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 (1) Populus fremontii
Shrub (1) Salix
(2) Rosa woodsiiHerbaceous (1) Leymus
Physiographic features
This forestland site occurs on stream terraces, drainageways, and axial-stream floodplains. Slope gradients are typically 0 to 8 percent. Elevations are 3700 to about 5500 feet.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Landforms (1) Stream terrace
(2) Drainageway
(3) Flood plain
Flooding duration Long (7 to 30 days) Flooding frequency Frequent Elevation 3700 – 5500 ft Slope 0 – 8 % Water table depth 18 – 84 in Aspect Aspect is not a significant factor Climatic features
The climate associated with this site is semiarid and characterized by cold, moist winters and warm, dry summers. Average annual precipitation is about 8(6) to 12 inches. Mean annual air temperature is 48 to 53 degrees F. The average growing season is 90 to 140 days.
Table 3 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (average) 140 days Freeze-free period (average) 0 days Precipitation total (average) 10 in BarLineFigure 1. Monthly precipitation range
BarLineFigure 2. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature
">Influencing water features
This site is associated to perennial stream channels.
Soil features
The soils associated with this site are very deep and poorly drained. These soils have a very thick, dark-colored, surface layer high in organic matter. The soils are frequently flooded in the late winter and early spring. A seasonal water table may rise to within 18 inches of the surface during the spring but stabilizes at depths between 20 and 40 inches during the growing season. The soils are classified as Fluvaquentic Haploxerolls and Fluvaquents.
Table 4. Representative soil features
Surface texture (1) Very gravelly loamy sand
(2) Very gravelly coarse sand
(3) Gravelly sandy loam
Family particle size (1) Loamy
Drainage class Poorly drained Permeability class Moderately slow Soil depth 72 – 84 in Surface fragment cover <=3" 45 – 50 % Surface fragment cover >3" 0 – 5 % Available water capacity
(0-40in)0 – 2 in Calcium carbonate equivalent
(0-40in)3 % Electrical conductivity
(0-40in)0 – 2 mmhos/cm Sodium adsorption ratio
(0-40in)0 – 5 Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-40in)6.6 – 8.4 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(Depth not specified)3 – 45 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(Depth not specified)0 – 2 % Ecological dynamics
Major Successional Stages of Forestland Development
HERBACEOUS: Vegetation is dominated by grasses and forbs under full sunlight. This stage is experienced after a major disturbance such as insect damage, disease damage or tree harvest. Various amounts of tree seedlings (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 1
Reference Plant CommunityCommunity 1.1
Reference Plant CommunityThe reference plant community is dominated by Fremont cottonwood. Willow and Woods rose are the primary understory shrubs. Wildrye is the most prevalent understory grasses. An overstory canopy of 40 to 60 percent is assumed to be representative of tree dominance on this site in the pristine environment. Overstory tree canopy composition is 100 percent Fremont cottonwood.
Forest overstory.MATURE FORESTLAND: The visual aspect and vegetal structure are dominated by cottonwood that have reached or are near maximal heights for the site. Tree canopy cover ranges from 40 to 60 percent. Understory vegetation is moderately influenced by tree competition, overstory shading, duff accumulation, etc.
Forest understory. Understory vegetative composition is about 70 percent grasses and grass-like plants, 10 percent forbs, 15 percent shrubs, and 5 percent trees when the average overstory canopy is medium (40 to 60 percent). Average understory production ranges from 1500 to 3000 pounds per acre with a medium canopy cover. Understory production includes the total annual production of all species within 4½ feet of the ground surface.
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)Grass/Grasslike 1050 1540 2100 Shrub/Vine 225 330 450 Forb 150 220 300 Tree 75 110 150 Total 1500 2200 3000 Additional community tables
Table 6. Community 1.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Grass/Grasslike1 Primary Perennial Grasses/Grasslikes 1100–2090 beardless wildrye LETR5 Leymus triticoides 550–1100 – bluegrass POA Poa 110–198 – sedge CAREX Carex 110–198 – saltgrass DISP Distichlis spicata 110–198 – thickspike wheatgrass ELLA3 Elymus lanceolatus 110–198 – basin wildrye LECI4 Leymus cinereus 110–198 – 2 Secondary Perennial Grasses/Grasslikes 22–110 rush JUNCU Juncus 22–110 – Forb3 Perennial 150–300 yarrow ACHIL Achillea 22–110 – clover TRIFO Trifolium 22–110 – Shrub/Vine4 Primary Shrubs 220–396 Woods' rose ROWO Rosa woodsii 110–198 – willow SALIX Salix 110–198 – 5 Secondary Shrubs 33–66 basin big sagebrush ARTRT Artemisia tridentata ssp. tridentata 11–22 – rubber rabbitbrush ERNAN5 Ericameria nauseosa ssp. nauseosa var. nauseosa 11–22 – currant RIBES Ribes 11–22 – Tree6 Deciduous 22–110 Fremont cottonwood POFR2 Populus fremontii 22–110 – Interpretations
Animal community
Livestock Interpretations:
This site is suited to cattle and sheep grazing during the early summer and fall. Livestock will often concentrate on this site taking advantage of the shade and shelter offered by the tree overstory.
Harvesting trees under a sound management program for fuelwood or other products can open up the tree canopy to allow increased production of understory species desirable for grazing.
Stocking rates vary with such factors as kind and class of grazing animal, season of use and fluctuations in climate. Actual use records for individual sites, a determination of the degree to which the sites have been grazed, and an evaluation of trend in site condition offer the most reliable basis for developing initial stocking rates. Selection of initial stocking rates for given grazing units is a planning decision. This decision should be made ONLY after careful consideration of the total resources available, evaluation of alternatives for use and treatment, and establishment of objectives by the decisionmaker.
