Table 1---- Reference (Baseline) Sites Used for Range Health
Assessments, Louse Canyon Geographic Management Area, 2000
Allotments
Anderson
Pastures
North and Spring
Bull Flat
Campbell
Sacramento Hill
Horse Hill
Baseline Vegetation types
Wyoming sagebrush / bluebunch wheatgrass-Idaho
Fescue
A-S-1 RANGE HEALTH WRITEUP
Wyoming Sagebrush / Idaho Fescue-bluebunch
wheatgrass
A-BF-2 RANGE HEALTH WRITEUP
Wyoming sagebrush / bluebunch wheatgrass
C-SH-2 RANGE HEALTH WRITEUP
Low sagebrush / Idaho fescue
C-HH-4 RANGE HEALTH WRITEUP
Wyoming sagebrush / bluebunch wheatgrass
C-HH-5 RANGE HEALTH WRITEUP
Louse Canyon Drummond Basin
Louse Canyon
Wyoming sagebrush / bluebunch wheatgrass
LC-DB-1 RANGE HEALTH WRITEUP
Wyoming sagebrush / bluebunch wheatgrass
LC-LC-4 RANGE HEALTH WRITEUP
Low sagebrush / Idaho fescue
LC-LC-5 RANGE HEALTH WRITEUP
Star Valley
Community
North Stoney
Corral
Wyoming sagebrush / bluebunch wheatgrass
SV-NSC-2 RANGE HEALTH WRITEUP
South Tent Creek
Low sagebrush / Idaho fescue
SV-STC-1 RANGE HEALTH WRITEUP
Table 2--- Allotment Active Preference and Rangeland
Program Summary (RPS) Objectives (1984)
Pastures
Active
Preference
AUMs1
Anderson (allotment # 01401)
North
2857
Bull Flat
Spring
Louse Canyon Community (Allot. # 01307)
Peacock
Twin Springs
Sacramento Hill
14,157
Starvation Seeding
Starvation Brush Control
Horse Hill
Louse Canyon Community (Allot. # 01307)
Drummond Basin
Steer Canyon Seeding
Pole Creek Seeding
11,306
Lower Louse Canyon
Upper Louse Canyon
Star Valley Community (Allot. # 01402)
North Stoney Corral
North Tent Creek
6957
South Tent Creek
Tristate
Ambrose Maher (Allot. #01102)
517
Ambrose Maher
1
RPS Objective
Maintain ecological status
Improve ecological status
Improve ecological status
Maintain ecological status
Maintain ecological status
Maintain ecological status
Maintain ecological status
Maintain ecological status
Maintain ecological status
Maintain ecological status
Maintain ecological status
Improve ecological status
Improve riparian
Improve riparian
Improve ecological status
Improve ecological status
Improve ecological status
Maintain ecological status
Maintain ecological status
and Improve riparian2
There are no suspended AUMs in any of the allotments listed above .
Ambrose Maher Allotment boundary was moved to exclude river riparian in the
SEORMP Record of Decision (2002).
2
Table 3--Allotment Actual Use, Utilizations, and Ownership
Table 3.1
Anderson Allotment (#01401)
NORTH, SPRING, AND BULL FLAT PASTURES
Year
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Period
Used
%
Actual Use Utilization
03/20-05/20
03/08-09/06
03/01-06/15
03/01-08/07
03/20-08/20
02/25-08/20
03/01-06/16
03/04-06/16
03/01-06/17
02/29-06/14
02/28-06/18
03/02-06/19
03/01-06/20
03/02-06/17
04/24-06/20
03/02-06/20
03/01-06/22
03/02-06/20
03/01-06/22
02/28-06/20
03/01-06/23
02/29-06/21
03/01-06/20
1
Table 3 – Allotment Actual Use, Utilizations, and Ownership
(AUMs)
1740
2210
1687
4227
2776
2512
2492
2446
2581
2609
2751
2565
2901
2631
953
2598
2515
2364
2859
2943
2718
2645
2535
24
21
12
19
17
31
36
41
25
30
25
44
13
18
31
17
38
Maximum
Allowable
Utilization
%
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
Average
Actual Use
(AUMs)
Acres /
AUM
Actual Use
2532.86
15.56
Ownership
BLM
State
Private
Other
Total
Acres
39422
0
56
0
39478
Table 3.2 Campbell Allotment (#11306)
SACRAMENTO HILL
Year
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Actual
Use Utilization
AUMs
%
Period
Used
05/10-06/27
REST
REST
03/05-10/09
REST
06/01-08/25
03/30-06/15
03/26-06/27
REST
REST
03/01-06/21
REST
05/11-07/10
03/15-06/27
03/22-07/05
03/15-06/25
REST
06/15-07/07
03/15-06/25
REST
03/15-07/12
REST
03/15-06/05
181
10
3354
10
5012
522
1075
22
22
1551
15
469
1105
1513
1522
41
41
13
22
1335
29
597 NO DATA
1257 NO DATA
792
2
Table 3 – Allotment Actual Use, Utilizations, and Ownership
18
Maximum
Allowable
Utilization
%
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
Average
Actual Use
AUMs
Acres / AUM
Actual Use
1504.47
12.83
Ownership
BLM
State
Private
Other
Total
Acres
19309
0
118
0
19427
Table 3.3 Campbell Allotment (#11306)
HORSE HILL
Year
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Actual
Utilization
Use
%
AUMs
Period
Used
08/16-10/21
08/16-10/31
08/25-10/19
08/14-10/15
08/15-10/09
08/15-10/10
08/25-11/10
08/25-10/30
08/18-10/28
08/22-10/30
08/02-10/31
08/21-10/31
08/09-10/27
08/22-10/25
09/01-10/25
09/10-10/30
09/15-11/15
08/28-10/25
08/26-10/28
08/13-10/18
08/25-10/28
08/14-10/28
08/05-10/22
08/10-09/29
2912
3007
2078
3309
2179
2896
2086
3431
3069
3742
2933
3638
3827
3597
1927
2254
1230
2755
2461
2371
1460
1835
3942
1097
3
Table 3 – Allotment Actual Use, Utilizations, and Ownership
42
12
14
10
15
18
26
24
28
45
35
38
22
58
19
16
17
13
16
10
21
12
12
Maximum
Allowable
Utilization
%
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
Average
Actual Use
AUMs
2709.11
Ownership
BLM
State
Private
Other
Total
Acres / AUM
Actual Use
15.74
Acres
42646
0
163
0
42809
Table 3.4 Campbell Allotment (#11306)
PEACOCK
Year
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Actual
Utilization
Use
%
AUMs
Period
Used
03/04-04/26
03/02-06/15
REST
03/05-10/09
REST
03/02-06/01
04/05-07/01
REST
03/01-06/06
REST
03/15-06/15
REST
03/01-07/01
REST
03/22-06/22
REST
03/01-05/28
