Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Ecological site NX119X01Y003

Shallow Upland

Last updated: 5/16/2025
Accessed: 12/05/2025

Home / Esd catalog / MLRA 119X / Ecological site NX119X01Y003

USC

Metric

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.

Click to explore map

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.

MLRA notes

Major Land Resource Area (MLRA): 119X–Ouachita Mountains

Major Land Resource Area 119, the Ouachita Mountains, is in Arkansas and Oklahoma. This MLRA is about 11,885 square miles (30,800 square kilometers). Hot Springs National Park and the Ouachita National Forest reside in this MLRA.

This MLRA is located in the Ouachita Mountains section of the Ouachita Province of the Interior Highlands. The steep mountains are underlain by folded and faulted sedimentary and metamorphic rocks. Most of the valleys are narrow and have steep gradients while wide terraces and flood plains border the Ouachita River. Elevation ranges from 130 feet (40 meters) in the bottomlands to 2,670 feet (810 meters) on the mountain peaks.

These steep mountains are underlain by folded and faulted formations, dominantly of shale and sandstone. Ordovician-age shale and sandstone are included in the Collier Shale, Crystal Mountain Sandstone, and Womble Shale. Mississippian-age shale, sandstone, novaculite, and chert are included in the Arkansas Novaculite and the Stanley Shale. Pennsylvanian-age shale, slate, quartzite, and sandstone are included in the Jackfork Sandstone, Johns Valley Shale, and upper Atoka Formations. Alluvial deposits of silt, sand, and gravel are on the wide terraces and flood plains that border the Ouachita River.

The dominant soil orders in this MLRA are Ultisols and Inceptisols. The soils in this MLRA have a thermic soil temperature regime, a udic soil moisture regime, and mixed or siliceous mineralogy.

Ecological site concept

The Shallow Upland ecological site is on hills and mountains along hillslopes and mountainsides. The soils associated with this site are shallow and formed in residuum derived from sandstone and shale. This site has slopes between 3 and 40 percent with elevations ranging from 500 to 1,800 feet (150 to 590 meters). Important abiotic characteristics associated with this site are less than 20 inches (50 cm) to a restriction layer, 18 to 35 percent clay in the particle size control section, and a shallow rooting depth.

Associated sites

NX119X01Y006	Clayey Upland This ecological site is differentiated from the Shallow Upland Ecological Site by a clay content of greater than 35 percent in the particle size control section and a Bt horizon within 10 inches.

NX119X01Y006

Clayey Upland

This ecological site is differentiated from the Shallow Upland Ecological Site by a clay content of greater than 35 percent in the particle size control section and a Bt horizon within 10 inches.

Similar sites

NX119X01Y007	Loamy Upland This ecological site is differentiated from the Shallow Upland Ecological Site by a soil depth greater than 20 inches.

NX119X01Y007

Loamy Upland

This ecological site is differentiated from the Shallow Upland Ecological Site by a soil depth greater than 20 inches.

Table 1. Dominant plant species

Tree	(1) Quercus alba (2) Pinus taeda
Shrub	(1) Rhus (2) Cornus
Herbaceous	(1) Schizachyrium scoparium (2) Sorghastrum nutans

Legacy ID

F119XY003AR

Download full description

Physiographic features

This ecological site is on hills and mountains along hillslopes and mountainsides. This site has slopes between 3 and 40 percent. Elevations range from 500 to 1,800 feet (150 to 590 meters). Runoff class varies from medium to high, with no ponding or flooding.

Table 2. Representative physiographic features

Landforms	(1) Hills > Hillslope (2) Mountains > Mountainside
Runoff class	Medium to high
Flooding frequency	None
Ponding frequency	None
Elevation	500 – 1,800 ft
Slope	3 – 40%
Aspect	Aspect is not a significant factor

Climatic features

This ecological site is characterized by hot summers, cool winters, and mild spring and fall temperatures. Mean annual precipitation is 54 inches. The average frost-free period is 182 days, and the average freeze-free period is 207 days. The highest precipitation occurs in May (6.4 inches), and the lowest occurs in August (3.4 inches). Precipitation varies greatly across this ecological site, with increasing precipitation from west to east. The warmest month of the year is August (93°F average high), and the coolest is January (26°F average low).

