United States

Department

of Agriculture

Forest Service

Rocky Mountain

Research Station

General Technical

Report RMRS-GTR-154

July 2005

Beginnings of Range

Management: An Anthology of the

Sampson-Ellison Photo Plots

(1913 to 2003) and a Short History

of the Great Basin Experiment

Station

David A. Prevedel

E. Durant McArthur

Curtis M. Johnson
Abstract ______________________________________

Prevedel, David A.; McArthur, E. Durant; Johnson, Curtis M. 2005. Beginnings of

range management: an anthology of the Sampson-Ellison photo plots (1913 to

2003) and a short history of the Great Basin Experiment Station. Gen. Tech. Rep.

RMRS-GTR-154. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,

Rocky Mountain Research Station. 60 p.

High-elevation watersheds on the Wasatch Plateau in central Utah were severely

overgrazed in the late 1800s, resulting in catastrophic flooding and mudflows through

adjacent communities. Affected citizens petitioned the Federal government to establish a Forest Reserve (1902), and the Manti National Forest was established by the

Transfer Act of 1905. The Great Basin Station, a forerunner of the Intermountain

Forest and Range Experiment Station, was created in 1911 within this area to study

the influence of rangeland vegetation on erosion and floods.

This publication contains a collection of 12 recurring sets of photographs that

started in 1913 on these depleted high-elevation rangelands. The sites were rephotographed in the 1940s, 1972, 1990, and 2003. It is also a tribute to two men who

pioneered the science of range management—Arthur W. Sampson and Lincoln

Ellison. As Directors of the Experiment Station, they initiated and maintained the early

photo sites and study plots. It was with these photograph records and study plots that

many of the interpretations and guidelines for the management of high-elevation

watersheds were developed.

After 90 years, plant community changes on these high-elevation watersheds has

led to a vegetation composition significantly different than the original condition. New

plant communities have reached thresholds where yearly vegetative composition

appears to be climate driven. Many of the higher elevation areas remain in unsatisfactory watershed health with active erosion.

_______________

Keywords: rangeland photos, repeat photography, secondary succession, watershed health,

high elevation watersheds, tall forb, Great Basin Experiment Station, Arthur

Sampson, Lincoln Ellison

Cover Photo: Sheep grazing on Wagon Road Ridge, 2004

(photo by Curt Johnson)
The Authors ___________________________________

David A. Prevedel is Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and Remote Sensing

Program Coordinator for the Intermountain Region of the USDA Forest Service in

Ogden, UT. He holds a B.S. degree in range science from Utah State University. He

was Range Conservationist on the Ferron Ranger District, Manti-LaSal National

Forest, 1971 to 1976.

E. Durant McArthur is Project Leader and Research Geneticist, Shrub Sciences

Laboratory, and Scientist-in-Charge, Great Basin Experimental Range, USDA Forest

Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Provo, UT. He holds an A.S. degree from

Dixie College and B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees from the University of Utah.

Curtis M. Johnson is Regional Rangeland Ecosystem Specialist for the Intermountain Region of the USDA Forest Service in Ogden, UT. He holds a B.S. degree in forest

management from Humboldt State University and an M.S. degree in watershed

management from the University of Arizona.
Acknowledgments _____________________________

We gratefully acknowledge the cooperation between the Rocky Mountain Research Station and the Intermountain Region of the U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service, in making this reference possible. We thank the following individuals

for their indepth review and input, and for providing invaluable personal knowledge

and suggestions on climate, disturbances, grazing effects, and vegetation and soils:

Richard A. Gill, Assistant Professor of Environmental Science and Regional Planning

at Washington State University, Pullman; Kimball T. Harper, Emeritus Professor,

Department of Integrative Biology, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT; Gary

Jorgensen, Range Technician, Great Basin Field Unit, Shrub Sciences Laboratory,

Rocky Mountain Research Station, Ephraim, UT; Stephen Monsen, Research

Botanist, Shrub Sciences Laboratory, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Provo, UT

(retired); Robert M. Thompson, Range Conservationist, Manti-LaSal National Forest,

Price, UT; David Tart, Regional Plant Ecologist, USDA Forest Service, Intermountain

Region, Ogden, UT. And we especially thank Liane Ellison Norman, daughter of

Lincoln Ellison, for her contributions to the biography of her father and for her

remembrances of life at the Great Basin Station.
Overview ..................................................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction: The Beginnings of Range Management ................................................................................. 2

Origin of Photographs ................................................................................................................................. 2

The Wasatch Plateau: Physical Characteristics.......................................................................................... 4

Terrain and Geology ................................................................................................................................ 4

Soils ......................................................................................................................................................... 4

Existing Vegetation .................................................................................................................................. 6

Climate ..................................................................................................................................................... 7

Area Grazing and Management (Administrative) History ............................................................................ 7

Sampson-Ellison Ecological Interpretations ................................................................................................ 10

Interpretation of the Photo Record .............................................................................................................. 14

Site A: Head of Big Bear Creek Looking East at Danish Knoll ................................................................ 14

Site B: Head of Big Bear Creek Looking West ........................................................................................ 16

Site C: Danish Knoll Enclosure ................................................................................................................ 18

Site D: South Side of Danish Knoll Enclosure ......................................................................................... 20

Site E: Area Between Danish Knoll and Cox’s Knoll on Wagon Ridge Road .......................................... 22

Site F: Cox’s Knoll Snowbank .................................................................................................................. 24

Site G: Wagon Road Ridge East of Cox’s Knoll ...................................................................................... 28

Site H: Wagon Road Ridge Near White Knoll, Five and One-Half Miles East of the Plateau Crest ........ 30

Site I: Wagon Road Ridge Near White Knoll, 100 Yards East of Photo Site H ....................................... 32

Site J: Looking Northeast From the North Side of Danish Knoll .............................................................. 34

Site K: One-Half Mile North of Danish Knoll, Looking North Into Little Pete’s Hole ................................. 36

Site L: Tom’s Ridge ................................................................................................................................. 39

Observations ............................................................................................................................................... 42

Conclusions................................................................................................................................................. 44

Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................... 46

References .................................................................................................................................................. 47

Appendix A: Plant Species Cited ................................................................................................................ 48

Appendix B: Current Plant Species on Protected Areas and Photo Points ................................................ 48

Alpine Cattle Pasture Enclosure, West Side (Protected) ......................................................................... 48

Elks Knoll RNA, West Side (Protected) ................................................................................................... 48

Photo Site A ............................................................................................................................................. 48

Photo Site B ............................................................................................................................................. 48

Photo Sites C and D ................................................................................................................................ 48

Photo Site E ............................................................................................................................................. 49

Photo Site F (General) ............................................................................................................................. 49

Photo Site F (Detail) ................................................................................................................................ 49

Photo Site G ............................................................................................................................................ 49

Photo Site H ............................................................................................................................................. 49

Photo Site I .............................................................................................................................................. 49

Photo Sites J and K ................................................................................................................................. 49

Photo Site L ............................................................................................................................................. 49

Appendix C: GPS Locations for Photo Plots ............................................................................................... 49

Appendix D: History of the Great Basin Station .......................................................................................... 50

Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 50

Establishment of the Great Basin Station ................................................................................................ 50

Research Programs ................................................................................................................................. 52

Education and Training ............................................................................................................................ 57

Life at the Station ..................................................................................................................................... 58

Concluding Word ..................................................................................................................................... 59

References .............................................................................................................................................. 59

Contents_____________________________________________________

Page
text
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 1

Overview ______________________

This publication contains a collection of a recurring set of

photographs with interpretations that started in the early 1900s

on depleted high-elevation rangeland, but more so it is a tribute

to two men who pioneered the science of range management:

Arthur W. Sampson and Lincoln Ellison. It was they who

initiated the photos, and it was with these photographs and

associated study plots that many of the interpretations and

guidelines for the management of high-elevation watersheds

were developed. These were to have worldwide application.

This document also contains a history of the Great Basin

Experiment Station (Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station) (appendix D).

Arthur Sampson was born in Oakland, NE, in 1884. He

developed an early interest in the outdoors and pursued it in

his study of botany and plant ecology at the University of

Nebraska where he received a B.S. degree in 1906 and an

M.A. degree in 1907. He then accepted a position as Plant

Ecologist with the USDA Forest Service. In the next few

years, his application of the research method to forest land

management problems resulted in clear and convincing evidence of the undesirable effects of improper grazing and led

to many land management recommendations that are used

today. He was the first Director (1912 to 1922) of the Great

Basin Experiment Station in Utah. In addition, during this

time he did graduate work, first at Johns Hopkins University

and later at George Washington University where he received

a Ph.D. degree in 1917.

He began teaching at the University of California in 1922. In

1923 he was promoted to Associate Professor, in 1936 to

Professor, and upon retirement in 1951 he was granted emeritus status. He wrote four textbooks on range management as

well as many research publications that have had far-reaching

influence. Of perhaps greater importance was the painstaking

care that he took in his teaching. It challenged and inspired

everyone who was exposed to his courses. No one has exerted

a more profound influence on the field of range management.

Beginnings of Range Management:

An Anthology of the SampsonEllison Photo Plots (1913 to 2003)

and a Short History of the Great

Basin Experiment Station

David A. Prevedel

E. Durant McArthur

Curtis M. Johnson

The focus of Professor Sampson’s research was on the ecology

of Western ranges. He died in 1967 (Parker and others 1967;

University of California 1968).

Lincoln Ellison was Forest Ecologist and Lead Researcher

at the Great Basin Experiment Station from 1938 to 1945. He

was part of a succession of pioneering scientists working on

Western ecology at the Station, which was also an essential

training ground for several generations of ecologists. He was

born in 1908 in Portland, OR, and attended the University of

California at Los Angeles from 1926 to 1931 (B.A. degree

1931). He then attended the University of Minnesota (M.S.

degree 1938 and Ph.D. degree 1948). His undergraduate major

was botany. Graduate studies were also botany, with minors in

geology and biometry. Ellison transferred to the Forest Service

in Ogden, UT, in 1945 and was in charge of grazing research,

and in 1953 he was appointed Division Chief of Range Research (Norman 2004).

Ellison has been cited as one of the most influential individuals in the creation of a high level of awareness about erosion

tragedies on National Forest Lands (Moir 1989).

Ellison accomplished essential research studies on the relationship between soil and vegetation, and he felt that reverence

for the ecological balance was an economic, aesthetic, and

ethical obligation. He served as President of the Utah Academy

of Sciences, Arts and Letters in 1955. During his career,

Lincoln Ellison published many research documents on the

ecology and management of high mountain watersheds. He is

still cited in sources as diverse as Soviet Soil Science and in

studies on the ecology of the steppes of Inner Mongolia. After

observing and working on the depleted rangelands of central

Utah, he wrote:

Survival rests not only on sound management: sound management

itself rests on moral values. If we ignore or despise our environment, it

will destroy us. If we reverently strive to understand our environment

and our place in it, if we develop an attitude of respect and love for it,

we have laid the groundwork for survival (Norman 2002).

Lincoln Ellison died in a snow avalanche in 1958 at the Snow

Basin ski area.
2 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

The Great Basin Experiment Station has served as a

training ground and working site for numerous scientists in

addition to Arthur Sampson and Lincoln Ellison. For additional information on these people and their accomplishments, see Antrei (1982), Keck (1972), McArthur (1992), and

appendix D.

The Great Basin Experimental Range provided a variety

of conditions for observation and study. In its early days, a

twisting, rutted 12-mile dirt road ran from Ephraim, UT, past

the Experiment Station Headquarters, and to the skyline of

the Wasatch Plateau. On this route, elevation rose 5,600 ft

through nine life zones and associated biotic communities.

These zones and communities were so close together and

easily accessible that they provided great diversity in plant

species, soils, and climate, and thus gave the opportunity for

convenient, efficient study of a wide variety of ecologically

oriented problems of wild land management. Visitors from

all over the world came to the Station to study its work for

application to their circumstances.

Work on the Experimental Range was possible because of a

small community of Forest Service houses where the researchers and their families, as well as visitors, could live near the

experimental plots and enclosures they studied. The Headquarters site is still owned by the Forest Service, but is operated

by Snow College in Ephraim as an Environmental Education

Center (Norman 2003). Appendix D is a more detailed history

of the Great Basin Experiment Station.

The Rocky Mountain Research Station holds the data from

the Great Basin Experiment Station. This data ranges from

precise quadrat to broad rangeland inventories. This large

historical record contains an extensive photo file, and tabular

data at many scales. Climatic data exists back to 1926.

Dr. Richard A. Gill at Washington State University, Pullman, is working on the recovery and analysis of the Great Basin

Experimental Range datasets. He is archiving nearly 50 years

of historical plant community and soils data from the Wasatch

Plateau (Gill 2003). He and his graduate students are continuing research work on the effect of grazing on soil organic

matter formation and belowground respiration.

Introduction: The Beginnings of

Range Management _____________

Lying on the north to south uplifted backbone of central

Utah is a high montane area known as the Wasatch Plateau.

To the west are the Sanpete Valley and the Mormon settlements of Mayfield, Manti, Ephraim, Spring City, and Mt.

Pleasant. On the east, in its rain shadow, are Castle Valley and

the San Rafael Swell with the communities of Emery, Ferron,

Castle Dale, Orangeville, and Huntington. As each canyon

from the Plateau flows east or west, it opens to farms and

towns, each nourished by the streams that originate as snow

in the highlands. It was here in the late 1880s that ignorance

of man’s environment contributed to overgrazing and erosion, which resulted in floods and mudslides that ravaged

some of these communities (Geary 1992).

Following the establishment of the Manti National Forest in

1905, the Great Basin Station, a forerunner of the Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, was created in

1911. Here the first studies of the influence of range vegetation

on erosion and floods were made. These studies first clearly

demonstrated that herbaceous vegetation, and not forest cover

alone, had a profound effect on the infiltration and yield of

water from torrential storms. The studies showed that the

abundance and character of apparently insignificant grasses

and forbs high on the watershed could mean the difference

between the normal streamflow of clear, usable water, and

abnormal, disastrous mud-rock floods. This led to a great deal

of additional research in the fields of hydrology, climatology,

ecology, agronomy, and forestry, oriented primarily toward

rehabilitating depleted vegetation and stabilizing eroding soil

(Ellison 1954).

One of the few long-term studies outside of the central

grassland regions was initiated by Arthur Sampson of the

Experiment Station in 1913. This census continued when

Lincoln Ellison became Director of the Experiment Station in

1938. The permanent plots cover a span of 45 years, and the

plots were maintained in areas where climate was continually

monitored (Gill 2003). Names such as Arthur Sampson and

Lincoln Ellison, who were in charge of the Station, were to

later become synonymous with the new science of range

management.

In his landmark monograph “Subalpine Vegetation of the

Wasatch Plateau,” Lincoln Ellison (1954) described the scientists involved and how, through the Intermountain Forest and

Range Experiment Station, they first clearly demonstrated that

herbaceous vegetation, and not forest cover alone, had a

profound effect on the infiltration and yield of water from

torrential storms. Early on, researchers found that effective soil

protection against accelerated erosion was more important in

the subalpine zone than forage production, and this protection

was probably more closely correlated with cover, both of

vegetation and litter, than it was with total weight of associated

vegetation. Ellison further stated that the watershed conditions

were attributable in large part to our ignorance of soil-plant

cover relations, our unconscious assumption that the present

vegetation is normal, and the confusion in the literature and in

the minds of land managers between primary succession

involving soil development on the one hand and secondary

succession and accelerated soil erosion on the other (Ellison

1954).

For clarification, ecologists of today interpret secondary

succession as not defining degradation or a loss of soil condition, but as a mechanism for gradual improvement.

Origin of Photographs ___________

Part of the early range studies on watershed protection were

a series of photographs and plots monitoring changes in

vegetation and soil conditions, starting in 1913. Figures 1 and 2

are location maps.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 3

Figure 1—(A) The photograhic points lie within the historic Great Basin Experiment Station’s

informal boundary (box). (B) the formally designated Great Basin Experimental Range is smaller

(McArthur and Monsen 1996).

Twelve repetitive photograph sites are colocated on what

were some of the 52 permanent square-meter quadrats used for

studying changes in cover and plant community composition

for the Great Basin Experiment Station. Thirty-five of the plots

were established mostly by A. W. Sampson and his associates

between 1913 and 1916. Seventeen were established in 1925 or

later. These photographs have been helpful in corroborating

evidence of change from permanent plots and quadrats and in

preserving a record of the character of denuded soil surfaces

(Ellison 1954). Lincoln Ellison rephotographed the same areas

from 1938 to 1947.

In 1972, as part of the area administration for the MantiLaSal National Forest, reprints of what could be found of the

early photographs from selected quadrat sites were acquired

from the Forest Service Archives in Washington, DC. They

were then field located and rephotographed by Dave Prevedel

during that summer.

Subsequently, in 1990 and 2003, the sites were again

rephotographed by Dave Prevedel and Curt Johnson. Because the latter photographs were for administrative use and

not research, no ground sampling or measurements were

made. Only the notes referenced with each photo were

recorded. Current existing vegetation species on protected

areas and the photo plots are listed in appendix B for comparison. We have been careful to rephotograph the sites on

approximately the same dates as the earlier photographs. Tall

forb types, in addition to phenological and seasonal climatic

responses, experience significant change after the first frosts

when a good deal of the plant material is reduced to ground

litter. When reviewing the literature over 90 years of research

and publication, and in personal communications, we found

that in addition to taxonomical changes, ecological terminology had changed. Terms such as invader, introduced, bunchgrass, climax, and so forth, have been modified in their

application and meaning. We have attempted to clarify these

facts and statements where indicated.

