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): 150B–Gulf Coast Saline Prairies
MLRA 150B is in the West Gulf Coastal Plain Section of the Coastal Plain Province of the Atlantic Plain and entirely in Texas. It makes up about 3,420 square miles. It is characterized by nearly level to gently sloping coastal lowland plains dissected by rivers and streams that flow toward the Gulf of Mexico. Barrier islands and coastal beaches are included. The lowest parts of the area are covered by high tides, and the rest are periodically covered by storm tides. Parts of the area have been worked by wind, and the sandy areas have gently undulating to irregular topography because of low mounds or dunes. Broad, shallow flood plains are along streams flowing into the bays. Elevation generally ranges from sea level to about 10 feet, but it is as much as 25 feet on some of the dunes. Local relief is mainly less than 3 feet. The towns of Groves, Texas City, Galveston, Lake Jackson, and Freeport are in the northern half of this area. The towns of South Padre Island, Loyola Beach, Corpus Christi, and Port Lavaca are in the southern half. Interstate 37 terminates in Corpus Christi, and Interstate 45 terminates in Galveston.
Classification relationships
USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2006.
-Major Land Resource Area (MLRA) 150BEcological site concept
Tidal Flats are areas adjacent to the bay where marshes ebb and flow with water as a result of tide phases.
Associated sites
R150BY651TX Salt Flat
Slightly higher elevation and less productive.
R150BY530TX Northern Coastal Sand
Slightly higher elevation and less frequent flooding.
R150BY648TX Southern Coastal Sand
Higher elevation and less flooding.
R150BY728TX Subaqueous Grassflat
This site is permanently submersed.
R150BY550TX Northern Salt Marsh
This site is in a slightly higher position and not greatly influenced by tidal activity.
Similar sites
R150BY651TX Salt Flat
Slightly higher in elevation and much less productive.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree Not specified
Shrub (1) Forb, perennial
Herbaceous (1) Spartina alterniflora
Physiographic features
The sites are found on broad, concave linear depressions on barrier islands and/or coastal plains. More commonly, these areas are referred to as tidal areas adjacent to bays and bayous. They are permanently saturated to the surface with seawater. This site is covered by 2 to 12 inches of water by daily normal high tides. Sediments are redeposited/scoured during seasonal storm events. Slopes range from 0 to 0.5 percent with the elevation ranging from 0 to 10 feet.
Figure 2.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Landforms (1) Barrier island > Tidal flat
(2) Barrier island > Wind-tidal flat
(3) Delta plain > Tidal marsh
Runoff class Negligible to high Flooding duration Long (7 to 30 days) to very long (more than 30 days) Flooding frequency Frequent to very frequent Ponding duration Very long (more than 30 days) Ponding frequency None to occasional Elevation 0 – 10 ft Slope 0 – 1 % Ponding depth 0 – 12 in Water table depth 0 – 6 in Aspect Aspect is not a significant factor Climatic features
The climate is predominately maritime, controlled by the warm and very moist air masses from the Gulf of Mexico. The climate along the upper coast of the barrier islands is subtropical subhumid and the climate on the lower coast of Padre Island is subtropical semiarid (due to high evaporation rates that exceed precipitation). Almost constant sea breezes moderate the summer heat along the coast. Winters are generally warm and are occasionally interrupted by incursions of cool air from the north. Spring is mild and damaging wind and rain may occur during spring and summer months. Tropical cyclones or hurricanes can occur with wind speeds of greater than 74 mph and have the potential to cause flooding from torrential rainstorms. Despite the threat of tropical storms, the storms are rare. Throughout the year, the prevailing winds are from the southeast to south-southeast.
