Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Ecological site F028AY080NV

ABCOC-PSMEG (White Fir-Douglas Fir)

Accessed: 07/14/2026

Home / esd CATALOG / MLRA 028A / ecological site F028AY080NV

USC

Metric

General information

Draft. A draft ecological site description is either incomplete or has not undergone quality control and quality assurance review.

MLRA notes

Major Land Resource Area (MLRA): 028A–Ancient Lake Bonneville

MLRA 28A occurs in Utah (82%), Nevada (16%), and Idaho (2%). It makes up about 36,775 square miles (95,300 square kilometers). About three-fifths of this area is federally owned land, large tracts of which are used for military training and testing purposes by the. A large area west and southwest of Great Salt Lake is a salty playa. This area is the farthest eastern extent of the Great Basin Section of the Basin and Range Province of the Intermontane Plateaus. It is an area of nearly level basins between widely separated mountain ranges trending north to south. The basins are bordered by long, gently sloping alluvial fans. The mountains are uplifted fault blocks with steep side slopes. They are not well dissected because of low rainfall in the MLRA. Most of the valleys are closed basins containing sinks or playa lakes. Elevation ranges from 3,950 to 6,560 feet (1,205 to 2,000 meters) in the basins and from 6,560 to 11,150 feet (2,000 to 3,400 meters) in the mountains.
Most of this area has alluvial valley fill and playa lakebed deposits at the surface. Great Salt Lake is all that remains of glacial Lake Bonneville, which covered this area during the most recent ice age. A level line on some mountain slopes indicates the former extent of this glacial lake. The uplifted mountains have exposed some Precambrian rocks at their margins. Most of the mountains in the interior of this area consist of tilted blocks of marine sediments from Cambrian to Mississippian age. Scattered outcrops of Tertiary continental sediments and volcanic rocks are throughout the area.
The average annual precipitation is 5 to 12 inches (125 to 305 millimeters) in the valleys and is as much as 49 inches (1,245 millimeters) in the mountains. Most of the rainfall occurs as high-intensity, convective thunderstorms during the growing season. The driest period is from midsummer to early autumn. Precipitation in winter typically occurs as snow. The average annual temperature is 39 to 53 degrees F (4 to 12 degrees C). The freeze-free period averages 165 days and ranges from 110 to 215 days, decreasing in length with elevation.
The dominant soil orders in this MLRA are Aridisols, Entisols, and Mollisols. The soils in the area dominantly have a mesic or frigid soil temperature regime, an aridic or xeric soil moisture regime, and mixed mineralogy. They generally are well drained or somewhat excessively drained, loamy or loamy-skeletal, and very deep.

Ecological site concept

This forestland site occurs on northerly aspects of mountain sideslopes. Slopes range from 8 to 75 percent. Elevations are 6800 to 10,700 feet.

Average annual precipitation is 25 to 35 inches. Mean annual air temperature is 40 to 43 degrees F. The average growing season is 50 to 70 days.

The soils associated with this site are moderately deep to very deep and well to somewhat excessively drained. The soils are formed in colluvium derived from limestone and shale or quartzite. These soils are modified by large volumes of rock fragments.

The reference state is dominated by a mixed stand of white fir and Douglas fir. On northerly aspects, Rocky Mountain white fir (Abies concolor var. concolor) commonly exceeds Rocky Mountain Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca) in tree volume production (Eyre, 1980). Overstory tree canopy composition is about 50 to 80 percent white fir, 20 to 50 percent Douglas-fir, and 2 to 10 percent quaking aspen, Engelmann''s spruce (Picea engelmannii), and/or limber pine (Pinus flexilis). Rocky Mountain ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa var, scopulorum) and Great Basin bristlecone pine (Pinus longaeva) will occasionally occur in the overstory. Quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) is recognized as an important seral species in the development of this woodland site.
Creeping barberry and mountain snowberry are the principal understory shrubs. Common juniper (Juniperus communis var. depressa) and greenleaf manzanita are other important shrubs found in the understory community. Sedges, along with skyline bluegrass, muttongrass and other bluegrasses, are the most prevalent understory grasses. Starwort, Fendler''s meadowrue, and daisy are common understory forbs. Production ranges from 25 to 125 pounds per acre.

Table 1. Dominant plant species

Tree	(1) Abies concolor (2) Pseudotsuga menziesii
Shrub	(1) Mahonia repens
Herbaceous	(1) Poa

Download full description

Physiographic features

This forestland site occurs on northerly aspects of mountain sideslopes. Slopes range from 8 to 75 percent. Elevations are 6800 to 10,700 feet.

Table 2. Representative physiographic features

Landforms	(1) Mountain
Elevation	6800 – 10700 ft
Slope	8 – 75 %
Aspect	N

Climatic features

Nevada’s climate is predominantly arid, with large daily ranges of temperature, infrequent severe storms, heavy snowfall in the higher mountains, and great location variations with elevation. Three basic geographical factors largely influence Nevada’s climate: continentality, latitude, and elevation. Continentality is the most important factor. The strong continental effect is expressed in the form of both dryness and large temperature variations. Nevada lies on the eastern, lee side of the Sierra Nevada Range, a massive mountain barrier that markedly influences the climate of the State. The prevailing winds are from the west, and as the warm moist air from the Pacific Ocean ascend the western slopes of the Sierra Range, the air cools, condensation occurs and most of the moisture falls as precipitation. As the air descends the eastern slope, it is warmed by compression, and very little precipitation occurs. The effects of this mountain barrier are felt not only in the West but throughout the state, with the result that the lowlands of Nevada are largely desert or steppes. The temperature regime is also affected by the blocking of the inland-moving maritime air. Nevada sheltered from maritime winds, has a continental climate with well-developed seasons and the terrain responds quickly to changes in solar heating.
Nevada lies within the mid-latitude belt of prevailing westerly winds which occur most of the year. These winds bring frequent changes in weather during the late fall, winter and spring months, when most of the precipitation occurs. To the south of the mid-latitude westerlies, lies a zone of high pressure in subtropical latitudes, with a center over the Pacific Ocean. In the summer, this high-pressure belt shifts northward over the latitudes of Nevada, blocking storms from the ocean. The resulting weather is mostly clear and dry during the summer and early fall, with scattered thundershowers. The eastern portion of the state receives significant summer thunderstorms generated from monsoonal moisture pushed up from the Gulf of California, known as the North American monsoon. The monsoon system peaks in August and by October the monsoon high over the Western U.S. begins to weaken and the precipitation retreats southward towards the tropics (NOAA 2004).

Average annual precipitation is 25 to 35 inches. Mean annual air temperature is 40 to 43 degrees F. The average growing season is 50 to 70 days.