REST
03/01-05/24
REST
03/01-05/27
REST
03/01-05/30
902
4304
0
3354
0
4692
903
0
4964
0
4984
0
4848
0
4652
0
4710
0
4600
0
4411
0
4415
4
Table 3 – Allotment Actual Use, Utilizations, and Ownership
12
36
0
19
0
11
14
0
33
0
37
0
56
0
66
0
28
0
43
0
32
0
41
Maximum
Allowable
Utilization
%
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
Average
Ac Use
AUMs
Acres / AUM
Ac Use
3943.67
7.24
Ownership
BLM
State
Private
Other
Total
Acres
28534
0
0
0
28534
Table 3.5 Campbell Allotment (#11306)
TWIN SPRINGS
Year
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Actual
Utilization
Use
%
AUMs
Period
Used
06/23-08/12
03/17-05/29
REST
03/01-06/04
REST
03/09-06/01
03/14-10/25
03/07-07/01
03/01-05/30
REST
03/10-06/02
REST
03/01-06/07
REST
03/01-05/28
REST
03/01-05/25
REST
03/01-05/25
REST
03/01-06/01
REST
03/01-06/05
REST
2904
35
4257
13
0
0
4866
10
0
0
3608
15
3479 NO DATA
3665
21
4301
30
0
0
1067
55
0
0
6271
35
0
0
4238
57
0
0
3204
47
0
0
3845
43
0
0
4614
24
0
0
4699
34
0
0
5
Table 3 – Allotment Actual Use, Utilizations, and Ownership
Maximum
Allowable
Utilization
%
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
Average
Actual Use
%
Acres / AUM
Actual Use
3929.86
8.11
Ownership
BLM
State
Private
Other
Total
Acres
31876
0
79
0
31955
Table 3.6 Campbell Allotment (#11306)
STARVATION SEEDING
Year
Actual
Utilization
Use
%
AUMs
Period
Used
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
5/18-7/19 8/188/29
03/01-07/23
07/15-10/21
06/01-08/15
06/01-08/15
04/02-10/14
06/01-08/25
06/03-08/25
05/30-08/24
03/14-09/15
06/10-09/15
06/21-09/15
06/07-09/15
07/01-08/22
05/15-08/20
07/05-09/09
05/04-09/14
07/07-08/28
05/15-09/06
06/26-09/06
03/15-09/08
07/07-09/01
03/15-08/10
07/01-9/19
4760
9544
1000
4319
2825
5415
5012
4633
4495
6212
5542
4744
4964
3230
4832
3752
5379
3015
6878
4360
6486
3437
4734
4126
6
Table 3 – Allotment Actual Use, Utilizations, and Ownership
51
38
10
34
28
23
26
42
41
58
34
57
18
70
24
31
19
35
15
31
51
32
42
Maximum
Allowable
Utilization
%
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
Average
Actual Use
AUMs
Acres / AUM
Actual Use
4763.83
3.27
Ownership
BLM
State
Private
Other
Total
Acres
15596
0
0
0
15596
Table 3.7 Campbell Allotment (#11306)
STARVATION BRUSH CONTROL
Maximum
Year
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Actual
Utilization Allowable
Use
%
Utilization
AUMs
%
Period
Used
02/28-05/20
5260
07/23-10/22
1225
05/21-09/02
2855
06/01-08/15
4319
06/01-08/15
2825
04/10-08/16
1265
Combined w/ S. Hill
07/01-10/04
912
06/27-10/31
1159
04/29-06/17
1826
REST
0
06/15-08/27
2008
05/10-10/23
735
03/12-08/25
2492
06/01-09/09
2174
06/23-07/22
1853
06/15-09/18
1391
05/23-08/29
3322
06/10-10/01
45
04/29-07/01
2401
05/22-08/24
1015
05/28-08/13
2608
05/19-08/04
803
05/25-07/03
2533
7
Table 3 – Allotment Actual Use, Utilizations, and Ownership
38
15
31
20
35
20
24
26
30
0
46
25
41
36
44
17
67
0
37
22
50
60
41
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
Average
Actual Use
AUMs
2023.48
Ownership
BLM
State
Private
Other
Total
Acres / AUM
Actual Use
9.35
Acres
18928
0
0
0
18928
Table 3.8
Louse Canyon Community Allotment (#01307)
DRUMMOND BASIN
Maximum
Year
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Actual
Utilization Allowable
Use
%
Utilization
AUMs
%
Period
Used
03/01-05/18
30/10-04/19
03/01-04/30
03/01-04/29
03/07-05/03
03/01-05/15
03/01-05/01
03/03-06/08
03/02-05/01
03/01-05/15
03/01-05/20
03/14-04/30
03/01-05/05
03/01-05/05
03/01-05/07
03/24-05/19
03/01-05/02
03/01-06/04
03/04-05/01
03/01-05/01
03/01-05/02
03/07-05/12
03/01-05/12
2038
801
1194
647
1386
1916
1517
1517
1417
1489
1518
986
1541
1085
1433
823
1098
1952
1407
1509
1533
1452
1440
33
10
10
10
10
10
12
14
13
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
2001 03/01-05/03
1229
13
50
8
Table 3 – Allotment Actual Use, Utilizations, and Ownership
18
20
20
17
25
32
7
18
13
14
6
Average
Actual Use
AUMs
1378.2
Ownership
BLM
State
Private
Other
Total
Acres / AUM
Actual Use
22.74
Acres
31177
0
160
0
31337
Table 3.9
Louse Canyon Community Allotment (#01307)
LOUSE CANYON
Year
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Actual
Use
AUMs
Period
Used
05/20-10/31
04/01-10/10
05/01-10/01
05/15-10/01
05/13-10/07
05/24-10/16
05/21-10/01
05/19-10/04
05/09-10/10
04/20-10/05
05/23-10/10
05/23-10/08
03/16-10/28
03/15-11/17
03/17-11/02
03/29-11/05
04/01-10/31
04/01-10/31
05/07-10/01
05/31-10/03
05/23-10/02
04/16-10/03
04/15-09/24
5258
8577
7139
7362
7909
8022
6996
7812
7059
7696
6882
7452
7347
6899
6899
6667
6484
6520
6154
5918
5435
6319
5591
9
Table 3 – Allotment Actual Use, Utilizations, and Ownership
Maximum
Utilization Allowable
%
Utilization
%
45
45
52
44
51
33
27
31
35
50
41
43
51
62
49
22
37
28
37
37
39
24
38
Average
Ac Use
AUMs
40
6886.83
40
40
40 Ownership
40 BLM
40 State
40 Private
40 Other
40 Total
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
Acres AUM
Ac Use
12.69
Acres
87374
0
1040
0
88414
Table 3.10 Louse Canyon Community Allotment (#01307)
POLE CREEK SEEDING
Year
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Period
Used
05/20-07/26
05/16-06/15 09/01-10/15
05/16-06/15 10/01-11/01
05/16-06/15 10/01-10/15
05/16-06/15 10/01-10/19
05/16-11/01
04/10-06/13 10/01-10/16
06/16-06/30 10/01-10/16
06/01-07/15 09/20-10/03
06/01-06/14 10/01-10/15