The average annual precipitation is 45 to 57 inches in the northeastern half of this area, 26 inches at the extreme southern tip of the area, and 30 to 45 inches in the rest of the area. Precipitation is abundant in spring and fall in the southwestern part of the area and is evenly distributed throughout the year in the northeastern part. Rainfall typically occurs as moderate-intensity, tropical storms that produce large amounts of rain during the winter. The average annual temperature is 68 to 74 degrees F. The freeze-free period averages 340 days and ranges from 315 to 365 days.Table 3 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (characteristic range) 260-370 days Freeze-free period (characteristic range) 370 days Precipitation total (characteristic range) 40-50 in Frost-free period (actual range) 240-370 days Freeze-free period (actual range) 280-370 days Precipitation total (actual range) 30-50 in Frost-free period (average) 310 days Freeze-free period (average) 350 days Precipitation total (average) 40 in Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 3. Monthly precipitation range
Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 4. Monthly minimum temperature range
Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 5. Monthly maximum temperature range
BarLineFigure 6. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature
Figure 7. Annual precipitation pattern
Figure 8 Annual average temperature pattern
Climate stations used
-
(1) CORPUS CHRISTI NAS [USW00012926], Corpus Christi, TX
-
(2) GALVESTON [USW00012944], Galveston, TX
-
(3) PADRE IS NS [USC00416739], Padre Island Ntl Seashor, TX
-
(4) ROCKPORT [USC00417704], Rockport, TX
-
(5) ROCKPORT ARANSAS CO AP [USW00012972], Rockport, TX
-
(6) ARANSAS WR [USC00410305], Tivoli, TX
-
(7) PORT O'CONNOR [USC00417186], Port O Connor, TX
-
(8) PALACIOS MUNI AP [USW00012935], Palacios, TX
-
(9) MATAGORDA NO 2 [USC00415659], Matagorda, TX
-
(10) FREEPORT 2 NW [USC00413340], Freeport, TX
-
(11) ANGLETON BRAZORIA AP [USW00012976], Angleton, TX
-
(12) GALVESTON SCHOLES FLD [USW00012923], Galveston, TX
">Influencing water features
These soils are permanently saturated with seawater. Most areas are inundated daily with 2 to 12 inches of water by daily high tides.
Wetland description
Somewhat poorly, poorly, and very poorly drained sites are hydric. Moderately well drained sites are non-hydric but have small areas of hydric soils. Onsite investigation needed to determine local conditions.
Soil features
The soils are very deep and very poorly drained that formed in saline loamy alluvium or eolian coastal deposits. The soils have very slow permeability, strong salinity, and strong sodicity with a neutral through moderately alkaline soil reaction. Soils exhibit halic soil properties along with a peraquic moisture regime. An organic mat of decomposing plant material can be found 1 to 8 inches thick on the surface. Soils correlated to this site include: Bayucos, Follet, Freeport, Tatlum, and Tracosa.
Table 4. Representative soil features
Parent material (1) Eolian deposits – igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary rock
(2) Alluvium – igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary rock
(3) Fluviomarine deposits – igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary rock
Surface texture (1) Clay
(2) Clay loam
(3) Fine sandy loam
Family particle size (1) Loamy
(2) Clayey
Drainage class Poorly drained to very poorly drained Permeability class Very slow Soil depth 80 in Surface fragment cover <=3" Not specified Surface fragment cover >3" Not specified Available water capacity
(0-60in)1 – 4 in Calcium carbonate equivalent
(0-60in)0 – 10 % Electrical conductivity
(0-10in)2 – 24 mmhos/cm Sodium adsorption ratio
(0-60in)20 – 65 Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-60in)6.6 – 8.4 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(10-60in)0 – 10 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(10-60in)0 – 2 % Ecological dynamics
The Texas coastline is composed of barrier islands, peninsulas, bays, estuaries, and natural or man-made passes. The process of erosion and accretion constantly reshapes these mobile environments. Hurricane activity can significantly change the environment. Tidal Flats occur adjacent to saline bays and bayous in areas subject to tidal inundation which lay between the high and the low water marks. Average water depth at high tide is between 2 and 12 inches while at low tides there is no inundation.
Smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora) dominates the reference plant community. This grass is specifically adapted because it is salt tolerant, absorbs wave energy, screens suspended solids from intertidal waters, and uptakes available nutrients from the sediment. Increaser plants in this community are inland saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), turtleweed (Batis maritima.), marshhay cordgrass (Spartina patens), maritime saltwort (Salicornia spp.), and saltmarsh bulrush (Scirpus robustus). Widgeongrass (Ruppia maritime) may occupy some of the open water adjacent to the tidal flats. If water levels decline for extend periods, glassworts, inland saltgrass, saltworts, and some sea-ox-eye (Borrichia frutescens) invade. The general cause of water level decline is subsidence, which may be natural, or more commonly, man-made.
