Physiographic features

This site occurs on summits and sideslopes of hills, mountains, and fan remnants on all aspects. At lower elevations this site is usually restricted to cooler, northerly aspects. Slopes range from 4 to 75 percent, but slopes from 15 to 50 percent are most typical. Elevations are 4400 to 8200 feet.

Table 2. Representative physiographic features

Climatic features

Nevada’s climate is predominantly arid, with large daily ranges of temperature, infrequent severe storms, heavy snowfall in the higher mountains, and great location variations with elevation. Three basic geographical factors largely influence Nevada’s climate: continentality, latitude, and elevation. Continentality is the most important factor. The strong continental effect is expressed in the form of both dryness and large temperature variations. Nevada lies on the eastern, lee side of the Sierra Nevada Range, a massive mountain barrier that markedly influences the climate of the State. The prevailing winds are from the west, and as the warm moist air from the Pacific Ocean ascend the western slopes of the Sierra Range, the air cools, condensation occurs and most of the moisture falls as precipitation. As the air descends the eastern slope, it is warmed by compression, and very little precipitation occurs. The effects of this mountain barrier are felt not only in the West but throughout the state, with the result that the lowlands of Nevada are largely desert or steppes. The temperature regime is also affected by the blocking of the inland-moving maritime air. Nevada sheltered from maritime winds, has a continental climate with well-developed seasons and the terrain responds quickly to changes in solar heating.
Nevada lies within the mid-latitude belt of prevailing westerly winds which occur most of the year. These winds bring frequent changes in weather during the late fall, winter and spring months, when most of the precipitation occurs. To the south of the mid-latitude westerlies, lies a zone of high pressure in subtropical latitudes, with a center over the Pacific Ocean. In the summer, this high-pressure belt shifts northward over the latitudes of Nevada, blocking storms from the ocean. The resulting weather is mostly clear and dry during the summer and early fall, with scattered thundershowers. The eastern portion of the state receives significant summer thunderstorms generated from monsoonal moisture pushed up from the Gulf of California, known as the North American monsoon. The monsoon system peaks in August and by October the monsoon high over the Western U.S. begins to weaken and the precipitation retreats southward towards the tropics (NOAA 2004).

Average annual precipitation is 10 to 14 inches. Mean annual air temperature is 45 to 50 degrees F. The average growing season is 100 to 120 days.


Mean annual precipitation at the Great Basin National Park climate station (263340) is 13.33 inches.
Monthly mean precipitation is:
January 1.05; February 1.18; March 1.37; April 1.21; May 1.24; June .87; July .97; August 1.18; September 1.08; October .96; December .96

Table 3. Representative climatic features

Influencing water features

There are no influencing water features associated with this site.

Soil features

The soils associated with this site are typically formed in residuum with limestone parent material. These soils normally have from 30 to over 50 percent gravel and cobbles by volume distributed throughout their profile. Some soils have a moderately fine to fine textured subsoil within 10 inches of the surface. The reaction of many soils is moderately or strongly alkaline. The available water capacity is low to very low. The soil moisture regime is typic aridic and the soil temperature regime is mesic. These soils usually have high amounts of gravels, cobbles or stones on the surface that occupy plant growing space, yet help to reduce evaporation and conserve soil moisture. Rock fragments on the surface provide a stabilizing affect on surface erosion conditions. The soil series associated with this site include: Amtoft, Borvant, Chainlink, Checkett, Eenreed, Radol, Stewval, and Tarnach.

The representative soil series is Amtoft, a Loamy-skeletal, carbonatic, mesic Lithic Xeric Haplocalcids. Diagnostic horizons include an Ochric epipedon from the surface of the soil to 18 cm, Calcic horizon from 20 to 43 cm
and a Lithic contact with hard bedrock at 43 cm. Clay content in the particle control section averages 12 to 27 percent. Rock fragments range from 35 to 60 percent. Reaction is moderately or strongly alkaline. Effervescence is violent. Lithology consists of calcareous sedimentary rocks.

