~
)
/
/7/
Results of Assessment/Establishment of Cause
Achieving Standards For Rangeland Health Conforming with Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management Resource Area: CORA
Geographic Area of Assessment: East of Eagle Rock within the Crooked River Watershed. (See Map- Appendix)
Allotment Areas Assessed:
WebdeU Allotment# 5256
Period Assessment Conducted: August 8, 2003
Assessment outcome: Not Meeting Standards, damage from season of use, rest rotation cycles
for pastures and overgrazing.
Assessment Benchmark: Standards for Rangeland Health and Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management for
Public Lands in Oregon and Washington. Approved August 12, 1997 by the Secretary of the Interior.
Assessment Objectives:
Per USDIIUSDA Tech Reference 1734-6 of 2000: Provide preliminary assessment of soil/site stability, hydrologic
function, biological integrity. Help land managers identify areas that are potentially at risk for degradation.
Provide early warnings of potential problems and opportunities. Provide capability to communicate fundamental
ecological concepts to a variety of audiences. Improve communications among interest groups. Provide capability
to select monitoring sites for future monitoring programs. Help understand and communicate rangeland health
issues.
Per BLM, Oregon State Office IB No. OR-98-315 of 7/24/98: Assess rangeland condition relative to Rangeland
Health Standards; determine cause in those cases where standards are not being met; and take action that will result
in progress toward standards attainment where these are not being met.
ii!!fi;;:.
Assessment Preparers
JoAnne Amllion, NRT
Rick Demmer, NRS
John Swanson,
~
___:_:::__ ~~ :~ ~ . ~ ~
Rangela~d Sp·;:~~k~t./ 'rdJHI/i;{,t'V~
Assessment Approval
U"fobert Towne, Fidd MM•gcr
f
ft}/[(A_x:P.:ii_.,;{_f)__
Allotment Assessment Findings
Maps
Plant List
List of Lichens and Mosses
Wildlife
H
R..ol!f;e,_ II
__,_/.L..£-=;z=-C:.'--'/f<--=-o--ty.____
Date:
_J_,_/_2-_t/!---o--'4-__
Date: __,_(,_{z_.JO-+'f-""O_.q:_-_ __
{)
Appendices:
A
B
C
D
E
--··
Date:
Date:
_z-+/_P._~j1+-/_D-,Lf,____
Appendix A Allotment Assessment Findings Notes:
1. This information applies only to ELM-administered lands within the allotment.
2. Where Allotment Monitoring Sites are referenced, information from these sites will include photographs,
vegetation data, trend rating forms, cover worksheets, and/or Rangeland Health Evaluation Summary Worksheets
(all located in the respective allotment's monitoring files).
Webdell Allotment# 5256
Public Land Upland Acres: 205
Public Land Riparian/Wetland Acres: 3
Public Land Stream Miles: 0.2
I. Standard 1 (Watershed Function- Uplands)
A. Determination
0
0
0
0
Meeting the Standard
Not Meeting the Standard; Making Significant Progress Toward
Not Meeting the Standard; Not Making Significant Progress Toward Standard
Standard Does Not Apply
B. Establishment of Cause:
0
D
0
Livestock are significantly contributing to the failure to meet the standard
Livestock are not significant contributors to the failure to meet the standard
Failure to meet the standard is related to other uses or conditions: X on-site X off-site
C. Rationale/Evidence
Historic management practices have contributed to the present condition ofWebdell Allotment. Currently, the poor
condition of allotment fences allows livestock to,access the public lands anytime they are released onto adjacent
private land. Heavy grazing has compacted soils and often churned the soil surface P0003624..TPG. This damage
has left areas weedy and without the appropriate vegetation. Many of the drier hillsides are almost
bareP0003650.JPG or covered with cheatgrass P0003632.JPG. Ground cover by vascular vegetation and biological
soil crust ranges from about 30% to 50% P0003612.JPG, P000366l.JPG, P0003586.JPG. Trailing P0003627.JPG
and terracing P0003652.JPG are much greater than expected throughout the allotment. A few gullies are present
P0003592.JPG and some hillsides contain rills P0003655.JPG. Over grazing has been the primary cause for the
negative changes that have occurred. These conditions are also exacerbated by exclusion from fire which typically
leads to an J.!nnatural increase in juniper cover. Juniper thinning projects have occurred adjacent to the allotment on
private land to the north and in the smaller parcels of public land in the southern part of the allotment
P0003648.JPG, P0003662.JPG juniper is however, still dominant over much of the north part P0003606.JPG.