Under heavy grazing pressure, smooth cordgrass stands will usually thin out. Although smooth cordgrass is recognized as an important forage species for livestock producers along the Central Gulf Coast, access for cattle is often a problem. Even if the ground is firm, cattle will seldom venture out unless tides are low. Cattle prefer eating smooth cordgrass following rains, which wash the salt crystals from the leaves.State and transition model
More interactive model formats are also available. View Interactive Models
Click on state and transition labels to scroll to the respective textEcosystem states
T 1A - Extreme disturbance event coupled with excessive grazing pressure R2A - Absence of disturbance, reintroduction of native species and natural regeneration over time State 1 submodel, plant communities
State 2 submodel, plant communities
State 1
ReferenceThe Reference state is considered to be representative of the range of variation under pre-Euro settlement conditions. Historically the tidal flats were subject to the erosion and accretion and tidal inundation.
Dominant plant species
-
smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora), grass
Community 1.1
CordgrassSmooth cordgrass dominates this community. Smooth cordgrass is adapted to high salinity soils with tidal inundation, wave action, and occasional burial. Average depth of water at high tide ranges from 2 to 12 inches and salinity varies from 12 to 50 parts per thousand, though rainfall may lower salinity. Subdominant grass species include marshhay cordgrass and inland saltgrass (Distichlis spicata). Salt-tolerant forbs such as glassworts and saltworts (Salicornia spp and Batis spp.) may occupy interspaces between cordgrass bunches.
This is a highly resilient community and well adapted to storm impacts. Typical recovery time from tropical storms and mild hurricanes is about a year. The site is relatively grazing tolerant due to the low palatability of mature cordgrass. Lack of grazing combined with high resiliency has resulted in many remnant reference sites. Burning is an option to remove rank vegetation, increase palatability, and diversity of plants.Figure 9. 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 6650 11875 17100 Forb 350 625 900 Shrub/Vine 0 0 0 Tree 0 0 0 Total 7000 12500 18000 Figure 10. Plant community growth curve (percent production by month). TX7751 , Midgrass Prairie Community. Open grassland plain composed of mid-grasses with seacoast bluestem and gulfdune paspalum dominate the site..
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec J F M A M J J A S O N D 0 0 5 15 20 15 10 10 15 6 4 0 Community 1.2
Hurricane ImpactedThe Hurricane-Impacted Community (1.2) is characterized by vegetation that has been burned, killed or stunted, due to storm-driven flooding and by high winds laden with coastal water. Vegetation may be buried under thick sediment deposits left by storm surges. Some areas are scoured and devoid of vegetation and may temporarily suffer complete vegetative loss.
The intensity of a hurricane plays a large role in the prevailing dominant plant community. Due to its ability to survive these impacts, large areas may be a near monoculture of cordgrass. The Hurricane-Impacted Community (1.2) can shift to the Mudflat Community (2.1) if there is repeated disturbance such as another hurricane or overgrazing, creating more plant burial and/or removal. Overall vegetative production will vary greatly in this community depending on the amount of plant survival and depth of sediment burial.Pathway 1.1A
Community 1.1 to 1.2The reference community is highly resilient however, a hurricane can drive this transition by burying vegetation under high amounts of sediment and debris.
Pathway 1.2A
Community 1.2 to 1.1Vegetation in this community may have a slow response time depending on the amount of sediment deposited. Areas that received minimal sediment disposition will recover to reference conditions (1.1) in 1 to 3 years. However, an area that received large amounts of sediment will have a slower recovery. The driver for this transition is proper management and time.
State 2
MudflatThis state is the result of severe disturbance and is characterized by sparse vegetation and extensive bare ground.
Community 2.1
MudflatAt its most extreme, The Mudflat Community (2.1) is devoid of vegetation. Although in most cases, some remnant plants occupy the site. The number and composition of these remnant plants depend on the cause of degradation, duration, and degree of flooding, salinity, or burial. These plants are frequently early successional species (pioneer species) adapted to disturbed areas.
The Mudflat Community (2.1) often occurs in a shifting mosaic among all communities in all the states. It can also occur in large areas if the vegetation community is removed through mechanical or chemical treatment. It can be found along waterways where ship wakes create continual disturbance.
Cordgrass reproduces vegetatively. The rate of recovery to the Cordgrass State (1) will be determined by the density and vigor of remnant plants. If revegetating from adjacent sites, the size of the mudflat determines how long it will take to revegetate the entire mudflat. If the mudflat is isolated from vegetated areas, it will be difficult to return to the Cordgrass Community (1.1) due to the dependence of cordgrass on vegetative reproduction.
