RANGE CONDITION 313

It was concluded that most of the criteria studied could be use- ful in classifying range condi- tion. However, criteria such as total plant density and percent organic matter did not appear to be reliable indexes.

LITERATURE CITED ARNOLD, JOSEPH F. 1955. Plant life-

form classification and its use in evaluating range condition and trend. Jour. Range Mangt. 8: 176- 181.

COOK, C. WAYNE, L. A. STODDART, AND LORIN E. HARRIS. 1954. The nutritive value of winter range plants in the Great Basin. Utah Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 372. 56pp.

COOK, C. WAYNE, L. A. STODDART, AND F. E. KINSINGER. 1958. Re- sponses of crested wheatgrass to various clipping treatments. Ecol. Mono. 28: 237-272.

COSTELLO, DAVID F., AND GEORGE T. TURNER. 1941. Vegetative changes following exclusion of livestock from grazed ranges. Jour. of For- estry. 39: 310-315.

DYKSTERHUIS, E. J. 1949. Condition and management of range land based on quantitative e c o 1 o g y. Jour. Range Mangt. 2: 104-115.

ELLISON, L. 1954. Subalpine vege- tation of the Wasatch Plateau, Utah Ecol. Mono. 24:89-184.

ESPLM, A. C., J E. GREAVES, AND L. A. STODDART. 1937. A study of Utah winter ranges, composition of forage plants and use of supple- ments. Utah Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 277. 47 pp.

GOEBEL, CARL J., LEONARD DEBANO, AND RUSSELL D. FLOYD. 1958. A

new method of determining for- age cover and production on des- ert shrub vegetation. Jour. Range Mangt. 11: 244-246.

HANSON, W. R. 1951. Condition classes on mountain ranges in southwestern Alberta. Jour. Range Mangt. 4: 165-170.

HUMPHREY, R. R. 1949. Field com- ments on the range condition method of forage survey. Jour. Range Mangt. 2: l-10.

HUTCHINGS, S. S., AND G. STEWART. 1953. Increasing forage yields and sheep production on Intermoun- tain ranges. U.S. Dept. Agr. Cir. 925. 64pp.

HUTCHINGS, S. S. 1954. Managing winter sheep range for greater profit. U.S. Dept. Agr. Bul. 2067. 46 PP.

INGRAM, D. C. 1931. Vegetative changes and grazing use on Doug- las-fir cut-over land. Jour. of Agr. Res. 43: 387-417.

JOHNSON, W. M. 1956. The effect of grazing intensity on plant compo- sition, vigor, and growth of pine- bunchgrass ranges in central Col- orado. Ecology 37: 790-798.

KLEMMEDSON, JAMES 0. 1956. Inter- relations of vegetation, soils and range conditions induced by graz- ing. Jour. Range Mangt. 9: 134-138.

KRAMER, P. J. 1949. Plant and Soil Water Relationships. McGraw - Hill Book Co., Inc., New York. 347

. Lg T L H C BUCKMAN AND

N. C. BRA&. 1950: The Nature and Properties of So i 1 s. Macmillan Co., New York. 5th ed. 591 pp.

PARKER, KENNETH W. 1954. Applica- tion of ecology in the determina- tion of range condition and trend.

Jour. Range Mangt. 7: 14-23. PECHANEC, J. F. 1945. Indicators of

downward trend on sagebrush- perennial grass ranges grazed by sheep in the spring and fall. Inter- mtn. Forest and Range Exp. Sta. Res. Paper 12. 2 pp. (Mimeo- graphed).

REID, E. H., AND G. D. PICKFORD. 1946. Judging mountain meadow range condition in eastern Ore- gon and eastern Washington. U.S. Dept. Agr. Cir. 748. 31 pp.

RENNER, F. G., AND E. A. JOHN~DN. 1942. Improving range conditions from wartime livestock produc- tion. U.S. Dept. Agr. Bul. 1921. 18 PP.

SCHOLLENBERGER, C. J. 1945. Deter- mination of soil organic matter. Soil Sci. 59:53-56.

SHANTZ, H. L. AND R. L. PIEMEISEL. 1940. Types of vegetation in Es- calante Valley, Utah, as indicators of soil conditions. U.S. Dept. Agr. Tech. Bul. 173. 46 pp.

SHORT, L. R. AND E. J. WOOLFOLK. 1956. Plant vigor as a criterion of range condition. Jour. Range Mangt. 9: 66-69.

STEWART, GEORGE, W. P. C~TTAM, AND S. S. HUTCHINGS. 1940. Influ- ence of unrestricted grazing on northern salt-desert plant associ- ation in western Utah. Jour. Agr. Res. 60: 289-316.

