Cold Moist Meadow
Scenario model
Current ecosystem state
Select a state
Management practices/drivers
Select a transition or restoration pathway
-
Transition T1A
Invasion of non-native meadow grasses
More details -
Transition T2A
Sustained improperly managed grazing during sensitive times of year
More details -
Transition T2B
Hydrologic and water table alteration
More details -
Transition T3A
Hydrologic and water table alteration
More details -
Restoration pathway R4A
Restoration of hydrologic and biotic processes
More details -
No transition or restoration pathway between the selected states has been described
Target ecosystem state
Select a state
Description
This represents the historical reference state in pristine conditions with no exotic species present. Variability in depth to water table and seasonal fluctuations support native facultative wetland vegetation and vegetated communities include all historical functional and structural groups. The historical disturbance regime is intact and driven primarily by climate which influences drought and flood cycles. The resilience and resistance of the site is bolstered by negative feedbacks between vegetation establishment and hydrologic processes that maintains a dynamic equilibrium with geomorphological processes.
Submodel
Description
This state is similar to the reference state yet includes a component of non-native species such as Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), common timothy (Phleum pratense), and meadow foxtail (Alopecurus pratensis). Ecological process and function have not been altered fundamentally by this low level of invasion, yet resistance and resilience are decreased. Erosion processes are still within a historical range of variation, yet with continued vegetation loss the site risks a transition to an alternative state. Variability in depth to water table and seasonal fluctuations support native vegetation and vegetated communities include all historical functional and structural groups, yet composition and richness may be reduced. This state is common due to widespread invasion of non-native meadow grasses in the Western US. Prolonged improperly managed grazing will promote the spread of Kentucky bluegrass, increase cover of silver sage and reduce tufted hairgrass risking a transition to a shrub state (State 3). Further improperly managed grazing will increase bareground, increase erosion and risk a transition to a drained state (State 4).
Description
Soil compaction, trampling and sustained overutilization has altered vegetated composition and increased bare ground. Relative to the current potential state, composition of wetland facultative species has been reduced, silver sage has increased and forbs have increased. Much of the tufted hairgrass cover has been replaced by Kentucky bluegrass. The state may also be invaded by exotic annual grasses and forbs and exotic tap rooted perennials. Soil erosion and vegetation pedestalling is often present. Banks are moderately stable, hydrology may be altered with somewhat lowered water tables. A return to the current potential state may not be possible given the following considerations: burning or cutting of silver sage will likely be ineffective due to the ability to resprout; proximity to waterways makes herbicide application impractical or risky in most situations.
Description
Sustained disturbance may lead to unstable stream banks, entrenched channels and headcuts. Active floodplains and primary terraces will become disconnected from the channel and evolve into high terraces with significantly lowered water tables. This will often lead to the replacement of facultative wetland communities with mountain big sagebrush communities. Plant community composition within this state will vary and may depend on adjacent vegetation types, water table levels, past disturbance history, drought and current management.
Mechanism
Sustained improperly managed grazing during times of year when soils are most susceptible to compaction, and when graminoids are most prone to damage by trampling and over utilization.
Mechanism
This transition may be the result of several disturbances that lower water tables beyond depths that support facultative wetland vegetation, alter sediment supply and transport leading to scouring and channel incision, or directly increase flow velocities or flashiness. These may include: alteration of streamflow by irrigation or impoundment leading to a lowering of the water table during times of year when riparian woody vegetation is dependent; prolonged improperly managed livestock grazing; removal of beaver; direct manipulation of channel morphology (namely straightening for agricultural or development purposes); removal of large woody debris or large woody debris sources from channels or adjacent forests; and significant alterations of upland watershed vegetation altering peak discharge or sediment loads.
Mechanism
This transition may be the result of several disturbances that lower water tables beyond depths that support facultative wetland vegetation, alter sediment supply and transport leading to scouring and channel incision, or directly increase flow velocities or flashiness. These may include: alteration of streamflow by irrigation or impoundment leading to a lowering of the water table during times of year when riparian woody vegetation is dependent; prolonged improperly managed livestock grazing; removal of beaver; direct manipulation of channel morphology (namely straightening for agricultural or development purposes); removal of large woody debris or large woody debris sources from channels or adjacent forests; and significant alterations of upland watershed vegetation altering peak discharge or sediment loads.
Mechanism
Restoration of hydrologic and biotic process and function through rehabilitation of channel and vegetation structure may be possible in some cases but will require considerable inputs, time and cost. Restoration actions should be designed to promote sediment capture and increase channel aggradation. These may include a combination of treatments including placement of large woody debris; creation or removal of impoundments; alteration of water withdrawals; management changes to adjacent agricultural or grazing practices; or mechanical manipulation of stream channel courses, often in combination with intensive planting of locally adapted, native species.
Context dependence
Restoration options will be highly site specific and may not be possible in many circumstances.
Model keys
Briefcase
Add ecological sites and Major Land Resource Areas to your briefcase by clicking on the briefcase (
) icon wherever it occurs. Drag and drop items to reorder. Cookies are used to store briefcase items between browsing sessions. Because of this, the number of items that can be added to your briefcase is limited, and briefcase items added on one device and browser cannot be accessed from another device or browser. Users who do not wish to place cookies on their devices should not use the briefcase tool. Briefcase cookies serve no other purpose than described here and are deleted whenever browsing history is cleared.
Ecological sites
Major Land Resource Areas
The 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.