Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Ecological site R070BC022NM
Sandhills
Accessed: 12/22/2024
General information
Provisional. A provisional ecological site description has undergone quality control and quality assurance review. It contains a working state and transition model and enough information to identify the ecological site.
Figure 1. Mapped extent
Areas shown in blue indicate the maximum mapped extent of this ecological site. Other ecological sites likely occur within the highlighted areas. It is also possible for this ecological site to occur outside of highlighted areas if detailed soil survey has not been completed or recently updated.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
| Tree |
Not specified |
|---|---|
| Shrub |
Not specified |
| Herbaceous |
Not specified |
Physiographic features
This site occurs on plains. The soils are calcareous sandy eolian deposits derived from sedimentary rock. Land form of sand dunes or hillslopes. Slopes average 5 to 35 percent. Slopes are complex as the steeper slopes are shorter in length while the more gentle slopes are longer in length. Direction of slopes vary and is usually not significant. Elevations range from 2,842 to 4,500 feet.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
| Landforms |
(1)
Plain
(2) Hill (3) Dune |
|---|---|
| Flooding frequency | None |
| Ponding frequency | None |
| Elevation | 866 – 1,372 m |
| Slope | 5 – 35% |
| Aspect | Aspect is not a significant factor |
Climatic features
The climate of the area is “semi-arid continental”. The average annual precipitation ranges from 8 to 13 inches. Variations of 5 inches, more or less, are common. Over 80 percent of the precipitation falls from April through October. Most of the summer precipitation comes in the form of high intensity – short duration thunderstorms. Temperatures are characterized by distinct seasonal changes and large annual and diurnal temperature changes. The average annual temperature is 61 degrees with extremes of 25 degrees below zero in the winter to 112 degrees in the summer. The average frost-free season is 180 to 220 days. The last killing frost is in late March or early April, and the first killing frost is in late October or early November. Temperature and rainfall both favor warm season perennial plant growth. In years of abundant spring moisture, annual forbs and cool season grasses can make up an important component of this site. Because of the texture of this soil, most rainfall is effective. Strong winds blow from the west and southwest from January through June which accelerates soil drying at a time for cool season plant growth.
Climate data was obtained from http://www.wrcc.sage.dri.edu/summary/climsmnm.html web site using 50% probability for freeze-free and frost-free seasons using 28.5 degrees F and 32.5 degrees F respectively.
Table 3. Representative climatic features
| Frost-free period (average) | 220 days |
|---|---|
| Freeze-free period (average) | 240 days |
| Precipitation total (average) | 330 mm |
Figure 2. Monthly precipitation range
Figure 3. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature
Influencing water features
This site is not influenced by wetlands or streams.
Soil features
The soils of this site are deep and very deep. Surface textures are fine sand or loamy fine sand. Subsoilis a fine sand or loamy fine sand to a depth of 60 inches or more. These soils have less than 10 percent clay content. These soils are subject to severe wind erosion if vegetative cover is not adequate.
Minimum and maximum values listed below represent the characterist soils for this site.
Characteristic Soils Are:
Kermit
Aguena
Table 4. Representative soil features
| Surface texture |
(1) Fine sand (2) Loamy fine sand (3) Loamy sand |
|---|---|
| Family particle size |
(1) Sandy |
| Drainage class | Well drained to excessively drained |
| Permeability class | Rapid to very rapid |
| Soil depth | 152 – 183 cm |
| Surface fragment cover <=3" | 0 – 5% |
| Surface fragment cover >3" | 0% |
| Available water capacity (0-101.6cm) |
7.62 – 22.86 cm |
| Calcium carbonate equivalent (0-101.6cm) |
0 – 7% |
| Electrical conductivity (0-101.6cm) |
0 – 2 mmhos/cm |
| Sodium adsorption ratio (0-101.6cm) |
0 – 1 |
| Soil reaction (1:1 water) (0-101.6cm) |
7.4 – 8.4 |
| Subsurface fragment volume <=3" (Depth not specified) |
0 – 5% |
| Subsurface fragment volume >3" (Depth not specified) |
0% |
Ecological dynamics
Overview:
The Sandhills site occurs adjacent to or intergrades with the Deep Sand site. The Sandhills site is differentiated from deep sand sites by a steeper average slope, and an increased depth to a soil texture change. Sandhills slopes are usually greater than eight percent, and the soil profile is a fine sand or loamy fine sand to a depth greater than 60 inches. Deep Sand sites have slopes less than eight percent and a textural change can occur at less than 60 inches. The historic plant community of the Sandhills site is a mixture of grasses, shrubs and forbs, with tall grasses dominating in aspect. During years of abundant spring moisture, tall growing forbs occasionally reach aspect dominance. Sand bluestem and giant dropseed are the dominant grasses, with Havard panicum and dropseeds as sub-dominants. Sand shinnery oak and soapweed yucca are the dominant shrubs. Drought favors shinnery by impacting grasses more severly. Shinnery oak's ability to store water and carbohydrates, and its strong negetive leaf water potential enable it to out compete grasses during drought conditions. Changes in historical fire regimes, competition by shrubs, and overgrazing may contribute to this site becoming dominated by sand shinnery oak.
