Natural Resources
Conservation Service
-
Search
Major Land Resource Area or ecological site by name and/or ID.
PreviousSectionsNextGeneral information
Provisional. A provisional ecological site description has undergone quality control and quality assurance review. It contains a working state and transition model and enough information to identify the ecological site.
Click to explore map
Figure 1. Mapped extent
Areas shown in blue indicate the maximum mapped extent of this ecological site. Other ecological sites likely occur within the highlighted areas. It is also possible for this ecological site to occur outside of highlighted areas if detailed soil survey has not been completed or recently updated.
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. 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 ft. in the basins and from 6,560 to 11,150 ft. 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. A level line on some mountain slopes indicates the former extent of this glacial lake. 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 ins. in the valleys and is as much as 49 ins. 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 °F. 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, loamy or loamy-skeletal, and very deep.
Ecological site concept
This site occurs on high mountain summits, shoulders, and upper sideslopes on all aspects. Slopes range from 8 to 50 percent, but slope gradients of 4 to 30 percent are typical. Elevations are about 8000 to over 9500 feet.
Average annual precipitation is over 18 inches. Mean annual air temperature is about 40 degrees F. The average growing season is 50 to 70 days.
The soils associated with this site are shallow or very shallow to bedrock. These soils have formed in residuum from limestone rock and are moderately to strongly alkaline. Available water capacity is very low. These soils normally have from 30 to over 50 percent gravel and cobbles by volume distributed throughout their profile and there are high amounts of gravels, cobbles or stones on the surface.
The reference state is dominated by black sagebrush and bluebunch wheatgrass. Production ranges from 100 to 350 pounds per acre.
Associated sites
R028AY065NV SHALLOW LOAM 14+ P.Z.
R028AY067NV CALCAREOUS LOAM 14+ P.Z.
R028AY097NV SHALLOW CALCAREOUS SLOPE 14+ P.Z.
Similar sites
R028AY097NV SHALLOW CALCAREOUS SLOPE 14+ P.Z.
More productive site
R028AY062NV MOUNTAIN RIDGE
ARAR8 dominant shrub; soils from volcanic parent material
R028AY035NV SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 10-12 P.Z.
ACHY major grass
R028AY036NV SHALLOW CLAY LOAM 12-14 P.Z.
PSSPS-ACTH7 codominant
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree Not specified
Shrub (1) Artemisia nova
Herbaceous (1) Pseudoroegneria spicata ssp. spicata
Physiographic features
This site occurs on high mountain summits, shoulders, and upper sideslopes on all aspects. Slopes range from 8 to 50 percent, but slope gradients of 4 to 30 percent are typical. Elevations are about 8000 to over 9500 feet.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Landforms (1) Mountain
Elevation 8000 – 9500 ft Slope 8 – 50 % Aspect Aspect is not a significant factor 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 over 18 inches. Mean annual air temperature is about 40 degrees F. The average growing season is 70 to 110 days.
The Mean annual precipitation at the Great Basin Natinal Park 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 .87; July .97; August 1.18; September 1.08; October .96; December .96Table 3 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (average) 110 days Freeze-free period (average) 150 days Precipitation total (average) 10 in BarLineFigure 2. Monthly precipitation range
BarLineFigure 3. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature
Figure 4. Annual precipitation pattern
Figure 5 Annual average temperature pattern
Climate stations used
-
(1) GREAT BASIN NP [USC00263340], Baker, NV
">Influencing water features
There are no influencing water features associated with this site.
Soil features
The soils associated with this site are shallow or very shallow to bedrock. These soils have formed in residuum from limestone rock and are moderately to strongly alkaline. Available water capacity is very low. These soils normally have from 30 to over 50 percent gravel and cobbles by volume distributed throughout their profile and there are high amounts of gravels, cobbles or stones on the surface. Runoff is very high. The soil series associated with this site include: Amtoft and Radol.
The representative soil series is Amtoft, a Loamy-skeletal, carbonatic, mesic Lithic Xeric Haplocalcids. Diagnostic horizons include an Ochric epipedon from the surface of the soil to 18 cm, Calcic horizon from 20 to 43 cm
and a Lithic contact with hard bedrock at 43 cm. Clay content in the particle control section averages 12 to 27 percent. Rock fragments range from 35 to 60 percent. Reaction is moderately or strongly alkaline. Effervescence is violent. Lithology consists of calcareous sedimentary rocks.Table 4. Representative soil features
Parent material (1) Residuum – limestone
(2) Colluvium – dolomite
Surface texture (1) Very gravelly loam
(2) Extremely cobbly loam
(3) Extremely gravelly fine sandy loam
Family particle size (1) Loamy
Drainage class Well drained Permeability class Slow to moderate Soil depth 10 – 20 in Surface fragment cover <=3" 30 – 70 % Surface fragment cover >3" 10 – 17 % Available water capacity
(0-40in)1 – 1.2 in Calcium carbonate equivalent
(0-40in)10 – 80 % Electrical conductivity
(0-40in)0 – 4 mmhos/cm Sodium adsorption ratio
(0-40in)0 – 3 Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-40in)8.2 – 8.8 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(Depth not specified)30 – 46 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(Depth not specified)6 – 36 % 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).
