Range plant community types and carrying capacity for the subalpine and alpine subregions : second approximation /

Willoughby, Michael T.; Alexander, Michael J.

doi:10.5962/bhl.title.104613

Cited by 3 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Forb species such as globeflower, fleabane, monkshood, and mountain heliotrope are all characteristic of these high elevation meadows. This community is much wetter than the rough fescue-bog sedge community (UFA 1 2) previously described and is similar to the forb meadows community type described by Willoughby (1999) n=l This community type is transitional between the Lower Foothills and Upper Foothills subregions. It was described on fine textured, silty soils adjacent to the Baptiste river west of Rocky Mountain House.…”

Section: Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%isupporting

confidence: 62%

“…This community type is very similar to the blunt sedge-rocky mtn. fescue/ bearberry community described by Willoughby (1999) and the junegrass-hairy wildrye-brome community described by Corns and Achuff (1982) on steep south-facing slopes in the Subalpine subregion. This community type is found scattered throughout the Upper Foothills subregion on dry, gravelly, well drained river flats.…”

Section: Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)mentioning

confidence: 92%

“…In the Yukon, these small meadows were found to form in depressions which appeared to act as pronounced frost pockets (Bailey et al, 1992). In the Subalpine subregion, these California oatgrass dominated grasslands are often associated with bog sedge (Willoughby 1999 This community type occurs on steep, south facing slopes with shallow soils overlying sandstone bedrock. The majority of the vegetation is composed of the drought tolerant species: sage, bearberry and junegrass.…”

Section: Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Range plant community types and carrying capacity for the upper foothills subregion : fourth approximation /

Willoughby¹

2001

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Key to modified grass and shmblands 37 Key to native shmblands 38 A. Grasslands UFAl . Water sedge meadows 39 UFA2. Sedge-Slender wheatgrass/Meadow me 40 UPA3. Tufted hairgrass-S edge 41 UFA4. Tufted hairgrass-S edge-Slender wheatgrass 42 UFA5. Rough fescue-Tufted hairgrass 43 UFA6. Rough fescue-Hairy wildrye 44 UFA7. Rough fescue/Bearberry 45 UFA7a.Califomia oatgrass-Rough fescue/Bearberry 46 UFA8. California oatgrass-Sedge 47 5 1 UFAl 3. Alpine rough fescue 52 UFA14. Cowparsnip-Meadowme/Fringedbrome 53 UFAl 5 . Hairy wildrye-Sedge 54 UFAl 6. Hairy wildrye-Rough fescue/Bearberry 55 UFAl 7. Idaho fescue-Parry oatgrass-Sedge 56 IV B. Shrublands UFBl. Willow-Bog birchAVater sedge 57 UFB2. Willow/Slender wheatgrass-Sedge 58 UFB3. Willow/Tufted hairgrass 59 UFB4. Willow/Rough fescue 60 UFB5. Bog birch/Rough fescue/Bearberry 61 UFB6. Willow/Califomia oatgrass-Sedge 62 UFB7. Pussy willow shnibland 63 UFB8. Willow/Hairy wildrye-Sedge 64 UFB9. Bog birch/Sedge-Marsh reedgrass 65 UFB 1 0. Willow-Bog birch/Sedge 66 UFB 1 1 . Willow-Bog birch 67 UFB12. Alder-Willow/Horsetail 68 C. Shrublands and Grasslands modified by grazing 69 UFCl . Slender wheatgrass-Sedge/Low forbs 72 UFC2. Rocky Mtn. fescue/Graceflil cinquefoil 73 UFC3. Kentucky bluegrass/Dandelion-Clover 74 UFC4. Kentucky bluegrass-Sedge/Dandelion 75 UFC5. Tufted hairgrass-Kentuckybluegrass 76 UFC6. Sedge-Tufted hairgrass 77 UFC7. Creeping red fescue/Clover * 78 UFC8. Kentucky bluegrass-Timothy/Meadow rue 79 UFC9. Purple oatgrass-Rough fescue 80 UFCl 0. Willow/Kentucky bluegrass 8 1 UFCl 1 . Sedge-Slender wheatgrass-Rough fescue 82 D. Deciduous community types 83 Key to deciduous community types 85 UFD 1 . Aspen/Rose/Bearberry 87 UFD2. Balsam poplar-White spruceAVillowAfellow Mtn. avens 88 UFD3. Aspen/Rose/Hairy wildrye 89 UFD4. Aspen/Buffaloberry/Hairy wildrye 90 UFD5. Aspen/Marsh reedgrass 91 UFD6. Balsam poplarAVillow/Horsetail 92 E. Conifer community types 93 V Key to conifer community types 95 UFEl. Lodgepolepine/Bog cranberry 97 UFE2. Lodgepole pine-White spruce/Bunchberry 98 UFE3. Lodgepole pineAVillow/Moss 99 UFE4. Lodgepole pine/Marsh reedgrass 1 00 UFE5. Black spruceAVillow 101 L)PE6. White spruce/Horsetail/Moss 102 UFE7. White spruceAVillow 103 UFE8. White spruce/Bearberry 104 UFE9. White spruce/Juniper-Buffaloberry 105 2 Vll AbstractThe Upper Foothills subregion is found elevationally below the Subalpine and above the Lower Foothills subregions. It is dominated by closed canopied lodgepole pine forests. In the valley bottoms the shrub and grassland community types are a classic example of multiple use land, providing summer range for livestock, prime habitat for many species of wildlife, productive watersheds, and recreational areas. Despite the importance of these vegetation types for livestock grazing, there is little information available on how grazing affects their production. There is little information on forage productivity, carrying capacity and the associated community types with grazing. The lack of information makes it very difficult to develop...