Reseeding is generally not feasible due to lack of a seed source and difficulty of seedling establishment. Planting of vegetative materials can assist in accelerating the recovery process but may not be feasible over large areas. Rest from further disturbance may be the only reasonable approach to recovery, but this may require several years or decades and be determined by weather instead of management.Transition T 1A
State 1 to 2Excessive disturbance of the Cordgrass Community (1.1) or Hurricane-Impacted Community (1.2) will shift to the Mudflat Community (2.1). Mechanical disturbance or improper grazing management that removes the existing protective vegetation can cause severe soil erosion and/or deposition.
Restoration pathway R2A
State 2 to 1With time and protection from disturbance, the Mudflat Community (2.1) can recover and return to the Hurricane-Impacted Community (1.2) and eventually the Cordgrass Community (1.1). Remnant cordgrass plants are necessary for this restoration pathway to occur. The drivers for this restoration pathway are time between disturbances and proper grazing management.
Additional community tables
Table 6. Community 1.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Grass/Grasslike1 Grasses 6300–16200 smooth cordgrass SPAL Spartina alterniflora 6300–16200 – saltmeadow cordgrass SPPA Spartina patens 500–4000 – saltgrass DISP Distichlis spicata 500–4000 – seashore paspalum PAVA Paspalum vaginatum 500–3000 – 2 Rushes 350–900 needlegrass rush JURO Juncus roemerianus 100–500 – California bulrush SCCA11 Schoenoplectus californicus 100–500 – Forb3 Forbs 350–900 Virginia glasswort SADE10 Salicornia depressa 350–900 – perennial saltmarsh aster SYTE6 Symphyotrichum tenuifolium 50–500 – dwarf saltwort SABI Salicornia bigelovii 50–500 – Table 7. Community 1.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 8. Community 2.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Interpretations
Animal community
The animal communities of the Coastal Prairie communities are influenced by fresh and salt water inundations. Cattle and many species of wildlife make extensive use of the site. White-tailed deer may be found scattered across the prairie and are found in heavier concentrations where woody cover exists. Feral hogs are present and at times become abundant. Coyotes are abundant and fill the mammalian predator niche. Rodent populations rise during drier periods and fall during periods of inundation. Alligators are locally abundant and make frequent use of the marshes depending on salt concentrations in the marshes.
The region is a major flyway for waterfowl and migrating birds. Hundreds of thousands of ducks, geese, and sandhill cranes abound during winter. Whooping cranes are an important endangered species that occur in the area, especially near Aransas National Wildlife Refuge. Northern harriers are common predatory birds seen patrolling marshes. Curlews, plovers, sandpipers, and willets are shorebirds that make use of the tidal areas. Seagulls and terns are plentiful throughout the year trolling the shores as well. Further inland, rails, gallinules, and moorhens make use of the brackish marshes.Hydrological functions
Infiltration into the soils of this site is slow due to the high water table. However, because of the level terrain and proximity to the Gulf of Mexico, this site may be inundated periodically. Runoff and erosion from water are seldom a problem in the Cordgrass Community (1.1). In the Hurricane-Impacted (1.2) and Mudflat Communities (2.1) hydrology functions differently due to the increased runoff, especially shortly after the hurricane. The site has sparse vegetation and the soil is loose due to recent disturbance. Therefore, short rills caused by flowing water may form.
Recreational uses
Bird watching is common as the site occurs along a popular migratory path for birds.
Supporting information
Inventory data references
Information presented was derived from the Range Site Description, NRCS clipping data, literature, field observations, and personal contacts with range-trained personnel.
Other references
Archer, S. 1994. Woody plant encroachment into southwestern grasslands and savannas: rates, patterns and proximate causes. Ecological implications of livestock herbivory in the West, 13-68.
Archer, S. and F. E. Smeins. 1991. Ecosystem-level processes. Grazing Management: An Ecological Perspective. Edited by R.K. Heischmidt and J.W. Stuth. Timber Press, Portland, OR.
Bailey, V. 1905. North American Fauna No. 25: Biological Survey of Texas. United States Department of Agriculture Biological Survey. Government Printing Office, Washington D. C.