Evidence: Photos and lists of vascular vegetation, lichens and mosses.
II. Standard 2 (Watershed Function- Riparian/Wetland Areas)
A. Determination
0
0
D
Meeting the Standard
,
Not Meeting the Standard; Making Significant Progress Toward
Not Meeting the Standard; Not Making Significant Progress Toward
B. Establishment of Cause:
0
D
0
Livestock are significantly contributing to the failure to meet the standard
Livestock are not significant contributors to the failure to meet the standard
Failure to meet the standard is related to other uses or conditions: _X_ on-site; _X_ off-site
C. Rationale/Evidence
There is one spring in the northern portion ofthe allotment that supports a more dense riparian vegetation
P0003594.JPG. The other draw that crosses this allotment show signs of seasonal surface and/or subsurface water,
which is necessary to maintain riparian or wetland vegetation. Livestock trailing is concentrated near the draws
P0003627.JPG, POOOl§l6.JPG causing some erosion along these watercourses. The streams have suffered
downcutting in the past P0003598.JPG which has lowered the water table nearby and left riparian vegetation, where
it exists, confined to the channel bottom. Eagle Creek is severely downcut and is dry in the short reach that crosses
public land P0003636.JPG. Eagle Creek and probably the other draws once supported far more riparian habitat.
Flow was once perennial in Eagle Creek and was probably nearly so in the draws. There are signs that the
easternmost draw is recovering and riparian vegetation including willows has recently expanded in some areas
P0003617.JPG, P0003625.JPG. Some juniper cutting has occurred at the confluence of these draws, P0003628.JPG
and heavy equipment has also been used in this area P0003629.JPG. Seepage areas on the hillside in the east central
part of the allotment P0003633.JPG have been heavily grazed leaving pocked, cracked soil and resulting in a change
from appropriate wetland species to a mix of weedy species.
III. Standard 3 (Ecological Processes)
A. Determination
D
D
0
0
Meeting the Standard
Not Meeting the Standard; Making Significant Progress Toward
Not Meeting the Standard; Not Making Significant Progress Toward
Standard Does Not Apply
B. Establishment of Cause:
0
0
0
Livestock are significantly contributing to the failure to meet the standard
Livestock are not significant contributors to the failure to meet the standard
Failure to meet the standard is related to other uses or conditions: _X_ on-site; _X_ off-site
C. Rationale/Evidence
The 205 acres of public land on this allotment contain a mosaic of soil types P0003630.JPG, P0003655.JPG and
topographic features P0003604.JPG, P0003623.JPG. Past disturbances including roads andgrazing practices have
degraded wildlife habitat, reduced biological diversity, lowered the water table and eroded soils. Fire exclusion has
allowed juniper to increase where it now dominates over 50% of the public land within the allotment P0003613.J1)G
Annual grasses (six-weeks fescue) and non-n~tive plant species such as cheatgrass P0003614.JPG are dominate on
about 40% of the allotment. The ability of the ecosystem occupying this land to maintain ecological processes.has
suffered accordingly. Energy flow and storage as well as nutrient cycling are reduced resulting in lower
productivity for now and in the near future.
·,
Riparian habitat and dependable water sources are keys to invertebrate and wildlife diversity. Many of the wildlife
species listed in appendix E are currently transient, passing through but not wintering or reproducing in the
allotment. Improved conditions that return spring and summer flows to the drainages within this allotment would
increase use by many species and dramatically increase energy flow and nutrient cycling within and around the
allotment.