Table 4. Representative soil features

Animal community

Livestock/Wildlife Interpretations:
This site is suitable for livestock grazing. Considerations for grazing management including timing, intensity and duration of grazing. Targeted grazing could be used to decrease the density of non-natives.
Black sagebrush is a significant browse species within the Intermountain region. It is especially important on low elevation winter ranges in the southern Great Basin, where extended snow free periods allow animal’s access to plants throughout most of the winter. In these areas it is heavily utilized by pronghorn (Antilocapra americana) and mule deer. (Blaisdell et al. 1982). A review identified black sagebrush as the most important source of winter browse for pronghorn in Utah (Allen et al. 1984). In winter, it was reported by Clary and Beale (1983) that pronghorn preferred black sagebrush habitat. In winter, it was reported by Clary and Beale (1983) that pronghorn preferred black sagebrush habitat.
In a study by Behan and Welch (1985) black sagebrush accessions were preferred over six other big sagebrush accessions for winter habitat by mule deer. Black sagebrush (and other sagebrush communities) are less attractive to elk (Alces alces) and moose (Alces americanus). In southwestern Wyoming comparing winter habitat use by wild ungulates, elk and moose used Wyoming big sagebrush and black sagebrush community less than expected, while mule deer used it almost exclusively (Oedekoven et al. 1987).
Bird species use black sagebrush dominant habitat. Sage thrashers (Oreoscoptes montanus) and most passerines prefer areas with black sagebrush and other dwarf shrubs over areas with taller shrubs (Medin et al. 2000). Brewer's sparrow (Spizella breweri), sage sparrow (Amphispiza belli), and sage thrasher, also use black sagebrush communities for cover and feed (Paige and Ritter 1999). Greater Sage grouse (Centrocerus urophasianus) are known obligates in black sagebrush and other sagebrush habitats and will use black sagebrush sites as winter grounds (Connelly et al. 2000). For example: sage-grouse on the Snake River Plains of Idaho use black sagebrush-big sagebrush communities as winter range, and in Nevada, sage-grouse select wind-swept ridges with short, scattered black sagebrush plants as winter feeding areas (Clements and Young 1997). Throughout the West, greater sage grouse use mixed sagebrush habitats of big sagebrush and black sagebrush stands.

