United States

Department

of Agriculture

Forest Service

Rocky Mountain

Research Station

General Technical

Report RMRS-GTR-47

April 2000

Monitoring the

Vegetation Resources

in Riparian Areas

Alma H. Winward
Rocky Mountain Research Station

324 25th Street

Ogden, UT 84401

The Author ____________________

Alma H. Winward is Regional Ecologist for the Intermountain Region, Forest Service in Ogden, UT. He

received his B.S. degree in Range Science from Utah

State University and his Ph.D. degree in Forestry Sciences from the University of Idaho. He has been involved

in the ecology and management of riparian ecosystems

since 1976.

Acknowledgments _____________

Funding for this publication was provided by: Harv Forsgren,

Director of Wildlife, Fish, and Rare Plants, Arthur Bryant,

Director of Watershed and Air Management, Russ

LaFayette, Riparian Area and Wetlands Coordinator, and

Bertha Gillam, Director of Range Management, each from

the Washington Office, U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service; Roland M. Stoleson, Director of Vegetation

Management in the Intermountain Region Office, Forest

Service, Ogden, UT, and Wayne Elmore, National Riparian

Service Team Leader, U.S. Department of the Interior,

Bureau of Land Mangement, Prineville, OR.

The author wishes to thank Van C. Elsbernd, Rangeland Specialist, Range Management, Washington Office, Fort Collins, CO, for his support and time in assisting

with all aspects in preparing this report for publication.

Special thanks are also extended to Sherel Goodrich,

Warren Clary, Irwin Cowley, Sandy Wyman, Clint Williams, Curt Johnson, and Larry Bryant for their review and

constructive suggestions, and to Jeanne Zschaechner

for the graphics used in the document.

Abstract ___________________________________________

Winward, Alma H. 2000. Monitoring the vegetation resources in riparian areas. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRSGTR-47. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

49 p.

This document provides information on three sampling methods used to inventory and monitor the

vegetation resources in riparian areas. The vegetation cross-section method evaluates the health of

vegetation across the valley floor. The greenline method provides a measurement of the streamside

vegetation. The woody species regeneration method measures the density and age class structure of any

shrub or tree species that may be present in the sampling area. Together these three sampling

procedures can provide an evaluation of the health of all the vegetation in a given riparian area.

Keywords: riparian sampling, vegetation cross-section, greenline, woody regeneration
Contents__________________________________________

Page

Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1

Terminology .................................................................................................................. 1

Special Features ........................................................................................................... 5

Successional Processes .................................................................................................. 5

Sampling Procedures ....................................................................................................... 7

Vegetation Cross-Section Composition ........................................................................ 8

Greenline Composition ............................................................................................... 10

Locating and Measuring the Greenline.................................................................... 10

Greenline Sampling ................................................................................................. 12

Woody Species Regeneration .....................................................................................17

Data Analysis Procedures .............................................................................................. 22

Successional Status ....................................................................................................23

Desired Condition ........................................................................................................23

Greenline Successional Status and Bank Stability ..................................................... 24

Greenline Successional Status Based on Capability Groups .................................. 25

Greenline Bank Stability ...........................................................................................25

Procedures for Refining the Calculation of Successional Status .................................26

Proportioning Transitional Types ..............................................................................26

Adjusting the Successional Status Rating for Areas Where

a Woody Overstory Component Should be Present but

Currently is not Present .........................................................................................27

Helpful Tips .................................................................................................................... 29

Summary ........................................................................................................................30

References ......................................................................................................................33

Appendices

Appendix A: Key to Greenline Riparian Capability Groups .............................................34

Appendix B: Riparian Community Types of the Intermountain Region,

Forest Service ..............................................................................................................35

Appendix C: Examples of Greenline Ecological Status and Stability Ratings .................40

Appendix D: Equipment List ............................................................................................41

Appendix E: Forms.................................................................................................... 41-49

Figures (abbreviated captions)

Figure 1—A typical colonizing species (brookgrass—Catabrosia aquatica).....................2

Figure 2—A portion of Nebraska sedge (Carex nebrascensis),

an important stabilizing greenline species .....................................................................4

Figure 3—A stream in process of recovering from a previous erosional event.................4

Figure 4—Graphic display of a typical riparian area .........................................................7

Figure 5—Vegetation cross-section measurement ...........................................................9

Figure 6—Location of the greenline at or near the bankfull stage ..................................11

Figure 7—Location of the greenline after summer water flows have decreased ............11

Figure 8—Location of the greenline on an eroded bank .................................................12

Figure 9—Example of the greenline supporting non-riparian vegetation ........................13

Figure 10—Example of a greenline dominated by non-hydrophytic plant species .........13

Figure 11—Stands of several community types in the riparian complex ........................14

Figure 12—Example of two riparian complexes..............................................................15

Figure 13—Greenline vegetation composition measurement of 363 feet,

minimum, each side of the stream ...............................................................................15

Figure 14—Woody species counts by age class ............................................................17

Figure 15—Sampler using a 6-foot pole to measure woody species

regeneration along the greenline .................................................................................18
Page

Figure 16—Correct placement of the sampling pole along the greenline water

interface ...................................................................................................................... 18

Figure 17—Placement of the measuring pole on streams less than 6 feet wide ........... 19

Figure 18—Use of line transect data to determine percent shrub or tree canopy ..........20

Figure 19—Substrate features, in this case a consolidated soil layer, may

substantially influence erosiveness of stream banks ...................................................25

Figure 20—Location of greatest water velocity in a stream (side view) ..........................31

Figure 21—Location of greatest water velocity in relation to the highest root

strength and concentration (front view) .......................................................................31

Figure 22—Water forces in combination with healthy rooting characteristics

provide special habitat features in riparian areas ........................................................32

Figure 23—Example of a healthy riparian area...............................................................32

Tables

Table 1—Example of successional status of vegetation using Coefficient of

Community Similarity—in percent (modified from Winward 1989) ..............................23

Table 2—Examples of ratings for two different areas representing the Booth

willow/beaked sedge-moderate gradient riparian type in relation to desired

community type composition values (modified from Winward 1989) ...........................24
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 1

Introduction ______________________________________________________

Until the mid 1970’s only minimal effort had been directed at monitoring

the vegetation resources in riparian areas. Since that time considerable

attention and research have been directed toward gaining a better understanding of the vegetation on these areas. This increased attention has been

due mainly to recognition of the important sociological and economic values

these areas provide to society in general.

This paper provides additional information on vegetation sampling methods first described in Winward and Pagett (1989). Subsequent publications

that expanded on this initial work include USDA (1992), Cagney (1993), and

several others not specifically cited. Procedures and methodologies are

written to be as scientific as possible, while designed to be efficient in both

time and cost. Some values used in specific ratings are based on available

research and, where this is lacking, are supplemented by the professional

judgment and experience of the author and various coworkers.

These procedures are specifically intended to be used as follow-up methods

to the Riparian Proper Functioning (PFC) Assessment when more quantitative information is desired (USDA 1998).

The three sampling methods described in this document include: (1) Vegetation Cross Section Composition, (2) Greenline Composition, and (3) Woody

Species Regeneration. The first two require that some sort of vegetation

(community type) classification be available to perform the measurements.

The latter method, Woody Species Regeneration, has been designed to

provide information on the relative amounts of each age class of woody

species found in the sampling area. All three sampling methods require a

working knowledge of most of the plant species on the area being sampled.

Terminology

Colonizers—Plant species that become established in open, barren areas

are among the first plants to occupy open sites. In riparian areas they

colonize edges of bars or areas where streambanks have freshly eroded. They

are rhizomatous/stoloniferous in growth form, but the roots are shallow and

the stems are relatively weak. Although they are short lived, they have a

capacity to grow very rapidly, up to 1 to 4 centimeters per day. They initiate

shallow roots every few centimeters and, as water forces align their stems

parallel to the water’s edge, they develop temporary bands or stringers of

vegetation along stream edges. Their primary function is to filter and catch

Monitoring the Vegetation

Resources in Riparian Areas

Alma H. Winward
2 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

very fine, flour-like sediments and build substrate for the stronger more

permanent stabilizing species (see definition for stabilizers). As such they

play a crucial role in initiating recovery and maintenance of streambanks.

Typical examples include: brookgrass (Catabrosia aquatica) and water-cress

(Rorippa nasturtium-aquaticum) (fig. 1).

Figure 1—A typical colonizing species (brookgrass—Catabrosia aquatica) forming a

temporary filtering community type along the greenline.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 3

Community type—A repeating classified and recognizable assemblage

or grouping of plant species. Riparian community types represent the

existing structure and composition of plant communities with no indication

of successional status. They often occur as patches, stringers, or islands, and

are distinguished by floristic similarities in both their overstory and understory layers.

Composition—The relative amount (percent) of one plant species or one

community type in relation to other species or community types in a given area.

Greenline—The first perennial vegetation that forms a lineal grouping of

community types on or near the water’s edge. Most often it occurs at or

slightly below the bankful stage.

Hydrophyte—A plant species found growing in areas where soils in the

rooting zone are saturated much or all of the growing season.

Potential Natural Community (PNC)—The biotic community that

would become established if all successional sequences were completed

without human interference, under the present environmental conditions.

Riparian Complex—A unit of land with a unique set of biotic and abiotic

factors. Complexes are identified on the basis of their overall geomorphology,

substrate characteristics, stream gradient and associated water flow features, and general vegetation patterns. They are named after the most

common or prominent community type present, along with special identifying features of the sites on which they occur, for example, Booth willow

(Salix boothii)/Nebraska sedge (Carex nebrascensis)—Cryaquoll—Trough

Floodplain Riparian Complex. A riparian complex is similar in definition to

a valley segment, except that the valley segment refers to the stream channel

proper and, thus, is normally a lineal feature (Maxwell and others 1995). The

riparian complex is used to describe the full width of the riparian area across

a particular portion of a valley. Generally, a limited set of stream reaches is

nested within a given riparian complex.

Stabilizers—Plant species that become established along edges of streams,

rivers, ponds, and lakes. Although they generally require hydric settings for

establishment, some may persist in drier conditions once they have become

firmly established. They commonly have strong, cord-like rhizomes as well

as deep fibrous root masses. Additionally, they have coarse leaves and strong

crowns, which, along with their massive root systems, are able to buffer

streambanks against the erosive forces of moving water (fig. 2). Along with

enhancing streambank strength, they filter sediments and, with the forces

of water, they build/rebuild eroded portions of streambanks (fig. 3). They

likewise filter chemicals, which is important in improving water quality.

