Rubus stipulatus (State END) Recovery Plan

On this page

Recovery Criteria | Population Assessment | Threat Assessment | Conservation Actions | Information Needs

Recovery Criteria for Rubus stipulatus 

Recovery criteria were developed based on three core conservation principles, redundancy, resiliency and representation. These principles were assessed and criteria developed to be in line with the NatureServe Conservation Status Assessment methodology (Master et al 2012, Faber-Langendoen et al 2012). The NatureServe methodology defines measurable factors and quantitative thresholds for them that are important for understanding the risk of extirpation (risk of local extinction) of a species. Ultimately, a species can only be considered recovered if its risk of being lost from the State is very low, and likely to stay low in the foreseeable future. The three principles are designed to work together to ensure the wholistic conservation of a species. All recovery criteria must be met independently for a species to be considered recovered. 

Redundancy

Redundancy is the ability of the species to withstand catastrophic events. - Criteria NOT Currently Met

Redundancy was measured in two ways. First, the number of EOs for R. stipulatus was extracted from the MN DNR’s Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS) spring 2026. An EO is typically created such that it represents a single biological population. Second, the total range extent was then calculated as the area (in Kilometers squared) of the minimum convex polygon encompassing those final EOs.

Criteria: There will be a minimum of 21 extant populations of R. stipulatus that may be viable in Minnesota with a range extent of at least 5,000 km2 with regular, adequate in-field survey documentation of their status.

Status: As of 2026, there were 35 extant populations that may be viable (excluding D and E ranked EOs) in Minnesota with a range extent of 19,937 km2. The number of EOs and their range extent currently meet the redundancy criteria for R. stipulatus, and nearly half of the populations lack adequate in-field documentation of their status (ten of the 35 are E ranked and six were last surveyed more than five years ago).

Resiliency

Resiliency is defined as the ability of a population to withstand (i.e. fluctuate in size from year-to-year with no overall decline) natural stochasticity or human induced disturbance events. - Criteria NOT Currently Met

Resiliency was measured as the number of viable populations of R. stipulatus. The quality rank of the EO, as per NatureServe’s Ranking Species Occurrences: Generic Guideline and Decision Key (Geoffery et al. 2020), was used to estimate population viability. Geoffery et al.’s method qualitatively estimates a population’s probability of persistence within a 20–30-year future time period using three viability metrics: population size, habitat conditions, and landscape context. Viability was categorized as:

• Presumed viable: EOs ranked A, AB, or B quality.  

• Possibly viable: EOs ranked BC, C, or CD quality.  

• Not viable: EOs ranked D quality or X (known to be extirpated). These were generally excluded from this assessment. Or,

• Insufficient information: an EO ranked E. It is unlikely that these would qualify as presumed viable based on the information that is available. They are considered, at most, possibly viable in this assessment.

Criteria: There will be at a minimum of 13 populations of R. stipulatus with excellent or good viability (A or B EO ranks) with evidence of that the population size is stable or increasing size, evidence that threats are low or absent and occur on protected land.  

Status: As of 2026, there were five populations presumed viable in Minnesota (all B ranked). Three of the five have recent survey data, but none have been surveyed regularly enough to provide evidence of stable or increasing size. All are likely buffered from negative hydrologic impacts. Habitat management is unknown or not occurring in all five. And again, none have been surveyed regularly enough to monitor the impact of threats. Two populations occur on protected land. Two are unlikely to be impacted by future land development, however one of those has been subject to Takings in the past. The last has been subject to Takings in the past and has no protection against further development activities.  

Representation

Representation is defined as the ability of a species to adapt to changing conditions. Representation can be ecological or genetic. - ARE Currently Met

Representation was assessed as the number of Ecological Subsections [hyperlink] containing populations relative to the expected distribution among Ecological Subsections predicted by a species habitat model (citation). The species habitat model was assumed to be an estimate of the species full ecological niche in Minnesota, including core versus edge of range dynamics. The criteria for representation were set to ensure viable populations exist across that entire range.

Criteria: No current ecological diversity will be lost from Minnesota. Representation will be attained proportionally within R. stipulatus’ core area, with 10-13 extant populations (approx. 47-66% of the 21 minimum) maintained in the Anoka Sand Plain and 2-4 extant populations (10-20% of 21) maintained in the Mille Lacs Uplands. In addition, there will be at least one extant population maintained in each of the remaining currently occupied Ecological Subsections.  

