Animal community

The animal community, like the plant community, is a component of a larger and more complex ecosystem. The animal community includes the primary consumer organisms, which interface directly with the vegetative component of the ecological site, as well as the secondary and tertiary consumers (carnivores and scavengers). All play a vital role in maintaining the cycling of nutrients and flow of energy in the ecosystem. Some animal species were site-specific, but many species common to the region used various ecological sites in association with one-another.

The animal community changed dramatically from the early 1800s to early 1900s, as a result of overexploitation of various wildlife species through unregulated market hunting, trapping, poisoning, and wanton destruction. Some of the most drastic changes in animal communities include the extinction of populations, species, and subspecies, changes in geographical distribution, and the introduction of non-endemic species. In the past century, changes in animal populations have been more related to loss or fragmentation of critical habitat. Loss of habitat is usually the major cause of population declines or even extinction of some species. Cultivation has been the demise of many wildlife species, such as the prairie chicken and certain kinds of waterfowl, while still other species, such as the pronghorn, have been displaced geographically. However, the problem does not always result from total destruction of habitat, but often involves the loss of one or more critical habitat components, such as mating and nesting habitat for certain birds, or in other cases the reduction in area or continuity of desirable habitat.

The major problem affecting many wildlife species of the Shallow Ecological Site was and continues to be degradation of the plant community and soils. As this site changed from a midgrass dominant community to a shortgrass and shrub dominant plant community, the animal component also changed. The true grassland animal species decreased their use of the site with loss of the prairie midgrasses and increase of woody cover. The site would have become less desirable for species, such as pronghorn, lesser prairie chicken, and certain species of grassland sparrows. Some of the mice and other small rodents migrated into the Mesquite/Pricklypear/Shortgrass Community, as well as the Converted Land Community Community, because they were more adapted to such habitats. Conversion of the natural plant communities of the Shallow Ecological Site to the Converted Land Community results in major habitat destruction and habitat fragmentation. Many wildlife species will use some crops as a food source, but still need cover and water in close proximity for survival. Conversion of the natural plant communities to the Converted Land Community also has a major impact on resident wildlife, since grass monocultures do not provide suitable habitat for many wildlife species. On-the-other-hand, such conversions can have positive benefits for domestic livestock, in terms of increased forage production, seasonally, and nutrition. Species having limited tolerance to habitat change abandoned certain vegetative states for more suitable habitat in another community, or in some cases were extirpated from the region.

The reference plant community of the Shallow Ecological Site was used by a diversity of indigenous wildlife which preferred grassland habitat. The larger grazing and browsing herbivores included bison, elk, pronghorn and white-tailed deer. The smaller mammals included prairie dog, badger, jackrabbit, cottontail rabbit, skunk, ground squirrel and various other species of small rodents. Transient species, such as bats, occasionally used the site intermittently or incidental to more preferred or associated sites. Carnivores included the wolf, coyote, bobcat, fox, black-footed ferret, ocelot and mountain lion. Birds included lesser prairie chicken, wild turkey, bobwhite quail, scaled quail, doves, nighthawk, roadrunner, and numerous species of sparrows, eagles, hawks and vultures. Various snakes and lizards, including the rattlesnake and horned lizard, also occurred in the historic climax plant community.

The migratory bison was the largest herbivore grazing the historic climax plant community. Bison probably grazed the Shallow Ecological Site intermittently in association with surrounding sites. They were selective grazers, preferring primarily grasses, while utilizing only a few forbs and very little woody browse. Bison often grazed an area heavily, but it was primarily during winter dormancy of the warm-season prairie grasses, and long deferment periods occurred before the next migration into the area. Unlike bison grazing, earlier domestic livestock grazing was both heavy and continuous. Domestic cattle eventually replaced the endemic bison and became the principal larger grazing herbivore, after 1860.

The elk, another large migratory herbivore, used the Shallow Ecological Site on an intermittent basis during the winter. The elk was primarily a grazer, using grasses and forbs in this wintering location, although newer leader growth of some shrubs would have been used. The elk probably did not impact the plant community to the extent of the bison. Like the bison, elk were eventually extirpated from this region, due to over exploitation, competition with domestic livestock, and land use practices after European settlement.