Thunderstorms and heat waves are common and occur frequently during summer months. Catastrophic storm events, such as tornados, ice-storms, floods, and hail-storms are also known to occasionally occur within this ecological site. According to the Oklahoma Water Resource Board, drought occurs on 5 to 10 year cycles. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) predicts that droughts will become more severe throughout Arkansas due to longer periods without rain and an increase in very hot days (EPA, 2016).

Data was provided by the Alum Fork, Battiest, Wilburton, Murfreesboro, Waldron, and Hot Springs climate stations. Site specific data should be obtained by accessing the database provided by the National Centers for Environmental Information (https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/search).

Table 3. Representative climatic features

Frost-free period (characteristic range)	167-193 days
Freeze-free period (characteristic range)	197-214 days
Precipitation total (characteristic range)	51-57 in
Frost-free period (actual range)	163-198 days
Freeze-free period (actual range)	196-225 days
Precipitation total (actual range)	50-57 in
Frost-free period (average)	182 days
Freeze-free period (average)	207 days
Precipitation total (average)	54 in

Characteristic range

Actual range

Bar

Line

Figure 2. Monthly precipitation range

Characteristic range

Actual range

Bar

Line

Figure 3. Monthly minimum temperature range

Characteristic range

Actual range

Bar

Line

Figure 4. Monthly maximum temperature range

Bar

Line

Figure 5. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature

Figure 6. Annual precipitation pattern

Figure 7. Annual average temperature pattern

Climate stations used

(1) ALUM FORK [USC00030130], Paron, AR
(2) BATTIEST [USC00340567], Bethel, OK
(3) WILBURTON 9 ENE [USC00349634], Red Oak, OK
(4) MURFREESBORO 1W [USC00035079], Murfreesboro, AR
(5) WALDRON [USC00037488], Waldron, AR
(6) HOT SPRINGS 1 NNE [USC00033466], Hot Springs National Park, AR

Soil features

The soils associated with this ecological site are formed in residuum derived from sandstone and shale. These soils are shallow, well to excessively drained, and have a moderate to moderately rapid permeability class. A gravelly or stony fine sandy loam or silt surface texture is common. Important abiotic characteristics associated with this site are less than 20 inches (50 cm) to a restriction layer, 18 to 35 percent clay in the particle size control section, and a shallow rooting depth.

The soil series associated with this site are Pickens, Bismark, and Clebit.

Table 4. Representative soil features

Parent material	(1) Residuum – sandstone and shale
Surface texture	(1) Gravelly fine sandy loam (2) Stony silt
Drainage class	Well drained to excessively drained
Permeability class	Moderate to moderately rapid
Depth to restrictive layer	20 in
Soil depth	20 in
Surface fragment cover <=3"	10 – 34%
Surface fragment cover >3"	2 – 22%
Available water capacity (Depth not specified)	0.6 – 2.4 in
Soil reaction (1:1 water) (Depth not specified)	4.5 – 6.5
Subsurface fragment volume <=3" (Depth not specified)	19 – 32%
Subsurface fragment volume >3" (Depth not specified)	4 – 15%

Ecological dynamics

The Shallow Upland reference state consists of a pine forest, characterized by a shortleaf pine overstory with a herbaceous forest floor. Loblolly pine and hardwood tree species can also be found on upland sites (Edlredge, 1937). Native grass species such as big bluestem, switchgrass, little bluestem, and Indiangrass are found in the herbaceous layer. (Arkansas Geological Survey, 2005).

Fire has a significant influence on this ecological site. The historical average fire-return interval was likely between 3 and 25 years (Guyette and Spetich, 2003; Hallgren, DeSantic, and Burton, 2012). These wildfires would occur naturally through lightning strikes, but the majority were probably ignited by anthropogenic sources (DeSantis, Hallgren, and Stahle, 2010). Native species evolved with and responded well to fires (Spetich and Hong He, 2008; Engle and Bidwell, 2001). Fires on upland ecological sites are likely moderate to low severity, due to forested conditions and lower amounts of ground vegetation (Carey, 1992).