These species play a significant role in attaining and maintaining proper

functioning of riparian and aquatic ecosystems.

Each stream or river must develop and maintain adequate amounts and kinds

of these species or, in some cases, anchored logs or rocks, to provide, over time,

a balance between the eroding and rebuilding forces of water. In this publication

the terms stabilizers and hydrophytic species are essentially synonymous.

Examples include: Nebraska sedge (Carex nebrascensis) and Geyer’s willow (Salix geyeri). A combination of stabilizing overstory and understory

species provides the highest amount of protection possible from a vegetation

standpoint. However, on low gradient systems, or on streams with low water

forces, either a suitable overstory or understory component is often sufficient.
4 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

Figure 3—A stream in process of recovering from a previous erosional event. Note the presence

of brookgrass colonizing and collecting sediments along the water’s edge. Also, note the presence

of the stabilizing species Nebraska sedge forming a strong buffering line behind the brookgrass.

This sequence of establishment is often one of the ways a stream channel becomes narrower after

an erosional event.

Figure 2—A portion of Nebraska sedge (Carex nebrascensis), an important stabilizing greenline

species. Note its extensive, strong roots, crown, and leaves.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 5

Successional Status—The present state of vegetation on an area in

relation to the potential natural community(ies) that could occur on that

area.

Special Features

One of the more perplexing difficulties encountered when monitoring in

riparian areas is the relatively small size and mosaic pattern of the community types. Individual stands of a community type may range from a few

square feet in size to several acres. Any one section of a stream or meadow

is usually composed of numerous, repeating stands of six to 12 community

types; their pattern or distribution is tied to the soils or, most often, the water

table features within that particular complex.

Another difficulty in monitoring riparian areas involves the many types of

land management activities that can potentially influence the resources on

these areas. Unlike surrounding upland areas, most damaging influences

are not limited to the areas where they occur. Many influences become

cumulative downstream or lower in the watershed. Also, some disturbance

events, such as downcutting of the channel and the subsequent loss of the

water table, may alter composition of the vegetation considerable distances

from the down cut, usually upstream. These influences often make it difficult

to understand or assign cause to particular disturbances.

Successional Processes ___________________________________________

Vegetation monitoring generally involves selection of a representative site

on which to initiate a sampling process. On upland areas, site characteristics,

such as overall climate and general landscape and soil features, normally

remain relatively stable over time. One can select an appropriate monitoring

site and be relatively confident that most changes in the vegetation on that

area, over time, can be related to whatever management is being applied.

However, in riparian areas there often is a continual process of change. Lakes

and ponds gradually fill with sediments, and rivers and stream channels move

about within the valley floor. These changes alone can result in an almost

continual readjustment in successional processes in many areas. Even under

“natural conditions,” stable plant communities such as those found on upland

settings can be short lived. Long term, self-perpetuating plant communities on

a specific area are achieved only on a few specially armored settings where

bedrock or large cobbles or boulders keep the stream channel intact or where

low-gradient meadows have stable enough environments for the community

types to reach a long-term balance with their environment.

This history of rapid change has produced some interesting riparian

species adaptations. Many of the cottonwood, alder, birch, and willow species

require, or at least regenerate much better on, disturbed or open ground.

Seedlings of these species often are very poor competitors in dense grass or

heavily sodded settings (Winward 1986). Instead, they depend on newly

developed sand and gravel bars, freshly broken banks, or seasonal deposition

areas to regenerate and establish. Similarly, many grass and sedge species

establish in new sections of a stream by anchoring chunks of sod broken from

banks upstream or collecting and anchoring floating seeds in openings along

the stream edge. All these processes indicate a history of continual disturbances in riparian settings.
6 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

The continual disruption of succession in riparian areas does not necessarily prevent us from developing monitoring procedures based on potential of

a site, nor does it leave us without an ability to use vegetation communities,

in our case the community types, as descriptors of condition of an area. It

means, instead, that we must accept that we are generally working with

communities that often are not long-term end points in succession as we have

tended to evaluate against on upland areas.

A common characteristic of the vegetation units within riparian complexes

involves a gradual movement or swapping of stands of community types. As

stream channels move about within a given complex or when a meander

breaks and forms a stream channel in a new area of the complex, plant

community types gradually develop to fit the newly created environments

associated with movement of the stream and its intertied soil and water

features. For example, stands of one community type can establish and exist

for several years in specific locations within the complexes (figs. 4a and 4b).

Then as the particular environment supporting them is altered, such as a

ground water change due to a movement of the stream channel (fig. 4c),

stands of that particular community type may move with the stream channel

or they may reoccur somewhere else in the complex where site features

become suitable (figs. 4d and 4e).

Other types suited to the newly developed settings on the original area also

begin to develop. Normally, all types were present in that particular complex.

Over time, stands of these types have merely “drifted” to new locations or

switched places. This realignment of stands of community types is different

from upland settings where stands may occur only on specific portions of a

geographic area and are essentially permanent. A sampling process should

be used that considers movement of site features, and subsequently, stands

of the community types, as one attempts to monitor changes over time.

Riparian complexes develop and function as a result of the relatively stable

interacting features of valley bottom gradient and substrate characteristics,

valley bottom width, general elevation, and the size and pattern of the water

forces, which are influenced by the general climate of the area. Seldom do

human-related influences change these factors. Instead, human-caused

influences normally involve changes in specific water table features or

damaging impacts on certain plant species. These influences normally show

up in changes in the community type composition within a complex.

If there is a set kind and composition of community types within a complex

in undisturbed conditions, and if new types develop within that complex

when unnatural disturbance factors are present, such as livestock grazing

and trampling or damages from recreational or other land disturbing

activities (fig. 4f), changes in kinds and amounts of community types can be

measured to determine the degree of impact.

For example, new communities that may increase or develop as a result of

excessive disturbances often include Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis) and

redtop (Agrostis stolonifera). The composition of these types in a complex can

be measured and used as indicators of impact.

Additionally, if the same or a very similar riparian complex occurs in two

or more different locations, we can predict potential compositions from one

geographic location to another. This should allow us to understand general

capabilities among similar settings and develop appropriate desired conditions and management prescriptions for similar riparian areas.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 7

Figure 4—Graphic display of a typical riparian area: (a) two riparian complexes along with stands of several

community types within each complex; (b) community type composition in two riparian complexes during sampling

period 1985; (c) a stream channel change that potentially may influence location of stands of the community types;

(d) realignment of stands of each community type as a result of the channel change; (e) composition changes due to

channel changes, sampling period 1995; (f) common changes in kinds of community types in two complexes as a result

of unnatural disturbance factors such as intensive grazing (see text discussion).

Sampling Procedures ______________________________________________

The following sampling procedures may be used to help monitor vegetation

changes taking place in riparian settings as a result of natural and humanrelated activities:

• Vegetation cross-section composition

• Greenline composition

• Woody species regeneration
8 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

The line intercept method, similar to that designed for use in obtaining

individual species cover (Canfield 1941), is used for obtaining community

type cover and composition in procedures one and two above. Density counts

of woody species by specified age classes, or in specific cases, patch sizes, are

used in procedure number three.

Other common methods such as density, cover, and frequency measurements, as found in USDA (1993), may also be used where detailed evaluations are necessary. However, if these latter methods are used, one must use

caution in accounting for vegetation changes caused by naturally occurring

site changes compared to changes due to specific management activities (see

discussion under Successional Processes, page 5).

A list of equipment needed to implement the three vegetation procedures

described in this document is found in Appendix D, page 41, and forms for

each procedure are found in Appendix E, pages 42-49.

Vegetation Cross-Section Composition

Each riparian complex is usually composed of a mix of stands of six to 12

community types. This procedure is designed to quantify the percent of each

community type in a particular complex. These data may be used to indicate

how much change has occurred in a particular complex (percent of acreage

supporting altered community types), or how closely the composition of types

in that area represents a previously described desired condition. Composition of types such as Kentucky bluegrass or redtop, which represent disturbance situations, can provide a measure of the percent of the complex that

has been altered. Or, sampling data from similar unmodified or minimally

modified riparian settings can be used as a standard to measure degree of

change that may have occurred (successional status). Either of these values

may then be used to compare how well an area is being managed, based on

the pre-set desired conditions. Subsequent measurements in the same

complex will provide information on the long-term trend of vegetation

communities in that complex.

Several step transects (at least five) are established perpendicular to the

grade in a riparian complex in such a way as to cross the entire riparian area

(fig. 5). Each of these transects should be randomly placed in such a way as

to best represent the entire complex. An aerial photograph often helps.

Pacing transects has been found to be as reliable as using a measuring tape

when calculating community type composition.

The beginning and ending points for each transect are permanently

marked with stakes. These stakes should be placed far enough back into the

non-riparian area (usually several feet) to allow subsequent quantification

in case the riparian area expands in size. Placement there also helps ensure

that stakes are not damaged or lost during an unusually high flooding event.

Community type composition is obtained by taking the number of steps

encountered for each type in all five transects divided by the total number of

steps taken in all five transects.

Number of steps in each community type = Community type

Total number of steps Composition
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 9

Example:

Steps Steps Percent

Community type T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 (ct) total comp

Willow/beaked sedge 40 45 40 35 20 = 180 / 480 = 38

Kentucky bluegrass 50 50 45 45 75 = 265 / 480 = 55

Beaked sedge 0 5 10 0 0 = 15 / 480 = 3

Redtop 5 0 10 5 0 = 20 / 480 = 4

Total = 480 100

Since the Kentucky bluegrass community type (55 percent) and the redtop

community type (4 percent) represent disturbance types in this complex, 59

percent of the area (55 + 4) has altered types present. Specific procedures for

evaluating cross-sectional data are shown in the Data Analysis Procedures

(page 22).

Since the number of steps in each community type is ultimately calculated

to percent composition, average length of each step does not need to be

measured as long as one person performs all pacing on any given transect and

the overall width of the riparian-wetland area is not needed. (Generally,

aerial extent of the riparian area can be more accurately obtained using GIS

technology.)