Local populations of pronghorn occupied the area year-round, prior to European settlement. The pronghorn was primarily a grazer, with strong preference for forbs, while using considerably less woody browse and grasses. Pronghorn populations are believed to have decreased in the Rolling Plains, due to extirpation of the larger predators, the increase of brush on the prairies, competition with domestic sheep, and the introduction of netwire fencing. The pronghorn has been displaced geographically and no longer inhabits the immediate region. Individuals or small groups of pronghorn may occasionally wander into this region from farther west.

White-tailed deer was another non-migratory herbivore with a considerably smaller home range than the antelope. The white-tailed deer is considered to be primarily a browser but also utilizes large quantities of forbs, including cool-season annuals, and some cool-season grasses in winter and early spring, while using very limited amounts of warm-season grasses in any season. The Shallow Ecological Site provided a wide variety of preferred food items of the white-tailed deer, and scattered woody shrubs and motes provided edge-effect and screening cover. The site was used in association with other sites in the area. Since European settlement, the white-tailed deer population has increased dramatically. The increase in the white-tailed deer population may be attributed to extirpation of the wolf and mountain lion, primary predators of the deer, increase of woody vegetation, eradication of the screwworm fly, and intensive predator control, as well as early regulatory restrictions on harvest of does. During the past three decades (1970-2004), great progress has been made in wildlife management, through habitat improvement, as well as selective population controls (primarily through hunting), including harvest of does and manipulation of buck:doe ratios. The white-tailed deer has become the most popular large game species in the region, and contributes immensely to local economies.

The reference plant community of the Shallow Ecological Site was marginally suitable to the javelina. It prefers habitat with dense woody cover and cacti. The site actually became more favorable to the javelina, following retrogression of the plant community, in which woody species and cacti increased in abundance. Pricklypear and mesquite beans are highly preferred dietary items. Interest in the javelina as a game species has grown in recent years, especially among bow hunters.

Smaller herbivores of the Shallow Ecological Site include jackrabbit, cottontail rabbit, black-tailed prairie dog, Mexican ground squirrel and many species of smaller rodents. Their diets consisted of herbage, seeds, and mast. Also occurring on the site, usually in association with other sites, were the striped skunk, raccoon, and opossum, which are omnivorous with mixed diets of insects, arthropods, roots, tubers, mast, fish, occasional rodents and carrion. Small carnivores included black-footed ferret, badger and ringtail with diets of rodents and insects. The black-footed ferret, which preyed primarily on the prairie dog when it was abundant, has been extirpated from the region and is near extinction.

The prairie dog was despised by European settlers, leading to large-scale control of the rodent by shooting and poisoning, in association with natural dieoffs from disease. These events led to major reductions in prairie dog populations throughout the region. Very few active prairie dog towns remain in the region. These relict prairie dog towns are small and very sparsely dispersed throughout the region. The vegetative state of the prairie dog towns represented degraded plant communities from higher seral stages. Since abandonment of prairie dog towns, the sites have been undergoing long-term secondary plant succession.

Lesser prairie chicken used the Shallow Ecological Site for feeding, nesting, and brood rearing, as long as the taller midgrasses were plentiful. Vegetation structure usually was more important than plant species in the life cycle of this bird and many others. The taller, standing dry grasses from previous year’s growth were important to nesting success. Openings among the taller bunchgrasses provided ease of movement by young chicks and protection from avian predators. The chicks and juveniles fed primarily upon protein-rich insects, which were abundant and easily accessible on recently burned areas. Prairie chickens used the open shortgrass or bare areas, and recently burned areas for leks, where the males performed their courtship ritual. Even after loss of midgrass dominance the prairie chicken continued to use the same historical leks on this and other sites, until rendered undesirable by excessive brush encroachment. The lesser prairie chicken no longer occurs in this immediate region, now relegated to only isolated populations farther north and northwest. All prairie chicken species and subspecies were true prairie birds, which have been so strongly affected by loss and fragmentation of grassland habitat, that some are now rare or on the brink of extinction.

Many other species of birds still inhabit the Shallow Ecological Site in the alternate vegetative states, although species composition differs considerably from that found in the reference plant community. Wild turkey, bobwhite quail, and scaled quail still occur in one or more of the communities, but the lesser prairie chicken has been extirpated. Many species of grassland passeriformes, including songbirds such as larks and sparrows, have been displaced due to increase in woody cover and cacti. The community has become more desirable for other species, such as wrens and thrashers, which prefer habitat with more woody cover. The roadrunner is a unique bird from the past, which thrives in vegetative states with abundance of woody vegetation and cacti such as the Mesquite/Pricklypear/Shortgrass Community. It feeds upon a variety of items including lizards, snakes, insects, and pricklypear tunas, common to such plant communities. The roadrunner nests in thorny shrubs and sometimes in larger pricklypear plants. Numerous species of hawks, many migratory, still use this site, due to the abundance of rodents and rabbits.

