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 Not specified
Herbaceous Not specified
Physiographic features
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Climatic features
">Influencing water features
Soil features
Ecological dynamics
State and transition model
Custom diagramStandard diagram
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 1
HCPC, PSSP6-FEID/PUTR2-ARTRTCommunity 1.1
HCPC, PSSP6-FEID/PUTR2-ARTRT!
Figure 1. Annual production by plant type (representative values) or group (midpoint values)
Table 3. Annual production by plant type
Plant type Low
(lb/acre)Representative value
(lb/acre)High
(lb/acre)Grass/Grasslike 588 804 1020 Shrub/Vine 204 300 396 Forb 72 132 192 Total 864 1236 1608 Additional community tables
Table 4. Community 1.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Grass/Grasslike1 Dominant deep rooted perennial grasses 480–780 Idaho fescue FEID Festuca idahoensis 360–540 – bluebunch wheatgrass PSSP6 Pseudoroegneria spicata 120–240 – 2 Sub-dominant deep rooted perennial grasses 36–84 basin wildrye LECI4 Leymus cinereus 24–60 – Thurber's needlegrass ACTH7 Achnatherum thurberianum 12–24 – 4 Sub-dominant shallow rooted perennial grasses 60–120 Sandberg bluegrass POSE Poa secunda 60–120 – 5 Other perennial grasses 12–36 western needlegrass ACOC3 Achnatherum occidentale 0–5 – Ross' sedge CARO5 Carex rossii 0–5 – melicgrass MELIC Melica 0–5 – Forb7 Dominant perennial forbs 48–72 milkvetch ASTRA Astragalus 24–36 – lupine LUPIN Lupinus 24–36 – 9 Other perennial forbs 24–120 common yarrow ACMI2 Achillea millefolium 0–5 – agoseris AGOSE Agoseris 0–5 – balsamroot BALSA Balsamorhiza 0–5 – mariposa lily CALOC Calochortus 0–5 – Indian paintbrush CASTI2 Castilleja 0–5 – pincushion CHAEN Chaenactis 0–5 – tapertip hawksbeard CRAC2 Crepis acuminata 0–5 – fleabane ERIGE2 Erigeron 0–5 – buckwheat ERIOG Eriogonum 0–5 – common woolly sunflower ERLA6 Eriophyllum lanatum 0–5 – western stoneseed LIRU4 Lithospermum ruderale 0–5 – desertparsley LOMAT Lomatium 0–5 – phacelia PHACE Phacelia 0–5 – spreading phlox PHDI3 Phlox diffusa 0–5 – Oregon checkerbloom SIOR Sidalcea oregana 0–5 – deathcamas ZIGAD Zigadenus 0–5 – Shrub/Vine12 Sub-dominant evergreen shrubs 60–120 basin big sagebrush ARTRT Artemisia tridentata ssp. tridentata 60–120 – 13 Dominant deciduous (or 1/2 shrubs) shrubs 120–180 antelope bitterbrush PUTR2 Purshia tridentata 120–180 – 15 Other shrubs 24–96 Saskatoon serviceberry AMAL2 Amelanchier alnifolia 0–5 – Klamath plum PRSU2 Prunus subcordata 0–5 – chokecherry PRVI Prunus virginiana 0–5 – desert gooseberry RIVE Ribes velutinum 0–5 – rose ROSA5 Rosa 0–5 – snowberry SYMPH Symphoricarpos 0–5 – spineless horsebrush TECA2 Tetradymia canescens 0–5 – Interpretations
Supporting information
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 08/21/2012 Approved by Approval date Composition (Indicators 10 and 12) based on Annual Production Indicators
-
Number and extent of rills:
None, slight to moderate sheet & rill erosion hazard -
Presence of water flow patterns:
None -
Number and height of erosional pedestals or terracettes:
None to few (shallow rooted grasses) -
Bare ground from Ecological Site Description or other studies (rock, litter, lichen, moss, plant canopy are not bare ground):
5-10% -
Number of gullies and erosion associated with gullies:
None -
Extent of wind scoured, blowouts and/or depositional areas:
None, slight wind erosion hazard -
Amount of litter movement (describe size and distance expected to travel):
Fine - limited movement -
Soil surface (top few mm) resistance to erosion (stability values are averages - most sites will show a range of values):
Moderately resistant to erosion: aggregate stability = 4-5 -
Soil surface structure and SOM content (include type of structure and A-horizon color and thickness):
Shallow to deep. well drained loams (sometimes gravelly or stony on the surface): Low OM (1-2%) -
Effect of community phase composition (relative proportion of different functional groups) and spatial distribution on infiltration and runoff:
High amount of plant cover (60-80%), rock fragments and moderate slopes (1-25%) effectively limit rainfall impact and overland flow; infiltration is moderate to moderately slow -
Presence and thickness of compaction layer (usually none; describe soil profile features which may be mistaken for compaction on this site):
None -
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:
Idaho fescue > Bluebunch wheatgrass > Antelope bitterbrush > Sandberg bluegrass = Basin big sagebrush > other grasses = other shrubs > other forbsSub-dominant:
Other:
Additional:
-
Amount of plant mortality and decadence (include which functional groups are expected to show mortality or decadence):
Normal decadence and mortality expected -
Average percent litter cover (%) and depth ( in):
-
Expected annual annual-production (this is TOTAL above-ground annual-production, not just forage annual-production):
Favorable: 1400, Normal: 1200, Unfavorable: 800 at high RSI (HCPC) -
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 brush species will increase with deterioration of plant community. Western Juniper readily invades the site. Cheatgrass and Medusahead invade sites that have lost deep rooted perennial grass functional groups. -
Perennial plant reproductive capability:
All species should be capable of reproducing annually
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
