Mimulus clivicola - Greenm.
Hill Monkeyflower
Synonym(s): Diplacus clivicola (Greenm.) G.L. Nesom
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Mimulus clivicola Greenm. (TSN 33303)
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.133349
Element Code: PDSCR1B0S0
Informal Taxonomy: Plants, Vascular - Flowering Plants - Figwort Family
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Plantae Anthophyta Dicotyledoneae Scrophulariales Scrophulariaceae Mimulus
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: Mimulus clivicola
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G4
Global Status Last Reviewed: 15May1998
Global Status Last Changed: 14Mar1994
Rounded Global Status: G4 - Apparently Secure
Reasons: A regional endemic, Mimulus clivicola is known from the interior Pacific Northwest and occurs in narrow river canyons in northern and west-central Idaho, northeastern Oregon, and historically in Washington. Threats are indirect logging activities, invasion of exotic weeds and consequent chemical control measures, grazing, the inundation of Dworshak Reservoir, potential resumption of mining activities, and recreational activities.
Nation: United States
National Status: NNR

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
United States Idaho (S3), Montana (S1S3), Oregon (S3), Washington (SNR)

Other Statuses

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent Comments: Mimulus clivicola is a regional endemic of the interior Pacific Northwest occurring in narrow river canyons in northern Idaho, west-central Idaho and adjacent northeast Oregon. In Idaho it occurs in portions of the St. Joe, North Fork Clearwater, Selway, Lochsa, South Fork Clearwater River canyons, the Elk Creek Falls vicinity, Carrill Peak, and the Bear-Cuprum area of west-central Idaho. In Oregon it occurs mostly in the North Pine Creek vicinity. (Lorain and Moseley 1990; Lorain 1991; Lorain 1992). See attached map of overall distribution (Lorain 1992).

Although most of the floras of the Pacific Northwest (Hitchcock et. al. 1959; Hitchcock and Cronquist 1973) describe this taxon as occurring in Washington, only one documented record by George Vasey in 1889 exists for the state and this occurrence has not been relocated. As of 1992 no extant locations are known from any portion of Washington (Lorain 1992).

Overall Threat Impact Comments: Both natural and human-caused factors play a role in threatening and/or eliminating populations of Mimulus clivicola (Lorain 1992). Natural threats include large-scale erosion and the process of natural succession. A certain amount of erosion or soil disturbance from animal movement appears to be necessary to create patches of exposed mineral soil, however, large-scale erosion could eliminate populations. The process of natural succession can increase shading and result in soil stabilization, factors that do not favor the growth of this species (Lorain 1991).

Human-caused threats include indirect logging activities, invasion of exotic weeds and consequent chemical control measures, grazing, the inundation of Dworshak Reservoir, potential resumption of mining activities, and recreation activities. Direct timber harvest activities probably do not threaten Mimulus clivicola because it occurs in non-timbered or very open stands which are unsuitable for intensive logging. However, some indirect logging activities, such as road building, road maintenance, and development or expansion of rock quarries, are associated with erosion and invasion of exotic species which pose distinct threats to Mimulus clivicola (Lorain and Moseley 1989). There are a number of highly competitive weeds that commonly occur in similar habitats as Mimulus clivicola, including knapweed, cheatgrass, and goatweed. The disappearance of many historical Mimulus clivicola sites can be directly attributable to road construction followed by the invasion of exotic weeds (Caicco 1988). Also, the chemical methods used to control these weeds may pose a further threat (Caicco 1987). Mimulus clivicola sites in west-central Idaho and adjacent northeast Oregon are frequently grazed which can result in trampling and soil damage if grazed when the soils are saturated (Lorain and Moseley 1990; Lorain 1992). Inundation by Dworshak Reservoir in north-central Idaho resulted in the loss of much suitable habitat. Resumption of mining at the presently inactive Lost Irishman Mine in the Lochsa River drainage, could pose a threat to one of the largest and best populations of Mimulus clivicola in north-central Idaho (Lorain and Moseley 1989). Recreationists pose a potential threat to those populations located near trails or existing roads (Lorain 1992).

