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): 152B–Western Gulf Coast Flatwoods
Major Land Resource Area (MLRA) 152B, Western Gulf Coast Flatwoods, is in eastern Texas and western Louisiana. Locally termed the Flatwoods, the area is dominated by coniferous forest covering 5,681 square miles (14,714 square kilometers). The region is a hugely diverse transition zone between the northern and eastern mixed forests and southern and western coastal prairies and grasslands.
Classification relationships
Major Land Resource Area (MLRA) (USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2006)
Ecological site concept
The Sandy Terrace ecological site has deep sandy soils greater than 80 inches (203 centimeters) with little horizon development. The upland landscape, coupled with properties associated with the depth of the sand, forms its unique plant community.
Associated sites
F152BY008TX Acid Baygall
Soils have a spodic horizon and are extremely acid. Sites are not open and have dense thickets of large gallberry.
F152BY010TX Terrace
Soils have an increase in clay causing more water availability to plants. Sites have higher plant productivity potentials.
Similar sites
F152BY010TX Terrace
Soils have an increase in clay, causing more water availability to plants. Sites have higher plant productivity potentials.
F152BY012TX Well Drained Bottomland
Soils are on a lower landscape position and flood frequently.
F152BY006TX Well Drained Loamy Upland
Soils have an increase in clay, causing more water availability to plants. Sites have higher plant productivity potentials, typically with higher canopy covers, higher basal areas, and more robust herbaceous plant communities.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree (1) Pinus palustris
(2) Quercus incanaShrub Not specified
Herbaceous (1) Schizachyrium scoparium
(2) Cnidoscolus texanusPhysiographic features
The ecological site includes areas on nearly level to gently sloping soils on terraces and uplands. Slopes range from 0 to 5 percent. Elevation ranges from 25 to 151 feet. The topography of the area includes terraces.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Landforms (1) Coastal plain > Terrace
Runoff class Negligible Flooding frequency None Ponding frequency None Elevation 25 – 151 ft Slope 0 – 5 % Aspect Aspect is not a significant factor Climatic features
The Western Gulf Coast Flatwoods (MLRA 152B) is within the humid subtropical climate zone. The region boasts one of the highest rainfall averages in the southern United States, over 60 inches (152 centimeters) annually. This is due to the gulf currents that carry humid air to the region, where it condenses and precipitates. Rainfall averages are fairly consistent month by month, ranging from the lowest of 3.5 inches (8.9 centimeters) in March and the highest of 5.6 inches (14.3 centimeters) in June.
The area is prone to severe thunderstorms and tornadoes when the proper conditions exist, generally in the springtime. Sometimes excessive rainfall occurs, leading to flooding. Hurricanes also strike the region, generally in late summer or early fall. These extreme weather events can be quite destructive, toppling trees, and serves to naturally reset the vegetation to primary succession. The higher humidity of the region amplifies the feeling of heat during the summer. Prolonged droughts and snowfall events are rare.Table 3 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (average) 250 days Freeze-free period (average) 290 days Precipitation total (average) 60 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) CLEVELAND [USC00411810], Cleveland, TX
-
(2) LIBERTY [USC00415196], Liberty, TX
-
(3) LUMBERTON [USC00415435], Silsbee, TX
-
(4) TOWN BLUFF DAM [USC00419101], Jasper, TX
-
(5) DE QUINCY [USC00162361], Dequincy, LA
-
(6) ELIZABETH [USC00162800], Oakdale, LA
-
(7) WILDWOOD [USC00419754], Kountze, TX
-
(8) OBERLIN FIRE TWR [USC00166938], Oberlin, LA
-
(9) ORANGE 9 N [USC00416680], Orange, TX
-
(10) DE RIDDER [USC00162367], Deridder, LA
">Influencing water features
The soils are comprised of deep sands and are very permeable. Water drains through quickly and therefore does not have an influence on the site. Rather, lack of water is the most influential.
Wetland description
The soils associated with this site are non-hydric. Some sites have small areas that are hydric. These areas are typically in depressions or low lying flats that remain wet for long periods. Onsite investigation is needed to make an accurate determination on the local conditions.
