Physiographic features

This site occurs on plains or canyonlands. Sandstone outcrops are common and can include vertical sandstone cliffs.

Table 2. Representative physiographic features

Climatic features

Approximately 75 percent of the annual precipitation occurs during the growing season from mid-April to late September. Snowfall can vary greatly from year to year and can range from 20 to 40 inches per year. Winds are estimated to average 6 to 7 miles per hour annually. Daytime winds are generally stronger than nighttime winds. Occasional strong storms may bring brief periods of high winds with gusts to more than 60 miles per hour. The average length of the freeze-free period (28 °F) is 168 days. The average last freeze in the spring is April 22nd, and the average date of first freeze in fall is October 7th. The average length of the frost-free period (32 °F) is 149 days. The last frost in the spring is May 5th, and the average date for first frost in the fall (32 °F), is October 1. July is the hottest month, and January is the coldest. It is not uncommon for temperature to exceed 100 degrees Fahrenheit during the summer. Summer humidity is low and evaporation is high. The winters are characterized with frequent northerly winds, producing severe cold and temperatures dropping to -30 degrees Fahrenheit.

LRU A, in the Arkansas River Valley, is the hottest and driest portion of the MLRA. Mean Annual Precipitation (MAP) is 10 to 12 inches, and Mean Annual Air Temperature (MAAT) is 51 to 54 degrees Fahrenheit. LRU B is the largest extent. MAP is 12 to 14 inches, and MAAT is 50 to 54 degrees Fahrenheit.

Table 3. Representative climatic features

Climate stations used

• (1) EADS [USC00052446], Eads, CO

• (2) ORDWAY 21 N [USC00056136], Ordway, CO

• (3) PUEBLO MEM AP [USW00093058], Pueblo, CO

• (4) ORDWAY 2 ENE [USC00056131], Ordway, CO

• (5) PUEBLO RSVR [USC00056765], Pueblo, CO

• (6) ROCKY FORD 2 SE [USC00057167], Rocky Ford, CO

• (7) CHERAW 1 N [USC00051539], La Junta, CO

• (8) LA JUNTA 20 S [USC00054726], La Junta, CO

• (9) TACONY 13 SE [USC00058157], Boone, CO

Influencing water features

There is no influential water table or wetland associated with this site.

Wetland description

N/A

Soil features

The soils of this site are very shallow or shallow. They are well drained with moderate or moderately rapid permeability. The surface layer thickness ranges from 3 to 5 inches. The soil moisture regime is ustic aridic. The soil temperature regime is mesic. Parent material kind is slope alluvium over residuum weathered from sandstone. Parent material originated from sandstone.

Major soil series correlated to this ecological site include Travessilla and Rizozo.

Revisions to soil surveys are on-going. For the most recent updates, visit the Web Soil Survey, the official site for latest soils information: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx.

Table 4. Representative soil features

Animal community

WILDLIFE INTERPRETATIONS:
The variety of grasses, forbs, and shrubs on this ecological site in the various plant communities provides habitat for a wide range of wildlife species. Historic large grazers that influenced these plant communities were bison, elk, and pronghorn. Changes over time have resulted in the loss of bison, the reduction in elk numbers, and pronghorn population swings. Domestic grazers now share these habitats with wildlife. The grassland communities of eastern Colorado are home to many bird species. Changes in the composition of the plant community when moving from the reference plant community to other communities on this ecological site may result in dramatic species shifts in the bird community. Because of a lack of permanent water, fish and many amphibians are not expected on this ecological site. Mule and white-tailed deer may use this ecological site, however the shrub cover is too low to expect more than occasional use. The gray wolf and wild bison used this ecological site in historic times. The wolf is thought to be extirpated from Eastern Colorado. Bison in the area are domesticated.