Whereas certain disturbance activities, either natural or human-caused, may harm existing individuals, this species appears to tolerate and potentially benefit from these activities which may help to disperse seed and create suitable microsites for future populations.

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: Mimulus clivicola is a regional endemic of the interior Pacific Northwest occurring in narrow river canyons in northern Idaho, west-central Idaho and adjacent northeast Oregon. In Idaho it occurs in portions of the St. Joe, North Fork Clearwater, Selway, Lochsa, South Fork Clearwater River canyons, the Elk Creek Falls vicinity, Carrill Peak, and the Bear-Cuprum area of west-central Idaho. In Oregon it occurs mostly in the North Pine Creek vicinity. (Lorain and Moseley 1990; Lorain 1991; Lorain 1992). See attached map of overall distribution (Lorain 1992).

Although most of the floras of the Pacific Northwest (Hitchcock et. al. 1959; Hitchcock and Cronquist 1973) describe this taxon as occurring in Washington, only one documented record by George Vasey in 1889 exists for the state and this occurrence has not been relocated. As of 1992 no extant locations are known from any portion of Washington (Lorain 1992).

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces
Color legend for Distribution Map

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States ID, MT, OR, WA

Range Map
No map available.


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
ID Adams (16003), Benewah (16009), Clearwater (16035), Idaho (16049), Kootenai (16055), Latah (16057), Lewis (16061), Nez Perce (16069)*, Shoshone (16079), Valley (16085), Washington (16087)
OR Baker (41001), Wallowa (41063)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
17 Upper Coeur D'alene (17010301)+, South Fork Coeur D'alene (17010302)+*, Coeur D'alene Lake (17010303)+, St. Joe (17010304)+, North Fork Payette (17050123)+, Weiser (17050124)+, Brownlee Reservoir (17050201)+, Powder (17050203)+, Hells Canyon (17060101)+, Imnaha (17060102)+, Lower Snake-Asotin (17060103)+*, Lower Grande Ronde (17060106)+, Palouse (17060108)+, Lower Salmon (17060209)+, Little Salmon (17060210)+, Upper Selway (17060301)+, Lower Selway (17060302)+, Lochsa (17060303)+, Middle Fork Clearwater (17060304)+*, South Fork Clearwater (17060305)+, Clearwater (17060306)+, Upper North Fork Clearwater (17060307)+, Lower North Fork Clearwater (17060308)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
Basic Description: Mimulus clivicola is a small, generally single-stemmed annual with opposite, mostly elliptic leaves and large, distinctly pink, showy flowers. The entire plant is covered with glandular hairs that emit a musky odor when rubbed between the fingers (Lorain and Moseley 1989).
General Description: Mimulus clivicola is a small, generally single-stemmed annual with opposite, mostly elliptic leaves and large, pink, showy flowers. The entire plant is covered with glandular hairs that emit a musky odor when rubbed between the fingers (Lorain and Moseley 1989).

Recent work with the taxon (Lorain and Moseley 1989; Lorain and Moseley 1990; Lorain 1991; Lorain 1992) has identified additional characteristics that are especially helpful for identification during field investigations. These investigators described Mimulus clivicola as having "distinctly pink" flowers and a musky, sweet smell when the herbage is rubbed.