Soil features
The soils of this site are deep and characterized by sands throughout the entire soil profile, measured to 80 inches (203 centimeters). The soils show little soil development indicative of the entisols soil order. These soils have a thin surface horizon that has the most organic carbon. The subsequent subsoil layers have little organic carbon and are mostly distinguished by color changes. Sand content is generally greater than 90 percent unweatherable minerals; clay and silt content ranges from 5 to 10 percent. The Turkey series is a representative soil and consists of very deep, somewhat excessively drained, moderately rapid permeable soils that formed in sandy deposits from the Deweyville Formation. The series is classified as a Thermic, coated Typic Quartzipsamment. Other soils are included within the ecological site and all are defined by deep sands throughout all horizons. Besides the Turkey series, the Alaga series and the McNeely series are included in the Sandy Terrace ecological site.
Table 4. Representative soil features
Parent material (1) Alluvium – igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary rock
Surface texture (1) Fine sand
Family particle size (1) Sandy
Drainage class Somewhat excessively drained Permeability class Moderately rapid to rapid Soil depth 80 in Surface fragment cover <=3" Not specified Surface fragment cover >3" Not specified Available water capacity
(0-60in)2 – 4 in Calcium carbonate equivalent
(0-60in)Not specified Electrical conductivity
(0-60in)0 – 1 mmhos/cm Sodium adsorption ratio
(0-60in)0 – 2 Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-60in)3.5 – 5 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(Depth not specified)Not specified Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(Depth not specified)Not specified Ecological dynamics
The information in this ecological site description (ESD), including the state-and-transition model (STM), was developed using archeological and historical data, professional experience, and scientific studies. The information is representative of a complex set of plant communities. Not all scenarios or plants are included. Key indicator plants, animals, and ecological processes are described to inform land management decisions.
Introduction – In southeastern Texas and southwestern Louisiana the transition from coastal grasslands to the large expanse of coniferous forest has been deemed the “Flatwoods”. As the name suggests, the region is relatively flat and, with many transitional areas, highly diverse in flora and fauna. Historically, the area was covered by pines with mixed hardwoods, sparse shrubs, and a diverse understory of grasses and forbs. Fire and drainage patterns play a significant role in shaping the plant communities and their development. Fire suppression, drainage alterations, and land conversion have reduced the amount of historical communities in existence today.
Background – Prior to settlement by the Europeans, the reference state for the Sandy Terraces were Longleaf Pine/Bluejack Oak Woodlands. Remnants of this presumed historic plant community still exist where natural conditions are intact. Evidence of the reference state is found in accounts of early historic explorers to the area, historic forest and biological survey teams, as well as recent ecological studies in the last 30 years. The age of this woodland community varies, and has a diverse flora.
Settlement Management – As human settlement increased throughout the area, so did the increase in logging and grazing by domestic livestock. The logging became so extensive that by the 1930’s most of the region had been cut-over. Replanting trees to historic communities was not common and early foresters began planting loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) for its quick growth. As more people colonized they began suppressing fire, which allowed dense thickets of shrubs to replace the herbaceous understory.
Current Management and State – Today much of the historic forest is gone, replaced by pine plantations, crops, and pastures. The areas that were not converted have been fire-suppressed so long that loblolly pine and fire intolerant hardwoods populate the overstory structure. Currently, federally-managed properties are the best place to view the remnant sites (National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, etc.). Some private individuals have begun restoring communities through selective tree planting and retention of communities that remain. Other restoration efforts include mimicking natural-disturbance regimes through gap-phase regeneration on plantation sites.
Fire Regimes – Fire was a natural and important disturbance throughout the region. Fire occurred naturally from lightning strikes, by Native Americans for game movement, and eventually early European settlers. Fires throughout the Flatwoods occurred at two different times. Early in the year, they would occur during late winter and early spring, removing senescent vegetation, recycling nutrients and minerals, and spurring new plant growth. Late summer and early fall fires occurred as well, but with a different community effect. Summer fires burned hotter and with more intensity, greatly suppressing the shrub canopy layer. The summer fires also shifted the ecological site transitional state by decreasing grass densities and increasing forb densities. The topography, fuel loads, and other conditions caused patchy burns throughout the region resulting in mosaic patterns of plant communities and a heterogeneous landscape.