Birds of prey associated with the Shallow Ecological Site, included eagles, hawks and falcons. Some of the common hawks, included Swainson’s hawk, red-tailed hawk and Harris’ hawk. The American kestrel was a small falcon using the site. The golden eagle was common and fed mostly on jackrabbits and other small mammals, as well as young lambs and kid goats. After settlement of the area, the golden eagle population was extirpated from this ecosystem and now only infrequently ventures into this region from farther west. The bald eagle occurred primarily around perennial streams and lakes, since their primary prey was fish. The bald eagle became endangered during the mid twentieth century. Although still rare, the bald eagle has recovered sufficiently enough to be removed from the endangered species list. Law now protects all eagles and hawks.

Both turkey and black vultures were and still are common to the Shallow Ecological Site and surrounding sites in the area. They are not site specific. Vultures are scavengers, feeding primarily on dead animals and birds. These tertiary consumers are important in accelerating nutrient cycling and flow of energy in the ecosystem. Although not commonly known, federal and state law also protects the vultures.

Snakes, lizards and tortoise are still important components of the Shallow Ecological Site. Many of the reptiles are important prey species of predators and omnivores. The rattlesnake, a remnant from the historic climax plant community or far beyond, was the only poisonous snake endemic to the site. Occasional rock outcrops on this site provided dens for the rattlesnake and its prey. The unique horned lizard, another remnant from past eras, also occurred on this site. It preferred bare or sparsely vegetated areas, especially where its primary dietary item, the red harvester ant, was abundant. The horned lizard has become rare during the late twentieth century, due to reduction of major dietary items within its very small home range, increased predation, and human activities.

Larger mammalian predators using the Shallow Ecological Site included the gray wolf, coyote, red fox, gray fox, ocelot, bobcat and occasional mountain lion. Wolves and ocelot were common to the area before European settlement, but declined rapidly thereafter and no longer occur in the area. All of these species did not coexist in harmony, but from time to time each found a survival niche in the community. The wolf and mountain lion preyed primarily on deer and antelope, but also took some of the smaller mammals, including other predators. After ranching was begun in the area, all of the larger predators preyed upon domestic livestock. The gray fox population tends to increase as the coyote population declines and visa versa. The Shallow Ecological Site was used for denning by coyote and fox, but not simultaneously at the same location. The wolf and ocelot have been extirpated the entire state, and the mountain lion now is only as an occasional transient in this region. Viable populations of coyote, gray fox, and bobcat still exist in the area, while the red fox occurs occasionally. Coyote and bobcat predation on domestic livestock can be a problem, especially where sheep and goats are raised.

The animal component of the plant community has changed drastically since settlement and the introduction of domestic livestock, including cattle, sheep and goats. All current vegetative states of the Shallow Ecological Site are now used for the production of domestic livestock, as well as native wildlife. Domestic livestock have largely replaced the endemic large herbivores, with the exception of white-tailed deer. Cattle have replaced bison as the principal grazers, utilizing approximately 85 percent grass, 10 percent forbs, and 5 percent woody plants. Sheep have replaced pronghorn, with their strong preference for forbs, approximately 85 %, while using only about 10 % grasses and 5% browse. There is strong competition between sheep and deer for forbs, especially during late winter and spring. Spanish goats are heavy browsers with diets consisting of approximately 80% woody plants, 10% forbs, and 10 % grasses. This places them in strong competition with white-tailed deer for woody browse. Angora goats and Borer goats utilize considerably less browse than the Spanish goat, with the balance of their diets consisting of about equal proportions of forbs and grass. Both Spanish and Angora goats have been used for biological control of certain woody species, especially in conjunction with mechanical brush management and prescribed burning. Tables of plant preferences for the major kinds of animals are provided following this section.

