Physiographic features

This ecological site occurs on plains, fans, and terraces. Slope ranges between and 15%, but is mainly less than 8%.

Table 2. Representative physiographic features

Climatic features

See Climatic Data Sheet for more details (Section II of the Field Office Technical Guide) or reference the following climatic web site: http://www.wrcc.sage.dri.edu/ .

Table 3. Representative climatic features

Climate stations used

• (1) JOLIET [USC00244506], Joliet, MT

• (2) COLUMBUS [USC00241938], Columbus, MT

• (3) BIG TIMBER [USC00240780], Big Timber, MT

• (4) MELVILLE 4 W [USC00245603], Big Timber, MT

• (5) MARTINSDALE 3 NNW [USC00245387], Martinsdale, MT

• (6) NYE 2 [USC00246190], Fishtail, MT

Influencing water features

No influencing water features.

Soil features

These soils are loams, silt loams, very fine sandy loams, or sandy clay loams more than 20 inches deep. They include soils that have two inches or more of one of these textures over a clayey (argillic) subsoil. There are no significant limitations to plant growth. Available Water Holding Capacity to a 40 inch depth is mostly about 8 inches.

Table 4. Representative soil features

Animal community

Livestock Grazing Interpretations: Managed livestock grazing is suitable on this site as it has the potential to produce an abundance of high quality forage. This is often a preferred site for grazing by livestock, and animals tend to congregate in these areas. In order to maintain the productivity of the Silty site, grazing on adjoining sites with less production must be managed carefully to be sure utilization on this site is not excessive. Management objectives should include maintenance or improvement of the plant community. Shorter grazing periods and adequate re-growth after grazing are recommended for plant maintenance and recovery. Heavy stocking and season-long use of this site can be detrimental and will alter the plant community composition and production over time.

Whenever Plant Communities 2 or 3 (Medium and short grasses) occur, grazing management strategies need to be implemented to avoid further deterioration. These communities are still stable, productive, and healthy provided they receive proper management. These communities will respond fairly quickly to improved grazing management, including increased growing season rest of key forage plants. Grazing management alone can usually move these communities back towards the potential community.

Plant Communities 4 and 5 have substantially reduced forage production, and a high percentage of aggressive, non-palatable species. Once these plant communities become established, it is much more difficult to restore the site to a community that resembles the potential with grazing management alone. Additional growing season rest is often necessary for re-establishment of the desired species and to restore the stability and health of the site. Brush management and mechanical treatment are often needed to restore the tall perennial grasses onto this site.

Plant Communities 6 and 7 have extremely limited forage production (< 250 pounds per acre), and a high percentage of non-preferred species for cattle and sheep. Seeding, along with brush management or mechanical treatment, may be necessary to restore desirable native perennial species.

Calculating Safe Stocking Rates: Proper stocking rates should be incorporated into a grazing
management strategy that protects the resource, maintains or improves rangeland health, and is consistent with management objectives. Safe stocking rates will be based on useable forage production, and should consider ecological condition and trend of the site, and past grazing use history.

Calculations used to determine a safe stocking rate are based on the amount of useable forage available,
taking into account the harvest efficiency of the animal and the grazing strategy to be implemented. Average annual production must be measured or estimated to properly assess useable forage production and stocking rates.

Stocking rates are calculated from average forage production values using a 25% Harvest Efficiency factor for preferred and desirable plants, and 10% Harvest Efficiency for less desirable species. AUM calculations are based on 790 pounds per animal unit month (AUM) for a 1,000-pound cow with calf up to 4 months. No adjustments have been made for site grazability factors, such as steep slopes, site inaccessibility, or distance to drinking water.

The following is an example of how to calculate the recommended stocking rate. This example does not use production estimates from this specific ecological site. You will need to adjust the annual production values and run the calculations using total annual production values from the ecological sites encountered on each individual ranch/pasture. Before making specific recommendations, an on-site evaluation must be made.