State and transition model
More interactive model formats are also available.
View Interactive Models
More interactive model formats are also available.
View Interactive Models
Click on state and transition labels to scroll to the respective text
Ecosystem states
State 1 submodel, plant communities
State 2 submodel, plant communities
State 1
Grass/Shrub Mix
Community 1.1
Grass/Shrub Mix
Grass/Shrub Mix: The historic plant community in the northern part of the resource area (SD-3) is dominated by sand bluestem and giant dropseed, with Havard panicum as a sub-dominant. Primary grass dominance may gradually shift moving south across the resource area to a community dominated by giant dropseed and spike dropseed, with mesa dropseed as the sub-dominant grass species. Throughout the resource area sand shinnery oak and soapweed yucca are the dominant shrubs with sand sagebrush as the sub-dominant. As retrogression within this state occurs, plants such as sand bluestem, giant dropseed, Havard panicum, plains bristlegrass, sand paspalum, and fourwing saltbush decrease. This results in an increase in spike dropseed, sand dropseed, mesa dropseed, threeawns sand shinnery oak, and sand sagebrush. Continued loss of grass cover may result in a transition to a sand shinnery oak dominated state. Diagnosis: Sand bluestem or giant dropseed are dominant or present in substantial amounts. Spike dropseed, sand dropseed or mesa dropseed may be dominant in some instances. Grass cover is variable, shifting sands and large irregular dunes produce considerable variation in the spatial distribution and composition of the plant community. Grass cover is not continuous, but is fairly uniform across the more stable areas. Large natural bare areas or blowouts are a common feature on the less stable portions of the Sandhills site.
Figure 4. Annual production by plant type (representative values) or group (midpoint values)
Table 5. Annual production by plant type
| Plant type | Low (kg/hectare) |
Representative value (kg/hectare) |
High (kg/hectare) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grass/Grasslike | 404 | 656 | 908 |
| Shrub/Vine | 135 | 219 | 303 |
| Forb | 135 | 219 | 303 |
| Total | 674 | 1094 | 1514 |
Table 6. Ground cover
| Tree foliar cover | 0% |
|---|---|
| Shrub/vine/liana foliar cover | 0% |
| Grass/grasslike foliar cover | 10-15% |
| Forb foliar cover | 0% |
| Non-vascular plants | 0% |
| Biological crusts | 0% |
| Litter | 20-25% |
| Surface fragments >0.25" and <=3" | 0% |
| Surface fragments >3" | 0% |
| Bedrock | 0% |
| Water | 0% |
| Bare ground | 45-60% |
Figure 5. Plant community growth curve (percent production by month). NM2822, R042XC022NM Sandhills HCPC. R042XC022NM Sandhills HCPC warm season plant community.
| Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| J | F | M | A | M | J | J | A | S | O | N | D |
| 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 10 | 10 | 25 | 30 | 12 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
State 2
Sand Shinnery Oak-Dominated
Community 2.1
Sand Shinnery Oak-Dominated
Additional States: Sand Shinnery Oak -Dominated: Sand shinnery oak is the dominant species and in dense stands may reduce forage production by as much as 90 percent.1 It often forms a mosaic of dense thickets interspersed with occasional motts of taller oaks, large areas of bare ground, and concentrations of sand sagebrush. Sand shinnery oak is well suited to deep sandy soils. The height and cover of oak decreases as sand depth decreases or clay content increases. The aggressive nature of fall witchgrass and continued loss of more palatable grasses and threeawn species may result in a sand shinnery oak-fall witchgrass community. Burning may result in a community with very little grass or sand shinnery oak (bare). Sand shinnery oak usually recovers due to its ability to sprout aggressively following fire. Diagnosis: Sand shinnery oak is the dominant species. Grass cover is sparse and patchy. Shrub cover is high. Blowouts and bare areas are common, however, high shrub cover mediates erosion. Transition to Sand Shinnery Oak Dominated (1a): Climate may play a role in facilitating the spread sand shinnery oak. It is best adapted to those areas that receive and average of 16 inches of annual rainfall; it may therefore gain a competitive advantage during cycles of above average precipitation. Sand shinnery oak spreads mainly by elongation of rhizomes, but in some instances will reproduce by seed. The establishment and survival of seedlings is limited to those years with abundant rainfall during the months of July and August. If fire historically played a part in suppressing the density and distribution of shrubs in desert grasslands, then fire suppression may facilitate a shift to shrub dominance.2 Competition for resources between grasses and shrubs may be a factor in increased densities of sand shinnery oak. 1 Sand shinnery oak has an extensive system of underground roots and stems that can uptake and store water for growth during drier periods, allowing it to increase, at times when grasses decrease. Evidence of competitive suppression of grasses is indicated by increases in herbaceous vegetation following chemical control of sand shinnery oak.1 However, this increase may in part be due to a flush of nutrients made available from the decomposing biomass of woody roots and stems. Loss of grass cover due to overgrazing or drought may give a competitive advantage to sand shinnery oak. Key indicators of approach to transition: * A decrease in the tall grass species and the associated increase in threeawns may be indicative of the initial stage of transition to a shrub-dominated state. * Increased cover of sand shinnery oak. Transition back to Grass/Shrub Mix (1b) Chemical brush control is an effective means of controlling sand shinnery oak and sand sagebrush. Where large areas of chemical control are planned, increased erosion and the effect on loss of wildlife habitat should be considered. Prescribed grazing will help ensure an adequate deferment period to allow grass recovery and subsequent proper forage utilization. There have been studies that suggest long term browsing by goats can reduce sand shinnery oak, altering production in favor of grasses.3
Additional community tables
Table 7. Community 1.1 plant community composition
| Group | Common name | Symbol | Scientific name | Annual production (kg/hectare) | Foliar cover (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Grass/Grasslike
|
||||||
| 1 | 219–328 | |||||
| sand bluestem | ANHA | Andropogon hallii | 219–328 | – | ||
| Havard's panicgrass | PAHA2 | Panicum havardii | 219–328 | – | ||
| giant dropseed | SPGI | Sporobolus giganteus | 219–328 | – | ||
| 2 | 164–219 | |||||
| spike dropseed | SPCO4 | Sporobolus contractus | 164–219 | – | ||
| sand dropseed | SPCR | Sporobolus cryptandrus | 164–219 | – | ||
