Vegetation Inventory Project Report: Big Hole National Battlefield

National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior

Natural Resource Stewardship and Science

Vegetation Inventory Project Big Hole National Battlefield

Natural Resource Report NPS/UCBN/NRR—2012/519

ON THE COVER BIHO overview looking at Battle Mountain, the North Fork of the Big Hole River, and surrounding valley. Photograph by: National Park Service.

Vegetation Inventory Project Big Hole National Battlefield

Natural Resource Report NPS/UCBN/NRR—2012/519

John A. Erixson P.O. Box 9748 Northwest Management, Inc. Moscow, Idaho

Dan Cogan Cogan Technology, Inc. 21 Valley Road Galena, IL 61036

April 2012

U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado

The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public.

The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate high-priority, current natural resource management information with managerial application. The series targets a general, diverse audience, and may contain NPS policy considerations or address sensitive issues of management applicability.

All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner.

This report received informal peer review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting of the data.

Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government.

This report is available from NPS Upper Columbia Basin Network website (http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/units/ucbn/) and the Natural Resource Publications Management website (http://www.nature.nps.gov/publications/nrpm).

Please cite this publication as:

Erixson, J, and D. Cogan, 2012. Vegetation inventory project report: Big Hole National Battlefield. Natural Resource Report NPS/UCBN/NRR—2012/519. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado.

NPS 341/113955, April 2012

Contents

Page

Figures...... v

Tables ...... vii

Appendices ...... ix

Executive Summary ...... xi

Acknowledgments...... xv

Introduction ...... 1

Background ...... 1

NPS Vegetation Inventory Program ...... 3

Upper Columbia Basin Network ...... 4

Big Hole National Battlefield ...... 5

Natural Setting ...... 10

Vegetation ...... 13

Big Hole National Battlefield Vegetation Inventory Project ...... 19

Scope of Work ...... 19

Methods...... 21

Planning, Data Gathering and Coordination ...... 21

Field Surveys ...... 23

Vegetation Classification ...... 26

Digital Imagery and Interpretation ...... 28

Accuracy Assessment ...... 33

Results ...... 39

Vegetation Classification ...... 39

Digital Imagery and Interpretation ...... 44

iii

Contents (continued)

Page

Vegetation Map ...... 47

Accuracy Assessment ...... 52

Discussion ...... 55

Field Survey ...... 56

Classification ...... 56

Digital Imagery and Mapping ...... 56

Accuracy Assessment ...... 57

Future Recommendations ...... 57

Research Opportunities ...... 59

Literature Cited ...... 61

Figures

Page

Figure 1. Map of UCBN showing the location of BIHO in the network...... 4

Figure 2. Park Map of Big Hole National Battlefield...... 6

Figure 3. Location Map of Big Hole National Battlefield and the Nez Perce National Historic Trail...... 7

Figure 4. BIHO cultural sites and landscape photos...... 8

Figure 5. BIHO overview map...... 9

Figure 6. BIHO 3d landscape overview map...... 9

Figure 7. BIHO Soil Survey Map...... 11

Figure 8. BIHO ecoregion location map...... 12

Figure 9. Representative cross-section of BIHO’s topography showing life zones...... 13

Figure 10. Common BIHO vegetation types...... 15

Figure 11. Example of sparse mountain big sagebrush and transitional areas at BIHO...... 18

Figure 12. Map of the BIHO vegetation project boundary and land boundary...... 20

Figure 13. Vegetation classification plot locations within the BIHO project area...... 25

Figure 14. Example of the 2009 base-map imagery for BIHO...... 28

Figure 15. Example of the 2011 true-color base-map imagery for BIHO...... 29

Figure 16. Location of the accuracy assessment (AA) points in BIHO...... 36

Figure 17. Pinus contorta / Calamagrostis rubescens Forest and Salix lucida / Deschampsia cespitosa Woodland and Shrubland at BIHO...... 47

Figure 18. Example of the BIHO vegetation map layer...... 51

Tables

Page

Table 1. Soil unit summary table for BIHO...... 10

Table 2. Project timeline for the BIHO Vegetation Inventory Project...... 22

Table 3. Plot sizes used for vegetation classification sampling at BIHO...... 24

Table 4. Polygon attribute items and descriptions...... 32

Table 5. Sampling protocol for AA points...... 34

Table 6. Statistics used in AA analysis...... 37

Table 7. List of 11 proposed associations cross-walked to existing NVCS alliances at BIHO...... 40

Table 8. List of 16 plant associations and four vegetation alliances for BIHO ...... 41