The paper emulsion photographs from 1913 through 1990

were scanned with a Microtec Scan Maker 98XL scanner at

600 dpi in TIF and JPG formats. They were then enhanced in

contrast with Adobe Photoshop. The 2003 photographs were

taken with a 4 Mega Pixel digital camera at 300 dpi in JPG

format. Global Positioning System (GPS) location readings of

the photo sites were also taken at that time.

Photo documentation over the 1913 to 2003 period was

accomplished by the following range scientists:

A B
4 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Figure 2—Photographic points: detail of location on the Wasatch Plateau.

Photograph date Photographer

1913 to 1922 Arthur W. Sampson and Associates

1932 Associates of the Great Basin

 Experiment Station, C. L. Forsling,

 Director

1938 to 1947 Lincoln Ellison

1972, 1990, 2003 David A. Prevedel

1990, 2003 Curtis M. Johnson

The Wasatch Plateau: Physical

Characteristics _________________

Excellent characterizations of the Wasatch Plateau are

included in Ellison’s 1954 monograph. To maintain clarity

and continuity, scientific plant names used by Ellison are

maintained in their old nomenclature system. Cross reference

to current nomenclature for these plants is included in appendix A (USDA Plants Database 2004). Following are brief

excerpts from his monograph, with supplemental information noted by annotations, to help set the character of the

landscape.

Terrain and Geology

The photograph sites all are located above 10,000 ft elevation on the top of an area known as the Wasatch Plateau. The

greater part of this top is level or rolling. Most of it is easily

accessible to domestic livestock and has been heavily grazed.

Lying on conspicuous white Flagstaff limestone, the parent

material is of Eocene origin that forms a cap several hundred

feet thick. Its origin was a large fresh water lake in what is now

central Utah. During the Pleistocene period, the area was

entirely covered with glaciers, and there are many cirques

forming the head basins. In some years, certain snowbanks

persist all summer long (refer to figure 3 for a topographic

cross section).

Soils

Soil parent material is limestone and shale. Accordingly,

the soils are mostly clays and clay loams that are light brown

in color. Today, horizons are poorly developed and difficult

to define due to the amount of soil lost to erosion. White

limestone fragments predominate in much of the area.

Organic matter content appears to be low due to the amount

of accelerated erosion that has taken place. Soil moisture-
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 5

Figure 3—Terrain profile and precipitation, Wasatch Plateau, Utah.

holding capacity is also low because of the loss to erosion.

As early as 1916, Sampson reported that evaporation in the

subalpine zone of the Wasatch Plateau was about the same

as in the much warmer oak brush zone approximately 2,500

ft lower. The retarding effect of lower temperatures at these

higher elevations is evidently offset by a much greater wind

movement in the subalpine zone. This is undoubtedly compounded by the lack of a persistent vegetative ground cover.

The authors’ observations of pristine tall forbs sites indicate

that poorly defined and developed “A” horizons may be a

characteristic of this type.

The photo sites are clustered on four land types that vary in

precipitation, soils, and topology (fig. 4):

1. Upper Big Bear Creek Basin Land Type (Photo Sites

A, B, C, and D)—This area is characterized as being on the

side slopes of a large cirque basin with slopes varying from 10

to 40 degrees. Soils are deep with A and B horizons almost

totally absent due to historical erosion. Some accelerated

erosion and head cutting is still occurring today. Precipitation

varies from 26 to 30 inches annually. Large rock fragments are

exposed when erosion removes soil down to near bedrock.

Lying close to the top of the Plateau, it contains little conifer

vegetation, and the open aspect probably was favorable to

historically supporting one of the tall forb associations.

2. Cox’s Knoll Highlands Land Type (Photo Sites E, F,

and G)—This area is in the estimated 22- to 24-inch annual

precipitation zone. It lies approximately 2 miles east of Skyline

Drive. Soils are shallow with poorly defined horizons and have

numerous rock fragments. Sheet erosion is occurring on some

limited areas. Terrain at the location of the photos is basically

flat. Cox’s Knoll is a prominent “knob” left by glaciation and

has a long history of sheep concentration and bedding. A

snowbank area exists on the east side, which is the site of one

of the photos. Historically, vegetation on this area was mixed.

Conifer on the northern aspects is subalpine fir with aspen on

the more favorable aspects. Cox’s Knoll was probably a grassforb site with Kings fescue (Leucopoa kingii) dominant along

with alpine blue grasses. Snowbank areas most likely supported tall forbs dominated by tall larkspur.

3. Wagon Road Ridge Land Type (Photo Sites H and I)—

Wagon Road Ridge is a long predominant plateau extending

east of the main crest of the skyline. The photo sites are about

5 miles from this top. Slopes are flat and the precipitation much

lower (estimated 20 inches or less annually). Soils are very

shallow with numerous rock fragments. Perennial winds constantly dry out the soil. Historically, vegetation on this site was

a grass-shrub mixture dense enough to support ground fires as

evidenced by the numerous fires scars on trees in the area.

Aspen and Ribes (red currant) may have also been prominent.
6 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Figure 4—Land types associated with photo sites, detail of location.

Limber pine is reestablishing on the area probably as a result

of the lack of wildfire.

-

4. Tom’s Ridge: Upper Pete’s Hole Land Type (Photo

Sites J, K, and L)—This area lies immediately east of Skyline

Drive and, like the Big Bear Creek Land Type, consists of

cirque basins from past glaciation. However, the photo sites lie

on flat terraces that may have been intermittent fluvial swamps

or wet areas as the glaciers melted. Soils are moderately deep

and fine textured. Few rock fragments exist in the profiles.

Some sheet erosion and rilling occur today. Pocket gophers

seem to favor this area, as they are present almost everywhere.

Precipitation is in the 26- to 30-inch annual range. Historical

vegetation was probably an upland tall forb association

Existing Vegetation

Vegetation descriptions are confined to the subalpine zone.

Herbaceous communities are more extensive in this subalpine

zone than other communities dominated by trees or shrubs.

Composition of the herbaceous cover varies greatly from place

to place. Large areas are dominated by grasses, predominantly

Stipa lettermanii, Agropyron trachycaulum, Trisetum spicatum,

and Hordeum nodosum. Other areas are dominated by forbs—

Artemesia discolor, Taraxacum officinale, Achillea lanulosa,

Penstemon rydbergii, Geranium richardsonii, and others. Still

other major plant associations occur on disturbed areas as a

result of local microclimatic conditions.

Lewis (1993) summarized:

Historically high grazing pressure during the latter half of the last

century and extending into the early portion of this century drastically

changed the soil and vegetation conditions on the Wasatch Plateau. In

general, vegetative ground cover was reduced and species composition

was changed from an original tall forb-dominated setting to lower

statured forb, grass, and shrub species.

The existing herbaceous communities should be considered

as interim or opportunistic because of the past history of

grazing use. The original vegetation has been altered for so

long that nobody can remember what it once was like. Accounts of pristine vegetation of the subalpine zone of the

Wasatch Plateau are lacking. The only evidence of the original

character of vegetation of the subalpine zone is based primarily

on areas that have escaped grazing or that have been grazed

relatively lightly, and on changes that have taken place on areas

that have been protected. Lincoln Ellison is believed to have

first referenced the vegetation in the subalpine zone as being

tall forb. Lewis (1993) stated that the tall forb type in this
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 7

portion of its range originally occurred on relatively deep,

fertile soils with approximately 35 inches of annual precipitation and above 8,500 ft elevation. Other sections of the Plateau

at lower elevations that receive lower amounts of precipitation

due to specific weather patterns and rain shadow influences

had other plant community types. Many of the plant species

from these more xeric types moved into the tall forb setting

during the heavy grazing years.

Small patches of Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii)

and alpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) dot the rolling terrain of the

higher parts of the subalpine zone, and these trees form dense

forests on steep northerly exposures. During the late 1990s,

spruce budworm severely infested these stands and resulted in

almost 100 percent mortality in some areas.

Aspen (Populus tremuloides), the prevalent species of the

montane forest below the subalpine zone, extends into the

subalpine zone in small stands, most commonly on southern

exposures. Limber pine (Pinus flexilis) is common on steep,

rocky, southern exposures. One of the most common shrubs is

Ribes montigenum. In some areas, low shrubs such as yellow

rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus) dominate.

Climate

Records from the Great Basin Experiment Station indicate

there are about 60 to 80 frost-free days per year near the

photograph sites. The highest summer temperature to be expected is about 75 degrees. Precipitation exceeds 30 inches

annually, about two-thirds occurring as snow. Summer precipitation varies significantly from year to year, and may be a

driving force in shaping the dominant vegetation in any given

year. The prevailing wind is westerly, in summer usually from

slightly south of west. The air in the subalpine zone is seldom

still. Daily average wind speeds in the summer average between 2.75 and 8.5 miles per hour (Price and Evans 1938).

Wind is responsible for forming great drifts of snow behind

patches of coniferous timber and enormous cornices on the

eastern rim of the Plateau. These also leave their impression on

the vegetation (fig. 5 and 6).

Area Grazing and Management

(Administrative) History __________

We will probably never know how much grazing use was

made of the Wasatch Plateau. Sheep numbers in the Utah

territory were low prior to 1880, but increased explosively

after that (fig. 7). By 1885 the territory supported 1 million

head, and by 1890, about 1.5 million. By the turn of the 20th

century sheep numbers reach 3.8 million (Hindley and others

2000).

Most of the residents in communities adjacent to the Plateau

were of Scandinavian decent whose parents had fled poverty

and religious prosecution in Europe, and in many instances,

pushed handcarts across the American plains to settle these

lands. They had virtually no prior experience with the low

capabilities and regenerative powers of desert and semiarid

mountain lands. Most at first assumed that spontaneous natural

processes would restore the land (Hall 2001).

Just before the turn of the 20th century, sheep populations

grazing the entire Wasatch Plateau peaked at somewhere

between 800,000 and 1 million head (USDA-FS Manti-LaSal

NF 1994). The sheepmen were not all local residents. Many of

them were transients who would bring their flocks from

Colorado (and with the advent of railroads in Sanpete Valley,

from Oregon), follow the snow up the flanks of the Plateau in

spring, graze northward along the subalpine zone during

summer, and ship their sheep from Colton, UT, in the fall.

Close herding and excessive trailing were only two of the

destructive practices of early grazers. Still another element in

range deterioration was the unwieldy size of herds. In 1880,

herds might consist of from 2,000 to 3,000 sheep exclusive of

lambs. Unrestricted overgrazing prompted one observer to

write that between 1888 and 1905, “The Wasatch Range, from

Thistle to Salina, was a vast dust bed.” Old Sanpete residents

tell of being able to count the herds of sheep on the mountain

by the dust clouds they could see from the valley (Ellison

1954).

Figure 5—Annual precipitation for the subalpine zone of the Wasatch Plateau, Utah.

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Year
8 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Grazing rights were determined by “customary use,” which

meant that if you had grazed your livestock in a particular area

in one year you had a presumptive right to put them there again

the following year. But if a more aggressive competitor trespassed on “your range,” your legal recourses were limited.

Streams that had once run clear became roily throughout the

year. Typhoid, spread by contaminated water, was epidemic in

Sanpete and Emery Counties during the late years of the

nineteenth century. Tensions developed between the stockmen

and the residents and water-users in the valleys. Because most

of the sheep with their economic benefits belonged to Sanpete

County growers, but a greater area of the subalpine range

drained into Emery County streams, the most vigorous complaints about stream contamination tended to come from the

Figure 7—Number of sheep on the Wasatch Plateau.

east side of the mountains. It was common around the turn of

the 20th century for Emery County Sheriff’s Deputies to arrest

sheepherders for “befouling the waters,” only to have the

charges dismissed by Sanpete County judges. Utah Senator

Thomas Kearns, defending the politically powerful woolgrower

interests, declared at the height of the controversy (Geary

2003):

If it be true, and scientific men tell us it is a fact, that water purifies

itself within three miles, then it occurs to me that all that is necessary...is

to guard the streams against contamination from the distance.

However, it was Sanpete Valley that paid the greatest price

for the overgrazing of the Wasatch Plateau through a series of

disastrous floods. Sanpete towns were typically established on

the banks of creeks, but there is no record of serious flooding

Figure 6—Summer precipitation (June, July, August) for the subalpine zone of the Wasatch

Plateau, Utah.

-

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

900,000

1,000,000

1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Year

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Year

Total inches
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 9

during the first three decades of settlement. Then, in August

1889, heavy rains carried mud and boulders from the denuded

mountain slopes into the streets and homes of several towns.

Between 1889 and 1910, serious floods were reported in Manti

and Ephraim and in other canyons on the Sanpete Valley side

of the Wasatch Plateau almost every summer. By the end of

1901, the situation in the Sanpete Valley was desperate.

Livestock overgrazing was frequently blamed for the disastrous flooding. L. R. Anderson was elected mayor of Manti on

a “no more floods” platform.

In 1902, Sanpete Valley citizens petitioned the Federal government to establish a Forest Reserve above Manti (Geary 2003).

Albert Potter, head of the Grazing Division of the U.S.

Department of Forestry (later the Forest Service) warned that

unless overgrazing was stopped, the watershed above Manti

and Ephraim would be irreparably harmed. Potter reported that

intensive grazing had ruined the forage over most of Sanpete

County’s high country, which he found covered with sagebrush or else completely barren. Gifford Pinchot toured the

area that summer, remarking that, “It would take the revenue

of a city like Chicago to save Manti unless the overgrazing of

this canyon is stopped” (Hall 2001).

On May 29, 1903, President Theodore Roosevelt signed the

official proclamation creating the Manti Forest Reserve. Jurisdiction of the existing Reserves was transferred to the Department of Agriculture through the 1905 Transfer Act. A few

months later, Gifford Pinchot, Chief of the Forest Service,

imposed grazing fees and a use-by-permit system. In addition,

permits were only issued to local residents; roving bands with

no home ranch were excluded. The establishment of the Manti

National Forest was not free from conflicts. The initial management plan proposed in 1904 called for a limit of 100,000

sheep and 15,000 cattle and horses, with no sheep permitted on

the critical Sanpete Valley watersheds. This proposal met with

predictable resistance from wool growers, who requested

permits for 400,000 sheep. The number of sheep permitted was

successively increased to 125,000, then 175,000, and ultimately 300,000, leading to complaints from Emery County

that “The Manti Forest reserve is now a sheep man’s preserve

and the presumed objects for which it was created

are...practically nullified.” Forest Supervisor A. W. Jensen,

through persistence and persuasion, managed to reduce the

sheep permits to 200,000 by 1907 and increased the cattle

permits to 28,000, thereby placating the Emery County cattlemen. Over time, grazing permits were restricted to operators

who farmed land in valleys adjacent to the forest. Jensen

invited the stock raisers themselves to draw the boundaries

between grazing districts (allotments).

Supervisor Jensen was a local attorney who moved the Forest

Headquarters from Manti to Ephraim to be closer to his law

practice. The early forest rangers were also locals who had

grown up in the towns and villages at the base of the mountains.

In many instances these rangers had herded livestock or worked

at sawmills on the mountains. They typically had close relatives,

friends, and neighbors in the livestock industry, so it was not

always easy for them to enforce the forest rules (Geary 2003).

Between 1904 and 1919, the number of permitted sheep on

the Manti Forest was reduced from nearly 300,000 to 140,000

(USDA-FS Manti-LaSal NF 1994).

Arthur Sampson wrote of this time: “The first historically to

call the attention of the entire Western management were the

public land administrators, of which the United States Forest

Service was the pioneer” (Sampson 1954).

In 1911, an area in Ephraim Canyon was selected as the site

for a Forest Service Range and Watershed Research Station.

First named the Utah Experiment Station, it was subsequently

renamed the Great Basin Experiment Station. The Station

brought the nation’s first true range scientists into the region.

The Station became the focal point for studies on range

restoration, plant vigor, poisonous plants, revegetation, impacts of grazing on erosion and runoff, artificial seeding, plant

nutrition, rodent damage, and silviculture (Keck 1972, USDAFS Manti-LaSal NF 1994). Extensive seeding trials and reseeding programs started almost immediately.

A 1922 U.S. Forest Service report declared that “range

more extensively abused by bad management...probably did

not occur” (Hall 2001). Many of the ranches with permitted

livestock were adjacent to the National Forest boundary, and

livestock were simply turned on and off the forest land. When

Mont E. Lewis was Ranger at Castle Dale in the 1940s, actual

stocking of cattle in particular was far above permitted

numbers. Upon the start of enforcing livestock numbers, the

Forest Service had to issue temporary permits to ranchers

above the grazing permit numbers so that the local economy

would not collapse. The temporary permits were then gradually phased out (Lewis 1976). Sheep numbers were somewhat more controllable because of the “driveway system” of

getting the animals to their respective allotments. Here, the

number of bands could be observed, but the number of

animals in a band was often questionable. Generally, a

permitted band consisted of 1,500 adult animals. Some areas

of National Forest were designated as “lambing areas,” and

sheep were permitted onto lower elevation ranges as early as

April. As animal husbandry improved after the Great Depression, improvement of breeding stock and genetics took place.

Twining of lambs was a common improvement. The weaning

weight of lambs increased substantially, and pounds of forage consumed per head increased. The Wasatch Plateau was

known for producing market “fat” lambs of 100 to 110

pounds by late August.

It was no easy matter to restore the damaged watershed

lands. The Civilian Conservation Corps did some important

work on the Forest during the 1930s, constructing roads,

ponds, and stock fences. Later still, heavy equipment was used

to terrace the steep south-facing slopes of the west side drainages such as Spring City Canyon.

By the 1950s most grazing permits for sheep on highelevation ranges were from early July to October. However,

bands often stayed into November or when snow forced them

off. Administrative recourse by Forest Service Rangers was

often rebuffed by political connections. In 1954 Ellison stated,
10 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

In some places the subalpine zone is being drastically overgrazed at

the present time. Wide spread accelerated soil erosion continues, despite

the fact that in may places vegetation has improved materially and

erosion has been slowed.

