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.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree Not specified
Shrub (1) Quercus
(2) CeanothusHerbaceous (1) Nassella
(2) Muhlenbergia rigensPhysiographic features
Steep to very steep mountainous land, usually rocky, generally with slopes from 50-75%, but including shallow or eroded soils with 9 to 50% slope. Elevations range from 100 to 3000 ft.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Landforms (1) Mountain slope
Elevation 100 – 3000 ft Slope 9 – 75 % Aspect Aspect is not a significant factor Climatic features
Precipitation ranges from 10 to 20 inches, all of which falls in winter and spring. The amount and time of rainfall varies widely from the average.
The growing season depends upon the rainfall, usually from January through April; but may start as early as December or as late as February and may end in May. Temperature and evapotranspiration are modified by coastal influence.
Table 3 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (average) 0 days Freeze-free period (average) 0 days Precipitation total (average) 0 in BarLineFigure 1. Monthly precipitation range
BarLineFigure 2. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature
">Influencing water features
Soil features
The soils are sandy loams and loams that rest on slowly permeable to permeable bedrock. Many of the soils are rocky and 10 to 20 inches deep although soils on steeper slopes are sometimes 20 to 36 inches deep. Total available moisture is 2.5 to 7 inches/foot soil.
Representative soil types (1975):
3L54A Fallbrook sandy loam
3rL54A Fallbrook rocky sandy loam
4rL4A Fallbrook rocky sandy loam
3L54F San Andreas fine sandy loam
4gM4E Santa Lucia shaly loam
4M4E San Timoteo loam
4rL5A Vista rocky sandy loam
Table 4. Representative soil features
Family particle size (1) Loamy
Available water capacity
(0-40in)2.5 – 7 in Ecological dynamics
4 plant communities are recognized on this site. This site will probably need to be split after the soil survey update.
The potential plant cover should be about 50% of brushy species as ceanothus (Ceanothus spp.), California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), and sumac (Malosma laurina). Elm brush, scrub oak (Quercus spp.), wild cherry (Prunus ilicifolia), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia) and other browse species may occur. In the understory and openings of the brush types, at least 70% of the plant cover should consist of needlegrasses (Nassella spp.), deergrass (Muhlenbergia rigens), junegrass (Koelaria spp.), soft chess (Bromus hordeaceous), wild oats (Avena spp.), ryegrasses (Lolium spp.), and filaree (Erodium spp.).
Estimated total herbage yields are 800 lbs./acre in favorable years and 200 lbs./acre in unfavorable years.
Litter should be sufficient to cover the soil surface in a rather continuous layer 1/4 to 1/2 inch thick. Decaying litter from previous years should be evident. There should be no active washing or soil movement.State and transition model
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 1
Plant Community 1.1Community 1.1
Plant Community 1.1Usually tall, heavy growth of brush with occasional oak or other trees. Annual and perennial grasses and forbs occur in the openings and as an understory where brush cover is not dense. Species may include elm brush, scrub oak (Quercus spp.), wild cherry (Prunus ilicifolia), CA wild lilac (Ceanothus spp.), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), sugar bush (Rhus ovata), Laural leaf sumac (Malosma laurina), white sage (Salvia apiana), black sage (Salvia mellifera), and CA sagebrush (Artemisia californica).
Figure 3. 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)Shrub/Vine 50 – 300 Total 50 – 300 State 2
Plant Community 1.2Community 2.1
Plant Community 1.2Cover is predominantly chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum) with scattered sumac (Malosma laurina) or other brush, and with no to a very light understory of annuals grasses and forbs.
Figure 4. 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)Shrub/Vine 0 – 50 Total 0 – 50 State 3
Plant Community 1.3Community 3.1
Plant Community 1.3Annual grasses or mixed annual grass and brush predominate on burns or occasionally on steep, shallow rocky areas. Brush will eventually re-occupy the burned areas.
Figure 5. Annual production by plant type (representative values) or group (midpoint values)
Table 7. Annual production by plant type
Plant type Low
(lb/acre)Representative value
(lb/acre)High
(lb/acre)Grass/Grasslike 50 – 200 Total 50 – 200 State 4
Plant Community 1.4Community 4.1
Plant Community 1.4Predominates at the lower elevations. California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), white and black sage (Salvia apiana and S. mellifera) predominate with smaller amounts of sumac (Melosma laurina), yucca (Yucca spp.) and other shrubs. Giant stipa (Nassella spp.) is common and annual grasses and forbs occupy the openings and occur as an understory.
Figure 6. Annual production by plant type (representative values) or group (midpoint values)
Table 8. Annual production by plant type
Plant type Low
(lb/acre)Representative value
(lb/acre)High
(lb/acre)Shrub/Vine 50 – 200 Total 50 – 200 Additional community tables
Table 9. Community 1.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 10. Community 2.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 11. Community 3.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 12. Community 4.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Interpretations
Animal community
Forage production by type:
Broadleaf Chaparral - Favorable years: 300 lbs./acre; Unfavorable years: 50 lbs./acre
Chamise Chaparral - Favorable years: 50 lbs./acre; Unfavorable years: 0 lbs./acre
Annual Grasses or Grass-Shrub - Favorable years: 200 lbs./acre; Unfavorable years: 50 lbs./acre
Coastal Sagebrush - Favorable years: 200 lbs./acre; Unfavorable years: 50 lbs./acreOther information
Brush control practice: Recommended only for fire protection
Range seeding practice: Not recommended
Emergency seeding practice: Recommended after fires.
All other range conservation practices apply.Supporting information
Inventory data references
This data is from MLRA 19 FOTG, for the Shallow loamy range site (06/1975).
Contributors
K.Moseley
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
