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:

   None to some, severe sheet & rill erosion hazard
   
   

2. Presence of water flow patterns:

   None to few
   
   

3. Number and height of erosional pedestals or terracettes:

   None to few
   
   

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

   10-20%
   
   

5. Number of gullies and erosion associated with gullies:

   None
   
   

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

   None, slight wind erosion hazard
   
   

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

   Fine - 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 = 3-5
   
   

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

   Granular to sub-angular blocky structure; Dry color value 4-5; 2-4" thickness; low OM (1-2%)
   
   

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

    Sparse ground cover (30-40%) and gentle slopes (2-15%) moderately limit rainfall impact and overland flow
    
    

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:

    Bluebunch wheatgrass > sandberg bluegrass

    Sub-dominant:

    onespike danthonia > idaho fescue

    Other:

    forbs > other grasses > shrubs

    Additional:

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: 600, Normal: 400, Unfavorable: 200 lbs/acre/year at high RSI (HCPC)
    
    

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:

    Sandberg bluegrass will increase with deterioration of plant community. Bulbous bluegrass, annual bromes, and medusahead invade sites that have lost deep rooted perennial grass functional groups. Excessive erosion may occur, deteriorating site potential.
    
    

17. Perennial plant reproductive capability:

    All species should be capable of reproducing annually
    
    

Print Options