Broad areas of the Wasatch Plateau were plowed and seeded

by the Manti National Forest at this time, primarily with

smooth brome on the higher elevations and crested wheatgrass

at the lower elevations.

By the mid 1960s, the Forest Service was making a concerted effort to manage grazing use. Rangeland analysis was

initiated, which included measuring plant species composition

and production. The Wasatch Plateau was unique in that

grazing allotments up until this time included common use

areas on mid-elevation ranges where both sheep and cattle used

the same area. Common use was eliminated and the division

between sheep and cattle range fenced. As a result, most sheep

allotments were confined to the higher elevations. The allocation of acreage in each allotment was based on plant species

composition and air-dried forage weight.

In the early 1970s, sheep numbers were still over-allocated.

As a result, additional reductions were made.

Mechanical treatments were also successful in the restoration of rangeland. Beginning in 1955 with the passage of the

Public 566 Small Watersheds Act, critical areas were contour

trenched and seeded. Major work was accomplished in the late

1960s and early 1970s in the Cottonwood Creek Drainage for

the Joe’s Valley Reservoir site and the Ferron Creek Drainage

for the Mill Site Reservoir Project. Some critical areas were

fenced and closed to grazing on high-elevation sheep ranges.

Today, the photograph areas lie on two sheep allotments with

the following permitted numbers (refer to fig. 2): (1) Wagon

Road Ridge sheep and goats: 1,000 ewes with lambs, July 8 to

September 27; (2) Little Pete’s Hole sheep and goats: 1,080

ewes with lambs, July 15 to September 30.

Grazing systems are basically a multi-time-over-use system

that has been in place for decades. Currently, about 71,000

sheep are permitted to graze on the entire Wasatch Plateau, or

what was the former Manti National Forest.

Undoubtedly, the majority of the area of the Wasatch

Plateau has improved in range condition, particularly on

lower and mid-elevation ranges. Disastrous flooding ceased

after 1950. However, portions of high-elevation sites where

sheep grazing is still permitted and where, concurrently,

some of the photo points exist, remain in less than satisfactory

rangeland health.

Sampson-Ellison Ecological

Interpretations __________________

When Arthur Sampson first arrived at the Experiment Station in 1912, rangelands in the subalpine zone were almost

entirely denuded. Since 1907, the Forest Service had sponsored Arthur Sampson’s research on range revegetation in

Oregon’s Wallowa Mountains. He was a student of Frederic

Clements and the American school of dynamic ecology and the

ecological climax state. Sampson believed that groups of

plants developed through several stages to reach a stable

climax condition. Reestablishing the Plateau as it once was,

therefore, meant reestablishing the climax. Sampson found

himself facing the dilemma of trying to re-create the climax

without really knowing what the climax looked like. He had

hoped to resolve the dilemma by monitoring samples of

developing vegetation until they reached a stable state, and

adopted the “quadrat” method developed by Clements for

tracing temporal vegetation changes. By periodically measuring the number and density of species in small demarcated

plots, he could estimate vegetation trends over much larger

areas (Hall 2001; Parker and others 1967).

From 1913 to 1915, Sampson established over 40 quadrats, about one-third of which excluded grazing. He found

that most fenced quadrats showed yearly increases in species numbers and vegetation density, but unfenced, grazed

quadrats showed decreases in both. Sampson declared in

1918 that the Wasatch Plateau’s range is “virtually in no

higher state of productivity than in 1912.” Further, he also

discovered that his data did not reveal the climax: “The

vegetation composition in both fenced and unfenced quadrats had not yet stabilized during the course of his experiments” (Hall 2001).

What species did increase in his studies led him to write in

1919 that “the wheat grasses (Agropyron) broadly considered,

constitute the climax herbaceous cover. In the vegetation sub

climax type, the timber species, of course, constitute the true

climax.” There are indications that Sampson had something

besides essentially pure wheatgrass in mind as the climax. He

further wrote,

The bunch wheatgrass type...supports a considerable variety of

weeds and other plants, both of deep and of shallow rooted characteristics. Plants other than grasses usually occupy the soil space between the

tufts. The non-grasses occur in varying density, depending chiefly upon

the available soil water content. Precipitation percolates deeply on the

rather exposed soils of the bunchgrass areas, and as a consequence both

deep-rooted and shallow-rooted species, chiefly other than grasses, are

commonly found on bunch wheatgrass areas (Ellison 1954).

This observation is not unlike Ellison’s where he later

postulated that the grassland-dominated communities in the

subalpine zone were the result of selective grazing by sheep.

Marc Hall (2001) in an essay, “Repairing Mountains: Restoration, Ecology, and Wilderness in Twentieth-Century Utah,”

uses the Great Basin Station, with particular emphasis on the

contributions of Sampson and Ellison, to make the case that

restorationists made progress in finding better ways to live on

the land. Hall (2001) concludes his essay by acknowledging

that the technical successes were accomplished despite the

daunting and continuing challenges of restoring and recovering

subalpine, semiarid landscapes. He furthermore concludes that

the motivation to act on these problems, despite their difficulty,

is a worthy legacy of Sampson, Ellison, and their colleagues.

Some direct quotes from Hall’s (2001) essay demonstrate the

challenges faced by these pioneering ecologists.

Even before Sampson’s arrival in Utah, Manti Forest rangers had

begun to revegetate sections of the Wasatch Plateau. In addition to trees,

they planted grasses, most of which were forage species that had never
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 11

grown in these mountains. At the top of the plateau in 1909, rangers

sowed seeds of timothy, Hungarian brome grass, Kentucky bluegrass,

orchard grass, meadow oats, Alsyke clover, and redtop. Not being

adapted to western mountains, only a small portion of the brome and

orchard grass germinated at all. With Sampson’s arrival, he built on the

experiences of the Manti Forest rangers and on his Oregon work. In the

station’s first annual report, he wrote that in all previous years he and

other range managers had failed to establish a single exotic forage plant

anywhere. The only species he found to consistently survive and

reproduce in these extreme environments were the ones already growing there. Sampson and his associates focused on finding better ways to

collect, germinate, and propagate forage species that could already be

found in Western United States mountains.

But in 1913, most all of the 1,130 attempted plantings, consisting of

sprouts and stems collected from local willow, aspen, and mountain

elder, died within a few months. The next spring, Sampson planted ten

times this number, along with seeds of local gooseberry, alpine currant,

and two wheat grasses. Discouragingly, very few survived, with only

the wheat grasses showing some success. After two seasons of poor

results with locally found species, Sampson expanded his search for

species to other nearby national forests. From Idaho, Payette Forest

Rangers sent him seeds of two alpine grasses that were favorites of local

sheep. Sawtooth Forest rangers sent him several ounces of wild carrot

seeds. From California, Trinity Forest rangers provided him with seeds

of a local clover. But all of these seeds showed poor abilities to

germinate and propagate in Ephraim Canyon, even in plots that had been

fenced to exclude cows and sheep.

With these problem areas in mind, Sampson even sought help from

the USDA’s Bureau of Plant Industry. He made plans to test species that

had been collected in Australia, Transvall, and the Mediterranean. In

1915, the bureau sent Sampson several strains of alfalfa that it had

developed from Russian stocks. These also failed. An important though

subtle point is that while he had begun to plant native vegetation, he was

not planting native vegetation as it existed in the past. The natives he

planted were usually limited to forage plants useful to cattle and sheep.

So while Sampson hoped to revegetate the Wasatch Plateau more like

nature ordinarily revegetated it, he still sought to improve the land to a

condition that was better than the original. As it became more obvious

that his improvements would not work on the plateau, Sampson set his

goal on reestablishing what used to grow there.

During its first decade, the condition of the herbaceous

subalpine uplands of the Wasatch Plateau was the main concern of the Great Basin Experiment Station, and Sampson and

other early researchers at the Station were in the forefront of

interpreting this scenario. Three landmark publications were

released during this period (as cited in Ellison 1954): Reynolds

(1911) described the effects of grazing in producing floods;

Sampson and Weyl (1918) studied the effects of grazing on

erosion; and Sampson (1919) studied secondary succession in

relation to range management.

Further quoting from Hall (2001):

Sampson’s experiments therefore indicated that historical—not ecological—research should give the best information about what to plant on

the plateau. After Sampson left Utah in 1922 to become a professor at

Berkeley, one of the main research pursuits at the Great Basin Station was

to determine the plateau’s historic vegetation so that it might be restored.

Lincoln Ellison, who became Sampson’s fourth successor, carried

out the most comprehensive vegetation history of the Wasatch Plateau,

before or since. Beginning in 1938, and for the next fifteen years, Ellison

sought to reveal once and for all the state of the plateau’s flora before it

had been altered by livestock. But Ellison soon discovered that not much

had been recorded about the early plant cover. Local sheep herders and

retired forest rangers provided Ellison with the best historical information. From his 1943 interview with seventy-four-year-old sheep herder,

James Jensen, Ellison corroborated his own hunches and scattered clues

that broad leafed plants (or “forbs”), rather than grasses, originally

covered much of the rolling alpine lands. During the summer of 1942,

he had searched neighboring mountain ranges by horse and foot for

pristine, relic sites to get a better idea of pre-grazing vegetation. In 1954

Ellison published his accumulated findings about the plateau’s pregrazing flora. But he also concluded that even if he could determine what

once grew there, such plants would probably no longer survive and

reproduce anyway. Ellison had come to think that the real problem lay

in soil loss, not in species choice. He was to write that an overgrazed area

may appear to be recovering and may occasionally produce as much as

before. But its soil has not recovered, nor is there much prospect that its

soils will ever recover. The presence of tall grass is a false indicator of

range recovery; such vegetation did not reflect true restoration. Ellison

emphasized that while past land use had done damage, only future land

use might retain what was left. After spending his career searching for

ways to restore the range, Ellison concluded that the alpine meadows

above Ephraim and Manti could never be completely restored. Only

ethical land use could prevent further degradation.

Today, Ellison and his studies on the Wasatch Plateau have

been continually cited as the authority on what is known as the

“tall forb” plant community. This type extends from the

southern Wasatch Range in Utah northward into Montana. It is

characterized by a large array of luxuriant, rather tall (16 to 48

inches [0.4 to 1.2 m]) mesic forbs (fig. 8). In the climax

condition, many species are present without any species dominating (Murray and Mayland 1994).

According to Ellison (1954), natural areas, relic forbs and

grasses in the shelter of shrubs, observation of range under

different degrees of use, and trends in secondary succession

following the elimination of grazing all indicate an original

vegetation of more mesic character than prevails today. Rather

than a singe dominant species over any extensive area, the original

upland-herb association appears to have been a mixture of many

species of tall, rather succulent forbs, grasses, and sedges. The

following species were probably among the most prominent:

Mertensia leonardii Bromus carinatus

Agropyron trachycaulum Bromus anomalus

Valeriana occidentalis Carex festivella

Osmorhiza occidentalis Carex hoodii

Heracleum lanatum Carex raynoldsii

Angelica pinnata Aquilegia coerulea

Polemonium foliosissimum Castelleja sulphurea

Erigeron speciosus Castelleja leonardii

The majority of these species are characteristic of rather

moist sites and are especially relished by sheep. Compared

with them as a group, vegetation of most of the upland-herb

association as it exists under grazing today (1954) is relatively

xeric, with the following dominants: Stipa lettermanii, Taraxacum officinale, Artemisia discolor, Madia glomerata, Penstemon rydbergii, and Geranium richardsonii. It is noted that

Madia glomerata and Chrysothamnus vicidiflorus are absent

from relic or protected spots, and that Stipa lettermanii, Artemisia discolor, and Helenium hoopesii, which are also often

abundant on more heavily grazed range, occur only sporadically (Ellison 1954).

Ellison did question whether the limitations of the small

natural areas and occurrence in the shelter of shrubs of the

same mesic species were representative of the upland-herb
12 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

association as a whole. He concluded that the pristine vegetation must have been more mesic than the vegetation prevailing on the existing grazed range.

Currently, Robert M. Thompson, Range Conservationist on

the Manti-LaSal National Forest, recognizes at least four tall

forb community types on the Wasatch Plateau. This is important to note because we feel that Great Basin Experiment

Station baseline sites of Watersheds A and B, the protected

alpine pasture (all on the west side of Wasatch Plateau), and the

photograph sites (east side of Wasatch Plateau) may not be in

the same plant associations. In fact, documentation provided

by the Rocky Mountain Research Station indicates that the

photograph sites are in different precipitation and climatic

zones (fig. 3).

In the next section we will view the photographic record over

90 years and see how well Sampson’s and Ellison’s interpretations and predictions unfolded. The photographs are not

analytical data, but can provide insight for observations and

possible conclusions. Our interpretations follow the photograph section.

Before viewing the photographs, the reader should be

aware that Ellison based many of his hypotheses on historical

experience and observation. Four main conclusions may be

extracted from his 1954 monograph on vegetation of the

subalpine zone of the Wasatch Plateau:

Figure 8—TYROS AVHRR satellite image showing approximate location of tall forb types within the Intermountain area

(red) (data compiled from Murray and Mayland 1994; Rosiere

2003; Winward 1998; personal observations; and spectrial

reflectance.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 13

1. The induced drier microclimate restricts mesic

species.

Citing from the monograph: “The restricted occurrence of

the mesic species today has an important implication. This

isthat one result of over grazing is a trend toward an increasing

xeric environment. Removal of herbage by overgrazing exposes the soil to wind and sun, and consequent loss of the

normal litter cover has the same effect. Accelerated soil

erosion usually follows, intensifying the induced drought in

several ways, from speeding up the loss of cover to causing

rainfall that would normally augment the soil moisture

supply to be lost as superficial runoff. Under such conditions species that are adapted to a dry environment are found

over those that require more moisture, and a tendency

toward xerophytism results.

Possible drier microclimate ranks equally with selective

grazing and trampling disturbances of the soil in explaining the

changes that have occurred since the white man’s livestock

began to graze.”

2. Grasslands may be the result of selective sheep

grazing.

Citation: “The grass dominated communities on sheep range

are primarily a result of selective grazing. Speaking very

broadly, grasses are less palatable to sheep than forbs, and

under heavy utilization by sheep year after year, forbs are

handicapped and grasses favored. Hence over time forbs tend

to disappear and grasses come to dominate the stand. Achillea

lanulosa, Artemisia discolor, Erigeron ursinus, and Penstemon rydbergia, are codominants in some of these grassdominated communities, partly because they are only slightly

or moderately palatable to sheep no doubt but also because

their rhizomatous growth habit enables them to store food

reserves out of reach of grazing animals, and to make rapid

regrowth after having been grazed, if moisture and warmth

allow. Taraxacum officinale, which does not have rhizomes, is

also a common codominant of grasses in these communities.

The disadvantage of a relatively high palatability in its case

appears to be offset by phenological and morphological adaptations for it flourishes under heavy grazing by sheep and

cattle.”

Note that grazing also removed desirable grass species as

well as the desirable forbs. The resulting grassland species may

not have been significant in the composition of the original

vegetation.

3. Artemisia discolor and Penstemon rydbergii are

invasives introduced by sheep.

Citation: “Artemisia discolor occurred in 1913 principally

on ridges, the areas from which soil is most severely eroded by

sheep in grazing, bedding, and trailing. The extensions of area

between 1913 and 1936 were also on ridges and on southfacing slopes in herbaceous types for the most part, readily

denuded by overgrazing. The fact that this Artemisia is absent

from large areas in the subalpine zone also bears upon the

problem of its origin and spread. Furthermore, all the natural

areas but one is free of it. The evidence for invasion of

ephemeral communities by rhizomatous species like Artemisia

discolor and Penstemon rydbergii exists. It happens that these

two species are extraordinarily persistent under heavy grazing

and on terrain where erosion is rapid. With their rhizomatous

growth form they would have persisted, had they been present,

while bunchgrasses and tap rooted forbs were being eliminated

by extreme overgrazing. If they had been part of the original

vegetation, they should be well distributed today, having held

their ground while other members of the upland-herb association were being destroyed. Because they are obviously invading extensive areas dominated by ephemerals, however, one is

led to doubt whether either of them was part of the original

mixed upland herb association or at any rate a very common

part of it.

Because Artemisia discolor is so commonly found on erosion-pavement areas in the central part of the subalpine zone,

it might be supposed at first sight to be one of the pioneers in

normal succession. However, from the foregoing lines of

evidence, together with the fact that Artemisia is present on few

talus slopes, and on these only in places where the seed may

have easily have been washed in from above, it seems clear that

this species has been introduced.” Note that Artemisia discolor

is now treated as A. michauxiana or A. ludoviciana var.

incompta (Conquist 1994; Welsh and others 2003). The Wasatch Plateau material is best placed as A. ludoviciana var.

incompta. Also, A. ludoviciana var. incompta and Penstemon

rydbergii are treated as native in current systematic treatments

(Conquist 1994; Welsh and others 2003). We recognize that

they may have expanded, but our belief is that Artemisia

discolor and Penstemon rydbergii were not introduced to this

region.

4. Accelerated erosion may continue independently of

vegetation composition.

Citation: “Very great increases in vegetation have occurred in

many parts of the subalpine zone during the last 40 years (1954),

but changes in vegetation on permanent quadrats during the past

decade or two suggest that this upward trend has ceased. It

appears, therefore, that management practices which succeed in

raising the range from the lowest stage in secondary succession

may still not be adequate for continuing improvement.

