Forage plantings on six Arizona pinyon-juniper subtypes.
Forty-four species and varieties of forage plants, including 3 shrubs, 6 forbs, and 35 grasses, were planted at each of six sites in four Arizona pinyon-juniper climatic subtypes. Represented were cold-moist and cold-dry climatic subtypes each on medium and fine-textured soils; a warm-moist climatic subtype on fine-textured soil; and a warm-dry climatic subtype on medium-textured soil. Sites are described and classified to help identify planting potential and facilitate wider application of results. Data are given on plant emergence, establishment, survival during 12 growing seasons, and forage production. Agropyron smithii Rydb., A. intermedium var. trichophorum (Link) Halac., and Sitanion hystrix (Nutt.) J.G. Sm. successfully revegetated swelling clay soils. These three species, A triplex canescens (Pursh) Nutt., and Bouteloua gracilis (H.B.K.) Lag. ex Steud. were the most widely adapted species tested. Successfully revegetating pinyon-juniper rangeland depends on using species adapted to specific sites. Information is needed to help determine why planted species succeed or fail on a given area and how to correlate species and sites (Gomm and Lavin 1968). Species adaption on pinyon-juniper rangelands has been reported by Judd (1966), Renney (1972), Judd and Judd (1976), and Lavin and Johnsen (1977a, 1977b) for Arizona; Springfield (1965) and Merkel and Herbel (1973) for New Mexico; McGinnies et al. (1963) for Colorado; and Plummer et al. (1968) for Utah. This study reports the results of forage-species plantings made in relation to pinyon-juniper climatic subtypes (Lavin and Johnsen 1977a, 1977b) paired with soil types. The accompanying site descriptions and classifications help identify potential planting sites and facilitate wider application of the results onto similar sites within 20.7 million ha of pinyonjuniper rangeland in Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, and Utah. This includes many areas invaded by junipers since the turn of the century (Johnsen 1962; Johnsen and Elson 1979), on which forage production could be restored. Site conditions not previously reported are included. Data are presented to help determine why various species failed or are not desirable at specific sites. Materials and Methods Site Descriptions and Classifications Six study sites in four pinyon-juniper climatic subtypes were used (Table 1). Cold-moist sites were represented by Cosnino, 14 km east of Flagstaff, in the SE. ?h sec. 24, T. 21 N., R. 8 E., and Indian Flat, 27 km north of Flagstaff, in the NW. ?h sec. 21, T. 24 N., R. 7 E. Cold-dry sites were represented by Hart Ranch, 37 km southeast of Flagstaff, in the SW. 1/2 sec. 20, T. 19 N., R. I 1 E., and Red Mountain, 43 km northwest of Flagstaff, in the NE. ?h sec. 1, T. 25 N., R. 4 E. Warm-moist sites were represented by Bluegrade, 59 km southwest of Flagstaff, in the NE. 1/4 sec. 25, T. 16 N., R. 6 E. Warm-dry sites were represented by Drake, 90 km southwest of Authors are research agronomist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Science and Education Administration, Agricultural Research, 2000 East Allen Road, Tucson, Arizona 85719, and range scientist, Crops Research Laboratory, Logan, Utah 84322. Hart Ranch permitted use of land; U.S. Forest Service, Southwestern Region, provided land and much of the fencing; U.S, Soil Conversation Service provided technical assistance on soils; and Plant Materials center at Tucson, Arizona, furnished much of the seed. Manuscript received, August 7, 1979. Flagstaff, mainly in the SE. ?4 sec. 28, T. 19 N., R. 1 W. The pinyon-juniper climatic subtypes are based on precipitation and temperature (Lavin and Johnsen 1977a). Data from nearby weather stations and more distant stations with similar elevation, physiography, and vegetation (Sellers and Hill 1974) were combined with limited on-site measurements to make the classifications. Arizona has distinct periods of summer and winter rainfall, with dry springs and falls. Indian Flat and Red Mountain receive more than half of their annual rainfall from May through October; Bluegrade and Drake, more than half from November through April; and Cosnino and Hart Ranch, about equal amounts during