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.
Click to explore map
Figure 1. Mapped extent
Areas shown in blue indicate the maximum mapped extent of this ecological site. Other ecological sites likely occur within the highlighted areas. It is also possible for this ecological site to occur outside of highlighted areas if detailed soil survey has not been completed or recently updated.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree Not specified
Shrub Not specified
Herbaceous Not specified
Physiographic features
This site occurs along drainageways and in concave areas in mountains. These areas receive additional moisture from melting snow or from seeps.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Landforms (1) Drainageway
Elevation 5800 – 7400 ft Slope 5 – 20 % Aspect Aspect is not a significant factor Climatic features
The annual precipitation ranges from 18 to 32 inches, most of which occurs in the form of snow during the months of October through May. The soil temperature regime is frigid with the mean annual air temperatures of about 45 degrees F. Temperature extremes range from 85 to -30 degrees F. The frost free period is less than 50 days. The optimum period for plant growth is from June through July.
Table 3 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (average) 50 days Freeze-free period (average) 0 days Precipitation total (average) 30 in BarLineFigure 2. Monthly precipitation range
BarLineFigure 3. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature
">Influencing water features
Soil features
The soils of this site are deep and moderately well drained. The soils have loamy textures and contain over 35 percent rock fragments throughout the profile. The organic matter content is 1 to 4 percent throughout the upper 20 inches of the soil. The available water holding capacity is about 3 to 7 inches. Supplemental moisture from seeps and runoff keep the soil moist during most of the growing season. Permeability is moderately slow. Runoff is medium. Erosion hasard by water is slight to moderate.
Table 4. Representative soil features
Surface texture (1) Loam
Family particle size (1) Loamy
Drainage class Moderately well drained Permeability class Moderately slow Soil depth 60 in Surface fragment cover <=3" 0 – 35 % Available water capacity
(0-40in)3 – 7 in Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(Depth not specified)0 – 35 % Ecological dynamics
If the condition of the site deteriorates as a result of overgrazing, the preferred forage grasses will decline in vigor and eventually diminish in the stand. Kentucky bluegrass, timothy, meadow barley, mountain brome and weedy forbs will increase or invade the site. Big sagebrush and green rabbitbrush will increase in the stand.
With a lack of occasional fire, the aspen will tend to become decadent and the canopy will decrease. This will encourage an increase in less shade-tolerant species.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, POLE-POSE/SYAL/POTR5Community 1.1
HCPC, POLE-POSE/SYAL/POTR5The potential native plant community is dominated by quaking aspen in the overstory. The understory vegetation is dominated by snowberry and bluegrasses. Vegetative composition is approximately 75% grasses, 10% forbs, and 15% shrubs.
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 300 468 636 Shrub/Vine 204 282 360 Tree 144 216 288 Forb 84 150 216 Total 732 1116 1500 Figure 5. Plant community growth curve (percent production by month). OR5557 , D21 High Elev, NA / South, Good Condition. HPCP Growth Curve.
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 0 0 5 30 50 15 0 0 0 0 Additional community tables
Table 6. Community 1.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Grass/Grasslike1 Dominant deep rooted perennial grasses 204–420 Leiberg's bluegrass POLE Poa leibergii 120–240 – slender wheatgrass ELTR7 Elymus trachycaulus 60–120 – basin wildrye LECI4 Leymus cinereus 24–60 – 2 Sub-dominant deep rooted perennial grasses 12–36 melicgrass MELIC Melica 24–36 – 3 Dominant shallow rooted perennial grasses 60–120 Sandberg bluegrass POSE Poa secunda 60–120 – 5 Other perennial grasses 24–60 Columbia needlegrass ACNE9 Achnatherum nelsonii 0–5 – mountain brome BRMA4 Bromus marginatus 0–5 – sedge CAREX Carex 0–5 – meadow barley HOBR2 Hordeum brachyantherum 0–5 – prairie Junegrass KOMA Koeleria macrantha 0–5 – timothy PHLEU Phleum 0–5 – Shrub/Vine11 Dominant evergreen shrubs 60–120 mountain big sagebrush ARTRV Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana 60–120 – 13 Dominant deciduous (or 1/2 shrubs) shrubs 120–180 common snowberry SYAL Symphoricarpos albus 120–180 – 15 Other shrubs 24–60 bitter cherry PREM Prunus emarginata 0–5 – chokecherry PRVI Prunus virginiana 0–5 – rose ROSA5 Rosa 0–5 – Tree18 Dominant deciduous trees 120–240 quaking aspen POTR5 Populus tremuloides 120–240 – 19 Sub-dominant deciduous trees 24–48 alder ALNUS Alnus 12–24 – willow SALIX Salix 12–24 – Interpretations
Animal community
This site is suited for livestock grazing in late spring, summer and fall under a planned grazing system.
Hydrological functions
The soils are in hydrologic group C.
Wood products
This site is a source of aspen for specialty products and firewood.
Other products
This site is suited for livestock grazing in late spring, summer and fall under a planned grazing system.
Supporting information
Contributors
Barrett, Carlson
E Ersch
K.KennedyRangeland 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) Jeff Repp Contact for lead author Oregon NRCS State Rangeland Management Specialist Date 09/05/2012 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 -
Bare ground from Ecological Site Description or other studies (rock, litter, lichen, moss, plant canopy are not bare ground):
<5% -
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):
Significantly resistant to erosion: aggregate stability = 4-6 -
Soil surface structure and SOM content (include type of structure and A-horizon color and thickness):
Deep, moderately well drained cobbly loams (>35% rock fragments throughout the soil profile): Moderate to High OM (1-4%) -
Effect of community phase composition (relative proportion of different functional groups) and spatial distribution on infiltration and runoff:
Significant vegetative cover (70-90%), litter cover, and gentle slopes (5-20%) effectively limit rainfall impact and overland flow; infiltration is 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:
Leiberg bluegrass > Quaking aspen > Snowberry > other dominant grasses > Mountain big sagebrush > forbs > other grasses + other shrubs > other treesSub-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: 1800, Normal: 1200, Unfavorable: 1000 lbs/acre/year 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 and weedy forb species will increase with deterioration of plant community. Western Juniper may invade 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