Juniper thinnings have been implemented on about 20 acres of public land in the southern parcels and on adjacent
private land to the north and south. On the public land grass are starting to increase. Sandburg bluegrass and
cheatgrass currently dominate these project areas P000366l.JPG, P0003662.JPG but some of the area is still
relatively bare. Juniper cutting is itself a disturbance that brings about a sudden change in conditions.
Transformation to a more diverse and perennial vegetation will occur over time with proper grazing and fire
management.
Riparian habitat would also benefit from juniper thinning in conjunction with proper grazing and fire management
on the northern parcel of public land within this allotment.
IV. Standard 4 (Water Quality)
A. Determination
0
0
0
0
Meeting the Standard
Not Meeting the Standard; Making Significant Progress Toward Standard
Not Meeting the Standard; Not Making Significant Progress Toward Standard
Standard Does Not Apply
B. Establishment of Cause (if applicable)
0
0
0
0
Livestock are significantly contributing to the failure to meet the standard
Livestock are not significant contributors to the failure to meet the standard
Failure to meet the standard is related to other uses or conditions: _on-site; _.off-site
Not Applicable
V. Standard 5 (Habitat for Native, T&E and Locally Important Species)
A. Determination
0~
0
0
0
Meeting the Standard
Not Meeting the Standard; Making Significant Progress Toward
:Not Meeting the Standard; Not Making Significant Progress Toward
Standard Does Not Apply
­
B. Establishment of Cause:
0
0
0
Livestock are significantly contributing to the failure to meet the standard
Livestock are not significant contributors to the failure to meet the standard
Failure to meet the standard is related to other uses or conditions: _X_on-site; _off-site
C. Rationale/Evidence
Riparian areas are critical for a variety of wildlife species. The cattle are inclined to "hang-out" in moist grassy
areas where quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), a locally important species, tends to grow. Quaking aspen is
often found along the margins of seasonally-wet meadows and streams along with ponderosa pine (Pinus
ponderosa) and western juniper (Juniperus occidentalis) P0003597.JPG. Season of use, rest rotation and length of
the grazing season are all aspects that should be considered when protecting locally important species such as
quaking aspen. An attempt should be made to thin the western juniper within the aspen stand and a small exclosure
might be erected to protect the remaining aspen.
VI. Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management:
0
Conforms with Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management 0
Does Not conform with Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management, Standards Number 1. a.; b.; c.; d.; f.; g.; h.; j.; 2.; 6. Livestock Grazing Management Guidelines
0 1: The season, timing, frequency, duration and intensity of livestock grazing use should be based on
the physical and biological characteristics of the site and the management in order to:
0
a. provide adequate cover to promote infiltration, conserve soil moisture and to maintain soil stability in
upland areas
0
b. provide adequate cover and plant community structure to promote streambank stability, debris and
sediment capture and floodwater energy dissipation in riparian areas.
0
c. promote soil surface conditions that support infiltration
0
d. avoid sub-surface soil compaction that retards the movement of water in the soil profile.
0
e. help prevent the increase and spread of noxious weeds
0
f. maintain or rest for diverse plant populations and communities that fully occupy the potential rooting
volume of the soil
0
g. maintain or restore plant communities to promote photosynthesis throughout the potential growing
season
0
h. promote soil and site conditions that provide the opportunity for the establishment of desirable plants
0
i. protect or restore water quality
0
j. provide for the life cycle requirements and maintain or restore the habitat elements of native and desired
plants and animals
0
2: Grazing mgmt plans should be tailored to site specific conditions and plan objectives. Livestock
grazing should be coordinated with the timing of precipitation, plant growth and plant form. Soil
moisture, plant growth stage and timing of peak stream flows are key factors in determining when to
graze. Response to different grazing strategies varies with differing ecological sites.
0
3: Grazing mgmt systems should consider nutritional and herd health requirements of the livestock
0
4: Integrate grazing mgmt systems into the year-round mgmt strategy and resources of the
permittee(s) or lessee(s). Consider the use of collaborative approaches in this integration.