Pygmy rabbits (Brachylagus idahoensis), a threatened species of conservation concern throughout Nevada often burrow where low sagebrush mixes with mountain big sagebrush. Black sagebrush, is often a component of low sagebrush communities and is an important shrub for pygmy rabbits and other sagebrush obligate species (Oregon Conservation Strategy, 2006).
Rodents also use black sagebrush habitats. A study in northeastern Nevada showed deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus), Great Basin pocket mice (Perognathus merriami), and Ord's kangaroo rats (Dipodomys ordii) used gray low sagebrush-black sagebrush communities on dry ridge tops in late spring and summer (McAdoo et al. 2006). Rodents on cold-desert warm-desert ecotones within the Nevada Test Site preferred cold-desert communities over transition and warm-desert communities in which black sagebrush communities were more abundant (Hansen et al. 1999). Black sagebrush communities also support predators. According to study by MacLaren et al. (1988) greater sage-grouse are the primary avian prey of golden eagles in a mixed big sagebrush-black sagebrush shrubland in southeastern Wyoming.
Several reptiles and amphibians are distributed throughout the sagebrush steppe in the west in Nevada, where basin big sagebrush is known to grow (Bernard and Brown 1977). Reptile species including: eastern racers (Coluber constrictor), ringneck snakes (Diadophis punctatus), night snakes (Hypsiglena torquata), Sonoran mountain kingsnakes (Lampropeltis pyromelana), striped whipsnakes (Masticophis taeniatus), gopher snakes (Pituophis catenifer), long-nosed snakes (Rhinocheilus lecontei), wandering gartersnakes (Thamnophis elegans vagrans), Great Basin rattlesnakes (Crotalus oreganus lutosus), Great Basin collared lizard (Crotaphytus bicinctores), long-nosed leopard lizard (Gambelia wislizenii), short-horned lizard (Phrynosoma douglassii), desert-horned lizard (Phrynosoma platyrhinos), sagebrush lizards (Sceloporus gracisosus), western fence lizards (Sceloporus occidentalis), northern side-blotched lizards (Uta uta stansburiana), western skinks (Plestiodon skiltonianus), and Great Basin whiptails (Aspidoscelis tigris tigris) occur in areas where sagebrush is dominant. Similarly, amphibians such as: western toads (Anaxyrus boreas), Woodhouse’s toads (Anaxyrus woodhousii), northern leopard frogs (Lithobates pipiens), Columbia spotted frogs (Rana luteiventris), bullfrogs (Lithobates catesbeianus), and Great Basin spadefoots (Spea intermontana) also occur throughout the Great Basin in areas sagebrush species are dominant (Hamilton 2004). Studies have not determined if reptiles and amphibians prefer certain species of sagebrush; however, researchers agree that maintaining habitat where basin big sagebrush and reptiles and amphibians occur is important. In fact, wildlife biologists have noticed declines in reptiles where sagebrush steppe habitat has been seeded with introduced grasses (West 1999 and ref. therein).
Black sagebrush palatability has been rated as moderate to high depending on the ungulate and the season of use(Horton 1989, Wambolt 1996). The palatability of black sagebrush increase the potential negative impacts on remaining black sagebrush plants from grazing or browsing pressure following fire (Wambolt 1996). Pronghorn utilize black sagebrush heavily (Beale and Smith 1970). On the Desert Experiment Range, black sagebrush was found to comprise 68% of pronghorn diet even though it was only the third most common plant. Fawns were found to prefer black sagebrush utilizing it more than all other forage species combined (Beale and Smith 1970). Domestic livestock will also utilize black sagebrush. The domestic sheep industry that emerged in the Great Basin in the early 1900s was largely based on wintering domestic sheep in black sagebrush communities (Mozingo 1987). Domestic sheep will browse black sagebrush during all seasons of the year depending on the availability of other forage species with greater amounts being consumed in fall and winter. Black sagebrush is generally less palatable to cattle than to domestic sheep and wild ungulates (McArthur et al. 1982); however, cattle use of black sagebrush has also been shown to be greatest in fall and winter (Schultz and McAdoo 2002), with only trace amounts being consumed in summer (Van Vuren 1984).
Inappropriate grazing management during the growing season will cause a decline in understory plants such as bluebunch wheatgrass, Indian ricegrass and needleandthread. Bluebunch wheatgrass is moderately grazing tolerant however is sensitive to defoliation during the active growth period (Blaisdell and Pechanec 1949, Laycock 1967, Anderson and Scherzinger 1975, Britton et al. 1990). Herbage and flower stalk production was reduced with clipping at all times during the growing season; however, clipping was most harmful during the boot stage (Blaisdell and Pechanec 1949). Tiller production and growth of bluebunch was greatly reduced when clipping was coupled with drought (Busso and Richards 1995). Mueggler (1975) estimated that low vigor bluebunch wheatgrass may need up to 8 years rest to recover. Although an important forage species, it is not always the preferred species by livestock and wildlife.
Indian ricegrass is a deep-rooted, cool season perennial bunchgrass that is adapted primarily to coarse textured soils. Indian ricegrass is a preferred forage species for livestock and wildlife (Cook 1962, Booth et al. 2006). This species is often heavily utilized in winter because it cures well (Booth et al. 2006). It is also readily utilized in early spring, being a source of green feed before most other perennial grasses have produced new growth (Quinones 1981). Booth et al. (2006) note that the plant does well when utilized in winter and spring. Cook and Child (1971), however, found that repeated heavy grazing reduced crown cover, which may reduce seed production, density, and basal area of these plants. Additionally, heavy early spring grazing reduces plant vigor and stand density (Stubbendieck et al. 1985). In eastern Idaho, productivity of Indian ricegrass was at least 10 times greater in undisturbed plots than in heavily grazed ones (Pearson 1976). Cook and Child (1971) found significant reduction in plant cover after seven years of rest from heavy (90%) and moderate (60%) spring use. The seed crop may be reduced where grazing is heavy (Bich et al. 1995). Tolerance to grazing increases after May, thus spring deferment may be necessary for stand enhancement (Pearson 1964, Cook and Child 1971); however, utilization of less than 60% is recommended. In summary, adaptive management is required to manage this bunchgrass well.
Needleandthread grass, a minor component of this site, is most commonly found on warm/dry soils (Miller et al. 2013). It is not grazing tolerant and will be one of the first grasses to decrease under heavy grazing pressure (Smoliak et al. 1972, Tueller and Blackburn 1974). Heavy grazing is likely to reduce basal area of these plants (Smoliak et al. 1972). With the reduction in competition from deep rooted perennial bunchgrasses, shallower rooted grasses such as Sandberg bluegrass and forbs may increase (Smoliak et al. 1972).

