Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Ecological site R025XY038OR
CLAYPAN NORTH SLOPES
11-13 PZ
Last updated: 4/25/2024
Accessed: 08/05/2026
-
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.
MLRA notes
Major Land Resource Area (MLRA): 025X–Owyhee High Plateau
The Owyhee High Plateau, MLRA 25, lies within the Intermontane Plateaus physiographic province. The southern half is found in the Great Basin while the northern half is located in the Columbia Plateaus. The southern section of the Owyhee High Plateau is characterized by isolated, uplifted fault-block mountain ranges separated by narrow, aggraded desert plains. This geologically older terrain has been dissected by numerous streams draining to the Humboldt River. The northern section forms the southern boundary of the extensive Columbia Plateau basalt flows. Deep, narrow canyons drain to the Snake River across the broad volcanic plain.
This MLRA is characteristically cooler and wetter than the neighboring MLRAs of the Great Basin. Elevation ranges from 3,000 to 7,550 feet on rolling plateaus and in gently sloping basins. It is more than 9,840 feet on some steep mountains. The average annual precipitation in most of this area is typically 11 to 22 inches. It increases to as much as 49 inches at the higher elevations. Precipitation occurs mainly as snow in winter. The supply of water from precipitation and streamflow is small and unreliable, except along major rivers. Streamflow depends largely on accumulated snow in the mountains.
The dominant soil orders in this MLRA are Aridisols and Mollisols. The soils in the area dominantly have a mesic or frigid temperature regime and an aridic, arid bordering on xeric, or xeric moisture regime. Most of the soils formed in mixed parent material. Volcanic ash and loess mantle the landscape. Surface soil textures are loam and silt loam, and have ashy texture modifiers in some cases. Argillic horizons occur on the more stable landforms.Ecological site concept
This ecological site is on north facing slopes of mountain plateaus and canyon side slopes. Slopes range from 12 to 70 percent. Elevations range from 4,300 to 5,300 feet. The soils associated with this site are shallow or moderately deep and have an abrupt boundary in the top 10 inches resulting in wet non-satiated conditions. The soil climate is frigid (soil temperature regime) and aridic bordering on xeric (soil moisture regime). Since this site occurs on north aspects, it receives less solar insolation and thus is slightly wetter and colder than its non-aspect counterpart, resulting in increased resistance and resilience, and annual production. The reference plant community is characterized by dominance of low sagebrush and Idaho fescue. Bluebunch wheatgrass and Sandburg bluegrass are also common in the understory.
(wet non-saturated conditions - Schoeneberger, P.J., 2012, pg 1-15)Associated sites
R025XY020OR SOUTH SLOPES 11-13 PZ
R025XY021OR CLAYPAN SOUTH SLOPES 11-13 PZ
R025XY030OR DROUGHTY NORTH SLOPES 11-13 PZ
R025XY032OR NORTH SLOPES 11-13 PZ
Similar sites
R025XY016OR SHALLOW CLAYPAN 11-13 PZ
Non-aspect; effectively warmer and drier (increased solar insolation); slightly lower production; understory species composition is co-dominant Idaho fescue and bluebunch wheatgrass
R025XY021OR CLAYPAN SOUTH SLOPES 11-13 PZ
South aspected; warmer and drier (increased solar insolation); slightly lower production; bluebunch wheatgrass is dominant understory species
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree Not specified
Shrub (1) Artemisia arbuscula
Herbaceous (1) Festuca idahoensis
Physiographic features
This site is on north exposures of plateaus and canyon side slopes. Slopes range from 12 to 70 percent. Elevation ranges from 4,300 to 5,300 feet.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Landforms (1) Lava plateau > Mountain
(2) Lava plateau > Canyon
Runoff class Very high Elevation 4300 – 5300 ft Slope 12 – 70 % Water table depth 100 in Aspect NW, N, NE Climatic features
The annual precipitation ranges from 11 to 13 inches, most of which occurs in the form of snow during the months of December through March. Localized convection storms occasionally occur during the summer. The soil temperature regime is frigid with a mean annual air temperature of 43 degrees F. Temperature extremes range from 10 to 90 degrees. The frost free period ranges from 30 to 90 days. The optimum growth period for native plants is from May through July.
Table 3 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (characteristic range) 30-90 days Freeze-free period (characteristic range) 90-120 days Precipitation total (characteristic range) 10-10 in Frost-free period (actual range) Freeze-free period (actual range) Precipitation total (actual range) 10-20 in Frost-free period (average) 70 days Freeze-free period (average) 100 days Precipitation total (average) 10 in Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 1. Monthly precipitation range
Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 2. Monthly minimum temperature range
Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 3. Monthly maximum temperature range
BarLineFigure 4. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature
Figure 5. Annual precipitation pattern
Figure 6 Annual average temperature pattern
Climate stations used
-
(1) DANNER [USC00352135], Jordan Valley, OR
">Influencing water features
Site is not influenced by water features.<br />
Site is not connected to a water table.Soil features
The soils of this site are shallow to moderately deep over lithic or paralithic bedrock. Typically, the surface layer is a gravelly loam to silty loam or ashy silt loam. The subsoil is a clay loam to clay. An abrupt boundary occurs at the interface of the surface and subsoil, resulting in wet non-satiated conditions in the spring. Depth to bedrock is 10 to 40 inches. Permeability is moderate in the surface layer and slow in the subsoil. The available water holding capacity is about 2 to 4 inches for the profile.