Climate related events, such as hail-storms, tornados, thunderstorms, and extreme precipitation, occur on these sites. Hail-storms can reduce canopy size, increase litter deposition, and increase tree bark removal. When paired with other disturbances, such as fire, the effects on tree species were much greater than in areas not affected by the hail-storm (Gower et al., 2015). Tornados have been shown to change plant community compositions in savanna ecosystems, favoring hardwoods and eliminating softwoods (Liu et al., 1997). Thunderstorms greatly effect ecosystem dynamics. Thunderstorms generally occur during summer months but can occur during every season. If a fire is started by a lightning strike, there will be different effects in the ecosystem depending on the season (Hiers, Wyatt, and Mitchell, 2000).

Livestock grazing can occur on this ecological site. Changes to the ecological dynamics are proportional to the intensity of livestock grazing and can be altered by grazing management practices (Angerer, Fox, and Wolfe, 2013; Kohl, 2016). For example, desirable grasses and forbs are relentlessly grazed by livestock. This will weaken and potentially remove or replace desirable species with less productive species (Smith, 1940).

A state and transition model has been created to explain this ecological site. However, sparse data availability only allowed basic principles to be explored and a small number of species to be recorded. More data will be collected to provide a greater understanding of the ecological dynamics, as well as the resources consumption and distribution.

State and transition model

More interactive model formats are also available. View Interactive Models
Click on state and transition labels to scroll to the respective text

Ecosystem states

SWAPAEH

SWAPAEH

SWAPAEH

T1B	-	Tree removal, mechanical and chemical woody vegetation suppression, tillage, introduce annual or perennial forage species.
T1A	-	Tree removal, brush management, plantation tree establishment and management.
T2B	-	Tree removal, mechanical and chemical woody vegetation suppression, tillage, introduce annual or perennial forage species.
T2A	-	Tree removal, brush management, plantation tree establishment and management.
T3B	-	Forage species suppression, brush management, native tree establishment and management.
T3A	-	Forage species suppression, brush management, plantation tree establishment and management.
T4A	-	Plantation species suppression, brush management, native tree establishment and management.
T4B	-	Woody species removal, prescribed fire, seeding, and grazing.

State 1 submodel, plant communities

1.1. Shortleaf Pine-White Oak/Bluestem

1.2. White Oak- Shortleaf Pine

1.3. White Oak-Southern Red Oak- Shortleaf Pine

1.4. Hickory- Elm- Red Maple

1.1A	-	Longer fire return intervals
1.1B	-	Longer fire return intervals
1.1C	-	Major ecosystem disturbance
1.2B	-	Major ecosystem disturbance
1.3B	-	Major ecological disturbance
1.4A	-	Regular fire return interval, time
1.4B	-	Regular fire return interval, time
1.4C	-	Regular fire return interval, time

State 2 submodel, plant communities

2.1. Shortleaf Pine-White Oak/Bluestem

2.2. White Oak- Shortleaf Pine

2.3. White Oak-Southern Red Oak- Shortleaf Pine

2.4. Hickory- Elm- Red Maple

1.1A	-	Longer fire return intervals
1.1B	-	Longer fire return intervals
1.1C	-	Major ecosystem disturbance
1.2B	-	Major ecosystem disturbance
1.3B	-	Major ecological disturbance
1.4A	-	Regular fire return interval, time
1.4B	-	Regular fire return interval, time
1.4C	-	Regular fire return interval, time

State 3 submodel, plant communities

3.1. Bermudagrass

3.2. Bermudagrass/ Elm- Eastern Redcedar

3.3. Eastern Redcedar- Elm/ Bermudagrass

3.1A	-	Fire Suppression, Grazing Pressure
3.2A	-	Tree Removal, Brush Management, Grazing Management
3.2B	-	Fire Suppression, Grazing Pressure
3.3A	-	Tree Removal, Brush Management
3.3B	-	Tree Removal, Brush Management

State 4 submodel, plant communities

4.1. Loblolly Pine

State 1
Reference

The Reference State is representative of the natural range of variability without anthropogenic influences. Drivers: Fire frequency between 3 and 25 years, climate (decadal scale), insect and disease presence or establishment, and wildlife grazing or browsing. Feedbacks: Fire-tolerant species dominate the ecological site. Wildlife grazing or browsing decreases the amount of grass available, decreasing fire intensity and causing wildlife migration to a new grazing location. When wildlife migrate, grasses and small shrubs grow and become sufficient fuel to carry a low or medium intensity fire across the landscape within the fire return interval.

