Range plant community types and carrying capacity for the montane subregion : fifth approximation /

Willoughby, Michael T.; Adams, Barry W.; Alexander, Michael J.

doi:10.5962/bhl.title.104601

Cited by 7 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This community type is very similar to the rough fescue dominated communities described in the Ya Ha n=4 This community type was described in the Upper Clearwater Forest Land Use Zone and is similar to the bog birch' rough fescue/ bearberry community type but lacks the cover of bog birch. Willoughby (2001) n=2 This community type was described in the Ghost area west ofCalgary. It appears to represent a transitional grassland between the Montane and Upper Foothills subregions.…”

Section: Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)mentioning

confidence: 98%

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(%)mentioning

confidence: 98%

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

“…by Beckingham and Archibald (1996), "Field Guide to Ecosites of West-Central Alberta" by Beckingham et al, (1996), "Field Guide to Ecosites of Southwestern Alberta" by Archibald et al, (1996), "Range Plant Community Types and Carrying Capacity for the Upper Foothills Subregion of Alberta" by Willoughby (2005), "Range Plant Community Types for the Subalpine and Alpine Subregions" by Willoughby and Alexander (2006), "Range Plant Community Types and Carrying Capacity for the Montane Subregion of Alberta" by Willoughby et al, (2005), "Range Plant Community Types and Carrying Capacity for the Lower Foothills Region of Alberta" by Lawrence et al, (2005), "Guide to Range Plant Community Types and Carrying Capacity for the Dry and Central Mixedwood Subregions in Alberta" by , and Range Plant Communities and Range Health Assessment Guidelines for the Foothills Fescue Natural Subregion of Alberta" by Adams et al, (2005). Twelve broad categories of vegetation types were created from the above sourcesthese were labeled based on the common moisture/nutrient level.…”

Section: Appendix 2: Ecological Site Classification Descriptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

High Sulfur Contamination Effect on the Environment at the Afforested Former Jeziórko Sulfur Mine

Likus‐Cieślik¹,

Pietrzykowski²

2019

JASMR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We developed a scientifically robust monitoring protocol to enable a consistent assessment of ecological recovery of physical, chemical, and biological indicators at certified reclaimed industrial well pads on grasslands. Using the developed protocols, data can be generated from measurement of soil, vegetation, and landscape indicators at reclaimed well pads and adjacent reference sites. We selected the appropriate vegetation, soil, and habitat indicators for a long-term reclamation monitoring program and have provided sampling protocols for the selected indicators here. The protocols may be used to identify and prioritize indicators of reduced ecosystem health and to track ecological recovery of reclaimed sites over time. The development of these integrated monitoring protocols is a first step towards successful and consistent long-term monitoring to assess ecological recovery of certified reclaimed well pads on grasslands.

show abstract

“…As a result, the Eastern Rockies Conservation Board was established to allow for collaborative federal and provincial management and monitoring of resource use in the Rocky Mountain Forest Reserve. Subsequently the Rangeland Reference Area Program was established in 1949 by the Eastern Rockies Conservation Board to assess range condition and monitor range trend on grasslands within the boundaries of the Rocky Mountain Forest Reserve (Hanson 1975 This report discusses and evaluates the trends in range health of the Rangeland Reference Areas that represent the rough fescue ecological site within the Montane subregion (Willoughby et al 2003). There are 1 1 long-term reference area sites which represent the rough fescue ecological site.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Figure 11. Ecological Succession diagram, with ecological status scores and plant community codes (Willoughby et al 2003) for the Rough fescue ecological site in the Montane subregion of Southern Alberta.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term trends in rangeland health of the rough fescue ecological site in the Montane subregion /

Willoughby¹,

Alberta.²

2005

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Rangeland Reference Area program administered by the Public Lands and Forests Division was established by the Eastern Rockies Conservation Board to assess range condition and monitor trend on rangelands within the boundaries of the Rocky Mountain Forest Reserve (RMFR). Over fifty fenced exclosures have been established in the Forest Reserve. These exclosures include permanently marked grazed and ungrazed transects. Species composition data has been recorded on these transects since 1953 when many of the sites were established. Recently, the data of these sites has been analyzed in order to determine the successional pathways in the presence and absence of grazing. This long-term data used in conjunction with a detailed ecological classification of the range community types will help to determine the health of the rangelands in the Rocky Mountain Forest Reserve. This report evaluates and discusses the range health and trend of the Rangeland Reference Areas that represent the rough fescue ecological site within the Montane subregion. vi

show abstract

Range plant community types and carrying capacity for the montane subregion : fifth approximation /

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 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 /

High Sulfur Contamination Effect on the Environment at the Afforested Former Jeziórko Sulfur Mine

Long-term trends in rangeland health of the rough fescue ecological site in the Montane subregion /

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About