The soil series correlated with this site are Chen, Sharesnout and Boost.Table 4. Representative soil features
Parent material (1) Colluvium
(2) Volcanic ash
(3) Loess
(4) Residuum
Surface texture (1) Gravelly loam
(2) Gravelly silt loam
(3) Ashy loam
Family particle size (1) Fine
(2) Clayey-skeletal
Drainage class Well drained Permeability class Slow to moderate Depth to restrictive layer 10 – 40 in Soil depth 10 – 40 in Surface fragment cover <=3" 5 – 20 % Surface fragment cover >3" 0 – 10 % Available water capacity
(0-40in)2 – 4 in Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-40in)7 – 8 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(0-40in)5 – 40 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(0-40in)0 – 15 % Table 5. Representative soil features (actual values)
Drainage class Not specified Permeability class Not specified Depth to restrictive layer 0 in Soil depth 0 in Surface fragment cover <=3" 0 % Surface fragment cover >3" 0 % Available water capacity
(0-40in)0 in Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-40in)6 – 8 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(0-40in)0 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(0-40in)0 % Ecological dynamics
The reference plant community is dominated by low sagebrush (little sagebrush) and Idaho fescue. Bluebunch wheatagrass and Sandberg bluegrass are also common in the understory. The site has moderate resilience to disturbance and resistance to invasion. Resilience is a system’s capacity to regain its structure, processes, and function following stressors or disturbance (e.g. drought or fire). Resistance is the capacity of the system to retain its structure, processes, and function despite stressors or disturbances (including pressure from invasive species) (Chambers 2014a). Increased resilience increases with elevation, aspect, increased precipitation and increased nutrient availability (Stringham et al. 2015); where greater resource availability and more favorable environmental conditions exist for plant growth and reproduction (Chambers 2014a).
This ecological site’s lower annual precipitation (aridic bordering on xeric soil moisture regime) and restrictive soil features limit site productivity; though since the site occurs on north aspects, it receives less solar insolation and thus is slightly wetter and colder than its non-aspect counterpart. The higher effective precipitation experienced on north slopes results in higher annual production and less open space for establishment of invasive annual grasses, increasing site resilience. The timing of precipitation on this site still favors invasive annual grasses that are particularly well adapted to cool wet winters and warm dry summers; beginning growth and utilizing resources prior to native species breaking dormancy. The site’s cooler soil temperature regime (frigid) does increase resistance compared to warmer sites but is not cold enough to inhibit invasive annual grasses (Chambers 2014b).
Idaho fescue and production will increase on deeper soils and at the upper end of the precipitation zone. Low sagebrush will increase on more shallow soils. Bluebunch wheatgrass will increase as the aspect varies to the east and northwest.
If the condition of the site deteriorates due to prolonged disturbance, Idaho fescue decreases while low sagebrush, bluebunch wheatgrass and Sandberg bluegrass increase. With further deterioration, bluebunch wheatgrass will decrease while Sandberg bluegrass and low sagebrush continue to increase. Annuals invade and bare ground markedly increases. Excess erosion in the bare soil interspaces reduces the site productivity and contributes to downstream sedimentation.
This ecological site is dominated by deep-rooted cool season, perennial bunchgrasses and long-lived shrubs (50+ years) with high root to shoot ratios. Community types with low sagebrush as the dominant shrub were found to have soil depths and thus available rooting depths of 71 to 81 centimeters in a study in northeast Nevada (Jensen 1990). These shrubs have a flexible generalized root system with development of both deep taproots and laterals near the surface (Comstock and Ehleringer 1992).
Periodic drought regularly influences sagebrush ecosystems and drought duration and severity has increased throughout the 20th century in much of the Intermountain West. Major shifts away from historical precipitation patterns have the greatest potential to alter ecosystem function and productivity. Species composition and productivity can be altered by the timing of precipitation and water availability with the soil profile (Bates et al. 2006).
Low sagebrush is fairly drought tolerant but also tolerates periodic wetness during some portion of the growing season. Low sagebrush is also susceptible to the sagebrush defoliator Aroga moth. Aroga moth can partially or entirely kill individual plants or entire stands of big sagebrush (Furniss and Barr 1975), but the research is inconclusive of the damage sustained by low sagebrush populations.
The low sagebrush communities have high spatial and temporal variability in precipitation both among years and within growing seasons. Nutrient availability is typically low but increases with elevation and closely follows moisture availability. The invasibility of plant communities is often linked to resource availability. Disturbance can decrease resource uptake due to damage or mortality of the native species and depressed competition. It can also increase resource pools by the decomposition of dead plant material following disturbance. The invasion of sagebrush communities by cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) has been linked to disturbances (fire, abusive grazing) that have resulted in fluctuations in resources (Chambers et al. 2007).