This ecological site is dominated by deep-rooted cool season, perennial bunchgrasses and long-lived shrubs (50+ years) with high root to shoot ratios. The dominant shrubs usually root to the full depth of the winter-spring soil moisture recharge, which ranges from 1.0 to over 3.0 m (Dobrowolski et al. 1990). Root length of mature sagebrush plants was measured to a depth of 2 meters in alluvial soils in Utah (Richards and Caldwell 1987). However, community types with black sagebrush as the dominant shrub were found to have soil depths and thus available rooting depths of 77 to 81 cm 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 within the soil profile (Bates et al. 2006).
Native insect outbreaks are also important drivers of ecosystem dynamics in sagebrush communities. Climate is generally believed to influence the timing of insect outbreaks especially a sagebrush defoliator, Aroga moth (Aroga websteri). Aroga moth infestations have occurred in the Great Basin in the 1960s, early 1970s, and is ongoing in Nevada since 2004 (Bentz et al. 2008). Thousands of acres of sagebrush have been impacted, with partial to complete die-off observed (Gates 1964, Hall 1965), but the research is inconclusive of the damage sustained by black sagebrush populations.
Black sagebrush is generally long-lived; therefore it is not necessary for new individuals to recruit every year for perpetuation of the stand. Infrequent large recruitment events and simultaneous low, continuous recruitment is the foundation of population maintenance (Noy-Meir 1973). Survival of the seedlings is dependent on adequate moisture conditions.
The perennial bunchgrasses that are co-dominant with the shrubs include bluebunch wheatgrass, muttongrass and pine needlegrass. These species generally have somewhat 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.
The Great Basin 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 or can increase resource pools by the decomposition of dead plant material following disturbance. The invasion of sagebrush communities by cheatgrass has been linked to disturbances (fire, abusive grazing) that have resulted in fluctuations in resources (Chambers et al. 2007).
This ecological site has moderate to high resilience to disturbance and resistance to invasion. Increased resilience increases with elevation, aspect, increased precipitation and increased nutrient availability. Three possible stable states have been identified for this site.
Fire Ecology:
Fire is not a major disturbance of these community types (Winward 2001), and would be infrequent. Historic fire return intervals have been estimated at 100 to 200 years (Kitchen and McArthur 2007); however, fires were probably localized and very infrequent due to the low productivity of these sites. Black sagebrush plants have no morphological adaptations for surviving fire and must reestablish from seed following fire (Wright et al. 1979). The ability of black sagebrush to establish after fire is mostly dependent on the amount of seed deposited in the seed bank the year before the fire. Seeds typically do not persist in the soil for more than one growing season (Beetle 1960). A few seeds may remain viable in soil for two years (Meyer 2008); however, even in dry storage, black sagebrush seed viability has been found to drop rapidly over time, from 81% to 1% viability after two and 10 years of storage, respectively (Stevens et al. 1981). Thus, repeated frequent fires can eliminate black sagebrush from a site, however black sagebrush in zones receiving 12 to 16 inches of annual precipitation have been found to have greater fire survival (Boltz 1994). Douglas’ rabbitbrush can sprout after fire and become a dominant shrub on this site often with an understory of galleta, Sandberg bluegrass and/or cheatgrass and other weedy species.
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. For most forbs and grasses the growing points 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 will influence plant response. Plant response will vary depending on post-fire soil moisture availability.
Fire will remove aboveground biomass from bluebunch wheatgrass but plant mortality is generally low (Robberecht and Defossé 1995) because the buds are underground (Conrad and Poulton 1966) or protected by foliage. Uresk et al. (1976) reported burning increased vegetative and reproductive vigor of bluebunch wheatgrass. Thus, bluebunch wheatgrass is considered to experience slight damage to fire but is more susceptible in drought years (Young 1983). Plant response will vary depending on season, fire severity, fire intensity and post-fire soil moisture availability.
Indian ricegrass has been found to reestablish on burned sites through seed dispersed from adjacent unburned areas (Young 1983, West 1994). Thus the presence of surviving, seed producing plants is necessary for reestablishment of Indian ricegrass. Grazing management following fire to promote seed production and establishment of seedlings is important.
Galleta grass, a minor component of these ecological sites, has been found to increase following fire likely due to its rhizomatous root structure and ability to resprout (Jameson 1962). Sandberg bluegrass, another minor component of these ecological sites, has also been found to increase following fire likely due to its low stature and productivity (Daubenmire 1975). Both grass species may retard reestablishment of deeper rooted bunchgrasses. Repeated frequent fire in this community will eliminate black sagebrush, significantly decrease bunchgrass density on the site and facilitate the establishment of an annual weed community with varying amounts of galleta, Sandberg bluegrass and rabbitbrush.State and transition model
Custom diagramStandard diagram
Figure 6. State and Transition Model
Figure 7. Legend
More interactive model formats are also available. View Interactive Models
More interactive model formats are also available. View Interactive Models
Click on state and transition labels to scroll to the respective textEcosystem states
State 1 submodel, plant communities
State 2 submodel, plant communities
State 3 submodel, plant communities
State 1
Reference StateThe 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. Due to the nature and extent of disturbance in this site, all three plant community phases would likely occur in a mosaic across the landscape.
