Animal community

LIVESTOCK – GRAZING INTERPRETATIONS:
Grazing by domestic livestock is one of the major income-producing industries in the area. This site is well adapted to managed grazing by domestic livestock. Rangeland in this area may provide year-long forage for cattle, sheep, or horses. The predominance of herbaceous plants across all plant community phases best lends these sites to grazing but browsing livestock such as goats will utilize native and invasive forbs and brush. During the dormant period, the protein levels of the forage maybe lower than the minimum needed to meet livestock (primarily cattle and sheep) requirements and supplementation based on a reliable forage analysis may be necessary.

A grazing management strategy that protects the resource, maintains or improves rangeland health, and is consistent with management objectives will include appropriate stocking rates based on the carrying capacity of the land. In addition to useable forage, stocking rates should consider ecological condition of the land, trend of the site, grazing history, season of use, stock density, kind and class of livestock, forage quality, and harvest efficiency based on plant preference. It should also consider site accessibility and distance to drinking water. Average annual production must be measured or estimated to properly assess useable forage production and carrying capacity.

If excessive defoliation or grazing distribution problems occur, reduced stocking rates are needed to maintain plant health and vigor. Year-to-year and season-to-season fluctuations in forage production are expected due to weather conditions. To avoid overuse of forage plants when conditions are unfavorable to forage production, timely adjustments to livestock number or in the length of grazing periods are needed.

WILDLIFE INTERPRETATIONS:
Major Land Resource Area (MLRA) 75 lies primarily within the loess mixed-grass prairie ecosystem mixed with tallgrass prairie in lower areas. The Sands ecological site is a component of that larger landscape. Prior to European settlement, this area consisted of diverse grassland habitats interspersed with varying densities of depressional wetlands and limited woody riparian corridors. These habitats provided critical life cycle components for the grassland birds, prairie dogs, and herds of roaming bison, elk, and pronghorn that historically occupied this landscape. Diverse populations of small mammals and insects provided a bountiful prey base for raptors and omnivores such as coyotes, foxes, raccoons, and opossums. Bobcats, wolves, and mountain lions occupied the apex predator niche. In addition, a wide variety of reptiles and amphibians thrived in this landscape.

The loess mixed-grass prairie was a disturbance-driven ecosystem with fire, herbivory, and climate functioning as the primary disturbances. Following European settlement, elimination of fire, widespread conversion to cropland, and other sources of habitat fragmentation significantly altered the appearance and functionality of the entire ecosystem. The reduced stability of the system is reflected by major changes in the composition and abundance of the native flora and fauna. Introduced and invading species further degrade the ecological integrity of the plant and animal communities.

Bison and prairie dogs were historically keystone species but free-roaming bison herds and nearly all prairie dogs have been extirpated. The loss of bison and fire as ecological drivers greatly influenced the character of the remaining native grasslands and the habitats that they provide. In addition to free-ranging bison, extirpated species include pronghorn, wolves, and swift fox.

Historically, an ecological mosaic of the sites provided habitat for species requiring unfragmented grasslands. Important habitat features and components found commonly or exclusively on modern day remnants include upland nesting habitat for grassland birds and game birds; nesting and escape cover for waterfowl; forbs and insects for brood rearing habitat; and a forage source for small and large herbivores.

Fragmentation has reduced habitat quality for numerous area-sensitive species, as highlighted by the decline of the greater prairie chicken. Many grassland nesting bird populations, such as dickcissel and Henslow's sparrow, are also declining. In this fragmented landscape, native grassland bird populations face increasing competition from the opportunistic European starlings and house sparrows and are subject to nest parasitism from brown-headed cowbirds. Tree encroachment creates habitat that favors generalist species such as American robin and mourning dove, and provides perches for raptors, increasing the predation mortality. Introduced species such as smooth brome, Kentucky bluegrass, nodding plumeless thistle (musk thistle), and Canada thistle further degrade the biological integrity of many of these remnant prairies.

1. REFERENCE STATE: The predominance of tall- and midgrasses plus a high diversity of forbs and shrubs in this community makes it ideal for grazers and mixed-feeders. Pollinating insects play a large role in maintaining the forb community and provide a food source for grassland birds and other grassland-dependent species. The vegetative structural diversity provides habitat for reptiles, amphibians, and a wide array of native and introduced bird species including Henslow's sparrow, western meadowlark, northern bobwhite, and ring-necked pheasants. The abundant prey base supports populations of Swainson’s hawk, burrowing, short-eared, and great horned owls, and other grassland raptors. Western meadowlark and American crow overwinter in this habitat.

The diversity of grasses, forbs and shrubs provide high nutrition levels for small and large herbivores including moles, mice, ground squirrels, white-tailed jackrabbit, and white-tailed deer. The structure of this plant community provides suitable thermal, protective, and escape cover for small herbivores and grassland birds. Many wide-ranging predators utilize this plant community, including coyote, badger, red fox, and least- and long-tailed weasels.

As the plant community degrades to more midgrasses and fewer tallgrasses, less winter and escape cover are provided. It also provides less cover for predators. As the plant community shifts from warm-season tallgrasses to midgrasses, it favors grassland birds that prefer shorter vegetation. This structural community provides better habitat for greater prairie chicken, lark bunting, and lark sparrow populations. Habitat in plant community 1.3 is much the same as 1.2 but provides less winter protection because of the reduced plant height and cover.