Disturbance Regimes – Extreme weather events occur occasionally throughout the region. Tornados uproot trees and open canopies in the spring months. In the late summer and early fall, hurricanes or tropical depressions can make landfall, dumping excessive amounts of rain and toppling trees with high winds. Another cause of large canopy openings is the effects of the southern pine beetle (Dendroctonus frontalis). Starting in the late 1950’s, beetle outbreaks have occurred every 6 to 9 years (although a major attack has not occurred in some time); usually when the trees are stressed due to multiple environmental factors.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
T1A - Absence of disturbance, coupled with natural regeneration over time T1B - Merchantable timber is harvested by clearcut and site is planted to a monoculture of pine trees T1C - Removal of native vegetation and introduction of improved forage species or annual crops R2A - Reduction of overstory canopy using fire and selective thinning T2A - Merchantable timber is harvested by clearcut and site is planted to a monoculture of pine trees T2B - Merchantable timber harvested by clearcut, followed by planting of improved forage species or annual crops R3A - Selective harvest combined with reintroduction of natural disturbances and native species T3A - Lack of natural/anthropogenic disturbance and natural regeneration over time T3B - Timber harvest by clearcut, followed by planting improved forage species or annual crops T4A - Lack of natural/anthropogenic disturbance and natural regeneration over time T4B - Site is planted to a monoculture of pine trees State 1 submodel, plant communities
State 2 submodel, plant communities
State 3 submodel, plant communities
State 4 submodel, plant communities
State 1
ReferenceThe Sandy Terrace ecological site is a Longleaf Pine/Bluejack Oak Woodland. The deep sandy soils greatly reduce the water-holding capacity of the site. Nutrients accumulate better in soils with higher clay content in their profile, so the Sandy Terraces are usually nutrient deficient. This creates a droughtier environment than the surrounding uplands, decreasing the amount of biomass produced and increasing the amount of bare ground. The amounts of fine-fuel litter accumulation allow fires to burn frequently (3 to 5 years). All of these factors contribute to the openness of the site, generally 50 to 70 percent canopy cover. In parallel, sites typically have basal areas of 75 to 95 square feet per acre.
Dominant plant species
-
bluejack oak (Quercus incana), tree
-
longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), tree
Community 1.1
Longleaf Pine/Bluejack Oak Woodland
The overstory canopy is dominated by longleaf pine with bluejack oak intermingled. An occasional post oak (Quercus stellata) or blackjack oak (Quercus marilandica) may be seen, but not in abundance. The ecological site is dotted with patches of bare ground and some litter accumulation, depending on the amount of time since the last fire. Like longleaf pines, species that can withstand dry, sandy, nutrient-lacking environments, occupy the area. Little bluestem (Schizachrium scoparium), threeawns (Aristada sp.), and rosette grasses (Dichanthelium sp.) are common throughout the ecological site. Other species include Louisiana yucca (Yucca louisianensis), Texas bullnettle (Cnidoscolus texanus), and noseburns (Tragia sp.).
State 2
EncroachedA long-term lack of fire and management has caused the community to cross a threshold, resulting in an Encroached State (2). The crossing of this threshold represents a closure in the overstory canopy, which limits the productivity of the ground layer. The limited ground layer does not provide enough fuel to harbor a burn with the intensity found in State 1. Fire-intolerant hardwoods have become part of the overstory. The overstory trees are overstocked and limit the growth of neighboring species. The overstocking reduces tree growth and causes stress, making them vulnerable to attacks from insects and/or diseases. Longleaf recruitment may be nonexistent due to lack of light and bare ground. Loblolly pine will especially take advantage of the current conditions. The plant communities will stay in this constant state and continue to age without disturbance or intervention.
Community 2.1
Pine/Hardwood Forest
The understory plant layer only contains remnants of the reference community and possibly no reference community indicator species. Shade-tolerant grasses, such as longleaf woodoats (Chasmanthium sessiliflorum), forbs, and greenbriers (Smilax sp.) may be the only ground-layer species. Added litter accumulation lessens the impact of the droughty soil at the surface. As more litter occurs, water retention is slightly higher. This helps in the establishment of species not adapted to the naturally droughty soils, further changing the makeup of the plant communities. Because the site lacks the diversity of the reference state, the wildlife diversity will be limited to generalist species, species requiring a closed canopy, and those seeking refuge.