06/15-06/18 08/28-10/15
06/18-07/15 10/03-10/07
05/18-06/23 09/10-10/04
05/06-6/28 09/1-10/21
09/16-10/8
06/19-06/24 10/01-10/15
6/20-6/29 9/18-10/14
6/23-6/29 10/1-10/17
6/21-6/26 9/15-10/17
6/23-6/25 8/18-10/17
6/21-6/25 9/1-10/11
6/24-6/26 9/30-10/15
6/22-6/28 9/25-10/15
10
Table 3 – Allotment Actual Use, Utilizations, and Ownership
Actual
Utilization
Use
%
AUMs
1224
1281
1067
962
1051
989
822
800
1330
710
948
965
723
1221
432
485
790
639
790
975
846
500
692
35
50
32
44
30
10
22
15
29
61
55
55
55
38
13
5
13
21
15
42
Maximum
Average
Allowable Actual Use
Utilization
%
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
AUMs
Acres / AUM
Actual Use
880.09
18.78
Ownership
BLM
State
Private
Other
Total
Acres
16530
0
215
0
16745
Table 3.11 Louse Canyon Community Allotment (#01307)
STEER CANYON SEEDING
Maximum
Year
Period
Used
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
05/01-08/15
04/10-06/15
04/16-05/31 10/01-11/15
03/08-06/10 09/08-10/01
04/29-06/11 07/20-10/07
05/13-10/16
04/15-06/14
04/15-07/28 10/04-10/31
04/21-09/30
03/10-06/19 08/04-11/20
04/20-06/10
04/26-06/12
05/05-06/14
08/23-11/12
5/6-5/31 8/20-10/9
05/17-06/16 10/01-11/15
05/03-05/30 08/19-11/12
05/17-08/04 08/24-11/15
05/02-08/17 10/03-11/01
04/30-06/15 08/20-10/30
05/03-06/10 08/10-10/31
05/13-06/10 08/15-10-29
05/13-06/02 08/01-10/12
5/4-6/15 8/15-10/17
11
Table 3 – Allotment Actual Use, Utilizations, and Ownership
Actual
Utilization Allowable
Use
%
Utilization
AUMs
%
2649
1763
1177
2788
1481
700
1148
1459
1207
2246
974
1088
983
909
948
1325
1615
1404
1584
1763
1942
1527
1179
1108
60
40
39
39
49
21
14
35
24
31
45
61
59
56
64
26
10
31
31
26
31
56
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
Average
Actual Use
AUMs
1472.13
Ownership
BLM
State
Private
Other
Total
Acres /AUM
Actual Use
7.47
Acres
10997
0
147
0
11144
Table 3.12 Star Valley Community Allotment (#01402)
NORTH STONEY CORRAL
Actual
Use
AUMs
Year
Period
Used
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
03/16-05/31
03/16-05/31
03/01-05/15
03/01-06/15
04/01-07/31
03/01-06/02
03/01-07/15
03/01-07/15
03/01-06/01
03/01-06/01
1023
450
1071
1968
1581
2529
1625
1742
1577
1364
03/01-06/04
03/01-06/01
03/01-06/01
03/01-09/01
03/20-06/08
03/01-06/02
03/01-06/01
03/01-05/01
03/01-06/03
03/01-06/02
03/01-06/02
03/01-06/01
03/01-06/02
1068
1750
1144
1156
970
1166
1177
938
1824
1999
1637
1439
1168
12
Table 3 – Allotment Actual Use, Utilizations, and Ownership
Maximum
Average
Utilization Allowable
Actual Use
%
Utilization
AUMs
%
30
11
14
24
10
10
10
16
19
21
18
14
18
34
34
13
15
13
20
15
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
Acres AUM
Ac Use
1418.1
40.39
Ownership
BLM
State
Private
Other
Total
Acres
57270
0
0
0
57270
Table 3.13 Star Valley Community Allotment (#01402)
SOUTH TENT CREEK
Year
Period
Used
Actual
Use
AUMs
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
03/01-10/15 06/01-10/15
03/21-10/22 06/01-09/30
03/01-09/30 06/01-10/17
06/16-08/14 03/15-09/20
05/15-07/31 03/17-10/09
05/30-08/16 03/14-10/10
05/14-07/15 03/17-10/14
06/15-10/10 03/03-09/28
06/02-10/14
06/03-09/30
05/31-08/30
03/15-09/30
03/20-09/30
03/18-10/14
03/20-10/10
03/25-10/15
03/22-09/30
06/06-10/01
05/30-09/29
06/05-09/30
06/05-09/30
06/02-09/30
06/01-10/01
05/16-10/31
3087
3150
3438
1758
3209
3205
1723
3077
2702
2016
552
1606
2995
2037
1688
1946
1976
1907
2684
1062
3784
1759
2130
2174
13
Table 3 – Allotment Actual Use, Utilizations, and Ownership
Maximum
Average
Utilization Allowable
Actual Use
%
Utilization
AUMs
%
32
41
50
30
37
35
29
22
22
30
29
38
36
58
28
14
21
22
30
34
32
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
Acres / AUM
Actual Use
2325.7
18.78
Ownership
BLM
State
Private
Other
Total
Acres
43680
0
40
0
43720
Table 3.14 Star Valley Community Allotment (#01402)
NORTH TENT CREEK
Year
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Period
Used
Actual
Use
AUMs
06/01-06/15
06/01-08/24
06/01-06/15
281
1448
224
06/04-07/15
REST
REST
REST
06/07-07/21
REST
06/02-07/15
REST
06/03-09/01
06/02-06/04
REST
03/01-09/30
06/01-06/03
493
0
0
0
668
0
557
0
2257
778
0
403
19
14
Table 3 – Allotment Actual Use, Utilizations, and Ownership
Utilization
%
27
45
0
0
0
23
0
0
23
14
0
23
Maximum
Average
Allowable Actual Use
Utilization
%
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
AUMs
789.88
Ownership
BLM
State
Private
Other
Total
Acres / AUM
Actual Use
55.30
Acres
43680
0
0
0
43680
Table 3.15
Star Valley Community Allotment (#01402)
TRISTATE
Year
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Period
Used
03/08-11/02
03/18-05/31
02/27-05/24
03/04-05/28
02/26-05/28
03/10-06/01
03/03-05/31
03/04-05/29
03/05-06/03
03/02-07/08
03/11-06/10
03/04-06/11
02/25-06/19
02/29-05/29
03/24-06/02
03/03-05/31
02/27-06/06
03/01-05/29
03/01-06/03
03/01-06/04
03/01-06/02
03/01-06/01
03/01-05/29
15
Table 3 – Allotment Actual Use, Utilizations, and Ownership
Actual
Use
AUMs
512
78
483
813
891
931
485
827
686
1010
1033
840
871
842
800
1145
1187
1403
1318
1310
1388
1150
1098
Utilization
%
45
28
17
10
10
9
11
19
21
18
23
29
40
19
48
29
24
Maximum
Average
Allowable Actual Use
Utilization
%
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
AUMs
Acres / AUM
Actual Use
909.23
49.57
Ownership
BLM
State
Private
Other
Total
Acres
45073
0
0
0