Characteristics and indicators. The reference state consists of a hardwood and pine forest, characterized by mixed hardwood and pine species. Gaps in the canopy allow sunlight to reach the herbaceous layer, allowing grass and forb species to grow.

Dominant plant species

oak (Quercus), tree
pine (Pinus), tree
hybrid hickory (Carya), tree
farkleberry (Vaccinium arboreum), shrub
American beautyberry (Callicarpa americana), shrub
bluestem (Andropogon), grass
rosette grass (Dichanthelium), grass
blueberry (Vaccinium), other herbaceous
greenbrier (Smilax), other herbaceous
eastern poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), other herbaceous

Community 1.1
Shortleaf Pine-White Oak/Bluestem

This community phase is dominated by mature pine and oak trees, along with warm-season, perennial tallgrasses.

Dominant plant species

white oak (Quercus alba), tree
bluestem (Andropogon), grass

Community 1.2
White Oak- Shortleaf Pine

This community phase has a moderately closed canopy with an understory of tallgrasses and midgrasses. This community phases occurs on drier locations than community phase 1.3.

Dominant plant species

white oak (Quercus alba), tree
shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata), tree

Community 1.3
White Oak-Southern Red Oak- Shortleaf Pine

Tree species dominate this community phase. High foliar cover does not allow sunlight below the overstory. This community phase occurs on locations that receive and hold more moisture than community phase 1.2.

Dominant plant species

white oak (Quercus alba), tree
shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata), tree
southern red oak (Quercus falcata), tree

Community 1.4
Hickory- Elm- Red Maple

This community phase has fast growing trees and shrubs that cause a "crowded" appearance.

Dominant plant species

hybrid hickory (Carya), tree
elm (Ulmus), tree
red maple (Acer rubrum), tree

Pathway 1.1A
Community 1.1 to 1.2

Longer fire return intervals allow more trees to grow and become large. Large trees will remove resources from the herbaceous layer, reducing the amount of grasses and forbs.

Pathway 1.1B
Community 1.1 to 1.3

Longer fire return intervals allow more trees to grow and become large. Large trees will remove resources from the herbaceous layer, reducing the amount of grasses and forbs.

Pathway 1.1C
Community 1.1 to 1.4

Major disturbance removes overstory vegetation. Hickory and elm species cover empty space, and grow rapidly.

Pathway 1.2B
Community 1.2 to 1.4

Major disturbance removes overstory vegetation. Hickory and elm species cover empty space, and grow rapidly.

Pathway 1.3B
Community 1.3 to 1.4

Major disturbance removes overstory vegetation. Hickory and elm species cover empty space, and grow rapidly.

Pathway 1.4A
Community 1.4 to 1.1

Time passes and large trees eventually shade out and kill smaller trees in the understory.

Pathway 1.4B
Community 1.4 to 1.2

Time passes and large trees eventually shade out and kill smaller trees in the understory.

Pathway 1.4C
Community 1.4 to 1.3

Time passes and large trees eventually shade out and kill smaller trees in the understory.

State 2
Forest

The Forest State is representative of the natural range of variability with minor anthropogenic influences. Drivers: Fire frequency between 3 and 25 years, climate (decadal scale), insect and disease presence or establishment, non-native vegetation establishment, and wildlife or livestock grazing or browsing. Feedbacks: Fire-tolerant species dominate the ecological site. Grazing and browsing species decreases the amount of grass available, decreasing fire intensity. Grazing and browsing species are removed from the area allowing grasses and small shrubs grow and become sufficient fuel to carry a low or medium intensity fire across the landscape within the fire return interval. Prescribed fire is the most common cause of fire on the current landscape.

Characteristics and indicators. The forest state consists of a hardwood and pine forest, characterized by mixed hardwood and pine species. Gaps in the canopy allow sunlight to reach the herbaceous layer, allowing grass and forb species to grow. The forest state is different than the reference state because non-native vegetation is present.