A hand-held tally counter will aid in using this sampling process.

Any community type fragment encountered that is less than one step in

length will normally not be tallied separately. Instead that fragment will be

tallied with the most common adjacent type.

Figure 5—Vegetation cross-section measurement. Use of the line intercept

method to measure amount of change in community type composition within

a complex after unnatural disturbances.
10 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

Photographs should be taken, as a minimum, at each of the permanent

cross-section stakes and should display the general setting of the transect.

Photographs may also be taken where the transect crosses the stream

channel or at other locations along the transect where a pictorial record will

be useful in visualizing specific features of the area.

Greenline Composition

Sampling community type composition along the greenline (see definition,

page 3) can provide additional information over that collected by the crosssection process. Presence of more or less permanent water in the plantrooting zone allows growth of robust, hydrophytic plant species that play an

important role in buffering the forces of water. Additionally, vegetation in

these favorable environments can often recover rapidly after either natural

or induced disturbances. This permits the land manager to make an early

evaluation of effects of management on a particular area. If subsequent

measurements are made in the same area 3 to 5 years apart, data can be

compared to provide indications of long-term trend for that riparian area.

Also, there is a strong interrelationship between amount and kind of

vegetation along the water’s edge and bank stability (Dunaway and others

1994; Kleinfelder and others 1992; Manning and others 1989; Weixelman

and others 1996). The majority of naturally occurring plant species in this

more or less permanently watered area have rooting characteristics (including strength, length, and mass) that enhance bank stability.

Evaluation of the vegetation on the greenline area provides a good indication of a streambank’s ability to buffer the hydrologic forces of moving water.

And, since the greenline is located where the forces of water are greatest, a

greenline measurement can provide an indication of health of the total

watershed above the point of sampling.

Locating and Measuring the Greenline—In most riparian settings,

there is a continual natural process in place to develop a buffering line of

protective vegetation on each side of the stream. At the same time, there is

continual cutting action by water forces to erode away this vegetation. Each

stream or river must develop adequate amounts and kinds of plant species

to maintain, over time, a balance between the eroding and rebuilding forces

of water. Specific amounts depend on the erosive features of the riparian

complex involved, particularly stream gradient and substrate materials.

Those with the greatest water forces and weaker substrate materials will

naturally have a higher percentage of the greenline made up of colonizing or

early successional plant species compared to stabilizing hydrophytic species.

Generally, not every foot of bank will be totally protected by a continuous

coverage of robust, hydrophytic species. In some riparian complexes, large

boulders, bedrock, or occasionally anchored logs or debris play a similar role

in reducing bank erosion. Based on the hydrologic features of each riparian

complex, there must be sufficient bank protection to maintain function of

that stream type (see estimated values presented as needed or required for

various groupings of riparian complexes in Appendix A, page 34).

Most often the greenline is located at or near the bankful stage (fig. 6). As

flows recede and the vegetation continues to develop summer growth, it may

be located part way out on a gravel or sandbar (fig. 7). At times when banks

are freshly eroding or, especially when a stream has become entrenched, the

greenline may be located several feet above bank-full stage (fig. 8). In these
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 11

Figure 6—Location of the greenline at or near the bank-full stage.

Figure 7—Location of the greenline after summer water flows have decreased.
12 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

situations, the vegetation is seldom represented by hydrophytic species and,

in fact, may be composed of non-riparian species (fig. 9).

Greenline Sampling—The greenline measurement is designed to account for a continuous line of vegetation on each side of the stream even when

this line of vegetation occurs several feet above or away from the stream’s

edge. The only (rare) exception to this continuous line is where a road or trail

crosses the stream or where a sidestream enters the stream being measured.

In these cases, the width, in steps, should be tallied as road/trail or stream

and included in the tally of early successional representation (discussed

later). It is important that the greenline sampling process follow these

continuous lines of vegetation rather than the seasonally fluctuating water’s

edge. This helps ensure that measurements are made on the best representative area for evaluating changes in vegetation over more than one sampling

period.

Disturbance activities, such as overgrazing or trampling by animals or

people, result in vegetation changes to shallower, weakly rooted species such

as Kentucky bluegrass or redtop (fig. 10). These species have a reduced

ability to buffer the forces of moving water and keep the stream’s hydrologic

features in balance. Therefore, an evaluation of the vegetation composition

on the greenline can provide a valuable indication of the general health of a

Figure 8—Location of the greenline on an eroded bank. Following the definition of

greenline, “the first line of perennial vegetation that forms a lineal grouping of

community types on or near the waters edge,” the eroded non-riparian portion of the

streambank serves as the current greenline (see further discussion on location of the

greenline in fig. 9).
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 13

Figure 9—Example of greenline supporting non-riparian vegetation. As areas such as this begin

to heal, the angle of the bank will become less steep and a greenline composed primarily of

hydrophytic vegetation will begin to form near the water’s edge. Over a period of time the sinuosity

of the stream channel will adjust to fit the hydrologic features of the site in concert with the

appropriate amounts and kinds of greenline vegetation. Until this occurs, non-riparian community

types may serve as the measured greenline edge.

Figure 10—Example of a greenline dominated by non-hydrophytic plant species. Note the

excessive streambank erosion on portions of this bank due to dominance of shallow-rooted

species.
14 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

riparian area (successional status) as well as the current strength of the

streambanks in buffering the forces of water (streambank stability).

The greenline sampling procedure requires that a vegetation community

type classification be completed for the area being measured (fig. 11). Since

plant species on an area generally act together as groups, an evaluation

based on community type composition provides a better measurement of

health and strength of the vegetation components on an area than a more

complicated process where individual plants are measured and evaluated

separately.

The greenline sampling measurement should be taken within one riparian

complex (fig. 12). Depending on length of the complex, one or more samples

may be necessary to provide adequate representation of that complex. To

minimize efforts and dollars, sampling placement should emphasize measurements in the complex, or complexes, most subject to influences by the

particular disturbance factors in that drainage.

General location of the transect(s) within the complex should be selected to

best represent influences of major activities in that complex and should be

agreed on by individuals from all disciplines interested in management of the

area. Often an aerial photo can be helpful in selecting the sampling location(s).

In settings where a stream has multiple channels, the current, most active

channel should be followed.

The starting point for the transect may be randomly selected within the

complex or it may be located where a cross-section transect intercepts the

stream (fig. 13). If both greenline and cross-section measurements are taken

in the same general area, a more complete evaluation of the streamside and

valley bottom health within a given complex will be possible.

A greenline transect begins on the right-hand side looking downstream and

proceeds down the greenline using a step transect approach as described in

Figure 11—Stands of several community types in the riparian complex.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 15

Figure 12—Example of two riparian complexes: Complex A—Narrowleaf cottonwood/Kentucky

bluegrass, Haploboroll, moderate gradient, narrow valley bottom, and Complex B—Coyote

willow/Kentucky bluegrass, Cryaquoll, low gradient, broad valley bottom riparian complexes.

Figure 13—Greenline vegetation composition measurement of 363 feet, minimum, each side of the

stream. The starting and stopping points on these

transects often are used to locate two of the five

cross-section transects.
16 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

the cross-section measurement. For each greenline measurement, enough

steps should be taken to total a minimum of 363 feet lineal distance on each

side of the stream. This minimum distance (363 feet each side) will help

ensure that the sampler measures an adequate length of stream to encompass the potential variation within a riparian complex. Additionally, this

length is important when conducting data collection of woody species regeneration (described later). A temporary marker is placed at the end of the

transect for location of the follow-up measurement of woody species regeneration. The beginning and ending points of these transects may be permanently marked with stakes to provide for greater repeatability for future and

different workers. However, because of the transient movement of stream

channels, it is recommended that these points be tied to a nearby reference

point, away from stream edges, so that subsequent sampling will be done as

near to the initial sampling area as is feasible. The overall goal is to get a

reliable measurement of streamside vegetation in that complex.

The sampler then crosses the stream and repeats the sampling process for

363 feet upstream. It is important to measure both sides of the stream since

grazing pressures or water forces may be different on each side. (NOTE: The

stopping point may not coincide with the initial starting point on the other

side of the stream due to differences in lengths of meanders on each side of

the stream. Divide the average length of the person’s step doing the sampling

into 363 feet to determine minimum number of steps to take on each side of

the stream, for example, 363 feet divided by 2.5 ft/step = 145 steps each side).

On certain streams, especially those with steeper gradients, large rocks

and downed logs may serve, along with the vegetation, to buffer water forces

on the greenline. The number of feet of large anchored rocks or logs

encountered on the greenline edge should be tallied in place of the vegetation.

These rocks and logs must be large enough to withstand the forces of water

and must appear stable in the setting. The number of feet of these rocks and

logs will be counted as a natural, stable percentage of the greenline.

The greenline measurement becomes less valuable in monitoring steeper

(greater than 4 percent gradient) streams since the large, permanently

anchored rocks are generally less susceptible to management activities. Also,

the greenline measurement may be a less valuable measurement on very

large rivers where landform features play the dominant role in regulating

hydrologic influences compared to vegetation influences.

The total number of steps of each community type encountered along the

greenline on both sides of the stream is tallied and percent composition for

each type computed, as described in the cross-section composition measurement. For example:

 Total steps of each type (both sides)

= Percent community type

Total steps taken both sides Composition

If one is interested in evaluating whether one side of the stream has been

impacted more than the other side, divide the community type values on each

side by the number of steps for each side and compare values.

An evaluation of percent of disturbance types in relation to percent of

natural types (see cross-section computation) provides a general indication

of ecological status. If available, a comparison of areas where the complex is

as close to potential natural community (PNC) as possible may be used as a

standard or reference to evaluate successional status of the area being

measured. Subsequent measurements of the same area will provide a
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 17

measurement of trend for that complex. See the Data Analyses Procedures

section to find descriptions of all methods for analyzing greenline data (page 22).

A photograph should be taken at the starting and ending points of the

greenline transect. Additional photos may be taken along the transect if

desired. These photographs should contain relatively permanent reference

points or markers (such as boulders or large trees) so the photographs can be

re-established in the future.

Woody Species Regeneration

A measurement of woody species regeneration is made using a 6-foot wide belt

along the same transects used for the greenline measurements (figs. 14 and 15).

