Sands
Scenario model
Current ecosystem state
Select a state
Management practices/drivers
Select a transition or restoration pathway
-
Transition T1A
Introduction of exotic species
More details -
Transition T2B
Light grazing, heavy season-long grazing, or no use and no fire
More details -
Transition T2A
Long-term non-use or very light grazing, no fire, long-term above average precipitation
More details -
Restoration pathway R3A
Long-term prescribed grazing and prescribed burning
More details -
Transition T3A
Long-term non-use or very light grazing and no fire
More details -
Restoration pathway R4A
Brush control and perhaps range planting
More details -
Restoration pathway R4B
Brush control
More details -
Restoration pathway R5A
Successful range planting
More details -
Restoration pathway R5B
Failed range planting and/or secondary succession
More details -
Transition T6A
Cessation of annual cropping
More details -
No transition or restoration pathway between the selected states has been described
Target ecosystem state
Select a state
Description
This state represented the natural range of variability that dominated the dynamics of this ecological site prior to European influence. The primary disturbance mechanisms for this site in the reference condition included frequent fire and grazing by large herding ungulates. Timing of fires and grazing, coupled with weather events, dictated the dynamics that occurred within the natural range of variability. These factors likely caused the community to shift both spatially and temporally between two community phases.
Characteristics and indicators
(i.e., characteristics and indicators that can be used to distinguish this state from others). Because of changes in disturbances and other environmental factors (particularly the widespread occurrence of exotic species), the Reference State is considered to no longer exist.
Resilience management
(i.e., management strategies that will sustain a state and prevent a transition). If intact, the reference state should probably be managed with current disturbance regimes which has permitted the site to remain in reference condition as well as maintaining the quality and integrity of associated ecological sites. Maintenance of the reference state is contingent upon a monitoring protocol to guide management.
Submodel
State 2
Native/Invaded State
Description
This state is similar to State 1: Reference State but has now been colonized by the exotic cool-season grasses (e.g., Kentucky bluegrass, smooth brome, crested wheatgrass, quackgrass) which are now present in small amounts. Although the state is still dominated by native grasses, an increase in these exotic cool-season grasses can be expected.
These exotic cool-season grasses can be quite invasive on the site and are particularly well adapted to heavy grazing. They also often form monotypic stands. As these exotic cool-season grasses increase, both forage quantity and quality become increasingly restricted to late spring and early summer due to the monotypic nature of the stand, even though annual production may increase. Native forbs generally decrease in production, abundance, diversity, and richness compared to that of State 1: Reference State.
These exotic cool-season grasses have been particularly and consistently invasive under extended periods of non-use and no fire. To slow or limit the invasion of these exotic grasses, it is imperative that managerial techniques (e.g., prescribed grazing, prescribed burning) be carefully constructed, monitored, and evaluated with respect to that objective. If management does not include measures to control or reduce these exotic cool-season grasses, the transition to State 3: Invaded State should be expected.
Annual production of this state can be quite variable, in large part due to the amount of exotic cool-season grasses. However, annual production may be similar to that of State 1: Reference State (i.e., 1800-3200 pounds per acre).
Characteristics and indicators
(i.e., characteristics that can be used to distinguish this state from others). The presence of trace amounts of exotic cool-season grasses indicates a transition from State 1 to State 2. The presence of exotic biennial or perennial leguminous forbs (i.e., sweet clover, black medic) may not, on their own, indicate a transition from State 1 to State 2 but may facilitate that transition.
Resilience management
(i.e., management strategies that will sustain a state and prevent a transition). To slow or limit the invasion of these exotic grasses, it is imperative that managerial techniques (e.g., prescribed grazing, prescribed burning) be carefully constructed, monitored, and evaluated with respect to that objective.
Grazing management should be applied that enhances the competitive advantage of native grass and forb species. This may include: (1) grazing when exotic cool-season grasses are actively growing and native cool-season grasses are dormant; (2) applying proper deferment periods allowing native grasses to recover and maintain or improve vigor; (3) adjusting overall grazing intensity to reduce excessive plant litter (above that needed for rangeland health indicator #14 – see Rangeland Health Reference Worksheet); (4) incorporating early heavy spring utilization which focuses grazing pressure on exotic cool- season grasses and reduces plant litter, provided that livestock are moved when grazing selection shifts from exotic cool-season grasses to native grasses.