Technical Description: The following technical description is adapted from Greenman (1899), Grant (1924) and Cronquist (1959):Low, herbaceous annual, 2 to 15 cm tall, glandular- pubescent throughout; stems mostly simple or branched from base; leaves opposite, oblanceolate or elliptic, 0.5-3 cm long, 2-12 mm wide, obscurely 3-nerved, entire or more commonly with scattered small teeth toward the obtuse apex; flowers axillary, short- pedicellate initially, pedicels elongating to 3-7 mm in fruit; calyx 5.5-10 mm long, teeth acute, 1-2 mm long, nearly equal; corolla purple to reddish-pink, conspicuously marked with yellow in throat and tube, funnelform, evidently bilabiate, 1-2.5 cm long, persistent for some time after withering; capsule lance-linear, curved, slightly overtopping the persistent calyx, dehiscent, placenta splitting to base at maturity, the halves adherent to their respective valves; seeds apiculate at both ends, oval, less than twice as long as broad.
Diagnostic Characteristics: The following characteristics help distinguish Mimulus clivicola from other small, annual, pink/purple-flowering Mimulus species occurring within its range, specifically M. breweri and M. nanus. M. breweri has rather inconspicuous, small (<10 mm), slender flowers, whereas, M. clivicola has larger (up to 2.5 cm), funnelform flowers. M. nanus has deep magenta flowers on pedicels 1-3 mm in length, has only a few hairs, and occurs in dry, open, often sandy or gravelly places, whereas, M. clivicola has distinctly pink flowers on pedicels 3-7 mm in length, is covered with rather dense sticky hairs, and occurs usually in more mesic sites. Neither M. breweri nor M. nanus has the distinct musky, sweet odor characteristic of M. clivicola (Lorain and Moseley 1989; Lorain and Moseley 1990).
Reproduction Comments: Mimulus clivicola is a spring-flowering annual that reproduces solely by seeds. Flowering begins in late May or early June and continues to mid-July. It is suspected that pollination is by ants, which may be attracted to the sweet, musky odor of the glandular hairs covering the plant (Lorain 1991).
Ecology Comments: Most biological/ecological information regarding Mimulus clivicola has been gathered from formal surveys in Idaho and Oregon which were initiated in the late 1980s by the Forest Service through contracts with the Idaho Natural Heritage Program. Also, a germination study was conducted by the University of Montana.

Mimulus clivicola is a spring-flowering annual that reproduces solely by seeds. Flowering begins in late May or early June and continues to mid-July. It is suspected that pollination is by ants, which may be attracted to the sweet, musky odor of the glandular hairs covering the plant (Lorain 1991).

Spring precipitation, availability of suitable microhabitat, and certain activities of big game animals seem to have high correlation with the germination and establishment of this species. Availability of spring moisture appears to be a necessary requirement. All known populations occur in moist microhabitats such as seepages caused by perched water tables, areas where water channels following rain, or in big-game tracks that hold water. Although these sites may dry out later in the summer, they provide a moist substrate in the spring for seed germination and flowering (Lorain and Moseley 1989; Lorain and Moseley 1990; Lorain 1991; Lorain 1992). Suitable microhabitat, patches of exposed mineral soil, which can result from natural causes such as erosion and the movements of big game or man-caused disturbances such as road-building, appears to be another necessary requirement. The movement of deer and elk not only create areas of exposed mineral soil and tracks that trap water, ideal conditions for germination and growth of the species, but also serve to disperse the seeds. Another aspect of big game activity which may be favoring the establishment of this species, is their grazing of cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), a very competitive introduced winter annual. This may reduce competition for limited soil moisture on southern slopes, especially during droughty springs, and favor the establishment and growth of Mimulus clivicola (Lorain 1989).

Research on seed germination and early growth characteristics was conducted by researchers in the Department of Biological Sciences at the University of Montana (Pavek and Mitchell-Olds 1990). Seed germination required three weeks of stratification (moist, cool conditions of 100% humidity at approximately 40 degrees C). There was a high percentage of germination (no actual values given) occurring 12-19 days after the stratification period was complete. First flower buds developed at approximately 5 weeks, just after the second pair of leaves when the plants were only 0.5 inches tall.

As with many annuals, the number of flowering individuals in any particular growing season is highly correlated with annual weather conditions, in this case the presence of spring moisture, and may not be a good indicator of the long-term viability of the species. Research is needed on the seedbank, seed viability, and population dynamics to help understand the population biology of this species.

Habitat Comments: Mimulus clivicola is restricted to a very specific set of habitat parameters. Plants typically occur in open pockets of moist, exposed mineral soil created by natural disturbances (erosion, big-game activity, etc.) or human-caused disturbances (roadcuts, etc.). They are almost exclusively found on southern exposures (southeast, south, southwest) with steep slopes (generally > 60%) in microhabitats that hold moisture during the spring.