Reference Community:
The grasses, forbs, and shrubs in this plant community provide habitat for reptiles such as western rattlesnake and bullsnake. The structural diversity in the plant community on this site provides habitat for Cassin’s and Brewer’s sparrow, lark bunting, scaled quail, and ferruginous and Swainson’s hawks. The combination of mid-tall grasses and shrubs provides habitat for lesser prairie chicken in the eastern part of this ecological site. Small mammals, such as white-tailed jackrabbit, badger, swift fox, and several species of mice, are common in this plant community. Pronghorn is a typical ungulate in this community.

1.2 Community:
All wildlife species found in the reference plant community are expected in this plant community. However, the loss of some of the vegetative structural diversity in this plant community makes it less attractive.

1.3, 2.1, 3.1 Communities:
As these communities develop into an open landscape the wildlife species will shift away from reference plant community species and toward the species that prefer unvegetated areas and short plants. Texas short- lizard, six-lined racerunner, and black-tailed jackrabbit would be expected more frequently here. In addition, mountain plover, black-tailed prairie dog, and burrowing owl might use these communities where slopes are less than 5 percent and vision is unobstructed.

4.1 Community:
Because of the increased shrub cover in this community, use by some of the grassland reptiles and birds decline, being replaced by species that need woody cover. Although the western rattlesnake and coachwhip continue to use this community as the vegetation changes to shrubs, other reptiles such as the collared lizard may begin using this community because of the increase in juniper. Birds such as flickers, chickadees, robins, and blue jays are expected. Mule and white-tailed deer increase on this plant community because of the improved cover adjacent to grassland. Desert cottontails may take advantage of the edge habitat.

GRAZING INTERPRETATIONS:
The following table lists suggested initial stocking rates for an animal unit (1000 pound beef cow) under continuous grazing (yearlong grazing or growing-season-long grazing) based on normal growing conditions. However, continuous grazing is not recommended. These estimates should only be used as preliminary guidelines in the initial stages of the conservation planning process. Often, the existing plant composition does not entirely match any particular plant community described in this ecological site description. Therefore, field inventories are always recommended to document plant composition, total production, and palatable forage production. Carrying capacity estimates that reflect on-site conditions should be calculated using field inventories.

If the following production estimates are used, they should be adjusted based on animal kind or class and on the specific palatability of the forage plants in the various plant community descriptions. Under a properly stocked, properly applied, prescribed grazing management system that provides adequate recovery periods following each grazing event, improved harvest efficiencies eventually result in increased carrying capacity. See USDA-NRCS Colorado Prescribed Grazing Standard and Specification Guide (528).

The stocking rate calculations are based on the total annual forage production in a normal year multiplied by 25 percent harvest efficiency divided by 912.5 pounds of ingested air-dry vegetation for an animal unit per month (AUM).

Plant Community Production (lbs./acre) and Stocking Rate (AUM/acre)

Reference Community - (1000) (0.27)

1.2 Community - (550) (0.15)

2.1 Community - (300) (0.08)

Stocking rates are guidelines and grazing plans should be developed from an on-site visit.

Grazing by domestic livestock is one of the major income-producing industries in the area. Rangelands in this area provide yearlong forage under prescribed grazing for cattle, sheep, horses and other herbivores.

Hydrological functions

Water is the principal factor limiting forage production on this site. This site is dominated by soils in hydrologic group A. Infiltration is moderate to high and runoff potential for this site is moderate depending on ground cover. Areas where ground cover is less than 50 percent have the greatest potential to have reduced infiltration and higher runoff (refer to NRCS Section 4, National Engineering Handbook (USDA–NRCS, 1972–2012) for runoff quantities and hydrologic curves).

Recreational uses

This site provides hunting, hiking, photography, bird watching, and other opportunities. The wide varieties of plants that bloom from spring until fall have an aesthetic value that appeals to visitors.

Wood products

Fence posts and firewood are potential wood products.

Other products

Site Development and Testing Plan:

General Data (MLRA and Revision Notes, Hierarchical Classification, Ecological Site Concept, Physiographic, Climate, and Water Features, and Soils Data):Updated. All “Required” items are complete to Provisional level.

