Natural Resources
Conservation Service
-
Search
Major Land Resource Area or ecological site by name and/or ID.
PreviousSectionsNextGeneral information
Provisional. A provisional ecological site description has undergone quality control and quality assurance review. It contains a working state and transition model and enough information to identify the ecological site.
Associated sites
R006XB012OR Dry Pumice Meadow 14-26 PZ
Dry Pumice Meadow
R006XB013OR Wet Pumice Meadow 14-26 PZ
Wet Pumice Meadow
R006XB014OR Meadow Swale 14-26 PZ
Meadow Swale
Similar sites
R006XB011OR Meadow Knoll 14-26 PZ
Meadow Knoll
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree Not specified
Shrub Not specified
Herbaceous Not specified
Physiographic features
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Landforms (1) Basin floor
(2) Alluvial fan
(3) Terrace
Flooding duration Brief (2 to 7 days) Flooding frequency Rare Ponding duration Brief (2 to 7 days) to long (7 to 30 days) Ponding frequency Occasional Elevation 4000 – 6000 ft Slope 0 – 3 % Ponding depth 1 – 2 in Water table depth 48 – 60 in Aspect Aspect is not a significant factor Climatic features
This site is characterized by relatively short, hot summers and cold, snowy winters. The site receives approximately 20 inches of precipitation per year, the bulk of which is snowfall. There are frequent thunderstorms in the summer months. There may be ground fogs in the mornings during the growing season which affect stomatal gas exchange and photosynthetic activity.
Table 3 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (average) 20 days Freeze-free period (average) 50 days Precipitation total (average) 30 in BarLineFigure 1. Monthly precipitation range
BarLineFigure 2. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature
">Influencing water features
Soil features
The soil has a well-developed argilic horizon with small amounts of glassy pumice (pre-Mazama). The soil is relatively old; Mazama pumice is eroded off the surface of the soil. There is a semi-impermeable layer in the soil at about 20 inches (it almost classifies as a duranode) that turns most roots away from the subsoil (allowing the Low Sagebrush to grow on the site). The apparent water table can penetrate the layer and saturate the surface for short periods. The water table comes to within 24 inches of the surface early in the growing season.
Table 4. Representative soil features
Surface texture (1) Loam
Family particle size (1) Loamy
Drainage class Moderately well drained Permeability class Moderate Soil depth 36 – 50 in Surface fragment cover <=3" Not specified Surface fragment cover >3" Not specified Available water capacity
(0-40in)5 – 6 in Calcium carbonate equivalent
(0-40in)2 % Electrical conductivity
(0-40in)0 – 2 mmhos/cm Sodium adsorption ratio
(0-40in)1 Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-40in)2 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(Depth not specified)Not specified Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(Depth not specified)Not specified Ecological dynamics
The sites are on remnant terraces and alluvial fans and are adjacent to or are islands within wetland sites. Elevations may differ by only 2 or 3 feet from adjacent wet sites. The sites are particularly dry in the summer; however, there is an apparent seasonal water table that has a marked influence on plant growth early in the growing season. All states have relatively thick clay layers in the subsoil and small amounts of pre-Mazama pumice. The interpretative plant community for this site is the Historic Climax Plant Community (HCPC).
State and transition model
Custom diagramStandard diagram
Figure 3. Meadow Fan State and Transition Model:
More interactive model formats are also available. View Interactive Models
More interactive model formats are also available. View Interactive Models
Click on state and transition labels to scroll to the respective textEcosystem states
State 1 submodel, plant communities
State 2 submodel, plant communities
State 1
State B, ARCA13/POSE3-CAMI7Community 1.1
State B, ARCA13/POSE3-CAMI7Dominated by Silver Sagebrush Nevada bluegrass and Small-wing Sedge. Sites in this state receive excess water and may have impermeable layer in the subsoil. Ponding duration is increased.
Figure 4. Annual production by plant type (representative values) or group (midpoint values)
Table 5. Annual production by plant type
Plant type Low
(lb/acre)Representative value
(lb/acre)High
(lb/acre)Grass/Grasslike 700 900 1100 Shrub/Vine 150 175 200 Forb 50 75 100 Total 900 1150 1400 Figure 5. Plant community growth curve (percent production by month). OR1852 , B6 Meadow Fan B. State B: Disturbance/Dry (ARCA13/POSE3-CAMI7) .