The fact is also clearly evident that loss of soil by accelerated

erosion acquires a momentum that is increasingly difficult for

vegetation to stop unaided. Accelerated erosion modifies the

site very greatly and the conditions accompanying it have a

great deal to do with the kind of vegetation that succeeds in

becoming established. Because of the difficulty that plants

have in getting established on some eroded slopes, the soil may

continue to erode long after overgrazing is removed.

It is often difficult to distinguish between trends that result

from current grazing and trends set in motion by grazing, or by

other factors, in the distant past. This is one of the major

problems in judging range condition and trend.

There is abundant evidence to show that accelerated erosion

can go on independently of vegetation composition; one must

also consider its amount as an adequacy of protective cover.

Where plants and litter between them cover less than 50 to 75

percent of the surface in the subalpine zone of the Wasatch

Plateau, accelerated erosion is usually manifest.”
14 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Interpretation of the Photo Record _____________

Site A: Head of Big Bear Creek Looking East at Danish Knoll

Figure 9—Site A, August 25, 1921—View of three of the early enclosures established by the

Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Transmountain water ditch is in the foreground.

Note the denuded aspect of the landscape, particularly along the drainages. Large gullies and rills are

apparent. Photo site C is at the enclosure on the upper left of this picture. Danish Knoll is in left middle.

Figure 10—Site A, August 22, 1941—Note the increase in ground cover. Grasses appear to be

establishing, and the large gullies and rills are more stable. The major drainage bottoms and

immediate side slopes still appear bare. The water in the ditch is from melting snowbanks.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 15

Figure 11—Site A, August 1972—Ground cover

has continued to increase. Note that slender

wheatgrass (Agropyron) and Letterman’s

needlegrass (Stipa) now dominate the aspect. It

is easy to see Sampson’s and Ellison’s

interpretations that grasslands were either part of

the climax vegetation or increased with sheep

grazing.

Figure 12—Site A, August 30, 1990—Note the

increase of herbaceous sagebrush. Grasses are

still apparent, but have decreased. It is important

to note that Ellison stated this was not an early

successional stage, but an opportunistic species.

The main drainage into Bear Creek on the right

has stabilized significantly.

Figure 13—Site A, September 4, 2003—

Herbaceous sage still dominates the foreground,

but note the site now contains a mixture of taller

forbs (Viguiera multiflora) andshrubs (Sambucus

racemosa). Grasses are dominant on the flatter

aspects. Note the landscape is taking on a

mixture of many vegetation species. Ground

cover is still lacking on slopes in the middle of the

picture. These oblique photographs are

somewhat deceptive in that they overrepresent

the amount of ground cover. Note the water in

the transmountain ditch. Irrigation water is

captured on the east side of the Wasatch Plateau

divide and transported back to the west side for

irrigation purposes by means of tunnels.
16 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Site B: Head of Big Bear Creek Looking West

Figure 14—Site B, August 19, 1943—Ellison’s caption reads: “An ephemeral community on an

eroding slope in which perennials are invading – elevation 10,000 ft.” Note the amount of bare soil

on this site even after the Manti National Forest had been created 40 years before.

Figure 15—Site B, August 29, 1948—Lincoln Ellison retook this photo in 1948. Caption: “Note

grasses have invaded the gullies along the sheep trail on the contour, also spread of Artemisia

discolor in immediate foreground. Grasses are pedestalled, and it is doubtful whether they can

invade fast enough under present grazing pressure to control erosion on this slope” (/s/ L. Ellison).
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 17

Figure 16—Site B, August 1972—Grass

species dominate the site. The main drainage

channel is still barren, with the occurrence of

herbaceous sage in this channel bottom.

Figure 17—Site B, August 30, 1990—Grasses

have decreased and herbaceous sagebrush

dominates the site. Note the lateral spreading of

the sage through its rhizomatous growth form.

The drainage channel still seems to be actively

eroding as witnessed by the rock and erosion

pavement in the bottom. Soil loss seems to be

several inches relative to the drainage bottom

since the last photograph. This substantiates

Ellison’s projection that erosion in drainage

bottoms would continue on these sites even with

the establishment of vegetation.

Figure 18—Site B, September 4, 2003—Note

the reestablishment of grasses in the drainage

channel. Erosion and overland flow of soils seems

to have decreased. Herbaceous sage is now

codominant with grasses, having lost its spreading

clump growth form. Dr. Richard Gill (personal

communication) reports that this breakup of a

rhizomatous growth form is consistent with other

rhizomatous species during drought.
18 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Site C: Danish Knoll Enclosure

Figure 19—Site C, August 3, 1932—Caption: “The soil is badly eroded and organic matter content

is extremely low. Records on this hillside begin in 1916 when the original vegetation had been

completely destroyed, and erosion had been so extreme that, except for scattered patches of Achillea

and Sambucus, the soil surface was barren.”

Figure 20—Site C, June 30, 1947—Caption: “Bunchgrasses are mostly Agropyron trachycaulum.

A road now runs along the contour above the enclosure and this appears to have acted as a terrace,

checking runoff from higher on the slope. Even so, erosion of the lower slope has been marked in this

brief period, as alluvial deposits and exposure of rocks in gullies show. Vegetation has increased since

1932, particularly Agropyron trachycaulum and Taraxacum officinale, but soil erosion has continued

rapidly as shown by the exposure of new rocks.”
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 19

Figure 23—Site C, September 4, 2003—Note

the establishment of ground cover on the lower

half of the hillside below the enclosure. The

sediment deposited at the bottom of the slope

now supports a vigorous community of mesic

species that include Carex and Deschampsia

caespitosa; however, a head cut moving up the

drainage from the right will bear watching in the

future.

Figure 21—Site C, August 1972—Not too

much notable change in the last 25 years. Some

increases in grass density are apparent.

Figure 22—Site C, August 30, 1990—Soil loss

continues in the area below the enclosure. Note

the increase of exposed rock fragments in the

rills. However, the soil is accumulating at the toe

of the slope and now is starting to support a more

mesic habitat.
20 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Site D: South Side of Danish Knoll Enclosure

Figure 24—Site D, August 3, 1932—This photograph was probably taken to monitor the gully that

was developing to the side of the mound of grass. Note the amount of raw area. This clump of grass

appears to be introduced meadow foxtail.

Figure 25—Site D, September 31, 1944—Caption: “Shows general lowering of soil level.” This site

appears to be heavily trampled by sheep as they trailed around the end of the enclosure. Large

amounts of bare soil are exposed.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 21

Figure 26—Site D, August 1972—This photo

shows the stabilization of the active gully surfaces

and the increase in Taraxacum officinale. Grasses

are reestablishing and spreading out.

Figure 27—Site D, August 30, 1990—Grass

and ground cover have been lost. Note the active

sheet erosion that is occurring, and a rhizomatous

patch of herbaceous sage is trying to establish

itself adjacent to the enclosure. The disturbance

on this site is probably related to sheep trailing

and trampling.

Figure 28—Site D, September 4, 2003—Not

much change in vegetation, but active rills and

small gullies have formed from the overland flow

of water. Note the extensive sheet erosion.

Disturbance on this site is probably a localized

occurrence. The trees on the horizon have been

killed by spruce budworm.
22 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Site E: Area Between Danish Knoll and Cox’s Knoll on Wagon

Ridge Road

Figure 29—Site E, September 15, 1917—Caption: “Heavily

overgrazed area. Road can hardly be distinguished from bare soil

beside it.” Note the mature aspen in the top center of the picture.

Other than aspen and conifer, no other vegetation is visible on this

site. This was one of the most overgrazed and abused areas on

the Wasatch Plateau; it is near an old bed ground and holding area.

Figure 30—Site E, August 22, 1941—Caption: “Not so heavily grazed today.” Grasses seem to be

coming into the site, and ground cover is starting to accumulate.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 23

Figure 33—Site E, September 4, 2003—Note

the increase in herbaceous sagebrush. Sheet

erosion appears to have been reduced or has

stabilized. Rock fragments on the surface have

increased significantly. The young aspen in the

photo have now grown to over 10 ft high, showing

that aspen can regenerate itself on the Wasatch

Plateau at the 10,000-ft elevation.

Figure 31—Site E, August 1972—Note the

grass dominance on the site. Ground cover has

increased along with some herbaceous sage

increase. The amount of white rock fragments

on the surface indicates soil turnover from frost

heaving.

Figure 32—Site E, August 30, 1990—Note the

further increase in white rock fragments on the

surface. This indicates continuing soil dynamics.

Grasses and herbaceous sage now codominate

the site. Of interest and encouragement is the

aspen regeneration coming in under the mature

stands. This is probably accountable to the

reduced grazing season of sheep use. Aspen

suckers are most susceptible to sheep grazing

in late September and early October when sheep

run out of feed or existing feed becomes very dry

(Alma Winward, personal communication).
24 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Site F: Cox’s Knoll Snowbank

Figure 34—Site F, October 21, 1940 (general view)—Looking southwest at Cox’s Knoll. These high

ridges have historically been traditional sheep bed grounds. Caption: “A snow bank area on Wagon

Road Ridge, showing progressively severe accelerated erosion, right of center.”

Figure 35—Site F, October 21, 1940 (Detail)—Caption from monograph: “Snow bank area on a

steep east-facing slope where a snowdrift accumulates each winter. Remnants of Delphinium barbeyi

indicate that this slope was formerly covered with a tall-forb community, and the depth and character

of soil in places indicate that the original cover was luxuriant. The gullies, initially formed by occasional

summer storms, are now kept open and enlarged by snowmelt every spring. Dark, slanting lines

[across the steep slopes in the center of the photo] are sheep trails.”
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 25

Figure 36—Site F, August 1972 (general view)—Some smoothing out of the snowbank area in

background. Note the grassland dominance of the basin. Serviceberry and grass cover have

increased in foreground.

Figure 37—Site F, August 1972 (detail)—Vegetation is starting to reestablish on peripheral areas

of the snowbank, especially top, bottom, and left side of photo. White exposed limestone in 1940 has

weathered and decomposed losing its distinctive color, an indication of stabilization. Some of the rills

appear to be active. Grass has covered the base area of the bank.
26 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Figure 38—Site F, August 30, 1990 (general view)—Note the hedging of the serviceberry

(Symphoricarpus) in the foreground. Continued grass domination of the basin; however, note the

yellow rabbitbrush community coming in from the left side of the photo (north).

Figure 39—Site F, August 30, 1990 (detail)—Note the continued cutting of slopes by water as

evidenced by exposed white rock fragments. Upper portion of the slope appears to have lost 8 to 9

inches of soil since 1972. Shrubs are trying to establish on the eroded areas.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 27

Figure 40—Site F, September 4, 2003 (general view)—The bright green areas under the

snowbank in the background are the type site for the tall forb vegetation. Foreground and basin

have lost density and ground cover of grass species and may be in transition to a yellow rabbitbrush

mixed community. The site contains many remnants of a historic grass community. Sheet erosion

seems more prevalent. Photo site “G” is to the far left of this picture and views diagonally across

this basin (Robert M. Thompson in photograph).

Figure 41—Site F, September 4, 2003 (detail)—This snow bank area has numerous species of

vegetation establishing across the steepened face. The rills stabilized only when enough rock was

exposed to protect the surface from runoff. Note the large amount of sediment accumulation at the

base of the slope and the vegetation established upon it.
28 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Site G: Wagon Road Ridge East of Cox’s Knoll

Figure 42—Site G, September 15, 1917—View looking north. Although the

elevation is 10,000 ft, this site is about 2 1/2 miles east of the crest of the Plateau

and therefore outside of the influence of large snowbanks and leeward cirques.

Here it appears that the environment has always been drier and more xeric.

Exposure to perennial winds is also greater.

Figure 43—Site G, August 22, 1941—Caption: “Mat of Mulenbergia richardsenis (M. squarrosa)

tending to exclude other species. Yellowbrush appears to be invading, but very slowly.”
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 29

Figure 46—Site G, September 4, 2003—

Grasses have decreased, and yellow rabbitbrush

seems to be increasing in density. Also, note the

increase of the blue-colored Antennaria rosea,

which has a low mat-forming growth form. Those

species currently present indicate an increasingly

xeric site. Soils on this site appear to be extremely

shallow with the white parent material near the

surface. On the Wasatch Plateau, yellow

rabbitbrush may be considered a persistent

increaser on drier sites (Robert M. Thompson,

personal communication).

Figure 44—Site G, August 1972—Mat of

Muhlenbergia is completely absent. Yellow

rabbitbrush and Stipa predominate. It appears

that more soil is exposed between the perennial

plants and some ground cover has been lost.

Figure 45—Site G, August 30, 1990—Not

much change, although there seems to be more

ground cover. A few remnant plants of

Muhlenbergia richardsonis were found at the

camera point on this site.
30 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Site H: Wagon Road Ridge Near White Knoll, Five and One-Half

Miles East of the Plateau Crest

Figure 47—Site H, September 15, 1917—Caption: “Aspen and grasses in competition for soil

moisture. Aspen dying...showing thickened cover (rabbit brush) on heavily grazed sheep range. Note

development of erosion pavement.” Lincoln Ellison used this site in his monograph as an example

of a yellow rabbitbrush community. He postulated that: “the origin of these shrub-dominated

communities seems to be the same as the origin of grass-dominated communities: denudation of the

original cover and dominance of ephemeral species, followed by invasion of persistent perennials—

in this case, low shrubs. As with Stipa lettermanii, the increase of Chrysothamnus has evidently been

helped, not only by the destruction of the original mesophytic herbaceous cover but by a general

spread of xeric conditions accompanying overgrazing and accelerated erosion.”

Figure 48—Site H, August 22, 1941—Caption from Ellison’s monograph: “Close observation reveals

evidence of active erosion, despite more effective soil protection. Aspen in background is dying out

because of sunscald and because root sprouts are annually browsed off to the ground by sheep.”
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 31

Figure 51—Site H, September 4, 2003—Yellow

rabbitbrush is still prevalent; however, it is

codominant with grass species. Ground cover

may have increased. Note the high lining of the

new aspen stems by current sheep grazing. The

leeward capture of snow drifts by pioneer species,

such as these limber pine, may be critical to the

reestablishment of the more mesic species such

as aspen on these drier sites. Historically, this

site was probably a grassland that was maintained

by ground fires.

Figure 49—Site H, August 1972—Looking

north. Site appears to be losing its rabbitbrush

domination and progressing into a grass

association. Note increase of limber pine in

background.

Figure 50—Site H, August 30, 1990—This

area does not appear to have had significant

grazing use in the last few years. Desirable

species are increasing. Note the aspen

regeneration under the decadent stand.
32 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Site I: Wagon Road Ridge Near White Knoll, 100 Yards East of

Photo Site H

Figure 52—Site I, September 15, 1917—Caption: “Later stages of succession. Grasses (Stipa and

Agropyron) in foreground, Ribes in middle background, and aspen and fir in the far background.”

Figure 53—Site I, August 22, 1941—Caption: “Many of the dead Ribes have disappeared; their

stumps can be found. Evidence of hedging indicates that this change is not one of autogenic

succession. Note establishment of grasses between yellowbrush.”
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 33

Figure 56—Site I, September 4, 2003—Yellow

rabbitbrush and grasses are codominants. Note

the young aspen. The two large limber pines on

the left, including the dead one, have large fire

scars, indicating that the area frequently burned

and the vegetation supported ground fires.

Figure 54—Site I, August 1972—Rabbitbrush

appears to be losing its dominance to grass

species. No indication is left that Ribes once

occupied the site. Note the growth of the limber

pines during the last 30 years.

Figure 55—Site I, August 30, 1990—This site

and immediately behind the camera point are in

transition. Aspen is going out and grass is

increasing. Limber pines are systematically

invading the open range type.
34 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Site J: Looking Northeast From the North Side of Danish Knoll

Figure 57—Site J, August 22, 1913—Caption: “Patch of tall larkspur on top of mountain. Other

species: yarrow and Penstemon.” The presence of tall larkspur on this site would indicate it once had

mesic conditions to support a tall forb community.

Figure 58—Site J, August 22, 1941—Caption: “Yarrow, Penstemon, and sweet sage are still

important and grasses—Stipa, Agropyron, and Trisetum—are now conspicuous.” Note the

disappearance of tall larkspur and the old enclosure as the site becomes more xeric.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 35

Figure 61—Site J, September 4, 2003—

Ground cover is much more prevalent and sheet

erosion is not too noticeable. Herbaceous

sagebrush is more dominant with Penstemon

and brome grass continuing as codominants.

The lower left corner of the photograph is almost

entirely tar weed (Madia glomerata). Note the

mortality of the conifers caused by spruce

budworm. The small patches of red elderberry

(Sambucus racemosa) are still hanging on.

Figure 59—Site J, August 1972—A heavy

infestation of pocket gophers has left the area

almost totally denuded of vegetation. This is one

of the few localized areas observed on the

Wasatch Plateau where pocket gophers caused

this significant amount of damage. Ellison stated,

“It seems quite clear that the pocket gopher is

important as an agent in soil development, in

mixing and aerating the soil. He (gophers) is also

a potent factor in speeding accelerated erosion.”

This area was seeded by helicopter in September

1972, but there is no indication that any of the

seeding established.

Figure 60—Site J, August 30, 1990—Gopher

activity has ceased, and several species such as

Artemisia discolor, Penstemon rydbergii, and

Madia glomerata are invading the site. Some

grass (Bromus carinatus) appears to be

interspersed in the site along with Helenium

hoopsii.
36 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Site K: One-Half Mile North of Danish Knoll, Looking North Into

Little Pete’s Hole

Figure 62—Site K, August 22, 1913—Caption: “Yarrow range on top of mountain.”

Figure 63—Site K, August 22, 1941—Caption: “A currant has become established in one corner of

the broken-down enclosure. Predominant species: Penstemon, Taraxacum, andStipa. Achillea is still

important, but no longer predominant.”
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 37

Figure 64—Site K, August 1972—The site appears to have increased in grass species. Taraxacum

is no longer conspicuous. Continued soil exposure. Penstemon and Stipa predominate.