0
5: Consider competition for forage and browse among livestock, big game animals and wild horses
in designing and implementing a grazing plan.
0
6: Provide periodic rest from grazing for rangeland vegetation during critical growth periods to
promote plant vigor, reproduction and productivity.
D
7: Range improvement practices should be prioritized to promote rehabilitation and resolve grazing
concerns on transitory grazing land.
D
8: Consider the potential for conflict between grazing use on public land and adjoining land uses in
the design and implementation of a grazing mgmt plan.
Appendix B Maps ,·
.. -
.~.
'\C,,
~m~=~~~~"~;~~~~~~~~~~
r,. -~,.=~...,.,..:.
.,-/
Appendix C Plant List Webdell Allotment # 5256
Field Date: August 8, 2003
Achillea millefolium Agropyron cristatum Agrostis alba Alyssum alyssoides Allium sp. Amelancier alnifolia Antennaria dimorpha Apocynum androsaemifolium Arabis sp. Artemisia ludoviciana Artemisia tridentata Aster sp. Astragalus conjunctus Astragalus curvicarpus Astragalus filipes Astragalus purshii Balsamorhiza careyana Balsamorhiza sagittata Berberis repens Bromus japonicus - Brumus tecto rum
Cardaria draba Calochortus macrocarpus Castilleja sp. Cercocarpus ledifolius Chrysothamnus nauseosus Ch1ysothamnus viscidiflorus Cirsium undulatum Circium vulgare Clematis ligusticifolia Crepis sp. Dactylis glomerata Danthonia unispicata Descurainia sophia Dipsacus sylvestris Draba verna Elymus cinereus Elymus elymoides Epilobium sp. Erigeron sp. Eriogonum microthecum Eriogonum sphaerocephalum Eriogonum spp. Equisetum sp. Festuca idahoensis Galium aparine Geum triflorum Holosteum umbellatum Iris missouriensis Juncus balticus Juniperus occidentalis Koeleria cristata Lactuca sp. Lewisia rediviva Lithospermum mderale Linum perenne Lomatium macrocarpum Lupinus leucophyllus Lupinus sp. Microsteris gracilis Orthocarpus sp. Penstemon richardsonii Perideridia gairdneri Penstemon sp. Phacelia sp. Philadelphus lewisii Phleum pratense Phlox hoodii Phoenicaulis cheiranthoides Pinus ponderosa Plectrtis macrocera Poa bulbosa Po a pratensis Poa secunda Polemonium micranthum Polemonium sp. Populus tremuloides Prunus virginiana Pseudoroegnaria spicata (AGSP) Purshia tridentata Ranunculus testiculatus Ribes cereum Ribes sp. Rosa woodsii Rumex sp. Salix lasiandra Salix sp. Scam Silene sp. Stipa thurberiana
Taraxacum ojjicinale
Tragopogon dubius
Verbascum thapsus
Veronica sp.
Vulpia octoflora
Zigadenus venenosus
Appendix D List of Lichens and Mosses Webdell Allotment # 5256
Field Date: August 8, 2003
Crustose
Aspicilia sp Candelaria concolor Candelariella aurella Lecanora hagenii Lepraria sp Leprocaulon subalbicans Pleopsidium flavum Rhizocarpon lecanorina Rhizocarpon geminatum Rinodina bischoffii Rinodina turfacea COMMON NAME
Disk lichen
Candleflame lichen
Hidden goldspeck lichen
Hagen's rim-lichen
Dust lichen
Cottonthread lichen
Gold cobblestone lichen
Crescent map lichen
Map lichen
Pepper-spore lichen
Tundra pepper-spore lichen
SUBTRATE
Rock
Bark and wood
Rock
Wood
Juniper bark
Moss over rock
Rock
Rock
Rock
Rock
Soil
Squamulose
Arthonia glebosa Cladonia sp Comma Lichen
Cladonia
Soil
Soil
Stonewall rim-lichen·
New Mexico rim-lichen
Lustrous camouflage lichen
Many spored camouflage lichen
Western shield lichen
Field Dog-Lichen
Mealy shadow lichen
Powder-tipped rosette-lichen
Frosted rosette-lichen
Orange rock-posy
Green rock-posy
Blistered Rock Tripe
Cumberland rock shield
Plitt's rock shield
Elegant sunburst lichen
Bare-bottomed sunburst lichen
Moss over rock
Rock
Juniper bark.