The perennial bunchgrasses that are dominant on this ecological site are Idaho fescue and bluebunch wheatgrass. These species generally have shallower root systems than the shrubs, but root densities are often as high as or higher than those of shrubs in the upper 0.5 m of the soil profile. General differences in root depth distributions between grasses and shrubs results in resource partitioning in these shrub/grass systems.
As ecological condition declines, the sagebrush and rabbitbrush become dominant with increases of Sandberg’s bluegrass, bottlebrush squirreltail and mat forming forbs in the understory. The potential invasive/noxious weeds are cheatgrass, rabbitbrush, and annual mustards.
Four possible alternative stable states have been identified for this ecological site.
Fire Ecology:
Prior to 1897, mean fire return intervals for low sagebrush communities have been estimated to be from 35 to over 100 years. Fire most often occurs during wet years with high forage production.
Low sagebrush is killed by fire and does not sprout (Tisdale and Hironaka 1984). Establishment after fire is from seed, generally blown in and not from the seed bank (Bradley et al. 1992). Fire risk is greatest following a wet, productive year when there is greater production of fine fuels (Beardall and Sylvester 1976). Fire return intervals have been estimated at 100-200 years in black sagebrush-dominated sites (Kitchen and McArthur 2007) and likely is similar in the low sagebrush ecosystem. Historically, however, fires were probably patchy due to the low productivity of these sites. Recovery time of little sagebrush following fire is variable (Young 1983). After fire, if regeneration conditions are favorable, low sagebrush recovers in 2 to 5 years; on harsh sites where cover is low to begin with and/or erosion occurs after fire, recovery may require more than 10 years (Young 1983). Slow regeneration may subsequently worsen erosion (Blaisdell et al. 1982).
The effect of fire on bunchgrasses relates to culm density, culm-leaf morphology, and the size of the plant. The initial condition of bunchgrasses within the site along with seasonality and intensity of the fire all factor into the individual species response. The growing points for most forbs and grasses are located at or below the soil surface, providing relative protection from disturbances which decrease above ground biomass, such as grazing or fire. Thus, fire mortality is more correlated to duration and intensity of heat which is related to culm density, culm-leaf morphology, size of plant and abundance of old growth (Wright 1971, Young 1983). However, season and severity of the fire and post-fire soil moisture availability will influence plant response.
Idaho fescue, the dominant grass within this community, response to fire varies with condition and size of the plant, season and severity of fire, and ecological conditions. Mature Idaho fescue plants are commonly reported to be severely damaged by fire in all seasons (Wright et al. 1979). Initial mortality may be high (in excess of 75%) on severe burns, but usually varies from 20 to 50% (Barrington et al 1988). Rapid burns have been found to leave little damage to root crowns, and new tillers are produced with onset of fall moisture (Johnson et al. 1994). However, Wright and others (1979) found the dense, fine leaves of Idaho fescue provided enough fuel to burn for hours after a fire had passed, thereby killing or seriously injuring the plant regardless of the intensity of the fire (Wright et al. 1979). Idaho fescue is commonly reported to be more sensitive to fire than the other prominent grass on this site, bluebunch wheatgrass (Conrad and Poulton 1966). However Robberecht and Defosse (1995) suggested the latter was more sensitive. They observed culm and biomass reduction with moderate fire severity in bluebunch wheatgrass, whereas a high fire severity was required for this reduction in Idaho fescue. Also, given the same fire severity treatment, post-fire culm production was initiated earlier and more rapidly in Idaho fescue (Robberecht and Defosse 1995).
Bluebunch wheatgrass has coarse stems with little leafy material, the aboveground biomass burns rapidly and little heat is transferred downward into the crowns (Young 1983). Bluebunch wheatgrass was described as fairly tolerant of burning, other than in May in eastern Oregon (Britton et al. 1990). Uresk et al. (1976) reported burning increased vegetative and reproductive vigor of bluebunch wheatgrass, thus it experiences slight damage to fire but is more susceptible in drought years (Young 1983).
Sandberg bluegrass has been found to increase following fire, likely due to its low stature and productivity (Daubenmire 1975) and may retard reestablishment of deeper rooted bunchgrasses.
Adapted from: Stringham, T.K., P. Novak-Echenique, P. Blackburn, D. Snyder, and A. Wartgow. 2015. Final Report for USDA Ecological Site Description State-and-Transition Models by Disturbance Response Groups, Major Land Resource Area 25 Nevada. University of Nevada Reno, Nevada Agricultural Experiment Station Research Report 2015-02. p. 569State and transition model
Custom diagramStandard diagramMore 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
Reference State 1.0The Reference State 1.0 is a representative of the natural range of variability under pristine conditions. The reference state has three general community phases: a shrub-grass dominant phase, a perennial grass dominant phase and a shrub dominant phase. State dynamics are maintained by interactions between climatic patterns and disturbance regimes. Negative feedbacks enhance ecosystem resilience and contribute to the stability of the state. These include the presence of all structural and functional groups, low fine fuel loads, and retention of organic matter and nutrients. Plant community phase changes are primarily driven by fire, periodic drought and/or insect or disease attack.
