Ecological dynamics

The reference native plant community is dominated by bluebunch wheatgrass
and Sandberg bluegrass. Thurber's needlegrass, Idaho fescue and a variety of forbs are present. A big sagebrush complex of mountain, Wyoming and basin big sagebrush is common. Xeric big sagebrush is occasionally present. Wild crab apple and antelope bitterbrush occur sporadically. Vegetative composition of the community is approximately 75 percent grasses, 10 percent forbs and 15 percent shrubs. Approximate ground cover is 40 to 60 percent (basal and crown).

Range in Characteristics:
Bluebunch wheatgrass is strongly dominant on south facing aspects. Idaho fescue increases as the aspect changes to the southeast. Thurber needlegrass increases on a gravelly surface. Mountain big sagebrush increases in relationship to basin, Wyoming and xeric big sagebrush with elevation. Deciduous shrubs increase at the upper end of the precipitation zone and over gravelly and fractured substratums. Production increases with soil depth and precipitation.

Response to Disturbance:
If the condition of the site deteriorates as a result of inappropriate grazing, bluebunch wheatgrass and Idaho fescue decrease. Big sagebrush (mountain, basin & xeric) rapidly increases and juniper invades from rock outcrops. With continued inappropriate grazing big sagebrush and juniper dominate the overstory. Cheatgrass and other annuals invade. With further deterioration and lack of fire juniper invasion continues. Sagebrush and other shrubs decrease from juniper competition and bare ground increases. With fire and inappropriate grazing juniper and big sage are severely impacted. Rabbitbrush increases and annuals and biennial forbs invade. Bare ground increases and excessive erosion contributes to downstream sedimentation.

States: JUOC/ARTRV-X-T/Annuals-Bare Ground; CHVI8/Annuals-Bare Ground (with fire)



Treatment Response:

South facing aspects lack resiliency and typically respond poorly to Juniper removal due to shallow soils and heat. One repair pathway (RP2) located between State 1 and 2 indicates that potential for rehabilitation of the juniper controlled plant community exists. The potential for success is less than that of the juniper-sagebrush steppe phase in State 1 due primarily to aspect and soils. Treatment of juniper should incorporate lopping of limbs to provide microsites for seedling establishment along with seeding of desired grasses, forbs and shrubs. Fire is not a recommended tool of rehabilitation due to the increased risk of cheatgrass invasion. A second repair pathway (RP3) exists between States 1 and 3. Treatment of the Sandberg bluegrass, cheatgrass and rabbitbrush phase would require chemical control of the rabbitbrush and cheatgrass along with seeding. Treatment of the juniper woodland and shallow rooted grasses phase would also require control on the cheatgrass while removing juniper and seeding desirable species. The potential for failure of rehabilitation projects within State 3 is high. Because of this, every effort should be taken to prevent threshold forcing events from occurring.

Reference Plant Community

State 1 – Reference State

Three plant community phases occur in the Reference State. They are phase 1.1, the Reference Plant Community Phase (RPCP) which is the perennial grass phase, phase 1.2, the sagebrush phase and phase 1.3, the juniper-sagebrush phase.

Phase 1.1. The Reference Plant Community Phase (RPCP) is the perennial grass phase. This plant community is strongly dominated by bluebunch wheatgrass with Sandberg bluegrass and Thurber needlegrass being common and lesser amounts of other perennial grasses and a small amount of forbs. Mountain big sagebrush and antelope bitterbrush are common. Grasses compose 80 % of the community, forbs 5% and shrubs 15%. Ecological processes are controlled by the perennial grasses.

Phase 1.2. The sagebrush phase results with prescribed grazing with normal fire frequency of 40-60 years (CP1.1A). The composition of sagebrush within the plant community will increase as the length of time between fires becomes greater. A period of improper grazing can accelerate the increase in sagebrush even if the bunchgrass plant community is maintained. Under prescribed grazing and fire the plant community pathway (CP1.2A) moves back toward Phase 1.1, the perennial grass community. With the continued absence of fire and improper grazing management or drought (CP1.2B) the plant community will move towards phase 1.3, juniper-sagebrush.

Phase 1.3. The juniper-sagebrush phase is dominated by Juniper, mountain big sagebrush, bluebunch wheatgrass, and Sandberg bluegrass. This plant community is a result of the absence of fire with improper grazing or drought and can occur through community pathways CP1.1B or CP1.2B. This phase is the “at risk” plant community within State 1. If the site deteriorates the potential for cheatgrass invasion and juniper increases. With proper grazing and fire this phase can be returned (RT1 & RT2) to Phase 1.1 by community pathway CP 1.3A. This “at risk” phase can transition to State 2 (IRT1A) “characterized by juniper dominance with a perennial grass understory” with suppressed fire or State 3 (IRT1B) “characterized by the loss of deep rooted perennial grass functional groups” with improper grazing management, and/or drought and continued lack of fire

State 2. This State is dominated by juniper. Initially, Phase 2.1, the juniper-sagebrush phase is occupied by juniper, mountain big sagebrush, Sandberg bluegrass, and Idaho fescue with a trace of bluebunch wheatgrass and cheatgrass. If fire continues to be suppressed and improper grazing continues, juniper will continue to increase and out compete both the sagebrush and bunchgrass understory. When fine fuels are reduced and fire will no longer carry (fire proof), the site transitions to a juniper woodland community (Phase 2.2). The potential for soil erosion increases as the juniper woodland matures and the understory plant community declines. The risk of an irreversible transition (IRT2A) over an abiotic threshold to the juniper woodland erosional phase of State 4 increases with increasing slope and increasing bare ground. The repair pathway (RP1) from state 2 back to State 1 is generally not economically feasible and would require mechanical treatment of the junipers prior to initiating prescribed burns. The potential for needing to reseed to adapted grasses, forbs and shrubs is extremely high. In this state all of the ecological processes are controlled by juniper.

State 3. This state is dominated in the understory by cheatgrass and in the overstory by either juniper (Phase 3.1) or rabbitbrush (Phase 3.2). Sagebrush and the deep-rooted perennial bunch grasses have almost been entirely replaced in the understory of the plant community by cheatgrass and Sandberg bluegrass. This state has developed as a result of continued improper grazing in the absence of fire (IRT1B) and this transition moves the plant community to the juniper woodland shallow-rooted grasses phase (3.1). If fire occurs, the plant community transitions to the cheatgrass, Sandberg bluegrass, and rabbitbrush phase (3.2). The risk of an irreversible transition (IR3A) to the erosional State 4 is paramount with continued improper grazing in combination with the lack of fire (4.1) or with frequent fire (4.2). The repair pathway (RP2) from State 3 back to State 1 is generally not economically feasible and requires mechanical treatment of the juniper, chemical treatment of the cheatgrass and rabbitbrush, and reseeding of desirable grasses, forbs, and shrubs. Ecological processes in this state are controlled by the juniper and/or the shallow rooted grasses and cheatgrass.

State 4. This state is dominated by cheatgrass and shallow-rooted grasses in the understory with junipers (4.1) or rabbitbrush (4.2) in the overstory. This state is recognized by the soil erosion that is occurring or has occurred on site. Since this state has occurred through widespread erosion from State 2 (IRT2A) or State 3 (IRT3A), the increase in bare ground makes the site more susceptible to increased wind and/or water erosion. Abiotic factors control site resources and ecological functions. Rehabilitation of this state may not be practical or possible due to extreme soil loss.