Prescribed burning should be applied in a manner that maintains or enhances the competitive advantage of native grass and forb species. Prescribed burns should be applied as needed to adequately reduce/remove excessive plant litter and maintain the competitive advantage for native species. Timing of prescribed burns (spring vs. summer vs. fall) should be adjusted to account for differences in annual growing conditions and applied during windows of opportunity to best shift the competitive advantage to the native species.
Submodel
Description
This state is the result of invasion and dominance by exotic cool-season grasses (e.g., Kentucky bluegrass, smooth brome, crested wheatgrass, quackgrass). Other exotic plants (e.g., leafy spurge, Canada thistle) are also known to invade the site. The exotic cool-season grasses can be quite invasive on the site and are particularly well adapted to heavy grazing. They often form monotypic stands. As these exotic cool-season grasses increase, both forage quantity and quality become increasingly restricted to late spring and early summer due to the monotypic nature of the stand, even though annual production may increase. Native forbs generally decrease in production, abundance, diversity, and richness compared to that of State 1: Reference State. Common forbs often include white heath aster, goldenrod, common yarrow, and white sagebrush. Shrubs, such as western snowberry and rose, may show marked increases. Once the state is well established, prescribed burning and grazing techniques have been largely ineffective in suppressing or eliminating these species, even though some short-term reductions may appear successful.
Annual production of this state may vary widely, in part due to variations in the extent of invasion by exotic cool-season grasses. However, annual production may be in the range of 2800-3800 pounds per acre with the exotic cool-season grasses contributing the bulk of the production.
Characteristics and indicators
(i.e., characteristics that can be used to distinguish this state from others). This site is characterized by exotic cool-season grasses constituting greater than 30 percent of the annual production and native grasses constituting less than 40 percent of the annual production.
Resilience management
(i.e., management strategies that will sustain a state and prevent a transition). Light or moderately stocked continuous, season-long grazing or a prescribed grazing system which incorporates adequate deferment periods between grazing events and proper stocking rate levels will maintain this State. Application of herbaceous weed treatment, occasional prescribed burning, and/or brush management may be needed to manage noxious weeds and increasing shrub (e.g., western snowberry) populations.
Submodel
Description
This state historically existed as small patches of shrubs (e.g., smooth sumac, western snowberry, chokecherry, and/or wild rose) scattered across the site, particularly where these shrubs could have encroached onto the site vegetatively (e.g., rhizomes, root sprouts) or by seed from nearby woody vegetation.
Characteristics and indicators
(i.e., characteristics and indicators that can be used to distinguish this state from others). The dominance of woody species (by cover and production) distinguishes this state from other herbaceously dominated states.
Resilience management
(i.e., management strategies that will sustain a state and prevent a transition). This state is resistant to change in the long-term absence of fire. Restoration efforts would require the use of prescribed fire, mechanical treatment, and prescribed grazing. Considerable time and effort will be required to restore to other States.
Submodel
Description
This state is highly variable depending on the level and duration of disturbance related to the T6A transitional pathway. In this MLRA, the most probable origin of this state is plant succession following cropland abandonment. This plant community will initially include a variety of annual forbs and grasses, some of which may be noxious weeds needing control. Over time, however, the exotic cool-season grasses (e.g., Kentucky bluegrass, smooth brome, quackgrass, crested wheatgrass) will likely predominate.
Characteristics and indicators
(i.e., characteristics that can be used to distinguish this state from others). Tillage has destroyed the native plant community, altered soil structure and biology, reduced soil organic matter, and resulted in the formation of a tillage induced compacted layer which is restrictive to root growth. Removal of perennial grasses and forbs results in decreased infiltration and increased runoff.
Resilience management
(i.e., management strategies that will sustain a state and prevent a transition). Continued tillage will maintain the state. Control of noxious weeds will be required.