Figure 65—Site K, August 30, 1990—The current bush that once was in the historical enclosure is

barely hanging on. Ground cover has decreased and tar weed has increased on the site.
38 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Figure 66—Site K, September 4, 2003—Site is now dominated by Penstemon and herbaceous

sage. Note the circular colonizing growth pattern. Ground cover has increased. Herbaceous sage

and Pen-stemon are able to stabilize the site because of their rhizomatous growth system. The

single currant bush has been replaced with a red elderberry. Photo site L is on the far ridge above

the white limestone cliff.

Figure 67—Site K, September 4, 2003 (supplemental)—From previous photo point looking

directly west. Active head cutting by melting snow is still occurring on upland slopes with existing

grazing use. However, notice that sediment is accumulating in a short distance and being stabilized

by grasses.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 39

Site L: Tom’s Ridge

Figure 68—Site L, September 12, 1919—Site appears to be mostly Penstemon.

Figure 69—Site L, August 13, 1925—Some evidence of gopher activity as seen from the dirt

mounds. Penstemon and herbaceous sage predominate.
40 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Figure 70—Site L, September 19, 1940—Grasses are now dominant. Note the dirt mounds to the

lower left of the photograph.

Figure 71—Site L, August 1972—Site has changed from predominantly a grass type to a grass-forb

association. Stipa, Penstemon, and Achillea predominate. There is no record of what caused this

transition in the interim 32 years.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 41

Figure 73—Site L, September 4, 2003—This area has continued to improve. Ground cover ranges

from 40 to 60 percent with a mixture of forbs and grasses. However, it still cannot be classified as a

mesic site. We can see that historically, the site went through many of the same grazing and erosional

impacts that the other photograph sites did. Plant species present are similar to other photo sites at

this elevation and include Erigeron speciosus, Achillea lanulosa, Penstemon rydbergii, Artemisia

discolor, Stipa lettermanii, and Lathyrus leucanthus.

Figure 72—Site L, August 30, 1990—Ground cover appears to have increased along with a mixture

of several forb and grass species.
42 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Figure 74—Vegetation on Wagon Road Ridge was once dense enough to have supported ground fires,

as indicated by these fire scars on limber pines.

Observations ___________________

Although Arthur Sampson and Lincoln Ellison did not have

the benefit of almost 90 years of photo records, when viewing

the sequence of photographs it is admirable that they were able

to interpret many of the ecological and physical processes we

see today. Still, Ellison and Sampson would probably be

surprised at the prolongation of secondary succession that

evolved into stable state and transition ecology we observe

today.

It is known that high-elevation ranges are fragile and take a

long time to recover, if ever, from extreme past overgrazing

and resulting soil loss. They are not simple, easily understood

systems. We were not able to quantify one important variable

in the recovery of the sites: Is a lack of seed sources one of the

reasons many areas are taking so long to recover (Monsen

2004)? It is of note that many species found in protected

recovering areas west of the Wasatch Plateau do not yet occur

or occur in only a few sites on the east side of the Plateau where

the photo sites exist.

Here are some general observations:

• The Wasatch Plateau appears to have long been a mosaic

of different plant communities, and not a single community type. Size and distribution of the communities have

shifted and been modified by grazing. Even light grazing

keeps the communities in the current state. From our

observations, we postulate that the subalpine portions of

the Wasatch Plateau adjacent to the Sky Line Drive were

once one of the tall forb associations or series. The longer

ridges running to the east such as Wagon Road Ridge

were most likely grass, grass-forb, or grass-shrub dominated. Fire scars on large trees (fig. 74) in this area

indicate a pristine vegetation that would support ground

fires (Thompson 2004).

• We suspect that moisture and climate-driven environments played a key role in the distribution of the original

vegetation mosaics. Appendix B includes species lists

from protected tall forb communities on the west side of

the Wasatch Plateau. Although not considered fully
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 43

recovered, these sites represent an insight on the progression of the communities. Also included are species

lists for each of the photo plot sites for comparison.

• Artemisia discolor (A. ludoviciana var. incompta in

current taxonomic terms), Penstemon rydbergii, and to

some extent Orthocarpus tolmiei forb communities are

adaptive as opportunists. Other late seral native vegetation does not effectively compete with them on the same

site until accelerated erosion stabilizes. Even Stipa

lettermanii and Bromus carinatus, which the authors

considered increaser grasses, may be considered in this

classification. This assumption is based on the pretext

that a seed source does exist for this late seral vegetation.

Ellison (1954) postulated: “...we are dealing with secondary succession on accelerated erosion.” On the realistic side, we do not believe in calling these species

“invaders” as did Ellison. They should probably be

called opportunists, increasers, or “saver watershed species” because without their rapid pioneering onto accelerated erosion areas and rhizomatous growth form holding the soil in place, sheet erosion, head cutting, and

mudflows on the Wasatch Plateau would have been

much more severe. These species may also be favored

by climatic and soil conditions such as frost heaving and

summer precipitation. Ellison documents the introduction and spreading of these species in his monograph.

All photo sites (A through L) indicate this observation.

We have also observed that Artemisia discolor and

Orthocarpus tolmiei are dominant species on accelerated erosion areas, and may be used as indicator species

to that event. Penstemon rydbergii is dominant on deeper

soil areas where some sheet erosion is still prevalent or

where soils have been disturbed by pocket gophers, frost

heaving, and so forth.

• Soil loss continues on some areas as sheet erosion, head

cutting, or rills until parent rock material is exposed or

until vegetation cover is sufficient to stabilize the area.

Ellison postulated this fact and our observations on sites

A through F show the same outcome. The increase of rock

and rock fragments on the soil surface may also be the

result of the turning of the soil and/or cobble sites being

pushed up by frost or pocket gophers.

• Sediment will accumulate in lower areas or at the base

of erosive slopes. Historically, this sediment just washed

down the larger drainages. Mesic plant species have

established on these sediment accumulation areas. Here

species of Carex and other graminoids such as

Deschampsia caespitosa and Phleum alpinum seem to

be taking hold (sites B, C, and F). However, these areas

are susceptible to head cutting if the drainage areas

above have significant overland flow during snowmelt.

• Assessing vegetative trends is extremely difficult on

transitional sites. Yearly changes in composition and

dominance based on phenology and precipitation (fig. 75)

seem to be the rule. Typically, in the summer, increaser

forbs dominate, but by fall, cool-season grasses produce

seed and dominate after the forbs have become succinct.

On drier years, herbaceous sage is a fall dominant, while

on moist years, grasses are fall dominates. Fall grassdominated sites decrease with drought, particularity with

lessened summer moisture. Increases in moisture seem to

benefit all species due to lessened competition for soil

moisture.

• Climate-driven mechanisms may be more important in

determining vegetation. In drier microclimates, yellow

rabbitbrush increases on the more xeric of these threshold

grass sites (sites E through I). The following tabulation

illustrates this dynamic between grasses and shrubs in the

White Knoll area of Wagon Road Ridge (Thompson

2004):

Lewis (1993) projected that in the drier portions of the

Plateau where needle grass and yellow rabbitbrush exist

today, they would most likely continue to maintain their

dominance.

• Selective grazing by sheep under current timing, intensity, and duration continues to suppress or eliminate

desirable plant species or those species thought to be in

the original vegetation. Preliminary work by Gill (2004)

shows that soil effects, as a result of grazing and compaction, include (1) lower microbes, (2) lower respiration,

and (3) lower production. In addition, the combination of

litter removal and soil compaction lowered soil moisture,

particularly in late summer. Sheep grazing may also

increase the opportunistic grass species due to selective

grazing as Ellison (1954) suggested. Lewis (1993) found,

with studies conducted in exclosures and in settings

where livestock grazing had been considerably reduced,

that a gradual shift was taking place back to tall forbdominated communities. Rhizomatous, somewhat lower

statured forb species, such as Penstemon rydbergii (fig.

76), Achillea millefolium, and Artemisia ludoviciana

(michauxiana) were gradually replaced by luxuriant,

often taller species of forbs.

• Aspen will regenerate and reestablish itself in the subalpine

zone if protected from sheep grazing (sites E, H, and I).

• From an ecosystem approach, there has been catastrophic

mortality in the subalpine fir conifer communities due to

spruce budworm along the entire Wasatch Plateau. This

insect epidemic is probably a result of fire suppression

over the last 100 years.

Percent composition by weight

1983 1987 1998 2004

Grasses 58.0 49.1 58.8 43.7

Forbs 18.1 30.7 24.9 24.9

Shrubs 24.0 20.1 16.1 30.9
44 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Thus, after nearly 90 years we can see the changes, but do not

completely know their cause. And we find ourselves in the

same position as Ellison (1954) who wrote 50 years ago:

The man assigned the management of...rangeland faces problems

whose final solutions require years of scientific study, but he is expected

to deliver immediate answers that are both correct and practical. With

the help of a few ecological principles he must be his own scientist, and

by observation ascertain what standards he can use for range in ideal

condition, on a variety of sites.

Conclusions____________________

Our current knowledge of plant ecology started with early

contributions from such men as Sampson and Ellison, and has

continued to progress. We believe we are starting to understand why recovery on the Wasatch Plateau has been so

prolonged. Within these complex ecosystems, there are many

variables in landscape ecology; climate and livestock management interact and have formed the resulting plant communities. A plant community that has lost most of its topsoil and

supports vegetation different from the original community

seems to reach various levels that appear to be stable (Moir

1989). This is evident by Ellison’s (1954) observations that

heavily grazed sites appeared to initially recover rapidly when

livestock were removed, but then stabilized and ceased recovering. The west side of the Wasatch Plateau, on areas that have

been protected from sheep grazing, have taken nearly 100

years to resemble what was perhaps an original tall forb

community, and a good deal of the plant succession toward that

community has taken place only in the last 30 years.

With the continuing soil loss on most of these sites, site

potential will continue to change and succession will not move

toward a new stable state. This recognition and the climatedriven annual and seasonal variation in species composition

Figure 75—Photos on site E showing change in dominance due to phenology and seasonal

precipitation. Left to right: fall 2003 (drought year), herbaceous sage dominant; summer 2004,

owl clover and grasses dominant; and fall 2004 (moist year), grasses dominant.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 45

Figure 76—Penstemon rhydbergii is an opportunistic or increaser species on the Wasatch Plateau.

leads us to shift our emphasis from observing community

composition to soil- and hydrology-based indicators (that is,

stability, precipitation, moisture-holding capacity, and litter) if

we are to effectively evaluate current rangeland condition or

health. Monitoring should emphasize soil and hydrologic

indicators until the soil is stabilized, then species composition

will become a more useful indicator of rangeland health. Initial

monitoring of community composition should focus on the

ability, or lack thereof, of species to stabilize the soil.

As part of this rangeland health assessment, threshold

identification is necessary for recognizing which plant communities can potentially occupy a site. We need to be able to

predict how thresholds may respond to restoration and/or

management practices. Thresholds can be categorized into

two general groups: the first group involves structural or

compositional thresholds based on changes in community

composition, plant growth, and invasive or increaser species

such as yellow rabbitbrush; and the second group involves

ecosystem function thresholds based on changes in soil and

hydrologic properties, nutrient cycling, and productivity as

in the herbaceous sage types (Briske and others 2005).

There are several mechanisms interacting and defining the

two groups of thresholds. They are currently taking place on

all sites and influence the establishment and growth of

respective plant communities (concepts taken from Bowman

2004). The first is the development of the soil. When secondary succession stabilizes a site and erosion ceases, soil

development can resume. We see this happening on the

Tom’s Ridge site. Soil development also includes nitrogen

fixation. Some plant species such as legumes support symbiotic bacteria in their roots. The bacteria transform atmospheric nitrogen to a molecular form, usable by living organisms. There are several of these types of plants in stable tall

forb communities. It would seem that increaser species (Penstemon and herbaceous sage) on secondary succession sites

may have lower requirements for nitrogen and other nutrients, or are able to assimilate their own nutrients from other

sources. We suspect that some observed conditions are the
46 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

result of nitrogen depletion. Legumes such as Vicia americana

and Lathyrus leucanthus are two of the early nitrogen-fixing

species we have observed on the eroding sites.

The presence of mycorrhizae (mutualistic symbiosis of

plants and fungi) is another important function in facilitation.

Early successional species stimulate the infection of roots of

later successional species with mycorrhizal fungi, increasing

their ability to take up phosphorus (P). Respiration in the soil

through microbial activity and decomposition of organic matter are important soil development processes.

Perhaps most important in soil development is the increase of

water-holding capacity. The greater the soil’s organic matter, or

the finer the soil particles resulting from weathering, and so

forth, the more water the soil is able to hold. Loss of waterholding capability and drier microclimate ties into Ellison’s

(1954) interpretation of why yellow rabbitbrush is so persistent.

There are two ways that one plant species can restrict or

inhibit the growth of another commonly observed on the

Wasatch front:

1. Alleopathy—A decrease in the germination of seeds and

lower survivorship of new plants. This is frequently seen with

woody sagebrush and conifer species where shed leaves may

contain chemical growth inhibitors or create a highly acid pH

in the soil. Tar weed (Madia glomerata) and owl clover

(Orthocarpus tolmiei) fall into this category along with their

low palatability to grazing ungulates (site K).

2. Competition—This is usually for soil nutrients, soil

moisture, and later for light. We observe this in the round

clone growth form of Artemisia discolorand Penstemon rybergii

and their rhizomatous roots. Being able to adapt and grow on

soils that are erosive and low in nutrients, and possessing

morphological characteristics to out-compete other plant

species are distinct advantages.

Disturbances were the causal factor for transitional states on

the Wasatch Plateau. The large spatial scale of this disturbance

contributes to the low recovery rate. How much of a community is disturbed is critical in determining the response (succession). Large-scale disturbances have a greater effect on climate

(exposure to winds, drier soils) and availability of plants

(seeds) for colonization. The frequency of disturbance is also

important. The turning of the soil and the pushing up of rocks

and fragments by frost and freezing (turbation) is probably

keeping many of the sites on the Wasatch Plateau in a constantly changing state.

Pocket gophers may be affecting the recovery. Gophers have

always inhabited the Wasatch Plateau, and soil castings from

these rodents can be observed over broad areas. Ellison (1954)

stated that pocket gophers were not a primary cause of accelerated erosion on the Wasatch Plateau; however, we observe

their castings on most of the photo sites. During the early

1970s, site “J” had reached an epidemic infestation of this

animal, which destroyed even the increaser plant species.

Perhaps paramount in restricting recovery on many sites is

today’s livestock grazing. Although just a small fraction of what

historically caused the greatest impacts, it still has an effect on

the environment. Selective grazing and soil compaction

undoubtedly have an effect in terms of losses of desired plant

species, organic matter, and soil respiration. In addition, the

reduction of organic matter by grazingreduces boththe availability of nutrients and soil water-holding capacity. It is easy to

observe on most of the photo sites that vast amounts of top soil

were lost historically, and sheet erosion and in some instances

accelerated erosion are ongoing occurrences on some sites today

(sites C, D, and F). On more productive sites, there has been an

impressive resurgence of young aspen even in the subalpine

zone as a result of adjusted livestock use over the last 30 years.

We also suspect some communities are mere chance assemblages of different species with similar environmental preferences. The presence or absence of species, yearly viable seed

production, and summer precipitation may play important roles

in determining the final outcome of a community. With the

amount of soil turning by gophers and frost heaving encountered, chance may play an important role in which vegetation

species dominates the next year. Many sites will also change

rapidly in dominance and composition based on phenology and

seasonal precipitation. These communities of chance may be

considered as semidynamic thresholds and should not be confused with preferential or original vegetation on these sites.

Long-term climate change has not been analyzed, although

we are aware of a persistent drought over the last 6 years and

other periods of drought during the last 100 years. We do not

know if global climate change is introducing variables we are

not aware of. Some unanswered questions include: Has the

amount of summer precipitation changed? Is the reduction of

flooding during the last 60 years totally the result of improved

watershed health, or is there a change in the pattern of summer

high-intensity thunderstorms? These need more study.

Climate-driven plant associations are what we see on many

sites today. The rapid change yearly between increaser forb

dominance and increaser grass dominance appears to be

precipitation driven. Researchers and administrators since

Sampson have confused this phenomenon with plant succession. Not until the soils are stabilized and erosion stops will

the sites return to natural soil development processes that in

turn will lead to a return of historical vegetation types.

Climate may also have been a historical factor in allowing

ground fires to burn into the subalpine zone on the extreme

eastward side of the Plateau on areas such as Wagon Road

Ridge. These would have maintained openings by restricting

conifer invasion (primarily limber pine) and provided age class

diversity within conifer communities to prevent epidemic

insect infestations.

Recommendations ______________

1. Rangeland condition or health evaluation should shift

from emphasis of plant community composition to soil and

hydrology-based indicators. Research should continue on

why stabilization and recovery occur on some sites and not

on others. Ongoing monitoring should emphasize soil and

hydrologic indicators until the soils are stabilized; then,

species composition will become a more useful indicator of
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 47

rangeland health. This monitoring of community composition should focus on the ability, or lack thereof, of species to

stabilize the soil.

2. The current vegetation on many sites does not have the

composition observed historically, nor are soils stable on these

sites. Explore if seed sources for native desirable species are

available. Identify thresholds that can occupy the same site

while recognizing that they are difficult to define and quantify

because they represent a complex series of interacting components rather than discrete boundaries in time and space .

