GrasslandsIN NORTHERN ARIZONA

GrasslandsIN NORTHERN ARIZONA

They can even seem monotonous through thewindshield of a car, but those who know themwell see instead a vigorous community of plantsand animals that respond dramatically to theseasons and are highly adapted to extremes ofheat and cold, wind and fire.

Healthy grassland ecosystems produce oxygen,purify water, enrich the soil, sequester carbonfrom the atmosphere, and provide a storehouseof biodiversity. Animals dependent upon grass-lands include pronghorn, prairie dogs, blackfooted ferrets and burrowing owls. Grasslandsalso hold the soil in place, preventing erosion.They sustain seeps and springs for wildlife andallow for infiltration of water into the aquifers,rivers, and streams that are critical sources ofwater for the growing population of Arizona.

Some of northern Arizona’s best known riversand streams have their headwaters in grasslands,including the Verde, Agua Fría, Little Coloradoand Cataract Creek. The future of Arizona’s tra-ditional ranching lifestyle and economy dependson maintaining healthy, native grasslands.

In Arizona today, native grasslands with lowshrub cover are now found on less than sevenmillion acres, comprising 31 percent of currentand former grasslands in the state. More than 15million acres of native grassland have been lostto shrub and tree encroachment, erosion andinvasive, non-native plants due to poor rangemanagement practices, fire suppression, andhuman development. The purpose of this publi-cation is to provide the public with informationabout the importance of northern Arizona’sdiminishing grasslands and to explore manage-ment strategies for conserving and restoringthese magnificent landscapes.

THE IMPORTANCE OFTHE IMPORTANCE OF

AT FIRST GLANCE, THE GRASSLANDS OF NORTHERN

ARIZONA SEEM TO BE LITTLE ELSE THAN WINDSWEPT

IMMENSITIES OF SPACE AND LIGHT.

Today, much of northern Arizona’s

grasslands continue to deteriorate

due to a lack of fire, improper range

use, the introduction and spread of

exotic species, human development

and fragmentation of habitat.

Grassland EcologyIn northern Arizona, healthy semi-aridgrassland plant communities are com-posed of a variety of perennial grassesand wildflowers as well as cactus, yucca,agaves, shrubs, and trees. The abundanceof these different plant species varies, inpart because the region’s rugged topogra-phy creates microclimates where shade,slope, and available moisture favor certainplants more than others.

Drought, grazing, burrowing animals,and especially fire, have the ability toinfluence the distribution and abundanceof grassland plants. Periodic fires oncemaintained grasses as the primary plantsin northern Arizona’s grasslands. Over thepast 150 years, unsustainable range usepractices and the suppression of fire haveallowed shrubs and trees to encroach anddegrade these grasslands.

PERENNIAL GRASSES are an importantcomponent of grasslands because theyhold soil in place, provide shade and helpconserve moisture. Up to two-thirds oftheir biomass is underground, in extensiveroot systems that reach deep into the soil.In fact, much of the life in grasslands is

underground. More than 20 species ofsmall animals including pocket gophers,prairie dogs, and ground squirrels surviveby burrowing down to where they areout of the wind, temperatures are moreconstant, and they are less vulnerable tocoyotes and other predators. They sharethese burrows with around 40 otherspecies of animals, ranging from snakesto burrowing owls.

SUPRESSION OF FIRE and improper rangeuse have allowed shrubs and trees toinvade grasslands, depleting availablemoisture and nutrients. Although theseimpacts can directly increase certainwoody shrub species, for most shrubspecies the interaction is an indirectone—a reduction in fine fuels needed forfire spread results in an altered fire regime(e.g. low fire frequency), allowing for anincrease in shrubs at the expense of nativegrasses. Soil dries out and erodes in thewind and rain, forming gullies that exposethe grasses to desiccation. Seeps andsprings disappear as the water table drops,diminishing the numbers and diversity ofplants as well as wildlife.

Over half of the critically endangered ecosystems in theUnited States (those with over 98 percent of area eitherlost or degraded) are grasslands.