Community 1.1
Reference Plant CommunityThis community is dominated by low sagebrush and Idaho fescue. Bluebunch wheagrass and Sandberg bluegrass are common. Forbs and other grasses make up smaller components.
Dominant plant species
-
little sagebrush (Artemisia arbuscula), shrub
-
Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis), grass
Figure 7. 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)Grass/Grasslike 680 850 1020 Shrub/Vine 80 100 120 Forb 40 50 60 Total 800 1000 1200 Community 1.2
This community phase is characteristic of a post-disturbance, early/mid-seral community. Idaho fescue, bluebunch wheatgrass and other perennial bunchgrasses dominate. Depending on fire severity patches of intact sagebrush may remain. Rabbitbrush and other sprouting shrubs may be sprouting. Perennial forbs may be a significant component for a number of years following fire.
Community 1.3
Sagebrush increases in the absence of disturbance. Decadent sagebrush dominates the overstory and the deep-rooted perennial bunchgrasses in the understory are reduced either from competition with shrubs and/or from herbivory.
Pathway P1.1a
Community 1.1 to 1.2Fire will decrease or eliminate the overstory of sagebrush and allow for the perennial bunchgrasses to dominate the site. Fires will typically be low severity resulting in a mosaic pattern due to low fuel loads. A fire following an unusually wet spring may be more severe and reduce sagebrush cover to trace amounts.
Pathway P1.1b
Community 1.1 to 1.3Time and lack of disturbance such as fire allows for sagebrush to increase and become decadent. Long-term drought, herbivory, or combinations of these will cause a decline in perennial bunchgrasses and fine fuels leading to a reduced fire frequency and allowing sagebrush to dominate the site.
Pathway P1.2a
Community 1.2 to 1.1Time and lack of disturbance will allow sagebrush to increase.
Pathway P1.3a
Community 1.3 to 1.1A low severity fire, herbivory or combinations will reduce the sagebrush overstory and create a sagebrush/grass mosaic.
Pathway P1.3b
Community 1.3 to 1.2Fire will decrease or eliminate the overstory of sagebrush and allow for the perennial bunchgrasses to dominate the site. Fires may be high severity in this community phase due to the dominance of sagebrush resulting in removal of overstory shrub community.
State 2
Current Potential State 2.0This state is similar to the Reference State 1.0. Ecological function has not changed, however the resiliency of the state has been reduced by the presence of invasive weeds. This state has the same three general community phases. These non-native species can be highly flammable, and promote fire where historically fire had been infrequent. Negative feedbacks enhance ecosystem resilience and contribute to the stability of the state. These feedbacks include the presence of all structural and functional groups, low fine fuel loads, and retention of organic matter and nutrients. Positive feedbacks decrease ecosystem resilience and stability of the state. These include the nonnatives’ high seed output, persistent seed bank, rapid growth rate, ability to cross pollinate, and adaptations for seed dispersal.
Community 2.1
This community phase is similar to the Reference State Community Phase 1.1, with the presence of non-native species in trace amounts. Low sagebrush and Idaho fescue dominate the site. Bluebunch wheagrass and Sandberg bluegrass are common. Forbs and other grasses make up smaller components.
Community 2.2
This community phase is characteristic of a post-disturbance, early to mid-seral community where annual non-native species are present. Sagebrush is present in trace amounts; perennial bunchgrasses dominate the site. Depending on fire severity patches of intact sagebrush may remain. Rabbitbrush may be sprouting or dominant in the community. Perennial forbs may be a significant component for a number of years following fire. Annual non-native species are stable or increasing within the community.
Community 2.3
(At Risk)This community is at risk of crossing a threshold to another state. Sagebrush dominates the overstory and perennial bunchgrasses in the understory are reduced, either from competition with shrubs or from inappropriate grazing, or from both. Rabbitbrush may be a significant component. Sandberg bluegrass may increase and become co-dominate with deep rooted bunchgrasses. Annual non-natives species may be stable or increasing due to lack of competition with perennial bunchgrasses. This site is susceptible to further degradation from grazing, drought, and fire.
Community 2.4
(At Risk)This community is at risk of crossing into an annual state. Native bunchgrasses dominate; however, annual non-native species such as cheatgrass may be sub-dominant in the understory. Annual production and abundance of these annuals may increase drastically in years with heavy spring precipitation. Sagebrush is a minor component. This site is susceptible to further degradation from grazing, drought, and fire.
Pathway P2.1a
Community 2.1 to 2.2Fire reduces the shrub overstory and allows for perennial bunchgrasses to dominate the site. Fires are typically low severity resulting in a mosaic pattern due to low fuel loads. A fire following an unusually wet spring or a change in management favoring an increase in fine fuels may be more severe and reduce sagebrush cover to trace amounts. Annual non-native species are likely to increase after fire.