Status: As of 2026, there were 23 extant populations of R. stipulatus’ that may be viable in the Anoka Sand Plain. Only one is presumed viable (B ranked) and five have insufficient information to assess viability (E ranked). There are four extant populations that may be viable in the Mille Lacs Uplands. Two are possibly viable (BC and C ranked) and two have insufficient information. The Oak Savanna and St. Paul-Baldwin Plains each contain one presumed viable population. The Pine Moraines & Outwash Plains contains one possibly viable population. Lastly, the St. Louis Moraines and Northshore Highlands each only contain E ranked populations.  

While R. stipulatus’ representation criteria are currently considered met, the lack of protection and baseline information for many of these populations could quickly result in their loss or degradation, also losing its currently sufficient representation across the state.  

Read more about the methods used to develop recovery criteria based on redundancy, resiliency and representation

Viability Metrics (Resiliency)

Population Size: Population size for R. stipulatus was estimated as the number of genetic individuals (genets). A genet is as a genetically distinct individual arising from a single root crown consisting of at least two stems (ramets), also called canes. Two factors make estimating population size for this species challenging. First, R. stipulatus tends to co-occur with other Rubus species. While R. stipulatus is distinctly identifiable, congeners are visually similar enough that identification and counting of an intermixed patch can be onerous. Second, all species of Rubus produce a variable number of stems (ramets) in any given year, typically ranging between 2 and 5. Thus, even if a population is pure solely R. stipulatus, a simple count of the number of stems will not provide a consistent estimate of the number of individuals (genets) in the population. All population count data within the NHIS for R. stipulatus were assumed to be stem (ramet) counts. These counts were converted to population size (genets) ranges, estimated as one-fifth of the stem count up to one-half of the count recorded in NHIS.

Habitat Conditions: Suitable habitat is defined as areas of occupied and unoccupied habitat in which data or expert opinion suggest R. stipulatus individuals could successfully survive and reproduce for multiple generations. The size and quality of suitable habitat is taken into consideration in EO ranking. Generally, direct information on habitat size and quality is sparse in the NHIS for this species. Habitat condition was assessed for each EO by considering if a site has an active habitat management plan, the historical impact of development, particularly permitted takings, and any relevant surveyor notes that were available in the NHIS.

Landscape Context: The connectedness of suitable habitat patches, the quality of the connecting buffer, and the security of the habitat are important landscape features for R. stipulatus. A high-quality protective buffer should create a contiguous area of native vegetation surrounding and connecting all suitable habitat patches in which deleterious human activity can be mitigated. To estimate the extent of buffering around each EO, a 250-square-meter zone around each EO was assessed for the likelihood of hydrological impacts. Two metrics were used, the percent of impervious surface and the level of ditching or channelization within the buffer zone. Those metrics were combined into an aggregate score of “buffered”, “mostly buffered,” “likely impacted,” and “impacted.” Any relevant surveyor notes that were available in the NHIS were also considered. 

Element Occurrence Ranks (Resiliency)

Many of the EOs for R. stipulatus did not have EO ranks assigned by an in-field surveyor. Those EO were ranked through a desktop analysis using the same guidelines as in-field assessments. Geoffery et al.’s method uses standardized guidelines for ranking EOs, assuming the surveyor will incorporate species-specific attributes into their interpretation of those guidelines (e.g., life-history, habitat requirements). The definitions for EO quality ranks used for R. stipulatus in this assessment are:

A Quality: Defined as likely sustainable for a minimum of 20-30 years with compatible habitat management practices on-site and absence of off-site activities that are likely to influence the hydrology of site. The population is relatively invulnerable (does not decline or rebounds quickly) to stochastic events such as drought or flooding. The occurrence consists of a meta-population that is estimated at a minimum of 500 individuals. The occurrence occupies a minimum of two acres of high-quality habitat. Occurrence is within a much larger area of high-quality suitable habitat. There is a minimum of 200 feet of protective buffer around occupied habitat, and all suitable habitat patches within the wetland complex are connected. Non-native species may be present but minimal.  