Community Phase Data (Ecological Dynamics, STM, Transition & Recovery Pathways, Reference Plant Community, Species Composition List, Annual Production Table):

Updated. All “Required” items are complete to Provisional level.
NOTE: Annual Production Table and Species Composition List are from the “Previously Approved” ESD (2004). These need review for future updates at the next Approved level. Minor edit was made to Species Composition List.

Each Alternative State/Community: Complete to Provisional level. Narrative for each state and community has been updated.

A canopy percent will need to be established for the threshold of the 4.1 One-seed Juniper community. This will need to be determined at the next "Approved" level after further site investigation and analysis.

1.3 Low Plant Density, Decadent Plants Plant Community is retained in STM as a concept for now. It is likely this plant community exists on steeper and less accessible slopes. This is due to increased plant decadence (not excessive litter accumulation). We need further site investigation and analysis at the next “Approved” level.

Supporting Information (Site Interpretations, Assoc. & Similar Sites, Inventory Data References, Agency/State Correlation, References):

Updated. All “Required” items complete to Provisional level.

Supporting Information:

Updated. All “Required” items complete to Provisional level.

Animal CommunityWildlife Interpretations:First “overview” paragraph retained.
Individual Plant Community phase interpretations are removed and need to be updated at next “Approved” level.

Livestock Interpretations:
Updated to reflect the plant community name revisions. The Stocking rate calculations remain the same because they are based on the “Legacy” Total Annual Production table.
The stocking rate calculations need to be updated when Total Annual Production and Plant Community annual production is revised at the next “Approved” level.

Hydrology:
From “Previously Approved” ESD (2004). This needs to be updated at next “approved” level.

Other Site Interpretation:
Recreational Uses, Wood Products, Other Products, and Plant Preferences table, and Rangeland Health Reference Sheet carried over from “Previously Approved” ESD (2004).


Rangeland Health Reference Sheet:
From “Previously Approved” ESD (2004). Will be updated at the next “Approved” level.

LRU C Sandstone Breaks ESD will be developed at a future date.

“Future work, as described in a project plan, to validate the information in this provisional ecological site description is needed. This will include field activities to collect low and medium intensity sampling, soil correlations, and analysis of that data. Annual field reviews should be done by soil scientists and vegetation specialists. A final field review, peer review, quality control, and quality assurance reviews of the ESD will be needed to produce the final document.” (NI 430_306 ESI and ESD, April, 2015)

Other information

Relationship to Other Classifications:
NRCS Classification Hierarchy:
Physiographic Divisions of the United States (Fenneman, 1946): Physiographic DivisionPhysiographic ProvincePhysiographic SectionLand Resource RegionMajor Land Resource Area (MLRA)Land Resource Unit (LRU).

USFS Classification Hierarchy:
National Hierarchical Framework of Ecological Units (Cleland et al, 181-200):
DomainDivisionProvinceSectionSubsectionLandtype Association LandtypeLandtype Phase.

Inventory data references

NRI: references to Natural Resource Inventory data
Information presented here has been derived from data collection on private and federal lands using:
• Double Sampling (clipped 2 of 5 plots)*
• Rangeland Health (Pellant et al., 2005)
• Soil Stability (Pellant et al., 2005)
• Line Point Intercept : Foliar canopy, basal cover (Forb, Graminoid, Shrub, subshrub, Lichen, Moss, Rock fragments, bare ground, % Litter) (Herrick et al., 2005)
• Soil pedon descriptions collected on site (Schoeneberger et al., 2012)

*NRCS double-sampling method, CO NRCS Similarity Index Worksheet 528(1).
Additional reconnaissance data collection using numerous ocular estimates and other inventory data; NRCS clipping data for USDA program support; Field observations from experienced range trained personnel. Specific data information is contained in individual landowner/user case files and other files located in county NRCS field offices.

References

• Guyette, R.P., M.C. Stambaugh, D.C. Dey, and R. Muzika. 2012. Predicting Fire Frequency with Chemistry and Climate. Ecosystems 15:322–335.