45073
Table 3.16 Ambrose Maher Allotment (#01102)
AMBROSE MAHER
Year
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Period
Used
Actual
Use
AUMs
10/15 - 10/21
3/01 - 6/07 & 10/15 - 11/01
3/01 - 5/20 & 10/15 - 11/04
3/10 - 6/10 & 10/15 - 10/28
3/01 - 6/07 & 10/12 - 10/15
144
557
399
404
184
2/25 - 5/21
69
2/14 - 5/17 & 10/17 - 11/01
3/01 - 6/02 & 10/07 - 10/20
2/12 - 5/27 & 10/05 - 10/11
2/19 - 5/14 & 1023 - 11/03
2/12 - 5/27 & 10/09 - 10/12
4/27 - 6/10 & 10/16 - 10/26
3/15 - 5/26 & 10/13 - 10/19
4/15 - 5/17 & 10/19 - 10/25
522
472
728
627
592
285
248
152
2/14 - 5/18 & 10/12 - 10/20
10/16 - 10/28
2/12 - 2/29 & 10/13 - 10/21
2/17 - 5/20 & 10/15 - 10/20
597
342
432
336
16
Table 3 – Allotment Actual Use, Utilizations, and Ownership
Utilization
%
10
Maximum
Allowable
Utilization
%
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Average
Actual Use
AUMs
Acres / AUM
Actual Use
397
7.32
Ownership
BLM
State
Private
Other
Total
Acres
2908
7
212
654
3781
TABLE 4a
STREAMS----RIPARIAN PROPER FUNCTIONING CONDITION SUMMARY
Allotment Name(s)
Campbell
Campbell
Campbell
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon & Star Valley
Louse Canyon & Star Valley
Louse Canyon & Star Valley
Louse Canyon & Anderson
Louse Canyon & Anderson
Louse Canyon & Anderson
Louse Canyon
Anderson
Campbell
Campbell
Campbell
Campbell
Campbell
Campbell
Campbell
Campbell
Campbell
Campbell
Campbell
Campbell
Campbell
Campbell
Campbell
Campbell
Campbell
Campbell
Campbell
Campbell
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Allotment Number
11306
11306
11306
01307
01307
01307
01307 & 01402
01307 & 01402
01307 & 01402
01307 & 01401
01307 & 01401
01307 & 01401
01307
01401
11306
11306
11306
11306
11306
11306
11306
11306
11306
11306
11306
11306
11306
11306
11306
11306
11306
11306
11306
11306
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
Pasture
Louse Canyon
Horse Hill
Horse Hill
Horse Hill
Horse Hill
Horse Hill
Horse Hill
Horse Hill
Horse Hill
Horse Hill
Horse Hill
Horse Hill
Horse Hill
Horse Hill
Sacramento Hill
Sacramento Hill
Sacramento Hill
Sacramento Hill
Starvation Brush Control
Starvation Brush Control
Starvation Seeding
Drummond Basin
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Table 4a - Streams- Riparian Proper Functioning Condition Summary
Stream Name
Reach #
West Little Owyhee River
West Little Owyhee River
West Little Owyhee River
West Little Owyhee River
West Little Owyhee River
West Little Owyhee River
West Little Owyhee River
West Little Owyhee River
West Little Owyhee River
West Little Owyhee River
West Little Owyhee River
West Little Owyhee River
Lake Fork-WLOwyhee River
Toppin Creek
Field Creek Trib 1
Field Creek
Field Creek
Field Creek
Antelope Creek
Antelope Creek
Antelope Creek
Antelope Creek
Antelope Creek
Antelope Creek
Bell Springs Trib
Chipmunk Creek
Trail Creek
Antelope Creek
Antelope Creek
Antelope Creek
Pole Creek
Antelope Creek
Field Creek
Antelope Creek
Pole Creek
Dry Canyon
Dry Canyon
Dry Canyon
Bobs Draw
Trib S of Bobs Draw
Trib N of Bobs Draw
Deer Creek
Deer Creek
Jack Creek
Jack Creek
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1
1
1
3c
4
5
3d
4
5
6
7
8
1
2
1
1
2
3a
1
3c
3b
3b
2
1
2
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
Stream
Miles
PFC
Rating*
0.7
1.6
1.3
2.3
2.0
2.0
9.5
4.7
18.7
5.7
2.6
1.9
1.5
4.7
0.7
0.7
3.0
4.3
3.0
1.1
2.5
2.5
1.0
1.2
2.6
0.4
1.2
8.2
1.3
2.5
4.8
5.4
0.2
8.8
0.4
0.4
1.1
1.0
1.4
0.3
0.7
1.0
1.2
0.6
1.6
PFC
PFC
PFC
PFC
PFC
PFC
PFC
PFC
PFC
PFC
NR
PFC
PFC
PFC
PFC
FARN
PFC
FARN
PFC
FARN
FARN
FARN
PFC
PFC
PFC
PFC
FARN
PFC
FARU
PFC
PFC
PFC
FARN
PFC
NR
PFC
FARN
FARN
FARN
FARN
FARN
FARN
FARN
PFC
PFC
Basis for
Rating**
*PFC RATINGS
PFC=Proper Functioning Condition
FARU=Functioning at Risk, Upward
FARN=Functioning at Risk Trend Not Apparent
FARD=Functioning at Risk, Downward Trend
NF=Not Functioning
NR=Not Riparian
**BASIS FOR RATING
E=erosion
HC=headcut
HF=hoof action
HU=hydrologic heaving (hummocking)
and compacted soils
PC=lack of plant cover
PD=low plant diversity or lack of reproduction
W=impacts from irrigation or water developments
E,PC,PD,
E,PC,PD,HF,
PC,HF
E,HF
E,PC
E,PC
E
E,PC,PD,
E, HF
W, E, HF
PD, PC, HF
PD, PC, HF
PD, PC, HF
E, PC,HF
E, PC,HF
TABLE 4a
STREAMS----RIPARIAN PROPER FUNCTIONING CONDITION SUMMARY
Allotment Name(s)
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Louse Canyon Community
Star Valley Community
Star Valley Community
Star Valley Community
Star Valley Community
Star Valley Community
Allotment Number
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1308
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1307
1402
1402
1402
1402
1402
Pasture
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Louse Canyon
Pole Creek Seeding
Pole Creek Seeding
Steer Canyon Seeding
Steer Canyon Seeding
Steer Canyon Seeding
South Tent Creek
South Tent Creek
South Tent Creek
South Tent Creek
South Tent Creek
Table 4a - Streams- Riparian Proper Functioning Condition Summary
Stream Name
Reach #
Stream
Miles
PFC
Rating*
Jack Creek
Jack Creek
Jack Creek
Jack Creek
Jack Creek
Jack Creek
Jack Creek South Fork
Three Week Spring Trib
Three Week Spring Trib
Three Week Spring Trib
New Road Spring Trib
New Road Spring Trib
New Road Spring Trib
Chipmunk Creek
WLO trib at Anderson Xing