Reduced bunchgrass vigor or density provides an opportunity for galleta and/or Sandberg bluegrass expansion and/or cheatgrass and other invasive species such as halogeton to occupy interspaces. Increased cheatgrass cover leads to increased fire frequency and potentially an annual plant community. Galleta and/or Sandberg bluegrass increases under grazing pressure (Jameson 1962, Tisdale and Hironaka 1981) and is capable of co-existing with cheatgrass. Excessive sheep grazing favors galleta or Sandberg bluegrass; however, where cattle are the dominant grazers, cheatgrass often dominates (Daubenmire 1970). Thus, depending on the season of use, the type of grazing animal, and site conditions, either galleta or Sandberg bluegrass or cheatgrass may become the dominant understory with inappropriate grazing management.

Livestock Interpretations:
This site has limited value for livestock grazing due to steep slopes. Bluebunch wheatgrass is considered one of the most important forage grass species on western rangelands for livestock. Although bluebunch wheatgrass can be a crucial source of forage, it is not necessarily the most highly preferred species. Indian ricegrass is highly palatable to all classes of livestock in both green and cured condition. It supplies a source of green feed before most other native grasses have produced much new growth. Needleandthread provides highly palatable forage, especially in the spring before fruits have developed. Needlegrasses are grazed in the fall only if the fruits are softened by rain. Sandberg bluegrass is a palatable species, but its production is closely tied to weather conditions. It produces little forage in drought years, making it a less dependable food source than other perennial bunchgrasses. Blue grama is valuable forage for all classes of domestic livestock, providing excellent forage for cattle and sheep. Blue grama tends to be most productive following summer rains, but it cures well and provides forage year round. In winter, at lower elevations, black sagebrush is heavily utilized by domestic sheep. Stansbury cliffrose is an important browse species for livestock, especially in the winter.

Stocking rates vary over time depending upon season of use, climate variations, site, and previous and current management goals. A safe starting stocking rate is an estimated stocking rate that is fine tuned by the client by adaptive management through the year and from year to year.

Hydrological functions

Runoff is medium to very high. Permeability is very slow to moderate. Hydrologic soil group is C and D. Rills are rare. A few rills can be expected on steeper slopes in areas subjected to summer convection storms or rapid spring snowmelt. A few water flow patterns can be expected in areas recently subjected to summer convection storms or rapid snowmelt, particularly on steeper slopes. If waterflow patterns are evident, they are typically short in length and not extensive. Pedestals are rare. Occurrence is usually limited to areas of water flow patterns. Frost heaving of shallow rooted plants should not be considered a "normal" condition. Gullies are none to rare in areas of this site that occur on stable landforms. Deep-rooted bunchgrasses (i.e., bluebunch wheatgrass & Indian ricegrass) slow runoff and increase infiltration. Although low statured, shrub canopy and associated litter break raindrop impact and provide some opportunity for snow catch on site.