Mean annual precipitaion at the GREAT BASIN NATL PARK,NEVADA climate station (263340) is 13.33 inches.

monthly mean precipitation is:
January 1.05; February 1.18; March 1.37; April 1.21;
May 1.24; June 0.87; July 0.97; August 1.18;
September 1.08; October 1.24;
November 0.97; December 0.96.

Table 3 Representative climatic features

Frost-free period (average)	110 days
Freeze-free period (average)	150 days
Precipitation total (average)	10 in

Bar

Line

Figure 1. Monthly precipitation range

Bar

Line

Figure 2. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature

Figure 3. Annual precipitation pattern

Figure 4 Annual average temperature pattern

Climate stations used

(1) GREAT BASIN NP [USC00263340], Baker, NV

Soil features

The soils associated with this site are moderately deep to very deep and well to somewhat excessively drained. The soils are formed in colluvium derived from limestone and shale or quartzite. These soils are modified by large volumes of rock fragments. Snow accumulation persists into late spring on this site when the soil is not frozen. Snow melt at this time adds to the soil moisture supply. There is normally a 1 to 3 inch surface layer of decomposing organic matter present. This duff layer reduces moisture loss due to evaporation. The soil series associated with this site include: Bakerpeak, Lemcave, Muiral, Osditch, Strawbcrek, Ragamuffin, and Winz.

The representative soil series is Osditch, a Loamy-skeletal, mixed, superactive Lamellic Haplocryepts. Diagnostic horizons include an Ochric epipedon from the soil surface to 18 cm,
Albic horizon from 8 to 46 cm, Cambic horizon from 8 to 152 cm, and a Lamellae from 46 to 152 cm. Clay content in the particle control sections average 15 to 25 percent. Rock fragments range from 60 to 85 percent, mainly cobbles. Reaction is moderately acid through neutral. Effervescence is none. Lithology consists of quartzite and argillite.

Table 4. Representative soil features

Parent material	(1) Colluvium – limestone and shale (2) Residuum – quartzite
Surface texture	(1) Extremely stony loam (2) Extremely gravelly loam (3) Ashy coarse sandy loam
Family particle size	(1) Loamy
Drainage class	Well drained to somewhat excessively drained
Permeability class	Very slow to moderately rapid
Soil depth	50 – 60 in
Surface fragment cover <=3"	20 – 70 %
Surface fragment cover >3"	0 – 5 %
Available water capacity (0-40in)	2.4 – 5 in
Calcium carbonate equivalent (0-40in)	0 – 35 %
Electrical conductivity (0-40in)	0 – 2 mmhos/cm
Sodium adsorption ratio (0-40in)	Not specified
Soil reaction (1:1 water) (0-40in)	5.6 – 8.6
Subsurface fragment volume <=3" (Depth not specified)	50 – 80 %
Subsurface fragment volume >3" (Depth not specified)	30 – 50 %

Ecological dynamics

An ecological site is the product of all the environmental factors responsible for its development and it has a set of key characteristics that influence a site’s resilience to disturbance and resistance to invasives. Key characteristics include 1) climate (precipitation, temperature), 2) topography (aspect, slope, elevation, and landform), 3) hydrology (infiltration, runoff), 4) soils (depth, texture, structure, organic matter), 5) plant communities (functional groups, productivity), and 6) natural disturbance regime (fire, herbivory, etc.) (Caudle et al. 2013). Biotic factors that influence resilience include site productivity, species composition and structure, and population regulation and regeneration (Chambers et al. 2013).
Rocky Mountain white fir occurs in 31 mountain ranges in Nevada, in ten counties it is relatively uncommon (Charlet 1996). It is considered fairly drought resistant and is a strong competitor with associated species (Maul 1958). It has good seed years at irregular intervals of two to four years. Seed bearing continues for many years but is more abundant during the period of rapid height growth (ages 50 to 100 years). Pole-size trees in dense stands usually bear seeds only when their leaders reach full sunlight (Maul, 1958). Any tree-top damage caused by insects, diseases, and mechanical agents such as ice, snow or wind directly reduces cone production. Crown decadence can be caused by fir mistletoe (Phoradendron pauciflorum), western dwarfmistletoe (Arceuthobium campylopodum), and the fir engraver beetle (Scolytus ventralis). Trees that lose their tops may develop new terminals and resume cone bearing (Maul 1958). Fir-cone moths (Barbara spp.) often seriously injure cones and seed chalcids (Megastigumus spp.) often damage white fir seeds (Maul 1958).
White fir reproduces solely by seed. Seeds are mostly disseminated by wind and to minor extent by rodents. Seed dissemination occurs from September through October later depending on elevation. The greatest number of seeds fall close to the base of the tree with wind dissemination influenced by height of tree, surrounding forest canopy, terrain, updrafts, air turbulence and direction of prevailing winds (Maul 1958). Seed germination requires available surface soil moisture and suitable temperatures. White fir is slow growing until about 30 years of age, then growth rapidly accelerates. Tree heights rarely exceed 100 feet. White fir is subject to windthrow and is often intensified by root rot from Fomes annosus that has becomes established through old fire wounds (Maul 1958).
This is a very stable site. Fire is the main disturbance but will be rare and low severity due to low fuel loads. Common dandelion is the most common species to invade these sites, non-native species have only been found in trace amounts. This site has two stable states; the Reference State and Current Potential.
Fire Ecology:
At higher elevations and fire safe zones where these sites occur, the understory is scarce and fire is infrequent and of low intensity due to low fuel loads. Fires in these zones are more likely related to El Nino events and higher production years (Sherriff et al. 2001). In the more productive sites, white fir may be dependent on infrequent stand replacing fires which reduce competition by other tree species and create open areas that promote regeneration (Coop and Schoettle 2009). White fir communities fire return interval averages between 5 an 30 years in the Sierra Nevada. Young white fir is highly susceptible to fire, and mature trees are only moderately fir tolerant. White fir is an aggressive, shade-tolerant species that will seed into the understory of low-elevation ponderosa or Jeffrey pine stands or into mixtures of ponderosa pine, Douglas-fir, quaking aspen, and southwestern white pine. The effects of fire on Rocky Mountain Douglas fir vary with fire severity and tree size. Seedlings are most susceptible to fire damage. In the pole and sapling stages Rocky Mountain Douglas fir is susceptible to fire damage. Mature trees can survive moderately severe surface fires because the lower bole is covered by thick, corky bark that insulates the cambium from heat damage. Rocky Mountain Douglas fir usually forms obvious fire scars and can survive several centuries after injury. Creeping barberry is moderately tolerant of fire. It is a vigorous sprouter following fire and may be favored by intense fire. Fires top-kill mountain snowberry. Although plant survival may be variable, mountain snowberry root crowns usually survive even severe fires. Mountain snowberry sprouts from basal buds at the root crown following fire. Bluegrass is generally unharmed by fire. It produces little litter, and its small bunch size and sparse litter reduces the amount of heat transferred to perennating buds in the soil. Its rapid maturation in the spring also reduces fire damage, since it is dormant when most fires occur. Sedge is top-killed by fire, with rhizomes protected by insulating soil. The rhizomes of sedge species may be killed by high-severity fires that remove most of the soil organic layer. Reestablishment after fire occurs by seed establishment and/or rhizomatous spread.
Fire suppression has aided an increase in the population of the white fir. Where fires were more frequent young plants were killed in the understory, with fire suppression these shade tolerant species have been allowed to mature. They act as “fire ladders” which conduct flames into the canopies of other trees, chiefly pines. Pine trees are not tolerant of shade and do not become established under canopies of white fir, thus the transition of pine dominated forests to firs (Lanner 2002).
Limber pine has been noted to be the first to colonize areas after burn. This is in part due to the seed dispersal mechanism; which is mainly by Clark’s nutcracker which prefers to cache in open burn sites (Lanner and Vander Wall 1980, Rebertus et al. 1991). Limber pine decreases in later succession with the increase in other more shade tolerant species (Donnegan and Rebertus 1999).
Muttongrass, a minor component on this site, is top killed by fire but will resprout after low to moderate severity fires. A study by Vose and White (1991) in an open sawtimber site, found minimal difference in overall effect of burning on mutton grass.
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 crown fire or tree harvest. Skeleton forest (dead trees) remaining after fire or residual trees left following harvest have little effect on the composition and production of the herbaceous vegetation.
SHRUB-HERBACEOUS: Herbaceous vegetation, woody shrubs, and quaking aspen saplings dominate the site. Various amounts of conifer tree seedlings (less than 20 inches in height) may be present up to the point where they are obviously a major component of the vegetal structure.
SAPLING: In the absence of disturbance, the conifer seedlings develop into saplings (20 inches to 4½ feet in height) with a range in canopy cover of about 5 to 10 percent. Vegetation consists of grasses, forbs and shrubs in association with Douglas-fir and white fir saplings and young aspen trees.
IMMATURE FORESTLAND: The visual aspect and vegetal structure are dominated by quaking aspen greater than 4½ feet in height. Seedlings and saplings of Douglas fir, white fir, limber pine and other conifers, as well as suckers of quaking aspen are present in the understory. Quaking aspen are the tallest trees on the site due to the slow growth of Douglas fir and white fir. Understory vegetation is moderately influenced by a tree overstory canopy of about 10 to 20 percent. As the fir trees continue to develop, they will eventually dominate the site. At this stage the Douglas-fir and white fir are in the pole stage of development, and the stand can be quite dense.
MATURE FORESTLAND: The visual aspect and vegetal structure are dominated by white fir and Douglas-fir that have reached or are near maximal heights for the site. Dominant trees average ten inches or greater in diameter at breast height. Tree canopy cover is about 50 percent. Understory vegetation is strongly influenced by tree competition, overstory shading, duff accumulation, etc. Few seedlings and/or saplings of Douglas fir or quaking aspen occur in the understory.
OLD GROWTH FORESTLAND: In the absence of wildfire or other naturally occurring disturbances, the tree canopy on this site can become very dense. This stage is dominated by white fir that have reached maximal heights for the site. Dominant and codominant trees average greater than ten inches in diameter at breast height. Understory vegetation is sparse due to tree competition, overstory shading, duff accumulation, etc. Canopy cover is commonly greater than 70 percent.

