Natural Resources
Conservation Service
-
Search
Major Land Resource Area or ecological site by name and/or ID.
PreviousSectionsNextGeneral information
Draft. A draft ecological site description is either incomplete or has not undergone quality control and quality assurance review.
Associated sites
R019XD053CA Coastal Bluff 14-16" p.z.
Coastal Bluff 14-16" p.z. is located geographically below the Coastal Terrace 14-16" p.z. site.
Similar sites
R019XD041CA Shallow Coastal Scrub 14-16" p.z.
Shallow Coastal Scrub 14-16" p.z. has steeper topography, lower production, and has presence of our Lord's candle and prickly pear.
R019XD032CA Shallow Loam 18-22" p.z.
Shallow Loam 16-20" p.z. is located on inland hills and has lower production.
R019XD053CA Coastal Bluff 14-16" p.z.
Coastal Bluff 14-16" p.z. has steeper topography, is a more erodible site, and has presence of giant coreopsis.
R019XD045CA Shaly Loam 16-20" p.z.
Shaly Loam 16-20" p.z. is located on inland hills and has lower production.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree Not specified
Shrub (1) Artemisia californica
(2) Malosma laurinaHerbaceous (1) Nassella pulchra
Physiographic features
This site occurs on alluvial fans and terraces. Slopes range from 0 to 15 percent. Aspects are variable. Elevation ranges from 50 to 2150 feet.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Landforms (1) Alluvial fan
(2) Terrace
Flooding frequency None Ponding frequency None Elevation 50 – 1250 ft Slope 0 – 15 % Aspect Aspect is not a significant factor Climatic features
This site receives less annual rainfall than the more inland sites due to movement of hot and cold air masses and pressure systems influenced by the ocean. Roughly 94% of yearly precipitation falls from November through April. The driest months are June, July and August, with those months historically receiving trace amounts of rainfall.
Table 3 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (average) 350 days Freeze-free period (average) 370 days Precipitation total (average) 20 in BarLineFigure 1. Monthly precipitation range
BarLineFigure 2. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature
">Influencing water features
This site is not influences by wetland or riparian water features.
Soil features
This ecological site is associated with the coastal phase of several soil components. These are the Danville, Lockwood, and Cropley soil series. All of these soils are deep or very deep and have formed in alluvium derived from shales, and other sedimentary or crystalline rocks. Most of these soils have been plowed and/or irrigated for crops. They have a calcium carbonate equivalent of 2- 10 percent in the lower horizons. The Danville series has a sandy clay loam surface texture in the upper 18 inches, with a clay horizon form 18 to 34 inches. Gravelly sandy clay loams are found from 38 to 67 inches, with a heavy clay loam below that.
The Lockwood series has a shaly loam surface texture in the upper 26 inches, with shaly heavy loams, and shaly clay loams to 82 inches. A heavy loam texture is below 82 inches. The Cropley series has clay textures throughout and is a vertisol, which dries in summer creating deep vertical cracks in the soil.
The Danville soils are classified as Fine, smectitic, thermic Pachic Argixerolls. The Lockwood soils are a Fine-loamy, mixed, superactive, thermic Pachic Argixerolls. The Cropley soils are a Fine, smectitic, thermic Aridic Haploxererts.
This site is correlated with the following soil components within the Santa Monica Mountain Soil Survey Area (CA692).
200 Danville, coastal 2
201 Danville, coastal 2
210 Danville, coastal 2
211 Danville, coastal 2
360 Danville, coastal 2
361 Danville, coastal 2
380 Danville, coastal 2
390 Danville,very gravelly surface 1
390 Danville, coastal 80
391 Danville, coastal 85
410 Lockwood, coastal 80
411 Lockwood, coastal 80
430 Cropley, coastal 85
430 Danville, coastal 8
431 Cropley, coastal 50
432 Cropley, coastal 85
432 Danville, coastal 10
433 Cropley, coastal 40
433 Danville, coastal 5
434 Cropley, coastal 2
434 Cropley, coastal 35
440 Danville, coastal 2
Table 4. Representative soil features
Surface texture (1) Clay loam
(2) Loam
(3) Clay
Family particle size (1) Clayey
Drainage class Moderately well drained to well drained Permeability class Slow to moderately slow Soil depth 60 – 0 in Surface fragment cover <=3" 0 – 20 % Surface fragment cover >3" 0 – 5 % Available water capacity
(0-40in)3.88 – 10.71 in Calcium carbonate equivalent
(0-40in)2 – 10 % Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-40in)6.1 – 8.4 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(Depth not specified)0 – 20 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(Depth not specified)0 – 26 % Ecological dynamics
The historical and potential natural community for this ecological site is the California sagebrush plant community. This community is dominated by California (coastal) sagebrush (Artemisia californica), purple needlegrass (Nassella pulchra), laurel sumac (Malosma laurina), and coyote brush (Bacharris pilularis) with an understory of native perennial grasses and forbs. This ecological site is found on coastal terraces near the ocean.