Differences in elevation, soils, and plant associations exist among the northern Idaho, north-central Idaho, and northeast Oregon sites. Elevations range from 1600 to 4100 ft (mostly < 3600 ft) in northern Idaho, from 4200 to 5600 ft in west-central Idaho (with a single site extending to 7100 ft), and from 2500 to 5500 ft (mostly > 3500 ft) in northeastern Oregon. Soils range from deep, loose, decomposed granitics in northern Idaho, to deep to thin basaltics in west-central Idaho, to shallow, gravelly basaltics in northeastern Oregon (Lorain and Moseley 1990; Lorain 1991; Lorain 1992).

Most Mimulus clivicola populations in northern Idaho occur in Douglas-fir/Idaho fescue (Pseudotsuga menziesii/Festuca idahoensis), Douglas-fir/ninebark (Pseudotsuga menziesii/Physocarpus malvaceus), and grand fir/ninebark (Abies grandis/Physocarpus malvaceus) habitat types (Cooper et.al.1987). The plant associates in these habitat types include Collomia linearis, Clarkia pulchella, Sedum lanceolatum, Pteridium aquilinum, Collinsia parviflora, Achillea millefolium, Agropyron spicatum, and Triodanis perfoliata. Clarkia pulchella and Collomia linearis are excellent indicators for identifying potential habitat (Lorain and Moseley 1989; Lorain and Moseley 1990; Lorain 1991; Lorain 1992).

Most of the populations in west-central Idaho occur in a much drier sagebrush habitat type, the stiff sagebrush/Sandberg's bluegrass (Artemisia rigida/Poa secunda) habitat type (Tisdale 1986) with the following plant associates: Castilleja oresbia, Allium tolmiei var. persimile, Allium acuminatum, Lomatium dissectum, and Clarkia pulchella. Other populations were found in habitats similar to northern Idaho, Douglas-fir/mountain snowberry and Douglas-fir/ninebark with the following plant associates: Carex geyeri, Collinsia parviflora, Antennaria luzuloides, Collomia linearis, Potentilla glandulosa, Paeonia brownii, Amelanchier alnifolia, Spiraea betulifolia, and Penstemon payettensis (Lorain and Moseley 1990; Lorain 1991; Lorain 1992).

Most populations in northeastern Oregon occur as part of the Cusick's camas seepage plant community type (Camassia cusickii - CACU) (Johnson and Simon 1987), a commmunity type which tends to occur beneath basalt rims where seepage water persists into early summer. Plant associates in this community type include Camassia cusickii, Allium acuminatum, Calochortus eurycarpus, Sedum stenopetalum, Collomia linearis, Bromus tectorum, Collinsia parviflora, Achillea millefolium, Agropyron spicatum, Eriogonum heracleoides, and Perideridia bolanderi. Also, other annual Mimulus species, M. nanus, M. breweri, M. floribundus and M. guttatus, were often found in this community type. Camassia cusickii was the best indicator for identifying potential habitat in northeastern Oregon (Lorain and Moseley 1990; Lorain 1991; Lorain 1992).

Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary
Help
Stewardship Overview: Mimulus clivicola is a limited regional endemic with very specific habitat requirements. Despite the number of new populations found during recent surveys, most populations are less than 200 individuals and many populations occur within areas where human habitat-altering activities are taking place. Both natural and human-caused factors play a role in threatening and/or eliminating populations of Mimulus clivicola (Lorain 1992).

Stewardship should encompass all survey, monitor, research and management needs aimed at the protection and perpetuation of Mimulus clivicola. Additional surveys are needed, not only on certain portions of Forest Service land, but also on private lands, to fully delineate the extent and range of this species. Monitoring should continue annually on the four Ecoplots already established and should be expanded to include key populations given permanent protection. Research should focus on the relationship between population levels and annual weather patterns and big game activities, the role of seedbank, seed viability, and pollinators on the long-term viability of the species, and the cumulative effect of human activities on habitat loss. Management activities should include notification to landowners of population locations on their land and the need for additional surveys if necessary, classification of populations into protection categories, permanent protection of key populations, and cooperation and information exchange between public and private landowners and state Heritage Programs.