Table 9. List of 13 ecological systems within BIHO...... 43

Table 10. Assignment of map classes to NVCS plant associations/alliances...... 45

Table 11. Summary statistics for the BIHO map class polygons...... 48

Table 12. Final Contingency Table (Error Matrix) for BIHO...... 53

vii

Appendices

Page

Appendix A - Components and Flow Diagram of the Vegetation Inventory Program ...... APP A.1

Appendix B - Field Data Forms and Instructions ...... APP B.1

Appendix C - Dichotomous Key to BIHO Plant Associations ...... APP C.1

Appendix D - BIHO Plant Association Descriptions ...... APP D.1

Appendix E - Plant Species List for BIHO ...... APP E.1

Appendix F - Photo Interpretation Mapping Conventions and Visual Key...... APP F.1

Appendix G - Final BIHO Vegetation Map ...... APP G.1

Executive Summary

Big Hole National Battlefield (BIHO) is located in southeast Montana near the town of Wisdom. Established in 1910 and expanded over the years the 665 acre site preserves and memorializes the tragic battle on August 9-10, 1877 between the U.S. Army, some Montana volunteers, and the Nez Perce people. The battle was part of a five-month conflict between the Nez Perce and the U.S. Army that culminated with the Nez Perce surrender on October 4, 1877. Today the National Park Service manages the sight of the battle in the Big Hole Valley next to the North Fork of the Big Hole River. Contained within BIHO are most of the important battlefield sites including the Howitzer Capture Site, the Siege Area, Battlefield Monument, the Nez Perce Campsite, the battle zone that includes the Twin Trees, Horse Pasture, and Retreat areas, and a battlefield overlook area.

The BIHO landscape is comprised of mostly natural vegetation that closely mirrors the battlefield conditions during the time of the conflict. Bisecting the battlefield is the confluence of Trail and Ruby Creeks that form the beginning of the North Fork of the Big Hole River. The river meanders through the center of BIHO creating a broad floodplain bordered by the steep eastern-slope of Battle Mountain to the west and a flat upland bench to the east. Vegetation at this site varies by location with the dry mountain slope containing second growth conifer trees and sagebrush steppe vegetation, willow and grass-like marshes are prominent in the floodplain, and the bench area is covered by sagebrush and various grasses.

Dominant mountain-side plant species at BIHO include lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta), Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana), bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis), and arrowleaf balsamroot (Balsamorhiza sagittata). Shining willow shrubs and trees (Salix lucida) along with shrubby-cinquefoil (Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda) sedges (Carex spp.), Baltic rush (Juncus balticus), meadow barley, (Hordeum brachyantherum), timber oatgrass (Danthonia intermedia), slender wheatgrass (Elymus trachycaulus), and tufted hairgrass (Deschampsia cespitosa) are common in the floodplain. Small forest ravines also occur at BIHO containing small bands of lodgepole pine and patches of black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa) and quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) trees. The eastern bench area is also dominated by mountain big sagebrush with bluebunch wheatgrass, Idaho fescue and various other grasses. To better understand the ecology and distribution of these species, and BIHO’s vegetation as a whole, the project described in this report was initiated by the NPS Vegetation Inventory Program (NVIP) in conjunction with the Upper Columbia Basin Inventory and Monitoring Network (UCBN).

A three-year, three-phase program was initiated to complete the tasks of sampling, classifying, and mapping the plant associations and vegetation alliances within BIHO. Phase-one, directed by UCBN staff in conjunction with Northwest Management Incorporated (NMI), Idaho State University (ISU), and S.M. Stoller Corporation (Stoller) resulted in the plant association and vegetation alliance classification using the National Vegetation Classification System (NVCS). Vegetation classification was based on the 2010 field sampling of 95 representative classification plots located within the boundary of BIHO. Analysis of the classification plot data by ISU and Stoller ecologists occurred in 2011. Through this process 16 distinct plant associations and four

alliances were identified. Vegetation alliance and plant association local descriptions and a field key to determine each association in the field are included in this report.

Phase-two, directed by NMI and Cogan Technology, Inc. (CTI) resulted in creation of the digital vegetation and land use map and project geodatabase. Mapping was conducted primarily by interpreting vegetation-specific and non-vegetated site signatures from the 2009 and 2011 National Aerial Imagery Program (NAIP) ortho-photo products. CTI reliably discerned 18 vegetation and 9 land use/land cover map units. The mapping process relied on manual digitizing of homogenous photo-signatures supported by on-site verification. All interpreted data were converted to Geographic Information System (GIS) databases and the final map layer contains vegetation and land-use polygons with corresponding map class, NVCS, and modifier attributes.