B Quality: Defined as likely sustainable for a minimum of 20-30 years with compatible management habitat management practices on-site and off-site activities that could influence the hydrology of site are monitored and could be controlled. The population is likely invulnerable (does not decline or rebounds quickly) to stochastic events such as drought or flooding. Population consists of at minimum 250 individuals, occupies slightly less than two acres, or is found in medium quality habitat. Total area of suitable habitat is less than a typical A-Ranked occurrence. There is a minimum of 100 feet of protective buffer around occupied habitat, and most suitable habitat patches within a wetland complex are connected. Non-native species may be present but minimal.  

C Quality: Defined as unlikely to be extirpated in the near-term (within a generation), but persistence under current conditions is uncertain and population is vulnerable to decline due to stochastic events. Improvement in population viability is possible with compatible management and/or restorative conservation actions. Population size estimates do not warrant A or B ranking, but habitat occupied is of medium quality with some protective buffering around suitable habitat patches. Non-native species may be present at higher amounts but may not yet be dominant.  

D Quality: Defined as unlikely to be sustained for 10 years or one generation without immediate conservation actions. The population may already be functionally extirpated. Very small population size in poor quality habitat with little to no protective buffers. Non-native species dominate the community.  

E Quality: Viability not assessed.  

X Quality: Extirpated

Species Habitat Modeling (Redundancy)

A species habitat model for R. stipulatus was developed in 2024 (citation). The model result was assumed to be an estimate of the species full ecological niche in Minnesota, including core versus edge of range dynamics. The model predicted that suitable habitat for R. stipulatus exists in 16 Ecological Subsections (using a threshold of at least 0.05% of the total area of the Subsection is predicted to be suitable). However, the core area for R. stipulatus was modeled to be within only two Ecological Subsections which together contain 67% of the total predicted suitable habitat within Minnesota (Anoka Sand Plain 47%; Mille Lacs Uplands 20%). No other Subsection exceeds 5% predicted suitable habitat).

Currently, R. stipulatus is only known to be extant in eight Ecological Subsections. The predicted core area and the documented core area differ slightly. Only one Ecological Subsections makes up the core area based on the proportion of extant populations (Anoka Sand Plain 66%), with two other Subsections exceeding 5% of extant populations (Mille Lacs Uplands 10%; Chippewa Plains 7%). The edge of range estimates (small proportion of suitable habitat predicted and a small proportion of extant populations) match well.

The proportion of predicted suitable habitat was compared to the proportion of extant populations within each Ecological Subsection to derive recovery criteria for representation. 

Ecological Subsection	Proportion of Extant Populations	Proportion of Predicted Habitat
Agassiz Lowlands		0.01
Anoka Sand Plain	0.66	0.47
Big Woods		0.01
Border Lakes		0.01
Chippewa Plains	0.07	0.01
Littlefork-Vermillion Uplands		0.02
Mille Lacs Uplands	0.10	0.20
Minnesota River Prairie		0.01
North Shore Highlands	0.02	0.03
Oak Savanna	0.02	0.02
Pine Moraines & Outwash Plains	0.02	0.03
Rochester Plateau		0.01
St. Louis Moraines	0.05	0.04
St. Paul-Baldwin Plains	0.05	0.05
Tamarack Lowlands		0.05
The Blufflands		0.02

Population Status Assessment for R. stipulatus

A population status assessment (by EO) for Rubus stipulatus in Minnesota was conducted with data as of Spring 2026. View status assessment table.

Summary

EO #	Last Survey	Population Size	Other Notes
32415	2004	200+	Large contiguous habitat of approx. 850 acres
36769	2009	10 to 20
36770	2009	20 to 100
37035	2021	30-70+	Population occurs in multiple patches separated by development
39046	2024	60-150	Contiguous habitat is small and heavily encroached by invasive shrubs; enacting management is difficult due to the small area and proximity to development on all sides
41422	2017	Unknown
41451	2016	10+
41734	2024	260-650	Large contiguous habitat
41735	2020	300-750	Large contiguous habitat
41736	2013	60-150
41821	2020	Unknown	Most individuals within transportation right-of-way
41882	2021	Unknown
41883	2024	<10	Population used to be multiple patches; most recent survey only found one small patch, despite an exhaustive search
41887	2024	1,000-2,500	Population occurs in multiple patches separated by development
41919	2024	0
41978	2021	150-375
41981	2021	1,300-3,250
41990	2024	2,600-6,500
42161	2024	<10
42176	2024	10 to 25
42184	2021	Unknown
42560	2024	2 to 25
42642	2024	24 to 60
42720	2024	20 to 50
42721	2024	6 to 20
42723	2023	20 to 50
42747	2024	4 to 10
42754	2024	26 to 81	Most individuals in transportation right-of-way
42778	2020	Unknown
42804	2024	Unknown
42847	2022	16-40
42853	2022	30 to 75	Most individuals in transportation right-of-way
42865	2014	500 to 1,875	Population occurs in multiple patches separated by development
42957	2024	<10
42958	2024	6 to 15
42959	2024	Unknown
43002	2024	<10
43030	2025	6 to 15	Development planned in immediate vicinity of population.
43142	2025	<10
43192	2025	20 to 110
43194	2025	30-70+