Pathway P2.1b
Community 2.1 to 2.3Time and lack of disturbance allows for sagebrush to increase and become decadent. Long-term drought reduces fine fuels and leads to a reduced fire frequency, allowing sagebrush to dominate the site. Inappropriate grazing management reduces the perennial bunchgrass understory; conversely Sandberg bluegrass may increase in the understory depending on grazing management.
Pathway P2.1c
Community 2.1 to 2.4Higher than normal spring precipitation favors annual nonnative species such as cheatgrass. Non-native annual species will increase in production and density throughout the site. Perennial bunchgrasses may also increase in production.
Pathway P2.2a
Community 2.2 to 2.1Time and lack of disturbance and/or grazing management that favors the establishment and growth of sagebrush allows the shrub component to recover. The establishment of low sagebrush can take many years.
Pathway P2.2b
Community 2.2 to 2.4Higher than normal spring precipitation favors annual nonnative species such as cheatgrass. Non-native annual species will increase in production and density throughout the site. Perennial bunchgrasses may also increase in production.
Pathway P2.3a
Community 2.3 to 2.1A change in grazing management that reduces shrubs will allow for the perennial bunchgrasses in the understory to increase. Heavy late-fall or winter grazing may cause mechanical damage and subsequent death to sagebrush, facilitating an increase in the herbaceous understory. Brush treatments with minimal soil disturbance will also decrease sagebrush and release the perennial understory. A low severity fire would decrease the overstory of sagebrush and low for the understory perennial grasses to increase. Due to low fuel loads in this State, fires will likely be small creating a mosaic pattern. Annual non-native species are present and may increase in the community.
Pathway P2.3b
Community 2.3 to 2.2Fire eliminates/reduces the overstory of sagebrush and allows for the understory perennial grasses to increase. Fires may be high severity in this community phase due to the dominance of sagebrush resulting in removal of overstory shrub community. Annual non-native species respond well to fire and may increase post burn.
Pathway P2.4a
Community 2.4 to 2.1Rainfall patterns favoring perennial bunchgrasses. Less than normal spring precipitation followed by higher than normal summer precipitation will increase perennial bunchgrass production.
Pathway P2.4b
Community 2.4 to 2.2Rainfall patterns favoring perennial bunchgrasses. Less than normal spring precipitation followed by higher than normal summer precipitation will increase perennial bunchgrass production.
State 3
Shrub State 3.0This state is a product of many years of heavy grazing during time periods harmful to perennial bunchgrasses. Sandberg bluegrass will increase with a reduction in deep rooted perennial bunchgrass competition and become the dominant grasses. Sagebrush dominates the overstory and rabbitbrush may be a significant component. Sagebrush cover exceeds site concept and may be decadent, reflecting stand maturity and lack of seedling establishment due to competition with mature plants. The shrub overstory and bluegrass understory dominate site resources such that soil water, nutrient capture, nutrient cycling and soil organic matter are temporally and spatially redistributed.
Community 3.1
(At Risk)Decadent sagebrush dominates the overstory. Rabbitbrush may be a significant component. Deep-rooted perennial bunchgrasses may be present in trace amounts or absent from the community. Sandberg bluegrass and annual non-native species increase. Bare ground is significant.
Community 3.2
Bluegrass dominates the site; annual non-native species may be present but are not dominant. Trace amounts of sagebrush or rabbitbrush may be present.
Pathway P3.1a
Community 3.1 to 3.2Fire, heavy fall grazing causing mechanical damage to shrubs, and/or brush treatments with minimal soil disturbance, will greatly reduce the overstory shrubs to trace amounts and allow for Sandberg bluegrass to dominate the site.
Pathway P3.2a
Community 3.2 to 3.1Time and lack of disturbance and/or grazing management that favors the establishment and growth of sagebrush allows the shrub component to recover. The establishment of low sagebrush can take many years.
State 4
Annual State 4.0An abiotic threshold has been crossed and state dynamics are driven by fire and time. The herbaceous understory is dominated by annual non-native species such as cheatgrass and mustards. Resiliency has declined and further degradation from fire facilitates a cheatgrass and sprouting shrub plant community. Fire return interval has shortened due to the dominance of cheatgrass in the understory and is a driver in site dynamics.
Community 4.1
Annuals dominate; Sandberg bluegrass and perennial forbs may still be present in trace amounts. Surface erosion may increase with summer convection storms and would be verified through increased pedestalling of plants, rill formation or extensive water flow paths.
State 5
Eroded State 5.0This state has one community phase. Loss of the A horizon and extreme pedestalling are identifiable features. Abiotic factors including soil redistribution and erosion, soil temperature, soil crusting and sealing are primary drivers of ecological condition within this state. Soil moisture, soil nutrients and soil organic matter distribution and cycling are severely altered due to degraded soil surface conditions. Regeneration of shrubs is not evident.
Community 5.1
This community phase is characterized by an increase in soil redistribution or loss of the A horizon. Low sagebrush and/or rabbitbrush dominate the overstory. Sandberg bluegrass and annual species dominate the understory. Plants are pedestalled. Dead sagebrush skeletons may be prominent. Regeneration of sagebrush and herbaceous species is not evident.