Example of total annual production amounts by type of year:
Favorable years = 2200 lbs/acre
Normal years = 1480 lbs/acre
Unfavorable years = 1200 lbs/acre

It is recommended that on slopes of 30% or less, stocking rate should be derived from the total annual production pounds minus 500 pounds for residual dry matter and 25% harvest efficiency. On slopes over 30%, stocking rate is derived from total annual production pounds minus 800 pounds for residual dry matter and 25% harvest efficiency. Refer to the NRCS National Range and Pasture Handbook for a list of Animal Unit Equivalents.

Sample Calculations using Favorable Year production amounts:

< 30% slopes: AUM/AC = [(2200-500)(0.25)]/915 lbs/month for one AU = 0.46 AUM/AC
AC/AUM = (1.0 AU)/(0.46AUM/AC) = 2.2 AC/AUM

> 30% slopes: AUM/AC = [(2200-800)(0.25)]/915 lbs/month for one AU = 0.38 AUM/AC
AC/AUM = (1.0 AU)/(0.38 AU! M/AC) = 2.6 AC/AUM

NOTE: 915 lbs/month for one Animal Unit is used as the baseline for maintenance requirements. This equates to 30 lbs/day of air-dry forage (1200 lb cow at 2.5% of body weight).

Wildlife Interpretations: The Silty ecological site occurs over large acreages on the Northern Rocky Mountain foothills except where it is fragmented by conversion to cropland, which is significant in many areas. Habitat fragmentation of this site has contributed to the decline of some “area sensitive” wildlife species, particularly such ground-nesting birds
as the grasshopper sparrow. This site is home to a diverse native wildlife complex. Historically, huge herds of migratory bison and pronghorn as well as large numbers of sharp-tailed grouse were probably the dominant “game” species in addition to a wide variety of ground-nesting songbirds, waterfowl and shorebirds, small mammals, and mammalian predators. Grazing patterns, topographic diversity, extensive acreages, and interspersion with other ecological sites make this type very important to numerous wildlife species. Small mammal diversity and abundance is high which, in turn, supports a varied raptor population. In the past, vast prairie dog towns provided habitat for such species as the black-footed ferret, burrowing owl, mountain plover, ferruginous hawk, and swift fox. Invasive plant species such as leafy spurge, Canada thistle, and several knapweeds contribute to a loss of biodiversity within this ecological site. Wildlife water requirements are provided by springs and seeps, intermittent and perennial streams, and, in modern times, numerous artificial ponds and livestock pipelines. These areas are locally important for northern leopard frogs, tiger salamanders and a number to toad species, all of which feed on a variety of insects. Grazing, fire, drought cycles and insect population fluctuations create a shifting mosaic of wildlife habitats across this site.

Plant Community 1: Tall and Medium Grasses, Forbs (HCPC): The diversity of plant species and life forms provides feeding substrate for pollinating insects. Grasshopper and Morman cricket infestations occasionally consume the majority of the herbaceous vegetation, especially during drought years. A variety of warm and cool water fish species inhabit the intermittent and perennial streams associated with this community. Northern pike, lake chub, carp, a variety of suckers and walleye are examples. Common reptile and amphibian species include tiger salamanders in ponds and stock tanks, Woodhouse’s toad, western chorus frogs, short-horned lizards, bull snake and rattlesnake, and three species of garter snakes. The diversity of grass stature and life forms, along with scattered shrubs and a variety of forbs, provides habitat for many bird species including the upland sandpiper, sharp-tailed grouse, loggerhead shrike, grasshopper and savanna sparrow, chestnut-collared longspur and western meadowlark. This community is especially favorable for ground-nesting birds because of the abundant residual plant material and litter available for nesting, escape, and thermal cover. Diverse prey populations are available for raptors such as ferruginous and Swainson’s hawks. The predominance of grasses plus a diversity of forbs, shrubs and half-shrubs in this community favors grazers and mixed feeders such as bison, pronghorn and elk. Suitable thermal and escape cover for mule deer is limited because of low shrub cover. Complex plant structural diversity and litter cover provide habitat for a wide array of small mammals (both seed eaters, i.e. deer mice and herbivores, i.e. voles and jackrabbits) and neotropical migratory birds.