Beasom, S. L, G. Proudfoot, and J. Mays. 1994. Characteristics of a live oak-dominated area on the eastern South Texas Sand Plain. In the Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute Annual Report, 1-2.
Bestelmeyer, B. T., J. R. Brown, K. M. Havstad, R. Alexander, G. Chavez, and J. E. Herrick. 2003. Development and use of state-and-transition models for rangelands. Journal of Range Management, 56(2):114-126.
Briske, B. B, B. T. Bestelmeyer, T. K. Stringham, and P. L. Shaver. 2008. Recommendations for development of resilience-based State-and-Transition Models. Rangeland Ecology and Management, 61:359-367.
Brown, J. R. and S. Archer. 1999. Shrub invasion of grassland: recruitment is continuous and not regulated by herbaceous biomass or density. Ecology, 80(7):2385-2396.
Butzler, R. E. 2006. The Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Lycium carolinianum Walt. M. S. Thesis. Texas A&M, College Station, TX.
Chabreck, R. H. 1972. Vegetation, water and soil characteristics of the Louisiana coastal region. Louisiana State University Agriculture Experiment Station Bulletin, 664.
Davis, W. B. 1974. The Mammals of Texas. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department Bulletin, 41.
Drawe, D. L., A. D. Chamrad, and T. W. Box. 1978. Plant communities of the Welder Wildlife Refuge. The Welder Wildlife Refuge, Sinton, TX.
Drawe, D. L., K. R. Kattner, W. H. McFarland, and D. D. Neher. 1981. Vegetation and soil properties of five habitat types on north Padre Island. Texas Journal of Science, 33:145-157.
Everitt, J. H., D. L. Drawe, and R. I. Leonard. 2002. Trees, Shrubs, and Cacti of South Texas. Texas Tech University Press, Lubbock, TX.
Foster, J. H. 1917. Pre-settlement fire frequency regions of the United States: A first approximation. Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference Proceedings, 20.
Frost, C. C. 1995. Presettlement fire regimes in southeastern marshes, peatlands, and swamps. Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference Proceedings, 19:39-60.
Fulbright, T. E., D. D. Diamond, J. Rappole, and J. Norwine. 1990. The Coastal Sand Plain of Southern Texas. Rangelands, 12:337-340.
Fulbright, T. E., J. A. Ortega-Santos, A. Lozano-Cavazos, and L. E. Ramirez-Yanez. 2006. Establishing vegetation on migrating inland sand dunes in Texas. Rangeland Ecology and Management, 59:549-556.
Gosselink, J.D., C.L. Cordes, and J.W. Parsons. 1979. An. Ecological characterization study of the Chenier Plain Coastal Ecosystem of Louisiana and Texas. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Washington, D.C.
Gould, F. W. 1975. The Grasses of Texas. Texas A&M University Press, College Station, TX.
Gould, F. W. and T. W. Box. 1965. Grasses of the Texas Coastal Bend. Texas A&M University Press, College Station, TX.
Grace, J. B., L. K. Allain, H. Q. Baldwin, A. G. Billock, W. R. Eddleman, A. M. Given, C. W. Jeske, and R. Moss. 2005. Effects of prescribed fire in the coastal prairies of Texas. USGS Open File Report, 2005-1287.
Hamilton, W. and D. Ueckert. 2005. Rangeland woody plant control: Past, present, and future. Brush management: Past, present, and future, 3-16.
Harcombe, P. A. and J. E. Neaville. 1997. Vegetation types of Chambers County, Texas. The Texas Journal of Science, 29:209-234.
Hatch, S. L., J. L. Schuster, and D. L. Drawe. 1999. Grasses of the Texas Gulf Prairies and Marshes. Texas A&M University Press, College Station, TX.
Johnson, M. C. 1963. Past and present grasslands of southern Texas and northeastern Mexico. Ecology 44(3):456-466.
Lehman, V. W. 1965. Fire in the range of Attwater’s prairie chicken. Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference Proceedings, 4:127-143.
Mann, C. 2004. 1491: New Revelations of the Americas before Columbus. Vintage Books, New York City, NY.
Mapston, M. E. 2007. Feral Hogs in Texas. Texas Agrilife Extension Bulletin, B-6149
McAtee, J. W., C. J. Scifres, D. L. and Drawe. 1979. Digestible energy and protein content of gulf cordgrass following burning or shredding. Journal of Range Management, 376-378.