Transition T1A
State 1 to 2Trigger: This transition is caused by the introduction of non-native annual plants, such as cheatgrass, mustards, and bur buttercup. Slow variables: Over time the annual non-native species will increase within the community. Threshold: Any amount of introduced non-native species causes an immediate decrease in the resilience of the site. Annual non-native species cannot be easily removed from the system and have the potential to significantly alter disturbance regimes from their historic range of variation.
Transition T2A
State 2 to 3Trigger: To Community Phase 3.1: Inappropriate grazing will decrease or eliminate deep rooted perennial bunchgrasses, increase Sandberg bluegrass and favor shrub growth and establishment. Trigger: To Community Phase 3.2: Severe fire in community phase 2.3 will remove sagebrush overstory, decrease perennial bunchgrasses and enhance Sandberg bluegrass. Annual non-native species will increase. Slow variables: Long term decrease in deep-rooted perennial grass density. Threshold: Loss of deep-rooted perennial bunchgrasses changes nutrient cycling, nutrient redistribution, and reduces soil organic matter.
Transition T2B
State 2 to 4Trigger: Fire or soil disturbing treatment would transition to Community Phase 4.1. Slow variables: Increased production and cover of non-native annual species. Threshold: Loss of deep-rooted perennial bunchgrasses and shrubs changes temporal and spatial nutrient capture and cycling within the community. Increased, continuous fine fuels modify the fire regime by increasing frequency, size and spatial variability of fires.
Transition T3A
State 3 to 4Trigger: Fire and/or treatments that disturb the soil and existing plant community. Slow variables: Increased seed production (following a wet spring) and cover of annual nonnative species. Threshold: Increased, continuous fine fuels modify the fire regime by changing frequency, intensity, size and spatial variability of fires. Changes in plant community composition and spatial variability of vegetation due to the loss of perennial bunchgrasses and sagebrush truncate energy capture and impact the temporal and spatial aspects of nutrient cycling and distribution.
Transition T3B
State 3 to 5Trigger: Inappropriate grazing management causing a removal of perennial bunchgrasses and a disruption of the soil surface would increase soil erosion. Soil disturbing treatments such as a chaining or other mechanical tree removal treatment. Slow variable: Bare ground interspaces large and connected; water flow paths long and continuous, understory is sparse, pedestalling of plants significant. Threshold: Soil redistribution and erosion is significant and linked to vegetation mortality evidenced by pedestalling and burying of herbaceous species and / or lack of recruitment in the interspaces.
Transition T4A
State 4 to 5Trigger: Inappropriate grazing management , multiple fires, cheatgrass dieoff, a prolonged drought, summer convection storms or combinations of disturbances that reduce ground cover. Soil disturbing treatments (ex: range seedings that fail) may promote further soil erosion. Slow variables: Overall reduction in the plant community coupled with increased bare ground and soil erosion. Threshold: Soil erosion is controlling site processes. Surface may be sealed after rain events and infiltration rates are greatly reduced. Ponding may be evident. Large connected bare ground patches and evidence of long connected flow paths is common. In some landscape positions wind erosion may be more significant than water erosion.
Additional community tables
Table 7. Community 1.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Grass/Grasslike1 Dominant, perennial, deep rooted grasses 600–700 Idaho fescue FEID Festuca idahoensis 600–700 – 2 Sub-dominant, perennial, deep rooted grasses 40–100 bluebunch wheatgrass PSSP6 Pseudoroegneria spicata 30–80 – basin wildrye LECI4 Leymus cinereus 10–20 – 4 Sub-dominant, perennial, shallow rooted grasses 20–50 Sandberg bluegrass POSE Poa secunda 20–50 – 5 All other perennial grasses 20–60 Thurber's needlegrass ACTH7 Achnatherum thurberianum 0–20 – squirreltail ELEL5 Elymus elymoides 0–20 – prairie Junegrass KOMA Koeleria macrantha 0–20 – Forb7 Dominant, perennial forbs 20–50 balsamroot BALSA Balsamorhiza 10–30 – lupine LUPIN Lupinus 10–20 – 9 All other perennial forbs 10–50 common yarrow ACMI2 Achillea millefolium 0–10 – milkvetch ASTRA Astragalus 0–10 – Indian paintbrush CASTI2 Castilleja 0–10 – tapertip hawksbeard CRAC2 Crepis acuminata 0–10 – fleabane ERIGE2 Erigeron 0–10 – buckwheat ERIOG Eriogonum 0–10 – stoneseed LITHO3 Lithospermum 0–10 – desertparsley LOMAT Lomatium 0–10 – phlox PHLOX Phlox 0–10 – Shrub/Vine11 Dominant, perennial, evergreen shrubs 50–100 little sagebrush ARAR8 Artemisia arbuscula 50–100 – 15 All other perennial shrubs 20–60 serviceberry AMELA Amelanchier 0–20 – mountain big sagebrush ARTRV Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana 0–20 – yellow rabbitbrush CHVI8 Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus 0–20 – Table 8. Community 1.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 9. Community 1.3 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 2.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 12. Community 2.3 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 13. Community 2.4 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 14. Community 3.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 15. Community 3.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 16. Community 4.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 17. Community 5.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Interpretations
Animal community
This site offers food and cover for antelope, mule deer, rodents and a variety of birds. It is an important spring, summer and fall use area for antelope and mule deer.