Community 1.1
Community PhaseThis community is dominated by black sagebrush, bluebunch wheatgrass, muttongrass and pine needlegrass. Forbs and other grasses make up smaller components. Potential vegetative composition is about 45% grasses, 10% forbs and 45% shrubs. Approximate ground cover (basal and crown) is 10 to 20 percent.
Figure 8. Annual production by plant type (representative values) or group (midpoint values)
Table 5. Annual production by plant type
Plant type Low
(lb/acre)Representative value
(lb/acre)High
(lb/acre)Grass/Grasslike 45 90 158 Shrub/Vine 45 90 157 Forb 10 20 35 Total 100 200 350 Community 1.2
Community PhaseThis community phase is characteristic of a post-disturbance, early or mid-seral community. Bluebunch wheatgrass, Indian ricegrass, and other perennial bunchgrasses dominate. Sprouting shrubs such as Douglas’ rabbitbrush may increase. Depending on fire severity or intensity of Aroga moth infestations, patches of intact sagebrush may remain.
Community 1.3
Community PhaseSagebrush 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. Sandberg bluegrass may increase in the understory and become the dominant grass on the site.
Pathway a
Community 1.1 to 1.2A low severity fire would decrease the overstory of sagebrush and allow for the understory perennial grasses to increase. Fires are typically low severity resulting in a mosaic pattern due to low fuel loads. A fire following an unusually wet spring facilitating an increase in fine fuels may be more severe and reduce sagebrush cover to trace amounts.
Pathway b
Community 1.1 to 1.3Time and lack of disturbance such as fire allows for sagebrush to increase and become decadent. Chronic drought, herbivory, or combinations of these will generally cause a reduction in perennial bunch grasses; however galleta grass may increase in the understory depending on the grazing management. Heavy spring grazing will favor an increase in sagebrush.
Pathway a
Community 1.2 to 1.1Time and lack of disturbance will allow sagebrush to increase.
Pathway a
Community 1.3 to 1.1A low severity fire, herbivory or combinations will reduce the sagebrush overstory and create a sagebrush/grass mosaic.
Pathway b
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 will typically be high intensity due to the dominance of sagebrush resulting in removal of the overstory shrub community.
State 2
Current Potential StateThis state is similar to the Reference State 1.0 however with the addition of a fourth community phase. Ecological function of community phases 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 has not changed, however the resiliency of the state has been reduced by the presence of invasive weeds. Non-natives may increase in abundance on a temporal basis as described in community phase 2.4 but will not become dominant within this State. These non-natives can be highly flammable and can 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 non-natives’ high seed output, persistent seed bank, rapid growth rate, ability to cross pollinate, and adaptations for seed dispersal.
Community 2.1
Community PhaseThis community phase is similar to the Reference State Community Phase 1.1, with the presence of non-native species in trace amounts. Black sagebrush, bluebunch wheatgrass, muttongrass and pine needlegrass dominate the site. Forbs and other shrubs and grasses make up smaller components of the plant community.
Community 2.2
Community PhaseThis community phase is characteristic of a post-disturbance, early 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 or other sprouting shrubs may be increasing. Annual non-native species are stable or increasing within the community.
Community 2.3
Community Phase (at risk)Black 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. This community is at risk of crossing a threshold to either State 3.0 (grazing or fire) or State 4.0 (fire).
Community 2.4
Community Phase (at risk)This community phase is characteristic of a post-disturbance, mid seral community where perennial bunchgrasses have had two plus years of recovery. Annual non-native grasses, primarily cheatgrass, are sub to co-dominate to perennial bunchgrasses. The production of annual grasses is a function of favorable climatic conditions – typically a wet spring. Sagebrush may be present in trace amounts. Rabbitbrush or other sprouting shrubs may be increasing. This community phase is at risk of transitioning to Annual State 5.0.
Pathway a
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 b
Community 2.1 to 2.3Time and lack of disturbance allows for sagebrush to increase and become decadent. Chronic drought reduces fine fuels and leads to a reduced fire frequency, allowing black sagebrush to dominate the site. Inappropriate grazing management reduces the perennial bunchgrass understory; conversely Sandberg bluegrass and/or galleta grass may increase in the understory.
Pathway a
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 black sagebrush can take many years.
Pathway b
Community 2.2 to 2.4Late spring moisture that favors the germination and production of non-native, annual grasses. Pathway typically occurs 3 to 5 years post-fire and may create a transitory plant community phase.
Pathway a
Community 2.3 to 2.1Grazing management that reduces shrubs will allow for the perennial bunchgrasses in the understory to increase. Heavy late-fall/winter grazing may cause mechanical damage to sagebrush thus promoting the perennial bunchgrass understory. Brush treatments with minimal soil disturbance will also decrease sagebrush and release the perennial understory. Annual non-native species are present and may increase in the community. A low severity fire would decrease the overstory of sagebrush and allow for the understory perennial grasses to increase. Due to low fuel loads in this State, fires will likely be small creating a mosaic pattern.