Draft maps were printed, field tested, reviewed, and revised based on field observations. Following verification, edits were applied to create the final vegetation map product for accuracy assessment (AA). In Phase-three the AA was conducted by NMI ecologists during the 2011 field season. Sampling required selecting 208 random point locations throughout the study area based on map unit frequency and abundance. AA locations were accessed by NMI field crews who keyed the vegetation at each target to the proper association and acquired representative ground photographs. The associations at each AA target were then compared to the electronic vegetation map and the AA analysis revealed an overall thematic accuracy of 92%.

Completion of the project in Phase-four included producing the standard project deliverables as described and presented in this report and the accompanying DVD. Deliverables include:

● The Final Report that includes keys to the vegetation types and imagery signatures, AA information, and a summary of the methods and results;  A Spatial GIS Database containing spatial data for the vegetation units, classification plots, and AA points;  Digital Photos from sample plots and miscellaneous park views;  Metadata for all spatial data [Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC)-compliant];  Vegetation Descriptions and Photo-Signature Key to the map units and plant associations/vegetation alliances.

xii

A Summary of the projects statistics is included below:

Field Work:  2010 Plot Sampling = 95 Classification Plots  2011 Accuracy Assessment = 208 Points

Classification:  16 NVCS Plant Associations, 4 NVCS Plant Alliances

GIS Database:  Project Size = 7,037-acre (2,850-hectare) o Big Hole National Battlefield = 665 acres (269 hectares) o Environs = 4,187 acres (1,696 hectares)  Base Imagery = o NAIP 2011, True-color, 3-band, 1-meter, 1:12,000-scale ortho-image  27 Map Units = 18 Vegetated and 9 Land-use/Land-cover  Minimum Mapping Unit = ½ hectare (1.24 acres), modified to ¼ acre (0.1 hectare) for wetlands and riparian polygons  Total Size = 1,319 Polygons  Average Polygon Size = 5.3 acres (2.2 hectares)

Overall Thematic Accuracy = 92% (90% Kappa Index)

xiii

Acknowledgments

This unique vegetation inventory project required the enthusiasm and energy of several individuals over three years to complete. The dedication of everyone participating helped to produce the product described herein that we, the authors, thankfully acknowledge.

Foremost, we thank Lisa Garrett and the UCBN staff (including Tom Rodhouse and Gordon Dicus) who provided contracting, data management, and technical review through all aspects of this project. Special recognition is also credited to Dr. Karl Brown and Tammy Cook with the NPS Vegetation Inventory Program for prioritizing this project and providing funding. Without the financial support from the NPS Vegetation Inventory Program this project would not have been possible.

The BIHO vegetation inventory project benefited greatly from the planning and ecological expertise contributed by Amy Forman, Jeremy Shive (S.M. Stoller, Corporation), and Ken Aho (Idaho State University). We would like to especially acknowledge all of the long days and hard work put in by our field crew members including ecologists and botanists from Northwest Management Incorporated staff.

We would also like to recognize the staff at BIHO including Steve Black (Superintendent) who helped review, update and approve this project.

Introduction

Background In 1994, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and National Park Service (NPS) formed the USGS-NPS Vegetation Mapping Program to cooperatively inventory and map the vegetation in the system of National Parks. Presently managed as the National Vegetation Inventory Program (NVIP) by the NPS Natural Resource Program Center, Biological Resource Management Division, program goals are to provide baseline ecological data for park resource managers, obtain data that can be examined in a regional and national context, and provide opportunities for future inventory, monitoring, and research activities (FGDC 1997, 2008 Grossman et al. 1998).

At program initiation, the NVIP adopted the U.S. National Vegetation Classification (USNVC) (The Nature Conservancy and Environmental Systems Research Institute 1994a, Grossman et al. 1998) as a basis for the a priori definition of vegetation units to be inventoried. The Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) adopted a modified version of the upper (physiognomic) levels as a federal standard (FGDC-STD-005) (FGDC 1997, 2008). This standard was hereafter termed the National Vegetation Classification Standard (NVCS). The NVCS established a federal standard for a complete taxonomic treatment of vegetation in the U.S. at eight physiognomic levels, they are: (1) Formation Class, (2) Formation Subclass, (3) Formation, (4) Division, (5) Macrogroup, (6) Group, (7) Alliance, and (8) Association, with the finest level being the plant association. Alliances are usually aggregations of associations that are physiognomically uniform and share one or more characteristic or diagnostic species. An association is defined as a plant community or type with a consistent species composition, uniform physiognomy, and homogenous habitat conditions (Flahault and Schroter 1910). The plant association or community type is determined by environmental patterns and disturbance processes.