WLO trib at Anderson Xing
Massey Canyon
Massey Canyon
Massey Canyon
Massey Canyon
Massey Canyon
Pole Creek
Pole Creek
Pole Creek
Pole Creek
Pole Creek
Pole Creek
Pole Creek
Pole Creek
Pole Creek
Pole Creek Trib at Reach 9
Pole Creek Trib at Reach 9
Pole Creek Trib at Reach 9
Pole Creek Trib at Reach 9
Pole Creek,Rawhide Spr Trib
Pole Creek
Pole Creek
Field Creek
Field Creek
Field Creek
Jack Creek
Tent Creek
Tent Creek
Tent Creek
Tent Creek
3b
4
5
6
7
8
1
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
1
2
1
2
3
4
5
1
5
6
7
8
9A
9B
10
11
1
2
3
4
1
3
4
1
2
3a
3a
4
5
6
7
0.2
1.2
0.5
1.3
1.8
1.5
1.8
2.1
0.7
0.4
0.5
0.9
1.4
1.9
0.6
1.5
2.9
0.4
0.9
1.1
0.8
4.8
1.4
0.3
0.3
2.5
0.3
0.4
1.4
1.3
0.2
1.6
0.4
1.0
0.4
2.4
1.0
1.2
2.4
2.4
0.5
4.2
1.2
2.5
0.5
NF
FARN
FARN
FARN
FARN
PFC
PFC
PFC
FARN
PFC
FARN
FARN
FARN
PFC
FARN
FARN
FARN
NF
PFC
FARN
PFC
PFC
FARD
FARD
PFC
PFC
FARD
FARD
FARN
FARD
FARN
FARN
FARN
FARN
FARN
NR
FARN
NF
FARN
FARN
NF
PFC
FARD
FARN
FARN
2
Basis for
Rating**
E,PC,PD,HF
E,PC,PD,
E,PC,PD,
E,PC,PD,HF
PC, HF
HC, PC, HU,
PC, HF
PC, HF
HC, HF,
HC,PC,HF
HC,PC,HF
PD, PC
E, PD, W
PC, HF
E,PC,PD,HF
E,PC,PD,HF
HC,PC,PD,HF
HC,PC,PD,HF
PC,PD,HF
W,E,HF
PD,HF
W,PC
W.E.HF
E,PC,HF
W,HF,HU
E,PC,HF
W
E,PC,PD,
E,PC,HF
E,PC,PD,
E,HC,PC,PD,HF
E,PC
HC,PC,PD,HF,HU
Exchange Spring
TABLE 4a
STREAMS----RIPARIAN PROPER FUNCTIONING CONDITION SUMMARY
Allotment Name(s)
Star Valley Community
Star Valley Community
Star Valley Community
Star Valley Community
Star Valley Community
Star Valley Community
Allotment Number
1402
1402
1402
1402
1402
1402
Table 4a - Streams- Riparian Proper Functioning Condition Summary
Pasture
South Tent Creek
South Tent Creek
South Tent Creek
Tristate
Tristate
Tristate
Stream Name
Reach #
Stream
Miles
PFC
Rating*
Tent Creek
Tent Creek Trib 1
Tent Creek Trib 2
Tent Creek
Tent Creek
Tent Creek
8
1
1
1
2
3
3.5
1.9
1.8
2.0
0.8
5.7
FARN
FARN
PFC
PFC
PFC
PFC
3
Basis for
Rating**
E,HC,PC,PD,HF
PD,PC
Table 5 - Shrub Cover Character Summary by Pasture
Louse Canyon Geographic Management Area
Note : Predominant herbaceous understory characteristics are described in Chapter 3, Range Health Determinations,
and Range Survey data on CD
Allotment and
Pasture
Vegetation Communities
Present 1
Acres per
pasture
Estimated
Estimated % of
Acres within
Pasture Occupied
Pasture
by Class 1and 2 Occupied by
Habitats
Class 1 and 2
Habitats
(grasslands)2
(grasslands)2
Estimated % of
Pasture
Occupied by
Class 3,4 or 5
Habitats
(shrublands)2
Conformance with Fine
Scale Sagebrush Steppe
Habitat Standards Cited in
Appendix F, SEORMP,
FEIS 3
Campbell 11306
Horse Hill
42,987
19,024
15,472
19,355
9,824
14,793
7,166
28,583
1,748
Starvation Brush Control
Starvation Seeding
Sacramento Hill
Twin Springs South
Twin Springs North
Twin Springs Middle
Peacock
Larribeau Holding
Arar, Artrtwyo, Artrva, Artrtr
Artrwyo
Agcr, Artrwyo/Agcr
Artrwyo
Artrwyo
Artrwyo
Artrwyo
Artrwyo
Arar, Artrtwyo, Artrva
100%
100%
10%
100%
100%
100%
100%
90%
100%
meets minimum
meets minimum
does not meet minimum
meets minimum
meets minimum
meets minimum
meets minimum
meets minimum
meets minimum
90%
13,925
10%
2,800
10%
5%
873
650
100%
90%
95%
meets minimum
meets minimum
meets minimum
49%
2,500
51%
meets minimum
100%
100%
100%
100%
meets minimum
meets minimum
meets minimum
meets minimum
100%
100%
100%
99%
meets/exceeds minimum
meets/exceeds minimum
meets/exceeds minimum
meets/exceeds minimum
Anderson 1401
12,959 Artrwyo
8,728 Artrwyo
12,991 Artrwyo, Arar
34,678
Spring
Bull Flat
North
Allotment subtotals
Ambrose Maher 01102
Ambrose Maher
5,097 Artrwyo
Star Valley Community 1402
North Stoney Corral
Tri-state
South Tent Creek
North Tent Creek
57,248
45,782
50,660
35,343
Artrwyo
Artrwyo
Artrwyo, Artrtr, Arar
Artrwyo
Louse Canyon Community 1307
Drummond Basin
Steer Canyon Seeding
Pole Creek Seeding
Louse Canyon
GMA total acres
1
15,050
11,272
15,586
87,737
3
<1%
522,924
Artrwyo = Wyoming big sagebrush
Agcr = Crested wheatgrass
2
Artrwyo
Artrwyo/Agcr
Artrwyo/Agcr, Artrtr
Artrwyo, Arar
360
21,107
Arar = Low sagebrush
(4 % of total acres in Class 1or 2)
Artrtr = Basin big sagebrush Artrva = Mountain big sagebrush
See Table 9, Shrub Cover Classes, for explanation of Classes 1-5
Native pasture minimum conformance standard = 50% to 75% of native range in the pasture supports Class 3,4, or 5 habitats
Seeded pasture minimum conformance standard = 25% to 50% of seeded range in the pasture supports Class 3,4, or 5 habitats
Table 6 - Range Improvement Project Summary
(Last updated December 2001)
Listed projects are not in workable condition. Project Needs recommends action for the
project, such as maintenance, abandonment (or removal), or total reconstruction.
Table 6.1 Anderson Allotment (#01401)
Project Name
South Toppin Butte
Pit
Project
Number
723889
Condition
Fair
Project Needs
Remove and
rehabilitate area
Table 6.2 Campbell Allotment (#11306)
Project Name
Condition
Echave Reservoir # 2
Project
Number
720109
Campbell Reservoir
Five Points Reservoir
Larribeau Reservoir
Pole Creek Well
720637
720639
720739
721412
Fair
Fair
Poor
Failure
Parson Reservoir
No Crossing Corral
Big Antelope Corral
Horse Hill Reservoir
721515
722010
722011
721413
Good
Unknown
Unknown
Fair
Project Needs
Good
Remove fence
around reservoir,
retain adjacent
corral.
