Animal community

Wildlife Interpretations.
Animal Community – Wildlife Interpretations

This rangeland ecological site provides habitat for select native wildlife species that can tolerate cold sites, high in elevation, with a sparse plant community. Large herbivore use of the reference plant community includes mule deer, elk, and pronghorn antelope. Site (south facing) can provide winter habitat for these large herbivores. The rangeland provides important seasonal habitat for resident and migratory animals including western toad, sagebrush lizard, shrews, bats, jackrabbits, ground squirrels, mice, coyote, red fox, badger, sage-grouse, Ferruginous hawk, prairie falcon, horned lark, and western meadowlark. Sage-grouse is an area sensitive species that may be present on this site. In isolated areas encroachment of noxious and invasive plant species (cheatgrass and medusahead) can replace native plant species which provide critical feed, brood-rearing, and nesting cover for a variety of native wildlife. Water is limited, being provided only by seasonal runoff, artificial water catchments, and spring sites.

State 1 Phase 1.1 – Low Sagebrush/ Bluebunch Wheatgrass/ Nevada Bluegrass Plant Community (RPC): This plant community provides a diversity of grasses, forbs, and shrubs used by native insect communities that assist in pollination. The reptile and amphibian community is represented by common sagebrush lizard, western rattlesnake, Great Basin spadefoot toad, western toad, and northern leopard frog. Amphibians are associated with springs and isolated water bodies adjacent to this plant community. Spring developments that capture all available water would preclude the use of these sites by amphibians. Nesting, brood-rearing, winter cover, and winter food habitat for sage grouse is provided by this plant community. Low sagebrush is a preferred winter food for sage-grouse. The plant community provides spring, fall, and winter food habitat for large herbivores including mule deer, elk, and antelope. Mule deer have a preference for low sagebrush. A diverse small mammal population including golden-mantled ground squirrels, jackrabbits, deer mice, and Great Basin pocket mice may utilize this plant community.

State 1 Phase 1.2- Low Sagebrush/ Sandberg Bluegrass/ Utah Juniper Plant Community: This plant community is the result of improper grazing management and no fire. An increase in canopy cover of sagebrush and juniper contributes to a sparse herbaceous understory. A reduced herbaceous understory results in lower diversity and numbers of insects. The reptile community will be similar to the State 1 Phase 1.1 community represented by common sagebrush lizard and western rattlesnake. The reduced diversity of insects and understory cover may reduce the quality of food and cover for reptile populations. As juniper increases, habitat cover for Brewer’s sparrow, sage thrasher, and sage sparrow may increase. Remaining low sagebrush provides brood-rearing, winter cover, and winter food habitat for sage-grouse but as juniper encroaches the quality of this habitat is severely reduced or eliminated. The plant community provides seasonal (spring and early summer) forage habitat for mule deer, elk, and antelope. As juniper encroaches, the site will provide additional thermal cover for deer and elk. As juniper becomes established additional food will be available for deer. The small mammal population will be similar to that in State 1 Phase 1.1.

State 1 Phase 1.3 – Bluebunch Wheatgrass/ Sandberg Bluegrass/ Plant Community: This phase has developed due to fire, prescribed burning, or brush management. The plant community, dominated by herbaceous vegetation with little or no sagebrush provides less vertical structure for animals. Insect diversity would be reduced with the loss of sagebrush, but a native forb plant community similar to that in State 1 Phase 1.1 would still support select pollinators. Encroachment of rabbitbrush would add fall pollinator habitat to the site. As rabbitbrush matures it would enhance the structural diversity of the site. Until rabbitbrush is established, diversity and populations of reptiles would decline or be excluded. The dominance of herbaceous vegetation with no sagebrush canopy cover would eliminate use of this area for nesting, winter cover, and winter food for sage-grouse. This plant community provides limited brood-rearing habitat for sage-grouse if site is adjacent to sagebrush cover. The dominant herbaceous vegetation improves habitat for grassland avian species (horned lark and western meadowlark). Winter habitat for large herbivores would be reduced or eliminated with the loss of low sagebrush. Small mammal populations would be reduced due to loss of cover and an increase in hunting success by predators.

State 1 Phase 1.4- Low Sagebrush/ Sandberg Bluegrass Plant Community: This phase has developed due to improper grazing management and no fire. The animal community would be similar to that in State 1 Phase 1.1. The reduced vigor and canopy cover of forbs would lower the quality of habitat for pollinators. The reptile community will be similar to the State 1 Phase 1.1 community represented by common sagebrush lizard and western rattlesnake. The reduced diversity of insects and understory cover may reduce the quality of food and cover for reptile populations. The site would provide winter cover and winter food habitat for sage-grouse. The quality of brood-rearing and nesting cover for sage-grouse would be lowered as the herbaceous understory is depleted. Mule deer, elk, and pronghorn would utilize the site for winter habitat. The small mammal population will be similar to that in State 1 Phase 1.1.