Pathway b
Community 2.3 to 2.2Fire will decrease or eliminate the overstory of sagebrush and allow for the perennial bunchgrasses to dominate the site. Fires will typically be high intensity due to the dominance of sagebrush resulting in removal of the overstory shrub community. Annual non-native species respond well to fire and may increase post-burn. Brush treatment would reduce black sagebrush overstory and allow for perennial bunchgrasses to increase.
State 3
Shrub StateThis state is characterized by black sagebrush or a sprouting shrub overstory with a Sandberg bluegrass and/or galleta grass understory. 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 Sandberg bluegrass understory dominate site resources such that soil water, nutrient capture, nutrient cycling and soil organic matter are temporally and spatially redistributed. Bare ground and soil redistribution may be increasing.
Community 3.1
Community phase
Figure 9. Calcareous Mountain Ridge (028AY096NV) T. Stringham July 2014
Decadent black 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. Galleta grass may be present. Bare ground is significant and soil redistribution may be occuring. If present on the site, Utah juniper and/or singleleaf pinyon is increasing. This community phase may be at risk of transitioning to either the Tree State or Annual State.
Community 3.2
Community Phase
Figure 10. Shallow Calcareous Hill (028AY102NV) T. Stringham August 2013
Rabbitbrush dominates the overstory. Annual non-native species may be increasing and bare ground is significant. This site is at risk for an increase in invasive annual weeds.
Pathway a
Community 3.1 to 3.2
Community phase
Community PhaseFire reduces black sagebrush to trace amounts and allows for sprouting shrubs such as rabbitbrush to dominate. Shadscale may also establish post-fire and become dominate. Inappropriate or excessive sheep grazing could also reduce cover of sagebrush and allow for shadscale or sprouting shrubs to dominate the community. Brush treatments with minimal soil disturbance would facilitate sprouting shrubs and galleta and/or Sandberg’s bluegrass.
Pathway a
Community 3.2 to 3.1
Community Phase
Community phaseShadscale and/or rabbitbrush dominate the overstory. Broom snakeweed may be present to increasing. Annual non-native species may be increasing and bare ground is significant. This site is at risk for an increase in invasive annual weeds.
Transition A
State 1 to 2Trigger: 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.
Transition A
State 2 to 3Trigger: To Community Phase 3.1: Inappropriate cattle/horse grazing will decrease or eliminate deep rooted perennial bunchgrasses, increase Sandberg bluegrass and favor shrub growth and establishment. To Community Phase 3.2: Severe fire will remove sagebrush overstory, decrease perennial bunchgrasses and enhance Sandberg bluegrass. Soil disturbing brush treatments and/or inappropriate sheep grazing will reduce sagebrush and potentially increase sprouting shrubs and Sandberg bluegrass and/or galleta grass. Slow variables: Long term decrease in deep-rooted perennial grass density and/or black sagebrush. Threshold: Loss of deep-rooted perennial bunchgrasses changes nutrient cycling, nutrient redistribution, and reduces soil organic matter. Loss of long-lived, black sagebrush changes the temporal and depending on the replacement shrub, the spatial distribution of nutrient cycling.
Additional community tables
Table 6. Community 1.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Grass/Grasslike1 Primary Perennial Grasses 76–136 bluebunch wheatgrass PSSPS Pseudoroegneria spicata ssp. spicata 60–90 – muttongrass POFE Poa fendleriana 10–30 – pine needlegrass ACPI2 Achnatherum pinetorum 6–16 – 2 Secondary Perennial Grasses 10–20 Indian ricegrass ACHY Achnatherum hymenoides 1–4 – blue grama BOGR2 Bouteloua gracilis 1–4 – squirreltail ELEL5 Elymus elymoides 1–4 – Sandberg bluegrass POSE Poa secunda 1–4 – Forb3 Perennial 25–75 aster ASTER Aster 1–4 – buckwheat ERIOG Eriogonum 1–4 – mat rockspirea PECA12 Petrophytum caespitosum 1–4 – phlox PHLOX Phlox 1–4 – goldenweed PYRRO Pyrrocoma 1–4 – Shrub/Vine4 Primary Shrubs 100–150 black sagebrush ARNO4 Artemisia nova 100–150 – 5 Secondary Shrubs 10–30 prairie sagewort ARFR4 Artemisia frigida 2–6 – yellow rabbitbrush CHVI8 Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus 2–6 – winterfat KRLA2 Krascheninnikovia lanata 2–6 – Table 7. Community 1.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 8. Community 1.3 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 9. Community 2.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 10. Community 2.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 11. Community 2.3 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 12. Community 2.4 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 13. Community 3.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 14. Community 3.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Interpretations
Animal community
Livestock and Wildlife Interpretations:
This site is suitable for livestock grazing. Considerations for grazing management including timing, intensity and duration of grazing. Targeted grazing could be used to decrease the density of non-natives.