The sampler uses a 6-foot pole that has the center marked. Measurements

are made by walking a minimum of 363 feet on each side of the stream (726

total feet), with the marked center of the pole held directly over the inside

edge of the greenline.

Use of the greenline edge as the center of the measurement helps to ensure

that sampling is done in a setting where regeneration of woody species is most

likely to occur. The distances indicated will result in sampling 0.1 acre (726

x 6 = 4,356 sq ft), which is normally considered an adequate sample area for

this type of measurement. NOTE: Where the greenline edge is immediately

adjacent to the stream edge, 3 feet of the pole will extend over water (fig. 16).

Figure 14—Woody species counts by age class.

Minimum - 363 ft. each side (726 ft. total)

3 ft. each side of greenline = 6 ft. wide belt [ ] = /10 Acre
18 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

Figure 15—Samplers using a 6-foot pole to measure woody species regeneration along the greenline.

Figure 16—Correct placement of the sampling pole along the greenline water interface.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 19

But, where a recently developed gravel or sand bar is present (see fig. 7,

page 11), this measurement will allow sampling on the most likely place

where most woody species regenerate, the open bars. Additionally, using this

approach will result in consistently sampling 0.1 acre.

A modification of this procedure will be necessary for situations where the

stream is less than 3 feet across. Where this occurs, the measurer should not

allow the left tip of the pole to extend beyond the center of the stream, as this

would result in double sampling of the middle portion of the stream when the

other side is measured (fig. 17).

All, or selected, woody plants rooted within the ends of the pole are tallied

based on the following age-class categories.

Clumped, multiple-stemmed species (most willows):

Number of stems at ground surface Age class

1 Sprout

2 to 10 Young

>10, >1⁄2 stems alive Mature

>10, <1⁄2 stems alive Decadent

0 stems alive Dead

Rhizomatous species (patches):

For rhizomatous willow species that form more or less continuous patches,

such as wolf willow (Salix wolfii), planeleaf willow (S. planifolia), or wild rose

(Rosa spp.), use permanently marked line transect measurements to follow

changes in patch sizes over time. Use both greenline and cross-section

transect data or establish several permanently marked 100-foot transects

randomly located within the complex (fig. 18).

Figure 17—Placement of the measuring pole such that the left end does not reach beyond the

center of a stream less than 6 feet wide.
20 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

Single-stemmed species:

For shrub and tree species that tend to grow more single stemmed, such as

coyote willow (Salix exigua), birch (Betula spp.), alder (Alnus spp.), and

cottonwoods or quaking aspen (Populus spp.), count each stem that occurs 12

or more inches from any other at ground level as a separate plant, and age

them by pre-established categories. As a minimum, four categories—sprout,

young, mature, and dead—should be developed based on a combination of

both growth rings and unbrowsed height.

Example:

Growth rings* Height Age class

1-2 <1⁄4 mature sprout

3-10 <1⁄2 mature young

>10 near full mature

— — dead

*Specific values vary by species.

NOTE: Stems cut or cored for developing growth ring categories should not

be taken from within the 6-foot wide transect belt. Observations or

measurements of the mature shrubs and trees in the general area can

usually serve as references for age and height categories.

Even though there may be little or no information concerning potential

densities of the shrub and tree species on an area, measurement of the ageclass distribution can provide an evaluation of whether management is

satisfactory to maintain or eventually reach appropriate coverages and

densities of woody species capable of being present on that area. It is assumed

Figure 18—Use of line transect data to determine percent shrub or tree canopy for species

that occur in patches. T1 = 7 + 13 = 20; T2 = 30; T3 = 14 + 41 = 55. Total = 20 + 30 + 55 = 105.

(105/300 = 35% willow canopy cover).
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 21

that if management is such that sustained recruitment is in progress,

eventually that area will support appropriate amounts of woody species

needed to provide a naturally functioning complex.

Several factors can influence recruitment and death ratios of woody plants

at any one location.

Recruitment:

1. Seed crop year—there is a high amount of variation in seed production

between years.

2. Amount and availability of sites suitable for establishment any given

year (see continuing discussion in this section).

Death:

1. Excessive drying or prolonged ponding of sites due to lowering or raising

of water tables or movement of the stream channel to a new location in the

valley bottom.

2. Cutting away of the root wad due to channel adjustments.

3. Occasional death from diseases.

4. Prolonged excessive browsing along with any of the above factors.

5. A combination of beaver cutting along with any of the above factors.

Not all riparian areas are well suited for growing woody species. This is

especially true where the complex has a low gradient and a limited amount

of natural stream channel movement, and on anaerobic meadow soils that

are often saturated to or near the surface during the growing season. In these

settings, understory sedges and rushes often are able to buffer the forces of

water without the addition of woody species. Most woody riparian species

regenerate best on settings where there are aerobic soil conditions and, at

least temporarily, minimal competition from herbaceous species. Generally

speaking, if the stream being monitored has a gradient over 0.5 percent or

has water forces adequate to periodically cut banks and deposit bars, it is

capable of supporting a woody overstory of willows, alder, birch, or cottonwood.

On streams with gradients of less than 0.5 percent, streambanks generally

can be adequately protected by robust sedges, rushes, and grasses. Woody

species are seldom naturally present on the greenline in these settings.

The amount and continuity of stream riffles, as tied to gradient, may be

used to broadly identify streams with water forces adequate to provide

habitat for woody species. A stream can support a considerable coverage of

shrubs and trees if it has a more or less continuous presence of riffles. An

exception to this is small spring-fed systems where gradients are sufficient

to provide riffles in the stream, but the relatively stable water forces are not

adequate to cut streambanks and deposit bars. In these settings robust

herbaceous species are adequate to protect the streambanks and maintain

hydrologic processes; a shrubby component will not likely be present.

A stream that has intermittent riffles with long pools of dead water

generally supports islands or patches of woody vegetation in the complex.

Once established, these patches may persist for many years, even as the

stream, over time, meanders to new locations in that complex.

An accurate evaluation of the cover or density of shrubs and trees that

should be present on an area cannot be known or approximated without

having data from a similar complex that is in a somewhat natural condition.

In absence of this information, a measurement of age-class distribution of

woody species can indicate whether current management is allowing an
22 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

adequate amount of recruitment to sustain or recover the woody component

in a particular complex. Generally, there should be several times more plants

present in the sprout and young categories as in the mature and dead

categories. This is especially true if an area has recently begun recovery of the

woody component. Complexes where the sprouts and young age classes are

less than the mature and dead classes will not likely sustain a shrub and tree

component over the long term.

Even though the current shoots on multi-stemmed species, such as willows,

resprout every 10 to 20 years, the crown portion of these plants may remain

alive for over 100 years—as long as the habitat features, especially water

tables, remain in place.

Where the willow component has been completely lost from an area,

mounded areas that develop under long-term presence of shrub crowns may

provide evidence that willows or other woody species were once present in a

particular complex. These remnant mounds, or in some cases remnant stems

or crowns, may persist for several decades after the plants have been lost

from an area.

Recent studies have shown that it is extremely difficult and time consuming to accurately measure utilization (browsing) impacts on many riparian

shrubs (Hall 1999). Until more acceptable methodologies are developed, it is

suggested that only a general estimate on overall browsing on the woody

plants be recorded in the comments section of the form. For example (USDA

1993):

Percent use Use class

0-5 No use

6-20 Slight

21-40 Light

41-60 Moderate

61-80 Heavy

81-100 Severe

There generally is a reduction in seed production on those plants that have

utilization values above 55 percent. There can be a reduction in the overall

health of plants, including size and root strength, when heavy and severe

utilization levels are sustained over time.

It is important that measurements or estimates be taken on the younger

aged shrubs since these plants are most likely to have, and show, impacts

from browsing. These young plants must have an opportunity to develop into

mature plants over time. If there is sustained recruitment of shrubs and

trees, an area will maintain or eventually support appropriate amounts of

woody plants to provide a naturally functioning system.

Data Analysis Procedures __________________________________________

These procedures are in addition to the procedure described on pages 8-16,

where percent of a complex that has altered types present provides an

indication of impact. Use vegetation composition data from the cross-section

or greenline measurements to rate status of an area in one or more of the

following ways:
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 23

Successional Status—Using Coefficient of Community Type Similarity (2w/a + b)

(a) = Sum of PNC values measured in a similar complex in an unmodified condition.

(b) = Sum of values for present composition.

(w) = Sum of the values common to both.

This procedure requires use of data from a similar complex sampled in as

unaltered condition as is possible (see Potential Natural Community (PNC)

values, table 1).

Therefore, similarity index (2w/a + b) = (2 x 45/100 + 100) = 45 percent, or

mid successional status. NOTE: When values used in “a” and “b” have been

calculated to percent composition (100 percent), the successional status

rating and the “w” value are the same; no calculation is necessary.

Similarity to PNC Successional status

 0-15 Very early seral

16-40 Early seral

41-60 → Mid seral

61-85 Late seral

86+ PNC

Desired Condition—Using Coefficient of Community Type Similarity

Use where a decision has been made to manage an area for a seral stage

other than PNC (2w/a + b) – table 2.

A similarity value of 75 percent or greater is often used to differentiate

between meeting or not meeting management objectives.

Therefore, Area One similarity index (2w/a + b) of (2 x 78/100 + 100) = 78

percent. (Area One is 78 percent of desired condition = meeting management

objectives.)

Therefore, Area Two similarity index of (2 x 19/100 + 100) = 19 percent.

(Area Two is 19 percent of desired condition = not meeting management

objectives.)

Table 1—Example of successional status of vegetation using Coefficient of Community Similarity

(modified from Winward 1989).

Composition Composition

potential natural present Amount in

Community type community community common

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Percent - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Booth willow/beaked sedge 65 30 30

Water sedge 5 5 5

Beaked sedge 15 10 10

Kentucky bluegrass 0 55 0

Solomon-seal/winged sedge 15 0 0

a = 100 b = 100 w = 45
24 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

Greenline Successional Status and Bank Stability

Since there often is limited information concerning which community types

indicate excessive or unnatural disturbances, and because it is extremely

difficult to find examples of PNC situations in riparian areas, the following

procedures may be used to broadly rate riparian areas as to their successional

status and relative bank stability.