Juniper bark
Bark
Soil and moss
Cottonwood bark
Wood
Rock
Rock
Rock
Rock
Soil over rock
Rock
Rock
Tree and shrub bark
Brown-eyed wolflichen
Wolf lichen
On bark and wood
On bark and wood
Foliose
Lecanora muralis Lecanora novomexicana · Melanelia exasperatula
Melanelia multispora
Parmelia hygrophila
Peltigera rufescens
Phaeophyscia orbicularis
Physcia dubia
Physcia biziana
Rhizoplaca ch1ysoleuca
Rhizoplaca melanophthalma
Umbilicaria hyperborea
Xanthoparmelia cumberlandia
Xanthoparmelia plittii
Xanthoria elegans
Xanthoria fulva
Fruiticose
Letharia columbiana Letharia vulpina Appendix E Wildlife This wildlife list consists of species that were seen or whose signs were seen in or near this allotment in similar habitat. Many other species are likely to be present. Mammals (* Signs not observed but probably present within the Allotment.)
Coyote
Badger
Striped skunk*
Pronghomed antelope
Deer
Elk
Chipmunk
Bushy-tailed woodrat
Cottontail rabbit
Black-tailed jackrabbit
Bird species seen in the vicinity of the Webdell Allotment around the time of the evaluation (not necessarily
breeding in the area)
Bald eagle
Golden eagle
Red-tailed hawk
Northem harrier
Turkey vulture
N o1ihem flicker
Mourning dove
Common raven
Black-billed magpie
Stellar's jay
Clark's nutcracker
Mountain bluebird
American robin
Common night hawk
Ash-throated flycatcher
Mountain chickadee
Bushtit
Rock wren
Canyon wren
Meadowlark
Yellow-rumped warbler
Bullock's Oriole
Brown-headed cowbird
Brewer's blackbird
Chipping sparrow
Song sparrow
Oregon Breeding Bird Atlas Species List of known breeding in the Webdell Allotment area To see more
information on habitats in the area control/click on the hyperlink, click on Oregon Breeding bird folder, then click
on Atlas, then on Hex. Click on a hexagon ill Deschutes County and find your way to the map hexagon 25974
..\..\OR Breeding Birds\Oregon Breeding (R)\ATLAS.HTM. It's easier than it sounds. If your computer is slow it
might be better to access this program directly through the S: drive folder OR breeding birds.
Reptiles (* Not observed but probably present within the Allotment.)
Racer
Wandering garter snake
Gopher snake*
Western rattlesnake*
Western fence lizard
Amphibians (* Not observed but probably present within the Allotment.)
Pacific treefrog*
Western Toad*
Long-toed salamander*
Comments/Suggestions on Webdell S & G Assessment
John Swanson
Preamble: "When the term 'allotment' is used here, it is referring only to public lands
within the Webdell Allotment.
Standard 1 - Watershed
Concur with both ratings
Also check other box (other uses and conditions) (cuz of juniper, equipment ops)
"Historic managmenet practices prolly played a major role in current conditions".
Recognizing some apparent improvement in some places- good! But, need to cite that
such progress across all PL areas is not on "significant progress" track. Evidence:
Ground cover, vegetation, soil stability on PL areas adjacent to (but not within) allotment
and which have the same soils, old history in much better shape.= a visible benchmark
All allotments (that are grazed) always have some degree of livestoc:Ktrailing/terracing.
But here, the amount of trailing and terracing is much greater than that expected, creating
more bare soil/soil-veg displacement than expected.
Deletec:reference to "grazing while soils are saturated". Instead, describe the negative
livestock impact effect ("churned soil, weeds, and/or lack of appropriate vegetation"
and/or??)- then, how many places and roughly how many acres ... and that "it is much
greater than expected".