UNITED STATES DEPT. INTERIOR, Bu- REAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT. 1957. Range condition criteria for two phase method surveys (Revised Mimeo.) .

WEAVER, J. E. AND R. W. DARLAND. 1947. A method of measuring vigor of range grasses. Ecology 28: 146-162.

Effect of Heat Treatment on Sprout Production of Some Shrubs of the Chaparral in Central Arizona’

FLOYD W. POND AND DWIGHT R. CABLE

Range Conservationists, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Tempe, Arizona

Chaparral occupies about 5% creasing grass production. The million acres in the central part study reported here was under- of Arizona. Most chaparral is taken to determine the effect of used yearlong by cattle and deer. burning at different intervals on Often the shrubs are too dense sprout production of several of for easy access by livestock. the important shrub species. Burning is being tried as a means Several shrubby species are of thinning the shrubs and in- found in the chaparral. Among

the more important are: shrub live oak (QUeTcUs turbinella Greene), Wright’s silktassel (Garrya wright% Torr.) , desert ceanothus (Ceanothus greggii A. Gray) 9 hollyleaf buckthorn (Rhamnus crocea Nutt.), point- leaf manzanita (Arctostaphylos pungens H.B.K.) , Pringle man- zanita (A. pringlei Parry),

1 Forest Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture; general headquarters maintained at Fort Collins, Colo- rado, in cooperation with Colorado State University. Authors stationed at Tempe and Tucson, Arizona. Re- search done at Tempe, Arizona, in cooperation with Arizona State University.

314

skunkbush sumac (Rhus trilo- bata Nutt.), sugar sumac (R. ovata S. Wats.), hairy mountain- mahogany (Cercocarpus brevifo- Zius A. Gray), birchleaf moun- tainmahogany (C. betuloides Nutt.), and larchleaf golden- weed (Aplopappus laricifolius A. Gray). Grasses and forbs usually are sparse.

The use of fire for modifying chaparral has received more at- tention in California than Ari- zona. Their opinions as to fire use are diverse. A sample of viewpoints follows: Sterling (1904) believed that fire was re- sponsible for all chaparral in northern California, for when coniferous forests are denuded by fire they are replaced by chaparral. Clements (1916) thought that chaparral was often a fire subclimax in southern Cal- ifornia. Jepson (1925) supported Clements in stating chaparral was, for the most part, a fire type of plant formation and that chaparral showed evidences of long continued burning. Bauer (1936) also believed that fires were frequent in the chaparral. Shantz (1947) concluded that repeated burns developed “soft” brush into broad-leaved chapar- ral and ultimately even chamise. Sampson (1944) stated that stands of sprouting chaparral are seldom destroyed or mate- rially thinned by periodic burn- ing, and that increases in herba- ceous vegetation following a fire virtually disappear by the fifth year because of the suppressive effect of the numerous brush sprouts. More recently, treat- ment of sprout regrowth with chemical herbicides in conjunc- tion with burning of the original shrub cover has been recom- mended for control of chamise in California (Buttery, et al., 1959).

Methods

In 1953, an area of chaparral at an elevation of 5,000 feet with annual precipitation of about 18 inches was selected on the Sierra

POND AND CABLE

Ancha Experimental Forest. The soils of this area were thin and rocky, and originated from quartzite parent materials.

Seven shrubby species, in suf- f icient numbers for experimen- tal replication, were selected on the area. These were: shrub live oak, skunkbush sumac, Wright’s silktassel, hollyleaf buckthorn, desert ceanothus, pointleaf man- zanita, and larchleaf golden- weed. Shrub live oak is usually the dominant shrub not only on

the experimental area but throughout the Arizona chapar- ral type. Pointleaf manzanita and skunkbush sumac may be locally abundant in rather small areas. The other four species are generally present throughout the chaparral but rarely domi- nate an area. Shrub live oak, skunkbush s u m a c , hollyleaf buckthorn, and Wright’s silk- tassel sprout from root crowns. The other three species general- ly invade by seedlings.

FIGURE 1. Shrub live oak previously burned in 1953 and in 1956. (A) Just before the third burn in 1959 and (B) following the 1959 burn.

HEAT TREATMENT 315

Table 1. Composition of seven species of Arizona chaparral af three loca- tions.