Ten capability groups (Appendix A, page 34) have been developed based on:

1. Percent stream gradient (similar to those presented in Rosgen 1996).

2. Certain substrate features that may substantially influence erosiveness

of streambanks:

(a) dominant soil particle sizes such as silts, sands, gravels, and

(b) presence of at least one major soil horizon within the rooting zone

that consists of strongly compacted, cohesive, or cemented particles

(consolidated materials) (fig. 19).

Each of these 10 groups has specific, inherent environmental characteristics, which influence the amount and kind of vegetation necessary for them

to function properly. An “expected value” percent of late successional community types along the greenline has been assigned to each of these groups (see

values in parentheses, Appendix A). These percent values are based on the

minimum amount of late successional community types that would be

expected to occur when areas representing each capability group are in good

health and functioning properly.

Additionally, a list has been developed of all community types known to

occur on lands administered by the Intermountain Region, Forest Service

(Appendix B, page 35). In this list, each community type has been assigned

an “L” if it is known to occur in later successional stages along the greenline,

or an “E” if known to occur in earlier stages of succession along the greenline.

Each community type also has been assigned a stability class ranking. This

ranking ranges from 1, those types least capable of buffering the forces of

moving water, to 10, those types with the highest buffering capabilities. The

rating is based on the strength, amount, and depth of roots, as well as special

leaf and crown features. As community type classifications are developed for

Table 2—Examples of ratings for two different areas representing the Booth willow/beaked sedge-moderate

gradient riparian type in relation to desired community type composition values (modified from

Winward 1989).

Desired composition Amount in common

Community type Composition Area One Area Two Area One Area Two

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Percent - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Booth willow/beaked sedge 20 16 3 16 3

Wolfs willow/hairgrass 5 3 1 3 1

Water sedge 7 2 1 2 1

Beaked sedge 60 50 8 50 8

Baltic rush 3 10 10 3 3

Kentucky bluegrass 0 5 47 0 0

Mesic forb 3 13 30 3 3

False-hellebore 2 1 0 1 0

 a = 100 b = 100 b = 100 w = 78 w = 19
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 25

Figure 19—Substrate features, in this case a consolidated soil layer, may substantially influence

erosiveness of stream banks.

other areas, successional status categories (early or late) and bank stability

ratings (1 to 10) will need to be developed for each of these types.

Percent composition of each community type from the greenline measurements is used to make both the successional status and bank stability

ratings. The procedures are:

Greenline Successional Status Based On Capability Groups—To

determine greenline successional status, use information provided in Appendix B, page 35, to arrange the community type composition values into either

the Early or Late columns (see example, Greenline Successional Status,

Appendix C, page 40). Summarize all types that occur in the Late column and

divide by the expected value for that particular capability group (Appendix

A). This will provide an intertie to the ecological potential of the area being

measured. Rating of ecological status is then determined by comparing this

number with those assigned to each of the five status values:

0-15 = Very early

16-40 = Early

41-60 = Mid

61-85 = Late

86+ = PNC

Greenline Bank Stability—The greenline stability rating is calculated

by multiplying the percent composition of each community type along the

greenline by the stability class rating assigned to that type (Appendix B, page

35). These index values are then summed and compared to the appropriate

rating classes:
26 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

1-2 = Very low

3-4 = Low

5-6 = Mid

7-8 = High

9-10 = Excellent

See example of Greenline Stability calculations (Appendix C, page 40).

These successional status and stability ratings may now be evaluated

against standards set for the general area being studied; management can be

adjusted if these standards are not being met.

Procedures for Refining the Calculation of Successional Status

Proportioning Transitional Types—Because of the many natural, or

induced, disturbances that are ongoing in riparian areas, it is not uncommon

to encounter community types that are in transition, developing into new or

different community types. For example, as an area progressively recovers

from a past disturbance, successional processes may move it from a Kentucky

bluegrass community type toward a Nebraska sedge type. The community

type classification keys generally handle these situations by prioritizing

which plant species occur first in the keys. For example, an area supporting

greater than 20 percent cover of both Nebraska sedge and Kentucky bluegrass would key to a Nebraska sedge type because Nebraska sedge occurs

ahead of Kentucky bluegrass in the community type key. A pure Nebraska

sedge type is higher on the successional scale than a mixed Nebraska sedge—

Kentucky bluegrass type and the intertied influences on such things as bank

stability are likewise considerably different.

If an area being sampled is going through a relatively rapid rate of recovery

or degradation, and if one is having difficulty discerning which of two

community types are being encountered in the area being sampled (near

equal amounts of two different indicator species are occurring together), one

should consider using the following approach:

• Determine which of the two indicator species is more prominent.

• Record the more prominent species first with the secondary indicator

species immediately behind it—in parentheses.

For example, Juncus balticus (Poa pratensis) would indicate that

Juncus is slightly more prominent than Poa.

• Initially record and calculate percent composition of this blended type as

one “type.”

• When calculating successional status and streambank stability, count

the species listed first (in this case Juncus) as 60 percent of the

composition and the species in parentheses as 40 percent.

For example, if the composition of this blended type = 30 percent

of all types on the area, then

30% composition x 60% = 18% of Juncus

30% composition x 40% = 12% of Poa

The 60/40 percent values have been selected to provide a refinement in

calculation of successional status and streambank stability over a process

that does not recognize this relatively common blending of types. It is
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 27

recommended that this proportioning procedure be used where there are

relatively high composition values of more than one indicator species in the

community type being evaluated. Any subsequent measurements, taken

several years later, should allow one to determine which of the indicators is

becoming more prominent under current management.

Examples: Assume the area is in a transitional mode of recovery; Poa pratensis

(Popr) is prevalent throughout the area, but plants of Carex nebrascensis (Cane)

and Juncus balticus (Juba) are increasing enough to appear near codominant

with the Poa.

Community Percent

types Steps composition

Popr 200 / 230 = 87%

Juba 30 / 230 = 13%

Total = 230 100%

(a) Not proportioning types

Successional status Early Late

Kentucky bluegrass 87

Baltic rush 13

13% Late seral types = Very Early successional status

(b) Proportioning types

Popr (Cane) 87% x 60 = Popr = 52%

87% x 40 = Cane = 35%

Juba (popr) 13% x 60 = Juba = 8%

13% x 40 = Popr = 5%

100%

Popr = 52 + 5 = 57% = Early

Cane = 35% = Late

Juba = 8% = Late

 100%

35%+ 8% = 43% Late seral types = Mid successional status

Proportioning of the types has indicated there is a high enough presence of

the late successional species to rate the area mid, compared to very early

ecological status, where types were not proportioned. Continuation of the

proportioning process into the streambank stability calculations will likewise allow one to make a more sensitive evaluation of bank stability.

Adjusting the Successional Status Rating for Areas Where a Woody

Overstory Component Should be Present but Currently is not

Present—Calculation of successional status for riparian areas that historically supported trees or shrubs, but currently have little or no woody

overstory present, may result in an over-inflated rating. For example, if an

area historically supported a Booth willow/beaked sedge community type,

but due to various disturbances currently only supports a beaked sedge type,

the rating process described under (a) “Greenline Successional Status Based

on Capability Groups,” would rate both types the same. This results because

both types are rated in the Late Succession category (see Appendix B). If an
28 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

area historically supported the willow/sedge community, it can generally be

assumed the area is adapted to function better with both the willow and

sedge components present. Consequently, an ecological status rating would

need to account for this difference.

Solution:

If the stream being monitored has a gradient greater than 0.5 percent and

has water forces adequate to periodically cut banks and deposit bars (see

discussion, page 21), it likely should support a hydrophytic woody overstory

component. If it does not, as evaluated using the Woody Species Regeneration data:

Lower the calculated Ecological Status score:

• Twenty (20) points if no hydrophytic woody plants are present.

• Ten (10) points if all age classes are present but one or more of the age

classes is nearly absent or obviously under-represented.

NOTE: A healthy age class representation should include slightly more

plants in the sprouts and young categories than in the mature and dead

categories.

There are several important reasons to have woody species on streams that

historically had them, including:

1. Protection and strengthening of streambanks (woody plant roots generally extend deeper into the soil profile and are stronger than roots of

herbaceous species).

2. Structural diversity.

3. Species diversity.

4. Stream shading.

5. Habitat values tied to foraging, hiding and thermal cover, nesting sites,

and others.

There is limited information to establish numerical values for all these

factors. Consequently, values provided to adjust the ecological status ratings

when woody species are absent, or not adequately represented, are meant to

be approximations. They are given to provide more consistency for workers

calculating ecological status ratings than if no values were given.

It is essential that the sampler(s) record in the comments section of the

forms what adjustments were made and why.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 29

Helpful Tips ______________________________________________________

1. When encountering an obstacle (bush or tree) while pacing the greenline

or vegetation cross-section transects, sidestep the object and tally only the

forward steps:

2. At times when attempting to run a cross-section transect through a very

wide valley bottom, 0.25 mile or more, it becomes infeasible both in time and

expense to complete a full transect. In such cases it may be appropriate to

select only a portion of the valley bottom for measurement. It is recommended

that one consider (1) the specific impacting factors occurring in the overall

valley, and (2) what portion of the valley may be measured to best represent

those impacting factors. Use permanent marking stakes to identify where

transects were run. Clearly indicate in the remarks section of the form

reasons for selecting that specific portion of the valley, and sketch a clear

diagram of where all five transects were run.

3. Occasionally, as one is pacing a cross-section transect, it becomes

difficult to identify, specifically, where certain community type boundaries

occur. It often is helpful to look several feet on each side of the line that one

is traversing to better select where a boundary occurs. This is especially

critical where one of the community types has a relatively sparse component

in the overstory, for example, willows, shrubby cinquefoil (Potentilla fruticosa),

or silver sage (Artemisia cana):
30 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

4. When pacing the cross-section or greenline transects, begin and end

recording of the shrub and tree overstory at the crown drip line:

Summary ________________________________________________________

Riparian areas represent the circulatory system of our lands. When the

vegetation, water, and soils in these areas are in balance with the climate and

landform features, the stream, in turn, maintains a balance with what it

gives and takes as it runs over and through the land (figs. 20-23).