Recreational uses

Aesthetic value is derived from the diverse floral and faunal composition and the colorful flowering of wild flowers and shrubs during the spring and early summer. This site offers rewarding opportunities to photographers and for nature study. This site is used for hiking and has potential for upland and big game hunting.

Other products

Triterpenoids extracted from Stansbury cliffrose have been shown to have inhibitory effects on HIV and Epstein-Barr virus. Native Americans used the inner bark for making clothing and ropes, and the branches for making arrows. Indian ricegrass was traditionally eaten by some Native Americans. The Paiutes used seed as a reserve food source.

Other information

Black sagebrush is an excellent species to establish on sites where management objectives include restoration or improvement of domestic sheep, pronghorn, or mule deer winter range. Stansbury cliffrose is recommended for wildlife, roadside, construction, and mine spoils plantings; and for restoring pinyon-juniper woodland, mountain brushland, basin big sagebrush grassland, black sagebrush, and black greasewood communities. It can be established on disturbed seedbeds by broadcast seeding, drill seeding, or transplanting. Fall or winter seeding is recommended. Needleandthread is useful for stabilizing eroded or degraded sites. Because of its wide adaptation, ease of establishment, and economic value, blue grama is used extensively for conservation purposes, rangeland seeding, and landscaping. Blue grama is useful for reclamation and for erosion control in arid and semiarid regions.

Type locality

Other references

Anderson, E. W. and R. J. Scherzinger. 1975. Improving quality of winter forage for elk by cattle grazing. Journal of Range Management:120-125.


Beale, D. M. and A. D. Smith. 1970. Forage Use, Water Consumption, and Productivity of Pronghorn Antelope in Western Utah. The Journal of Wildlife Management 34:570-582.


Beetle, A. A. 1960. A study of sagebrush. The section Tridentatae of Artemisia. Bull. Wyo. agric. Exp. Stn. 368:83 pp.


Bentz, B., D. Alston, and T. Evans. 2008. Great Basin Insect Outbreaks. Pages 45-48 in Collaborative Management and Research in the Great Basin -- Examining the issues and developing a framework for action Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-204. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO.


Blaisdell, J. P. and J. F. Pechanec. 1949. Effects of Herbage Removal at Various Dates on Vigor of Bluebunch Wheatgrass and Arrowleaf Balsamroot. Ecology 30:298-305.


Boltz, M. 1994. Factors influencing postfire sagebrush regeneration in south-central Idaho. Pages 281-290 in Proceedings -- ecology and mangement of annual rangelands. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-313. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Boise, ID.


Booth, D. T., C. G. Howard, and C. E. Mowry. 2006. 'Nezpar' Indian ricegrass: description, justification for release, and recommendations for use. Rangelands Archives 2:53-54.


Bradley, A. F., N. V. Noste, and W. C. Fischer. 1992. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-287: Fire ecology of forests and woodlands in Utah. . U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, UT.


Britton, C. M., G. R. McPherson, and F. A. Sneva. 1990. Effects of burning and clipping on five bunchgrasses in eastern Oregon. Great Basin Naturalist 50:115-120.


Bunting, S. 1994. Effects of Fire on Juniper woodland ecosystems in the great basin.in Proceedings--Ecology and Management of Annual Rangelands. USDA: FS Intermountain Research Station.


Busso, C. A. and J. H. Richards. 1995. Drought and clipping effects on tiller demography andgrowth of two tussock grasses in Utah. Journal of Arid Environments 29:239-251.