Submodel
Mechanism
This is the transition from the State 1: Reference State to the State 2: Native/Invaded State due to the introduction and establishment of exotic cool-season grasses (e.g., Kentucky bluegrass, smooth brome, crested wheatgrass, quackgrass). This transition was inevitable and corresponded to a decline in native warm-season and cool-season grasses. It may have been exacerbated by chronic season-long or heavy late season grazing. Complete rest from grazing and suppression of fire could also have hastened the transition. The threshold between states was crossed when Kentucky bluegrass, smooth brome, crested wheatgrass, quackgrass, or other exotic plants became established on the site.
Constraints to recovery
(i.e. variables or processes that preclude recovery of the former state). Current knowledge and technology will not facilitate a successful restoration to Reference State.
Mechanism
This transition from the State 2: Native/Invaded State to State 3: Invaded State generally occurs with light grazing, heavy season-long grazing, or periods of non-use and no fire especially when the shrub component is sparse. Exotic cool-season grasses, such as Kentucky bluegrass and/or smooth brome, often become the dominant graminoids. Studies indicate that a threshold may exist in this transition when both the exotic cool-season grasses exceed 30% of the plant community and native grasses represent less than 40% of the plant community composition.
Constraints to recovery
(i.e., variables or processes that preclude recovery of the former state). Variations in growing conditions (e.g., cool, wet spring) will influence effects of various management activities on exotic cool-season grass populations. The opportunity for high intensity spring burns (which can serve to reduce the introduced cool-season species) is severely reduced by early green-up and the lack of fuel.
Mechanism
This transition from the State 2: Native/Invaded to State 4: Invaded Wooded State generally occurs during long-term non-use or very light grazing, and no fire. It may also occur with long-term above average precipitation, particularly when an abundant shrub component is present. It has also become more frequent following European settlement when the historic fire regime was markedly reduced.
Constraints to recovery
(i.e., variables or processes that preclude recovery of the former state). The extended fire interval may make recovery doubtful due to the abundance of exotic cool-season grasses and lack of native grasses. Fire intensity along with consumption of available fuels may cause incomplete or patchy burns. Continued recruitment of tree seeds from adjacent sites will hamper site restoration.
Reticence to undertake tree removal and the perception that trees may be a desirable vegetation component for wildlife habitat, carbon sequestration, aesthetics, etc. are some of the constraints to recovery. Managers wanting to manage the site for deer, livestock, or grassland nesting birds will need to consider the intensive management required to restore and maintain the site in State 2. The disturbance regime necessary to restore this site to State 2: Native/Invaded State is very labor intensive and costly; therefore, addressing woody removal earlier in the encroachment phase is the most cost-effective treatment for woody control.
Mechanism
This restoration pathway from State 3: Invaded State to State 2: Native/Invaded State may be accomplished with the implementation of long-term prescribed grazing and prescribed burning, assuming there is an adequate component of native grasses to respond to the treatments.
Both prescribed grazing and prescribed burning are likely necessary to successfully initiate this restoration pathway, the success of which depends upon the presence of a remnant population of native grasses in Community Phase 3.1. That remnant population, however, may not be readily apparent without close inspection. The application of several prescribed burns may be needed at relatively short intervals in the early phases of this restoration process, in part because many of the shrubs (e.g., western snowberry) sprout profusely following one burn. Early season prescribed burns have been successful, however, fall burning may also be an effective technique.
The prescribed grazing should include adequate recovery periods following each grazing event and stocking levels which match the available resources. If properly implemented, this will shift the competitive advantage from the exotic cool-season grasses to the native cool-season grasses.
Context dependence
(i.e., factors that cause variations in plant community shifts, restoration likelihood, and contribute to uncertainty). Grazing management should be applied in a manner that enhances/maximizes the competitive advantage of native grass and forb species over the exotic species. This may include the use of prescribed grazing to reduce excessive plant litter accumulations above that needed for rangeland health indicator #14 (see Rangeland Health Reference Worksheet). Increasing livestock densities may facilitate the reduction in plant litter provided length and timing of grazing periods are adjusted to favor native species.