Dominant plant species

oak (Quercus), tree
pine (Pinus), tree
hybrid hickory (Carya), tree
blueberry (Vaccinium), shrub
greenbrier (Smilax), shrub
muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), shrub
eastern poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), shrub
farkleberry (Vaccinium arboreum), shrub
blackberry (Rubus), shrub
bluestem (Andropogon), grass
rosette grass (Dichanthelium), grass
longleaf woodoats (Chasmanthium sessiliflorum), grass

Community 2.1
Shortleaf Pine-White Oak/Bluestem

This community phase is dominated by mature pine and oak trees, along with warm-season, perennial tallgrasses.

Dominant plant species

white oak (Quercus alba), tree
shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata), tree
bluestem (Andropogon), grass

Community 2.2
White Oak- Shortleaf Pine

This community phase has a moderately closed canopy with an understory of tallgrasses and midgrasses. This community phases occurs on drier locations than community phase 1.3.

Dominant plant species

white oak (Quercus alba), tree
shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata), tree

Community 2.3
White Oak-Southern Red Oak- Shortleaf Pine

Dominant plant species

white oak (Quercus alba), tree
shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata), tree
southern red oak (Quercus falcata), tree

Community 2.4
Hickory- Elm- Red Maple

This community phase has fast growing trees and shrubs that cause a "crowded" appearance.

Dominant plant species

hybrid hickory (Carya), tree
elm (Ulmus), tree
red maple (Acer rubrum), tree

Pathway 1.1A
Community 2.1 to 2.2

Longer fire return intervals allow more trees to grow and become large. Large trees will remove resources from the herbaceous layer, reducing the amount of grasses and forbs.

Pathway 1.1B
Community 2.1 to 2.3

Longer fire return intervals allow more trees to grow and become large. Large trees will remove resources from the herbaceous layer, reducing the amount of grasses and forbs.

Pathway 1.1C
Community 2.1 to 2.4

Major disturbance removes overstory vegetation. Pioneer tree species cover empty space and grow rapidly.

Pathway 1.2B
Community 2.2 to 2.4

Major disturbance removes overstory vegetation. Pioneer tree species cover empty space and grow rapidly.

Pathway 1.3B
Community 2.3 to 2.4

Major disturbance removes overstory vegetation. Pioneer tree species cover empty space and grow rapidly.

Pathway 1.4A
Community 2.4 to 2.1

Time passes and large trees eventually shade out and kill smaller trees in the understory.

Pathway 1.4B
Community 2.4 to 2.2

Time passes and large trees eventually shade out and kill smaller trees in the understory.

Pathway 1.4C
Community 2.4 to 2.3

Time passes and large trees eventually shade out and kill smaller trees in the understory.

State 3
Pasture

The Pasture State is characterized by the dominance of improved forage species. The quality and quantity of forb, grass, and legume species within this state will depend on the level of management inputs including seeding, fertilization, herbicide application, livestock management, and land uses. Species of both warm-season and cool-season grasses are feasible for these sites. Drivers: Mechanical soil disturbance and seed planting, climate (decadal scale), seed dispersal, and wildlife or livestock grazing or browsing. Feedbacks: Land managers use mechanical and chemical equipment to increase forage. Inputs of fertilizer and brush management are required to maintain high productivity. Wildlife and livestock grazing and browsing decrease the amount of available forage.

Characteristics and indicators. The Pasture State consists of species that are grown for specific management goals, mainly livestock grazing. Common pasture species include bermudagrass, bahiagrass, dallas grass, little bluestem, broom sedge bluestem, annual ryegrass, and tall fescue. Quality and quantity of forb, grass, and legume species within this state depend on the level of management inputs (seeding, weed management, and land uses). Species of both warm-season and cool-season grasses are feasible for these sites.

Dominant plant species

Bermudagrass (Cynodon), grass
bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum), grass
bluestem (Andropogon), grass
ryegrass (Lolium), grass

Dominant resource concerns

Sheet and rill erosion
Wind erosion
Ephemeral gully erosion
Classic gully erosion
Bank erosion from streams, shorelines, or water conveyance channels
Compaction
Organic matter depletion
Nutrients transported to surface water

Community 3.1
Bermudagrass

Herbaceous species have been planted to maximize forage production for grazing livestock.