Plant Community 2: Medium and Short Grasses, Forbs: The partial loss of structural diversity makes this plant community somewhat less attractive to the variety of wildlife species using the HCPC. A decrease in residual plant material and litter cover is usually associated with degradation of the HCPC, which makes this community less attractive for ground-nesting birds. Pronghorn make considerable use of this type because of forb and half-shrub availability in the generally open landscape.

Plant Community 3: Medium and Short Grasses, Shrubs, Forbs: Wyoming big sagebrush, with canopy cover of 15-30%, and an understory of grasses and forbs, is excellent nesting, winter, brood-rearing, and foraging habitat for sage grouse. Other obligate sagebrush-grassland species, notably Brewer’s sparrow, also benefit from an increase in sagebrush cover. When residual grass and litter cover decrease in this community, ground nesting bird habitat values decline. This community often provides important winter range for mule deer and pronghorn. The sagebrush crowns break up hard crusted snow and provide about 15% protein and 40-60% digestibility for ungulates.

Plant Community 4: Short and Medium Grasses, Sageworts, Shrubs: Heavy stands of big sagebrush can provide winter cover and foraging habitat for mule deer, elk, pronghorn, and sage grouse. However, a decline in herbaceous cover and litter reduces overall wildlife species diversity and habitat value for ground-nesting birds. When this seral stage is dominated by forbs and fringed sagewort, it may provide lek sites for sage grouse and habitat for birds such as horned larks, McCown’s longspurs, mountain plovers, and long-billed curlews. Prairie dogs will have an easier time establishing and expanding towns in this community to the benefit of burrowing owls, mountain plovers, and black-footed ferrets.

Plant Community 5: Medium and Short Grasses, Sedges, Fringed Sagewort, Sagebrush, Forbs: Sparse vegetation and a greater percent cover of bare ground provides suitable habitat for mountain plovers, prairie dogs, horned larks and McCown’s longspurs. However, a lack of complex vegetation structure and residual cover makes this community poor habitat in general for most ground-nesting birds and relatively poor big game habitat. Pronghorn may forage in this community spring though fall.

Plant Community 6: Short Grasses, Fringed Sagewort, Weedy Forbs: This community has low habitat value for most wildlife species except when it occurs in prairie dog towns. It may be important in providing lek sites for sage grouse when adjacent to sagebrush stands and provides forage for pronghorn seasonally.

Plant Community 7: Sagebrush, Short Grasses, Weedy Forbs: When big sagebrush cover exceeds about 15 percent, this community may provide winter sage grouse habitat; nest cover for sage grouse is poor because of a lack of standing herbaceous material and surface litter. Lek sites for sage and sharp-tailed grouse may be available in this type. General wildlife habitat is of low value.

Hydrological functions

The runoff potential for this site is low to moderate, depending on slope and ground cover/health. Runoff curve numbers generally range from 78 to 90. The soils associated with this ecological site are generally in Hydrologic Soil Group C. The infiltration rates for these soils will normally be moderate to moderately rapid.

Inventory data references

NRCS?Production & Composition Record for Native Grazing Lands (Range-417): __

BLM?Soil & Vegetation Inventory Method (SVIM) Data: ___

NRCS?Range Condition Record (ECS-2): ___

NRCS?Range/Soil Correlation Observations & Soil 232 notes: ___

Ecological Site Reference: NRCS 417 No.:

Contributors

BL-G, MJR, REL, POH
Matt Ricketts
NRCS

Approval

Kirt Walstad, 7/19/2023