—Reed Noss et al., 1995

Wide-open landscapes foster social groups like those of prairie dogs (left) and pronghorns(below); large flocks of birds are much more common in grassland landscapes than in forests.

Burrowing Owl

Gunnison Prairie Dog

Photos on this page ©George Andrejko, AGFD

2

Northern Arizona GrasslandsThe open country north of the MogollonRim can be classified as GREAT BASINGRASSLAND. Here, freezing temperaturesmay occur many nights of the year. Manyanimals hibernate, including most reptilesand rodents. Elk and pronghorn foragewidely, and can browse shrubs when grass is unavailable. These grasslands receive amixture of summer and winter rain and aredominated by blue grama grass as well asgalleta grass and Indian ricegrass that are welladapted to this dry, cold region. Sagebrushthrives too, as do lupines and mallow, snake-weed and yucca.

In contrast, APACHERIAN SEMI-DESERTGRASSLANDS are found south of theColorado River and the Mogollon Rim. Here,the indicator grass is tobosa, found withthreeawn, blue and sideoats grama, Plainslovegrass, green sprangletop and black grama,to name a few. This grassland also includesyucca and agaves, small shrubs like snakeweedand burroweed, and cactus in addition tomesquite, creosotebush, and ocotillo.

The History of Northern Arizona GrasslandsThe grasslands of northern Arizona oncesustained not only a more diverse range ofplants and animals, but also people who wereable to live entirely off the land by huntingand gathering. They took advantage of theperiodic natural fires—and perhaps set firesthemselves—that reinvigorated the grasses,prompting new growth that would lure andnourish game animals and produce seeds thatthe people consumed in cakes and porridge.

When people from European culturesexplored the Southwest, they marveled at thesight of grasses that grew “as high as the bellyof a horse” in some areas. Being unfamiliarwith the carrying capacity of the land and itsinevitable cycles of fire and drought, theyintroduced great numbers of sheep and cattle.By the early 1890s, there were nearly five mil-lion head of livestock in Arizona, a numberthat was ecologically unsustainable.

A more recent factor that now contributes tothe degradation of northern Arizona’s grass-lands is the construction of subdivisions andassociated roads, which not only fragment thehabitat but also deplete the aquifer. In addition,roads facilitate the spread of exotic species,including cheat grass.

Examples of Great Basin Grassland (above) and Apacherian Semi-Desert Grasslands (below).

SIDEOATS GRAMA

THREEAWN

YUCCATOBOSA

INDIAN RICEGRASS

With proper land and livestock management practices, grazing and grassland conservation objectives can be compatible. The Nature Conservancy seeks to demonstratethis balance everyday through the management of our ownherds of beef cows and bison, as well as collaboration withpublic and private land managers.

—Tom Collazo, Director of ConservationThe Nature Conservancy in Arizona

3

Photos on this page ©The Nature Conservancy

The Status of Northern Arizona’s GrasslandsThe Status of Northern Arizona’s Grasslands

MapScale 1:2,500,000

Mapping and evaluation of the condition of

Arizona’s grasslands below 5,000 feet in elevation

occurred through consultations with 39 range man-

agement specialists from federal and state agencies,

universities, and non-governmental organizations.

Expert input was verified and corrected where

necessary through extensive field reconnaissance

and quantitative vegetation sampling. The accuracy

of expert opinion was estimated at 74 percent

and the final map presumably exceeds this due to

adjustments made during field work. The effort to

evaluate and map the condition of Arizona’s grass-

lands is on-going. The above map provides results

of the grassland assessment for northern Arizona.

Results of the state-wide grasslands assessment,

including a state-wide map, can be found at

www.azconservation.org.

4

Grasslands Below 5,000 Feet

The Status of Arizona GrasslandsNot enough is known about Arizona’s current and former grasslands. To addressthis data gap The Nature Conservancyundertook a statewide grassland assessment.The primary objective was to characterizethe condition of grasslands relative to theirsuitability for management with fire becausefire is a primary tool for reducing woodyspecies and increasing perennial grass coverin native grasslands.