Management Requirements: In order to adequately protect a given population of Mimulus clivicola, protection must center on the habitat of the species. Methods to protect the habitat include restriction of grazing or fencing populations in June and July to insure that plants won't be trampled prior to seed set, restriction of ORVs, no herbicide spraying, prohibition of road construction and maintenance, prohibition of fire and the establishment of an intact forest buffer of a minimum width of 100 ft from the population margins (Lorain 1992).

Specific management objectives are recommended for maintaining Mimulus clivicola populations at or above the minimum viable population level on Forest Service lands (Lorain 1992). In order to maintain this level, the populations must be self-sustaining, genetically stable, and adequately distributed throughout the species range. These objectives can be applied to management on other federal land, and state and private land as well. Following is a list of these objectives, revised to cover application to all areas where Mimulus clivicola occurs: 1) inform agency or private individual(s) of the locations of Mimulus clivicola on their land, 2) conduct further surveys in suitable habitat that has not yet been surveyed, 3) classify known populations into three protection categories, based on population size and distribution, 4) permanently protect and monitor key populations, and 5) maintain cooperation between federal/state agencies, private owner(s), and The Idaho Conservation Data Center and the Oregon Natural Heritage Data Base. Discussion and implementation of these objectives is described in the following paragraphs.

Private/public organizations or individuals conducting surveys for Mimulus clivicola (i.e., the Idaho Conservation Center, the Oregon Natural Heritage Data Base, The Nature Conservancy, private contractors, state/federal employees, etc.) should inform the landowner(s) of populations located on their land and advise them, if necessary, of the need to survey potential suitable habitat not yet surveyed.

State and federal agencies (i.e., Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, State Department of Lands, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, etc.) may have computer geographic information systems already in place that they can query for potential habitat for Mimulus clivicola on their land.

New locations of Mimulus clivicola should be documented by specimens (if the population exceeds 50 individuals) that include both flowers and roots. The specimens should be sent to the Herbarium either at the University of Idaho or Washington State University for verification of their identity. Notification of confirmed sightings of Mimulus clivicola should be submitted to the state Natural Heritage Program for entry into their permanent data base on sensitive species. If sizable new populations and numbers of new sites are located, a reevaluation of the species status and conservation strategy would be warranted (Lorain 1992).

Monitoring Requirements: Although numerous field surveys have been conducted in five different National Forests (Idaho Panhandle, Clearwater, Nez Perce, Payette in Idaho, and Wallowa-Whitman in Oregon), there are many areas of suitable habitat on areas managed by the Forest Service that have not yet been surveyed. Previous surveys have indicated three areas on national forest lands where surveys should be conducted, specifically (Lorain 1992):

1) Nez Perce National Forest: a) intervening area between Dixie on the Red River Ranger District several miles north of the Salmon River and Wild Horse Ridge in the Hells Canyon National Recreation Area. These sites represent considerable range extensions for Mimulus clivicola and b) area along the South Fork of the Clearwater River. Surveys conducted here in 1990 were done late in the season and it is possible that some populations were missed.

2) Coeur d'Alene National Forest: a recent range extension was discovered near Carrill Peak on the Fernan Ranger District, just east of Lake Coeur d'Alene. This area should be more completely surveyed.

3) Wallowa-Whitman National Forest (Oregon): potential habitat exists throughout much of the Pine District and the southern portion of the Hells Canyon National Recreation Area.

Few surveys have been conducted on private land. Additional inventory surveys should be conducted not only on these Forest Service lands but on as much private land as possible to delineate fully the species distribution

Since a relatively high number of populations of Mimulus clivicola have been discovered in recent years, detailed and expensive demographic monitoring does not seem warranted at this time (Lorain 1992). However, monitoring should be continued at the four ecoplots established in 1989 and expanded to include key populations with Protection Category 1 status (see Lorain 1992 for specific key populations). Monitoring should continue on an annual basis for at least 5 years, preferably 10 years. This monitoring would provide baseline data concerning the amount of annual population fluctuation of observed individuals and help assure protection for these sites.