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec J F M A M J J A S O N D 0 0 10 25 30 20 5 0 5 5 0 0 State 2
HCPC, ARAR8-ARCA13/FEID/CAFICommunity 2.1
HCPC, ARAR8-ARCA13/FEID/CAFIDominated by Low sagebrush, Silver Sagebrush, Idaho Fescue, and Threadleaf Sedge. A weak cemented layer allow the Low sagebrush to thrive.
Figure 6. Annual production by plant type (representative values) or group (midpoint values)
Table 6. Annual production by plant type
Plant type Low
(lb/acre)Representative value
(lb/acre)High
(lb/acre)Grass/Grasslike 300 425 550 Shrub/Vine 175 213 250 Forb 100 130 160 Total 575 768 960 Figure 7. Plant community growth curve (percent production by month). OR1851 , B6 Meadow Fan RPC. State A: HCPC-ARAR8-ARCA13/FEID-CAFI B6 Meadow Fan RPC.
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec J F M A M J J A S O N D 0 0 5 15 35 30 10 0 5 0 0 0 Additional community tables
Table 7. Community 1.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Grass/Grasslike1 350–560 Sandberg bluegrass POSE Poa secunda 280–420 – smallwing sedge CAMI7 Carex microptera 210–350 – prairie Junegrass KOMA Koeleria macrantha 70–140 – squirreltail ELEL5 Elymus elymoides 35–70 – slender wheatgrass ELTRT Elymus trachycaulus ssp. trachycaulus 35–70 – 2 35–140 prairie Junegrass KOMA Koeleria macrantha 140–210 – mat muhly MURI Muhlenbergia richardsonis 35–70 – Kentucky bluegrass POPR Poa pratensis 35–70 – Nebraska sedge CANE2 Carex nebrascensis 35–70 – squirreltail ELEL5 Elymus elymoides 35–70 – slender wheatgrass ELTRT Elymus trachycaulus ssp. trachycaulus 35–70 – 3 245–420 smallwing sedge CAMI7 Carex microptera 210–350 – Nebraska sedge CANE2 Carex nebrascensis 35–70 – 4 34–70 Forb3 50–100 common yarrow ACMI2 Achillea millefolium 28–42 – pussytoes ANTEN Antennaria 28–42 – 4 1–42 buckwheat ERIOG Eriogonum 1–28 – old man's whiskers GETR Geum triflorum 1–28 – cinquefoil POTEN Potentilla 1–28 – 5 56–84 common yarrow ACMI2 Achillea millefolium 28–42 – pussytoes ANTEN Antennaria 28–42 – 6 1–42 buckwheat ERIOG Eriogonum 1–28 – old man's whiskers GETR Geum triflorum 1–28 – cinquefoil POTEN Potentilla 1–28 – Shrub/Vine5 150–200 silver sagebrush ARCA13 Artemisia cana 140–210 – yellow rabbitbrush CHVI8 Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus 14–28 – 7 150–200 silver sagebrush ARCA13 Artemisia cana 140–210 – yellow rabbitbrush CHVI8 Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus 14–28 – Table 8. Community 2.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Grass/Grasslike1 255–450 Idaho fescue FEID Festuca idahoensis 225–360 – Sandberg bluegrass POSE Poa secunda 45–90 – threadleaf sedge CAFI Carex filifolia 45–90 – squirreltail ELEL5 Elymus elymoides 15–45 – 2 30–90 squirreltail ELEL5 Elymus elymoides 15–45 – prairie Junegrass KOMA Koeleria macrantha 15–45 – Kentucky bluegrass POPR Poa pratensis 15–45 – Sandberg bluegrass POSE Poa secunda 15–45 – 3 45–90 threadleaf sedge CAFI Carex filifolia 45–90 – 4 15–45 Forb3 100–160 old man's whiskers GETR Geum triflorum 45–72 – pussytoes ANTEN Antennaria 27–45 – 4 3–63 common yarrow ACMI2 Achillea millefolium 3–27 – buckwheat ERIOG Eriogonum 3–27 – cinquefoil POTEN Potentilla 3–27 – 6 3–63 common yarrow ACMI2 Achillea millefolium 3–27 – buckwheat ERIOG Eriogonum 3–27 – cinquefoil POTEN Potentilla 3–27 – Shrub/Vine5 175–250 little sagebrush ARAR8 Artemisia arbuscula 180–225 – silver sagebrush ARCA13 Artemisia cana 27–45 – yellow rabbitbrush CHVI8 Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus 9–18 – 7 175–250 little sagebrush ARAR8 Artemisia arbuscula 180–225 – silver sagebrush ARCA13 Artemisia cana 27–45 – yellow rabbitbrush CHVI8 Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus 9–18 – Interpretations
Animal community
Several grazing animals seasonally use the site. Mule deer, elk, and antelope use the site for both grazing and resting. Antelope are perhaps the most frequent animals on the site. Mule deer and elk use the site int he late winter and early spring. The position of the site makes it attractive to grazing animals when the adjacent sites are wet; it is often used as a resting and ruminating area. The site is marginal for nesting birds but may be seasonally used by waterfowl which nest in the adjacent meadow and marsh sites.