The assessment identified six grasslandtypes (see map):

(1) Open Native grasslands with low (lessthan 10 percent) shrub cover;

(2) Restorable Native grasslands withmoderate (10–35 percent) shrub coverand fire restoration potential;

(3) Non-native grasslands where non-nativeperennial grasses dominate

(4) Transitional grasslands with low (0–10percent) perennial grass and shrub coverand considerable bare soil;

(5) Historic grasslands that have crossedan ecological threshold with respect tothe encroachment of woody speciessuch as trees and shrubs, resulting inconversion to shrubland, where recoveryof perennial grasses is either no longerpossible by removing livestock or maybe possible only after 40+ years of live-stock grazing rest.

(6) Undetermined grassland condition.

The grassland assessment is not yet complete.High elevation montane grasslands (above5,000 feet) were not included and signifi-cant areas of grasslands are considered“undetermined.” Almost all of Arizona’sundetermined grasslands occur in northernArizona, underscoring the need for morework in this area. Future studies shouldseek to fill these data gaps. However, theassessment has shown that while much ofnorthern Arizona’s grasslands have not yetbeen fully studied, many of the state’slargest, contiguous blocks of open nativegrassland identified and studied in theassessment are in northern Arizona. Theseinclude the Coconino Plateau, the BigChino and Verde Valleys, lands east ofFlagstaff along the Little Colorado Riverand portions of the Arizona Strip.

n. Arizona % n. Arizona Arizona % stateGrassland type (acres) (acres)Open 1,647,356 7 2,685,266 11

Restorable 3,320,667 14 5,705,160 23

Non-native 2,407 0.01 1,451,027 6

Historic 1,217,668 5 3,679,008 15

Transitional 683,145 3 683,145 3

Undetermined 10,213,315 42 10,374,524 42

Total 17,084,558 70 24,578,130 100

Total determined 6,871,243 28 14,203,606 58

The gathering of high-quality ecological and conservationinformation is needed to guide the wise stewardship of thegrasslands of Northern Arizona. Accurate, comprehensive andtimely information is crucial to understanding and minimizingthreats to grasslands, including habitat loss, fragmentationand invasion of non-native species.

—William Cordasco, PresidentEcological Monitoring & Assessment (EMA) Foundation

Summary of Grassland Assessment Results

These photos are of restorable native grasslands on the Arizona Strip. The top photo is 12% shruband 15% grass canopy cover. The bottom photo is of 19% shrub and 54% grass canopy cover.While shrub levels may remain relatively constant, decreasing grass cover results in increased exposureof soil to wind and water erosion, undermining the long-term health of the ecosystem.

5

Photos on this page ©The Nature Conservancy

The Role of Fire in NorthernArizona GrasslandsFire plays a vital role in the life cycle ofhealthy grasslands, helping to maintaintheir vigor and diversity. Fire clears awaybrush, kills many invading shrubs andtrees, and stimulates new growth fromthe crowns of grasses and creates a flushof annual and perennial forbs. Naturalfires once probably swept across much ofnorthern Arizona’s grasslands at intervalsof 10–30 years. Most fires would have beenlight and swift, singeing off dead stalksand plant litter, returning nutrients to thesoil, and preventing the encroachment ofshrubs and trees.

With the active suppression of fire and the reduction of fine fuels due tograzing over the past one hundred andfifty years, trees and shrubs have dramati-cally increased in Great Basin grasslandsat the expense of perennial grasses. Thegrowth of trees and shrubs has depletedsoil moisture and nutrients that couldhave been used by grasses and forbs andexposed the ground to erosion.

In the Apacherian Semi-Desert grass-lands, fire at more frequent intervals of2 – 10 years once stimulated perennialgrasses, curbed cactus, and reducedmesquite and many other shrub species.Where fire has been absent for manyyears, mesquite, snakeweed, burroweed,acacia, and amole have taken over to thedetriment of bunchgrasses and otherherbaceous plants.

Options for Restoring Fire• Grazing rest so that sufficient fine fuel

can accumulate to carry fire.

• Prescribed burning.

• Incorporating naturally ignited fire intoland management practices.