3. Broad areas of secondary succession communities that are

not producing more vegetation than is needed to prevent

unacceptable erosions rates should be deferred from supporting domestic livestock grazing until a stable state forb or grassforb community is present. Traditionally, these deferred areas

have been small localized areas such as snowbanks, gullies,

and so forth. Protection at a larger scale is needed to maintain

watershed health.

4. Correlation needs to be made between historic summer

precipitation and high-intensity thunderstorms, and weather

patterns and seasonal precipitation of today.

5. Short-term monitoring should be undertaken to document

domestic livestock movement and distribution patterns on the

photo site areas. Documentation should include avoidance of

recreation use, perennial water sources use including the transmountain ditches, and the terrain utilized.

References _____________________

Antrei, Albert C. T. 1982. Zion stands with hills surrounded. In: Antrei, Albert

C.T.; Scow, Ruth D., eds. The other forty-niners, and topical history of Sanpete

County, Utah, 1849–1963. Salt Lake City, UT: Western Notes: 193–231.

Bowman, William. 2004. Ecology and evolutionary biology. University

of Colorado, Boulder, CO. Available: http://www.colorado.edu/

epob3020bowman htm pages 011-024 [June 2004].

Briske, D. D.; Fuhlendorf, S. D.; Smeins, F. E. 2005. State-and-transition

models, thresholds, and rangeland health: a synthesis of ecological concepts and perspectives. Rangeland Ecology and Management. 58(1).

Conquist, Arthur. 1994. Asterales. Vol. 5. Intermountain flora, vascular plants

of the Intermountain West, USA. Bronx, NY: New York Botanical Garden.

496 p.

Ellison, Lincoln. 1949. The ecological basis for judging condition and trend on

mountain rangeland. Journal of Forestry. 47: 787–795.

Ellison, Lincoln. 1954. Sub alpine vegetation of the Wasatch Plateau, Utah.

Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain

Forest and Range Experiment Station. Reprinted from Ecological Monographs. 24: 89–184.

Geary, Edward A. 1992. The proper edge of the sky. Salt Lake City, UT:

University of Utah. 282 p.

Geary, Edward A. 2003. Stories of the Manti National Forest. Provo, UT:

Brigham Young University, Department of English. 13 p.

Gill, Richard A. 2003. Washington State University, [Online]. Available:

www.wsu.edu/~rgill/index.htm [June 2004].

Gill, Richard A. 2004. [Personal communications]. Washington State University. July 28, 2004. Ephraim, UT.

Hall, Marcus. 2001. Repairing mountains—restoration, ecology, and wilderness in twentieth-century Utah. Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL,

[Online]. Available: http://www.wsl.ch/staff/marcus.hall/Hall_

Repairing_Mtns_2001 [September 2004].

Hindley, C. Earl; Brown, James E.; Scherick, Edward R.; Curtis, Paul; Forrest,

Jimmie A. 2000. Photographic history of vegetation and stream channel

changes in San Juan County, Utah. Supported by San Juan County, Charles

Redd Foundation, and Utah State University Extension: 2–3.

Keck, Wendall M. 1972. Great Basin Station—sixty years of progress in range

and watershed research. Res. Pap. INT-118. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 48 p.

Lewis, Mont E. 1976. [Personal communications]. Ferron, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Manti-LaSal National Forest.

Lewis, Mont E. 1993 Successional changes in the tall forb type of the Wasatch

Plateau. Unpublished Report. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Forest Service, Intermountain Region. 73 p.

McArthur, E. Durant. 1992. In memoriam—A. Perry Plummer (1911–1991):

Teacher, naturalist, range scientist. Great Basin Naturalist. 52: 1–10.

McArthur, E. Durant; Monsen, Stephen B. 1996 Great Basin Experimental

Range. In: Schmidt, Wyman C.; Friede, Judy L., comps. Gen. Tech. Rep.

INT-GTR-334. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 23–30.

Moir, W. H. 1989. Secondary succession and the evaluation of rangeland

condition. In: Lauenroth, W. K.; Laycock, W. A., comps. Westview special

studies in agriculture science and policy. ISBN 0-8133-7808-7. Westview

Press: 66.

Monsen, Stephen. 2004. [Personal communications]. July 28, 2004. Ephraim,

UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain

Research Station.

Murray, R. B.; Mayland, H. F. 1994. Tall forb SRM 409. In: Shiflet, Thomas N.,

ed. Rangeland cover types of the United States. Denver, CO: Society of Range

Management: 48–49.

Norman, Liane Ellison. 2002. Standard Examiner. Ogden, UT, March 8, 2002,

[Online]. Available: www.fs.fed.us/rm/main/pa/newsclips/02_03/

030802_remembering.html [June 2004].

Norman, Liane Ellison. 2003. The Salt Lake Tribune—Salt Lake City, UT,

January 12, [Online]. Available: www.sltrib.com/2003/jan/01122003/

commenta/19239.asp. [June 2004].

Norman, Liane Ellison. 2004. [Personal communications]. Pittsburgh, PA,

June 4.

Parker, Kenneth W.; Chapline, W. R.; Swift, L. W.; Craddock, George W.;

Reynolds, Hudson G.; Cornelius; Biswell, Harold H. 1967. Arthur W.

Sampson—Pioneer range scientist. Journal of Range Management. 20:

345–352.

Price, Raymond; Evans, Robert B. 1938 Climate of the West Front of the

Wasatch Plateau in central Utah. Monthly Weather Review. 65: 291–301.

Reynolds, R. V. R. 1911. Grazing and floods: A study of conditions in the

Manti National Forest. Agric. Bull. 700. Washington, DC: U.S. Department

of Agriculture.

Rosiere, R. E. 2003. Range types of North America. Tarleton State UniversityTexas A&M, [ Online]. Available: http://www.tarleton.edu/~range/ [September 2004].

Sampson, A. W. 1919. Plant succession in relation to range management.

Agric. Bull. 791. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Sampson, A. W.; Weyl, L. H. 1918. Range preservation and its relation to

erosion control on Western grazing lands. Agric. Bull. 675. Washington,

DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Sampson, Arthur W. 1954, The education of range managers. Journal of Range

Management. 7(5). [Online]. Available: http://digital.library.arizona.edu.

jrm.jrm.nav/v04n01.htm, [June 2004].

Sampson, Arthur W. 1955 Where have we been and where are we going in

range management. Journal of Range Management. 8(6). [Online]. Available: http://digital.library.arizonia.edu.jrm.jrm.nav/v08v06.htm [June 2004].

Smith, Lamar E. 1989. Secondary succession and the evaluation of rangeland

condition. In: Lauenroth, W. K.; Laycock, W. A., comps. Westview special

studies in agriculture science and policy. ISBN 0-8133-7808-7. Westview

Press: 117.

Thompson, Robert M. 2004. [Personal communications]. Price UT: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Manti-LaSal National Forest.

University of California. 1968. Arthur William Sampson, forestry: Berkeley.

Available: http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/uchistory/archives_exhibits/

in_memorium/berkeley4.html [April 2005].

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Manti-LaSal National Forest,

1994. Vegetation changes on the Manti-LaSal National Forest—A photographic study using comparative photographs from 1902–1992. 128 p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2004. National plants database, [Online].

Available: http://plants.usda.gov [June 2004].

Welsh, Stanley L.; Atwood, N. Duane; Goodrich, Sherrel; Higgins, Larry C.,

eds. 2003. A Utah flora. 3d ed. Revised. Provo, UT: Brigham Young

University, Print Services. 912 p.

Winward, Alma. 1990. [Personal communications]. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Region.

Winward. A. H. 1998. The tall forb type. Unpublished document on file at:

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Ogden UT. 6 p.
48 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Appendix A: Plant Species Cited ___

Ellison monograph name Current taxonomy name

Artemesia discolor Artemisia michauxiana/A.

Ludoviciana var. incompta

Penstemon rydbergii Penstemon rydbergii

Stipa lettermanii Achnatherum lettermanii

Agropyron trachycaulum Elymus trachycaulus

Trisetum spicatum Trisetum spicatum

Hordeum nodosum Hordeum brachyantherum

Taraxacum officinale Taraxacum officinale

Achillea lanulosa Achillea millefolium

Genanium richardsonii Geranium richardsonii

Picea engelmannii Picea engelmanii

Abies lasiocarpa Abies lasiocarpa

Populus tremuloides Populus tremuloides

Pinus flexilis Pinus flexilis

Ribes montigenum Ribies montigenum

Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus

Mertensia leonardii Mertensia oblongifolia

Valeriana occidentalis Valeriana occidentalis

Heracleum lanatum Heracleum maximum

Angelica pinnata Angelica pinnata

Polemonium foliosissimum Polemonium foliosissimum

Erigeron speciosus Erigeron speciosus

Erigeron ursinus Erigeron ursinus

Bromus carinatus Bromus marginatus

Bromus anomalus Bromus anomalus

Carex festivella Carex microptera

Carex hoodii Carex hoodii

Carex raynoldsii Carex raynoldsii

Aquilegia coerulea Aquilegia caerulea

Castilleja sulphurea Castilleja sulphurea

Castilleja leonardi Castilleja rhexiifolia

Madia glomerata Madia glomerata

Helenium hoopesii Hymenoxys hoopesii

Muhlenbergia richardsonis Muhlenbergia richardsonis

Symphoricarpos oreophilus Symphoricarpos oreophilus

Delphinium barbeyi Delphinium barbeyi

Sambucus racemosa Sambucus racemosa

Other plants cited in text

Deschampsia caespitosa Deschampsia caespitosa

Phleum alpinum Phleum alpinum

Antennaria rosea Antennaria rosea

Viguiera multiflora Heliomeris multiflora

Stipa columbiana Achnatherum nelsonii

Agropyron smithii Pascopyrum smithii

Orthocarpus tolmiei Orthocarpus tolmiei

Lathyrus leucanthus Lathrus leucanthus

Vicia americana Vicia americana

Appendix B: Current Plant Species

on Protected Areas and Photo

Points _________________________

Alpine Cattle Pasture Enclosure, West

Side (Protected)

The site is dominated by forbs in both overstory and appearances with Ligusticum porteri, Geranium viscosissimum, Vicia

americana, Erigeron speciosus, and Artemisia ludoviciana as

dominants. The gramonoid component is intermingled with

Elymus trachycaulum, Bromus marginatus, andMelica bulbosa.

Other important species include Achnatherum lettermanii,

Achnatherum nelsonii, Lupinus argenteus, Heliomeris multiflora,Penstemon rydbergii,Viola purpurea, Aster adscendens,

Stellaria jamesiana, Thalictrum fendleri, Potentillia gracilis,

Collomia linearis, Osmorhiza occidentalis, Castilleja

sulphurea, Solidago multiradiata, Achillea millefolium, and

Valeriana edulis.

Elks Knoll RNA, West Side (Protected)

Tall forbs dominate the overstory and appearances. Geranium viscosissimum, Valeriana occidentalis, Ligusticum

porteri, Penstemon rydbergii, Aster adscendens, Erigeron

speciosus, and Heliomeris multiflora are dominant. A good

graminoid component is intermingled with Elymus

trachycaulum, Melica bulbosa, and Bromus marginatus as

dominants. Other plants found on this type are Carex hoodii,

Achnatherum lettermanii,Carex raynoldsii,Carex egglestonii,

Vicia americana, Viola purpurea, Agoseris glauca, Achillea

lanulosa, Stellaria jamesiana, Ligusticum porteri, Thalictrum

fendleri, Potentilla gracilis, Collomia linearis, Solidago

multiradiata, Taraxacum officinale, Eriogonum umbellatum,

Senecio crassulus, and Erigeron ursinus.

Photo Site A

Artemisia michauxiana, Sambucus racemosa, Achnatherum

lettermanii, Achillea lanulosa, Eriogonum umbellatum,

Koeleria cristata, Poa arctica, Ribes montigum, Potentilla

gracilis, Antennaria rosa, and Heliomeris multiflora.

Photo Site B

Orthocarpus tolmiei, Bromus marginatus, Achnatherum

lettermanii, and Artemisia michauxiana.

Photo Sites C and D

Potentilla gracilis, Poa artica, Achillea lanulosa, Taraxacum officinale, Koeleria cristata, Artemisia michauxiana,

Vicia americana, Eriogonum umbellatum, Carex spp.,

Deschampsia caespitosa, and Phleum alpinum.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 49

Photo Site E

Artemisia michauxiana, Bromus marginatus, Orthocarpus

tolmiei, Achnatherum lettermanii, Lathyrus leucanthus,

Taraxicum officinale, Penstemon rydgergii, Bromus inermis,

Sambucus racemosa, and Acihillea lanulosa.

Photo Site F (General)

Leucopoa kingii, Vicia americana, Eriogonum umbellatum,

Poa pattersonii, Elymus trachycaulum, Koeleria cristata,

Achillea lanulosa, Taraxacum officinale, Poa femdleriana,

Poa arctica,Chrysothamnus vicidiflorus,Pascopyrum smithii,

and Trisetum spicatum.

Photo Site F (Detail)

Vicia americana, Bromus marginatus, Artemisia michauxiana, Taraxacum officinale, Rumex crispus, Eriogonum

umbellatum,Oenothera flava, and Hordeum brachyantherum.

Photo Site G

Chrysothamnus vicidiflorus, Penstemon rydbergia, Achillea lanulosa, Taraaicum officinale, Achnatherum lettermanii,

Poa arctica, Poa fendleriana, Artemisia michauxiana,

Antennaria rosea, Koeleria cristata, Potentilla gracilis, and

Achnatherum nelsonii.

Photo Site H

Chrysothamnus vicidiflorus,Potentilla gracilis,Taraxacum

officinale, Achillea lanulosa, Symphoricarpus oreophyllus,

Achnatherum lettermanii, Elymus trachycaulum, Poa arctica,

Erigeron ursinus, Pascopyrum smithii, Bromus marginatus,

Bromus inermus, Koeleria cristata, Lathyrus leucanthus,

Achnatherum nelsonii,Castilleja spp., and Trisetum spicatum.

Photo Site I

Chrysothamnus vicidiflorus,Potentilla gracilis,Taraxacum

officinale, Achillea lanulosa, Symphoricarpus oreophyllus,

Achnatherum lettermanii, Elymus trachycaulum, Poa arctica,

Erigeron ursinus, Pascopyrum smithii, Bromus marginatus,

Bromus inermus, Koeleria cristata, Lathyrus leucanthus, and

Trisetum spicatum.

Photo Sites J and K

Sambucus racemosa, Phleum alpinum, Carex spp.,

Achnatherum lettermanii, Bromus marginatus, Artemisia

michauxiana, Helenium hoopsii, Madia glomerata, Erigeron

ursinu, Penstemon rydbergii, and Taraxacum officinale.

Photo Site L

Erigeron speciosus, Achillea lanulosa, Penstemon rydbergii,

Artemisia michauxiana, Lathyrus leucanthus, Achnatherum

lettermanii, Orthocarpus tolmiei, and Potentilla gracilis.

Appendix C: GPS Locations for

Photo Plots ____________________

Site A Lat: N 39 degrees 17.154 minutes

Lon: W 111 degrees 26.370 minutes

Lat: 39.285896 N

Lon: 111.439470 W

Site B Lat: N 39 degrees 17.152 minutes

Lon: W 111 degrees 26.397 minutes

Lat: 39.285868 N

Lon: 111.439873 W

Site C Lat: N 39 degrees 17.115 minutes

Lon: W 111 degrees 26.190 minutes

Lat: 39.285251 N

Lon: 111.436520 W

Site D Lat: N 39 degrees 17.116 minutes

Lon: W 111 degrees 26.164 minutes

Lat: 39.285270 N

Lon: 111.436083 W

Site E Lat: N 39 degrees 16.699 minutes

Lon: W 111 degrees 25.345 minutes

Lat: 39.278320 N

Lon: 111.422404 W

Site F1 Lat: N 39 degrees 16.702 minutes

Lon: W 111 degrees 23.923 minutes

Lat: 39.278313 N

Lon: 111.398753 W

Site F2 Lat: N 39 degrees 16.630 minutes

Lon: W 111 degrees 24.385 minutes

Lat: 39.277178 N

Lon: 111.406415 W

Site G Lat: N 39 degrees 16.629 minutes

Lon: W 111 degrees 24.105 minutes

Lat: 39.277135 N

Lon: 111.401771 W

Site H Lat: N 39 degrees 15.520 minutes

Lon: W 111 degrees 21.146 minutes

Lat: 39.258667 N

Lon: 111.352667 W

Site I Lat: N 39 degrees 15.456 minutes

Lon: W 111 degrees 21.087 minutes

Lat: 39.257604 N

Lon: 111.351450W
50 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Site J Lat N 39 degrees 17.233 minutes

Lon: W 111 degrees 26.118 minutes

Lat: 39.287076 N

Lon: 111.435196 W

Site K Lat: N 39 degrees 17.338 minutes

Lon: W 111 degrees 26.049 minutes

Lat: 39.288967N

Lon: 111.434150 W

Site L Lat: N 39 degrees 18.022 minutes

Lon: W 111 degrees 25.778 minutes

Lat: 39.300351 N

Lon: 111.429640 W

Appendix D: History of the Great

Basin Station ___________________

On the occasion of the 100-year Celebration of the

Manti-La Sal National Forest

Great Basin Environmental Education Center

July 24, 2003

Presented by E. Durant McArthur

Project Leader and Research Geneticist

Shrub Sciences Laboratory, and

Scientist-in-Charge, Great Basin Experimental Range

USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station

Provo, UT

Introduction

It is my pleasure to summarize the history of the Great

Basin Station, which is the name I use in this account

interchangeably with the Great Basin Experimental Range—

its formal current name. Its names and functions have changed

with the times since the site was selected in 1911 and research

and facility development started in 1912 (Antrei 1982; Keck

1972; McArthur and Monsen 1996). It has been known as

the Utah Experiment Station (1912–1918, Great Basin Experiment Station (1918 to 1930), Great Basin Branch Experiment Station (1930 to 1947), Great Basin Research

Center (1947 to 1970), and Great Basin Experimental Range

(1970 to the present time) (McArthur and others 1999).