Community 3.2
Bermudagrass/ Elm- Eastern Redcedar

Herbaceous species have been planted to maximize forage production for grazing livestock. Management decisions allow the growth of woody species, such as elm and eastern redcedar.

Community 3.3
Eastern Redcedar- Elm/ Bermudagrass

Herbaceous species have been planted to maximize forage production for grazing livestock. Improper pasture management and time have allowed for the growth of woody species such as eastern redcedar, oaks, and American elm. Woody species encroach on the pasture and dominate resources that were previously utilized by forage species.

Pathway 3.1A
Community 3.1 to 3.2

This pathway consists of an absence of fire, intense grazing pressure, and natural regeneration.

Pathway 3.2A
Community 3.2 to 3.1

This pathway consists of the removal or reduction of woody species and the increase of desirable forage species.

Pathway 3.2B
Community 3.2 to 3.3

This pathway consists of an absence of fire, intense grazing pressure, and natural regeneration.

Pathway 3.3A
Community 3.3 to 3.1

This pathway consists of the removal or reduction of woody species.

Pathway 3.3B
Community 3.3 to 3.2

This pathway consists of the removal or reduction of woody species.

State 4
Timber Plantation

The timber plantation state is characterized by the planting of merchantable trees species. The most common species for plantations in the Ouachita Mountains is loblolly pine. Drivers: Pest management, vegetation management, canopy density. Feedbacks: Timber harvesting. Planted tree species dominate this ecological site, shading out other vegetation. Anthropogenic management decreases competition with other species and assists in growth.

Characteristics and indicators. The timber plantation state consists of tree species that are planted and managed to maximize the production of merchantable timber. The most common plantation species is loblolly pine, followed by hardwood trees. Timber management differs by tree type (softwood or hardwood), timber harvest method, and reforesting practices.

Dominant plant species

loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), tree
oak (Quercus), tree

Dominant resource concerns

Sheet and rill erosion
Ephemeral gully erosion
Classic gully erosion
Bank erosion from streams, shorelines, or water conveyance channels
Compaction
Organic matter depletion
Ponding and flooding

Community 4.1
Loblolly Pine

Loblolly pine is planted to maximize timber production.

Dominant plant species

loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), tree

Transition T1B
State 1 to 3

Trigger: Mechanical and chemical woody vegetation suppression, tillage, seeding, and annual forage species introduction. Slow Variables: Increase production and management of forage species. Thresholds: Changes in soil properties, such as structure, organic matter, and nutrient cycling, as well as changes in type and frequency of disturbance.

Conservation practices

Brush Management
Prescribed Burning
Land Clearing
Prescribed Grazing

Transition T1A
State 1 to 4

Trigger: Native tree removal, mechanical and chemical woody vegetation suppression, introduce plantation tree species. Slow Variables: Increased production and management of plantation species. Thresholds: Changes in soil properties such as structure, organic matter, and nutrient cycling as well as changes in type and frequency of disturbance.

Transition T2B
State 2 to 3

Transition T2A
State 2 to 4

Transition T3B
State 3 to 2

Trigger: Forage species removal and suppression, mechanical and chemical woody vegetation suppression, introduce and manage native tree species. Slow Variables: Increased production and management of native species. Thresholds: Changes in soil properties such as structure, organic matter, and nutrient cycling as well as changes in kind and frequency of disturbance.

Transition T3A
State 3 to 4

Trigger: Forage species removal and suppression, mechanical and chemical woody vegetation suppression, introduce and manage plantation tree species. Slow Variables: Increased production and management of plantation species. Thresholds: Changes in soil properties such as structure, organic matter, and nutrient cycling as well as changes in kind and frequency of disturbance.

Transition T4A
State 4 to 2

Trigger: Timber species removal and suppression, mechanical and chemical woody vegetation suppression, introduce and manage native tree species. Slow Variables: Increased production and management of native species. Thresholds: Changes in soil properties such as structure, organic matter, and nutrient cycling as well as changes in kind and frequency of disturbance.

Transition T4B
State 4 to 3

Trigger: Tree removal, mechanical and chemical woody vegetation suppression, tillage, seeding, and introduce annual or perennial forage species. Slow Variables: Increase production and management of forage species. Thresholds: Changes in soil properties such as structure, organic matter, and nutrient cycling as well as changes in type and frequency of disturbance.