The southern California sagebrush plant communities are considered threatened by California Department of Fish and Game, and are a home to 100 or more potentially threatened or endangered species. The California sagebrush communities are the main habitat for the California gnatcatcher which is listed as a threatened species by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Urban development and invasion of non-native species are the main threats to these plant communities.
California sagebrush has shallow fibrous roots that are well adapted for the shallow loamy soils associated with this ecological site. Soils with loamy surface textures have a moderate water holding capacity within that zone, which allows the roots to reach the soil moisture for a longer period of time than the more coarse textured soils.
California sagebrush communities can perpetuate themselves without much disturbance. Stands can be greater than 60 years old with out encroachment of chaparral species or stand senescence. California sagebrush can produce seedlings in the absence of fire. So the stand can continue to renew itself. However, human caused disturbances have brought change to California sagebrush communities. The introduction of non-native annual grasses and forbs and an increased fire frequency have caused some sagebrush communities to convert to annual grasslands.
The primary natural disturbance to this community is lightning-ignited fire. The historic fire interval for California sagebrush is difficult to determine, but several reports indicates a range between 20 to 100 years (Hauser, 2006). Fire frequencies have increased in recent times due to human ignited fires and the increased flammability and continuity of the non-native annual grasses. One fire study in the Santa Monica Mountain sagebrush communities concluded that the average fire return interval was 14 years between 1909 and 1977 (Hauser, 2006).
State and transition model
Custom diagramStandard diagram
Figure 3. Coastal Terrace 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 3 submodel, plant communities
State 4 submodel, plant communities
State 5 submodel, plant communities
State 1
California sagebrush scrubland with non-native grasses and forbs 2.1Community 1.1
California sagebrush scrubland with non-native grasses and forbs 2.1This plant community is the interpretive plant community for this ecological site. It is dominated by purple needlegrass (Nassella pulchra), California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), trefoil (Lotus spp.), and sawtooth goldenbush (Hazardia squarrosa). Laurel sumac (Malosma laurina), pricklypear (Opuntia spp.), dwarf chaparral broom (also called coyote brush) (Baccharis pilularis), and black sage (Salvia mellifera) are also present. It differs from the historic plant community due to the presence of non-native grasses. Red brome (Bromus rubens) is the dominant non-native grass, but other oats (Avena spp.) and bromes (Bromus spp.) create 5 percent of the annual production.
This community may exist for many years without disturbance, because these shrubs continually produce seedlings and new basal spouts, even in the absence of fire. However moderate and high severity fires are a natural part of this ecosystem, and when they occur, it initiates (pathway 2.1a) stand regeneration.
State 2
California sagebrush shrubland regeneration with non-native species 2.2Community 2.1
California sagebrush shrubland regeneration with non-native species 2.2After a fire, this diverse and short lived community develops. Several native "fire follower" species germinate from seeds that have been lying dormant in the soil more many years. California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), black sage (Salvia mellifera), and purple needlegrass (Nassella pulchra) can resprout after fire. These species also regenerate from seed.
A study concerning the suppression of California sagebrush regeneration by annual grasses showed that the sagebrush had difficulty competing with the non-native grasses during germination and the first season of growth, most likely due to limited water resources. Annual grass roots are closer to the soil surface making them capable of taking up water before the sagebrush roots, which are commonly deeper in the soil surface. Annuals also tend to utilize soil water earlier in the season and more efficiently, leaving the soil depleted for the sagebrush. By the second year, the California sagebrush that survived has a more established root system and the annual grasses have less of an affect on sagebrush growth (Eliason and Allen).
The natural pathway for this community is with growth and time to a developed sagebrush community (2.1).
If fire becomes too frequent the non-native annual grasses gain dominance, and this community transitions to state 3.
State 3
California sagebrush shrubland with native grasses and forbs 1.1Community 3.1
California sagebrush shrubland with native grasses and forbs 1.1The historic California sagebrush community associated with this ecological site was dominated by California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), needlegrass (Nassella pulchra), and Laurel sumac (Malosma laurina). The historic community probably had more diversity of native annuals and perennials, than are present today. There are still patches of relatively unaltered and un-invaded coastal sagebrush communities, but they are uncommon.
Historically this community may have developed with a fire interval between 35 to 100 years. Fire is the natural cause of regeneration initiating community pathway 1.1.
State 4
California sagebrush shrubland regeneration 1.2Community 4.1
California sagebrush shrubland regeneration 1.2After a canopy fire native annuals and perennials are dominant for approximately two to three years. California sagebrush is considered a weak sprouter after fire. Resprouting ability is better in younger sagebrush shrubs and with low to moderate intensity fires. In one study in the Santa Monica Mountains, there were very few sagebrush seedlings the first year after the fire, but the resprouting shrubs produced abundant seed the first year. The following year many seedlings were present (Hauser, 2006). Some sagebrush seeds germinate better with the presence of charred wood leachate.