Other references

Data collection for this ecological site was done in conjunction with the progressive soil surveys within the Upper Arkansas Valley (MLRA 69) of Colorado. The site has been mapped and correlated with soils in the following soil surveys: Baca County, Bent County, Crowley County, El Paso County Area, Fremont County Area, Huerfano County Area, Kiowa County, Las Animas County: Parts of Huerfano and Las Animas, Lincoln County, Otero County, Prowers County, and Pueblo Area: Parts of Pueblo and Custer Counties.

30 Year Climatic and Hydrologic Normals (1981-2010) Reports. National Water and climate Center: Portland, OR. August 2015

ACIS-USDA Field Office Climate Data (WETS), period of record 1971-2000 http://agacis.rcc-acis.org (powered by WRCC) Accessed March 2016

Andrews, R. and R. Righter. 1992. Colorado Birds. Denver Museum of Natural History, Denver, CO. 442

Armstrong, D.M. 1972. Distribution of mammals in Colorado. Univ. Kansas Museum Natural History Monograph #3. 415.

Butler, LD., J.B. Cropper, R.H. Johnson, A.J. Norman, G.L. Peacock, P.L. Shaver, and K.E. Spaeth. 1997, revised 2003. National Range and Pasture Handbook. National Cartography and Geospatial Center’s Technical Publishing Team: Fort Worth, TX. http://www.glti.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/publications/nrph.html Accessed August 2015

Clark, J., E. Grimm, J. Donovan, S. Fritz, D. Engrstom, and J. Almendinger. 2002. Drought cycles and landscape responses to past Aridity on prairies of the Northern Great Plains, USA. Ecology, 83(3), 595-601.

Cleland, D., P. Avers, W.H. McNab, M. Jensen, R. Bailey, T. King, and W. Russell. 1997. National Hierarchical Framework of Ecological Units, published in Ecosystem Management: Applications for Sustainable Forest and Wildlife Resources, Yale University Press

Cooperative climatological data summaries. NOAA. Western Regional Climate Center: Reno, NV. Web. http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/climatedata/climsum Accessed August 2015

Egan, Timothy. 2006. The Worst Hard Time. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company: New York, NY.

Fitzgerald, J.P., C.A. Meaney, and D.M. Armstrong. 1994. Mammals of Colorado. Denver Museum of Natural History, Denver, CO. 467. Hammerson, G.A. 1986. Amphibians and reptiles in Colorado. CO Div. Wild. Publication Code DOW-M-I-3-86. 131.

Herrick, Jeffrey E., J.W. Van Zee, K.M. Haystad, L.M. Burkett, and W.G. Witford. 2005. Monitoring Manual for Grassland, Shrubland, and Savanna Ecosystems, Volume II. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. Jornada Experimental Range, Las Cruces, N.M.

Kingery, H., Ed. (1998) Colorado Breeding Birds Atlas. Dist. CO Wildlife Heritage Foundation: Denver, CO. 636.

National Water & Climate Center. USDA-NRCS. USDA Pacific Northwest Climate Hub: Portland, OR. http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/ Accessed March 2016

National Weather Service Co-op Program. 2010. Colorado Climate Center. Colorado State Univ. Web. http://climate.atmos.colostate.edu/dataaccess.php March 2016

Pellant, M., P. Shaver, D.A. Pyke, J.E. Herrick. (2005) Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health, Version 4. BLM National Business Center Printed Materials Distribution Service: Denver, CO.

PLANTS Database. 2015. USDA-NRCS. Web. http://plants.usda.gov/java/ Accessed August 2015. February 2016

PRISM Climate Data. 2015. Prism Climate Group. Oregon State Univ. Corvallis, OR. http://www.prism.oregonstate.edu/ Accessed August 2015.

Rennicke, J. 1990. Colorado Wildlife. Falcon Press, Helena and Billings, MT and CO Div. Wildlife, Denver CO. 138.