| mesa dropseed | SPFL2 | Sporobolus flexuosus | 164–219 | – | ||
| 3 | 55–110 | |||||
| thin paspalum | PASE5 | Paspalum setaceum | 55–110 | – | ||
| plains bristlegrass | SEVU2 | Setaria vulpiseta | 55–110 | – | ||
| 4 | 33–55 | |||||
| threeawn | ARIST | Aristida | 33–55 | – | ||
| mat sandbur | CELO3 | Cenchrus longispinus | 33–55 | – | ||
| flatsedge | CYPER | Cyperus | 33–55 | – | ||
| 5 | 33–55 | |||||
| Grass, perennial | 2GP | Grass, perennial | 33–55 | – | ||
|
Shrub/Vine
|
||||||
| 6 | 55–110 | |||||
| Havard oak | QUHA3 | Quercus havardii | 55–110 | – | ||
| 7 | 55–110 | |||||
| soapweed yucca | YUGL | Yucca glauca | 55–110 | – | ||
| 8 | 33–55 | |||||
| sand sagebrush | ARFI2 | Artemisia filifolia | 33–55 | – | ||
| 9 | 22–55 | |||||
| fourwing saltbush | ATCA2 | Atriplex canescens | 22–55 | – | ||
| 10 | 22–55 | |||||
| rabbitbrush | CHRYS9 | Chrysothamnus | 22–55 | – | ||
| 11 | 22–55 | |||||
| Shrub (>.5m) | 2SHRUB | Shrub (>.5m) | 22–55 | – | ||
|
Forb
|
||||||
| 12 | 22–55 | |||||
| featherplume | DAFO | Dalea formosa | 22–55 | – | ||
| 13 | 33–55 | |||||
| sundrops | CALYL | Calylophus | 33–55 | – | ||
| phlox heliotrope | HECO5 | Heliotropium convolvulaceum | 33–55 | – | ||
| sharpleaf penstemon | PEAC | Penstemon acuminatus | 33–55 | – | ||
| 14 | 22–55 | |||||
| touristplant | DIWI2 | Dimorphocarpa wislizeni | 22–55 | – | ||
| lemon beebalm | MOCI | Monarda citriodora | 22–55 | – | ||
| 16 | 33–55 | |||||
| hymenopappus | HYMEN4 | Hymenopappus | 33–55 | – | ||
| blazingstar | MENTZ | Mentzelia | 33–55 | – | ||
| threadleaf ragwort | SEFLF | Senecio flaccidus var. flaccidus | 33–55 | – | ||
| 17 | 22–55 | |||||
| sunflower | HELIA3 | Helianthus | 22–55 | – | ||
| 18 | 22–55 | |||||
| buckwheat | ERIOG | Eriogonum | 22–55 | – | ||
| 19 | 22–55 | |||||
| Forb (herbaceous, not grass nor grass-like) | 2FORB | Forb (herbaceous, not grass nor grass-like) | 22–55 | – | ||
Interpretations
Animal community
This site provides habitat which support a resident animal community that is characterized by pronghorn antelope, black-tailed jackrabbit, Ord’s kangaroo rat, Northern grasshopper mouse, Southern Plains woodrat, swift fox, roadrunner, meadowlark, lark bunting, ferruginous hawk, lesser prairie chicken, mourning dove, scaled quail, sand dune lizard, marbled whiptail, ornate box turtle, bullsnake and Western diamondback rattlesnake. Grasshopper and vesper sparrows utilize the site during migration. The ferruginous hawk sometimes nests on dunes associated with the site. White-tailed deer are also sometimes associated with this site (Mescalero Sands). Where mesquite invades, resident species of birds such as white-necked raven, roadrunner, pyrrhuloxia, mourning dove, and Harris hawk nest. Where sand hummocks form around shrubs, rodent populations and their predators increase. Fourwing saltbush, shinnery oak, sand sagebrush, and mesquite provide protective cover for scaled quail. Seed, green herbage, and fruit from a variety of grasses, forbs, and shrubs provide food for a number of birds and mammals, including mourning dove, scaled quail, lessor prairie chicken and antelope.
Hydrological functions
The runoff curve numbers are determined by field investigations using hydrolic cover conditions and hydrologic soil groups.
Hydrologic Interpretations
Soil Series------- Hydrologic Group
Kermit------------- A
Aguena------------- A
Recreational uses
This site offers recreation potential for hiking, horseback riding, nature observation and photography. This site also offers opportunities for hunting of such species as quail, dove and antelope.
Mechanical, off-road vehicle use by dune buggies, four wheelers, or motor bikes is site-destructive, resulting in severe soil movement by wind erosion. Off-road vehicle use should be confined to those areas which are already deterioriated and where intensive management for soil protection can be practiced.
During years of abundant spring moisture, this site desplays a colorful array of wildflowers during May and June. A few showy summer and fall flowers also occur.
Wood products
The plant community associated with this site affords little or no wood products.