Location

Natural Pinal 3-Bar Species drainages Mountain Wildlife Area ._

Percent 77.7 42.6

1.6 1.3 2.1 0 2.5 5.6 0.4 1.9 0.2 0 0 0

15.5 48.6

Shrub live oak _________________________._~._ 75.6 Skunkbush sumac __._______.___________._ 2.1 Wright’s silktassel ____.__.________._ ____ __ 3.2 Hollyleaf buckthorn ._ ______ ___ ._.. _____ 2.2 Desert ceanothus __________________._______. 9.6 Pointleaf manzanita _____________.______ 3.0 Larchleaf goldenweed ___ _____ __ ._____ 1.8 Other shrubs __.__.____________________________ 2.5

Total ______________.______________ ____________ .lOO.O ____-

The relative importance of the seven species in the composition of woody vegetation on three chaparral sites is given in Table 1. Natural drainages are near the experimental area on the Sierra Ancha Experimental For- est. Pinal Mountain is about 40 miles south near the town of Globe. Other species of woody vegetation are found in this area, the most important being sugar sumac. The 3-Bar Wildlife Area is about 20 miles to the south- west of the experimental forest. Birchleaf mountainmahogany and sugar sumac are important species in this area.

Of the seven species studied, the ones most preferred by live- stock and deer are not abundant on most chaparral sites. Holly- leaf buckthorn, desert ceano- thus, and Wright’s silktassel are all rated fairly good as deer and livestock browse. Shrub live oak and skunkbush sumac are used heavily only when other forage or browse is scarce. Pointleaf manzanita and larchleaf golden- weed are seldom, if ever, used by deer or livestock.

The treatments assigned at random to the plots were: (1) burned each year, (2) burned every second year, (3) burned every third year, (4) burned every fourth year, and (5) burned every fifth year.

Each treatment was replicated two times for each species. Plot size depended on number of

- 100.0 100.0

stems. Each plot was large enough to contain sufficient stems for experimental counts.

Plots were burned in June with a torch generating 1,500”F (Figure 1). The torch was applied until the plant parts near the ground glowed in order to kill all cambial tissue at the base of the plants. Live stems were counted where they emerged from the ground prior to the first burn and immediately be- fore each succeeding burn.

Results

Shrub Live Oak This species proved difficult

to kill by burning (Table 2). Following the first four annual burns, stem counts were con- siderably higher than the pre- treatment number. Only after the fifth annual burn, were the live stems fewer than before the first burn. Numbers were fur- ther reduced by the sixth burn.

Burning at intervals of 2 or more years failed to reduce sprouting (Figure 2). In 1959, the number of live stems pres- ent on all plots except those burned each year was several times the original.

Skunkbush Sumac Results with this species were

somewhat erratic. On plots burned each year, the number of live stems was reduced by the first burn and none was found following the second burn.

The following year, however, more than the original number of live stems were found on the plots. These were burned and during the fourth year live stems were again not found. A few live stems were found in the fifth year and burned. In 1959, living stems were not found on the plots.

On plots burned every fourth year, live stems were not found following the first burn.

On plots burned at 2-, 3-, and 5-year intervals, live stems were found following each burn. The number of stems varied from several times to only a fraction of the original number.

Wright’s silktassel

Four annual burns or two burns spaced 2 years apart were sufficient to completely elimi- nate the sprouts of this species. Burning less frequently did not completely kill sprouts, although numbers were considerably re- duced after three burns at 3- year intervals.

Hollyleaf buckihom Two annual burns or two

burns spaced 2 years apart com- pletely killed sprouts of this spe- cies. The number of live stems more than doubled following the first burn but was reduced to zero by the second burn. Burn- ing less frequently failed to re- duce the number of sprouts.

Desert ceanofhus One burn was sufficient to kill

most of the old plants of this species. Seedlings were observed coming in on the burned plots over the years. Also, two of the old plants definitely sprouted on the plots treated at 2-year inter- vals. These were the only sprouts of this species observed. They were eliminated by the second treatment.

( Poinfleaf manzanifa

This species was completely killed by one burn. Though man- zanita seed are reported to ger-

316 POND AND CABLE

FIGURE 2. Shrub live oak burned at 2-year intervals showing (A) the plot prior to the first burn in 1953 and (B) the same plot prior to the fourth burn in 1959.

minate readily after a fire, no pretreatment level. Broadcast seedlings were observed. burning for five successive years

Larchleaf gddenweed This species was also elimi-

nated by one burn. No sprouts or seedlings were observed on the plots following the first treatment.

Discussion Shrub live oak sprouts are

difficult to control with fire. Burning increased the number of sprouts, and five annual burns were necessary to reduce the number of sprouts below the

is practically impossible in Ari- zona because of lack of sufficient fuel to carry a fire. How long it would take to reduce the oak sprouts by burning less often is unknown. After three treat- ments at 2-year intervals, there was still 4.37 times as many live stems as originally. Burning at less frequent intervals showed about the same results.

Sprouting of skunkbush sumac was erratic during the study.