Location and Land Status

EO #	Ecological Subsection	Land Ownership
32415	Oak Savanna	County
36769	Anoka Sand Plain	Private
36770	Mille Lacs Uplands	Private
37035	Anoka Sand Plain	Mixed; Private & City
39046	Anoka Sand Plain	State
41422	Mille Lacs Uplands	Tax Forfeit
41451	St. Louis Moraines	Tax Forfeit
41734	Chippewa Plains	Federal
41735	Chippewa Plains	Federal
41736	Anoka Sand Plain	Private
41821	Anoka Sand Plain	Private
41882	Anoka Sand Plain	County
41883	Anoka Sand Plain	Mixed; State & County
41887	Anoka Sand Plain	Mixed; Private & County
41919	Anoka Sand Plain	Private
41978	Anoka Sand Plain	Private
41981	Anoka Sand Plain	Private
41990	St. Paul-Baldwin Plains	City
42161	Anoka Sand Plain	Private
42176	Anoka Sand Plain	Private
42184	Mille Lacs Uplands	Private
42560	Anoka Sand Plain	County
42642	Mille Lacs Uplands	State
42720	St. Paul-Baldwin Plains	Private
42721	Anoka Sand Plain	County
42723	Anoka Sand Plain	Private
42747	Anoka Sand Plain	Private
42754	Chippewa Plains	Private
42778	Anoka Sand Plain	City
42804	St. Louis Moraines	State
42847	North Shore Highlands	Private
42853	Pine Moraines & Outwash Plains	State
42865	Anoka Sand Plain	Mixed; Private & City
42957	Anoka Sand Plain	State
42958	Anoka Sand Plain	Private
42959	Anoka Sand Plain	Mixed; Private & City
43002	Anoka Sand Plain	County
43030	Anoka Sand Plain	Private
43142	Anoka Sand Plain	State
43192	Anoka Sand Plain	Private
43194	Anoka Sand Plain	Private

Threats and Management

EO #	Habitat Management	Past Takings	Future Land Development	Hydrologic Stability
32415	Unknown	None	Unlikely	Buffered
36769	No	None	No Protection	Buffered
36770	No	None	No Protection	Mostly Buffered
37035	Likely Yes	Partial impact	Unlikely (Partial)	Likely Impacted
39046	Yes - Site Level	None	Prohibited	Likely Impacted
41422	Likely No	None	No Protection	Buffered
41451	Likely No	None	Unlikely	Buffered
41734	Unknown	None	Prohibited	Buffered
41735	Unknown	None	Prohibited	Buffered
41736	Unknown	Partial impact	No Protection	Likely Impacted
41821	No	Partial impact	No Protection	Likely Impacted
41882	Yes - Species Specific	Partial impact	Unlikely	Mostly Buffered
41883	No	None	Prohibited	Buffered
41887	Yes - Species Specific	Partial impact	No Protection	Likely Impacted
41919	N/A	Destroyed	N/A	N/A
41978	Unknown	Partial impact	No Protection	Mostly Buffered
41981	No	Partial impact	No Protection	Mostly Buffered
41990	Unknown	Partial impact	Unlikely (Partial)	Mostly Buffered
42161	No	None	Prohibited (Partial)	Buffered
42176	No	Partial Impact	No Protection	Impacted
42184	No	Partial impact	No Protection	Buffered
42560	Unknown	None	Unlikely	Mostly Buffered
42642	Unknown	None	Prohibitied	Mostly Buffered
42720	No	None	No Protection	Impacted
42721	No	None	Unlikely	Buffered
42723	No	None	No Protection	Mostly Buffered
42747	No	None	No Protection	Buffered
42754	No	None	No Protection	Mostly Buffered
42778	Unknown	None	No Protection	Mostly Buffered
42804	No	None	Unlikely	Buffered
42847	No	Destroyed	No Protection	Likely Impacted
42853	No	None	No Protection	Mostly Buffered
42865	No	None	No Protection	Impacted
42957	Yes - Site Level	None	Prohibited	Likely Impacted
42958	No	None	No Protection	Impacted
42959	No	None	No Protection	Likely Impacted
43002	No	No	No Protection	Impacted
43030	No	None	No Protection	Likely Impacted
43142	Yes - Site Level	None	Prohibited	Mostly Buffered
43192	No	Partial impact	No Protection	Impacted
43194	No	None	No Protection	Impacted