This site is suitable for livestock grazing. Grazing management considerations include timing, intensity and duration of grazing.
Domestic sheep and, to a much lesser degree, cattle consume low sagebrush, particularly during the spring, fall, and winter (Sheehy and Winward 1981). Heavy dormant season grazing by sheep will reduce sagebrush cover and increase grass production (Laycock 1967). Severe trampling damage to supersaturated soils could occur if sites are used in early spring when there is abundant snowmelt. Trampling damage, particularly from cattle or horses, in low sagebrush habitat types is greatest when high clay content soils are wet.
Bunchgrasses, in general, best tolerate light grazing after seed formation. Britton et al. (1990) observed the effects of clipping date on basal area of 5 bunchgrasses in eastern Oregon and found grazing from August to October (after seed set) has the least impact. Heavy grazing during the growing season will reduce perennial bunchgrasses and increase sagebrush (Laycock 1967). Abusive grazing by cattle or horses will likely increase low sagebrush, rabbitbrush and some forbs such as arrowleaf balsamroot. Annual non-native weedy species such as cheatgrass and mustards, and potentially medusahead, may invade.
Idaho fescue tolerates light to moderate grazing (Ganskopp and Bedell 1980) and is moderately resistant to trampling (Cole 1987). Heavy grazing may lead to replacement of Idaho fescue with non-native species such as cheatgrass (Mueggler 1984).
Bluebunch wheatgrass is moderately grazing tolerant and is very sensitive to defoliation during the active growth period (Blaisdell and Pechanec 1949, Laycock 1967, Anderson and Scherzinger 1975, Britton et al. 1990). Herbage and flower stalk production was reduced with clipping at all times during the growing season; however, clipping was most harmful during the boot stage (Blaisdell and Pechanec 1949). Tiller production and growth of bluebunch was greatly reduced when clipping was coupled with drought (Busso and Richards 1995). Mueggler (1975) estimated that low vigor bluebunch wheatgrass may need up to 8 years rest to recover. Although an important forage species, it is not always the preferred species by livestock and wildlife.
Reduced bunchgrass vigor or density provides an opportunity for Sandberg bluegrass expansion and/or cheatgrass and other invasive species to occupy interspaces. Sandberg bluegrass increases under grazing pressure (Tisdale and Hironaka 1981) and is capable of co-existing with cheatgrass or other weedy species. Excessive sheep grazing favors Sandberg bluegrass; however, where cattle are the dominant grazers, cheatgrass often dominates (Daubenmire 1970). Thus, depending on the season of use, the grazer and site conditions, either Sandberg bluegrass or cheatgrass may become the dominant understory with inappropriate grazing management.
(Adapted from Stringham, T.K. et al., 2015)Other products
This site is suited to use by cattle, sheep and horses in late spring, summer and fall under a planned grazing system. Use should be postponed until the soils are firm enough to prevent trampling damage and soil compaction.
Supporting information
Inventory data references
Vale District BLM Ecological Site Inventory NASIS component and pedon data Range Site Descriptions Field knowledge of range-trained personnel
Other references
Barrington, M., S. Bunting, and G. Wright. 1988. A fire management plan for Craters of the Moon National Monument. Cooperative Agreement CA-9000-8-0005. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho, Range Resources Department. 52 p. Draft.
Bates, J. D., T. Svejcar, R. F. Miller, and R. A. Angell. 2006. The effects of precipitation timing on sagebrush steppe vegetation. Journal of Arid Environments 64:670-697.
Beardall, L. E. and V. E. Sylvester. 1976. Spring burning of removal of sagebrush competition in Nevada. In: Tall Timbers fire ecology conference and proceedings. Tall Timbers Research Station. 14: 539-547
Blaisdell, J. P. and J. F. Pechanec. 1949. Effects of Herbage Removal at Various Dates on Vigor of Bluebunch Wheatgrass and Arrowleaf Balsamroot. Ecology 30:298-305.
Blaisdell, J. P., R. B. Murray, and E. D. McArthur. 1982. Managing intermountain rangelands-sagebrushgrass ranges. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-134. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, UT. p. 41.
Britton, C. M., G. R. McPherson, and F. A. Sneva. 1990. Effects of burning and clipping on five bunchgrasses in eastern Oregon. Great Basin Naturalist 50:115-120.
Busso, C. A. and J. H. Richards. 1995. Drought and clipping effects on tiller demography and growth of two tussock grasses in Utah. Journal of Arid Environments 29:239-251.
Comstock and Ehleringer 1992 Bradley, A. F., N. V. Noste, and W. C. Fischer. 1992. Fire ecology of forests and woodlands in Utah. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-287. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. P. 128.
