Many sub-populations of Sanicula marilandica lack any monitoring of population size and vigor. This information is critical in assessing the status of the species within the state. Further, several populations have experienced wildfire in recent years. These populations provide an excellent opportunity for formally monitoring the species’ response to wildfire. List of Tables Table Page 1 Conservation Status of Sanicula marilandica in select jurisdictions across its in North America. 15 2 Distance between isolated Sanicula marilandica populations in Washington State. 18 3 Summary of Population Data for the Element Occurrences of Washington State. 20 4 Plant Association data for 50 sub-populations (21 populations) of Sanicula marilandica in Washington State. 23 5 Potential Threats to Sanicula marilandica in Washington State. 25 6 Land allocation of Sanicula marilandica of sub-populations in Washington State. 29 7 Agencies responsible for unmonitored Sanicula marilandica sub-populations in Washington State and the percentage of each agency’s sub-population represented. 35 8 Constancy Table for All Qualifying Element Occurrences in Washington State. 60 9 Constancy Table for Qualifying Non-Colville Element Occurrences in Washington State. 61 10 Constancy Table for Qualifying Colville Element Occurrences in Washington State. 62 List of Figures Figure Page 1 Line drawing of Sanicula marilandica from Hitchcock et al. 1961. 9 2 Line drawing of Sanicula marilandica from Pryer and Phillipe (1989). 11 3 Range of Sanicula marilandica in North America, from Pryer and Phillipe 1989. 14 4 Distribution of Sanicula marilandica in Washington 16 5 Distribution of Sanicula marilandica in Northeast Washington. 17 6 Washington Mean Temperature – Annual 70 7 Precipitation Data for Washington State 71
soils with deep surface horizons of volcanic ash and relatively deep organic matter, typically more moist and found along riparian areas (most productive for S. marilandica within this LTA). Andic Haploxerepts, these soils have less than 10 inches of ash over poorly developed soils and are moderately supportive of S. marilandica within this LTA. SUMMARY OF LTA SOIL RESULTS AND INTERRELATIONSHIPS For each soil sample site, Table 1 below will list the corresponding LTA, soil type, and soil test results. A discussion below the table will touch on the interrelationships between each of these factors and how conducive they are to S. marilandica. The optimum range for calcium in soil samples is between 600-4000 ppm. The optimum range for CEC for the soil types collected is between 25-33 meg/100g. 1: Summary of Soil Sample Results from Areas Surveyed Soil Sample Site LTA Common Soil Type Available Calcium Test Result (ppm) *** CEC Test Result (meg/100g) *** Early Winters Creek (Upper Methow River Watershed). No plants found Nu2 Vitrixerands Excessive (11200 ppm) 66.0 Twisp River Watershed. No plants found. Nj2 Typic Vitrixerands Optimum range (2400 ppm) 25.0 Chewuch River Watershed at large known population (1000 + plants) Nu2 Typic Vitrixerands Above optimum (4120 ppm) 38.0 Chewuch River Watershed at known population (8 plants) Nu2 Typic Vitrixerands Optimum (2740 ppm). 33.6 San Poil River Watershed at known population (75 plants) Mu2 Vitrandic Haploxerepts Optimum range (699 ppm) 7.5