Chambers, J., B. Bradley, C. Brown, C. D’Antonio, M. Germino, J. Grace, S. Hardegree, R. Miller, and D. Pyke. 2013. Resilience to Stress and Disturbance, and Resistance to Bromus tectorum L. Invasion in Cold Desert Shrublands of Western North America. Ecosystems:1-16.


Chambers, J. C., B. A. Roundy, R. R. Blank, S. E. Meyer, and A. Whittaker. 2007. What makes great basin sagebrush ecosystems invasible by Bromus tectorum? Ecological Monographs 77:117-145.


Comstock, J. P. and J. R. Ehleringer. 1992. Plant adaptation in the Great Basin and Colorado plateau. Western North American Naturalist 52:195-215.


Conrad, C. E. and C. E. Poulton. 1966. Effect of a wildfire on Idaho fescue and bluebunch wheatgrass. Journal of Range Management:138-141.


Cook, C. W. 1962. An Evaluation of Some Common Factors Affecting Utilization of Desert Range Species. Journal of Range Management 15:333-338.


Eckert, R. E., Jr. and J. S. Spencer. 1987. Growth and reproduction of grasses heavily grazed under rest-rotation management. Journal of Range Management 40:156-159.


Evans, R. A. and J. A. Young. 1978. Effectiveness of Rehabilitation Practices following Wildfire in a Degraded Big Sagebrush-Downy Brome Community. Journal of Range Management 31:185-188.


Everett, R. L. and K. Ward. 1984. Early plant succession on pinyon-juniper controlled burns. Northwest Science 58:57-68.

Fire Effects Information System (Online; http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/plants/).


Ganskopp, D. 1988. Defoliation of Thurber Needlegrass: Herbage and Root Responses. Journal of Range Management 41:472-476.


Gates, D. H. 1964. Sagebrush infested by leaf defoliating moth. Journal of Range Management 17:209-210.


Hall, R. C. 1965. Sagebrush defoliator outbreak in Northern California. Res. Note PSW-RN-075., Berkeley, CA.


Horton, H. 1989. Interagency forage and conservation planting guide for Utah. Extension circular 433. Utah State University, Utah Cooperative Extension Service, Logan UT.

Houghton, J.G., C.M. Sakamoto, and R.O. Gifford. 1975. Nevada’s Weather and Climate, Special Publication 2. Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, Mackay School of Mines, University of Nevada, Reno, NV.


Kitchen, S. G. and E. D. McArthur. 2007. Big and black sagebrush landscapes. Fire Ecology and Management of the Major Ecosystems of Southern Utah. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-202, Fort Collins, CO. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. :73-94.


Koniak, S. 1985. Succession in pinyon-juniper woodlands following wildfire in the Great Basin. The Great Basin Naturalist 45:556-566.


Laycock, W. A. 1967. How heavy grazing and protection affect sagebrush-grass ranges. Journal of Range Management:206-213.



McArthur, E. D., A. Blaner, A. P. Plummer, and R. Stevens. 1982. Characteristics and hybridization of important Intermountain shrubs: 3. Sunflower family. En Ref. in Forest. Abstr 43:2176.


Meyer, S. E. 2008. Artemisia L. -- sagebrush. Pages 274-280 in F. T. Bonner and R. P. Karrfalt, editors. The woody plant seed manual. Agriculture Handbook 727. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington, DC.


Miller, R. F., J. C. Chambers, D. A. Pyke, F. B. Pierson, and C. J. Williams. 2013. A review of fire effects on vegetation and soils in the Great Basin Region: response and ecological site characteristics.


Miller, R. F. and R. J. Tausch. 2000. The role of fire in pinyon and juniper woodlands: a descriptive analysis. Pages 15-30 in Proceedings of the invasive species workshop: the role of fire in the control and spread of invasive species. Fire conference.


Mozingo, H. N. 1987. Shrubs of the Great Basin: A natural history. Pages 67-72 in H. N. Mozingo, editor. Shrubs of the Great Basin. University of Nevada Press, Reno NV.