Grazing prescriptions designed to address exotic grass invasion and favor native species may involve earlier, short, intense grazing periods with proper deferment to improve native species health and vigor. Fall (e.g., September, October) prescribed burning followed by an intensive, early spring graze period with adequate deferment for native grass recovery may shift the competitive advantage to the native species, facilitating the restoration to State 2: Native/Invaded.
Prescribed burning should be applied in a manner that enhances the competitive advantage of native grass and forb species over the exotic species. Prescribed burns should be applied at a frequency which mimics the natural disturbance regime, or more frequently as is ecologically (e.g., available fuel load) and economically feasible. Burn prescriptions may need adjustment to: (1) account for change in fine fuel orientation (e.g., “flopped” Kentucky bluegrass); (2) fire intensity and duration by adjusting ignition pattern (e.g., backing fires vs head fires); (3) account for plant phenological stages to maximize stress on exotic species while favoring native species (both cool- and warm-season grasses).
The longer this community phase exists, the more resilient it becomes. Natural or management disturbances that reduce the cover of Kentucky bluegrass or smooth brome are typically short-lived.
Mechanism
This transition from State 3: Invaded State to State 4: Invaded Wooded State occurs with long-term non- use or very light grazing and no fire. It frequently occurs when the site is in close proximity to wooded areas where the shrubs may encroach vegetatively upon the site and/or serve as a seed source for these species to colonize the site. It has also become more frequent following European settlement when the historic fire regime was markedly reduced.
Constraints to recovery
(i.e., variables or processes that preclude recovery of the former state). The extended fire interval may make recovery doubtful due to the abundance of exotic cool-season grasses and lack of native grasses. Fire intensity along with consumption of available fuels may cause incomplete or patchy burns. Continued recruitment of tree seeds from adjacent sites will hamper site restoration.
Constraints to recovery include reticence to undertake tree removal and the perception that trees may be a desirable vegetation component for wildlife habitat, carbon sequestration, aesthetics, etc. Managers wanting to manage the site for deer, livestock, or grassland nesting birds will need to consider the intensive management required to restore and maintain the site in State 2. The disturbance regime necessary to restore this site to State 2: Native/Invaded State is very labor intensive and costly; therefore, addressing woody removal earlier in the encroachment phase is the most cost-effective treatment for woody control.
Mechanism
This restoration pathway from State 4: Invaded Wooded State to State 2: Native/Invaded State can be accomplished with brush control. However, depending upon level of remnant native grasses and forbs, a range planting may also be necessary to re-establish the herbaceous plant community, thus completing the restoration.
A combination of brush control methods may be necessary (e.g., chemical, mechanical, prescribed burning). However, initially, low fuel loads may preclude the application of prescribed burns. As a result, herbicides and/or mechanical brush control may be necessary to initiate the restoration effort. Subsequently, several prescribed burns may be needed at relatively short intervals, in part because many of the shrubs sprout profusely following one burn.
If a range planting is necessary, it may be possible using selected plant materials and agronomic practices to approach something very near the functioning of State 2: Native/Invaded State. Application of chemical herbicides and the use of mechanical planting methods using adapted varieties of the dominant native grasses are possible and can be successful.
Context dependence
(i.e., factors that cause variations in plant community shifts, restoration likelihood, and contribute to uncertainty). Prescribed burning should be applied in a manner that enhances the competitive advantage of native grass and forb species over the exotic species. Prescribed burns should be applied at a frequency which mimics the natural disturbance regime or more frequently as is ecologically (e.g., available fuel load) and economically feasible. Burn prescriptions may need adjustment to: (1) account for change in fuel type (herbaceous vs. shrub vs. tree), fine fuel amount and orientation; (2) fire intensity and duration by adjusting ignition pattern (e.g., backing fires vs head fires); (3) account for plant phenological stages to maximize stress on woody and exotic species while favoring native species (both cool- and warm-season grasses).
The method of brush management will be site specific, but generally the goal would be to apply the pesticide, mechanical control or biological control (either singularly or in combination) in a manner that shifts the competitive advantage from the targeted species to the native grasses and forbs. The control method(s) should be as specific to the targeted species as possible to minimize impacts to non-target species.