Parts of northern Arizona’s semi-arid

grassland have been invaded by a broad

array of invasive, non-native species,

including Dalmation toadflax (Linaria

dalmatica), leafy spurge (Euphorbia

esula), knapweed (Centaurea diffusa)

and camelthorn (Alhagi pseudalhagi).

Invasive, non-native species pose a

serious challenge to land managers.

Activities such as livestock grazing may

allow establishment, and in some cases

domination, of invasive, non-native

species. Control is challenging and the

ecological consequences are serious.

Negative impacts include a reduction in

biodiversity and the quality of wildlife

habitat, competition with perennial grasses

for soil moisture, reduction in forage,

damage to sensitive riparian and water-

shed areas and increased erosion. The

rapid expansion of invasive weed popula-

tions has been a deterrent to restoring

native plant communities and re-estab-

lishing historic ecological conditions.

A particularly challenging species is

Bromus tectorum or cheatgrass.

Cheatgrass is native to Eurasia and

was introduced in the Intermountain

West in the 1880s. Cheatgrass germi-

nates quickly after a rain and forms

up to 300 seeds per plant, which are

viable for as long as five years and

able to survive fire. Its threadlike

roots deprive native bunchgrasses of

moisture and its dried stalks increase

the frequency and intensity of fire,

burning so fiercely that perennial

bunchgrasses and their seeds are

killed. However, there is a brief period

in spring before perennial bunchgrasses

emerge when cheatgrass seedlings are

vulnerable to fire.

Proper range use and the restoration and conservation ofnative grasslands promote the health of wildlife, preventsoil erosion, and maintain precious water resources.

—Rick Miller, Habitat Specialist, AZGF Region ll

Invasive Non-Native Plants

6

• Suppression of fire.

• Inappropriate grazing practices.

• Encroachment by native shrubs

and trees and loss of perennial

grass cover.

• Invasive, non-native plants.

• Soil erosion.

• Roads, buildings, and subdivisions.

Threats to Northern Arizona’s Grasslands

Cheatgrass ©John Randall, The Nature Conservancy

What We Can DoAdaptive ManagementLand managers are often forced to makeland management decisions in the face of little or no information regarding theoutcome of those decisions. Adaptive man-agement is a process designed to changethis through the collection of informationthat assists in evaluating the effects ofmanagement actions and in identifyingknowledge gaps that can be addressed byresearch or additional monitoring. Theresult is a decision making process basedon on-the-ground information.

The adaptive management process requiresseven primary steps:1. Identification of management goals and

desired future grassland conditions.2. Development of monitoring protocols

to detect meaningful change in grasslandcondition. Monitoring protocols mustspecify a timeframe during which moni-toring should be conducted as well as anoptimal frequency for data collection.

3. Consistent implementation of themonitoring protocol.

4. Analysis of data.5. Review of data against established goals

and grassland condition to determineneed for changes in management.

6. Implementation of needed managementchanges (and continued monitoring).

7. Implementation of follow-up studies tofill information gaps.

Fire RestorationThe role of fire in northern Arizona’s grass-lands is becoming better understood, butmost public and private land managers stilllack sufficient information on grassland fire

ecology. They often establish acreage tar-gets for prescribed and wildland fire thatresult in longer fire return intervals thanhistorically occurred in these fire adaptedvegetation communities. Some areas havedegraded to the point where decades ofwork will be required in order to restoregrassland ecosystems and their naturalprocesses, including fire.

As new and better information emerges onthe fire ecology of fire-adapted grasslands,land managers should incorporate thisinformation into grassland managementplans and on-the-ground actions. Forexample, regenerative parts of some plantstolerate fire only at certain points in theirlife cycles. Snow or rainfall before and aftera fire will also influence the levels of salts,sugars, lignin, and moisture in plants, mak-ing them more or less susceptible to fire.Fire management considers factors such asthese in the timing of prescribed burns.