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 text

State 1
Reference State

The Reference State 1.0 is representative of the natural range of variability under pristine conditions. This reference state has 2 general community phases: a dominant tree/shrub phase and a dominant tree/grass 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
Community Phase

The plant community is dominated by a mixed stand of white fir and Douglas fir. On northerly aspects, Rocky Mountain white fir (Abies concolor var. concolor) commonly exceeds Rocky Mountain Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca) in tree volume production (Eyre, 1980). Overstory tree canopy composition is about 50 to 80 percent white fir, 20 to 50 percent Douglas-fir, and 2 to 10 percent quaking aspen, Engelmann's spruce (Picea engelmannii), and/or limber pine (Pinus flexilis). Rocky Mountain ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa var, scopulorum) and Great Basin bristlecone pine (Pinus longaeva) will occasionally occur in the overstory. Quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) is recognized as an important seral species in the development of this woodland site.
Creeping barberry and mountain snowberry are the principal understory shrubs. Common juniper (Juniperus communis var. depressa) and greenleaf manzanita are other important shrubs found in the understory community. Sedges, along with skyline bluegrass, muttongrass and other bluegrasses, are the most prevalent understory grasses. Starwort, Fendler's meadowrue, and daisy are common understory forbs.

Forest overstory.MATURE FORESTLAND: The visual aspect and vegetal structure are dominated by white fir and Douglas-fir that have reached or are near maximal heights for the site. Dominant trees average ten inches or greater in diameter at breast height. Tree canopy cover is about 50 percent. Understory vegetation is strongly influenced by tree competition, overstory shading, duff accumulation, etc. Few seedlings and/or saplings of Douglas fir or quaking aspen occur in the understory.

Forest understory. Understory vegetative composition is about 15 percent grasses, 15 percent forbs and 70 percent shrubs and young trees when the average overstory canopy is medium (40 to 50 percent). Average understory production ranges from 50 to 350 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 5. 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	23	68	158
Tree	12	37	87
Grass/Grasslike	8	23	53
Forb	7	22	52
Total	50	150	350

Community 1.2
Community Phase

The herbaceous understory increases. Sprouting shrubs such as serviceberry and creeping barberry may increase. Perennial grasses in the understory such as bluebunch wheatgrass, spike fescue, muttongrass, and Letterman’s needlegrass may increase due to reduced competition from the overstory and increased sunlight. Conifers may be present in patches and fire safe zones.

Community 1.3
Community Phase

The herbaceous understory decreases due to competition from maturing conifer seedlings and saplings. Mountain big sagebrush increases. Limber pine and Rocky Mountain white fir seedlings and saplings increase in size and density.

Community 1.4
Community Phase

Limber pine and Rocky Mountain white fir may be reduced but remain a major component of the overstory. Bristlecone pine trees may show some fire damage but will most likely survive a low intensity fire. Common juniper and mountain big sagebrush are killed by fire and may take many years to reestablish. Sprouting shrubs such as creeping barberry and Utah serviceberry may be sprouting or increasing in the understory. Perennial bunchgrasses such as bluebunch wheatgrass may be reduced the first season after fire but will likely increase in cover and density due to the reduced competition from shrubs and trees.

Pathway a
Community 1.1 to 1.2

High severity, stand replacing fire would reduce tree cover and allow for the herbaceous understory to increase.