A successful range planting will include proper seedbed preparation, weed control (both prior to and after the planting), selection of adapted native species representing functional/structural groups inherent to the State 1, and proper seeding technique. Management (e.g., prescribed grazing, prescribed burning) during and after establishment must be applied in a manner that maintains the competitive advantage for the seeded native species. Adding non-native species can impact the above and below ground biota. Some evidence suggests the addition of exotic legumes to the seeding mixture may favor exotic cool-season grass expansion/invasion.
Mechanism
This restoration from State 4: Invaded Wooded State to State 3: Invaded State can be accomplished with brush control. Initial use of herbicides and/or mechanical brush control to reduce smooth sumac and other shrubs may be necessary to increase fine fuel loads to enable the application of prescribed burning to further control sprouting shrubs species.
Context dependence
(i.e., factors that cause variations in plant community shifts, restoration likelihood, and contribute to uncertainty). The method of brush management will be site specific, but generally the goal would be to apply the pesticide, mechanical control or biological control (either singularly or in combination) in a manner that shifts the competitive advantage from the targeted species to the grasses and forbs. The control method(s) should be as specific to the targeted species as possible to minimize impacts to non-target species.
Continued recruitment of seeds of trees and shrubs from adjacent sites will hamper site restoration. Intensive management is required to restore and maintain the site in State 3: Invaded State.
Mechanism
This Restoration Pathway from State 5: Go-Back State to the State 2: Native/Invaded State can be accomplished with a successful range planting. Following planting, prescribed grazing, prescribed burning, haying, or use of herbicides will generally be necessary to achieve the desired result and control any noxious weeds.
It may be possible using selected plant materials and agronomic practices to approach something very near the functioning of State 2: Native/Invaded State. Application of chemical herbicides and the use of mechanical planting methods using adapted varieties of the dominant native grasses are possible and can be successful. After establishment of the native plant species, prescribed grazing should include adequate recovery periods following each grazing event and stocking levels which match the available resources; management objectives must include the maintenance of those species, the associated reference state functions, and continued treatment of exotic grasses.
Context dependence
(i.e., factors that cause variations in plant community shifts, restoration likelihood, and contribute to uncertainty). A successful range planting will include proper seedbed preparation, weed control (both prior to and after the planting), selection of adapted native species representing functional/structural groups inherent to the State 1, and proper seeding technique. Management (e.g., prescribed grazing, prescribed burning) during and after establishment must be applied in a manner that maintains the competitive advantage for the seeded native species. Adding non-native species can impact the above and below ground biota. Elevated soil nitrogen levels have been shown to benefit smooth brome and Kentucky bluegrass more than some native grasses. As a result, fertilization, exotic legumes in the seeding mix, and other techniques that increase soil nitrogen may promote smooth brome and Kentucky bluegrass invasion.
The method or methods of herbaceous weed treatment will be site specific to each situation but, generally, the goal would be to apply the pesticide, mechanical control, or biological control (either singularly or in combination) in a manner that shifts the competitive advantage from the targeted species to the native grasses and forbs. The control method(s) should be as specific to the targeted species as possible to minimize impacts to non-target species.
Mechanism
A failed range planting and/or secondary succession will lead to State 4: Invaded State.
Context dependence
(i.e., factors that cause variations in plant community shifts, restoration likelihood, and contribute to uncertainty). Failed range plantings can result from many causes, both singularly and in combination, including drought, poor seedbed preparation, improper seeding methods, seeded species not adapted to the site, insufficient weed control, herbicide carryover, poor seed quality (purity & germination), improper management
Mechanism
This is the Transition from any plant community to State 5: Go-Back State. It is most commonly associated with the cessation of cropping without the benefit of range planting, resulting in a “go-back” situation. Soil conditions can be quite variable on the site, in part due to variations in the management/cropping history (e.g. development of tillage induced compaction, erosion, fertility, herbicide/pesticide carryover). Thus, soil conditions should be assessed when considering restoration techniques.
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.