Grass BankingPartners in a grass bank pool land so that grazing, grassland conservation andrestoration can be implemented acrossownership boundaries. In return for accessto abundant, high quality grass that is noton their land, partners provide some formof conservation benefit. One grass bank, forexample, exchanges grass for conservationeasements on partners’ private property inorder to maintain open space. Anotherprovides access to grass in exchange forecological restoration of partners’ federalgrazing allotments. Yet another aims atimproving stewardship of private ranch-lands. Grass utilization may last year-roundfor many years or a single month during

the growing season. The type of workvaries among participants and landscapes.The land growing the grass for exchangemay be public or private

Grazing RestIn some areas, continuous grazing hasremoved the fine fuels that would ordinarilycarry the low-intensity fires that perpetuatenative grasslands. Swiftly moving, low-intensity fires benefit a variety of perennialgrasses that grow in dense clumps whichprotect inner shoots. Rest from grazing, inorder to build-up fine fuels that can carrya fire, may be appropriate and may rangefrom one or two growing seasons to severalyears, depending upon conditions. Butgrazing rest, while ecologically beneficial,may carry, at least in the short-term, afinancial cost for ranchers. Incentivesmust be identified that can help facilitategrazing rest and overcome the financialobstacles it poses.

Conservation EasementsConservation easements are legal restric-tions that landowners voluntarily placeon their property. They can be sold ordonated. These easements restrict presentand future landowners from specifiedactivities, such as subdividing their land.Conservation easements have proven to be extremely effective in conservingecosystems and open space and sustaininga traditional, rural way of life. In northernArizona, Babbitt Ranches Co. has donatedthe largest conservation easement inArizona to protect nearly thirty-five thousand acres of grasslands south of theGrand Canyon (see map on page 4) fromsubdivision and habitat fragmentation.

NAU, Cline Library, Don Lyngholm Collection, NAU.PH.95.55.2259Grama Grass

7

THE NATURE CONSERVANCY MISSION

To preserve the plants, animals, and natural communities that representthe diversity of life on Earth by protecting the lands and waters theyneed to survive. www.nature.org

ECOLOGICAL MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT FOUNDATION MISSION

To affect a land ethic so that private and public land managers havescience-based knowledge and technologies to support the soundstewardship and conservation of their lands and natural and culturalresources. www.emaprogram.com

THE ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT MISSION

To conserve, enhance, and restore Arizona’s diverse wildlife resourcesand habitats through aggressive protection and management programs,and to provide wildlife resources and safe watercraft and off-highwayvehicle recreation for the enjoyment, appreciation, and use by presentand future generations. www.azgfd.gov

REFERENCES

Arizona Game and Fish. “Wildland Fire and Wildlife”(Deserts, Grasslands), in Wild Kids, Number 26, 2002.

Brown, James K. and Smith, Jane Kapler, editors.Wildland Fire in Ecosystems: Effects of Fire on Flora,USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain ResearchStation, 2000.

Brown, Lauren. The Audubon Society Nature Guides:Grasslands, Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., New York, 1985.

Burgess, Tony L. Northwestern Apacherian Savannas:A Description and Review of Issues Concerning HumanHabitat. In B. Tellman, D.M. Finch, C. Edminster, andR. Hamre (eds). The Future of Arid Grasslands:Identifying Issues, Seeking Solutions, pages 3-10. U.S.Department of Agriculture, Forest Service RockyMountain Research Station, Tucson, Arizona, 1996.

Colorado Plateau – Land Use History of North America.www.cpluhna.nau.edu/biota/invasive_exotics.htm on the worldwide web.

Finch, Deborah M., editor. Assessment of GrasslandEcosystem Conditions in the Southwestern United States,Volume 1, USDA Forest Service, Rocky MountainResearch Station, General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-135, 2004.

Gori, David and Enquist, Carolyn. An Assessment of the Spatial Extent and Condition of Grasslands inCentral and Southern Arizona, Southwestern NewMexico and Northern Mexico, The NatureConservancy, Tucson, AZ, 2003.

Gori, David and Schussman, Heather. State of the LasCienegas National Conservation Area: Condition andTrend of the Desert Grassland and Watershed. TheNature Conservancy, Tucson, Arizona 2005.