Delete reference to moderate use- it may or may not have always been that way. ·
Standard 2 - Riparian
Concur with both ratings Also check "other uses/conditions" (juniper, equipment impacts) Recognize historical impacts. Recognizing some gains - good. Willow, etc. here. W ebdell photos show rip veg often confined to immediate channels in the shallower channels. Typically see no or little evidence of expansion of wetted/rip zone- as we do in rip areas outside of (but adjacent to) this allotment. Aspen less healthy, abundant than expected. No apparent reprod. Cite "O'Neill aspen stand" (across hi way) as measure of "significant progress". Causal factor may be the juniper, may be the wildlife, may be the cows, may be fire exclusion- or may be all. We
don't know for sure.
"While livestock trailing along riparian areas typically occurs to some degree in all
allotments with riparian areas, the amount in the Webdell is much greater than expected,
as are the impacts associated with it"
Standard 3 - Ecological Processes
Concur with ratings
Also check "other use" block
Differentiate (in a general sense) health/functioning of public land juniper cuts vs. not
cut. I think the cut I did a few years ago has a pretty good perennial grass component.
"It is expected that the juniper-dominated sites should have lower-seral (such as Sandberg
bluegrass) dominance. In the Webdell Allotment, however, within these stands (and
often, in sites where juniper is absent) cheatgrass and annual forb dominance, and
depauperate perennial plants are often observed. This contrasts with the apparently
much greater litter and perennial plant density/ production in juniper-dominated and non­
juniper-dominated sites in areas adjacent to (but outside of )this allotment - which have
similar soils, historic management history, wildlife presence, and the like.".
Noxious Weeds??
Standard 4 - Water Quality
No thoughts.
Standard 5 - Wildlife
Concur with ratings
Check "other uses" block
Livestock grazing may be having one beneficial effect (forage pre-conditioning for deer
and elk).
Riparian areas critical for variety of WL species. As previously addressed, riparian areas
apparently improving but not making significant progress. Causal factors have been
previously addressed under Standard 2.
VI. Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management
Concur with ratings.
"No doubt, recent grazing management on the Webdell Allotment is much better today
than it was before. In terms of forage production, the allotment's public land appears
properly stocked. However, recent management has in some years led tore-grazing of
individual graminoids, and longer-duration grazing (which typically expresses itself with
greater amounts of trailing and bedding, and lower vigor/health of perennial plants).
While in some years, the allotment has been rested year-long, it is suspected that during
grazed years, plants have not received adequate recovery time between grazing
treatments. This situation (along with juniper occupation) is believed to be preventing
significant progress being made in repairing/rehabilitating very deteriorated sites
drastically impacted in historic times.
Team Recommendations
1. Reduce juniper occupation
2. Work with grazing permittee to prevent annual re-grazing of forage plants, and to
increase plant recovery periods between grazing treatments. Actions taken could
involve interior fence construction/reconstruction; additional herding; closer control of
the timing and intensity of grazing use; increasing livestock numbers (base property
leasing?)/shortening grazing durations; or other ideas that might be developed through
­
cooperative/collaborative efforts.
3. Take immediate action (via the UPR EA/Plan) to repair/rehabilitate/monitor the
known and potential aspen sites.
4. Establish additional monitoring sites to track progress toward achievement of the
standards._ (Including riparian, bitterbrush, upland soil movement).
5. Increase forage utilization/actual use monitoring.
6. ??
7. ??.
Appendix F
Range Comments/Suggestions on W ebdell S & G Assessment
John Swanson
Preamble: "When the term 'allotment' is used here, it is referring only to public lands
within the Webdell Allotment.
Standard 1 - Watershed
Concur with both ratings
Also check other box (other uses and conditions) (cuz ofjuniper, equipment ops)
"Historic managment practices probably played a major role in current conditions".