The Shallow Ecological Site is one of the lower producing sites with considerable amounts of woody plants, especially in the Brushland and Go-back Vegetative States. These vegetative states would be less desirable for cattle, but highly desirable for Spanish goats and white-tailed deer, since both are strong browsers. The abundance of pricklypear in these states provides large amounts of pricklypear tunas (fruits). Deer and other animals utilize large amounts of pricklypear tunas when available from late summer to winter. The wide variety of forbs preferred by deer would be desirable during winter and early spring thus placing deer and sheep in strong competition. Areas with large amounts of catclaw and catclaw mimosa are undesirable for Angora goats, and to a lesser degree for sheep, due to snagging of mohair and wool. Kid goats sometimes become entangled in these shrubs and die from overexposure to heat or cold, starvation, or predation. The site also provides cover for white-tailed deer, in conjunction with other sites.

Numerous exotic herbivores have been introduced to this region, primarily from Africa and Asia. They now graze and browse the Shallow Ecological Site, in association with other sites, usually confined by high fences. Some of the more common exotic animals include axis deer, blackbuck antelope, gazelle, red deer, fallow deer, ibex, and eland. Some of the exotics compete directly with the native white-tailed deer, as well as domestic livestock. The feral hog is an exotic, invader species sometimes associated with this site. It often is destructive to rangeland through its feeding habits, which cause major soil disturbance and damage to perennial vegetation. The feral hog is considered omnivorous and sometimes preys on young lambs and kid goats, as well as ground nests of birds.

Recreational hunting is a decimating factor of wildlife species which are also considered to be game animals. Game hunting substitutes for natural predation of earlier times. Hunting can be a useful management tool when based upon sound ecological principles. On the contrary, it can be detrimental to wildlife populations, if not based upon sound principles. Hunting can be used for population control, to manipulate sex ratios, and to enhance quality of certain attributes within a population. State game laws regulate seasons and bag limits of non-migratory species, while Federal game laws take precedent over state laws in regulating the harvest of migratory species. Most exotic species using this site are hunted as an economic enterprise and are not regulated by law as to seasons or bag limits. Whitetail deer, a non-migratory species, is the only native big game animal hunted in association with the Shallow Ecological Site. Non-migratory game birds of this site are the Rio Grande wild turkey, bobwhite quail, and scaled quail. Migratory game birds using this site include the mourning dove, and more recently the white-winged dove. Wildlife management takes the form of habitat conservation and habit manipulation, as well as balancing populations with available habitat. It requires knowledge of the natural history of individual species and their specific habitat requirements. Brief statements follow, regarding some of the preferences and habitat requirements for principle native game species using the Shallow Ecological Site.

White-tailed deer prefer an edge-effect mosaic, but will readily adapt to other vegetation types or plant community states. They require cover for protection from predators (including hunters), bedding areas, travel corridors, and thermoregulation of body temperature. White-tailed deer are strong browsers, utilizing large amounts of certain woody plants on a seasonal basis. White-tailed deer also utilize large amounts of forbs and some cool-season grasses, especially during late fall, winter, and early spring. Some of the preferred perennial forbs are used during the summer and fall. They are, however, very selective as to species (see table of preference ratings).

The Rio Grande turkey prefers to locate in the vicinity of roost trees, but they range over large areas while feeding. They would use this site in conjunction with others for feeding and cover. The wild turkey feeds on seeds and mast of many plants occurring on the Shallow Ecological Site. They also use large amounts of herbaceous plant material, including lush green grass, especially Texas wintergrass, during fall, winter, and spring. Turkeys would nest among the taller midgrasses of this site when it is in a higher stage of plant succession. Structure is the key vegetation attribute for most ground nesting birds, with the exception of the nighthawk and killdeer.

Bobwhite quail prefer edge-effect, and scattered shrubs with underspace, such as lotebush and littleleaf sumac, which provide loafing areas and cover from raptors. Combinations of bunchgrasses and low shrubs provide good nesting cover. The Shallow Ecological Site supports many plants, especially the leguminous forbs and shrubs, which produce hard seeds preferred by quail. Many of the annual forbs also produce desirable foods of the bobwhite quail. The scaled (blue) quail prefers the more regressed plant communities of this site to higher seral stages of dense grass cover. It prefers openness in the understory, bare ground, and shortgrasses, which facilitates their running nature and their preference or tolerance for more woody cover and cacti. They use many of the same foods as bobwhites, in addition to fruits of the tasajillo and pricklypear. Both species also use considerable amounts of leafy herbage in their diets.

Additional information on both game and non-game species is available from local offices of Natural Resources Conservation Service, Texas Agricultural Extension Service, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, or range, wildlife, and biology departments of various universities.