The Forest Service should monitor the cumulative effects from human-caused activities on National Forest lands that result in reduced habitat for Mimulus clivicola (Lorain 1992).

Monitoring Programs: Four permanent Ecodata plots (USDA Forest Service 1987) (see diagram of ecodata plot) were established within healthy Mimulus clivicola populations in four different river drainages (Elk Creek, North Fork of the Clearwater, Lochsa, and Selway) during the 1989 field season. In addition to the complete ecodata information collected at each plot, counts were made of all plants, including seedlings, that fell within a 2-meter wide belt transect running in a north-south direction through the center of the circle. These sites were recounted in 1990 and 1991 (see Table 1 for data on the number of flowering individuals counted for each year) (Lorain 1992).
Management Research Programs: Research on seed germination and early growth characteristics was conducted by researchers in the Department of Biological Sciences at the University of Montana (Pavek and Mitchell-Olds 1990). Seed germination required three weeks of stratification (moist, cool conditions of 100% humidity at approximately 40 degrees C). There was a high percentage of germination (no actual values given) occurring 12-19 days after the stratification period was complete. First flower buds developed at approximately 5 weeks, just after the second pair of leaves when the plants were only 0.5 inches tall.
Management Research Needs: For a successful management strategy, new populations should be classified into the following protection categories (Lorain 1992): 1) Protection Category 1 - Key populations that will be permanently protected. Populations in this category should be the largest (> 500 individuals), most vigorous populations that occur in relatively undisturbed habitats where existing and/or future monitoring is considered important. Consideration should also be given to populations that fall within existing special designation areas (i.e., Recreation Areas, Research Natural Areas, etc.) and disjunct or peripheral populations that define the geographic range of the species and may represent important genetic variability.

2) Protection Category 2 - Populations managed within a multiple-use framework with some considerations given to their maintenance. Populations in this category are usually of moderate size (200-500 individuals), have been naturally and/or artificially disturbed in the past and may provide important information concerning the effects of disturbance.

3) Protection Category 3 - Populations that could be sacrificed if necessary, if there is some assurance that the best populations are being protected. These populations are usually the smallest (< 200 individuals) and are considered marginal because of size, low density, and/or occur on non-pristine sites.

(Known populations of Mimulus clivicola have been classified into these 3 categories. Refer to Lorain (1992) for the specific locations and their protection category designations.)

To insure proper category designation of newly discovered sites, a detailed assessment of existing and surrounding habitat and annual site visits are recommended. Since there are wide fluctuations in numbers of observed individuals from year to year, annual population counts can provide a more accurate picture of the true population size. However, knowledge of the seedbank as well, would provide the best information on population size.

Additional topics: Family: Scrophulariaceae (Figwort Family), Synonymy: Eunanus clivicola, Heller (Muhlenbergia 1(4): 47-62, 1904), Citation: Greenman, J.M. 1899. Northwestern plants, chiefly from Oregon. Erythea, 7(11): 115-120, Type specimen: Sandberg, MacDougal, and Heller. No. 586. Idaho, slopes near the foot of Weissner's Peak, Kootenai County, 8 July, 1892.
Population/Occurrence Delineation Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Viability
Help
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank) Not yet assessed
Help
Authors/Contributors
Help
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Edition Date: 24Nov1995
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Janice Hill, rev. D. Gries (1998)
Management Information Edition Date: 24Nov1995
Management Information Edition Author: Janice Hill
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 24Nov1995
Element Ecology & Life History Author(s): JANICE HILL

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
  • Barker, W.R., G.L. Nesom, P.M. Beardsley, and N.S. Fraga. 2012. A taxonomic conspectus of Phrymaceae: A narrowed circumscriptions for Mimulus, new and resurrected genera, and new names and combinations. Phytoneuron 39:1-60.