State 2 – Cheatgrass/ Sandberg Bluegrass/ Medusahead Rye/ Forbs Plant Community:
This plant community is the result of continued improper grazing management and fire. The reduced forb and shrub components in the plant community would support a very limited population of pollinators. Most reptilian species identified in State 1 Phase 1.1 are not supported with food, water, or cover. This plant community does not support the habitat requirements for sage-grouse. Diversity of grassland avian species is reduced due to poor cover and available food. Birds of prey including hawks and falcons may range throughout these areas looking for prey species. Hunting success by raptors may increase. Mule deer, elk, and pronghorn may utilize the herbaceous vegetation in the early part of the year when the invasive annuals (cheatgrass) are more palatable. At other times of the year these large mammals would not regularly utilize the area due to poor food and cover conditions. Small mammal populations and diversity would be reduced due to poor quality cover, food, and an increase in hunting success by predators.

State 3 – Utah Juniper/ Bluebunch Wheatgrass/ Sandberg Bluegrass Cheatgrass/ Annuals: This state has developed due to improper grazing management and no fire. The loss of native understory vegetation will reduce insect diversity on the site. The lack of flowering plants reduces use by pollinators like butterflies and moths. Most reptilian species identified in State 1 Phase 1.1 are not supported with food, water, or cover. This plant community does not support the habitat requirements for sage-grouse. Birds using this site as resident or migratory habitat include Juniper titmouse, western bluebird, and Virginia’s warbler. The Juniper titmouse relies heavily on juniper seeds for winter food. Hunting success by raptors may decrease due to a heavy overstory of juniper. The plant community supports limited seasonal forage habitat for elk in the spring and fall. Forage habitat for mule deer is provided by juniper. As juniper encroaches the site will provide additional thermal and young of year cover for large mammals.

Grazing Interpretations.

This site has a limited potential for grazing. This site is suited for grazing by livestock in late spring, early summer, and fall. Avoid grazing when the soils are wet in the spring. Extremely stony soils may occasionally limit livestock movement.
Estimated initial stocking rate will be determined with the landowner or decision-maker. They will be based on the inventory which includes species composition, similarity index, production, past use history, season of use, and seasonal preference. Calculations used to determine estimated initial stocking rate will be based on forage preference ratings.

Hydrological functions

The soils in this site are in hydrologic group D. Erosion can be severe it the vegetative cover is depleted. They have high runoff potential.

Recreational uses

The site provides limited recreational opportunities for hunting, off-road vehicles, snowmobiles, hiking, cross-country skiing, early spring flower observation and photography.

Wood products

none.

Other products

none.

Other information

Field Offices

American Falls
Blackfoot
Burley
Driggs
Idaho Falls
Malad
Pocatello
Rexburg
Soda Springs
St. Anthony

Revision Notes: “Previously Approved” Provisional
This Provisional ecological site concept has passed Quality
Control (QC) and Quality Assurance (QA) to ensure that the site
meets the 2014 NESH standards for a Provisional ecological site
description. This is an updated “Previously Approved” ESD that
represents a first-generation tier of documentation that, prior to the
release of the 2014 National Ecological Site Handbook (NESH),
met all requirements as an “Approved” ESD as laid out in the 1997
(rev.1, 2003) National Range and Pasture Handbook (NRPH). The
document fully described the Reference State and Community
Phase in the State-and-Transition model. All other alternative
states are at least described in narrative form. The “Previously
Approved” ESD has been field-tested for a minimum of five years
and is a proven functional document for conservation planning.
The “Previously Approved” ESD does not contain all tabular and
narrative entries as required in the current “Approved” level of
documentation, but it is expected that the “Previously Approved”
ESD will continue refinement toward an “Approved” status.

Site Development and Testing Plan:
Future work, as described in a Project Plan, is necessary to
validate the information in this Provisional Ecological Site
Description. This will include field activities to collect low-,
medium-, and high-intensity sampling, soil correlations, and
analysis of that data. Annual field reviews should be done by soil
scientists and vegetation specialists. The final field review, peer
review, quality control, and quality assurance reviews of the ESD
will be required to produce the final document.

Inventory data references

Information presented here has been derived from NRCS clipping and other inventory data. Also, field knowledge of range-trained personnel was used. Those involved in developing this site description include: Dave Franzen, co-owner, Intermountain Rangeland Consultants, LLC Jacy Gibbs, co-owner, Intermountain Rangeland Consultants, LLC Jim Cornwell, Range Management Specialist, IASCD Brendan Brazee, State Rangeland Management Specialist, NRCS, Idaho Lee Brooks, Range Management Specialist, IASCD Kristen May, Resource Soil Scientist, NRCS, Idaho

Type locality

Other references

Hironaka, M., M.A. Fosberg, A. H. Winward. 1983. Sagebrush-Grass Habitat Types of Southern Idaho. University of Idaho. Moscow, Idaho. Bulletin Number “35”.
Petersen, S.L., 2004. A Landscape-Scale Assessment of Plant Communities, Hydrologic Processes, and State-and-Transition Theory in a Western Juniper Dominated Ecosystem. PhD Dissertation. Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon.

USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 2004. Restoring Western Ranges and Wildlands. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-136-vols. 1-3.
USDA, NRCS.2001. The PLANTS Database, Version 3.1 (http://plants.usda.gov.). National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70874-4490 USA.
USDA, Forest Service, Fire Effects Information Database. 2004. www.fs.fed.us/database/feis
USDI Bureau of Land Management, US Geological Survey; USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, Agricultural Research Service; Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health. Technical Reference 1734-6; Version 4-2005.

Approval

Kirt Walstad, 2/13/2025

Print Options