Hydrological functions

The reference plant community of the Shallow Ecological Site, with its abundance of deep-rooted bunchgrasses, good surface mulch, moderately high soil organic matter, and limited erosion, contributed to optimum hydrologic functions, within limitations of the prevailing climate, geology, and soils. Infiltration and percolation of water to plant root zones was good, and runoff was medium. Permeability was moderate to slow in surface layers, depending on depth and amounts of hardened layers beneath the surface and amounts of cobbles in the soil profile. The soils of this site are well drained, but have low available water capacity. Therefore, this was and still is a droughty site, requiring more frequent rainfall to maintain adequate moisture for plant growth. The soils’ low available water capacity and medium runoff limit precipitation effectiveness. Light showers are ineffective in benefiting the deeper-rooted midgrasses, although the short grasses and annuals may have short-term benefits. Deep percolation beyond the root zone is limited, due to low annual precipitation and hardened subsurface layers of caliche and limestone. However, where limestone is fractured, some water would reach greater depths during higher rainfall events, provided adequate surface cover is available to reduce runoff. The Shallow Ecological Site would not be considered a major contributor for recharging underground aquifers or water tables, although greater than the Very Shallow Ecological Site. In some vegetative states, the site supports various woody shrubs, having limited effect on deep percolation. However, deep-rooted trees, such as the mesquite may actually provide root channels that aid deeper percolation, although this is probably offset by mesquite’s heavy demand for water in its life cycle. In some instances spring flows have been revived after many years of dormancy, following removal of mesquite and juniper over large areas of a contributing watershed.

Loss of herbaceous vegetative cover, especially the larger bunchgrasses, accompanied by loss of mulch and soil organic matter, reduces infiltration and increase runoff. This occurs under heavy continuous grazing, prolonged drought and cessation of fire or untimely fire. As the deep-rooted midgrasses, such as little bluestem, sideoats grama, and cane bluestem, decrease, the shortgrasses, such as buffalograss, curlymesquite, and slim tridens, increase. Shallow-rooted, sod-forming grasses, such as buffalograss and curlymesquite, are less effective than bunchgrasses in promoting good water infiltration and reducing runoff. Increased runoff results in less infiltration, less water for plant growth, and accelerated soil erosion. Under intensive rainfall, the degraded site can contribute to down slope flooding, sedimentation, and poor water quality in streams and rivers. As degradation of the plant community and soil becomes increasingly more severe, water dynamics are more negatively impacted, resulting in impairment of the normal water cycle associated with this site.

Brush management and prescribed grazing will help improve hydrologic function over a period of several years, through increase of deep-rooted midgrasses and surface cover, which will improve water infiltration and percolation to the root zone; also reduce raindrop splash and soil erosion. Woody plants use larger amounts of water than grasses per unit of biomass produced and usually out compete grasses for available water. Reduction of woody plants through chemical versus mechanical methods will avoid soil disturbance and give grasses a competitive advantage for limited moisture. Reduction of brush canopy also will reduce evaporation of precipitation intercepted by woody canopies, thus allowing more water to reach the surface and infiltrate to replenish soil moisture for plant growth. Although hydrologic functions can be improved along with improvement in the plant community, neither will return to that of the historic climax plant community, if excessive soil loss has occurred in association with site degradation, leading to the crossing of ecological thresholds.

Soil Surveys of Concho County (1988) and Tom Green County (1976) placed the principal soils of the Shallow Ecological Site in Hydrologic Groups C and D.

Recreational uses

The Shallow Ecological Site is used for hunting, birding, hiking, camping, and horseback riding. The site provides aesthetic appeal from wildlife, and from colorful spring wildflowers. In some locations the site contains artifacts and other historical evidence of past civilizations. Interesting fossils of past fauna and flora sometimes occur in limestone outcrops and surface fragments.

Wood products

Mesquite from the Shallow Ecological Site can be used as firewood and for specialty wood work, including furniture and flooring. Blueberry juniper can be used for fence posts and stays, but redberry juniper is less desirable.

Other products

The Shallow Ecological Site contains caliche, which is mined for roadfill and construction of ranch roads. Occasional limestone boulders and flagstone occurring on the site are used in landscaping. The site may be used for honey production from some of the woody shrubs, such as catclaw and mesquite, which produce blooms favored by honeybees.

Other information

None.