The forage value rating is not an ecological evaluation of the understory as is the range condition rating for rangeland. The forage value rating is a utilitarian rating of the existing understory plants for use by specific kinds of grazing animals.
Wildlife Interpretations:
This site provides valuable habitat to mule deer during the summer. It furnishes ideal habitat for a variety of cavity-nesting birds and provides den trees for wildlife. The North American porcupine occurs extensively on this site. Beaver can be sustained by the trees on this site. It is also used by various small mammals and reptiles and their associate predators natural to the area.Hydrological functions
Runoff is very high. Permeability is moderately slow. Hydrologic soil group is D.
Recreational uses
Aesthetic value is derived from the rich hues and textures of the trees, particularly in the fall. It has high value for hunting, picnicking, and family wood gathering.
Wood products
Fremont cottonwood has been used for posts in fences as well as for fuelwood.
PRODUCTIVE CAPACITY
This site is of medium quality for tree production. Site index ranges from about 65 to 75 (Baker, Broadfoot, 1977).
Productivity class: 4
CMAI*: 56 to 67 ft3/ac/yr
3.6 to 4.7 m3/ha/yr
*CMAI: is the culmination of mean annual increment or highest average growth rate of the stand in the units specified.
Fuelwood Production: 8 to 10 cords per acre. Firewood is commonly measured by cords, or a stacked unit equivalent to 128 cubic feet. Solid wood volume in a cord varies but usually ranges from 65 to 90 cubic feet. Assuming an average of 75 cubic feet of solid wood volume per cord, there are about 15 million British Thermal Units (BTUs) heat value in a cord of Fremont cottonwood wood.
Saw Timber: 200 to 300 board-feet per acre.
MANAGEMENT GUIDES AND INTERPRETATIONS
1. LIMITATIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS
a. Potential for sheet erosion is low.
b. Moderate to severe equipment limitations on wet soils.
c. Proper spacing is the key to a well-managed, multiple use and multi-product Fremont cottonwood woodland.
2. ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS
a. Adequately protect from wildfire.
b. Protect soils from accelerated erosion.
c. Apply proper grazing management.
3. SILVICULTURAL PRACTICES
a. Harvest cut selectively or in small patches (size dependent upon site conditions) to enhance forage production.
1) Thinning and Improvement Cutting – Removal of poorly formed, diseased and low vigor trees for fuelwood.
2) Harvest Cutting: - Selectively harvest surplus trees to achieve desired spacing. Harvest stands in small blocks of 1/5 to 1/2 acre with slash left in place to shelter tree seedlings from browsing.
3) Spacing Guide: Spacing of about 15 X 15 feet is considered desirable for multiple use management during periods of stand maturity.
b. Selective tree removal on suitable sites to enhance forage production and manage site reproduction.
c. Pest control - Use necessary and approved control for specific pests and diseases.
d. Fire hazard - Fire is rarely a problem in Fremont cottonwood stands. However, even a light fire may kill Fremont cottonwood seedlings, saplings and mature trees.Other products
Native Americans ate the inner bark of Fremont cottonwood for antiscorbutic. The bark and leaves were used to make poultices to relieve swelling, treat cuts, cure headaches, and wash broken limbs, and to treat saddle sores and swollen legs of horses. Native Americans used the leaves of willows to treat mosquito bites, bee stings and stomach aches and used to stems for implements such as baskets, arrow shafts, scoops and fish traps. Native Americans made extensive use of Wood’s rose roots, stems, leaves, flowers, and hips for foods and therapeutic materials. The hips are a source of vitamin C and are dried for use in flavoring teas, jellies, fruitcakes and puddings. Wood’s rose is used as an ornamental near homes to attract birds and other wildlife.
Other information
Fremont cottonwood’s rapid early growth makes it well suited for revegetating riparian sites. It has been recommended for revegetating areas where invasive saltcedar has been removed. Fremont cottonwood, along with willows and other native plants, has also been used to restore, enhance, or create bird habitat in riparian areas. Willow is useful in stabilizing streambanks and providing erosion control on severely disturbed sites. It is valuable in revegetating disturbed riparian sites having high water tables and low elevations. Wood’s rose extensive rhizomes, and good survivability and revegetation characteristics even on harsh sites makes this species an effective tool in erosion control. It has also been suggested as a useful species for revegetation on high pH and lime soils. Wood’s rose is used to revegetate disturbed sites along streambanks and seeps. Creeping wildrye is primarily used for reclamation of wet, saline soils.
Table 7. Representative site productivity
Common name Symbol Site index low Site index high CMAI low CMAI high Age of CMAI Site index curve code Site index curve basis Citation Fremont cottonwood POFR2 65 75 56 67 – – – Supporting information
Type locality
Location 1: Washoe County, NV Township/Range/Section T31N R18E S16 UTM zone N UTM northing 250871 UTM easting 4492875 Latitude 40° 32′ 57″ Longitude 119° 56′ 31″ General legal description NW 1/4 NW 1/4, Along Smoke Creek drainage, Washoe County, Nevada. This site also occurs in Humboldt County, Nevada. Other references
Baker, J. B., Broadfoot, W. M. 1977. Site Evaluation for Eight Important Southern Hardwoods. USDA-FS, GTR 50-14.
Fire Effects Information System (Online; http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/).
USDA-NRCS Plants Database (Online; http://www.plants.usda.gov).
Contributors
RH/DK/GKB
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