State 5
Non native annual grasses 3.1Community 5.1
Non native annual grasses 3.1This community develops when fire frequency or other disturbances such as heavy grazing have allowed the annual grasses to establish and dominate. The annual grasses compete directly with California sagebrush for water and nutrients. The annual grasses create a continuous and easily ignitable fuel source, which increases the fire frequency. California sagebrush cannot continue to resprout with frequent fire fires, and will not replenish the seed bank or create new seeds if they have not had enough time to mature. The length of time needed for California sagebrush to properly regenerate has not been determined. Some reports state that fire intervals less than 40 years will cause a significant decline in California sagebrush communities in 100 years, while others say a 20 year fire interval is actually appropriate, and less than 10 year intervals are detrimental (Hauser, 2006).
Restoration of this site would be difficult, but should focus on the reintroduction of native species, eliminating non-native species, and restoring longer fire frequencies.
Additional community tables
Table 5. Community 1.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 6. Community 2.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 7. Community 3.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 8. Community 4.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 9. Community 5.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Interpretations
Animal community
California sagebrush provides shade and nesting habitat for small birds, mammals, amphibians, and arthropods(Hauser, 2006).
California sagebrush provides habitat for Bell's sage sparrow, a bird species listed as a Species of Special Concern, and the California gnatcatcher which is found almost exclusively in California sagebrush-dominated communities (Hauser, 2006).
Recreational uses
This area often has excellent ocean views and is suitable for hiking, biking, and horse riding trails.
Other products
California sagebrush was used by Chumash Indians for a variety of purposes. They used branches for firesticks and arrow foreshafts. Poultices were made for treating headaches. California sagebrush was used for many sacred rituals. Spanish settlers made tea to treat bronchial problems and used it externally as a wash for wounds and swellings (Hauser, 2006).
Other information
California sagebrush can be used for restoration projects. It easily establishes from seed, and can be hydroseeded. It should be planted with a mix which includes commonly associated species (Hauser, 2006).
Supporting information
Other references
Allen E.B.; Eliason, S.A.; Marquez V.J.; Shultz, G.P.; Storms, N.K.; Stylinski, C.D.; Zink, T.A.; and Allen, M.F. What are the Limits to Restoration of Coastal Sage Scrub in Southern California? 2nd Interface Between Ecology and Land Development in California. J.E. Keeley, M.B. Keeley and C.J. Fotheringham, eds. USGS Open-File Report 00-62, Sacramento, California. In press.
Bowler, P.A. 2000. Ecological restoration of coastal sage scrub and it's potential role in habitat conservation plans. Environmental Management, vol. 26, supplement 1: pgs S85-S96.
Eliason S.A. and Allen, E.B. (1997). Exotic Grass Competition in Suppressing Native Shrubland Re-establishment. Restoration Ecology, September 1997, vol. 5, no.3 pp. 245-255. Blackwell Publishing.
Howard, Janet L. 1993. Artemisia californica. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ [2005, April 7].
Hauser, A. Scott. 2006. Artemisia californica. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ [2007, December 19].
Keeler-Wolf, Todd (1995). Post-Fire Emergency Seeding and Conservation In Southern California Shrublands. Brushfires in California Wildlands: Ecology and Resource Management. Edited by J.E. Keeley and T. Scott. 1995. Internatitional Association of Wildland Fire, Fairfield, WA.
Keeley, Jon E (2003). Fire and Invasive Plants in California Ecosystems. Fire Management Today, Volume 63, No. 2
Keeley, Jon E. (2002). Native American Impacts on Fire Regimes of the Pacific Coast Ranges. US Government, Journal of Biogeography, 29, p. 303-320. Blackwell Science Ltd.
Keeley, J.E. (2001). Fire and invasive species in Mediterranean-climate ecosystems of California. Pages 81–94 in K.E.M. Galley and T.P. Wilson (eds.). Proceedings of the Invasive Species Workshop: the Role of Fire in the Control and Spread of Invasive Species. Fire Conference 2000: the First National Congress on Fire Ecology, Prevention, and Management. Miscellaneous Publication No. 11, Tall Timbers Research Station, Tallahassee, FL.
Keeley, Jon E. and Keeley Sterling C. (1984). Postfire recovery of California Coastal Sage Scrub. American Midland Naturalist, Vol. 111, Issue 1 (Jan. 1984) pp. 105-117
McMurray, Nancy E. 1990. Salvia mellifera. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online].
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer).
Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ [2007, October 23].
Minnich, Richard A. and Scott, Thomas A. Wildland Fire and the Conservation of Coastal Sage Scrub. Department of Earth Sciences, University of California, Riverside.
Steinberg, Peter D. 2002. Baccharis pilularis. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ [2005, March 3].
Westman, Walter E., 1987. Implications of ecological theory for rare plant conservation in coastal sage scrub. Pages 133-140 in T. S. Elias, editor. Conservation and management of rare and endangered plants: proceedings of a California conference on the conservation and management of rare and endangered plants. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, California.
White, Scott D 1995. Disturbance and Dynamics in Coastal Sage Scrub. Fremontia, Volume 23, No 4. California Native Plant Society.
Contributors
Curtis Talbot, Marchel Munnecke
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