This document provides information on three sampling methods used to

inventory and monitor the vegetation resources in riparian areas. The

vegetation cross-section method is designed to evaluate the health of vegetation across the valley floor. The greenline method is designed to provide a

measurement of the streamside vegetation. The woody species regeneration

method is designed to measure the density and age class structure of any

shrub or tree species that may be present in the sampling area. Together

these three sampling procedures can provide an evaluation of the health of

all the vegetation in a given riparian area.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 31

Figure 20—Location of greatest water velocity in a stream (side view).

Figure 21—Location of greatest water velocity in a stream in relation to the highest root strength

and concentration in the streambank (front view).
32 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

Figure 22—The combination of greatest water velocity and highest rooting strength and concentration in healthy riparian systems creates undercut banks, which in turn provide a cooling effect

in the water column as well as other special habitat features beneficial to many aquatic organisms.

Figure 23—Example of a healthy riparian area: CrossSection = PNC; Greenline = PNC; Woody Regeneration = Healthy; and Bank Stability = Excellent.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 33

References _______________________________________________________

Cagney, Jim. 1993. Riparian management—greenline riparianwetland monitoring. TR 1737-8. Denver, CO: U.S. Department of

the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Service Center. 45 p.

Cainfield, R. H. 1941. Application of the line interception method in

sampling range vegetation. Journal of Forestry. 39: 388-394.

Dunaway, D.; Swanson, S. R.; Wendel, J.; and Clary, W. 1994. The

effect of herbaceous plant communities and soil texture on particle erosion of alluvial streambanks. Geomorphology. 9: 47-56.

Hall, Frederick C. 1999. Test of observer variability in measuring

riparian shrub twig length. Journal of Range Management. 52

(6): 633-636.

Kleinfelder, D.; Swanson, S.; Norris, G.; Clary, W. 1992. Unconfined

compressive strength of some streambank soils with herbaceous

roots. Soil Science Society of America Journal. 56 (6): 1920-1925.

Manning, M. E.; Swanson, S. R.; Svejcar, T. J.; Trent, J. 1989.

Rooting characteristics of four intermountain meadow communities. Journal of Range Management. 42 (4): 309-312.

Manning, Mary E.; Padgett, Wayne G. 1995. Riparian community

type classification for Humboldt and Toiyabe National Forests,

Nevada and Eastern California. R4-Ecol-95-01. Ogden, UT: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Region. 306 p.

Maxwell, James R.; Edwards, J.; Jensen, Mark E.; Paustian, Steven

J.; Parrot, Harry; Hill, Donley M. 1995. A hierarchical framework

of aquatic ecological units in North America (Nearctic Zone). Gen.

Tech. Rep. NC-176. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station.

72 p.

Padget, W. G.; Youngblood, A. P.; Winward, A. H. 1989. Riparian

community type classification of Utah and southeastern Idaho.

R4-Ecol-89-01. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Region. 191 p.

Rosgen, David L. 1996. Applied river morphology. Pagosa Springs,

CO: Wildland Hydrology. Paginated by Chapter.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 1992. Integrated

riparian evaluation guide. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Region, 60 p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1993. F.S. 2209.21-Rangeland

ecosystem analysis and management handbook. Region 4 Amendment NO. 2209-21-93-1. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 20 p.

U.S. Department of Interior. 1998. Riparian area managementprocess for assessing proper functioning condition. Tech. Reference 1737-9. Denver, CO: U.S. Department of the Interior,

Bureau of Land Management. 51 p.

Weixelman, Dave A.; Zamadio, Desierio C.; Zamudio, Karen A.

1996. Central Nevada riparian field guide. R4-Ecol-96-01. Odgen,

UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Region. Variously paged.

Winward, A. H. 1989. Calculating ecological status and resource

value rating in riparian areas. In: Clary, Warren P.; Webster,

Bert F. 1989. Managing grazing of riparian areas in the Intermountain Region. Gen. Tech. Rept. INT 263. Ogden, UT: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 11 p.

Winward, Alma H. 1986. Vegetation characteristics of riparian

areas. In: Transactions of the Western Section of the Wildlife

Society. Sparks, NV: Wildlife Society: 98-101.

Winward, A. H.; Padgett, W. G. 1989. Special considerations when

classifying riparian areas. In: Land classifications based on

vegetation: applications for resource management. Gen. Tech.

Rept. INT-257. Moscow, ID: U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 176-179.

Youngblood, A. P.; Padgett, W. G.; Winward, A. H. 1985. Riparian

community type classification of eastern Idaho-western Wyoming. R4-Ecol-85-01. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Region. 78 p.
34 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

Appendix A: Key to Greenline Riparian Capability Groups ________________

Percent gradient and substrate classes modified from Rosgen (1996).
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 35

Appendix B: Riparian Community Types of the Intermountain Region,

Forest Service ____________________________________________________

The following list of community types represents a summary of types taken from Youngblood and

others (1985), Padgett and others (1989), and Manning and Padgett (1995). Each community type has

been assigned an “L” if it is known to occur in the latter successional stages along the greenline or an

“E” if it occurs in earlier stage of succession along the greenline. Additionally, each community type has

been assigned a greenline stability class ranking, ranging from 1 (least) to 10 (greatest), rating its ability

to buffer the forces of moving water (see footnotes 1-4, page 39). As community type classifications are

developed for other areas, successional status categories (early or late) and bank stability ratings (1-10)

will need to be developed for each of these types.

Stability Successional

class statusa

Abbreviation Community type name (veg) (greenline)

Coniferous tree-dominated community types

Conif/Acco Conifer/Aconitum columbianum c.t. 6 E

Conif/Acru Conifer/Actaea rubra c.t. 6 E

Conif/Beoc Conifer/Betula occidentalis c.t. 8 L

Conif/Caca Conifer/Calamagrostis canadensis c.t. 8 L

Conif/Cose Conifer/Cornus sericea c.t. 8 L

Conif/Dece Conifer/Deschampsia cespitosa c.t. 5 E

Conif/Elgl Conifer/Elymus glaucus c.t. 6 E

Conif/Eqar Conifer/Equisetum arvense c.t. 7 L

Conif/MF Conifer/Mesic Forb c.t. 6 E/Lb

Conif/Pofr Conifer/Potentilla fruticosa c.t. 6 E

Conif/Popr Conifer/Poa pratensis c.t. 5 E

Conif/Rowo Conifer/Rosa woodsii c.t. 7 E

Conif/TF Conifer/Tall Forb c.t. 6 E

Picea/Caca Picea/Calamagrostis canadensis c.t. 8 L

Picea/Cost Picea/Cornus stolonifera c.t. 8 L

Picea/Begl Picea/Betula glandulosa communities 9 L

Picea/Eqar Picea/Equisetum arvense c.t. 7 L

Picea/Gatr Picea/Galium triflorum c.t. 6 E

Pico/Casc Pinus contorta/Carex scopulorum c.t. 8 L

Tall deciduous tree-dominated community types

Acne/Cose Acer negundo/Cornus sericea c.t. 9 L

Acne/Eqar Acer negundo/Equisetum arvense c.t. 8 E

Poan/Beoc Populus angustifolia/Betula occidentalis c.t. 8 L

Poan/Cose Populus angustifolia/Cornus sericea c.t. 8 L

Poan/Cost Populus angustifolia/Cornus stolonifera c.t. 8 L

Poan/Popr Populus angustifolia/Poa pratensis c.t. 6 E

Poan/Rhar Populus angustifolia/Rhus aromatica c.t. 6 E

Poan/Rowo Populus angustifolia/Rosa woodsii c.t. 7 E

Popul/Bar Populus/Bar c.t. 6 E

Popul/Beoc Populus/Betula occidentalis c.t. 8 L

Popul/Cose Populus/Cornus sericea c.t. 8 L

Popul/Rhar Populus/Rhus aromatica c.t. 6 E

Popul/Rowo Populus/Rosa woodsii c.t. 7 E

Popul/Salix Populus/Salix c.t. 8 L

Potr/Beoc Populus tremuloides/Betula occidentalis c.t. 8 L

(con.)
36 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

Stability Successional

class statusa

Abbreviation Community type name (veg) (greenline)