State 3
PlantationThe Plantation State is a result of conversion activities. The landowner has maximized silviculture production by planting a monoculture of pine species, usually loblolly pine, but sometimes slash pine (Pinus ellioti) is planted.
Community 3.1
Pine PlantationIn the immediate years following the initial plantation tree planting, the understory community will resemble the reference state (State 1). During this early growth period, the landowner will typically remove unwanted hardwoods and herbaceous plants to reduce competition with the planted pine trees. As the overstory canopy closes, less understory management is required due to sunlight restrictions to the ground layer.
State 4
ConvertedThe Converted state is a result of pasture planting or cropping activities. The landowner has maximized agriculture production by planting a monoculture of introduced grass species or agricultural row crops.
Community 4.1
Planted Pasture and Row CropTypical introduced pasture grass species include bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum) and different varieties of bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon). The grasses are grown for livestock production through direct grazing or baling hay for later use. Agricultural row crops are grown for food and fiber production. Many farmers use herbicides to reduce unwanted plant competition which yields a plant community unrepresentative of the reference (State 1) or subsequent vegetative states.
Transition T1A
State 1 to 2The transition from a State 1 to the Encroached (State 2) is a result of time and long periods (greater than 10 years) of no fire and/or forest management practices. Without fire to suppress tree seedlings, biomass and diversity are lost from the grass and forb layers of the system.
Transition T1B
State 1 to 3The transition is due to the land manager maximizing silviculture potential. Merchantable timber is harvested by clearcut. Then, the site is prepared and planted to a monoculture of pine trees.
Transition T1C
State 1 to 4The transition is due to the land manager maximizing agricultural production. Merchantable timber is harvested by clearcut. Then, the site is prepared and planted to either an improved grass or row crops.
Restoration pathway R2A
State 2 to 1Restoration of this community to the reference state begins with a selective timber harvest. Removing unwanted trees opens up the canopy, allowing sunlight penetration to the ground. Years of overstory growth have limited the fuel necessary to have an effective fire. Time will be needed to encourage understory growth. Once the herbaceous layer has established, more frequent than natural burns (1 to 2 years) may be required to suppress the woody vegetation.
Transition T2A
State 2 to 3The transition is due to the land manager maximizing silviculture potential. Merchantable timber is harvested by clearcut. Then, the site is prepared and planted to a monoculture of pine trees.
Transition T2B
State 2 to 4The transition is due to the land manager maximizing agricultural potential. Merchantable timber is harvested by clearcut. Then, the site is prepared and planted to either an improved grass or row crops.
Restoration pathway R3A
State 3 to 1When restoring a plantation, the land manager can either clearcut the timber, prepare the site, and plant trees. Otherwise, gap-phase regeneration is possible through selective timber harvests. This involves replanting the desired overstory species in small openings within the current structure of the woodland. The benefit is a slow progression of restoration instead of starting from primary succession.
Transition T3A
State 3 to 2This community transition is caused by neglecting the plantation understory. Without fire, mowing, or herbicides, unwanted understory saplings can begin to grow into the overstory.
Transition T3B
State 3 to 4The transition is due to the land manager maximizing agricultural production. Merchantable timber is harvested by clearcut. Then, the site is prepared and planted to either an improved grass or row crops.
Transition T4A
State 4 to 2This community transition is caused by neglecting crop or pasture. Without continuation of agricultural management, first-successional herbaceous plants will occupy the ground layer, followed by shrubs, and eventually shade-loving, fire-intolerant overstory species.
Transition T4B
State 4 to 3The transition is due to the land manager maximizing silviculture production. The site prepared and planted to a monoculture of pine trees.