Pathway b
Community 1.1 to 1.4

A lightning strike, low severity fire and/or disease and insects would reduce the tree cover and shrubs in the understory and allow the perennial bunchgrasses to increase.

Pathway a
Community 1.2 to 1.3

Time without disturbance such as fire, drought or disease will allow for the trees and shrubs to increase in height and density.

Pathway a
Community 1.3 to 1.1

Time without disturbance such as fire, drought or disease will allow for the trees and shrubs to increase in height and density.

Pathway b
Community 1.3 to 1.2

Fire would reduce the maturing trees and shrubs and allow for the herbaceous understory to increase.

Pathway a
Community 1.4 to 1.1

Time without disturbance would allow for the conifers to increase.

State 2
Current Potential State

This state is similar to the Reference State 1.0 and has two similar community phases. Ecological function has not changed in this state, but the resiliency of the state has been reduced by the presence of invasive weeds. 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 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 non-natives high seed output, persistent seed bank, rapid growth rate, ability to cross pollinate and adaptations for seed dispersal.

Community 2.1
Community Phase

This community phase is characterized by mature bristlecone pine trees, Rocky Mountain white fir, and limber pine trees. Mountain big sagebrush is the dominant shrub in the understory. Bluebunch wheatgrass is the dominant grass. Spike fescue, muttongrass, Letterman’s needlegrass and sedges are also common. Creeping barberry, common juniper and Utah serviceberry are common understory shrubs. Non-native species such as common dandelion are present.

Community 2.2
Community Phase

Community 2.3
Community Phase

Community 2.4
Community Phase

Limber pine and Rocky Mountain white fir may be reduced but remain a major component of the overstory. Bristlecone pine trees may show some fire damage but will most likely survive a low intensity fire. Common juniper and mountain big sagebrush are killed by fire and may take many years to reestablish. Sprouting shrubs such as creeping barberry and serviceberry may be sprouting or increasing in the understory. Perennial bunchgrasses such as bluebunch wheatgrass may be reduced the first season after fire but will likely increase in cover and density due to the reduced competition from shrubs and trees. Non-native species such as common dandelion may be present.

Pathway a
Community 2.1 to 2.2

High severity, stand replacing fire would reduce tree cover and allow for the herbaceous understory to increase.

Pathway b
Community 2.1 to 2.4

A lightning strike, low severity fire and/or disease and insects would reduce the trees in the overstory and shrubs in the understory allowing the perennial bunchgrasses to increase.

Pathway a
Community 2.2 to 2.3

Time without disturbance such as fire, drought or disease will allow for the trees and shrubs to increase in height and density.

Pathway a
Community 2.3 to 2.1

Time without disturbance such as fire, drought or disease will allow for the trees and shrubs to increase in height and density.

Pathway b
Community 2.3 to 2.2

Fire would reduce the maturing trees and shrubs and allow for the herbaceous understory to increase.

Pathway a
Community 2.4 to 2.1

Time without disturbance such as fire, drought or disease will allow for the trees and shrubs to increase in height and density.

Transition A
State 1 to 2

Trigger: This transition is caused by the introduction of non-native annual plants, such as cheatgrass and mustards. 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.

Additional community tables

Table 6. Community 1.1 plant community composition

Group	Common name	Symbol	Scientific name	Annual production ()	Foliar cover (%)
Grass/Grasslike
1	Primary Perennial Grasses/Grasslikes			21–39
	sedge	CAREX	Carex	7–13	–
	Cusick's bluegrass	POCUE2	Poa cusickii ssp. epilis	7–13	–
	muttongrass	POFE	Poa fendleriana	7–13	–
2	Secondary Perennial Grasses			7–23
	mountain brome	BRMA4	Bromus marginatus	2–7	–
	bluegrass	POA	Poa	2–7	–
	spike trisetum	TRSP2	Trisetum spicatum	2–7	–
	big squirreltail	ELMU3	Elymus multisetus	1–2	–
Forb
3	Perennial			16–56
	milkvetch	ASTRA	Astragalus	2–7	–
	fleabane	ERIGE2	Erigeron	2–7	–
	lupine	LUPIN	Lupinus	2–7	–
	beardtongue	PENST	Penstemon	2–7	–
	ragwort	SENEC	Senecio	2–7	–
	starwort	STELL	Stellaria	2–7	–
	dandelion	TARAX	Taraxacum	2–7	–
	Fendler's meadow-rue	THFE	Thalictrum fendleri	2–7	–
Shrub/Vine
4	Primary Shrubs			22–49
	creeping barberry	MARE11	Mahonia repens	15–36	–
	mountain snowberry	SYOR2	Symphoricarpos oreophilus	7–13	–
5	Secondary Shrubs			6–18
	gooseberry currant	RIMO2	Ribes montigenum	2–7	–
	greenleaf manzanita	ARPA6	Arctostaphylos patula	2–7	–
	curl-leaf mountain mahogany	CELE3	Cercocarpus ledifolius	1–2	–
	Utah serviceberry	AMUT	Amelanchier utahensis	1–2	–
Tree
6	Deciduous			7–13
7	Evergreen			20–47
	common juniper	JUCO6	Juniperus communis	7–13	–
	Engelmann spruce	PIEN	Picea engelmannii	2–7	–
	limber pine	PIFL2	Pinus flexilis	2–7	–
	Rocky Mountain Douglas-fir	PSMEG	Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca	2–7	–

Table 7. Community 1.1 forest overstory composition

Common name	Symbol	Scientific name	Nativity	Height ft	Canopy cover (%)	Diameter in	Basal area (square ft/acre)
Tree
Rocky Mountain Douglas-fir	PSMEG	Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca	Native	–	20-50	–	0
quaking aspen	POTR5	Populus tremuloides	Native	–	1-4	–	0
Engelmann spruce	PIEN	Picea engelmannii	Native	–	1-3	–	0
limber pine	PIFL2	Pinus flexilis	Native	–	0-3	–	0

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 1.4 plant community composition

Group	Common name	Symbol	Scientific name	Annual production ()	Foliar cover (%)

Table 11. Community 2.1 plant community composition

Group	Common name	Symbol	Scientific name	Annual production ()	Foliar cover (%)

Table 12. Community 2.2 plant community composition

Group	Common name	Symbol	Scientific name	Annual production ()	Foliar cover (%)

Table 13. Community 2.3 plant community composition

Group	Common name	Symbol	Scientific name	Annual production ()	Foliar cover (%)

Table 14. Community 2.4 plant community composition

Group	Common name	Symbol	Scientific name	Annual production ()	Foliar cover (%)