Read more about the methods used to conduct the population assessment of R. stipulatus’

EO #: The Element Occurrence number is the unique identifier given to a known location of rare species in the MN DNR’s Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS). An EO is meant to represent a biological population.  

Ecological Subsection: The Ecological Subsection of each EO follows the MN DNR’s Ecological Classification System.  

Land Ownership: Ownership was determined using publicly available land parcel resources.

Last Survey: All ground survey-based information in the assessment table is current as of the year of the last on-the-ground survey documented within the NHIS. All other information provided was assessed in Spring 2026.

EO Rank: Element Occurrence quality ranks were either assigned by the surveyor in-field, or using the population size, habitat condition and landscape context criteria developed to assess viability {link to Viability metrics section} where the NHIS survey data and expert knowledge were sufficient to make a quality determination. Very few EOs had in-field rank assignments.

Population Size: Population size was estimated as the number of genetic individuals (genets), which typically consist of 2-5 stems (ramets). Data within the NHIS that was assumed to be counts of ramets, so population size ranges are reported in the assessment table as one-fifth of the number of ramets to one-half the number of ramets.

Habitat Condition was assessed by:

1. Habitat Management: The likelihood of appropriate habitat management was assessed based on the availability of a management plan and expert knowledge of the site. Information on management was not always easy to access, resulting in many EOs marked as “Unknown.” In this column, “No” means the assessor was certain no management is taking place. “Likely Yes” or “Likely No” means the assessor was confident that management is or is not taking place, but not completely certain. “Yes” means the assessor was certain management is taking place. Those EOs were categorized as having a management plan at either a “Site Level,” meaning the plan only addresses general habitat management needs, or a “Species Specific” plant, meaning the plan directly addressing enhancing or maintaining R. stipulatus.

2. Past Takings: Takings information was gathered from internal DNR records, expert knowledge and aerial imagery. In this column, “Destroyed” means all documented individuals are known to have been removed through a permitted Taking. “Partial impact” means at least some of the population has been Taken, through permitted or unpermitted activities, but a portion of the population remains. “Avoided” means that development occurred in the vicinity (altering the greater landscape context) but was modified to prevent direct Taking of individuals. “None” means the assessor found no evidence of Takings of R. stipulatus within the EO.

3. Other Notes: any relevant expert information and surveyor notes that were available in the NHIS were also considered.  

Landscape Context was assessed by:

1. Future Land Development: The potential for future losses to an EO due to development was assessed by considering land ownership and designation from publicly available land parcel records. “Prohibited” was assigned to EOs on land that is permanently protected and designated for conservation or uses compatible with conservation (e.g., DNR-owned Scientific and Natural Areas, Wildlife Management Areas, National Forests). “Unlikely” was assigned to EOs on land that may not have full protection from development but is designated for uses that are likely to maintain its natural state and it is unlikely to change ownership (e.g., County-owned Parks or Wilderness Areas). “No Protected” was assigned to EOs on land under private ownership, corporate ownership, or otherwise does not have any other assurances the natural area containing R. stipulaus will remain. EOs with patches under different conditions are marked as ‘partial.’

2. Hydrologic Stability: The assessors combined two metrics to estimate Hydrologic Stability, percent of impervious surface and the level of ditching or channelization, within a 250 m2 buffer zone around each EO. A qualitative assessment of the likelihood of negative impacts to that buffer zone from those two metrics was assigned from “Buffered,” meaning no evidence of negative impacts, “Mostly Buffered,” “Likely Impacted,” to “Impacted,” meaning strong evidence of negative impacts with the buffer zone.  