Additional community tables
Table 5. Community 1.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 6. Community 1.1 forest overstory composition
Common name Symbol Scientific name Nativity Height ft Canopy cover (%) Diameter in Basal area (square ft/acre) Treelongleaf pine PIPA2 Pinus palustris Native – – – 0 bluejack oak QUIN Quercus incana Native – – – 0 blackjack oak QUMA3 Quercus marilandica Native – – – 0 post oak QUST Quercus stellata Native – – – 0 Table 7. Community 1.1 forest understory composition
Common name Symbol Scientific name Nativity Height (ft) Canopy cover (%) Grass/grass-like (Graminoids)little bluestem SCSC Schizachyrium scoparium Native – – silver bluestem BOSA Bothriochloa saccharoides Native – – threeawn ARIST Aristida Native – – lovegrass ERAGR Eragrostis Native – – rosette grass DICHA2 Dichanthelium Native – – Forb/Herbnoseburn TRAGI Tragia Native – – Texas bullnettle CNTE Cnidoscolus texanus Native – – soft greeneyes BEPU2 Berlandiera pumila Native – – hairy bedstraw GAPI2 Galium pilosum Native – – queen's-delight STSY Stillingia sylvatica Native – – Fern/fern allywestern brackenfern PTAQ Pteridium aquilinum Native – – Shrub/Subshrubfarkleberry VAAR Vaccinium arboreum Native – – feltleaf willow SAAL Salix alaxensis Native – – Gulf Coast yucca YULO Yucca louisianensis Native – – Treelongleaf pine PIPA2 Pinus palustris Native – – bluejack oak QUIN Quercus incana Native – – blackjack oak QUMA3 Quercus marilandica Native – – post oak QUST Quercus stellata Native – – Vine/Lianacat greenbrier SMGL Smilax glauca Native – – southern dewberry RUTR Rubus trivialis Native – – Table 8. Community 2.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 9. Community 3.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 10. Community 4.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Interpretations
Wood products
These soils occur in the Woodland Suitability Group 3s3. These sandy soils are on uplands and have a moderate potential for pine management. The 50-year site index for loblolly pine averages 85 feet (57 feet on a 25-year curve) but ranges from 80 feet to 95 feet, depending on slope position. The yield from a natural, unmanaged stand of loblolly pine, over a 50-year period, is approximately 280 board feet (Doyle Rule), 2.24 tons, or 80 cubic feet per acre per year. Management can substantially increase this yield. Because these soils are loose when dry, access and equipment operability is poor during such periods when rutting is possible. They are well suited for access and equipment operability during wet periods. These soils are also well suited for roads and log landings but can have erosion problems as slopes increase. Adequate water control devices for roads, such as wing ditches and water bars, should be installed on the steeper slopes. Seedling mortality may be slight to moderate. Proper planting depth and compaction will be important. Herbaceous weed control may be needed. Attention should be given to the possible leaching of fertilizers and of chemicals when herbicides are used for site preparation. Choose appropriate chemicals and application methods to prevent the possible contamination of ground water.
Supporting information
Inventory data references
This site description was developed as part of the provisional ecological site initiative using historic soil survey manuscripts, available range site descriptions, and low intensity field sampling.
Type locality
Location 1: Hardin County, TX UTM zone N UTM northing 30.349484 UTM easting -94.236016 General legal description Roy E. Larsen Sandylands Sanctuary Other references
Ajilvsgi, G. 2003. Wildflowers of Texas. Revised edition. Shearer Publishing, Fredericksburg, TX.
Ajilvsgi, G. 1979. Wildflowers of the Big Thicket. Texas A&M University Press, College Station, TX.
Allen, J. A., B. D. Keeland, J. A. Stanturf, and A. F. Kennedy Jr. 2001. A guide to bottomland hardwood restoration. Technical report, USGS/BRD/ITR-2000-0011.
Bray, W. L. 1904. Forest resources of Texas. Bureau of Forestry Bulletin 47, Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
Diggs, G. M., B. L. Lipscomb, M. D. Reed, and R. J. O’Kennon. 2006. Illustrated flora of East Texas. Second edition. Botanical Research Institute of Texas & Austin College, Fort Worth, TX.
Jones, S. D., J. K. Wipff, and P. M. Montgomery. 1997. Vascular plants of Texas: a comprehensive checklist including synonymy, bibliography, and index. University of Texas Press, Austin.
Liu, C., P. A. Harcombe, and I. S. Elsik. 1990. Fire study report, including Roy E. Larsen Preserve species list. Summer 1990. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Rice University, Houston, TX.
Marks, P. L., and P. A. Harcombe. 1981. Forest Vegetation of the Big Thicket, southeast Texas. Ecological Monographs 51:287-305.
Matos, J. A. 1985. Roy E. Larsen Sandylands Sanctuary vascular plant species list. Master thesis, Stephen F. Austin University, Nacogdoches, TX.
NatureServe. 2002. International classification of ecological communities: Terrestrial vegetation of the United States. National forests in Texas final report. NatureServe, Arlington, VA.