Bentonite
Bentonite
Bentonite
Remove and
rehabilitate area
Bentonite
Unknown
Unknown
Bentonite
Table 6.3 Louse Canyon Community Allotment (#01307)
Project Name
Steer Canyon
Pipeline
Rawhide/Steer
Canyon Pipeline
Exhange Spring
Pipeline
New Road Spring
Project
Number
720857
Condition
720936
Fair
722050
Fair
722052
Fair
Fair
1
Table 6 – Range Improvement Project Summary
Project Needs
Replace float valves
and wildlife ramps
Replace float valves
and wildlife ramps
Re-alignment, some
reconstruction, and
wildlife ramps
Repair outlet and fit
Project Name
Project
Number
Condition
Lower Exchange
Spring
Pedroli Spring
723788
Fair
724215
Poor
Edge Spring
Dilemma Spring
Indian Spring
Little Bog Spring
724795
724803
724805
724806
Poor
Poor
Failure
Poor
Spare Spring
724810
Failure
Flint Spring
Lone Tree Spring
Cavieta Reservoir
Jack Cr. Spring
Unknown Spring
Lime Spring
724811
724812
725686
No File
No File
714814
Unknown
Failure
Fair
Poor
Poor
Poor
Project Needs
float valve
Remove trash and
replace float valve
Remove trash and
replace or remove
trough
Remove and abandon
Reconstruct
Remove and abandon
Replace trough or
remove
Remove trash and
abandon
Unknown
Reconstruct
Repair dam face
Remove trash
Remove and abandon
Replace inlet
Table 6.4 Star Valley Community Allotment (#01402)
Project Name
Cairn Spring
Star Valley
Reservoir
Oregon Butte
Spring
Tent Cr. Corral
and House
Stoney Corral
Cabin
Twin Butte
Reservoir
Airplane Reservoir
Freeway Reservoir
Project
Number
720057
720062
Condition
Poor
Good
Reconstruct
Bentonite
720171
Poor
Reconstruct
721930
Poor
Remove and abandon
721931
Failure
Remove and abandon
722086
Fair
724002
724783
Fair
Good
2
Table 6 – Range Improvement Project Summary
Project Needs
Bentonite
Bentonite
Remove and
rehabilitate area
Table 6.5 EXCLOSURES, Summary and Recommendations
Project Name
Allotment
Name
Ambrose
Maher
Campbell
Campbell
Project
Number
723667
Condition
Good
Keep and maintain
721552
722040
Good
Good
Bell Spring
Wildlife Exclosure
Campbell
723606
Good
Sacramento Hill
Test Plot Exclosure
Pedroli Spring
Exclosure
Upper Guadalupe
Spring Wildlife
Exclosure
New Road Spring
Exclosure
Rawhide Exclosure
Campbell
725645
Good
Keep and maintain
Reconstruct and
maintain for
recreational fishing.
Keep outer exclosure,
remove downed wire
and posts in interior.
Keep
Louse Canyon
Community
Louse Canyon
Community
Unknown
Poor
Remove and abandon
724029
Good
Keep and build new
fence corners
Louse Canyon
Community
Louse Canyon
Community
Star Valley
Community
724030
Poor
Remove and abandon
725651
Poor
Remove and abandon
Warm Springs
Exclosure
Climax Exclosure
Coyote Holes
Habitat Exclosure
Oregon Butte
Spring Wildlife
Exclosure
725711
3
Table 6 – Range Improvement Project Summary
Recommendation
No longer exists Remove from files
Table 7--Interim Grazing Management Use Dates (Beginning 2002)
Anderson (Allot. # 01401)
North
03/01 – 03/31
Bull Flat
04/01 – 07/31
Spring
04/01 – 07/31
Campbell (Allot. # 11306)
Peacock
Rest
03/01 – 05/31
Twin Springs
03/01 – 05/31
Rest
Sacramento Hill
03/15 – 5/31
Horse Hill
04/01 – 07/15
Starvation BC
07/16 – 09/30
Starvation Seeding
07/16 – 09/30
Larribeau
Trailing (9/1 - 10/31)
Louse Canyon Community (Allot. #
01307)
Drummond Basin
03/01 – 5/15
Steer Canyon
05/16 – 05/31
Seeding
Lower Louse
04/15 – 07/15
Canyon
Upper Louse
03/16 -08/01
Canyon*
Pole Creek Seeding
07/16 – 09/31
Steer Canyon
07/16 – 09/31
Seeding
Star Valley Community (Allot. # 01402)
Tristate
03/01 - 05/31
North Stoney Corral
06/01 – 09/05
North Tent Creek
03/01 – 05/31
Every other year
South Tent Creek**
06/01 – 07/15
09/05 – 09/20
Ambrose Maher (Allot. # 01102)
Ambrose Maher
02/12 - 05/30
10/15 - 10/21
*Includes Quinn River Allotment.
**Includes Little Owyhee Allotment
Table 8----Riparian Trend Analysis
(from SEORMP/FEIS,Volume 2, Appendix D4, Table D4-1, page 42 )
Table 9 – Sagebrush Canopy Cover Classes
(from SEORMP/FEIS, Appendix F, Table F-1)
General habitat relationships of sagebrush canopy cover (as determined by line intercept)
and herbaceous understory composition to wildlife habitat values and use
Class 1 No sagebrush canopy cover— Characteristic of rangelands that exhibit a grassland aspect
and low vegetative structure. Generally common and widespread species of wildlife in Malheur County (e.g.,
pronghorn and horned larks) can be supported. Forage and insects may be abundant even for species that are
dependent on sagebrush cover availability for nesting, hiding, and other needs. Native or nonnative Class 1
rangeland extent may be a wildlife issue of concern due to habitat fragmentation especially when they dominate
large tracts of land within a GMA. Class 1 rangelands do not necessarily and always pose a threat to wildlife
diversity because they may in fact meet part or all of the habitat requirements of certain wildlife species.
Depending on rangeland ecological status and site potential, grass and forb values are highly variable.
Class 1(A): Plant communities that are dominated by native grasses and forbs which generally provide a portion
of habitat needs for sage grouse and other wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe habitats. These plant communities
are typically observed after fire, before sagebrush species recolonize. These plant communities are desirable to
achieve in a patchy, mosaic pattern within the sagebrush-steppe, intermingled with Class 2(A, C), Class 3(A, B,
C), Class 4(B), and Class 5(B:25% to near 35% canopy cover) plant communities.
Class 1(B): Plant communities that are dominated by introduced annual grasses and forbs such as cheatgrass,
medusahead, and tumblemustard, which do not provide habitat needs for sage grouse and other wildlife that use
sagebrush-steppe habitats. These plant communities are not desirable to sustain in their present condition if the
sites are capable of supporting a sagebrush plant community(ies). Before converting to annual grasses and annual
forbs, these Class 1(B) plant communities were more likely to have been Wyoming big sagebrush or basin big
sagebrush plant communities than either low sagebrush or mountain big sagebrush plant communities (Miller and
Eddleman 2000). These plant communities are biologically and physically unstable because of high risk for
repeated fire. High plant density of these annual plants, combined with great amounts of litter, effectively
eliminate biological soil crusts. The combination of these conditions inhibit native plant recovery.
Class 1(C): Plant communities that are dominated by seedings of crested wheatgrass or other exotic perennial
grasses which generally do not provide habitat needs for sage grouse and other wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe
habitats. These plant communities are lacking in sagebrush canopy cover either because a sagebrush seed source
is lacking, or there has not been sufficient time elapsed for sagebrush species to recolonize the seeding. These
plant communities are not desirable to sustain in their present condition if the sites are capable of supporting a
sagebrush plant community(ies).
Class 1(D): Plant communities that are closed woodlands dominated by species such as western juniper.
Particularly in the mountain big sagebrush and low sagebrush plant communities, western juniper encroachment
and increasing density can result in near total loss of sagebrush canopy cover (Miller and Eddleman 2000). These
Class 1(D) plant communities do not provide habitat needs for sage grouse (sage grouse did not select western
juniper communities in central Oregon for nesting or winter habitat [BLM 1994; Miller and Eddleman 2000]) and
other wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe habitats. In many of these plant communities, excessive livestock grazing
pressure and/or fire suppression have been the main contributors to their formation. These plant communities
have depleted herbaceous understories in addition to depleted shrub canopy cover, and could have depleted
biological soil crusts if the sites are capable of supporting biological soil crusts. The depletion of the shrub,
herbaceous, and biological soil crust cover can result in accelerated erosion on these sites. These plant
communities are not desirable to sustain in their present condition if the sites are capable of supporting a sagebrush
plant community(ies) and supported a sagebrush plant community(ies) before the western juniper encroached.
