relating to that document. The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference the web site.

Citation for data on website including State Distribution, Watershed, and Reptile Range maps:
NatureServe. 2019. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org. (Accessed:

Citation for Bird Range Maps of North America:
Ridgely, R.S., T.F. Allnutt, T. Brooks, D.K. McNicol, D.W. Mehlman, B.E. Young, and J.R. Zook. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Birds of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Bird Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Robert Ridgely, James Zook, The Nature Conservancy - Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International - CABS, World Wildlife Fund - US, and Environment Canada - WILDSPACE."

Citation for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
Patterson, B.D., G. Ceballos, W. Sechrest, M.F. Tognelli, T. Brooks, L. Luna, P. Ortega, I. Salazar, and B.E. Young. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Mammals of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Bruce Patterson, Wes Sechrest, Marcelo Tognelli, Gerardo Ceballos, The Nature Conservancy-Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International-CABS, World Wildlife Fund-US, and Environment Canada-WILDSPACE."

Citation for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe. 2004. Global Amphibian Assessment. IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe, Washington, DC and Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
"Data developed as part of the Global Amphibian Assessment and provided by IUCN-World Conservation Union, Conservation International and NatureServe."

NOTE: Full metadata for the Bird Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/birdDistributionmapsmetadatav1.pdf.

Full metadata for the Mammal Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/mammalsDistributionmetadatav1.pdf.

Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute documents delivered from this server is hereby granted under the following conditions:
  1. The above copyright notice must appear in all copies;
  2. Any use of the documents available from this server must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes;
  3. Some data may be downloaded to files and altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using the citation above;
  4. No graphics available from this server can be used, copied or distributed separate from the accompanying text. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by NatureServe. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring by implication, estoppel, or otherwise any license or right under any trademark of NatureServe. No trademark owned by NatureServe may be used in advertising or promotion pertaining to the distribution of documents delivered from this server without specific advance permission from NatureServe. Except as expressly provided above, nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring any license or right under any NatureServe copyright.
Information Warranty Disclaimer: All documents and related graphics provided by this server and any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server are provided "as is" without warranty as to the currentness, completeness, or accuracy of any specific data. NatureServe hereby disclaims all warranties and conditions with regard to any documents provided by this server or any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, including but not limited to all implied warranties and conditions of merchantibility, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement. NatureServe makes no representations about the suitability of the information delivered from this server or any other documents that are referenced to or linked to this server. In no event shall NatureServe be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, consequential damages, or for damages of any kind arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information contained in any documents provided by this server or in any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, under any theory of liability used. NatureServe may update or make changes to the documents provided by this server at any time without notice; however, NatureServe makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. Since the data in the central databases are continually being updated, it is advisable to refresh data retrieved at least once a year after its receipt. The data provided is for planning, assessment, and informational purposes. Site specific projects or activities should be reviewed for potential environmental impacts with appropriate regulatory agencies. If ground-disturbing activities are proposed on a site, the appropriate state natural heritage program(s) or conservation data center can be contacted for a site-specific review of the project area (see Visit Local Programs).

Feedback Request: NatureServe encourages users to let us know of any errors or significant omissions that you find in the data through (see Contact Us). Your comments will be very valuable in improving the overall quality of our databases for the benefit of all users.