Other products
This site is suitable for grazing during all seasons of the year by all kinds and classes of livestock. Where shinnery oak has increased considerably above the amount in the potential plant community cattle loss can occur if grazed during the late bud and early leaf stage. This site responds well to an integrated brush management and grazing management. Brush management is inappropriate in occupied or potential habitat for sand dune lizard. Mismannagement of this site will cause a decrease in Harvard panicum, sand bluestem, giant dropseed, plains bristlegrass, sand paspalum and fourwing saltbush. There will be a corresponding increase in dropseeds, sand sagebrush and shinnery oak. When shinnery oak is not a problem, this site responds best to a system of mangement that rotates the season of use. Grazing management plans should be design to leave adequate residual cover for lesser prairie chicken nesting.
Other information
Guide to Suggested Initial Stocking Rate Acres per Animal Unit Month
Similarity Index----- Ac/AUM
100 - 76------------- 2.0 – 4.0
75 – 51-------------- 3.0 – 6.5
50 – 26-------------- 5.0 – 12.0
25 – 0--------------- 12.0 - +
Supporting information
Inventory data references
Data collection for this site was done in conjunction with the progressive soil surveys within the Southern Desertic Basins, Plains and Mountains (SD-3) Major Land Resource Area of New Mexico. This site has been mapped and correlated with soils in the following soil surveys: South Chaves, Eddy, Lea and Otero Counties.
Other references
Literature Cited:
1. Sears, W.E., C.M. Britton, D.B. Wester, and R.D. Pettit. 1986. Herbicide conversion of a sand shinnery oak (Quercus havardii) community: effects on biomass. J. Range. Manage. 39: 399-403.
2. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (2002, September). Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ [accessed 1/07/02].
3.Villena, F. and J.A. Pfister. 1990. Sand shinnery oak as forage for Angora and Spanish goats. J. Range. Manage. 43: 116-122.
Contributors
David Trujillo
Don Sylvester
Rangeland health reference sheet
Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health is a qualitative assessment protocol used to determine ecosystem condition based on benchmark characteristics described in the Reference Sheet. A suite of 17 (or more) indicators are typically considered in an assessment. The ecological site(s) representative of an assessment location must be known prior to applying the protocol and must be verified based on soils and climate. Current plant community cannot be used to identify the ecological site.
| Author(s)/participant(s) | |
|---|---|
| Contact for lead author | |
| Date | |
| Approved by | |
| Approval date | |
| Composition (Indicators 10 and 12) based on | Annual Production |
Indicators
-
Number and extent of rills:
-
Presence of water flow patterns:
-
Number and height of erosional pedestals or terracettes:
-
Bare ground from Ecological Site Description or other studies (rock, litter, lichen, moss, plant canopy are not bare ground):
-
Number of gullies and erosion associated with gullies:
-
Extent of wind scoured, blowouts and/or depositional areas:
-
Amount of litter movement (describe size and distance expected to travel):
-
Soil surface (top few mm) resistance to erosion (stability values are averages - most sites will show a range of values):
-
Soil surface structure and SOM content (include type of structure and A-horizon color and thickness):
-
Effect of community phase composition (relative proportion of different functional groups) and spatial distribution on infiltration and runoff:
-
Presence and thickness of compaction layer (usually none; describe soil profile features which may be mistaken for compaction on this site):
-
Functional/Structural Groups (list in order of descending dominance by above-ground annual-production or live foliar cover using symbols: >>, >, = to indicate much greater than, greater than, and equal to):
Dominant:
Sub-dominant:
Other:
Additional:
-
Amount of plant mortality and decadence (include which functional groups are expected to show mortality or decadence):
-
Average percent litter cover (%) and depth ( in):
-
Expected annual annual-production (this is TOTAL above-ground annual-production, not just forage annual-production):
-
Potential invasive (including noxious) species (native and non-native). List species which BOTH characterize degraded states and have the potential to become a dominant or co-dominant species on the ecological site if their future establishment and growth is not actively controlled by management interventions. Species that become dominant for only one to several years (e.g., short-term response to drought or wildfire) are not invasive plants. Note that unlike other indicators, we are describing what is NOT expected in the reference state for the ecological site:
-
Perennial plant reproductive capability:
Print Options
Sections
Font
Other
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.
Click on box and path labels to scroll to the respective text.