Very Shallow
Scenario model
Current ecosystem state
Select a state
Management practices/drivers
Select a transition or restoration pathway
- Transition T1 More details
- Restoration pathway R2 More details
-
No transition or restoration pathway between the selected states has been described
Target ecosystem state
Select a state
Description
State 1 Narrative:
The Reference State represents non-invaded communities composed of native species. Invasive annual grasses are not present. Very Shallow sites rarely burn, and in most cases, receives minimal grazing. This ecological site is the most stable ecological site on the landscape.
Reference State Community Phases:
1.1 Reference Sandberg bluegrass – low shrub
1.2 Forb – low shrub Native forbs with low shrub
Dominant Reference State Species:
Sandberg bluegrass and stiff sage &/or other low shrub Eriogonum species
At-risk Communities:
• All communities in the reference state are at risk of moving to State 2. The seed source of cheatgrass is nearby and blowing onto most sites annually
• Community 1.1 has a high Sandberg bluegrass cover and is thus, at lower risk of moving to State 2, Forb-Annual Grass
• Community 1.2, has less Sandberg bluegrass cover and a high amount of forb cover, and is at considerable risk of moving to State 2
Submodel
Description
State 2 Narrative:
This state represents the ecological changes that occur when there is a shift from dominance by perennial native grasses to forbs or annual grass dominance in the herbaceous layer. The shrub components generally remain in the overstory.
Most Very Shallow sites never cross the threshold into State 2 as they are not attractive to grazing animals and rarely burn (limited forage values and surface rocks). The exception being chronic heavy grazing in the spring from migrating elk, feral horses or livestock. As the cover of Sandberg bluegrass significantly declines the site becomes open to invasion by invasive annuals, however.
Invasive annual grasses, which are common & frequently dominant on adjacent Loamy ecological sites, do not often compete as well on Very Shallow sites. However, the cheatgrass seed blows onto Very Shallow sites annually and can become a minor component. In a year with heavy snowfall and early spring rain, such as 2017, the site had far more moisture that the plant community could utilize. This is the perfect opportunity for cheatgrass seed, which is capable of rapid germination and growth to establish in significant amounts across the site. In following years when moisture is normal or below normal, native species will utilize most of the available moisture and cheatgrass seed will not germinate or make viable plants. Therefore, in most cases, these micro-bursts of cheatgrass tend to be episodic and mostly a temporary condition on Very Shallow sites.
However, due to long term disturbances and higher precipitation, Very Shallow sites in the Goldendale Prairie portion of MLRA 8 are now dominated by cheatgrass, medusahead, ventenata or bulbous bluegrass. Sites have been significantly impacted by heavy grazing pressure from livestock that have removed much of the native grass components, leaving niches for these invasive annuals to take hold. Native forbs such as Lomatium may be prominent, but the grass component has shifted completely.
A reduction to Sandberg bluegrass cover allows annual grasses the opportunity to colonize and invade on a more permanent basis. Heavy grazing use disrupts the soil surface and the moss-lichen layer via animal hooves, which in turn, causes loss of both soil structure and biological crust. When this happens site resistance to erosional forces are greatly diminished as well.
State 2 may exhibit either a significant decrease in pedestaling due to the lack of bunchgrass cover and heavy use trampling by ungulates, or there will be a significant increase in pedestaling due to increased erosion from water flows around the remaining bunchgrasses.
Community Phases for State 2:
Community Phase 2.1: dominated by native forbs and/or invasive annual grasses. Forbs which increase in the altered conditions and are competitive with invasive grasses, can include lomatium, fleabane, willow herb, yarrow and onion. Typical invasive grasses may include annual bromes, medusahead and sixweeks fescue.
Submodel
Mechanism
T1 Result: Shift from Reference Community Phase 1.1 to Sate 2 Community Phase 2.1, resulting in the shift in functional groups to forbs and non-native annual grass dominance.
Primary Trigger: Extensive spring grazing with heavy use to Sandberg bluegrass. The grazing pressure can come from elk, cattle or feral horses.
Secondary Trippers: a micro-burst of cheatgrass could put Community 1.2 at risk. The trampling of Very Shallow soils, displacing and disturbing the surface soil structure by grazing animals could also trigger transition to State 2. A micro-burst of annual grasses could allow even pristine sites to be invaded. Community 1.2 is the community most at risk and is also the pathway for crossing the threshold from State 1 to State 2.
Ecological process: consistent spring defoliation pressure to Sandberg bluegrass causes poor vigor, shrinking crowns and plant mortality. Most or all Sandberg bluegrass plants are lost from the community, and this allows native forbs to increase and invasive annuals (forbs and grasses) to colonize and expand. This facilitates plant community changes from Community 1.2 to Community 2.1.
Indicators: Declining vigor and cover of Sandberg bluegrass, declining soil biotic crust and, increasing gaps between perennial bunchgrasses.
Mechanism
State 2 is considered non-reversible. Restoration of Sandberg bluegrass, the low shrub component, native forbs and the soil biotic crust would be extremely difficult, labor intensive and costly. Seedlings and plugged plants need soil moisture and time to germinate and become established. In most years, seeds and plugs may not have a chance as site conditions on Very Shallow can change quickly and the non-native species are much more adaptable under these conditions. Drying winds and bright sun can turn a snowy or muddy site into a hard crust before plants are established. Timing of all recovery efforts would have an extremely narrow window of opportunity on these altered sites of Very Shallow.
References:
Boling M., Frazier B., Busacca, A., General Soil Map of Washington, Washington State University, 1998
Daubenmire, R., Steppe Vegetation of Washington, EB1446, March 1968
Davies, Kirk, Medusahead Dispersal and Establishment in Sagebrush Steppe Plant Communities, Rangeland Ecology & Management, 2008
Environmental Protection Agency, map of Level III and IV Ecoregions of Washington, June 2010
Miller, Baisan, Rose and Pacioretty, “Pre and Post Settlement Fire regimes in mountain Sagebrush communities: The Northern Intermountain Region
Natural Resources Conservation Service, map of Common Resource Areas of Washington, 2003
Rapid Assessment Reference Condition Model for Wyoming sagebrush, LANDFIRE project, 2008
Rocchio, Joseph & Crawford, Rex C., Ecological Systems of Washington State. A Guide to Identification. Washington State Department of Natural Resources, October 2015. Pages 156-161 Inter-Mountain Basin Big Sagebrush.
Rouse, Gerald, MLRA 8 Ecological Sites as referenced from Natural Resources Conservation Service-Washington FOTG, 2004
Soil Conservation Service, Range Sites for MLRA 8 from 1980s and 1990s
Tart, D., Kelley, P., and Schlafly, P., Rangeland Vegetation of the Yakima Indian reservation, August 1987, YIN Soil and Vegetation Survey
Model keys
Briefcase
Add ecological site groups 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 site groups
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.