Other references

Davis, W.B., and D.J. Schmidly. 1994. The mammals of Texas. Texas Parks and Wildlife
Press, Austin. 338 pp.
Gould, F. W. 1975. Texas plants a checklist and ecological summary. Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, MP-585 revised.119 pp.
Hatch, S.L., K.N. Gandhi, and L.E. Brown. 1990. Checklist of the vascular plants of Texas. Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, MP-1655.
Matthews, S.R. Interwoven – a pioneer chronicle. Texas A&M University Press, College
Station, TX.
Oberholser, H. C. 1974. The bird life of Texas. Vol. 1 and Vol. 2. University of Texas Press,
Austin. 1069 pp.
Pederson, R.J. 1965- 1976. Range site descriptions of western Texas, SCS (NRCS) Field
Office Technical Guide, rangeland interpretations; and rangeland interpretations for Soil Surveys of Coke and Tom Green Counties, Texas.
Sibley, Marilyn McAdams. 1967. Travelers in Texas 1761-1860. University of Texas Press,
Austin, TX.
Thomas, G. W. 1975. Texas plants – an ecological summary. In: Gould, F. W. 1975.
Texas plants a checklist and ecological summary. Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, MP-585 revised. pp. 7-14.
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 1974. Soil survey of Coke County, Texas, in
cooperation with Texas Agricultural Experiment Station. 49 pp., plus maps.
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 1976. Soil survey of Tom Green County,
Texas, in cooperation with Texas Agricultural Experiment Station. 60 pp., plus maps.
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 1981-86, 2004. SCS Range 417, Production
and composition record for native grazing lands.
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 1988. Soil survey of Concho County, Texas,
in cooperation with Texas Agricultural Experiment Station and Texas Soil and Water Conservation Board. 117 pp. plus maps.
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 1998. National range and pasture handbook.
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2000. PLANTS, National plants database.
http:\\plants.usda.gov.
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2004. NASIS, National soil survey database.
http:\\soils.usda.gov.
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2004. Texas plant list 7. NRCS
Temple, TX. Excel spreadsheet, computerized. unpublished.
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service, GLCI, and RC&D. 2004. Common rangeland
plants of the Texas panhandle. NRCS, Temple , TX. Excel spreadsheet, computerized. unpublished.
Vines, R.J. 1960. Trees, shrubs, and vines of the Southwest. University of Texas Press,
Austin, TX. 1104 pp.
Weniger, Del. 1984. The Explorers’ Texas – The lands and waters. Eakin Publications Inc.
Weniger, Del. 1997. The Explorers’ Texas, Volume 2 – The animals. Eakin Press.

Other Contributors Assisting With Development of This Site Description:
Homer Sanchez, State Rangeland Management Specialist, NRCS, Temple, Texas
Justin Clary, Rangeland Management Specialist, NRCS, Temple, Texas
Charles Anderson, Rangeland Management Specialist, NRCS, San Angelo, Texas
Bruce Deere, Range and Wildlife Mgt. Consultant, San Angelo, Texas
Dr. Bob Steger, Range Consultant; Mertzon, Texas
Rusty Dowell, Soil Scientist, NRCS, San Angelo, Texas
Gary Bates, District Conservationist, NRCS, Menard, Texas
Brad Teplicek, District Conservationist, NRCS, Eden, Texas
Ronald Crumley, District Conservationist, NRCS, San Angelo, Texas
Kyle Wright, Soil Conservationist, NRCS, San Angelo, Texas
Michael Votaw, Environmental Resource Specialist, USACE, Fort Worth, Texas
Marty Underwood, Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Austin, Texas
Tim Schumann, Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Austin, Texas
Rudy Pederson, SCS Range Conservationist, Retired, San Angelo, Texas
Steve Nelle, Biologist, NRCS, San Angelo, Texas
Kurt Kemp, Manager, San Angelo State Park, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, San Angelo, TX
Pat Bales, Assistant Manager, San Angelo State Park, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, San Angelo, TX

Contributors

PES Edits by Tyson Morley, MLRA Soil Scientist, Altus, Oklahoma
Dean Chamrad

Approval

Bryan Christensen, 9/15/2023

Acknowledgments

Site Development and Testing Plan: Future work, as described in a Project Plan, to validate the information in this Provisional Ecological Site Description is needed. This will include field activities to collect low, medium and high intensity sampling, soil correlations, and analysis of that data. Annual field reviews 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. Annual reviews of the Project Plan are to be conducted by the Ecological Site Technical Team.

Print Options