  • Caicco, S. L. 1988. Field investigations of selected sensitive plant species on the Clearwater National Forest. Idaho Natural Heritage Program, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Boise, Idaho. 21 pp. plus appendices.

  • Caicco, S. L. 1989. Field investigations of selected sensitive plant species on the Nez Perce National Forest. 12 pp. plus appendices.

  • Conservation Data Center. 1994. Rare, threatened, and endangered plants and animals of Idaho, third edition. Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Boise, Idaho.

  • Cooper, S. V., K. E. Neiman, R. Steele, and D. W. Roberts. 1987. Forest habitat types of northern Idaho: A second approximation. General Technical Report INT-236.USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, UT. 135 pp. [reprinted in 1991]

  • Cronquist, A. 1961. Mimulus. Pp. 337-350 in Hitchcock, C. L., A. Cronquist, M. Ownbey and J. W. Thompson. 1961. Vascular Plants of the Pacific Northwest. Univ. Washington Press, Seattle, WA. 4 v.

  • Fish and Wildlife Service. 1991. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants: Review of plant taxa for listing as endangered and threatened species: Notice of review. Federal Register 56: 58804-59936 (21 Nov 1991).

  • Grant, A.L. 1924. A monograph of the genus Mimulus. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden, 11 (2-3): 99-374.

  • Greenman, J.M. 1899. Northwestern plants, chiefly from Oregon. Erythea 7(11): 115-120.

  • Heller, A.A. 1904. Western species, new and old. II. Muhlenbergia 1(4): 47-62.

  • Hitchcock, C.L., and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest: An Illustrated Manual. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington. 730 pp.

  • Johnson, Jr., C. G., and S. A. Simon. 1987. Plant associations of the Wallowa-Snake Province. Wallowa-Whitman National Forest. U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region. R6-ECOL-TP-255A-86. 400+ 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.

  • Lorain, C. and R.K. Mosely. 1990. Continued field investigations of Mimulus clivicola (bank monkeyflower). Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Boise, ID.

  • Lorain, C.C. 1991. Species management guide for Mimulus clivicola (bank monkeyflower) on the Clearwater and Nez Perce National Forest. Unpublished report on file at Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Conservation Data Center, Boise, Idaho. 16 pp. plus appendices.

  • Lorain, C.C. 1992. Conservation strategy- Mimulus clivicola (bank monkeyflower). USDA Forest Service, Northern Region, Missoula, MT. Unpublished report on file at Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Conservation Data Center, Boise, Idaho. 22 pp. plus appendices.

  • Lorain, C.C. and R.K. Moseley. 1989. Field investigation of Mimulus clivicola (bank monkeyflower), a Region 1 Sensitive Species, on the Clearwater and Nez Perce National Forests. Challenge Cost Share report submitted to the Clearwater National Forest. Unpublished report on file at: Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Boise, ID. 15 pp. plus appendices.

  • Oregon Natural Heritage Program. 1993. Rare, threatened, and endangered plants and animals of Oregon. Oregon Natural Heritage Program. Portland, OR. 79 pp.

  • Tisdale, E. W. 1986. Canyon grasslands and associated shrublands of west-central Idaho and adjacent areas. Bulletin No. 40. Forest, Wildlife and Range Experiment Station, University of Idaho, Moscow. 42 pp.

  • U.S. Forest Service (USFS). 1987. Ecosystem classification handbook FSH 12/87 R-1, Ch. 4- Ecodata sampling methods. USDA Forest Service, Regional Office, Northern Region, Missoula, MT.

  • U.S. Forest Service (USFS). 1991. Threatened, endangered and sensitive plants and animals. USDA Forest Service Manual, Chapter 2670. Washington, DC.

  • Washington Natural Heritage Program. 1994. Endangered, threatened and sensitive vascular plants of Washington. Dept. of Natural Resources, Olympia, Washington. 52 pp.

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 November 2016.
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 © 2017 NatureServe, 4600 N. Fairfax Dr., 7th Floor, Arlington Virginia 22203, 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. 2017. 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.