Potr/Cose Populus tremuloides/Cornus sericea c.t. 8 L

Potr/DG Populus tremuloides/Dry Graminoid c.t. 6 E

Potr/MF Populus tremuloides/Mesic Forb c.t. 6-8 E/Lb

Potr/Rowo Populus tremuloides/Rosa woodsii c.t. 6 E

Potr/Salix Populus tremuloides/Salix c.t. 8 L

Low deciduous tree-dominated community types

Alin/Bench Alnus incana/Bench c.t. 6 E

Alin/Cose Alnus incana/Cornus sericea c.t. 8 L

Alin/Eqar Alnus incana/Equisetum arvense c.t. 7 E

Alin/MF Alnus incana/Mesic Forb c.t. 6-8 E/Lb

Alin/MG Alnus incana/Mesic Graminoid c.t. 6-8 E/Lc

Alin/Rihu Alnus incana/Ribes hudsonium c.t. 7 L

Beoc/Bench Betula occidentalis/Bench c.t. 6 E

Beoc/Cose Betula occidentalis/Cornus sericea c.t. 8 L

Beoc/Equis Betula occidentalis/Equisetum c.t. 7 E

Beoc/MF Betula occidentalis/Mesic Forb c.t. 6-8 E/Lb

Beoc/MG Betula occidentalis/Mesic Graminoid c.t. 6-8 E/Lc

Nonwillow shrub-dominated community types

Arca/Dece Artemisia cana/Deschampsia cespitosa c.t. 4 E

Arca/DG Artemisia cana/Dry Graminoid c.t. 4 E

Arca/Feid Artemisia cana/Festuca idahoensis c.t. 4 E

Arca/Feov Artemisia cana/Festuca ovina c.t. 4 E

Arca/MG Artemisia cana/Mesic Graminoid c.t. 4-6 E/Lc

Arca/Popr Artemisia cana/Poa pratensis c.t. 4 E

Artrt/Rowo Artemisia tridentata /Rosa woodsii c.t. 5 E

Cose Cornus sericea c.t. 7 L

Cose-Salix Cornus sericea-Salix c.t. 8 L

Cose/Gatr Cornus sericea/Heracleum lanatum c.t. 7 L

Pofr/Dece Potentilla fruticosa/Deschampsia cespitosa c.t. 5 E

Pofr/Feid Potentilla fruticosa/Festuca idahoensis c.t. 5 E

Pofr/Ligr Potentilla fruticosa/Ligusticum grayii c.t. 5 E

Pofr/Popr Potentilla fruticosa/Poa pratensis c.t. 5 E

Prvi/Rowo Prunus virginiana/Rosa woodsii c.t. 6 E

Rhal Rhamnus alnifolia c.t. 8 E

Rowo Rosa woodsii c.t. 6 E

Low willow-dominated community types

Low Salix/MF Low Salix/Mesic Forb c.t. 7-9 E/Lb

Saea Salix eastwoodiae c.t. 8 L

Saea/Casc Salix eastwoodiae/Carex scopulorum c.t. 10 L

Saor/Dece Salix orestera/Deschampsia cespitosa c.t. 8 E

Saor/TF Salix orestera/Tall Forb c.t. 8-9 E

Sapl Salix planifolia c.t. 8 L

Sapl/Caaq Salix planifolia/Carex aquatilis c.t. 10 L

Sapl/Caca Salix planifolia/Calamagrostis canadensis c.t. 10 L

Sapl/Casc Salix planifolia/Carex scopulorum c.t. 10 L

Sapl/Dece Salix planifolia/Deschampsia cespitosa c.t. 8 E

Sawo/Caaq Salix wolfii/Carex aquatilis c.t. 10 L

Sawo/Caut Salix wolfii/Carex utriculata (formerly C. rostrata) c.t. 10 L

(con.)
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 37

Sawo/Casc Salix wolfii/Carex scopulorum c.t. 10 L

Sawo/Dece Salix wolfii/Deschampsia cespitosa c.t. 8 E

Sawo/MF Salix wolfii/Mesic Forb c.t. 7-9 E/Lb

Tall willow-dominated community types

Sabe/MG Salix bebbiana/Mesic Graminoid c.t. 7-10 E/Lc

Sabo/Caaq Salix boothii/Carex aquatilis c.t. 10 L

Sabo/Caca Salix boothii/Calamagrostis canadensis c.t. 10 L

Sabo/Cane Salix boothii/Carex nebrascensis c.t. 10 L

Sabo/Caut Salix boothii/Carex utriculata (formerly C. rostrata) c.t. 10 L

Sabo/Eqar Salix boothii/Equisetum arvense c.t. 7 E

Sabo/MF Salix boothii/Mesic Forb c.t. 7-8 E/Lb

Sabo/MG Salix boothii/Mesic Graminoid c.t. 7-10 E/Lc

Sabo/Popa Salix boothii/Poa palustris c.t. 7 E

Sabo/Popr Salix boothii/Poa pratensis c.t. 7 E

Sabo/Smst Salix boothii/Smilacina stellata c.t. 7 L

Sadr Salix drummondiana c.t. 7 L

Saex/Barren Salix exigua/Barren c.t. 6 E

Saex/Bench Salix exigua/Bench c.t. 5 E

Saex/Eqar Salix exigua/Equisetum arvense c.t. 7 E

Saex/MF Salix exigua/Mesic Forb c.t. 7-8 E/Lb

Saex/MG Salix exigua/Mesic Graminoid c.t. 7-10 E/Lc

Saex/Popr Salix exigua/Poa pratensis c.t. 6 E

Saex/Rowo Salix exigua/Rosa woodsii c.t. 8 E

Sage/Caaq Salix geyeriana/Carex aquatilis c.t. 10 L

Sage/Caca Salix geyeriana/Calamagrostis canadensis c.t. 9 L

Sage/Caut Salix geyeriana/Carex utriculata (formerly C. rostrata) c.t. 10 L

Sage/Dece Salix geyeriana/Deschampsia cespitosa c.t. 7 E

Sage/MF Salix geyeriana/Mesic Forb c.t. 7-8 E/Lb

Sage/MG Salix geyeriana/Mesic Graminoid c.t. 7-10 E/Lc

Sage/Popa Salix geyeriana/Poa palustris c.t. 6 E

Sage/Popr Salix geyeriana/Poa pratensis c.t. 6 E

Sala1/Bench Salix lasiandra/Bench c.t. 6 E

Sala1/MF Salix lasiandra/Mesic Forb c.t. 7-8 E/Lb

Sale/Bench Salix lemmonii/Bench c.t. 6 E

Sale/Casc Salix lemmonii/Carex scopulorum c.t. 10 L

Sale/Caaq Salix lemmonii/Carex aquatilis c.t. 10 L

Sale/MF Salix lemmonii/Mesic Forb c.t. 7-8 E/Lb

Sale/MG Salix lemmonii/Mesic Graminoid c.t. 7-10 E/Lc

Sale/Seep Salix lemmonii/Seep c.t. 7 L

Sale/TF Salix lemmonii/Tall Forb c.t. 7 E

Sala2/Barren Salix lasiolepis/Barren c.t. 6 E

Sala2/Bench Salix lasiolepis/Bench c.t. 6 E

Sala2/Rowo Salix lasiolepis/Rosa woodsii c.t. 7 E

Salu Salix lutea c.t. 6 L

Salu/Bench Salix lutea/Bench c.t. 6 e

Salu/MF Salix lutea/Mesic Forb c.t. 6-10 E/Lb

Salu/MG Salix lutea/Mesic Graminoid c.t. 6-10 E/Lc

Salu/Popr Salix lutea/Poa pratensis c.t. 6 E

Salix/Rowo Salix/Rosa woodsii c.t. 8 E

Salix/Caut Salix/Carex utriculata (formerly C. rostrata) c.t. 10 L

(con.)

Stability Successional

class statusa

Abbreviation Community type name (veg) (greenline)
38 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

Salix/MF Salix/Mesic Forb c.t. 6-8 E/Lb

Salix/MG Salix/Mesic Graminoid c.t. 6-10 E/Lc

Salix/Popr Salix/Poa pratensis c.t. 6 E

Salix/TF Salix/Tall Forb c.t. 7 E

Forb-dominated community types

Anki Angelica kingii c.t. 5 E

Asch Aster chilensis c.t. 4 E

Asin-Dain Aster integrifolius-Danthonia intermedia c.t. 3 E

Asin-Dece Aster integrifolius-Deschampsia cespitosa c.t. 3 E

Asin-Feid Aster integrifolius-Festuca idahoensis c.t. 3 E

Cale Caltha leptosepala c.t. 6 E

Carda Cardamine spp. c.t. 4 E/Ld

Ciar Cirsium arvense c.t. 6 E

Doje Dodecatheon jeffreyi c.t. 3 E

Eqar Equisetum arvense c.t. 5 E

Equis Equisetum spp. c.t. 7 L

Irmi/DG Iris missouriensis/Dry Graminoid c.t. 6 E

Irmi/MG Iris missouriensis/Mesic Graminoid c.t. 6-8 E

Lupo-Setr Lupinus polyphyllus-Senecio triangularis c.t. 5 E

Mear Mentha arvensis c.t. 4 E/Ld

Meci Mertensia ciliata c.t. 7 L

MFM Mesic Forb Meadow c.t. 4-6 E/Lb

Migu Mimulus guttatus c.t. 3 E/Ld

Naof Nasturtium officinale 4 E/Ld

[Rorippa nasturtium-aquaticum] c.t.

Raaq Ranunculus aquatilis c.t. 4 E/Ld

Soca Solidago canadensis c.t. 8 L

Tyla Typha latifolia c.t. 9 L

Urdi Urtica dioica c.t. 7 E

Veam Veronica americana 3 E/Ld

Veca Veratrum californicum c.t. 6 E

Graminoid-dominated community types

Alar Alopecurus arundinaceus c.t. 6 E

Agsc Agrostis scabra c.t. 2 E

Agst Agrostis stolonifera c.t. 3 E

Alaq Alopecurus aequalis c.t. 3 E/Ld

Alge Alopecurus geniculatus c.t. 3 E/Ld

Caca Calamagrostis canadensis c.t. 8 L

Cane2 Calamagrostis neglecta [C. stricta] c.t. 7 L

Caaq Carex aquatilis c.t. 9 L

Caaq2 Catabrosia aquatica c.t. 3 E/Ld

Cabu Carex buxbaumii c.t. 8 L

Cado Carex douglasii c.t. 4 E

Cala1 Carex lasiocarpa c.t. 9 L

Cala2 Carex lanuginosa c.t. 9 L

Cale Carex lenticularis 4 E

Cali Carex limosa c.t. 8 L

Cami Carex microptera c.t. 4 E

Cane Carex nebrascensis c.t. 9 L

Caut Carex utriculata (formerly C. rostrata) c.t. 9 L

Stability Successional

class statusa

Abbreviation Community type name (veg) (greenline)

(con.)
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 39

Casa Carex saxatilis c.t. 8 L

Casc Carex scopulorum c.t. 9 L

Casi Carex simulata c.t. 8 E/L

Dain Danthonia intermedia c.t. 3 E

Dece Deschampsia cespitosa c.t. 4 E

Dece-Cane Deschampsia cespitosa-Carex nebrascensis c.t. 7 L

Elpa1 Eleocharis palustris c.t. 6 E

Elpa2 Eleocharis pauciflora c.t. 5 E

Glyce Glyceria spp. c.t. 8 E/L

Hobr Hordeum brachyantherum c.t. 3 E

Hoju Hordeum jubatum c.t. 2 E

Juba Juncus balticus c.t. 9 L

Juen Juncus ensifolius c.t. 7 L

Muan Muhlenbergia andina c.t. 3 E

Muri Muhlenbergia richardsonis c.t. 3 E

Phar Phalaris arundinacea c.t. 9 L

Phma (Phau) Pragmites communis (P. australis) c.t. 9 L

Pone Poa nevadensis c.t. 3 E

Popr Poa pratensis c.t. 3 E

Scac Scirpus acutus c.t. 9 L

Scmi Scirpus microcarpus c.t. 9 L

Scpu Scirpus pungens c.t. 7 E

Nonvegetated types

Barren Barren 1 E

Rock Anchored Rock 10 L

Log Anchored Log 10 L

a

The successional status ratings (E and L) and the vegetation stability class ratings (1-10) used in this appendix were

developed based on several years of observations and study of various successional sequences as well as in-field evidence of

their abilities to withstand the erosive forces of water. Information from various research studies also was used where it was

available. A few values have been adjusted slightly in this document as continuing field experiences and recommendations

from other riparian ecologists have demonstrated a need for such modifications. b

These types are considered late seral only if the following, or similar, mesic/hydrophtic forbs dominate the undergrowth

(at least 20 percent cover):

Angelica kingii Mertensia ciliata

Equisetum spp. Saxifraga odontoloma

Urtica dioica

c

These types are considered late seral only if the following, or similar, mesic/hydrophytic graminoids dominate the

undergrowth (at least 25 percent cover):

Carex lanuginosa Carex nebrascensis

Juncus balticus

d

These types are dominated by early colonizing species and are considered late seral only when they occur in settings where

the adjacent community types (those dominated by stabilizing species that serve as backup protection on the same stream

footage) are rated Late. For example, 5 steps of Catabrosia aquatica backed up by Carex nebrascensis = L while 5 steps of

Catabrosia aquatica backed by Agrostis stolonifera = E.