Black sagebrush palatability has been rated as moderate to high depending on the ungulate and the season of use (Horton 1989, Wambolt 1996). The palatability of black sagebrush increase the potential negative impacts on remaining black sagebrush plants from grazing or browsing pressure following fire (Wambolt 1996). Pronghorn utilize black sagebrush heavily (Beale and Smith 1970). On the Desert Experiment Range, black sagebrush was found to comprise 68% of pronghorn diet even though it was only the third most common plant. Fawns were found to prefer black sagebrush utilizing it more than all other forage species combined (Beale and Smith 1970). Domestic livestock will also utilize black sagebrush. The domestic sheep industry that emerged in the Great Basin in the early 1900s was largely based on wintering domestic sheep in black sagebrush communities (Mozingo 1987). Domestic sheep will browse black sagebrush during all seasons of the year depending on the availability of other forage species with greater amounts being consumed in fall and winter. Black sagebrush is generally less palatable to cattle than to domestic sheep and wild ungulates (McArthur et al. 1982); however, cattle use of black sagebrush has also been shown to be greatest in fall and winter (Schultz and McAdoo 2002), with only trace amounts being consumed in summer (Van Vuren 1984).
Inappropriate grazing management during the growing season will cause a decline in understory plants such bluebunch wheatgrass, muttongrass, needlegrass and Indian ricegrass. Bluebunch wheatgrass is considered one of the most important forage grass species on western rangelands for livestock. Although bluebunch wheatgrass can be a crucial source of forage, it is not necessarily the most highly preferred species. Bluebunch wheatgrass is moderately grazing tolerant however is 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 is excellent forage for domestic livestock especially in the early spring. Muttongrass begins growth in late winter and early spring, which makes it available before many other forage plants. Pine needlegrass provides a palatable and nutritious feed for livestock and wildlife during the spring and early summer.
Indian ricegrass is a preferred forage species for livestock and wildlife (Cook 1962, Booth et al. 2006). This species is often heavily utilized in winter because it cures well (Booth et al. 2006). It is also readily utilized in early spring, being a source of green feed before most other perennial grasses have produced new growth (Quinones 1981). Booth et al. (2006) note that the plant does well when utilized in winter and spring. Cook and Child (1971), however, found that repeated heavy grazing reduced crown cover, which may reduce seed production, density, and basal area of these plants. Additionally, heavy early spring grazing reduces plant vigor and stand density (Stubbendieck et al. 1985). In eastern Idaho, productivity of Indian ricegrass was at least 10 times greater in undisturbed plots than in heavily grazed ones (Pearson 1976). Cook and Child (1971) found significant reduction in plant cover after seven years of rest from heavy (90%) and moderate (60%) spring use. The seed crop may be reduced where grazing is heavy (Bich et al. 1995). Tolerance to grazing increases after May, thus spring deferment may be necessary for stand enhancement (Pearson 1964, Cook and Child 1971); however, utilization of less than 60% is recommended. In summary, adaptive management is required to manage this bunchgrass well.
Reduced bunchgrass vigor or density provides an opportunity for Sandberg bluegrass expansion and/or cheatgrass and other invasive species such as halogeton to occupy interspaces. Increased cheatgrass cover leads to increased fire frequency and potentially an annual plant community. Sandberg bluegrass increases under grazing pressure (Jameson 1962, Tisdale and Hironaka 1981) and is capable of co-existing with cheatgrass. Depending on the season of use, the type of grazing animal, and site conditions, either galleta or Sandberg bluegrass or cheatgrass may become the dominant understory with inappropriate grazing management.
Black sagebrush is a significant browse species within the Intermountain region. It is especially important on low elevation winter ranges in the southern Great Basin, where extended snow free periods allow animal’s access to plants throughout most of the winter. In these areas it is heavily utilized by pronghorn and mule deer. Pronghorn (Antilocapra americana) do best where shrub cover is moderate to low, therefore, black sagebrush are preferred in some areas over big sagebrush varieties (Blaisdell et al. 1982). Furthermore, a review identified black sagebrush as the most important source of winter browse for pronghorn in Utah (Allen et al. 1984). In winter, it was reported by Clary and Beale (1983) that pronghorn preferred black sagebrush habitat.
In a study by Behan and Welch (1985) black sagebrush accessions were preferred over six other big sagebrush accessions for winter habitat by mule deer. Black sagebrush (and other sagebrush communities) are less attractive to elk (Alces alces) and moose (Alces americanus). In southwestern Wyoming comparing winter habitat use by wild ungulates, elk and moose used Wyoming big sagebrush and black sagebrush community less than expected, while mule deer used it almost exclusively (Oedekoven et al. 1987).
Bird species use black sagebrush dominant habitat. Sage thrashers (Oreoscoptes montanus) and most passerines prefer areas with black sagebrush and other dwarf shrubs over areas with taller shrubs (Medin et al. 2000). Brewer's sparrow (Spizella breweri), sage sparrow (Amphispiza belli), and sage thrasher, also use black sagebrush communities for cover and feed (Paige and Ritter 1999). Greater Sage grouse (Centrocerus urophasianus) are known obligates in black sagebrush and other sagebrush habitats and will use black sagebrush sites as winter grounds (Connelly et al. 2000). For example: sage-grouse on the Snake River Plains of Idaho use black sagebrush-big sagebrush communities as winter range, and in Nevada, sage-grouse select wind-swept ridges with short, scattered black sagebrush plants as winter feeding areas (Clements and Young 1997). In fact, throughout the west, greater sage grouse use mixed sagebrush habitats of big sagebrush and black sagebrush stands.