Recognizing some apparent improvement in some places - good! But, need to cite that
such progress across all PL areas is not on "significant progress" track. Evidence:
Ground cover, vegetation, soil stability on PL areas adjacent to (but not within) allotment ·
and which have the same soils, old history in much better shape. = a visible benchmark
All allotments (that are grazed) always have some degree oflivestock trailing/terracing.
But here, the amount of trailing and terracing is much greater than that expected, creating
more bare soil/soil-veg displacement than expected.
--Delete reference to "grazing while soils are saturated". Instead, describe the negative
livestock impact effect ("churned soil, weeds, and/or lack of appropriate vegetation"
and/or??)- then, how many places and roughly how many acres ... and that "it is much
greater than expected".
Delete reference to moderate use - it may or may not have always been that way.
Standard 2 - Riparian
Concur with both ratings Also check "other uses/conditions" Guniper, equipment impacts) Recognize historical impacts. Recognizing some gains- good. Willow, etc. here. W ebdell photos show rip veg often confined to immediate channels in the shallower channels. Typically see no or little evidence of expansion of wetted/rip zone- as we do in rip areas outside of (but adjacent to) this allotment. Aspen less healthy, abundant than expected. No apparent reprod. Cite "O'Neill aspen stand" (across hiway) as measure of "significant progress". Causal factor may be the juniper, may be the wildlife, may be the cows, may be fire exclusion- or may be all. We
don't know for sure.
"While livestock trailing along riparian areas typically occurs to some degree in all
allotments with riparian areas, the amount in the Webdell is much greater than expected,
as are the impacts associated with it"
Standard 3- Ecological Processes
Concur with ratings
Also check "other use" block
Differentiate (in a general sense) health/functioning of public land juniper cuts vs. not
cut. I think the cut I did a few years ago has a pretty good perennial grass component.
"It is expected that the juniper-dominated sites should have lower-seral (such as Sandberg
bluegrass) dominance. In the Webdell Allotment, however, within these stands (and
often, in sites where juniper is absent) cheatgrass and annual forb dominance, and
depauperate perennial plants are often observed. This contrasts with the apparently
much greater litter and perennial plant density/ production in juniper-dominated and non­
juniper-dominated sites in areas adjacent to (but outside of)this allotment- which have
similar soils, historic management history, wildlife presence, and the like.".
Noxious Weeds??
Standard 4- Water Quality
No thoughts.
Standard 5 - Wildlife
Concur with ratings
Check "other uses" block
Livestock grazing may be having one beneficial effect (forage pre-conditioning for deer
and elk).
Riparian areas critical for variety ofWL species. As previously addressed, riparian areas
apparently improving but not making significant progress. Causal factors have been
previously addressed under Standard 2.
VI. Guidelines for Livestock Grazing Management
Concur with ratings.
"No doubt, recent grazing management on the Webdell Allotment is much better today
than it was before. In terms of forage production, the allotment's public land appears
properly stocked. However, recent management has in some years led to re-grazing of
individual graminoids, and longer-duration grazing (which typically expresses itself with
greater amounts of trailing and bedding, and lower vigor/health of perennial plants).
While in some years, the allotment has been rested year-long, it is suspected that during
grazed years, plants have not received adequate recovery time between grazing
treatments. This situation (along with juniper occupation) is believed to be preventing
significant progress being made in repairing/rehabilitating very deteriorated sites
drastically impacted in historic times.
Team Recommendations
1. Reduce juniper occupation
2. Work with grazing permittee to prevent annual re-grazing of forage plants, and to
increase plant recovery periods between grazing treatments. Actions taken could
involve interior fence construction/reconstruction; additional herding; closer control of
the timing and intensity of grazing use; increasing livestock numbers (base property
leasing?)/shortening grazing durations; or other ideas that might be developed through
cooperative/collaborative efforts.
3. Take immediate action (via the UPR EA/Plan) to repair/rehabilitate/monitor the
known and potential aspen sites.
4. Establish additional monitoring sites to track progress toward achievement of the
standards. (Including riparian, bitterbrush, upland soil mevement).
5. Increase forage utilization/actual use monitoring.