2. NATIVE/INVADED GRASS STATE: Although the amount of Kentucky bluegrass in this plant community varies, the generally lower structure height favors the suite of grassland birds that prefer more visual space. Increased dominance by Kentucky bluegrass with lower plant diversity provides less habitat for ring-necked pheasant, northern bob-white, and mixed-feeders, such as white-tailed deer and small mammals. Insect populations are somewhat reduced, but still play a large role in maintaining the forb community and providing a moderate forage supply for grassland birds and other species. The reduced stature of this plant community still provides suitable thermal, protective, and escape cover for small herbivores and grassland birds.

3. INVADED WOODY STATE: The Eastern Redcedar/Honeylocust Community provides habitat niches for white-tailed deer, wild turkey, raccoon, and Cooper’s and sharp-shinned hawk, among other species. Birds that are habitat generalists, such as the Bell’s Vireo, common yellowthroat, eastern kingbird, mourning dove, American goldfinch, northern bobwhite, field sparrow, solitary vireo, and pigmy nuthatch use woody cover for nesting, food, and breeding habitats. While a woody component of the grassland provides specific short-term habitats for some species, an expansive forest component is very detrimental to grassland wildlife species diversity and abundance overall.

Hydrological functions

Water is the principal factor limiting forage production on this site. Soils on this site are in Hydrologic Soil Group A (low runoff and high infiltration even when thoroughly wetted). Water transmission through Group A soils is normally greater than 0.30 inches per hour. Runoff is expected to occur only during the most intense storms (refer to Section 4, NRCS National Engineering Handbook for runoff quantities and hydrologic curves).

For the Reference Plant Community, rills and gullies should not typically be present. Water flow patterns should be barely distinguishable if at all present. Pedestals are only slightly present in association with bunchgrasses such as little bluestem. Litter typically falls in place, and signs of movement are not common. Chemical and physical crusts are rare to non-existent. Overall this site has the appearance of being very stable and productive

Recreational uses

This site provides hunting for upland game species and white-tailed deer, along with hiking, photography, bird watching and. The wide varieties of plants which bloom from spring until fall have an aesthetic value that appeals to visitors.

Wood products

No appreciable wood products are present on the site.

Other products

The sandy nature of this site limits its use primarily to rangeland.

Other information

Site Development and Testing Plan:
Future work is needed to validate the information in this Provisional Ecological Site Description. Additional data collection and evaluation may also be needed to develop this ESD to the Approved, then Correlated level. This could include field activities to collect low, medium and high intensity sampling, soil correlations, and analysis of that data. Field reviews of the project plan should be done by soil scientists and vegetation specialists. A final field review, peer review, quality control, and quality assurance reviews of the ESD will be needed to produce the final document.

Inventory data references

Information presented here has been derived from 2 NRI points, field observations from range-trained personnel and literature and soil surveys.

Other references

High Plains Regional Climate Center, University of Nebraska. (http://hpcc.unl.edu, accessed 12/05/16)

Johnsgaard, P.A. 2001. “The Nature of Nebraska.” University of Nebraska Press.

LaGrange, T.G. 2015. Final Report submitted to EPA for the project entitled: Nebraska’s Wetland Condition Assessment: An Intensification Study in Support of the 2011 National Survey (CD# 97714601), and the related project entitled: Nebraska's Supplemental Clean Water Act §106 Funds, as Related to Participation in National Wetland Condition Assessment (I – 97726201). Nebraska Game and Parks Commission, Lincoln.

Muhs, Daniel R., E. Bettis III, J. Aleinikoff, J. McGeehin, J. Beann, G. Skipp, B. Marshall, H. Roberts, W. Johnson, and R. Benton. 2008.
"Origin and paleoclimatic significance of late Quaternary loess in Nebraska: Evidence from stratigraphy, chronology, sedimentology, and geochemistry." USGS Staff -- Published Research. Paper 162. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub/162. Accessed 12/05/16.

U.S. Dept. of Agriculture. NRCS National Ecological Site Handbook. January, 2014.

U.S. Dept. of Agriculture. NRCS National Engineering Handbook, Section 4. August, 2011.

Personal communications with professional ecologists and wildlife experts.

Rolfsmeier, S.B. and G. Steinauer. 2010. "Terrestrial Ecological Systems and Natural Communities of Nebraska," (version IV).
Nebraska Natural Heritage Program.

USDA, NRCS. National Water and Climate Center, Portland, OR. http://wcc.nrcs.usda.gov Accessed 12/05/16.

USDA, NRCS.1997. National Range and Pasture Handbook.

USDA, NRCS. National Soil Information System, Information Technology Center, Fort Collins, CO. http://nasis.nrcs.usda.gov Accessed 12/05/16.

USDA, NRCS. 2002. The PLANTS Database, Version 3.5 http://plants.usda.gov Accessed 12/05/16. National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA.

USDA, NRCS Soil Surveys from Gosper, Phelps, Kearney, Adams, Hamilton, Polk, York, Butler, Seward, Saline, Fillmore, Clay, Franklin, Webster, Nuckolls, Thayer, and Jefferson Counties in Nebraska, and Republic and Washington Counties in Kansas.

Contributors

Doug Whisenhunt
Nadine Bishop

Approval

Suzanne Mayne-Kinney, 4/17/2025

Print Options