show abstract

Section: Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%isupporting

confidence: 62%

Section: Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)mentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Range plant community types and carrying capacity for the upper foothills subregion : fourth approximation /

Willoughby¹

2001

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This study reveals the substantial sensitivity of the subalpine and alpine zones and suggests that livestock management plans and vegetation health assessment criteria should be adjusted for mountain zones. Historically, there have been different management practices across the elevational zones along the creeks in our study, as grazing in the subalpine and alpine zones was restricted to a 3‐mo interval of Jul–Sep and there have already been recommendations to exclude livestock grazing in the alpine zone (Willoughby & Alexander, 2006). Our study provides empirical support for this management recommendation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the upper mountain zones along Yarrow Creek, grazing was further restricted to a maximum of 2 mo and generally occurred for only 6 wks annually. Stocking rates in the mountain zones are restricted by provincial guidelines to an average of 0.9 AUM ha −1 for the subalpine (Willoughby & Alexander, 2006). In contrast to Yarrow Creek, Drywood Creek has limited access because of fencing and topography, and livestock grazing has always been minimal in the subalpine and alpine zones.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Elevated sensitivity: riparian vegetation in upper mountain zones is especially vulnerable to livestock grazing

Samuelson

Rood

2011

Applied Vegetation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abbreviations AUM = animal unit month; DBH = tree diameter at breast height; TSR = transformed species richness Abstract Question: Riparian zones provide ecologically rich interfaces between land and flowing water, and are favoured areas for grazing by native ungulates and livestock. Overgrazing can degrade riparian vegetation. Will sensitivity and vulnerability to grazing increase in upper mountain zones because of the harsh physical environment?Location: We compared the impact of cattle grazing along natural elevational corridors provided by two first-order creeks in the Rocky Mountains of Alberta, Canada.Methods: Substrate and vegetation characteristics were assessed in quadrats within transects positioned in ungrazed or lightly grazed, versus moderately to heavily grazed sites extending from the alpine down through the subalpine, montane, parkland and prairie zones.Results: Analyses revealed that 18 of 19 substrate and vegetation characteristics varied along the elevational profile (17 P o 0.05; 1 P o 0.1). Fifteen differed with grazing (12 P o 0.05; 3 P o 0.1), which was associated with coarser substrate with lower pH, reduced diversity and density of shrubs and trees, reduced vegetation cover, increased percent cover and species of weeds and changes in proportions of particular plants such as increasing yarrow (Achillea millefolium) and decreasing mountain valerian (Valeriana sitchensis). Significant grazing Â elevation interactions for seven characteristics (5 P o 0.05; 2 P o 0.1) indicated greater impacts at higher elevations. Conclusions:This study revealed that the upper elevations were heavily affected, despite their shorter, seasonally restricted grazing history. This indicates that riparian zones in upper mountain environments are particularly vulnerable to livestock grazing.

show abstract

The rough fescue dominated community types in the foothills of north-central Alberta /

Willoughby¹,

Alberta.²

2001

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

List of Photos Photo 1. The lack of fire has allowed bog birch cover to increase on both the grazed and ungrazed transects at the Elk Creek rangeland reference area from 1968 to 2000. 13 Photo 2. In over 30 years of protection from grazing and fire there has been little shrub expansiion at the Harold Creek rangeland reference area. However shrub expansion has continued on the moister sites in the background.

show abstract

Range plant community types and carrying capacity for the subalpine and alpine subregions : second approximation /

Cited by 3 publications

References 8 publications

Range plant community types and carrying capacity for the upper foothills subregion : fourth approximation /

Range plant community types and carrying capacity for the upper foothills subregion : fourth approximation /

Elevated sensitivity: riparian vegetation in upper mountain zones is especially vulnerable to livestock grazing

The rough fescue dominated community types in the foothills of north-central Alberta /

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About