Pygmy rabbits (Brachylagus idahoensis), a threatened species of conservation concern throughout Nevada often burrow where low sagebrush mixes with mountain big sagebrush. Black sagebrush, is often a component of low sagebrush communities and is an important shrub for pygmy rabbits and other sagebrush obligate species (Oregon Conservation Strategy, 2006).
Rodents also use black sagebrush habitats. A study in northeastern Nevada showed deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus), Great Basin pocket mice (Perognathus merriami), and Ord's kangaroo rats (Dipodomys ordii) used gray low sagebrush-black sagebrush communities on dry ridge tops in late spring and summer (McAdoo et al. 2006). Rodents on cold-desert warm-desert ecotones within the Nevada Test Site preferred cold-desert communities over transition and warm-desert communities in which black sagebrush communities were more abundant (Hansen et al. 1999). Black sagebrush communities also support predators. According to study by MacLaren et al. (1988) greater sage-grouse are the primary avian prey of golden eagles in a mixed big sagebrush-black sagebrush shrubland in southeastern Wyoming.
Several reptiles and amphibians are distributed throughout the sagebrush steppe in the west in Nevada, where basin big sagebrush is known to grow (Bernard and Brown 1977). Reptile species including: eastern racers (Coluber constrictor), ringneck snakes (Diadophis punctatus), night snakes (Hypsiglena torquata), Sonoran mountain kingsnakes (Lampropeltis pyromelana), striped whipsnakes (Masticophis taeniatus), gopher snakes (Pituophis catenifer), long-nosed snakes (Rhinocheilus lecontei), wandering gartersnakes (Thamnophis elegans vagrans), Great Basin rattlesnakes (Crotalus oreganus lutosus), Great Basin collared lizard (Crotaphytus bicinctores), long-nosed leopard lizard (Gambelia wislizenii), short-horned lizard (Phrynosoma douglassii), desert-horned lizard (Phrynosoma platyrhinos), sagebrush lizards (Sceloporus gracisosus), western fence lizards (Sceloporus occidentalis), northern side-blotched lizards (Uta uta stansburiana), western skinks (Plestiodon skiltonianus), and Great Basin whiptails (Aspidoscelis tigris tigris) occur in areas where sagebrush is dominant. Similarly, amphibians such as: western toads (Anaxyrus boreas), Woodhouse’s toads (Anaxyrus woodhousii), northern leopard frogs (Lithobates pipiens), Columbia spotted frogs (Rana luteiventris), bullfrogs (Lithobates catesbeianus), and Great Basin spadefoots (Spea intermontana) also occur throughout the Great Basin in areas sagebrush species are dominant (Hamilton 2004). Studies have not determined if reptiles and amphibians prefer certain species of sagebrush; however, researchers agree that maintaining habitat where basin big sagebrush and reptiles and amphibians occur is important. In fact, wildlife biologists have noticed declines in reptiles where sagebrush steppe habitat has been seeded with introduced grasses (West 1999 and ref. therein).
Hydrological functions
Permeability is slow to moderate. Runoff is very high. Rills and water flow patterns are none to rare. Pedestals and terracettes are none to rare. Gullies are none. Deep-rooted perennial bunchgrasses and shrubs enhance infiltration and reduce runoff. Litter also aids in infiltration and helps to reduce runoff.
Recreational uses
Aesthetic value is derived from the diverse floral and faunal composition and the colorful flowering of wild flowers and shrubs during the spring and early summer. This site offers rewarding opportunities to photographers and for nature study. This site is used for camping and hiking and has potential for upland and big game hunting.
Other information
Black sagebrush is an excellent species to establish on sites where management objectives include restoration or improvement of domestic sheep, pronghorn, or mule deer winter range.
Supporting information
Type locality
Location 1: White Pine County, NV Township/Range/Section T18N R68E S36 Latitude 39° 22′ 36″ Longitude 114° 15′ 42″ General legal description SE¼ Section 36, T18N. R68E. MDBM. N39º 22' 36" W114º 15' 42" About 5½ miles east of Eight Mile Ranch, 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.
Beale, D. M. and A. D. Smith. 1970. Forage Use, Water Consumption, and Productivity of Pronghorn Antelope in Western Utah. The Journal of Wildlife Management 34:570-582.
Beetle, A. A. 1960. A study of sagebrush. The section Tridentatae of Artemisia. Bull. Wyo. agric. Exp. Stn. 368:83 pp.
Bentz, B., D. Alston, and T. Evans. 2008. Great Basin Insect Outbreaks. Pages 45-48 in Collaborative Management and Research in the Great Basin -- Examining the issues and developing a framework for action Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-204. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO.
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.
Boltz, M. 1994. Factors influencing postfire sagebrush regeneration in south-central Idaho. Pages 281-290 in Proceedings -- ecology and mangement of annual rangelands. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-313. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Boise, ID.