each rainfall period. All sites receive some snow during the winter. Soils were described from on-site examination by soil scientists experienced with Arizona pinyon-juniper range soils. Four soil series are represented (Table 1). Cosnino and Hart Ranch have similar Wiona loams classified as loamy, carbonatic, mesic, Lithic Torriorthents. Indian Flat and Red Mountain have similar Thunderbird clay loams classified as fine, montmorillonitic, mesic, Aridic Arguistolls. Bluegrade has a Springerville clay loam classified as fine, montmorillonitic, mesic, Typic Chromusterts. Drake has a Tajo gravelly loam classified as fine-loamy, mixed, mesic Petrocalcic Paleustolls. All the soils have moderate infiltration rates (1.5 to 5.1 cm per hour) except that at Bluegrade which has a slow infiltration rate (0.15 to 1.5 cm per hour) (Miller and James 1972; Wheeler and Williams 1974; Wendt et al. 1976). Soil depths range from 15 to 50 cm, with an estimated water-storage capacity of 7.6 to 12.7 cm, at Cosnino, Hart Ranch, and Drake. Soil depths at Indian Flat and Red Mountain range from 56 to 102 cm, with estimated water-storage capacities of 20 to 25 cm. The Springerville soil at Bluegrade ranges from 91 to more than 152 cm deep, with an estimated water-storage capacity of 46 to 56 cm. During late spring, soils at the study sites are usually dry throughout. Moisture from high-intensity, brief summer thunderstorms seldom penetrates deeply into the soil; deep-soil moisture is usually replenished by low-intensity, long-lasting winter storms. In elevation, precipitation, temperature, soil, and vegetation (Table 1), the sites represent a wide range of conditions common in Arizona pinyon-juniper rangelands. The study sites are all relatively level, so differences due to slope and aspect are minimal. Study sites were fenced against livestock, but Hart Ranch was opened to livestock grazing in late 1970. All sites are on national forests except Hart Ranch, which is on privately owned land. Drake and Red Mountain are located near species-adaptation test sites reported earlier; Red Mountain is adjacent to the earlier Dog Knobs site (Lavin and Johnsen 1977a, 1977b). Procedure Seed plantings of 44 promising species and recognized varieties were made June 8 to July 1, 1966. Seedbed preparations began with removal of live trees at Red Mountain, Indian Flat, and Drake, and of slash left from chaining and burning at Hart Ranch, Cosnino, and Bluegrade. Seedbeds were plowed during May; rocks and other debris were removed, and the seedbeds were smoothed and lightly packed with a cultipacker. Seeds were planted 0.6 to 2.5 cm deep at the rate of 25 to 30 pure JOURNAL OF RANGE MANAGEMENT 34(2), March 1981 131 This content downloaded from 207.46.13.160 on Mon, 17 Oct 2016 05:08:41 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms live seeds per 0.3 m in shallow furrows. Planting dates were: Hart Ranch, June 8; Cosnino, June 9; Bluegrade, June 14; Drake, June 17; and Red Mountain, July 1. Indian Flat plantings were delayed by rainstorms; partial plantings were made on June 29, June 30, and July 1. Weeds were not controlled. Similar plantings had been made at Hart Ranch and Red Mountain in 1965. Individual plots were 1.5 by 6.1 m, with four rows spaced 30 cm apart and 60 cm between rows of adjacent plots. A randomizedblock experimental design with four replicates was used at each site. A standard rain gauge modified to reduce evaporative losses (Gomm 1961) collected rainfall at each site. Recording rain gauges were also used at Red Mountain, Hart Ranch, Indian Flat, and Drake. Totalizing anemometers recorded wind movement. Duplicate sets of gypsum electrical-resistance blocks (Taylor et al. 1961) buried 1.3, 5, 15, 30, 46, and 61 cm deep in the soil measured soil moisture-depletion trends at each site. Thermographs in furrow bottoms at Hart Ranch, Red Mountain, Bluegrade, and Drake recorded soil temperature and relative humidity 7.6 cm above the soil at Red Mountain, Hart Ranch, and Drake. Plant numbers were determined by sampling 12 random 0.3 m row segments per plot at the time of apparent maximum emergence, at the end of the first growing season, and at the beginning and end of the second growing season. Seed were recovered from plots