This species appears to have the ability of delaying sprouting for a full year. Because of the im- practibility of burning each year and delayed sprouting character- istics, it is unlikely that this spe- cies could be reduced by broad- cast burning alone.

Wright’s silktassel is not as difficult to kill with fire as either shrub live oak or skunk- bush sumac. It was eliminated by four successive annual burns, and by two burns at a-year in- tervals. Deer and livestock graze this species readily so that it is considered a valuable browse species. That it will survive one burn easily is important. Re- burning at 1 or 2 years may, however, seriously injure or completely kill this species.

Hollyleaf buckthorn survives one burn with ease. Plants may be eliminated by a second burn if it occurs within an interval of 3 years. This species furnishes important forage for deer and livestock and its elimination would be detrimental to the for- age value of a chaparral range.

Old plants of desert ceanothus and pointleaf manzanita are vir- tually eliminated by burning. Both, however, are usually re- placed by seedlings. A few des- ert ceanothus may sprout from old stems, but sprouts of point- leaf manzanita were not ob- served. Desert ceanothus is a valuable browse plant, particu- larly for deer, while pointleaf manzanita is seldom used by deer or livestock except as cover.

Larchleaf goldenweed is easily killed by a single burn. The spe- cies is of little or no value as forage.

The possibilities of reducing the abundance of the less desir- able shrubs in the chaparral by broadcast burning appear to be remote. This is especially true from the standpoint of range management. Moreover, the spe- cies of most value to livestock and deer are more easily killed by fire than some of those with little or no value.

HEAT TREATMENT

Table 2, Cffecf of burnilng af diifereiif inf&vStls oti sproutitig of four species Within the Arizona chapartak

-- Stem counts before burning Final

Years between in indicated year count _ _____. _~_ treatments 19531 1954 1955 1950 1957 i958

121 152 276 170 94

91 95 41 61 13

15 25 56 59 22

21 25

9 23 13

173 223 147 131 175

58 51 74 77 15

29 27 15 22 22

710

26

7

62

Shrub live oak 330 371 161

1231 1142 1161

790

Skunkbush sumac 0 99 0

529 233 109

0

Wright’s silktassel 26 10 0 58 0

41 35

Hollyleaf buckthorn 0 0 0

58 0 64

102

Desert ceanothus 0 0 0 8 0

0 0

Pointleaf manzanita 0 0 0 0 0

0 0

Larchleaf goldenweed 0 0 0 0 0

0 0

1 Original stem counts prior to first burn.

38

436

16

24

0

26

0

24

1959 ___-

17 662

1469 773

1107

0 11 16 0

23

0 0 7

32 26

0 0

13 93 23

0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 __-

Summary hand torch at intervals varying Seven chaparral species were from 1 to 5 years. Number of

burned and reburned with a stems of shrub live oak was re-

317

duced only after five annual burns, Burning less frequently produced more live stems than were present prior to the first burn. Skunkbush sumac was al- SO hard to kili by burning, al- though results were more erratic than with shrub live oak. Wright’s silktassel and holly- leaf buckthorn are easier to kill than shrub live oak or skunk- bush sumac but must be burned at least twice within 3 years to be eliminated. Old plants of des- ert ceanothus, pointleaf manza- nita and larchleaf goldenweed are killed by one burn.

Reduction of the less desirable species of chaparral by repeat burning appears impractical. However, repeated fires at short intervals may reduce or elimi- nate many species preferred by deer and livestock.

LITERATURE CITED BAUER, HARRY L. 1936. Moisture

relations in the chaparral of the Santa Monica Mountains, Cali- fornia. Ecol. Monog. 6: 409-454.

BUTTERY, R. F., BENTLEY, J. R., AND PLUMB, T. R., JR. 1959. Season of burning affects follow-up chemi- cal control of sprouting chamise. Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Expt. Sta. Res. Note 154. 11 pp., illus. (Processed.)

CLEMENTS, F. E. 1916. Plant succes- sion. Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. 242: 1-512.

JEPSON, W. L. 1925. Manual of the Flowering Plants of California. Assoc. Students Store. Univ. of Calif. Berkeley, Calif. 1238 pp.

SAMPSON, ARTHUR W. 1944. Plant succession on burned chaparral lands in northern California. Calif. Agr. Expt. Sta. Bul. 685. 144 pp.

SHANTZ, H. L. 1947. Fire as a tool in management of brush ranges. Calif. Div. of Forestry Bul. 156 pp.

STERLING, E. 1904. Chaparral in northern California. F o r e s t r y Quart. 2: 209-214.

EDUCATION COUNCIL TO MEET

There will be a meeting of the Education Council, A.S.R.M., at 1 p.m., January 30, 1961 in the

convention headquarters hotel, Salt Lake City, Utah.