Mueggler, W. F. 1975. Rate and Pattern of Vigor Recovery in Idaho Fescue and Bluebunch Wheatgrass. Journal of Range Management 28:198-204.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2004. The North American Monsoon. Reports to the Nation. National Weather Service, Climate Prediction Center. Available online: http://www.weather.gov/


Richards, J. H. and M. M. Caldwell. 1987. Hydraulic lift: Substantial nocturnal water transport between soil layers by Artemisia tridentata roots. Oecologia 73:486-489.


Robberecht, R. and G. Defossé. 1995. The relative sensitivity of two bunchgrass species to fire. International Journal of Wildland Fire 5:127-134.


Schultz, B. W. and J. K. McAdoo. 2002. Common Sagebrush in Nevada. Special Publication SP-02-02. University of Nevada, Cooperative Extension, Reno, NV.


Smoliak, S., J. F. Dormaar, and A. Johnston. 1972. Long-Term Grazing Effects on Stipa-Bouteloua Prairie Soils. Journal of Range Management 25:246-250.


Stevens, R., K. R. Jorgensen, and J. N. Davis. 1981. Viability of seed from thirty-two shrub and forb species through fifteen years of warehouse storage. Western North American Naturalist 41:274-277.

Stringham, T.K., P. Novak-Echenique, P. Blackburn, C. Coombs, D. Snyder, and A. Wartgow. 2015. Final Report for USDA Ecological Site Description State-and-Transition Models, Major Land Resource Area 28A and 28B Nevada. University of Nevada Reno, Nevada Agricultural Experiment Station Research Report 2015-01. p 1524.


Tausch, R. J. 1999. Historic pinyon and juniper woodland development. Proceedings: ecology and management of pinyon–juniper communities within the Interior West. Ogden, UT, USA: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, RMRS-P-9:12-19.


Tausch, R. J. and N. E. West. 1988. Differential establishment of pinyon and juniper following fire. American Midland Naturalist:174-184.


Tueller, P. T. and W. H. Blackburn. 1974. Condition and Trend of the Big Sagebrush/Needleandthread Habitat Type in Nevada. Journal of Range Management 27:36-40.

USDA-NRCS Plants Database (Online; http://www.plants.usda.gov).


Uresk, D. W., J. F. Cline, and W. H. Rickard. 1976. Impact of wildfire on three perennial grasses in south-central Washington. Journal of Range Management 29:309-310.


Van Vuren, D. 1984. Summer Diets of Bison and Cattle in Southern Utah. Journal of Range Management 37:260-261.


Wambolt, C. L. 1996. Mule Deer and Elk Foraging Preference for 4 Sagebrush Taxa. Journal of Range Management 49:499-503.


Winward, A. H. 2001. Sagebrush taxonomy and ecology workshop.in Vegetation, wildlife and fish ecology and rare species management -- Wasatch-Cache National Forest. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Region, Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest, Logan, UT.


Wright, H. A. 1971. Why Squirreltail Is More Tolerant to Burning than Needle-and-Thread. Journal of Range Management 24:277-284.


Wright, H. A. 1985. Effects of fire on grasses and forbs in sagebrush-grass communities. Pages 12-21 in Rangeland Fire Effects; A Symposium: Boise, ID, USDI-BLM.


Wright, H. A. and J. O. Klemmedson. 1965. Effect of Fire on Bunchgrasses of the Sagebrush-Grass Region in Southern Idaho. Ecology 46:680-688.


Wright, H. A., L. F. Neuenschwander, and C. M. Britton. 1979. The role and use of fire in sagebrush-grass and pinyon-juniper plant communities : a state-of-the-art review. Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden.


Young, R. P. 1983. Fire as a vegetation management tool in rangelands of the intermountain region. Pages 18-31 in Managing intermountain rangelands - improvement of range and wildlife habitats. USDA, Forest Service.

Contributors

RL / GKB
T. Stringham/P.Novak-Echenique