Additional community tables

Interpretations

Animal community

Common wildlife species in this area include coyote, whitetail deer, bobcat, beaver, raccoon, otter, skunk, opossum, muskrat, mink, cottontail, armadillo, gray squirrel, and turkey. The species of fish in the area include largemouth bass, bluegill, redear sunfish, channel catfish, spotted bass, white bass, crappie, flathead catfish, sucker, bullhead, bowfin, and gar.

Hydrological functions

Following are the estimated withdrawals of freshwater by use in this MLRA:

Public supply— surface-water, 26.5%; ground-water, 0.3%
Livestock— surface-water, 9.6%; ground-water, 0.3%
Irrigation— surface-water, 0.6%; ground-water, 0.0%
Other— surface-water, 62.6%; ground-water, 0.0%

The total withdrawals average 155 million gallons per day (585 million liters per day). About 1 percent is from ground-water sources, and 99 percent is from surface-water sources. The high precipitation, perennial streams, and reservoirs provide abundant water. Several large reservoirs are used for water storage, flood control, and recreation. In the valleys, small ponds and springs are the main sources of water for domestic use and for livestock. The surface-water is typically of very good quality in this mountainous area.

In the valleys, shallow wells in alluvium are the main sources of water for domestic use and for livestock. None of the bedrock aquifers in Arkansas or Oklahoma occur in this area. The quality of the shallow ground-water is very similar to the quality of the water in the streams and rivers. The ground-water is suitable for drinking.

Recreational uses

Mountain biking, camping, fishing, hiking, horseback riding, hunting, mineral prospecting, nature viewing, off-highway vehicle riding, and water activities can all be enjoyed throughout this MLRA on public land where permitted and on private land where allowed. The Ouachita National Forest is throughout this MLRA, encompassing nearly 1.8 million acres of public land.

Wood products

Public and private timberland comprise large areas throughout this MLRA. Loblolly pine is the most popular species to harvest and produces products such as lumber, pulpwood, posts, and poles. Hardwood species are also harvested and used to produce lumber, flooring, and pulpwood.

Other products

Poultry production is a major industry throughout the MLRA. Small grains, soybeans, and hay are major crops.