Booth, D. T., C. G. Howard, and C. E. Mowry. 2006. 'Nezpar' Indian ricegrass: description, justification for release, and recommendations for use. Rangelands Archives 2:53-54.
Bradley, A. F., N. V. Noste, and W. C. Fischer. 1992. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-287: Fire ecology of forests and woodlands in Utah. . U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, UT.
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. 1994. Effects of Fire on Juniper woodland ecosystems in the great basin.in Proceedings--Ecology and Management of Annual Rangelands. USDA: FS Intermountain Research Station.
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.
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.
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.
Comstock, J. P. and J. R. Ehleringer. 1992. Plant adaptation in the Great Basin and Colorado plateau. Western North American Naturalist 52:195-215.
Conrad, C. E. and C. E. Poulton. 1966. Effect of a wildfire on Idaho fescue and bluebunch wheatgrass. Journal of Range Management:138-141.
Cook, C. W. 1962. An Evaluation of Some Common Factors Affecting Utilization of Desert Range Species. Journal of Range Management 15:333-338.
Eckert, R. E., Jr. and J. S. Spencer. 1987. Growth and reproduction of grasses heavily grazed under rest-rotation management. Journal of Range Management 40:156-159.
Evans, R. A. and J. A. Young. 1978. Effectiveness of Rehabilitation Practices following Wildfire in a Degraded Big Sagebrush-Downy Brome Community. Journal of Range Management 31:185-188.
Everett, R. L. and K. Ward. 1984. Early plant succession on pinyon-juniper controlled burns. Northwest Science 58:57-68.
Fire Effects Information System (Online; http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/).
Ganskopp, D. 1988. Defoliation of Thurber Needlegrass: Herbage and Root Responses. Journal of Range Management 41:472-476.
Gates, D. H. 1964. Sagebrush infested by leaf defoliating moth. Journal of Range Management 17:209-210.
Hall, R. C. 1965. Sagebrush defoliator outbreak in Northern California. Res. Note PSW-RN-075., Berkeley, CA.
Horton, H. 1989. Interagency forage and conservation planting guide for Utah. Extension circular 433. Utah State University, Utah Cooperative Extension Service, Logan UT.
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.
Kitchen, S. G. and E. D. McArthur. 2007. Big and black sagebrush landscapes. Fire Ecology and Management of the Major Ecosystems of Southern Utah. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-202, Fort Collins, CO. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. :73-94.
Koniak, S. 1985. Succession in pinyon-juniper woodlands following wildfire in the Great Basin. The Great Basin Naturalist 45:556-566.
Laycock, W. A. 1967. How heavy grazing and protection affect sagebrush-grass ranges. Journal of Range Management:206-213.
McArthur, E. D., A. Blaner, A. P. Plummer, and R. Stevens. 1982. Characteristics and hybridization of important Intermountain shrubs: 3. Sunflower family. En Ref. in Forest. Abstr 43:2176.
Meyer, S. E. 2008. Artemisia L. -- sagebrush. Pages 274-280 in F. T. Bonner and R. P. Karrfalt, editors. The woody plant seed manual. Agriculture Handbook 727. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington, DC.
Miller, R. F., J. C. Chambers, D. A. Pyke, F. B. Pierson, and C. J. Williams. 2013. A review of fire effects on vegetation and soils in the Great Basin Region: response and ecological site characteristics.
Miller, R. F. and R. J. Tausch. 2000. The role of fire in pinyon and juniper woodlands: a descriptive analysis. Pages 15-30 in Proceedings of the invasive species workshop: the role of fire in the control and spread of invasive species. Fire conference.
Mozingo, H. N. 1987. Shrubs of the Great Basin: A natural history. Pages 67-72 in H. N. Mozingo, editor. Shrubs of the Great Basin. University of Nevada Press, Reno NV.
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/
Richards, J. H. and M. M. Caldwell. 1987. Hydraulic lift: Substantial nocturnal water transport between soil layers by Artemisia tridentata roots. Oecologia 73:486-489.
Robberecht, R. and G. Defossé. 1995. The relative sensitivity of two bunchgrass species to fire. International Journal of Wildland Fire 5:127-134.
Schultz, B. W. and J. K. McAdoo. 2002. Common Sagebrush in Nevada. Special Publication SP-02-02. University of Nevada, Cooperative Extension, Reno, NV.
Smoliak, S., J. F. Dormaar, and A. Johnston. 1972. Long-Term Grazing Effects on Stipa-Bouteloua Prairie Soils. Journal of Range Management 25:246-250.
Stevens, R., K. R. Jorgensen, and J. N. Davis. 1981. Viability of seed from thirty-two shrub and forb species through fifteen years of warehouse storage. Western North American Naturalist 41:274-277.
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.
Tausch, R. J. 1999. Historic pinyon and juniper woodland development. Proceedings: ecology and management of pinyon–juniper communities within the Interior West. Ogden, UT, USA: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, RMRS-P-9:12-19.
Tausch, R. J. and N. E. West. 1988. Differential establishment of pinyon and juniper following fire. American Midland Naturalist:174-184.
Tueller, P. T. and W. H. Blackburn. 1974. Condition and Trend of the Big Sagebrush/Needleandthread Habitat Type in Nevada. Journal of Range Management 27:36-40.