Interpretations

Animal community

This ecological site provides shelter and forage for numerous wildlife (Kris 2001). Mammals including, mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), elk (Cervus elaphus), black bear (Ursus americanus), moose (Alces alces) and mountain goat (Oreamnos americanus) use white fir habitats for cover and forage (Kris 2001 and references therein). Mule deer are especially fond of succulent, new white fir growth in the spring (Lanner 1983, Laacke 1990). Porcupines prefer the bark of white fir, and have been known to forage so enthusiastically that they destroy saplings (Hayward 1945).
White fir seeds are eaten by several species of small mammals Indications of small rodents feeding on the cambial tissue of white fir were noticed in a study by Hayward (1945) Rodents trapped in the study area where white fir trees occur include: deer mouse(Peromvscus maniculatus), Meadow vole (Microtus mordax mordax), Montane vole (Microtus montanus nanus), Hidden forest chipmunk (Tamias umbrinus) yellow-pine chipmunk (Tamias amoenus), jumping mouse (Zapus pinceps) and montane shrew, (Sorex monticolus). Pocket gophers (Thomomys monticola), flying squirrels (Glaucomys sabrinus), and Ground squirrels (Otospermophilus beecheyi) also occur in subalpine habitat and are known to utilize white fir habitat (Lanner 1984, Laacke 1990, Waters and Zabel 1995).
Several other mammals, although do not actively use the trees for food or shelter, inhabit the same ecosystems (subalpine, montane, timberline and limberpine) in which white fir trees occur in Nevada. Yellow bellied marmot (Marmota flaviventris) found in meadows, valleys, and foothills, where forests and meadows form a mosaic will also inhabit subalpine communities above 6500 feet (Great Basin National Park, Listing Sensitive and Extirpated Species 2006, Linzey and Hammerson 2008). The water shrew (Sorex palustris) although restricted to riparian environments occurs in montane communities where white fir trees are known to grow (Great Basin National park, Listing Sensitive and Extirpated Species 2006). Inyo shrew (Sorex tennellus) is confirmed to occur in subalpine communities at 9900 feet. The ringtail (Bassaricus atutus), ermine (Mustela ermine), long-tailed weasel (Mustela frenata), and striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis) all have a wide ranging habitat including high-elevation, forested subalpine uplands and are documented as occurring above 9,000 feet (Goldberg 2003, Great Basin National Park, Listing Sensitive and Extirpated Species 2006, Zevit 2012, Kiiskila 2014).
Several bat species occur within subalpine habitat, adding to the community’s diversity. The fringed myotis (Myotis thysanodes), Long-eared myotis (Myotis evotis), Long-legged myotis (Myotis volans), Silver-haired bat (Lasionycteris noctivagans), townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii), all are documented as occurring in coniferous, subalpine forests above 9000 feet (Keinath 2003, Arroyo-Calbrales and Alvares-Castneda 2008, Warner and Czaplewski 1984, Armstrong 2007, Sullivan 2009, Great Basin National Park, Listing Sensitive and Extirpated Species 2006).
Many species of birds also use the subalpine habitat for shelter and food. The bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and western yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) use mature trees for nesting and foraging (Wildlife Action Plan Team 2012). The burrowing owl will utilize surrounding meadows of subalpine habitat for burrowing (Wildlife Action Plan Team 2012). Censuses determined the broad-tailed hummingbird (Selasphorus platycereus), northern flicker (Colaptes auratus), willow flycatcher (Empidonax oberholseri), mountain chickadee (Parus gambeli), White-breasted nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis), rock wren (Salpinctes obsoletus), American robin (Turdus migratorius), hermit thrush (Catharus guttatus), mountain bluebird (Sialia currucoides), Townsend’s solitaire (Myadestes townsendi), yellow-rumped warbler (Dendroica coronata), Cassin’s finch (Carpodacus cassinii), pine siskin (Carduelis pinus), dark-eyed junco (Junco hyemalis) and Clark’s nutcracker (Nucifraga columbiana) use subalpine habitat for nesting (Wildlife Action Plan Team 2012, Medin 1984, Fryer 2004).
Habitat distribution of reptiles and amphibians is not as widely studied as other animals and few reptiles and amphibians are found at such elevations where white fir trees occur. However; the Sonoran mountain kingsnake (Lampropeltis pyromelana), a highly secretive reptile, which prefers ponderosa pine habitat has been captured at elevations upwards of 9000 feet; suggesting that this snake could occur in habitats shared with Great Basin bristlecone pine (Brennan 2008, Great Basin National Park, Listing Sensitive and Extirpated Species 2006). Also, the western toad (Anaxyrus boreos) has a very wide ranging habitat throughout Nevada, and, if it is near vernal pools the western toad’s habitat could also overlap with Great Basin bristlecone pine habitat. In fact, it has been trapped at elevations of 9000 feet (Lindsdale 1940). The distribution of most of herpetafuana present in these high-elevation woodlands is poorly understood and more research and management are needed.
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.

Muttongrass, a minor component on this ecological site, is relatively grazing tolerant. It is palatable and nutritional forage for livestock and wildlife when it is in the early stages of growth. It rates as excellent forage for cattle and horses, and good for sheep, elk and deer (Dayton 1937). Muttongrass persists well in open areas and under canopies of oak and other shrubs (Monsen et al. 2004). Muttongrass may be more shade tolerant than other perennial bunchgrasses and may persist in the understory as the canopy closes (Erdman 1970).

Livestock Interpretations:
This site is not well suited to cattle or sheep grazing. Many areas are not used because of steep slopes, rock outcrops and lack of adequate water. Attentive grazing management is required due to steep slopes and erosion hazards.

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, and a determination of the degree to which the sites have been grazed offer the most reliable basis for developing initial stocking rates.

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:
Open to sparse tree canopies on this site provide forage and browse, and medium to dense tree canopies provide shelter and protection for mule deer and elk. This site may be used by a variety of upland game species including rabbits and blue and ruffed grouse. Various songbirds, rodents, reptiles and associated predators natural to the area also use this woodland.