Supporting information

References

Angerer, J., W. Fox, and J. Wolfe. 2016. Land Degradation in Rangeland Ecosystems. Biological and Environmental hazards, Risks, and Disasters. Academic Press.
Cannon, J.B. and J.S. Brewer. 2013. Effects of Tornado Damage, Prescribed Fire, and Salvage Logging on Natural Oak Regeneration in a Xeric Southern USA Coastal Plain Oak and Pine Forest.
Carey, J. 1992. Quercus stellata, Fire Effects Information System. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Fire Sciences Laboratory.
Clark, J.A. and K.R. Covey. 2012. Tree species richness and the logging of natural forests: A meta analysis. Forest Ecology and Management. Elsevier, Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies. 146–153.
DeSantis, R.D., S.W. Hallgreen, and D.W. Stahle. 2010. Historic Fire Regime of an Upland Oak Forest in South Central North America. Fire Ecology. USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Saint Paul, Minnesota.
Eldredge, I. 1937. Forest Resources of Southern Arkansas. Southern Forest Experiment Station. US Forest Service.
Engle, D. and T. Bidwell. 2001. The response of central North American prairies to seasonal fire. Range Management 54:2–10.
Engle, D.M. 2017. Fire in North American Tallgrass Prairies. Weed Technology 5:247–248.
Gower, K., J. Fontaine, C. Birnbaum, and N. Enright. 2015. Sequential Disturbance Effects of Hailstorms and Fire on Vegetation in a Mediterranean-Type Ecosystem. Ecosystems 18:1121–1134.
Guldin, J.M. and M.W. Fitzpatrick. 1991. Comparison of Log Quality from Even-Aged and Uneven-Aged Loblolly Pine Stands in South Arkansas. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 15:10–17.
Guyette, R.P. and M. A. Spetich. 2003. Fire History of Oak-Pine Forests in the Lower Boston Mountains, Arkansas, USA. Forest Ecology and Management. Elsevier. 463–474.
Guyette, R.P., M.A. Spetich, and M.C. Stambaugh. 2006. Historic fire regime dynamics and forcing factors in the Boston Mountains, Arkansas, USA. Forest Ecology and Management 234:293–304.
Hallgren, S.W., DeSantis. R. D., and J.A. Burton. 2012. Fire and vegetation Dynamics in the Cross Timbers Forests of South-Central North America. Proceedings of the 4th Fire in Eastern Oak Forests Conference. USDA Forest Service General Techincal Report NRS-P-102, Springfield, Missouri. 52–66.
Heikens, A. 2007. Glade Communities of the Ozark Plateaus Province. Pages 220–230 in Savannas, Barrens, and Rock Outcrop Plant Communities of North America.
Hiers, K., R. Wyatt, and R. Mitchell. 2000. The effects of fire regime on legume reproduction in longleaf pine savannas: is a season selective?. Oecologia 125:521–530.
Jenks, J.A., Leslie, R.L. Lochmiller, M.A. Melchiors, and McCollum. 1996. Competition in sympatric white-tailed deer and cattle populations in southern pine forests of Oklahoma and Arkansas, USA. Acta Theriologica 41:287–306.
Klos, R.J. and G.G. Wang. 2009. Drought impact on forest growth and mortality in the southeast USA: an analysis using Forest Health and Monitoring data. Ecological Applications 19:699–708.
Kohl, M., P. Krausman, K. Kunkel, and D. Williams. 2013. Bison Versus Cattle: Are They Ecologically Synonymous. Rangeland Ecology and Management 66:721–731.
Linzon, S.N. 1962. Hail Damage to White Pine and Other Trees. The Forestry Chronicle. Canadian Institute of Forestry.
Liu, C., J. Glitzenstein, P. Harcombe, and R. Knox. 1997. Tornado and fire effects on tree species composition in a savanna in the Big Thicket National Preserve, southeast Texas, USA. Forest Ecology and Management 91:279–289.
Owens, D. 2005. First report of a geological reconnaissance of the northern counties of Arkansas, made during the years 1857 and 1858. Arkansas Geological Survey.
Siemann, E., J.A. Carrillo, C.A. Gabler, R. Zipp, and W.E. Rogers. 2009. Experimental test of the impacts of feral hogs on forest dynamics and processes in the southeastern US. Forest Ecology and Management. Elsevier. 546–553.
Smith, C. 1940. The Effects of Overgrazing and Erosion Upon the Biota of the Mixed-Grass Prairie of Oklahoma. Ecology. Wiley. 381–397.
Spetich, M. and H. He. 2008. Oak decline in the Boston Mountains, Arkansas, USA: Spatial and temporal patterns under two fire regimes. Forest Ecology and Management 254:454–462.
Varner, J.M., D.R. Gordon, F.E. Putz, and J.K. Hiers. 2005. Restoring Fire to Long-Unburned Pinus palustris Ecosystems: Novel Fire Effects and Consequences for Long-Unburned Ecosystems. Restoration Ecology 13:536–544.
Warrillow, M. and P. Mou. 1999. Ice Storm Damage to Forest Tree Species in the Ridge and Valley Region of Southwestern Virginia. The Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society. Torrey Botanical Society. 147–158.
Zou, C., D. Twidwell, and C. Bielski. 2018. Impact of Eastern Redcedar Proliferation on Water Resources in the Great Plains USA- Current State of Knowledge.

Other references

Arkansas Soil Survey
Ouachita National Forest
Arkansas State Parks
The Nature Conservancy
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Encyclopedia of Arkansas
United States Forest Service Southern Research Station
NatureServe
Oklahoma Water Resource Board
National Centers For Environmental Information
University of Arkansas
Oklahoma State University
Arkansas Department of Forestry
Oklahoma Department of Forestry

Contributors

Trevor Crandall, Ecological Site Specialist

Approval

Dean Stacy, 5/16/2025

Acknowledgments

Larry Gray
Elizabeth Gray
Erin Hourihan

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	08/08/2024
Approved by	Dean Stacy
Approval date
Composition (Indicators 10 and 12) based on	Annual Production