3. Other Notes: any relevant expert information and surveyor notes that were available in the NHIS were also considered.

Threat Assessment

Major threats and the stresses they induce for Rubus stipulatus were categorized according to The IUCN Threats Classification Scheme, Version 3.3 (IUCN, 2022) and the IUCN Stresses Classification Scheme, Version 1.0 (IUCN, 2012). Threats in Minnesota were determined based on information from the MN DNRs Rubus stipulatus Rare Species Guide profile (MN DNR, 2025), the Rubus stipulatus NatureServe Explorer profile (NatureServe, 2024), and local expert opinion. 

Development

Table 1d: Major Threat - Invasive and Other Problematic Species, Genes and Diseases

Sub-Threats	Stresses Caused	Discussion
Housing and Urban Areas;  Commercial and Industrial Areas	Ecosystem Conversion;  Ecosystem Degradation;  Indirect Ecosystem Effects;  Species Mortality	The core area of this species range in MN is within the Anoka Sand Plain, an area experiencing explosive residential and commercial growth. There are records of ten residential or commercial development projects in Minnesota causing take of R. stipulatus. Unpermitted projects have likely also caused impacts. While direct mortality is a key stressor, there are also negative impacts through loss of surrounding habitat, habitat fragmentation, genetic isolation, and habitat degradation, particularly alteration in hydrology.

Corridors 

Table 1b: Major Threat - Transportation and Service Corridors

Sub-Threats	Stresses Caused	Discussion
Roads and Railroads;  Utility and Service Lines	Ecosystem Conversion;  Ecosystem Degradation;  Indirect Ecosystem Effects;  Species (direct) Mortality	The construction and modification of roads associated with development is a source of past and likely future permitted takings. Also, there are several occurrences that have been reduced only to individuals remaining on degraded roadsides, right-of-way habitats, or utility corridors.

System Modifications 

Table 1c: Major Threat - Natural System Modifications

Sub-Threats	Stresses Caused	Discussion
Fire and Fire Suppression	Ecosystem Degradation;  Species Disturbance	The natural system that R. stipulatus is a part of is maintained by regular disturbance, such as fire. The frequency of natural disturbances has been altered by human development. Management tools needed to accomplish this goal will vary from site to site, but dormant season prescribed burns are preferred. Burns must be conducted at a minimum four-year rotation (three growing seasons of rest between burns). R. stipulatus is top-killed by fire and needs time to recover after disturbance.
Dams and water management or use	Ecosystem Degradation;  Ecosystem Indirect Effects	Groundwater resource use and changes to surface water hydrology in the Anoka Sand Plain have increased with development. Ditches, drain tiles, impoundments, storm water ponds, ground and surface water abstraction etc. are all deleterious to R. stipulatus’ habitat through changing ground or surface water dynamics. Even where populations occur on protected land, negative hydrologic impacts can occur if there is an insufficient buffer between the population and neighboring activities.

Competition Species, Genes and Diseases 

Table 1d: Major Threat - Invasive and Other Problematic Species, Genes and Diseases

Sub-Threats	Stresses Caused	Discussion
Invasive Non-Native or Alien Species;  Problematic Native Species	Ecosystem Degradation	The small, fragmented nature of R. stipulatus’ habitat makes displacement by problematic species more likely. Exotic Phalaris arundinacea (Reed Canary Grass) and woody vegetation are the main concerns. If the extent of encroachment is limited, control methods should favor mechanical removal. Heavy machinery should be avoided to prevent soil damage. Chemical control should also be avoided, if possible, to prevent impacts to non-target species.

Conservation Actions

Major conservation actions needed for Rubus stipulatus were categorized according to The IUCN Conservation Actions Classification Scheme, Version 2.0 (IUCN, 2012). Priority conservation actions needed in Minnesota were determined based on information from the MN DNRs Rubus stipulatus Rare Species Guide profile (MN DNR, 2025), and local expert opinion. 

See the full assessment of conservation actions likely to most benefit R. stipulatus in Minnesota

content 2

Information Needs

Major research and information needs for Rubus stipulatus were categorized according to The IUCN Research Needed Classification Scheme, Version 2.0 (IUCN, 2012). Priority research and information needed in Minnesota were determined based on information from the MN DNRs Rubus stipulatus Rare Species Guide profile (MN DNR, 2025) and local expert opinion. 

See the full assessment of information most urgently needed to support the recovery of R. stipulatus in Minnesota

content 1

References

Work in Progress