Harper, C. The GrassbankTM Movement, TheConservation Fund, Arlington, VA, 2001.

Kaczmarski, Jennifer. Restoration Implications ofBromus tectorum-Infested Grasslands of the Great Basin,in Restoration and Reclamation Review, Volume 6, Fall,University of Minnesota, St. Paul, 2000.

McLaren, M.P. and Van Devender, T.R. The DesertGrassland, University of Arizona Press, Tucson, 1995.

McPherson, G.R. Ecology and Management of NorthAmerican Savannas, University of Arizona Press,Tucson, 1997.

Noss, Reed, E.T. Laroe and J.M. Scott. EndangeredEcosystems of the United States: A PreliminaryAssessment of Loss and Degradation. Biological Rep. 28.U.S. Department of Interior Biological Services,Washington, DC, 1995.

Schussman, Heather and Gori, David. An EcologicalAssessment of the Bureau of Land Management’s CurrentFire Management Plans, The Nature Conservancy,Tucson, AZ, 2004.

Collaborative Partnerships and ResourcesMany partnerships and other arrangementshave developed among ranchers, state andfederal government agency officials, scien-tists, conservation organizations, and otherswith an interest in the conservation andrestoration of northern Arizona’s grasslands.Contact the following for more informationon resources available for grassland man-agement and conservation.

THE WILDLIFE HABITAT INCENTIVESPROGRAM (WHIP) is a voluntary programfor land managers who want to develop andimprove wildlife habitat, primarily on privateland. Through WHIP the US Department ofAgriculture’s Natural Resources ConservationService provides both technical assistanceand up to 75 percent cost-share assistanceto establish and improve fish and wildlifehabitat. WHIP agreements between NRCSand the participant generally last from 5 to10 years from the date the agreement issigned. WHIP has proven to be a highlyeffective and widely accepted programacross the country. By targeting wildlifehabitat projects on all lands and aquaticareas, WHIP provides assistance to conser-vation minded landowners who are unableto meet the specific eligibility requirementsof other USDA conservation programs. TheFarm Security and Rural Investment Act of2002 reauthorized WHIP as a voluntary

approach to improving wildlife habitat inour Nation. For additional information pleasesee: www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/WHIP.

THE LAND OWNER INCENTIVEPROGRAM (LIP) is a voluntary assistanceprogram for the conservation, enhance-ment and restoration of wildlife habitat onprivate land. The U.S. Fish and WildlifeService distributes LIP funds to the states,which in turn provide technical and finan-cial assistance to private landowners. To beeligible for these funds, a project must occuron private land, and it must conserve,enhance or restore habitat for an “at-risk”or declining species. Like most Federalfunding programs, a 25% match is required,which can include in-kind contributions bythe landowner (labor, use of equipment,donation of materials, volunteer time, etc).The Arizona Game and Fish Department(Department) provides LIP funds to privatelandowners through a competitive grantprocess. There is no project minimum ormaximum funding level, and these fundscan be used to purchase ConservationEasements. Agreements between thelandowner and the Department can lastfrom one year to several years, depending on the project and the benefit received byArizona’s wildlife. For more informationregarding this program, please see:www.azgfd.gov/outdoor_recreation/land-owner_lip.shtml.

This publication is based upon An EcologicalAssessment of the Bureau of Land Management’sCurrent Fire Management Plans: Materials andRecommendations for Future Fire Planning byHeather Schussman and David Gori (2004), andAn Assessment of the Spatial Extent and Conditionof Grasslands in Central and Southern Arizona,Southwestern New Mexico and Northern Mexicoby David Gori and Carolyn Enquist (2003) For thefull reports, go to www.azconservation.org. If youhave information, questions or comments concern-ing this publication, please contact The NatureConservancy at (928) 774-8892.

Through public and private collaboration, such as the provision of sufficient

allotment space in the federal and state systems, ranchers should be provided

with much needed land to graze their cows and rest their home allotments

for the benefit of native grasses and their ranching operations.

Front cover image ©The Nature ConservancyAll Illustrations ©Zackery ZdinakDesign by Joan Carstensen Design