Hydrological functions
The site has a high potential in low seral condition to produce significant run-off to receiving water. IN some years, the site may be flooded with water backed up in the adjacent wetter sites. Adjacent wetter and lower sites surrounding the site provide extra ground water that may move laterally through the Meadow Fan site.
Recreational uses
There is little recreational use on this site other than big game hunting and bird watching.
Other information
Due to the relatively dry nature of this site, there is a possibility that American Indians used this site for temporary, seasonal hunting camps. Survey the area carefully before recommending ground disturbing practices. The aid of an archaeologist maybe be needed.
Grazing- The site is frequently used for grazing by domestic livestock and wildlife (mule deer, elk, and antelope). There are several species that are preferred that are available for most of the growing season. The site can be havily used because the slightly higher elevation of this site makes it drier than adjacent meadow sites and therefore more attractive for resting, ruminating, and grazing.
Wildlife- There is little use by wildlife other than by grazing animals (see above). The elevated position of the site and its proximity to important wetter meadow sites makes it an important part of the entire meadow/marsh ecosystem.Supporting information
Contributors
Jeffrey P. Repp
Rangeland health reference sheet
Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health is a qualitative assessment protocol used to determine ecosystem condition based on benchmark characteristics described in the Reference Sheet. A suite of 17 (or more) indicators are typically considered in an assessment. The ecological site(s) representative of an assessment location must be known prior to applying the protocol and must be verified based on soils and climate. Current plant community cannot be used to identify the ecological site.
Author(s)/participant(s) Contact for lead author Date Approved by Approval date Composition (Indicators 10 and 12) based on Annual Production Indicators
-
Number and extent of rills:
-
Presence of water flow patterns:
-
Number and height of erosional pedestals or terracettes:
-
Bare ground from Ecological Site Description or other studies (rock, litter, lichen, moss, plant canopy are not bare ground):
-
Number of gullies and erosion associated with gullies:
-
Extent of wind scoured, blowouts and/or depositional areas:
-
Amount of litter movement (describe size and distance expected to travel):
-
Soil surface (top few mm) resistance to erosion (stability values are averages - most sites will show a range of values):
-
Soil surface structure and SOM content (include type of structure and A-horizon color and thickness):
-
Effect of community phase composition (relative proportion of different functional groups) and spatial distribution on infiltration and runoff:
-
Presence and thickness of compaction layer (usually none; describe soil profile features which may be mistaken for compaction on this site):
-
Functional/Structural Groups (list in order of descending dominance by above-ground annual-production or live foliar cover using symbols: >>, >, = to indicate much greater than, greater than, and equal to):
Dominant:
Sub-dominant:
Other:
Additional:
-
Amount of plant mortality and decadence (include which functional groups are expected to show mortality or decadence):
-
Average percent litter cover (%) and depth ( in):
-
Expected annual annual-production (this is TOTAL above-ground annual-production, not just forage annual-production):
-
Potential invasive (including noxious) species (native and non-native). List species which BOTH characterize degraded states and have the potential to become a dominant or co-dominant species on the ecological site if their future establishment and growth is not actively controlled by management interventions. Species that become dominant for only one to several years (e.g., short-term response to drought or wildfire) are not invasive plants. Note that unlike other indicators, we are describing what is NOT expected in the reference state for the ecological site:
-
Perennial plant reproductive capability:
Print Options
Sections
Font
AAAAOther
PrintThe Ecosystem Dynamics Interpretive Tool is an information system framework developed by the USDA-ARS Jornada Experimental Range, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, and New Mexico State University.
Accessibility statement