Schoeneberger, P.J., D.A. Wysockie, E.C. Benham, and Soil Survey Staff. 2012. Field book for describing and sampling soils, Version 3.0. Natural Resources Conservation Service, National Soil Survey Center: Lincoln, NE.

The Denver Posse of Westerners. 1999. The Cherokee Trail: Bent’s Old Fort to Fort Bridger. The Denver Posse of Westerners, Inc. Johnson Printing: Boulder, CO

U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. September, 1991. Changes in Vegetation and Land Use I eastern Colorado, A Photographic study, 1904-1986.

U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land Resource Regions and Major Land Resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. US Department of Agriculture Handbook 296.

U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National Geospatial Center of Excellence. Colorado annual Precipitation Map from 1981-2010, Annual Average Precipitation by State

U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2009. Part 630, Hydrology, National Engineering Handbook

U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 1972-2012. National Engineering Handbook Hydrology Chapters. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detailfull/national/water/?&cid=stelprdb1043063 Accessed August 2015.

U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National Soil Survey Handbook title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ref/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242 Accessed July 2015

U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil Survey Manual.

U.S. Dept. of Agriculture.1973. Soil Survey of Baca County, Colorado.

U.S. Dept. of Agriculture. 1970. Soil Survey of Bent County, Colorado.

U.S. Dept. of Agriculture. 1968. Soil Survey of Crowley County, Colorado.

U.S. Dept. of Agriculture. 1981 Soil Survey of El Paso County Area, Colorado.

U.S. Dept. of Agriculture. 1995. Soil Survey of Fremont County Area, Colorado.

U.S. Dept. of Agriculture. 1983. Soil Survey of Huerfano County Area, Colorado.

U.S. Dept. of Agriculture.1981. Soil Survey of Kiowa County, Colorado.

Western Regional Climate Center. 2022. Climate of Colorado, climate of the eastern plains. https://wrcc.dri.edu/Climate/narrative_co.php (accessed 9 August 2022).

Contributors

Doug Whisenhunt Ecological Site Specialist NRCS
Kimberly A. Diller Ecological Site Specialist NRCS
Ben P. Berlinger Rangeland Management Specialist NRCS Retired
Laura L. Craven MLRA Project Leader NRCS

Approval

Kirt Walstad, 9/07/2023

Acknowledgments

Project Staff:
Kimberly Diller, Ecological Site Specialist, NRCS MLRA, Pueblo SSO
Laura Craven, MLRA 69 Soil Survey Leader, NRCS MLRA Pueblo SSO
Amber Wyndham, Soil Scientist, NRCS MLRA Pueblo SSO
Ben Berlinger, Rangeland Management Specialist, Retired NRCS La Junta, CO

Program Support:
Rachel Murph, NRCS State Rangeland Management Specialist
David Kraft, NRCS MLRA Ecological Site Specialist-QA (acting), Emporia, KS
Chad Remley, Regional Director, N. Great Plains Soil Survey, Salina, KS
B.J. Shoup, State Soil Scientist, Denver
Eugene Backhaus, State Resource Conservationist, Denver
Chanda Garcia, NRCS State Biologist, NRCS, Denver CO
Patty Knupp, Area 3 Biologist, NRCS, Pueblo CO

Partners/Contributors:
James Kulbeth, Natural Resources Specialist, Department of the Army, Fort Carson, CO
John Lamman, Rangeland Management Specialist, BLM, Cañon City, CO
Steve Olson, Botanist, USFS, Pueblo, CO
Renee Rondeau, Ecologist, CO Natural Heritage Program, Hesperus, CO
Terri Schultz, The Nature Conservancy, Ft. Collins, CO
John Valentine, District Manager, CO State Land Board, Pueblo, CO

Those involved in developing earlier versions of this site description include: Ben Berlinger, rangeland management specialist (RMS); Scott Woodall, RMS; Lee Neve, soil scientist; Julie Elliott, RMS; Terri Skadeland, Colorado State biologist; and Herman Garcia, Colorado State RMS.