1
Table 9 – Sagebrush Canopy Cover Classes
Class 2 Trace to 5%— Characteristic of rangelands that exhibit a predominantly grassland aspect and
low vegetative structure. Canopy cover in this range of values is often indicative of relatively recent fire or other
treatment effects. They indicate recolonization of sagebrush is underway. Generally common and widespread
species of wildlife (e.g., pronghorn and horned larks) can be supported. Most of the complex shrub cover needs of
sage grouse and other sagebrush dependent wildlife (structure, forage, and cover) are very limited or absent
altogether in Class 2 rangelands. Connelly et al. refer to the cessation of sage grouse nesting where live sagebrush
canopy cover values go below 5%. Depending on rangeland ecological status and site potential, grass and forb
values are highly variable.
Class 2(A): Plant communities that are dominated by native grasses and forbs with some recruitment of
sagebrush species, which provide a portion of habitat needs for sage grouse and other wildlife that use sagebrushsteppe habitats. These plant communities are typically observed after fire, when sagebrush species are
recolonizing. These plant communities are desirable to achieve in a patchy, mosaic pattern within the sagebrushsteppe, intermingled with Class 1(A), Class 2(C), Class 3(A, B, C), Class 4 (B), and Class 5(B:25% to near 35%
canopy cover) plant communities.
Class 2(B): Plant communities that are dominated by introduced annual grasses and forbs such as cheatgrass,
medusahead, and tumblemustard, where sagebrush species are generally declining in abundance attributable to too
frequent of fire. These plant communities are typically not providing habitat needs for sage grouse and other
wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe habitats. These plant communities are not desirable to sustain in their present
condition if the sites are capable of supporting a sagebrush plant community(ies). These plant communities are
biologically and physically unstable because of high risk for repeated fire. High plant density of these annual
plants, combined with great amounts of litter, effectively eliminate biological soil crusts. The combination of
these conditions inhibit native plant recovery.
Class 2(C): Plant communities that are dominated by seedings of crested wheatgrass or other exotic perennial
grasses, where sagebrush species are in the early stages of recolonization. These plant communities might not be
providing the complex shrub-grass-forb cover and food needs of sage grouse and other wildlife that use sagebrushsteppe habitat, but if there is active recolonization of sagebrush species, there is high future likelihood for
providing habitat needs. These plant communities are desirable to sustain if they are moving successionally to
greater abundance of sagebrush species.
Class 2(D): Plant communities that are woodlands dominated by species such as western juniper. Particularly in
the mountain big sagebrush and low sagebrush plant communities, western juniper encroachment and increasing
density can result in near total loss of sagebrush canopy cover (Miller and Eddleman 2000). These plant
communities do not provide habitat needs for sage grouse (sage grouse did not select western juniper communities
in central Oregon for nesting or winter habitat [BLM 1994; Miller and Eddleman 2000]) and other wildlife that use
sagebrush-steppe habitats. In many of these Class 2(D) plant communities, excessive livestock grazing pressure
and/or fire suppression have been the main contributors to their formation. These plant communities have
depleted herbaceous understories in addition to depleted shrub canopy cover, and could have depleted biological
soil crusts if the sites are capable of supporting biological soil crusts. The depletion of the shrub, herbaceous, and
biological soil crust cover can result in accelerated erosion on these sites. These plant communities are not
desirable to sustain in their present condition if the sites are capable of supporting a sagebrush plant
community(ies) and supported a sagebrush plant community(ies) before the western juniper encroached.
2
Table 9 – Sagebrush Canopy Cover Classes
Class 3 Greater than 5%, up to 15%— Characteristic of rangelands that exhibit a shrub land
aspect and desirable complex vegetative structure that is capable of supporting a variety of sagebrush-dependent
wildlife (including many special status species), especially at the higher canopy values of 10 to 15%. Connelly et
al. suggest that sage grouse are able to winter within habitats that support at least a 10% canopy cover of sage if
the shrub cover is available 10 to 12" above snow cover. Sage grouse nesting habitat values are thought to be
present at the upper (near 15%) sagebrush canopy cover values. Unpublished BLM surveys suggested sagebrush
obligate songbirds began to reoccupy crested wheatgrass grasslands where the sagebrush canopy was more than
5%. Songbird studies in Nevada crested wheatgrass seedings, Macadoo (1989), showed that a balanced
composition of grassland and shrub dependent species were present when shrub overstory recovery was around
10% line intercept values. Depending on rangeland condition and site potential, grass and forb values are highly
variable.
Class 3(A): Plant communities supporting low sagebrush or Wyoming big sagebrush, with an understory of
native grasses and forbs (typically about 10% grass canopy cover and less than 10% forb canopy cover), and intact
biological soil crusts in interplant spaces, represent the potential natural vegetation for these plant communities (
Miller and Eddleman 2000). Class 3(A) low sagebrush or Wyoming big sagebrush plant communities provide
habitat needs for sage grouse (e.g., winter habitat [Miller and Eddleman 2000]) and other wildlife that use
sagebrush-steppe habitat. They are desirable to sustain in a patchy, mosaic pattern within the sagebrush-steppe,
intermingled with Class 1(A), Class 2(A, C), Class 3(B, C), Class 4(B), and Class 5(B:25% to near 35% canopy
cover) plant communities.
Class 3(B): Plant communities supporting basin big sagebrush or mountain big sagebrush, with an understory of
native grasses and forbs, which are typically moving successionally to greater abundance of sagebrush species and
are not yet at the potential natural vegetation for these two plant communities. Despite this, Class 3(B) basin big
sagebrush or mountain big sagebrush plant communities provide habitat needs for sage grouse and other wildlife
that use sagebrush-steppe habitat. Their presence in a mosaic, intermingled with Class 1(A), Class 2(A, C), Class
3(A, C), Class 4(B), and Class 5(B:25% to near 35% canopy cover) plant communities, should be considered
desirable for sagebrush-steppe habitat. It should be recognized however, that these Class 3(B) plant communities
are probably transitory and should be permitted to move successionally to Class 4 (see Class 4(B) for more detail).
Class 3(C): Plant communities that are dominated by seedings of crested wheatgrass or other exotic perennial
grasses, where sagebrush canopy cover is on the increase attributable to sagebrush colonization. While not
providing the quality of habitat that Class 3(A) or Class 3(B) plant communities do, because typically there is not a
diverse grass or forb component in these seedings, Class 3(C) plant communities do provide added structure
because of the sagebrush, which provides habitat for some wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe habitat.
3
Table 9 – Sagebrush Canopy Cover Classes
Class 4 Greater than 15%, up to 25%— Characteristic of rangelands that exhibit a shrubland
aspect and desirable complex vegetative structure that is capable of supporting a wide variety of sagebrushdependent wildlife (including many special status species). Sage grouse breeding and wintering can both occur
within habitats with Class 4 shrub cover. Depending on rangeland condition and site potential, grass and forb
values are highly variable.