Stability Successional

class statusa

Abbreviation Community type name (veg) (greenline)
40 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

Appendix C: Examples of Greenline Ecological Status and

Stability Rating ___________________________________________________

Stability Rating

 0–2 = Very Poor (very low)

3–4 = Poor (low) 3.92 = Poor (low)

5–6 = Moderate

7–8 = Good (high)

9–10 = Excellent (very high)

Ecological Status

0–15 = Very Early

16–40 = Early 14⁄

85* = 16 % = Early

41–60 = Mid

61–85 = Late

86+ = PNC

*From Capability Group (Appendix A, page 34)

Example: Greenline Stability Rating

Stability

Greenline Composition (Class) (Index)

Popr 70 3 2.10

Caut 10 9 .90

Sabo/Popr 03 6 .18

Sabo/MF 02 6 .12

Raaq 05 4 .20

Caaq 05 3 .15

Rock 02 9 .18

Agst 03 3 .09

Total 100% 3.92

Example: Greenline Ecological Status

Area: Willow Creek, Strawberry Valley,

7,000 feet, 2.5% gradient, non-consolidated cobble/gravel

Ecological status

Greenline Composition (Early) (Late)

Popr 70 70

Caut 10 10

Sabo/Popr 03 03

Sabo/MF 02 02

Raaq 05 05

Caaq 05 05

Rock 02 02

Agst 03 03

Total 100% 86 14
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 41

Appendix D: Equipment List ________________________________________

Steel fence posts or rebar for permanently marking study locations.

Hammer or post pounder.

Clip board and forms.

Tally counter.

Camera and film.

Plant identification book, and if available, community type book.

Two 3-foot rods for temporarily marking the beginning and ending points of

transects.

One 6-foot pole for use in sampling woody species regeneration.

Flagging.

Global positioning system unit (if available).

Appendix E: Forms ________________________________________________

1—Cross Section Composition (Transect Data)

2—Cross Section Summary Sheet

3—Riparian Greenline Transect Data

4—Greenline Summary Sheet

5—Woody Species Regeneration

6—Woody Species Regeneration Summary

7—Greenline Successional Status Worksheet

8—Greenline Stability Rating (CT’s) Worksheet
42 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

CROSS SECTION COMPOSITION

(Transect Data)

Forest / District ________________________________ / ___________________________________ Date _________________

Drainage _________________________________________________________________________________________________

Examiners ________________________________________________________________ Photo No’s _____________________

Complex _________________________________________________________________________________________________

Location _________________________________________________________________________________________________

Transect No _____________________ Feet/Step ________________________

NUMBER STEPS TOTAL FEET

Community Type STEPS Optional

ESTIMATED Sprout Young Mature Decadent Dead

AVERAGE HT.

LINE INTERCEPT CANOPY OF WOODY SPECIES (optional) _____________

TOTAL FEET OF RIPARIAN (optional) ____________
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 43

CROSS SECTION SUMMARY SHEET

Forest/ District _______________________________ /________________________ Date Compiled __________________

Drainage __________________________________________________________________________________________

Examiners _________________________________________________________________________________________

Complex __________________________________________________________________________________________

Transect No’s ________________________________

TOTAL UNDISTURBED TYPES (PERCENT) ____________

Status (check)

 Total Steps ea. CT.

 ----------------------- = Composition

 Grand Total Steps

Community Type

Total

Grand Total 100

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 PCT

Steps Steps Steps Steps Steps TOTAL COMPOSITION

 __________ 0 – 15 = very early seral

 __________ 16 – 40 = early seral

 __________ 41 – 60 = mid seral

 __________ 61 – 85 = late seral

 __________ 85 + = PNC
44 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

Total Steps ea. CT

-------------------------- = Composition

Grand Total

RIPARIAN GREENLINE TRANSECT DATA

Forest / District ________________________________ / ________________________________ Date _________________

Drainage ______________________________________________________________________________________________

Examiners ________________________________________________________________ Photo Nos ___________________ 

Complex ______________________________________________________________________________________________

Location ______________________________________________________________________________________________

Transect No. ___________________________________________________________Feet/Step _______________________

STEPS STEPS TOTAL %

Community Type (Left) (Right) STEPS COMP.

BARS WITHIN TRANSECT (Optional)

STEPS FEET

GRAVEL

SAND

SILT / CLAY

Grand Total
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 45

GREENLINE SUMMARY SHEET

(Use when more than one greenline measurement is taken within one complex)

Forest / District ________________________________ / _________________________________ Date Compiled _____________

Drainage ____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Examiners ______________________________________________________________________ Photo Nos ___________________

Complex ____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Transect Nos ________________________

Grand Total

Total Steps ea. C.T.

----------------------- = Composition

Grand Total

 BARS WITHIN ALL TRANSECT (Optional)

FEET

GRAVEL

SAND

SILT / CLAY

T1 (Steps)

Community Type Left Right

T2 (Steps) T3 (Steps)

Left Right Left Right

 Total Comp.

Steps %
46 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 WOODY SPECIES REGENERATION Forest / District ___________________________________________ / _______________________________________________________ Date __________________ Drainage _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Examiners ______________________________________________________________________________________________ Photo No’s ________________________ Complex _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Location _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Transect No. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Seedling / Sprout Young / Sapling Mature Decadent Dead Species Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right Total Total (L&R) Average Height (Optional) Use dot count method to record numbers eg. Tree Layer Shrub Layer Herb Layer = 4 = 8 = 10
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 47

Seedling/Sprout Young/Sapling Mature Decadent

Species T1 TTTTTTTTTTT 2

Dead

3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 TTT 1 2 3

Forest / District _______________________________ / __________________________________ Date _________________

Drainage _________________________________________________________ Photo No’s _________________________

Examiners _____________________________________________________________________________________________

Complex ______________________________________________________________________________________________

Transect No’s ______________________________

WOODY SPECIES REGENERATION SUMMARY

TOTAL

(ea trans)

TOTAL

(combined)

Statement of Health and General Comments:

Average Height: (Optional) 

Tree Layer

Shrub Layer

Herb Layer
48 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000

GREENLINE SUCCESSIONAL STATUS WORKSHEET

Complex name: _________________________________________________________________________

(Stream, Lake, etc; Dominant C.T., Soil Family, Stream Type)

General Location: _______________________________________________________________________

Total 100%

Percent Late Seral Types = ______________ Potential (see capability group value) = _______________

Successional Status)

 (Check One)

 __________ 0 – 15 = very early seral

 __________ 16 – 40 = early seral

 __________ 41 – 60 = mid seral

 __________ 61 – 85 = late seral

 __________ 85 + = PNC

SUCCESSIONAL RATING

Community Type % Composition Early Late
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-47. 2000 49

GREENLINE STABILITY RATING (CT’s) WORKSHEET

Complex name:

_________________________________________________________________________________________

(Stream, Lake, etc; Dominant C.T.

General Area:

_________________________________________________________________________________________

STABILITY

Community Type

Stability Rating

 __________ 0 – 2 = very poor (very low)

 __________ 3 – 4 = poor (low)

 __________ 5 – 6 = moderate

 __________ 7 – 8 = good (high)

 __________ 9 – 10 = excellent (very high)

Totals 100%

Composition

%

Class Index

, Soil Family, Stream Type)
Federal Recycling Program Printed on Recycled Paper

You may order additional copies of this publication by sending your mailing information

in label form through one of the following media. Please specify the publication title and

General Technical Report number.

USDA Forest Service

Rocky Mountain Research Station

Telephone (970) 498-1392

FAX (970) 498-1396

E-mail rschneider/@fs.fed.us

Web site http://www.fs.fed.us/rm

Mailing Address Publications Distribution

Rocky Mountain Research Station

240 West Prospect Road

Fort Collins, CO 80526

Or

Department of the Interior

Bureau of Land Management

Telephone (303) 236-0162

FAX (303) 236-3508

E-mail dprichard@blm.gov

Mailing Address Bureau of Land Management

NARCS, RS-130

P.O. Box 25047

Denver, CO 80225-0047
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its

programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion,

age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not

all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require

alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print,

audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice

and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights,

Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC

20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice or TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity

provider and employer.

The Rocky Mountain Research Station develops scientific information and technology to improve management, protection, and use of

the forests and rangelands. Research is designed to meet the needs

of National Forest managers, Federal and State agencies, public and

private organizations, academic institutions, industry, and individuals.

Studies accelerate solutions to problems involving ecosystems,

range, forests, water, recreation, fire, resource inventory, land reclamation, community sustainability, forest engineering technology,

multiple use economics, wildlife and fish habitat, and forest insects

and diseases. Studies are conducted cooperatively, and applications

may be found worldwide.

Research Locations

Flagstaff, Arizona Reno, Nevada

Fort Collins, Colorado* Albuquerque, New Mexico

Boise, Idaho Rapid City, South Dakota

Moscow, Idaho Logan, Utah

Bozeman, Montana Ogden, Utah

Missoula, Montana Provo, Utah

Lincoln, Nebraska Laramie, Wyoming

*Station Headquarters, Natural Resources Research Center,

2150 Centre Avenue, Building A, Fort Collins, CO 80526