Since 1997, Snow College in Ephraim, UT, has managed

this Headquarters area as the Great Basin Environmental

Education Center (GBEEC). In its beginnings research was

not clearly separated from other Forest Service functions,

although research was clearly the primary purpose of the

Great Basin Station. The Station was one of the key elements that coalesced into the Intermountain Forest and

Range Experiment Station when the network of nationwide

geographical Forest Service Research Stations was established in 1930. Prior to that time it was managed out of the

District Office (now Regional Office) in Ogden, UT. The

Intermountain Research Station (former Intermountain

Forest and Range Experiment Station) Headquarters were in

Ogden with the establishment of a separate Forest Service

Research branch until that Station was consolidated into the

Rocky Mountain Research Station in Fort Collins, CO, in

1997. (Figures 77–88 are not directly referred to in the text.

These archival photos are maintained at the Rocky Mountain

Research Station’s Ogden Service Center.)

Establishment of the Great Basin Station

We are at the historic Headquarters of the Great Basin

Station. Research was and is conducted within the Great Basin

Experimental Range, which comprises some 4,600 acres in the

Ephraim (Cottonwood Creek) Canyon watershed ranging from

6,700 to 10,500 ft elevation. Research from this headquarters,

however, was not confined to the Great Basin Experimental

Range per se, but expanded out onto other lands in the Manti

National Forest (now Manti-La Sal National Forest) and beyond. To quote a technician, Albert Antrei (1936, 1993b) of

earlier times (1936):

My job was to help with the gathering of data in the field for research

projects that were to be analyzed during the winter months in Ogden...by

scientists in range botany and soil erosion. All of the field work took

place on summer range in Ephraim Canyon. Winter range research was

conducted at the “Desert Station” about 50 miles from Milford, Utah,

and spring-fall range problems were studied at a station north of Dubois,

Idaho.

The Station got its start when Arthur Sampson, then 28, and

his colleague James T. Jardine (the two had been appointed in

1907 as Forest Service Researchers to study urgent range

problems in eastern Oregon) were searching for:

...a locality which might somewhat typify extensive range types and

climatic conditions. We preferred optimum rather than less favorable

conditions for growth; we sought rugged country and a wide range of

elevations, with variable soils; and it was especially important to be

located where many extensive vegetation types occurred.

Erosion was an extremely serious problem on many recently created

National Forests. ...Having heard much of the erosion situation in

central Utah, we proceeded there; and largely at the urgent suggestion

of Supervisor A. W. Jensen, the Manti Forest was among those to be

observed (Sampson, personal communication, 1936).

The first buildings constructed (started in 1912 and completed by 1914) were the Director’s residence (East House),

the laboratory building (museum), the Assistants’ residence,

and a barn. A greenhouse was soon constructed behind these

houses. In the late 1920s a garage and dormitory (the Palmer

House) was constructed. In 1933 a new phase of building

began with the help of Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC)

labor. This phase included the End House (Plummer House)

and the South House (dining hall), and by 1936 the Lodge had

been built on the site of the former Assistants’ residence, which

had burned in 1935 (Keck 1972). Tent bases, storage and other

out buildings, and a shower house were also constructed to

provide for the needs of an active Research Station. Other

improvements were also built to facilitate the research studies

of the Great Basin Station. These included gauging stations,

water catchments basins, grazing exclosures and other fences,

and the Alpine Cabin.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 51

Sampson acknowledged the important role of Supervisor

A. W. Jensen not only in the establishment of the Station but

the selection of the site: “[Supervisor Jensen] had more to do

with location of the Station than any one, indeed more than all

other(s)...combined” (Sampson, personal communication).

Supervisor Jensen himself described the site selection by a

committee that examined several sites in Fairview and Ephraim

Canyons. Dr. Sampson was complementary to the thrift and

industry of the local builders in the construction of the

buildings (Sampson, personal communication, 1936).

The Great Basin Station was selected in 1911 only 8 years

after (established 9 years after) the Manti National Forest was

established. Parenthetically and interestingly, the appointment of the first forest officers (a Forest Supervisor and

Rangers of the Manti, Mayfield, and Emery Districts) was

exactly 100 years ago—July 24, 1903 (the Forest was created

by President Teddy Roosevelt’s decree on May 29, 1903).

The two events, establishment of the Manti National Forest

and Great Basin Station, were tied together by the condition

of the land. L. R. Anderson was elected Mayor of Manti, UT,

on the platform “to reduce the flood menace” (Antrei 1982,

1995). Supervisor Jensen stated, “when I was supervisor

[1902 to 1911] there was very little grass” (Antrei 1982). The

Great Basin Station was established to discover the causes

and solutions to the flooding problems as well as other

rangeland and forest issues. Certainly ecological conditions

had changed rapidly on the mountain since the time of

settlement. Lauritz Neilsen of Ephraim (born 1875) and

James Jensen of Spring City (born 1869) provide first-hand

accounts on conditions on the Wasatch Plateau at the time of

early grazing activities. Mr. Neilsen, in 1953, at the request

of A. Perry Plummer provided a written account of ecological

conditions, and Mr. Jensen, in 1946, on a bus ride with

Lincoln Ellison which Dr. Ellison recorded as an official file

memo (1945) detail the more pristine conditions. Both Dr.

Ellison and Mr. Plummer, in turn, were scientists in charge of

the Great Basin Station. Mr. Jensen recalled that in 1880, and

Mr. Nielsen recalled that in 1885, the vegetation on the

Wasatch Plateau was thick and tall and it would obscure

sheep and logs. The vegetation in nonforested areas was

“weeds” (forbs) and grass. Mr. Neilsen recounts in about

1885 that the road up Ephraim Canyon followed along

Cottonwood (Ephraim) Creek up to the place we call “the

Hole”—just below the Station. The road crossed back and

forth across the creek in a few places. The creek was shallow

with clear water and good trout habitat. Both gentlemen

recount that there were many large bands of sheep on the

mountain. The vast numbers of sheep on the mountain led to

conditions such that “looking through the aspen...there was

not a green leaf or sprig of any kind as high as the sheep could

reach and the ground was absolutely bare. They ate everything that was green” (Antrei 1982) and “...old Sanpete

residents, who tell of being able to count the herds of sheep

on the mountain by the (columns) of dust clouds they could

see from the valley” (Ellison 1954; Reynolds 1911). By the

Figure 77—Arthur Sampson, circa 1912.

Figure 78—Arthur Sampson, circa 1930.
52 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

late 1880s, large floods, driven by summer thunderstorms,

started and became increasingly common. A massive flood in

Ephraim Canyon in 1889 materially changed canyon access

and the character of the creek. These devastating floods

scoured and cut channels, caused landslides, destroyed access roads, and carried mud and debris into valley settlements. These conditions led to the loss of much of the topsoil

on the Wasatch Plateau—up to 3 ft in many places. Nevertheless, prudent management has led to remarkable recovery

over the 100 years of National Forest management, although

rebuilding the soils is a process that will take centuries, even

millennia, to complete.

Research Programs

Watershed studies were among the first to be undertaken at

the Great Basin Station. Director Sampson established two

Figure 79—Manti Flood, 1902.

Figure 80—Wasatch Plateau: building contour trenches with

horse and plow during the 1920s.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 53

erosion areas (A and B) in 1912. Studies on vegetation cover,

manipulation, and sediment flow have been documented over

a 90-year period (Forsling 1931; Meeuwig 1960; Sampson

and Weyl 1918; Stevens 2003; Stevens and others 1992;

Stewart and Forsling 1931). My colleague Richard Stevens

concluded in a recent publication that this long-term study

has demonstrated that management practices can stabilize

depleted subalpine range through long periods of nonuse or

stabilize rapidly with restoration or revegetation techniques

(Stevens 2003). The long-term study on the paired watersheds has compared the effectiveness of grasses and forbs for

erosion control (grasses establish more quickly), documented

the relative effectiveness of various species and litter, and

provided information on plant successional trajectories (how

plant species interact with one another and their environment

over time). Sediment production measured at over 100 cubic

ft per acre under various vegetation cover values during the

first 40 years of the study have been virtually nil during the

last half century (Stevens 2003). Other watershed studies

involved infiltrometers and vegetative and mechanical means

to reduce gully erosion and control water release in snowbanks (Keck 1972).

Vegetation composition and dynamics studies conducted

at the Great Basin Station and across the Wasatch Plateau have

contributed significantly to the body of knowledge for range

management and plant ecology. Lincoln Ellison’s (1954)

superb publication in Ecological Monographs, “Subalpine

Vegetation of the Wasatch Plateau,” is a classical study on the

pristine and grazing modified vegetation. He and his colleagues used information on plant succession gained on the

Wasatch Plateau to formulate principles for use in management of rangelands. For example, the publications “The Ecological Basis for Judging Condition and Trend on Mountain

Range Land” (Ellison 1949) and “Indicators of Condition and

Trend on High Range Watersheds in the Intermountain Region” (Ellison and others 1951) provide a basis for a healthy

landscape and a stable forage resource with proper management. Ellison’s basic recommendation is that the land resource

is of paramount importance.

Figure 81—Arthur Sampson, circa 1930.

Figure 82—Lincoln Elllison, circa 1950.
54 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Shortly after the Great Basin Station was begun, Sampson

and his colleagues established vegetation plots and exclosures

where grazing effects could be compared under managed and

protected conditions (Hall 1997; Keck 1972; Sampson 1919;

Tippets and Anderson 1991). These plots have been evaluated

over time to monitor succession and are still of use. For

example, Dr. Rick Gill of Washington State University is

currently conducting research on the impact of sheep grazing

on soil organic matter formation and retention, and on

belowground respiration under the auspices of a USDA National Research Initiative competitive grant; Dr. Don Breakwell

of Brigham Young University is examining the soil microbial

community inside and outside of exclosures using DNA profiles analyzed by polymerase chain reaction techniques

An interesting aside is whether grasses or forbs were the

dominant pristine herbaceous vegetation. Sampson made a

case for grasses, perhaps in part because he was a student of

Frederick Clements, a founder and strong proponent of linear

vegetation succession. Ellison, however, was convinced that

forbs were dominant with an admixture of grasses. When he

rode the bus from Salt Lake City to Sanpete County in 1946

with an old timer (the aforementioned James Jensen who

remembered “weeds” as the primary herbaceous vegetation),

he made it a point to document that conversation and place it

in the record (Ellison 1945). Recently Klemmendson and

Tiedemann (1994, 1998) reopened that question—the primary

herbaceous dominant in the pristine vegetation. No doubt both

classes of plants were present. It may be that some conditions

favored one class of vegetation as a dominant, and other

conditions favored the other one.

The Great Basin Experimental Range, a diverse topography

and an environmental gradient, includes several major vegetational types, including mountain herblands, oakbrush, pinyonjuniper, aspen, spruce and fir, and white fir (Keck 1972;

McArthur and Monsen 1996). These vegetative types have

been differentially modified by ecological conditions and

management during the time since the land has been managed

(Walker and others 1996). For example, the aspen type has

been reduced by about one-half. Oak and mountain brush are

also increasing, but sagebrush is decreasing. Seeded exotic,

aggressive understory plants, particularly intermediate wheatgrass and smooth brome, were seeded to control erosion and

provide forage. They have been so competitive as to exclude

native plant recruitment, including that of sagebrush (Monsen

and McArthur 1995; Walker and others 1996).

Figure 83—Great Basin Experiment Station, 1934.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 55

Plant adaptation for revegetation and restoration of depleted and damaged rangeland and wildlands was started in

1912 by Director Sampson (Hall 1997; Keck 1972). This work

has continued until the present not only on the Great Basin

Experimental Range but also at many other sites. The greatest

impetus to this work was given by A. Perry Plummer, who

directed work at the Station from 1947 to 1977, and was

involved there from the late 1930s until his death in 1991

(McArthur 1992). Mr. Plummer was a champion of restoring

damaged wildlands (Plummer 1977; Plummer and others

1968).

A multitude of testing sites are located on the Great Basin

Experimental Range from Major’s Flat at the Forest Boundary

to the top of the Plateau at the Alpine Cattle Pasture and at many

other sites in Utah and beyond. This work was given a major

impetus by a cooperative venture begun in 1954 by the Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station of the Forest

Service (now the Rocky Mountain Research Station) and the

Utah Department of Fish and Game (now the Utah Division of

Wildlife Resources of the Utah Department of Natural Resources) to restore damaged big game habitats. Mr. Plummer

directed that combined effort for many years. The cooperation

continues to this day with the Rocky Mountain Research

Station effort directed from the Shrub Sciences Laboratory in

Provo (but with a presence at the Great Basin Experimental

Range), and the Division of Wildlife Resources effort headquartered in Ephraim’s Great Basin Research Center. Hundreds of species and populations of grasses, shrubs, and forbs

have been tested and dozens of strains have been provided for

increase and production for wildland rehabilitation and restoration including several named cultivar varieties. A culmination of this work led to the classical publication “Restoring Big

Game Range in Utah” by Plummer and others (1968). This

work on plant materials and techniques for rehabilitation of

disturbed wildlands has been widely used and has been updated and expanded by several of Mr. Plummer’s protegees

from the two agencies (“Restoring Western Ranges and Wildlands”—Monsen and others 2004). This combined effort has

stimulated interaction and cooperation between a score or

more of scientists from both agencies. The current direction of

the work is to emphasize native plants for restoration of fire

ravaged lands. This effort has also been responsible, in large

measure, for the growth of a native seed industry in the

Intermountain West. There are several successful wildland

seed companies in Sanpete County. In fact, Sanpete County is

a Westwide leader in the wildland seed collection and marketing industry.

Plant phenology, vigor, and nutrition studies were also

initiated by Director Sampson (Sampson and Malmsten 1926).

In these studies plant growth was correlated with season,

climate, and other environmental variables including clipping

and grazing. These pioneering studies were among the first

practical plant physiological studies geared to assay productivity of range plants in natural settings. They were made possible

Figure 84—Lincoln Ellison.

Figure 85—Ellison family at the Great Basin Experiment

Station, circa 1946.
56 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

by the diversity of plant species and habits on the Great Basin

Experimental Range. Price and Evans (1937) described the

climate of the Wasatch Plateau; McCarty (1938) and McCarty

and Price (1942) documented carbohydrate and growth characteristics of range plants. This quantitative work was performed in the laboratory building (now the museum) across the

lawn from us. What a nice place to work in a laboratory!

Silvicultural studies never rose to the level of those on

herbaceous plants, but some interesting work has occurred. An

effort was made to grow ponderosa pine and other conifers in

the oakbrush zone (Baker 1925a,b; Baker and Korstian 1931).

Some remnant trees remain on the Great Basin Experimental

Range as a result of those studies that were regarded as

unsuccessful because of the pattern of summer precipitation

and a soil substrate of heavy calcareous, fine-grained soils.

Pioneering studies on the phenology, growth, form, root systems, climate, moisture, and soil requirements of aspen in a

western setting were first done by Fredrick Baker (1925a).

Followup work on aspen ecology has continued, including

Figure 86—Great Basin Experiment Station, 1952.

Figure 87—Wasatch Plateau—watershed contouring, circa

1950.
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 57

Figure 88—Great Basin Experiment Station—employees and families, circa 1952.

additional work on Baker’s plots (Harniss and Harper 1982;

Keck 1972; McArthur and others 1999). The aspen system is

in decline because of its lack of renewal by fire and other

disturbances (Bartos and Campbell 1998). Currently, Stan

Kitchen of the Shrub Sciences Laboratory is studying the longterm fire history of the Great Basin Experimental Range.

Renewal of aspen stands is a Forest Service management

priority.

Other research on the Great Basin Experimental Range was

conducted and continues, for example, autecology of

Orthocarpus, mineral cycling of various plant communities,

the effect of gophers on plant succession, and roadside

beautification and stabilization. I hope my examples have

shown some of the depth and breadth of the research at the

Great Basin Station. The Rocky Mountain Research Station,

the Manti-La Sal National Forest, and Snow College’s Great

Basin Experimental Experiment Center continue to support

research here.

Education and Training

The Great Basin Station has been a site important in the

training of resource personnel. Great Basin Station Director

Lincoln Ellison (Keck 1972) once remarked, in 1939, that the

Great Basin may be regarded as one of two cradles of range

research in this country. The other is the Jornada Range

Reserve in New Mexico. It is said that almost everybody in

range research has, at one time or another, worked on the

Jornada, and almost the same may be said of the Great Basin.

Some of these researchers received national and international

recognition:

• The founding director, Arthur Sampson, became an Eminent Professor at the University of California, Berkeley,

and is considered one of the founders of the formal

discipline of range management—he established the first

range management curriculum (at the University of California). He authored four ground-breaking and widely

used text books (Sampson 1923, 1924, 1928, 1951) on

range management, forage plants, and animal husbandry

that were published by the New York publishing house,

John Wiley and Sons. He received both the American

Forestry Association’s Conservation Award and the Ecological Society of America’s Eminent Ecologist Award.

• Early workers Fredrick Baker and Clarence Korstian

became Deans and Administrators at the Forestry schools

at the University of California, Berkeley, and Duke University, respectively, and received many honors. Another

early worker, W. R. Chapline, became the Chief of Range

Research for the Forest Service in Washington, DC, and

endowed two prestigious awards presented annually by

the Society for Range Management. The second Director,

C. L. Forsling, became the Director of Research for the

Forest Service in Washington, DC.
58 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

• Director Raymond Price became a Staff Officer for

research in the Washington Office of the Forest Service

and subsequently a long-time Director of both the Southwest and Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Stations.