Class 4(A): Plant communities supporting low sagebrush or Wyoming big sagebrush, which typically show a
decrease in native grass and forb canopy cover (particularly where sagebrush canopy cover is 20% or greater
[Miller and Eddleman 2000]), and biological soil crust development, compared with Class 3(A) low sagebrush or
Wyoming big sagebrush plant communities. Disturbances such as excessive livestock grazing pressure are often
contributory to development of Class 4(A) plant communities (Miller and Eddleman 2000). Class 4(A) is not the
potential natural vegetation, nor a desirable outcome, for these two plant communities when the inherent
capabilities of soils, landform, and climate are factored in. However, Class 4(A) plant communities can provide
some habitat needs for sage grouse (e.g., winter habitat [Miller and Eddleman 2000]) and other wildlife that use
sagebrush-steppe habitat.
Class 4(B): Plant communities supporting basin big sagebrush or mountain big sagebrush, with an understory of
native grasses and forbs, more often than not represent the potential natural vegetation for these plant
communities. Class 4(B) plant communities provide habitat needs for sage grouse (e.g., nesting and brood-rearing
habitat [Miller and Eddleman 2000]) and other wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe habitat. Their presence in a
mosaic, intermingled with Class 1(A), Class 2(A and C), Class 3(A, B, C), and Class 5(B:25% to near 35% canopy
cover) plant communities, should be considered desirable for sagebrush-steppe habitat.
Class 4(C): Plant communities supporting mountain big sagebrush or low sagebrush, with tree seedlings
(particularly western juniper) in the understory. Particularly in the mountain big sagebrush and low sagebrush
plant communities, western juniper encroachment and increasing density can result in near total loss of sagebrush
canopy cover (Miller and Eddleman 2000). These Class 4(C) plant communities currently provide habitat needs
for sage grouse and other wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe habitats. However, with continued growth and
increasing density of the western juniper, sagebrush will decline and these plant communities will transition and at
some point not provide habitat needs for sage grouse and other wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe habitats. On
many of these Class 4(C) plant communities, excessive livestock grazing pressure and/or fire suppression have
been the main contributors to their formation. These plant communities are not desirable to sustain in their present
condition if the sites are capable of supporting a sagebrush plant community(ies) and supported a sagebrush plant
community(ies) before the western juniper encroached.
4
Table 9 – Sagebrush Canopy Cover Classes
Class 5 Greater than 25%— Characteristic of rangelands that exhibit a shrubland aspect and complex
vegetative structure that is capable of supporting sagebrush dependent species. Class 5 types may, though not
always, support diminished herbaceous cover values. However, Class 5 cover values need to be present for some
species such as the pygmy rabbit. Mule deer and elk use this type of habitat for hiding in rangelands where
topographic cover is limited and/or tall structure provided by mountain shrubs is absent. Class 5 shrub cover does
not necessarily imply poor or low value habitat conditions for wildlife.
Class 5(A): Plant communities supporting basin big sagebrush or mountain big sagebrush, with an understory of
native grasses and forbs, can represent the potential natural vegetation for these plant communities, particularly for
canopy cover that ranges from 25% to less than 35% (Miller and Eddleman 2000). However, as sagebrush canopy
cover approaches 35%, the understory of native grasses and forbs decreases. Class 5(B) basin big sagebrush or
mountain big sagebrush plant communities can provide habitat needs for sage grouse (e.g., nesting and broodrearing habitat [Miller and Eddleman 2000]) and other wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe habitat (e.g., pygmy
rabbit). Class 5(B) that has sagebrush canopy cover in the range of 25% to less than 35% is probably within the
range of what the soils, landform, and climate would sustain for these two plant communities, whereas canopy
cover Class 5(B) that approaches or exceeds 35% in these two plant communities is probably undesirable and a
result of excessive livestock grazing pressure and/or fire suppression
Class 5(B): Plant communities supporting low sagebrush or Wyoming big sagebrush, which typically are
depauperate in understory native grasses and forbs (Miller and Eddleman 2000) and often have an understory
composed of exotic annuals such as cheatgrass and mustards. Understory native grasses, forbs, and biological soil
crusts would be primarily restricted to microsites beneath shrub canopies and would rarely be found in interspace
microsites. Disturbances such as excessive livestock grazing pressure are often contributory to development of
Class 5(A) plant communities (Miller and Eddleman 2000). Although these low sagebrush or Wyoming big
sagebrush plant communities can provide some habitat needs for sage grouse (e.g. winter habitat; Miller and
Eddleman 2000) and other wildlife that use sagebrush-steppe habitat, these Class 5(A) plant communities are not
the potential natural vegetation, nor a desirable outcome, for these two plant communities when the inherent
capabilities of soils, landform, and climate are factored in.
5
Table 9 – Sagebrush Canopy Cover Classes
Table 10 - Alternative I---Livestock Stocking Level Calculations
Allotment
Anderson
Pasture
North, Spring & Bull
Flat
Campbell
Existing
AUMs
Existing
Stocking
Levels
(Acres/AUM)
2857
15.6
Acres
(2001 GIS
Data)
33749.5
Average
Active Use
(AUMs)
2533.0
Proposed
Stocking
Levels
(Acres/AUM)
AUM Increase
10.0
842.0
14157
Peacock
Twin Springs
Sacramento Hill
Starvation Seeding
Starvation Brush
Control
Horse Hill
Louse Canyon
7.2
8.1
22.0
3.2
28582.9
31782.9
19427.0
15472.0
2249.5
2292.4
882.0
4763.8
10.0
10.0
10.0
3.2
2632.5
0
0
1060.7
0
9.4
15.8
19024.1
42809.0
2023.5
2709.1
9.4
10.0
0
1071.8
10.0
7.0
10.0
10.0
2340.7
126.8
138.2
678.5
1397.2
11306
Drummond Basin
Steer Canyon Seeding
Pole Creek Seeding
Louse Canyon
Star Valley
10.9
7.7
17.7
12.0
15050.2
11272.0
15586.3
82840.0
1378.2
1472.1
880.1
6886.8
6838
Tristate
North Stoney Corral
North Tent Creek
South Tent Creek
50.4
40.4
74.2
22.4
45782.0
57248.4
33051.5
52160.4
909.2
1418.1
445.5
2325.7
30.0
30.0
50.0
10.0
4212.9
616.8
490.2
215.5
2890.3
Quinn River
Upper Louse Canyon
447
9.5
4224.7
447.0
9.5
0
Little Owyhee
South Tent Creek
892
7.9
7015.9
892.0
7.9
0
Ambrose
Maher
Ambrose Maher
517
7.3
2908
397
7.3
0
Total Increase for LCGMA:
10,029 AUMs
Graph 1
Comparison of Crested Wheatgrass Grasslands
to Big Sagebrush Shrublands and Wildlife Use
200
# of animals that breed and feed
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
crested wheatgrass
grassland
big sagebrush
shrubland early
structural
big sagebrush
shrubland mid
structural
big sagebrush
shrubland late
structural
Geographic Management Areas
Trout Creek
Soldier Creek
Bully Creek
Louse Canyon
Cow Creek
Willow Creek
South Fork
Malheur
Mainstem Malheur
Owyhee
Succor Creek
Rattlesnake
Barren Valley
Dry Creek
Jackies Butte
North Fork Malheur
Saddle Butte
Sandhills
Number of Leks
Graph 2
Sage Grouse Leks in Malheur and Jordan
Geographic Management Areas
(2001 data)
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0