Livestock/Wildlife Grazing Interpretations:
This ecological site provides shelter and forage for numerous wildlife (Kris 2001). Mammals including, mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), elk (Cervus elaphus), black bear (Ursus americanus), moose (Alces alces) and mountain goat (Oreamnos americanus) use Rocky Mountain white fir habitats for cover and forage (Kris 2001 and references therein). Mule deer are especially fond of succulent, new white fir growth in the spring (Lanner 1983, Laacke 1990). Porcupines prefer the bark of white fir, and have been known to forage so enthusiastically that they destroy saplings (Hayward 1945).
Rocky Mountain white fir seeds are eaten by several species of small mammals. Indications of small rodents feeding on the cambial tissue of white fir were noticed in a study by Hayward (1945) Rodents trapped in the study area where white fir trees occur include: deer mouse (Peromvscus maniculatus), Meadow vole (Microtus mordax mordax), Montane vole (Microtus montanus nanus), Hidden forest chipmunk (Tamias umbrinus) yellow-pine chipmunk (Tamias amoenus), jumping mouse (Zapus pinceps) and montane shrew, (Sorex monticolus). Pocket gophers (Thomomys monticola), flying squirrels (Glaucomys sabrinus), and Ground squirrels (Otospermophilus beecheyi) also occur in subalpine habitat and are known to utilize white fir habitat (Lanner 1984, Laacke 1990, Waters and Zabel 1995). Browsing by big game may retard the height of white fir for many years (Markstrom and McElderry 1984).
Several other mammals, although do not actively use the trees for food or shelter, inhabit the same ecosystems (subalpine, montane, timberline and limberpine) in which white fir trees occur in Nevada. Yellow bellied marmot (Marmota flaviventris) found in meadows, valleys, and foothills, where forests and meadows form a mosaic will also inhabit subalpine communities above 6500 feet (Great Basin National Park, Listing Sensitive and Extirpated Species 2006, Linzey and Hammerson 2008). The water shrew (Sorex palustris) although restricted to riparian environments occurs in montane communities where white fir trees are known to grow (Great Basin National park, Listing Sensitive and Extirpated Species 2006). Inyo shrew (Sorex tennellus) is confirmed to occur in subalpine communities at 9900 feet. The ringtail (Bassaricus atutus), ermine (Mustela ermine), long-tailed weasel (Mustela frenata), and striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis) all have a wide ranging habitat including high-elevation, forested subalpine uplands and are documented as occurring above 9,000 feet (Goldberg 2003, Great Basin National Park, Listing Sensitive and Extirpated Species 2006, Zevit 2012, Kiiskila 2014).
Several bat species occur within subalpine habitat, adding to the community’s diversity. The fringed myotis (Myotis thysanodes), Long-eared myotis (Myotis evotis), Long-legged myotis (Myotis volans), Silver-haired bat (Lasionycteris noctivagans), townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii), all are documented as occurring in coniferous, subalpine forests above 9000 feet (Keinath 2003, Arroyo-Calbrales and Alvares-Castneda 2008, Warner and Czaplewski 1984, Armstrong 2007, Sullivan 2009, Great Basin National Park, Listing Sensitive and Extirpated Species 2006).
Many species of birds also use the subalpine habitat for shelter and food. The bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and western yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) use mature trees for nesting and foraging (Wildlife Action Plan Team 2012). The burrowing owl will utilize surrounding meadows of subalpine habitat for burrowing (Wildlife Action Plan Team 2012). Censuses determined the broad-tailed hummingbird (Selasphorus platycereus), northern flicker (Colaptes auratus), willow flycatcher (Empidonax oberholseri), mountain chickadee (Parus gambeli), White-breasted nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis), rock wren (Salpinctes obsoletus), American robin (Turdus migratorius), hermit thrush (Catharus guttatus), mountain bluebird (Sialia currucoides), Townsend’s solitaire (Myadestes townsendi), yellow-rumped warbler (Dendroica coronata), Cassin’s finch (Carpodacus cassinii), pine siskin (Carduelis pinus), dark-eyed junco (Junco hyemalis) and Clark’s nutcracker (Nucifraga columbiana) use subalpine habitat for nesting (Wildlife Action Plan Team 2012, Medin 1984, Fryer 2004).
Habitat distribution of reptiles and amphibians is not as widely studied as other animals and few reptiles and amphibians are found at such elevations where white fir trees occur. However; the Sonoran mountain kingsnake (Lampropeltis pyromelana), a highly secretive reptile, which prefers ponderosa pine habitat has been captured at elevations upwards of 9000 feet; suggesting that this snake could occur in habitats shared with Great Basin bristlecone pine (Brennan 2008, Great Basin National Park, Listing Sensitive and Extirpated Species 2006). Also, the western toad (Anaxyrus boreos) has a very wide ranging habitat throughout Nevada, and, if it is near vernal pools the western toad’s habitat could also overlap with Great Basin bristlecone pine habitat. In fact, it has been trapped at elevations of 9000 feet (Lindsdale 1940). The distribution of most of herpetafuana present in these high-elevation woodlands is poorly understood and more research and management are needed.
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.

Muttongrass, a minor component on this ecological site, is relatively grazing tolerant. It is palatable and nutritional forage for livestock and wildlife when it is in the early stages of growth. It rates as excellent forage for cattle and horses, and good for sheep, elk and deer (Dayton 1937). Muttongrass persists well in open areas and under canopies of oak and other shrubs (Monsen et al. 2004). Muttongrass may be more shade tolerant than other perennial bunchgrasses and may persist in the understory as the canopy closes (Erdman 1970).

Hydrological functions

Permeability is very slow to moderately rapid. Runoff is medium to high. Hydrologic soil groups are A, B, and C.

Recreational uses

This site has high aesthetic value and provides a variety of recreational opportunities such as hiking, camping and deer and upland game bird hunting. Steep slopes and the fragile soil-vegetation complex, however, inhibit many other forms of recreation such as the use of off-road vehicles.

Wood products

PRODUCTIVE CAPACITY

This site is of low quality for tree production. Site index ranges from less than 40 to about 45 for both white fir and Douglas fir.

Productivity Class: 5
Basal Area: 94 square feet/acre1/
White fir = 50% (Cochran, 1979)
Douglas fir = 80% (Cochran, 1979)
1/ Percent of Normal Basal Area (PNBA)
CMAI*: White fir and Douglas fir:
4.5 to 5.4 m3/ha/yr;
64 to 77 ft3/ac/yr.
*CMAI: is the culmination of mean annual increment or highest average growth rate of the stand in the units specified.
Timber Production: 14,000 board ft/ac (International Rule) for stands averaging 10 inches in diameter breast height.

Fuelwood Production: About 35 to 50 cords per acre for stands averaging 10 inches in diameter breast height. There are about 209,000 British Thermal Units (BTUs) of heat energy per cubic foot of white fir and about 268,000 British Thermal Units (BTUs) of heat energy per cubic foot of Douglas-fir wood. Firewood is commonly measured in cords, or a stacked unit equivalent to 128 cubic feet. Solid wood volume in a cord varies but straight material of even taper will give a solid volume of 80 to 90 cubic feet. Assuming an average of 85 cubic feet of solid wood per cord, there are about 18 million BTUs of heat value in a cord of white fir and about 23 million BTUs in a cord of Douglas fir.

MANAGEMENT GUIDES AND INTERPRETATIONS

1. LIMITATIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS
a. Potential for sheet and rill erosion is moderate to severe.
b. Severe equipment limitations on steeper slopes because of traction loss on wet soils; unsafe operating conditions due to slope.
c. Potential for wind throw is moderate to severe depending on wind conditions and soil depth.

2. ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS
a. Adequately protect from uncontrolled burning to protect woodland resources and reduce potential erosion hazards.
b. Protect soils from accelerated erosion. Use water bars at designed spacing on roads and install necessary ditching and culverts.

3. SILVICULTURAL PRACTICES
a. Harvest cut selectively or in small patches (size dependent upon site conditions) to enhance the vigor of the stand, maintain site reproduction and minimize windthrow hazard.
1) Harvest Cutting - Selectively harvest surplus trees to achieve desired spacing. Rotation time for cutting should be adjusted to the desired products and extent of the previous harvest. Save large, healthy, full-crowned trees for a seed source. Do not select only "high grade" trees during harvest.
2) Thinning and Improvement Cutting - Removal of poorly formed, diseased and low vigor trees for fuelwood. D+5 is the optimum spacing. As the spacing approaches D+1, thinning should be done to maintain the vigor of the stand. Thinning and improvement cutting would be of particular importance during the immature woodland stage. Proper spacing will improve the health and development of the trees as well as the overall health of the stand.
3) Spacing Guide - D+5
b. Windthrow hazard - Windthrow should only be a problem in the "over-mature woodland" successional stage. Deep rooting and infrequent saturation of the root zone result in firm anchorage of trees. No special windthrow problems due to soils.
c. Pest control - Control pests as the need arises to maintain the vigor of the stand. Use of pesticides or harvesting of over-mature trees can be effective pest controls.
d. Fire hazard - Fire can be a problem in the mature community. Precautions should be taken, where possible, to reduce the fire hazard. Prescribed fires can be used to reduce available food supply for insect pests (which may occupy cull logs or windthrown trees) and expose mineral soil which is the best seedbed as soil moisture is more stable. Hot fires are not desirable because they sterilize the mineral soil and leave it unprotected.
e. Seedling mortality - Seedling mortality is slight to moderate. It is important for land owners and managers to be aware of climatic and soil features that contribute to this problem. It may be necessary to use special planting stock or to do special site preparation, such as bedding or furrowing.
f. Plant competition - Plan competition is slight to moderate. Unwanted plants may delay desirable natural or planted trees and may hamper stand development, but will not prevent the eventual development of fully stocked stands. Land owners and managers should be aware of possible site preparation needs following fire, or harvest release treatments, to ensure development of the new crop.

Other products

White fir is a valuable ornamental tree. It is often used for ornamental plantings in rural and urban landscapes in northern US cities, because it is attractive and frost-hardy. White fir is used extensively in the Christmas tree industry. White fir needles were used to make tea by Native Americans. Douglas-fir is used in landscaping and for mountain windbreaks and is a popular Christmas tree.

Other information

Mountain snowberry is useful for establishing cover on bare sites and has done well when planted onto roadbanks.

Table 15. 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
	ABCOC	40	45	64	77	–	–	–
Rocky Mountain Douglas-fir	PSMEG	40	45	64	77	–	–	–
Rocky Mountain Douglas-fir	PSMEG	40	45	5	5	–	031	50BH	Cochran, P.H. 1979a. Site index and height growth curves for managed, even-aged stands of white or grand fir east of the Cascades in Oregon and Washington. USDA, Forest Service. Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station Research Paper PNW-252.

Supporting information

Type locality

Location 1: White Pine County, NV
Township/Range/Section	T12N R68E S22
Latitude	38° 53′ 20″
Longitude	114° 19′ 40″
General legal description	Approximately ½ mile south of Mount Wheeler Mine, Snake Range, White Pine County, Nevada.

Other references

Anderson, E. W. and R. J. Scherzinger. 1975. Improving quality of winter forage for elk by cattle grazing. Journal of Range Management:120-125.

Arroyo-Cabrales, J. & Álvarez-Castañeda, S.T. 2008. Myotis evotis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.3. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. Downloaded on 23 January 2015.

Blaisdell, J. P. 1953. Ecological effects of planned burning of sagebrush-grass range on the upper Snake River Plains. US Dept. of Agriculture.

Blaisdell, J. P., R. B. Murray, and E. D. McArthur. 1982. Managing intermountain rangelands-sagebrush-grass ranges. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-134. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, UT.

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.

Brennan, T. 2008. Online field guide to amphibians and reptiles of Arizona. Available at: http://www.reptilesofaz.org/index.html. Accessed 23 January 2015.

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.

Bunting, S. C., B. M. Kilgore, and C. L. Bushey. 1987. Guidelines for prescribed burning sagebrush-grass rangelands in the northern Great Basin. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station Ogden, UT, USA.

Busso, C. A. and J. H. Richards. 1995. Drought and clipping effects on tiller demography andgrowth of two tussock grasses in Utah. Journal of Arid Environments 29:239-251.

Caudle, D., J. DiBenedetto, M. Karl, H. Sanchez, and C. Talbot. 2013. Interagency ecological site handbook for rangelands. Available at: http://jornada.nmsu.edu/sites/jornada.nmsu.edu/files/InteragencyEcolSiteHandbook.pdf. Accessed 4 October 2013.

Chambers, J., B. Bradley, C. Brown, C. D’Antonio, M. Germino, J. Grace, S. Hardegree, R. Miller, and D. Pyke. 2013. Resilience to Stress and Disturbance, and Resistance to Bromus tectorum L. Invasion in Cold Desert Shrublands of Western North America. Ecosystems:1-16.

Charlet, D. A. 1996. Atlas of Nevada Conifers. University of Nevada Press, Reno, NV, USA.

Cochran, P.H. 1979. Gross Yields for Even-Aged Stands of Douglas Fir and White Fir East of the Cascades in Oregon and Washington. USDA-Forest Service Research Paper PNW-263, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Portland, Oregon.

Conrad, C. E. and C. E. Poulton. 1966. Effect of a wildfire on Idaho fescue and bluebunch wheatgrass. Journal of Range Management:138-141.

Coop, J. D. and A. W. Schoettle. 2009. Regeneration of Rocky Mountain bristlecone pine (Pinus aristata) and limber pine (Pinus flexilis) three decades after stand-replacing fires. Forest Ecology and Management 257:893-903.

Donnegan, J. A. and A. J. Rebertus. 1999. Rates and mechanisms of subalpine forest succession along an environmental gradient. Ecology 80:1370-1384.

Erdman, J. A. 1970. Pinyon-juniper succession after natural fires on residual soils of Mesa Verde, Colorado. Brigham Young University Science Bulletin-Biological Series 11:1-26.

Eyre, F.H., editor. 1980. Forest Cover Types of the United States and Canada. Society of American Foresters, Washington, D.C.

Farjon, A. 2013. Abies concolor. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.3. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org Downloaded on 27 January 2015.

Fire Effects Information System (Online; http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/).