with little or no emergence to determine the condition of the seeds. Estimates of percent stand (Gomm 1974) were made in the fall of 1968, 1969, and 1970. Forage production was determined by double sampling and weight estimates in the fall of 1969 and 1970 for selected grass species. Long-term relative stand ratings (Hull 1954) were made during the spring and fall of 1977 to obtain representative ratings of both cooland warm-season plants. Stands were rated on a scale of 0 to 10, representing the actual stand in relation to the best possible stand, considering plant numbers, distribution, vigor, and height. Seed dormancy, stand increase, weed invasion, native plant establishment, plant damage, and growth stages were also observed. Since planting in succeeding years could not be done, results were compared to those of prior plantings at the same or similar sites with the same climatic and soil subtypes. Because the results of the older plantings had been reported as adjective ratings, numerical data were converted to adjective ratings; thus, 0 = failure, 1 to 2 = very poor, 3 to 4= poor, 5 to 6= fair, 7 to 8 = good, and9to 10 = excellent. Only stand ratings differing by two or more adjective rating classes were considered to be different. Results and Discussion
Range management research, Fort Valley Experimental Forest (P-53)
Range management research at the Fort Valley Experimental Forest during the past 100 years has provided scientific knowledge for managing ponderosa pine forests and forest-range grazing lands in the Southwest. Three research time periods are identified: 1908 to 1950, 1950 to 1978, and 1978 to 2008. Early research (1908-1950) addressed ecological effects of livestock grazing on pine regeneration and forage plant growth. In later years (1950-1978) the research scope broadened to include the multiple uses of forest resources (trees, understory vegetation, livestock, wildlife, etc.), environmental and socio-economic impacts, and tree, forage, and animal interactions and interrelationships. Currently (1978- 2008) research is focused on biodiversity, ecosystem restoration, and ecology of invasive non-native species.
Experimental study of water fluxes in a residential area: 2. Road infiltration, runoff and evaporation
Lack of accurate data has led some hydrologists and city planners to assume that urban infiltration is zero and runoff is 100% of the rainfall. These assumptions lead to an over estimation of road runoff volume and an underestimation of direct recharge to groundwater, which is already rising under some UK cities. This study investigates infiltration and runoff processes and quantifies the percentage of rainfall that contributes to storm drainage, and that which infiltrates through different types of road surface. Access tubes were installed for measuring soil water content using a neutron probe in three car parks, a road and a grass site at the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Crowmarsh Gifford, Wallingford. Storm drainage was recorded at the exit of the Thamesmead Estate in Crowmarsh Gifford, just before the drain joins the River Thames at Wallingford. Rainfall and water table depth were also recorded. Weekly measurements of soil moisture content indicated that the top 40 cm layer is not influenced by water‐table fluctuations and, therefore, positive changes in soil moisture could be attributed to infiltration of rainfall through the surface. Depending on the nature of the surface, subsurface layers, level of traffic, etc., between 6 and 9% of rainfall was found to infiltrate through the road surfaces studied. The storm drainage generated by road runoff revealed a flow pattern similar to that of the receiving watercourse (River Thames) and increased with the increase of infiltration and soil water content below the road surface. The ratio of runoff to rainfall was 0·7, 0·9 and 0·5 for annual, winter (October–March) and summer (April–September) respectively. As the results of the infiltration indicated that 6 to 9% of annual rainfall infiltrates through the road surface, this means that evaporation represents, 21–24% of annual rainfall, with more evaporation taking place during summer than winter. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.