USDA-NRCS Plants Database (Online; http://www.plants.usda.gov).
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.
Van Vuren, D. 1984. Summer Diets of Bison and Cattle in Southern Utah. Journal of Range Management 37:260-261.
Wambolt, C. L. 1996. Mule Deer and Elk Foraging Preference for 4 Sagebrush Taxa. Journal of Range Management 49:499-503.
Winward, A. H. 2001. Sagebrush taxonomy and ecology workshop.in Vegetation, wildlife and fish ecology and rare species management -- Wasatch-Cache National Forest. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Region, Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest, Logan, UT.
Wright, H. A. 1971. Why Squirreltail Is More Tolerant to Burning than Needle-and-Thread. Journal of Range Management 24:277-284.
Wright, H. A. 1985. Effects of fire on grasses and forbs in sagebrush-grass communities. Pages 12-21 in Rangeland Fire Effects; A Symposium: Boise, ID, USDI-BLM.
Wright, H. A. and J. O. Klemmedson. 1965. Effect of Fire on Bunchgrasses of the Sagebrush-Grass Region in Southern Idaho. Ecology 46:680-688.
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. Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden.
Young, R. P. 1983. Fire as a vegetation management tool in rangelands of the intermountain region. Pages 18-31 in Managing intermountain rangelands - improvement of range and wildlife habitats. USDA, Forest Service.
Contributors
DBP
T. Stringham/P.Novak-EcheniqueRangeland 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) P. NOVAK-ECHENIQUE Contact for lead author STATE RANGELAND MANAGEMENT SPECIALIST Date 06/09/2015 Approved by Approval date Composition (Indicators 10 and 12) based on Annual Production Indicators
-
Number and extent of rills:
Rills are none to rare. A few may occur on steeper slopes after summer convection storms or rapid snowmelt. -
Presence of water flow patterns:
Water flow patterns are none to rare. A few flow patterns (short <1 m) and disconnected may occur on steeper slopes. Flow patterns are meandering and are interrupted by plants and rocks. -
Number and height of erosional pedestals or terracettes:
Pedestals are rare to few. Occurrence is usually limited to areas of water flow patterns. Frost heaving of shallow rooted plants should not be considered an indicator of soil erosion. Terracettes are none to rare and small in extent. -
Bare ground from Ecological Site Description or other studies (rock, litter, lichen, moss, plant canopy are not bare ground):
Bare Ground ± 5-15%. -
Number of gullies and erosion associated with gullies:
None -
Extent of wind scoured, blowouts and/or depositional areas:
None -
Amount of litter movement (describe size and distance expected to travel):
Fine litter (foliage from grasses and annual & perennial forbs) expected to move distance of slope length during intense summer convection storms or rapid snowmelt events. Persistent litter (large woody material) will remain in place except during large rainfall events. -
Soil surface (top few mm) resistance to erosion (stability values are averages - most sites will show a range of values):
Soil stability values should be 4 to 6 on most soil surfaces found on this site. -
Soil surface structure and SOM content (include type of structure and A-horizon color and thickness):
Surface structure is medium subangular blocky. Soil surface colors are browns and dark browns and soils are typified by a mollic epipedon. Organic matter of the surface 2 to 3 inches is typically 1 to 4 percent dropping off quickly below. Organic matter content can be more or less depending on micro-topography. -
Effect of community phase composition (relative proportion of different functional groups) and spatial distribution on infiltration and runoff:
Perennial herbaceous plants (especially deep-rooted bunchgrasses) slow runoff and increase infiltration. Shrubs break raindrop impact and provide opportunity for snow catch and accumulation on site. -
Presence and thickness of compaction layer (usually none; describe soil profile features which may be mistaken for compaction on this site):
Compacted layers are none. Subangular blocky structure is not to be interpreted as compacted layers. -
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:
Low shrubs (black sagebrush) = deep-rooted, cool season, perennial bunchgrasses >>Sub-dominant:
shallow-rooted, cool season, perennial grasses > associated shrubs > deep-rooted, cool season, perennial forbs = fibrous, shallow-rooted, cool season, perennial forbs = annual forbs.Other:
Additional:
With an extended fire return interval, the shrub component will increase at the expense of the herbaceous component. -
Amount of plant mortality and decadence (include which functional groups are expected to show mortality or decadence):
Dead branches within shrubs are common and standing dead shrub canopy material may be as much as 35% of total shrub canopy; mature bunchgrasses (<25%) may have dead centers. -
Average percent litter cover (%) and depth ( in):
Litter within interspaces (10-20%) and litter depth is ± ¼ inch. -
Expected annual annual-production (this is TOTAL above-ground annual-production, not just forage annual-production):
For normal or average growing season (through June) ± 200 lbs/ac. Favorable years ± 350 lbs/ac and unfavorable years ± 100 lbs/ac. -
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:
Potential invaders include annual mustards and cheatgrass. -
Perennial plant reproductive capability:
All functional groups should reproduce in average (or normal) and above average growing season years. Reduced reproduction and growth occurs during extreme or extended drought periods.
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