Fryer, Janet L. 2004. Pinus longaeva. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available at: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/. Accessed: 2015, January 22

Johnson, K. A. 2001. Pinus flexilis. Fire Effects Information System [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Science Laboratory (Producer). Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ Accessed: 2015, January 22

Houghton, J.G., C.M. Sakamoto, and R.O. Gifford. 1975. Nevada’s Weather and Climate, Special Publication 2. Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, Mackay School of Mines, University of Nevada, Reno, NV.

Hayward, C.L. 1945. Biotic communities of the southern Wasatch and Unita mountains, Utah. Great Basin Naturalist. 6:1-40

Laacke, Robert J. 1990. Abies concolor (Gord. & Glend.) Lindl. ex Hildebr. white fir. In: Burns, Russell M.; Honkala, Barbara H., technical coordinators. Silvics of North America. Volume 1. Conifers. Agric. Handb. 654. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 36-46. 0 p.

Langor, D. W. 1989. Host effects on the phenology, development, and motality of field populations of the mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins (Coleoptera: Scolytidae). The Canadian Entomologist 121:149-157.

Lanner, R. M. 1988. Dependence of Great Basin Bristlecone Pine on Clark's Nutcracker for Regeneration at High Elevations. Arctic and Alpine Research 20:358-362.
Lanner, R. M. 2002. Conifers of California. Cachuma Press, Los Olivos, CA, USA.

Lanner, R.M. 1984. Trees of the Great Basin: A Natural History. Reno: University of Nevada Press.

Lanner, R. M. and S. B. Vander Wall. 1980. Dispersal of Limber Pine Seed by Clark's Nutcracker. Journal of Forestry 78:637-639.

Laycock, W. A. 1967. How heavy grazing and protection affect sagebrush-grass ranges. Journal of Range Management:206-213.

Lindsdale, J.M. 1940. Amphibians and Reptiles in Nevada. Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. 73:197-257

Markstrom, D.C. and S. E. McElderry. 1984. White fir, an American wood. FS-237. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO. p. 11.

Maul, D.C. 1958. Silvical Characteristics of White Fir. Technical Paper No. 25. California Forest and Range Experiment Station. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Berkeley, CA. 21pp.

Miller, R. F. and E. K. Heyerdahl. 2008. Fine-scale variation of historical fire regimes in sagebrush-steppe and juniper woodland: an example from California, USA. International Journal of Wildland Fire 17:245-254.

Monsen, S. B., R. Stevens, and N. L. Shaw. 2004. Grasses. Pages 295-424 In: S. B. Monsen, R. Stevens [eds.]. Restoring western ranges and wildlands, vol. 2. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136-vol-2. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO.

Mueggler, W. F. 1975. Rate and Pattern of Vigor Recovery in Idaho Fescue and Bluebunch Wheatgrass. Journal of Range Management 28:198-204.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2004. The North American Monsoon. Reports to the Nation. National Weather Service, Climate Prediction Center. Available online: http://www.weather.gov/.

Neuenschwander, L. 1980. Broadcast burning of sagebrush in the winter. Journal of Range Management:233-236.

Nevada Division of Forestry. Fir Engraver Beetle (Scolytus vetralis). Available at: http://forestry.nv.gov /forestry-resources/forest-health/fir-engraver-beetle/. Accessed 27 January 2015.

Noy-Meir, I. 1973. Desert Ecosystems: Environment and Producers. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 4:25-51.

Rebertus, A. J., B. R. Burns, and T. T. Veblen. 1991. Stand dynamics of Pinus flexilis-dominated subalpine forests in the Colorado Front Range. Journal of Vegetation Science 2:445-458.

Robberecht, R. and G. Defossé. 1995. The relative sensitivity of two bunchgrass species to fire. International Journal of Wildland Fire 5:127-134.

Schumacher, F.X. 1926. Normal Yield Tables for White Fir. California Ag Ext Sta Bulletin No. 407, Berkeley, CA.

Sherriff, R. L., T. T. Veblen, and J. S. Sibold. 2001. Fire history in high elevation subalpine forests in the Colorado Front Range. Ecoscience 8:369-380.

Stringham, T.K., P. Novak-Echenique, P. Blackburn, C. Coombs, D. Snyder and A. Wartgow. 2015. Final Report for USDA Ecological Site Description State-and-Transition Models, Major Land Resource Area 28A and 28B Nevada. University of Nevada Reno, Nevada Agricultural Experiment Station Research Report 2015-01. p. 1524.

Stuever, Mary C.; Hayden, John S. 1996. Plant associations (habitat types) of the forests and woodlands of Arizona and New Mexico. Final report: Contract R3-95-27. Placitas, NM: Seldom Seen Expeditions, Inc. p. 52
Tappeiner, J. C., II and J. A. Helms. 1971. Natural Regeneration of Douglas Fir and White Fir on Exposed Sites in the Sierra Nevada of California. American Midland Naturalist 86:358-370.

Uresk, D. W., J. F. Cline, and W. H. Rickard. 1976. Impact of wildfire on three perennial grasses in south-central Washington. Journal of Range Management 29:309-310.

USDA-NRCS. National Forestry Manual - Part 537. Washington, D.C.

USDA-NRCS Plants Database (Online; http://www.plants.usda.gov).

Vose, J. M. and A. S. White. 1991. Biomass response mechanisms of understory species the first year after prescribed burning in an Arizona ponderosa-pine community. Forest Ecology and Management 40:175-187.

Waters, J.R. and C.J. Zabel. 1995. Northern flying squirrel densities in fir forests of northeastern California. Journal of Range Management. 59:858-866.

Wildlife Action Plan Team. 2012. Nevada Wildlife Action Plan. Nevada Department of Wildlife, Reno, NV.

Young, R. P. 1983. Fire as a vegetation management tool in rangelands of the intermountain region. Pages 18-31 In: S. B. Monsen, N. Shaw [eds.] Managing intermountain rangelands - improvement of range and wildlife habitats INT-GTR-157. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station.

Ziegenhagen, L. L. 2003. Shrub reestablishment following fire in the mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata Nutt. ssp. vaseyana (Rydb.) Beetle) alliance. M.s. Oregon State University.

Ziegenhagen, L. L. and R. F. Miller. 2009. Postfire Recovery of Two Shrubs in the Interiors of Large Burns in the Intermountain West, USA. Western North American Naturalist 69:195-205.

Contributors

DBP/GKB
T.Stringham/P.Novak-Echenique

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:

Download reference sheet

Natural ResourcesConservation Service

Ecological site F028AY080NV

ABCOC-PSMEG (White Fir-Douglas Fir)

Accessed: 07/14/2026

Search

General information

MLRA notes

Ecological site concept

Table 1. Dominant plant species

Natural Resources
Conservation Service