McGowen, J. H., L. F. Brown, T. J. Evans, W. L. Fisher, and C. G. Groat. 1976. Environmental geologic atlas of the Texas Coastal Zone-Bay City-Freeport area. The University of Texas at Austin, Bureau of Economic Geology, Austin, TX.
Miller, D. L., F. E Smeins, and J. W. Webb. 1998. Response of a Texas Distichlis spicata coastal marsh following Lesser Snow Goose herbivory. Aquatic Botany, 61:301-307.
Miller, D. L., F. E. Smeins, and J. W. Webb. 1996. Mid-Texas coastal marsh change (1939-1991) as influenced by Lesser Snow Goose herbivory. Journal of Coastal Research, 12:462-476.
Miller, D. L., F. E. Smeins, J. W. Webb, and M. T. Longnecker. 1997. Regeneration of Scirpus americanus in a Texas coastal marsh following Lesser Snow Goose herbivory. Wetlands, 17:31-42.
Oefinger, R. D. and C. J. Scifres. 1977. Gulf cordgrass production, utilization, and nutritional value following burning. Texas Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin, B-1176.
Palmer, G. R., T. E. Fulbright, and G. McBryde. 1995. Inland sand dune reclamation on the Coastal Sand Plain of Southern Texas. Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute Annual Report, 1994-1995.
Prichard, D. 1998. Riparian area management: A user guide to assessing proper functioning condition and the supporting science for lotic areas. Bureau of Land Management, Denver, CO.
Rappole, J. H. and G. W. Blacklock. 1985. Birds of the Texas Coastal Bend: Abundance and distribution. Texas A&M University Press, College Station, TX.
Scifres, C. J. and W. T. Hamilton. 1993. Prescribed burning for brushland management: The South Texas example. Texas A&M Press, College Station, TX.
Scifres, C. J., J. W. McAtee, and D. L. Drawe 1980. Botanical, edaphic, and water relationships of gulf cordgrass (Spartina spartinae [Trin.] Hitchc.) and associated communities. The Southwestern Naturalist, 25(3):397-409.
Shiflet, T. N. 1963. Major ecological factors controlling plant communities in Louisiana marshes. Journal of Range Management, 16:231-235.
Singleton, J. R. 1951. Production and utilization of waterfowl food plants on the east Texas gulf coast. Journal of Wildlife Management, 15:46-56.
Smeins, F. E., D. D. Diamond, and W. Hanselka. 1991. Coastal prairie, 269-290. Ecosystems of the World: Natural Grasslands. Edited by R. T. Coupland. Elsevier Press, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Smeins, F. E., S. Fuhlendorf, and C. Taylor, Jr. 1997. Environmental and land use changes: A long term perspective. Juniper Symposium, 1-21.
Snyder, R. A. and C. L. Boss. 2002. Recovery and stability in barrier island plant communities. Journal of Coastal Research, 18:530-536.
Stoddart, L. A., A. D. Smith, and T. W. Box. 1975. Range management. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, NY.
Stringham, T. K., W. C. Krueger, and P. L. Shaver. 2001. State and transition modeling: An ecological process approach. Journal of Range Management, 56(2):106-113.
Thornthwaite, C. W. 1948. An approach towards a rational classification of climate. Geographical Review, 38: 55-94.
Thurow, T. L. 1991. Hydrology and erosion. Grazing Management: An Ecological Perspective. Edited by R.K. Heitschmidt and J.W. Stuth. Timber Press, Portland, OR.
Urbatsch, L. 2000. Chinese tallow tree Triadica sebifera (L.) Small. USDA-NRCS, National Plant Center, Baton Rouge, LA.
Van’t Hul, J. T., R. S. Lutz, and N. E. Mathews. 1997. Impact of prescribed burning on vegetation and bird abundance on Matagorda Island, Texas. Journal of Range Management, 50:346-360.
Vines, R. A. 1977. Trees of Eastern Texas. University of Texas Press, Austin, TX.
Vines, R. A. 1984. Trees of Central Texas. University of Texas Press, Austin, TX.
Wade, D. D., B. L. Brock, P. H. Brose, J. B. Grace, G. A. Hoch, and W. A. Patterson III. 2000. Fire in Eastern ecosystems. Wildland fire in ecosystems: effects of fire on flora. Edited by. J. K. Brown and J. Kaplers. United States Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Ogden, UT.