Nixon, E. S. 2000. Trees, shrubs & woody vines of East Texas. Second edition. Bruce Lyndon Cunningham Productions, Nacogdoches, TX.
Randall, J. M., and J. Marinelli. 1996. Invasive plants: weeds of the global garden. Volume 149. Brooklyn Botanic Garden, Brooklyn, NY.
Stanturf, J. A., S. H. Schoenholtz, C. J. Schweitzer, and J. P. Shepard. 2001. Achieving restoration success: Myths in bottomland hardwood forests. Restoration Ecology, 9:189-200.
Stringham, T. K., W. C. Krueger, and P. L. Shaver. 2003. State and transition modeling: An ecological process approach. Journal of Range Management 56:106-113.
Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database.
Truett, J. C. 1984. Land of bears and honey: A natural history of East Texas. The University of Texas Press, Austin, TX.
Van Kley, J. E., R. L. Turner, L. S. Smith, and R. E. Evans. 2007. Ecological classification system for the national forests and adjacent areas of the West Gulf Coastal Plain. Second approximation. Stephen F. Austin University and The Nature Conservancy, Nacogdoches, TX.
USDA-NRCS Ag Handbook 296 (2006).
Vines, R. A. 1960. Trees, shrubs, and woody vines of the Southwest. University of Texas Press, Austin, TX.
Watson, G. E. 2006. Big Thicket Plant Ecology. Third Edition. University of North Texas Press, Denton, TX.Contributors
Tyson Hart
Approval
Bryan Christensen, 9/22/2023
Acknowledgments
Thanks to all involved during the preparation, sampling, and reviewing of the Flatwoods project. Thanks to Josh Berry, Dennis Brezina, Kenny Hall, Jason Hohlt, Stacey Kloesel, Ricky Lambert, Cody Langston, Mark Moseley, Ramiro Molina, Mike Oliver, Alan Peer, Sara Russell, Don Sabo, Mary Webb-Marek, and Jon Wiedenfeld for all their help.
Rangeland health reference sheet
Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health is a qualitative assessment protocol used to determine ecosystem condition based on benchmark characteristics described in the Reference Sheet. A suite of 17 (or more) indicators are typically considered in an assessment. The ecological site(s) representative of an assessment location must be known prior to applying the protocol and must be verified based on soils and climate. Current plant community cannot be used to identify the ecological site.
Author(s)/participant(s) Contact for lead author Date 09/21/2021 Approved by Approval date Composition (Indicators 10 and 12) based on Annual Production Indicators
-
Number and extent of rills:
-
Presence of water flow patterns:
-
Number and height of erosional pedestals or terracettes:
-
Bare ground from Ecological Site Description or other studies (rock, litter, lichen, moss, plant canopy are not bare ground):
-
Number of gullies and erosion associated with gullies:
-
Extent of wind scoured, blowouts and/or depositional areas:
-
Amount of litter movement (describe size and distance expected to travel):
-
Soil surface (top few mm) resistance to erosion (stability values are averages - most sites will show a range of values):
-
Soil surface structure and SOM content (include type of structure and A-horizon color and thickness):
-
Effect of community phase composition (relative proportion of different functional groups) and spatial distribution on infiltration and runoff:
-
Presence and thickness of compaction layer (usually none; describe soil profile features which may be mistaken for compaction on this site):
-
Functional/Structural Groups (list in order of descending dominance by above-ground annual-production or live foliar cover using symbols: >>, >, = to indicate much greater than, greater than, and equal to):
Dominant:
Sub-dominant:
Other:
Additional:
-
Amount of plant mortality and decadence (include which functional groups are expected to show mortality or decadence):
-
Average percent litter cover (%) and depth ( in):
-
Expected annual annual-production (this is TOTAL above-ground annual-production, not just forage annual-production):
-
Potential invasive (including noxious) species (native and non-native). List species which BOTH characterize degraded states and have the potential to become a dominant or co-dominant species on the ecological site if their future establishment and growth is not actively controlled by management interventions. Species that become dominant for only one to several years (e.g., short-term response to drought or wildfire) are not invasive plants. Note that unlike other indicators, we are describing what is NOT expected in the reference state for the ecological site:
-
Perennial plant reproductive capability:
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
