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.

Indicators

1. Number and extent of rills:

   Some rills present due to slope. More rills will be present on steeper slopes.

2. Presence of water flow patterns:

   Few to some.

3. Number and height of erosional pedestals or terracettes:

   None

4. Bare ground from Ecological Site Description or other studies (rock, litter, lichen, moss, plant canopy are not bare ground):

   15% - 25%

5. Number of gullies and erosion associated with gullies:

   None

6. Extent of wind scoured, blowouts and/or depositional areas:

   None

7. Amount of litter movement (describe size and distance expected to travel):

   Fine sized litter with limited movement.

8. Soil surface (top few mm) resistance to erosion (stability values are averages - most sites will show a range of values):

   Moderately resistant to erosion: aggregate stability = 4-5

9. Soil surface structure and SOM content (include type of structure and A-horizon color and thickness):

   weak very fine granular to moderate fine subangular blocky structure, 3 to 9 inches thick with a dry color value of 4 to 5. Low organic matter (1-2%).

10. Effect of community phase composition (relative proportion of different functional groups) and spatial distribution on infiltration and runoff:

    Moderate to low ground cover (20-40%) limits rainfall impact and overland flow, steeper slopes can have more serious problems with run off and infiltration.

11. Presence and thickness of compaction layer (usually none; describe soil profile features which may be mistaken for compaction on this site):

    None

12. 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:

    Moderately deep-rooted perennial bunch-grasses

    Sub-dominant:

    Shallow rooted perennial bunch-grasses

    Other:

    Perennial forbs > Shrubs

    Additional:

    Scattered Western Juniper may be present.

13. Amount of plant mortality and decadence (include which functional groups are expected to show mortality or decadence):

    Normal decadence and mortality expected.

14. Average percent litter cover (%) and depth ( in):

15. Expected annual annual-production (this is TOTAL above-ground annual-production, not just forage annual-production):

    Favorable: 900, Normal: 600, Unfavorable: 300 lbs/acre/year for the reference plant community.

16. 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:

    Cheatgrass and Medusahead invade sites that have lost moderately deep-rooted perennial bunch-grass functional group.

17. Perennial plant reproductive capability:

    All species should be capable of reproducing annually.

Print Options