• Director Lincoln Ellison was the Lead Rangeland Research Administrator for the Intermountain Forest and

Range Experiment Station when his life was cut prematurely short in an avalanche at Snow Basin in 1958. He

was a highly respected research leader. Dr. James

Blaisdell (1989), himself a prominent rangeland researcher and administrator wrote:

I have fond memories of Lincoln Ellison—a gentleman, scholar, and

friend...I remember his keeping a group of us out in a downpour on the

Great Basin Experimental Range so that we could observe the mechanics of runoff and erosion. I recall his thorough review of manuscripts

(and how) he would pause and reach for his thesaurus so that we could

discuss the precise usage of keywords.... Linc Ellison was a range

ecologist par excellent—many years ahead of his time in ecological

reasoning and applications to range management. Many are the occasions when I have wished for his sage counsel.

Another retired Forest Service research Range Scientist,

Ralph Holmgren, recently told me how, as a young

scientist, he learned from Dr. Ellison. He remembers

being enraptured as Lincoln explained his discovery of

how tender young plants germinated under an insulating

layer of snow to get a jump on the growing season.

• Project Leader A. Perry Plummer (the terminology of

administration of the Station changed) was a wonderful

teacher with far-ranging impact. He knew the Great

Basin Experimental Range like the back of his hand. The

roadside plantings that you witnessed coming up the

road are his legacy. He is a mentor to my generation,

including my colleagues Steve Monsen and Richard

Stevens who are here today. His work on rangeland

revegetation in the Great Basin Experimental Range and

elsewhere were instrumental in the establishment of the

Shrub Sciences Laboratory in Provo. It was at a site at the

mouth of Ephraim Canyon that the then Deputy Chief for

Research of the Forest Service, V. L. Harper, after listening to Mr. Plummer’s presentation and viewing some

field experiments concluded “we ought to amend...the

research program to include a new laboratory at Provo

featuring shrub research...” (McArthur 1992). He was

honored for his work by national awards from both the

U.S. Department of Agriculture and from professional

societies.

• Our current generation of researchers associated with the

Great Basin Experimental Range has had substantive

impacts on research and land management programs and

policy through their research and application efforts. This

work has been recognized by national awards, wideranging consultation, and visits by scientists from around

the world.

• The Great Basin Station has been a training ground not

only for those I just mentioned but also for many who

have visited for various periods of time. There have been

numerous field days, conferences, and workshops held

here, including many of national importance. I mention a

few:

– Ecological Society of America Range Research Conference, August 1931.

– New Building Rededication Field Day, August 1936.

– Servicewide Range Research Seminar for the Forest

Service, July 1939.

– Society for Range Management Summer Meeting and

Great Basin Experimental Range 60th Anniversary

Celebration, July 1972.

– Great Basin Environmental Education Center Ribbon

Cutting Ceremony, August 1993.

– Tenth Wildland Shrub Symposium: Shrubland Ecotones, August 1998.

– Many others including the Utah Section, Society for

Range Management Youth Camps, and Utah Educational Association Teacher Training. The tradition

continues, and is expanded by the present use of the

Headquarters complex—The Great Basin Environmental Education Center of Snow College.

Life at the Station

I conclude my presentation with some insights and vignettes

of life at the Station. This beautiful complex has been host to

a lot of living. My family and I recall the pleasant summer of

1975 when we lived in the East House while we were in

transition from a work assignment from the Great Basin

Station and Ephraim to the Shrub Sciences Laboratory and

Provo. For the most part we, especially my young family, lived

here in isolation. But in earlier years, especially the decades

from the teens through the fifties, scientists, technicians, and

families filled the compound and forest with life and excitement. My insights into those times are drawn mainly from

conversations with members of the Plummer, Ellison, and

Hansen families, and from writings of Albert Antrei (1982,

1993b, 1995) and Liane Ellison Norman (in review).

Now would be an appropriate time to mention those who, in

addition to the science staff, have kept the Station beautiful and

in operational form. I know that Walt Mann and George

Gruschow out of the Ogden Station Headquarters made things

happen. Paul Hansen was a Technician at the Great Basin

Station for 47 years! Imagine all the work and love he put into

the Station. Lincoln Ellison said of Paul, “a jewel—he runs the

place and I take the credit” (Norman, in review). Gary Jorgensen

has been a technician assigned to work at the Great Basin

Experimental Range, among other duties, for 35 years. He has

been up and down the canyon road literally thousands of times,

taking fences up and down, as well as performing multitudinous duties here. Shake his hand if you get a chance. Thanks

Gary. Now the GBEEC staff, supervised first by Steve Peterson

but for several years by Dave Lanier, has restored and lovingly

cared for the Center—my thanks go to them. District Ranger

Tom Shore of the Sanpete Ranger District and his staff as well

as many from the Manti-La Sal Supervisors Office have also

worked hard and long for the good of GBEEC. I give my thanks
USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005 59

to all. It became difficult for our Forest Service Research

organization to properly fund and maintain the Headquarters

complex that became the GBEEC. We are happy to partner

with Snow College, the Manti-La Sal National Forest, and the

community in a successful GBEEC, and to foster continuing

inhouse and cooperative research on the Great Basin Experimental Range.

I return to the life at the Station in bygone days. Let me quote

Albert Antrei (1993a) regarding Director Sampson:

Sampson was a familiar figure in both Sanpete and Sevier Valleys,

racing horses at county fairs. Local recollections of him have been

generally friendly, and it has been said, the ladies in Ephraim were not

unaware of him. Socially, again it has been said, he was in tune with

Victorian concepts of the polished gentleman. Nor was he above playing

teacher to the farmers. He taught local pea growers, for instance, the

value of pea silage as cattle feed. Until he demonstrated it the farmers

of Sanpete were accustomed to dispose of the ill-smelling stuff as

quickly as possible.

Again, Antrei (1993b) on his personal experiences:

It was on June 1 [1936] when I descended from that bus in Ephraim,

and it was on a Sunday. As the bus departed, I stood alone on the corner

of Main and Center Streets occupied by the D. W. Anderson Drug

Company. ...Before looking for the hotel, which was just around the

corner, I looked up at snowladen Haystack Mountain, where the Great

Basin Branch Experiment Station of the Forest Service was located.

....Between June 1 and about October 1, I went to town with other

station technicians. ...I was making $125 per month, and every Saturday

afternoon (we worked until noon) I went to town for a little R & R, to

last until the station truck left for the station again usually around

midnight. There was a movie theater in Ephraim and on Saturday nights

an open-air dancing pavilion. I was not interested in church on Sunday,

so on Sunday I remained at the foot of Haystack Mountain, either

reminiscent or nursing a headache. Religion did not bother me, and I did

not bother it. I drank a little, which in Utah is the same as drinking a

whole lot, and I smoked a pipe; moderately, I thought. But here again,

in Utah one curl of smoke means a forest fire. This seemed to bother the

girls of Ephraim. Eventually, I quit the drinking, and if I desired, I could

go months and months without a smoke, which for me was usually no

more than an after-dinner thing. The weed never wound me up.

And from Antrei (1993a):

The Station’s young men were all inept at cooking and bottlewashing, and to take care of such chores, as well as to perform the art of

a little mothering-at-large, in 1936 there was Annie Bartholomew to

advise the field technicians on matters of social conduct and who the

girls were in Ephraim. More complete rundowns of such social weight

were also available from the State’s road grader, Lew Christensen.

Lastly, from Liane Ellison Norman (in review):

The Station houses were sturdy and pleasant. All had furnaces,

electricity, hot and cold running water and wood stoves. None was

equipped with a refrigerator; coolers, which connected kitchens with

the out of doors, provided the only storage of perishables. ...the

Station kept a cow for milk, cream, and butter, which provided a

succession of adventures. Grocery orders were phoned down to

Ephraim’s one general store. Whoever went down to Ephraim brought

groceries, mail and library books up the 15 miles of winding, rutted

road. By—1945 there were six Ellisons, three Hansens (two more to

come), and six Plummers (three more to come). Many visitors brought

their families. Though apparently isolated, the station seemed—at

least to us children—a hive of sociability. ...evening activities

...brought the Station men and families together in a community

during the short summers. There were lively games of tennis, horseshoes, checkers, chess and charades; evenings spent singing around

fireplace or piano; tall tales and shop talk. ....Liane (Ellison) and

...Nathalie (Hansen) adopted and hand raised (a fawn—“Billy

Deer”)....Mrs. Bartholomew insisted that he (Billie Deer) shed tears

(when he was taken to the state game preserve). The Station was an

extraordinary place to grow up. It was safe and stunningly

beautiful....(we) came to the Station every summer...up from

Ephraim...across the cattle guard...to the place where scrub oak

stunningly gave way to aspen...delicious with clean white trunks and

shivering leaves....We developed large repertories of imaginative

play.... The women of the Station—our mothers and the cook in the

Lodge, where single men and visitors stayed—developed a cooperative social life which allowed the scientists—all of them men at the

time—to make systematic observations of the plots on the Wasatch

Plateau...The importance of headquarters was that it allowed the

scientists to live with their families close to their field work.

Concluding Word

The Great Basin Station has a distinguished history, has

provided meaningful research results, has been a meaningful

training ground for natural resource professionals, and has

been a place of vibrant human life and interactions. It continues

to serve as a focal point for natural resource study, training, and

education. It is a beautiful place. It is my pleasure to have been

and continue to be a part of its continuing saga.

References

Antrei, A. 1993a. Community perspectives on the Great Basin. In: Intercom,

September 1993. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest

Service, Intermountain Research Station: 7–10

Antrei, A. 1995. High, dry, and offside. Manti, UT: Manti City Corporation.

372 p.

Antrei, A. C. T. 1982. Zion stands with hills surrounded. In: Antrei, A. C. T.;

Scow, R. D., eds. The other forty-niners. Salt Lake City, UT: Western Epics:

193–232.

Antrei, A. C. T. 1993b. To whom this may concern, landmarks of a liberal

education. Manti, UT: Universal Impression. 339 p.

Baker, F. S. 1925a. Aspen in the Central Rocky Mountains. Tech. Bull. 1291.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 47 p.

Baker, F. S. 1925b. Character of the soil in relation to the reproduction of

western yellow pine. Journal of Forestry. 23: 630–634.

Baker, F. S.; Korstian, C. F. 1931. Suitability of brush lands in the Intermountain Region for the growth of natural or planted western yellow pine forests.

Tech. Bull. 256. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 83 p.

Bartos, D. L.; Campbell, R. B., Jr. 1998. Decline of quaking aspen in the

Interior West—examples from Utah. Rangelands. 20: 17–24.

Blaisdell, J. P. 1989. I remember when. Society for Range Management, Utah

Section Newsletter. 89-4: 7–8.

Ellison, L. 1945 [File memo, July 15]. Copy in possession of: E. D. McArthur,

Shrub Sciences Laboratory, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Provo, UT.

Ellison, L. 1949. The ecological basis for judging condition and trend on

mountain range land. Journal of Forestry. 47: 786–795.

Ellison, L. 1954. Subalpine vegetation of the Wasatch Plateau. Ecological

Monographs. 24: 89–184.

Ellison, L.; Croft, A. R.; Bailey, R. W. 1951. Indicators of condition and trend

on high range watersheds in the Intermountain Region. Handb. 19. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 66 p.

Forsling, C. L. 1931. A study of the influence of herbaceous plant cover on

surface runoff and soil erosion in relation to grazing on the Wasatch Plateau

in Utah. Tech. Bull. 220. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture.

72 p.

Hall, M. 1997. Co-workers with nature, the deeper roots of restoration.

Restoration and Management Notes. 15: 173–178.

Harniss, R. O.; Harper, K. T. 1982. Tree dynamics in seral and stable aspen

stands in central Utah. Res. Pap. INT-297. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment

Station. 7 p.
60 USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-154. 2005

Keck, W. M. 1972. Great Basin Station—sixty years of progress in range and

watershed research.—Res. Pap. INT-118. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment

Station. 48 p.

Klemmedson, J. O.; Tiedemann, A. R. 1994. Soil and vegetation development

in an abandoned sheep corral on degraded subalpine rangeland. Great Basin

Naturalist. 54: 301–312.

Klemmedson, J. O.; Tiedemann, A. R. 1998. Soil-vegetation relations of

recovering subalpine range of the Wasatch Plateau. Great Basin Naturalist.

58: 352–362.

McArthur, E. D. 1992. In memoriam—A. Perry Plummer (1911–1991):

teacher, naturalist, range scientist. Great Basin Naturalist. 52: 1–10.

McArthur, E. D.; Monsen, S. B. 1996. Great Basin Experimental Range. In:

Schmidt, W. C.; Friede, J. L., comps. Experimental forests, ranges, and

watersheds in the Northern Rocky Mountains: a compendium of outdoor

laboratories in Utah, Idaho, and Montana. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-334.

Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain

Research Station: 23–28.

McArthur, E. D.; Monsen, S. B.; Stevens, R. 1999. Field trip report: shrubland

ecotones. In: McArthur, E. D.; Ostler, W. K.; Wambolt, C. L., comps.

Proceedings: shrubland ecotones. Proc. RMRS-P-11. Ogden, UT: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research

Station: 293–299.

McCarty, E. C. 1938. The relation of growth to the varying carbohydrate

content in mountain brome. Tech. Bull. 598. Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Agriculture. 24 p.

McCarty, E. C.; Price, R. 1942. Growth and carbohydrate content of important

mountain forage plants in central Utah as affected by clipping and grazing.

Tech. Bull. 818. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 51 p.

Meeuwig, R. O. 1960. Watersheds A and B—a study of surface runoff and

erosion in the subalpine zone of central Utah. Journal of Forestry. 58: 556–

560.

Monsen, S. B.; McArthur, E. D. 1995. Implications of early Intermountain

range and watershed restoration practices. In: Roundy, B. A.; McArthur,

E. D.; Haley, J. S.; Mann, D. K., comps. Proceedings: wildland shrub and

arid land restoration symposium. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-315. Ogden,

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

Research Station: 16–25

Monsen, S. B.; Stevens, R.; Shaw, N. L., comps. 2004. Restoring Western

ranges and wildlands. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-136. 3 Vol. Ogden,

UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain

Research Station. 884 p. plus appendices and index.

Norman, L. E. [In review]. Searching for my father, Lincoln Ellison. Unpublished manuscript on file with author in Pittsburgh, PA.

Plummer, A. P. 1977. Revegetation of disturbed Intermountain area sites. In:

Thames, J. L., ed. Reclamation and use of disturbed land in the Southwest.

Tucson: University of Arizona Press: 302–339

Plummer, A. P.; Christensen, D. R.; Monsen, S. B. 1968. Restoring big game

range in Utah. Publ. 68-3. Salt Lake City: Utah Fish and Game Department.

183 p.

Price, R.; Evans, R. B. 1938. Climate of the west front of the Wasatch Plateau

in central Utah. Monthly Weather Review. 65: 291–301.

Reynolds, R. V. R. 1911. Grazing and floods: a study of conditions in the Manti

National Forest, Utah. Bull. 91. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service. 16 p.

Sampson, A. W. 1919. Plant succession in relation to range management. Bull.

791. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 76 p.

Sampson, A. W. 1923. Range and pasture management. New York: John

Wiley and Sons, Inc. 421 p.

Sampson, A. W. 1924. Native American forage plants. New York: John Wiley

and Sons, Inc. 435 p.

Sampson, A. W. 1928. Livestock husbandry on range and pasture. New York:

John Wiley and Sons, Inc. 411 p.

Sampson, A. W. 1936. [Letter to Raymond Price, July 31]. Copy in possession

of: E. D. McArthur, Shrub Sciences Laboratory, Rocky Mountain Research

Station, Provo, UT.

Sampson, A. W. 1952. Range management—principles and practices. New

York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. 570 p.

Sampson, A. W.; Malmsten, H. E. 1926. Grazing periods and forage production on the National Forests. Bull. 1405. Washington, DC: U.S. Department

of Agriculture. 55 p.

Sampson, A. W.; Weyl, L. H. 1918. Range preservation and its relation to

erosion control on Western grazing lands. Tech. Bull. 675. Washington,

DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 35 p.

Stevens, R. 2003. Historical summary: oldest watershed study in America,

Wasatch Plateau, Utah, Great Basin Experiment Station. In: Proceedings of

the 15th high altitude revegetation workshop. Fort Collins: Colorado State

University: 94–100.

Stevens, R.; McArthur, E. D.; Davis, J. N. 1992. Reevaluation of vegetative

cover changes, erosion, and sedimentation on two watersheds—1912–

1983. In: Clary, W. P.; McArthur, E. D.; Bedunah, D.; Wambolt, C. L.,

comps. Proceedings—symposium on ecology and management of riparian

shrub communities. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-289. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 128–

132

Stewart, G.; Forsling, C. L. 1931. Surface run-off and erosion in relation to soil

and plant cover on high grazing lands of central Utah. Journal of the

American Society of Agronomy. 23: 815–832.

Tippets, D.; Anderson, V. J. 1991. Partnership preserves historic range

research sites. Rangelands. 13: 121–124.

Walker, S. C.; Mann, D. K.; McArthur, E. D. 1996. Plant community changes

over 54 years within the Great Basin Experimental Range, Manti-La Sal

National Forest. In: McArthur, E. D.; Ostler, W. K.; Wambolt, C. L., comps.

Proceedings: shrubland ecosystem dynamics in a changing environment.

Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-338. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 66–68
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 number.

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
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

*Station Headquarters, Natural Resources Research Center,

2150 Centre Avenue, Building A, Fort Collins, CO 80526

RMRS

ROCKY MOUNTAIN RESEARCH STATION