Chambers J.C., Miller R.F., Board D.I., Pyke D.A., Roundy B.A., Grace J.B., Schupp E.W., Tausch R.J. 2014. Resilience and Resistance of Sagebrush Ecosystems: Implications for State and Transition Models and Management Treatments. Rangeland Ecology and Management, 67 (5) , pp. 440-454.
Chambers, Jeanne C.; Pyke, David A.; Maestas, Jeremy D.; Pellant, Mike; Boyd, Chad S.; Campbell, Steven B.; Espinosa, Shawn; Havlina, Douglas W.; Mayer, Kenneth E.; Wuenschel, Amarina. 2014. Using resistance and resilience concepts to reduce impacts of invasive annual grasses and altered fire regimes on the sagebrush ecosystem and greater sage-grouse: A strategic multi-scale approach. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-326. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 73 p.
Chambers, J. C., B. A. Roundy, R. R. Blank, S. E. Meyer, and A. Whittaker. 2007. What makes great basin sagebrush ecosystems invasible by Bromus tectorum? Ecological Monographs 77:117-145.
Cole, D.N. 1987. Effects of three seasons of experimental trampling on five montane forest communities and a grassland in western Montana, USA. Biological Conservation 40:219-244.
Conrad, C. E. and C. E. Poulton. 1966. Effect of a wildfire on Idaho fescue and bluebunch wheatgrass. Journal of Range Management 19:138-141.
Daubenmire, R. 1970. Steppe vegetation of Washington. Technical bulletin. Washington Agriculture Experiment Station. 131 pp.
Daubenmire, R. 1975. Plant succession on abandoned fields, and fire influences in a steppe area in southeastern Washington. Northwest Science 49:36-48.
Furniss, M. M. and W. F. Barr. 1975. Insects affecting important native shrubs of the northwestern United States General Technical Report INT-19. Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Ogden, UT. p. 68
Ganskopp, D. 1988. Defoliation of Thurber Needlegrass: Herbage and Root Responses. Journal of Range Management 41:472-476.
Jensen, M.E. 1990 Interpretation of environmental gradients which influence sagebrush community distribution in northeastern Nevada. J. of Range Management 43:161-166.
Johnson, C.G., Jr., R.R. Clausnitzer, P.J. Mehringer, and C. Oliver. 1994. Biotic and abiotic processes of Eastside ecosystems: the effects of management on plant and community ecology and on stand and landscape vegetation dynamics. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-322. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 66 p.
Kitchen, S. G. and E. D. McArthur. 2007. Big and black sagebrush landscapes. In: S. Hood, M. Miller [eds.]. Fire ecology and mangement of the major ecosystems of southern Utah. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRMS-GTR-202. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO. P. 73-95.
Laycock, W. A. 1967. How heavy grazing and protection affect sagebrush-grass ranges. Journal of Range Management 20:206-213.
Mueggler, W. F. 1975. Rate and Pattern of Vigor Recovery in Idaho Fescue and Bluebunch Wheatgrass. Journal of Range Management 28:198-204.
Mueggler, W.F. 1984. Diversity of western rangelands. In: Natural diversity in forest ecosystems: Proceedings; 1982; Athens, GA. Athens, GA: University of Georgia, Institute of Ecology: Pgs 211-217.
Robberecht, R. and G. Defossé. 1995. The relative sensitivity of two bunchgrass species to fire. International Journal of Wildland Fire 5:127-134.
Schoeneberger, P.J., D.A. Wysocki, E.C. Benham, and Soil Survey Staff. 2012. Field book for describing and sampling soils, Version 3.0. Natural Resources Conservation Service, National Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, NE.
Sheehy, D. P. and A. H. Winward. 1981. Relative Palatability of Seven Artemisia Taxa to Mule Deer and Sheep. Journal of Range Management 34:397-399.
Stringham, T.K., P. Novak-Echenique, P. Blackburn, D. Snyder, and A. Wartgow. 2015. Final Report for USDA Ecological Site Description State-and-Transition Models by Disturbance Response Groups, Major Land Resource Area 25 Nevada. University of Nevada Reno, Nevada Agricultural Experiment Station Research Report 2015-02. p. 569
Tisdale, E. W. and M. Hironaka. 1981. The sagebrush-grass region: A review of the ecological literature. University of Idaho, Forest, Wildlife and Range Experiment Station. Moscow, ID. P. 31
Young, R. P. 1983. Fire as a vegetation management tool in rangelands of the intermountain region. In: S. Monsen, N. Shaw [eds.] Managing intermountain rangelands - improvement of range and wildlife habitats. USDA, Forest Service. P. 18-31
Wright, H.A., L.F. Neuenschwander, and C.M. Britton. 1979. The role and use of fire in sagebrush-grass and pinyon-juniper plant communities: A state-of-the-art review. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-58. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 48 p.
Wright, H. A. 1971. Why Squirreltail Is More Tolerant to Burning than Needle-and-Thread. Journal of Range Management 24:277-284.Contributors
A.V. Bahn, R.H. Barrett
Bob Gillaspy
E. Ersch
Jennifer MoffittApproval
Kendra Moseley, 4/25/2024
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 08/05/2026 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