Warren, W. S. 1998. The La Salle Expedition to Texas: The journal of Henry Joutel, 1684-1687. Edited by W. C. Foster. Texas State Historical Association, Austin, TX.
Weaver, J. E. and F. E. Clements. 1938. Plant ecology. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Williams, A. M., R. A. Feagin, W.K. Smith, and N. L. Jackson. 2009. Ecosystem impacts of Hurricane Ike on Galveston Island and Bolivar Peninsula: Perspectives of the coastal barrier island network (CBIN). Shore and Beach, 7(2):1-5.
Williams, L. R. and G. N Cameron. 1985. Effects of removal of pocket gophers on a Texas coastal prairie. The American Midland Naturalist Journal, 115:216-224.
Wright, H.A. and A.W. Bailey. 1982. Fire Ecology: United States and Southern Canada. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ.Contributors
Jack Alexander, Synergy Resource Solutions, Inc., Belgrade, MT
Dr. Fred Smeins, Texas A&M University, College Station, TXApproval
Bryan Christensen, 9/22/2023
Acknowledgments
Technical Reviewers and Contributors: Shanna Dunn, RSS, NRCS, Corpus Christi, TX Jason Hohlt, RMS, NRCS, Kingsville, TX Mark Moseley, RMS, NRCS, Boerne, TX Tim Reinke, RMS, NRCS, Victoria, TX Mike Stellbauer, RMS, NRCS, Bryan, TX 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.
Rangeland health reference sheet
Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health is a qualitative assessment protocol used to determine ecosystem condition based on benchmark characteristics described in the Reference Sheet. A suite of 17 (or more) indicators are typically considered in an assessment. The ecological site(s) representative of an assessment location must be known prior to applying the protocol and must be verified based on soils and climate. Current plant community cannot be used to identify the ecological site.
Author(s)/participant(s) Mike Stellbauer, Zone RMS, NRCS, Bryan, TX Contact for lead author 979-846-4814 Date 04/24/2009 Approved by Approval date Composition (Indicators 10 and 12) based on Annual Production Indicators
-
Number and extent of rills:
None. -
Presence of water flow patterns:
They are permanently saturated to the surface with seawater. These soils are covered by 2 to 12 inches of water by daily high tides. Water is 1 to 2 inches deep on the surface, even during low tides. -
Number and height of erosional pedestals or terracettes:
None. -
Bare ground from Ecological Site Description or other studies (rock, litter, lichen, moss, plant canopy are not bare ground):
Less than 20 percent bare ground randomly distributed throughout, although it is constantly fluctuating due to tidal waves and storms. -
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):
High amounts of litter are expected to be removed based upon the storm intensity. -
Soil surface (top few mm) resistance to erosion (stability values are averages - most sites will show a range of values):
Stability class ranges 4 to 6 at surface. Soil surface is resistant to erosion. -
Soil surface structure and SOM content (include type of structure and A-horizon color and thickness):
0 to 4 inches; gray (10YR 5/1) clay loam, massive; flows easily between fingers and leaves small residue in hand when squeezed; slightly sticky; common fine and medium roots; strongly saline; slightly alkaline; clear smooth boundary. SOM is 1 to 2%. -
Effect of community phase composition (relative proportion of different functional groups) and spatial distribution on infiltration and runoff:
Native vegetation is dominated by smooth cordgrass. Other plants include saltwort and glasswort species. If the site has adequate litter and little bare ground, it will provide maximum infiltration and little runoff under normal rainfall events. -
Presence and thickness of compaction layer (usually none; describe soil profile features which may be mistaken for compaction on this site):
None. -
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:
Warm-season tallgrasses >>Sub-dominant:
Other:
Warm-season midgrasses > Forbs Shrubs annual grassesAdditional:
-
Amount of plant mortality and decadence (include which functional groups are expected to show mortality or decadence):
Grasses, due to their growth habit, will exhibit some mortality and decadence, though very slight. -
Average percent litter cover (%) and depth ( in):
Litter is primarily herbaceous. -
Expected annual annual-production (this is TOTAL above-ground annual-production, not just forage annual-production):
7,000 to 18,000 pounds per acre. -
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:
Salt cedar and huisache. -
Perennial plant reproductive capability:
All species should be capable of reproducing except for periods of prolonged drought conditions, heavy natural herbivory, and intense wildfires.
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