The NVCS established conceptual taxonomic levels for the floristic units of alliance and association, largely following the USNVC, but did not offer a taxonomic treatment for the floristic levels because of the immense scope of establishing robust floristic units for the entire U.S. The FGDC standard requires that federally funded vegetation classification efforts collect data in a manner that enables cross-walking the data to the NVCS (i.e., the physiognomic levels) and sharing between agencies, but does not require use of that standard by agencies for internal mission needs. NatureServe (2011) maintains a treatment of floristic units (alliances and associations), which, though not a federal standard, are used as classification and mapping units by the NVIP whenever feasible. For purposes of this document, the federal standard (FGDC 1997, 2008) is denoted as the NVCS; the USNVC will refer exclusively to the NatureServe treatment for vegetation floristic units (alliances and associations only).

Use of the NVCS as the standard vegetation classification system is central to fulfilling the goals of the NVIP because it:

. is vegetation based; . uses a systematic approach to classify a continuum; . emphasizes natural and existing vegetation; . uses a combined physiognomic-floristic hierarchy; . identifies vegetation units based on both qualitative and quantitative data; and . is appropriate for mapping at multiple scales.

The use of the NVCS and the NVIP vegetation inventory protocols facilitate effective resource stewardship by ensuring compatibility and widespread use of the information throughout the NPS and by other federal and state agencies. The vegetation maps and associated information support a wide variety of resource assessment, park management, and planning needs. In addition they can be used to provide a structure for framing and answering critical scientific questions about vegetation communities and their relationship to environmental conditions and ecological processes across the landscape.

The NVCS has primarily been developed and implemented by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and the network of State Natural Heritage Programs over the past forty years (TNC and ESRI 1994a; Grossman et al. 1998). The NVCS is currently supported and endorsed by multiple federal agencies, the FGDC, NatureServe, State Heritage Programs, and the Ecological Society of America. Refinements to the classification occur in the process of application, which lead to ongoing revisions that are reviewed both locally and nationally. TNC and NatureServe have made available a two-volume publication presenting the standardized classification, providing a thorough introduction to the classification, its structure, and the list of vegetation types occurring within the U.S. as of April 1997 (Grossman et al. 1998). Volume I: The National Vegetation Classification Standard can be accessed electronically on the Internet at: http://www.natureserve.org/publications/library.jsp. NatureServe has since superseded Volume II of the publication (the classification listing), providing regular updates to ecological communities in the U.S. and Canada. This online database server, NatureServe Explorer®, can be accessed electronically on the Internet at: http://www.natureserve.org/explorer (2011).

NPS Vegetation Inventory Program The Director of the NPS approved the Natural Resource Challenge (NRC) in 1999 to encourage the NPS to focus on the preservation of the U.S. natural heritage through science, natural resource inventories, and expanded resource monitoring (NPS 1999). The NRC provided funding for 12 baseline inventories to be completed in each of 270 parks with significant natural resources. The vegetation inventory and mapping is considered one of the 12 baseline inventories. Through the NRC, 270 NPS units were organized into 32 networks in 2000 for the purpose of accomplishing natural resource inventory and monitoring projects.

The NVIP is a cooperative effort between the NPS and the USGS to classify, describe, and map vegetation communities in more than 270 national park units across the U.S. The scope of this effort is large and implementation is complex due to the fact that vegetation species and communities can be unique from park-to-park. When the NVIP is completed the final products will assist park managers to: 1) identify and conserve plant biodiversity; 2) better understand resources and processes including wildlife habitat relationships and wildland fires; and 3) provide the necessary tools to better manage resource issues including exotic species invasions, insect effects, and diseases.

The primary objective of the NVIP is to produce high-quality, standardized maps and associated data sets of vegetation and other land cover occurring within parks and selected adjacent environments (environs). This information fills data gaps and complements a wide variety of resource assessments, park management, and conservation needs. For example, in Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks, the 2007 vegetation map and digital database provided tools to better manage the foxtail pine (Pinus balfouriana ssp. austrina), an endemic species to the southern Sierra Nevada Mountains that can live for more than 1,000 years.

The NVIP uses well-established procedures that are compatible with other agencies and organizations including the NVCS, a system that is integrated with the major scientific efforts in the taxonomic classification of vegetation, and is a FGDC standard. In addition, stringent quality control procedures ensure the reliability of the vegetation data and encourage the use of resulting maps, reports, and databases at multiple scales.

A complete vegetation mapping project for an NPS unit includes the following products, at a minimum:  Detailed vegetation report  Digital vegetation map  Vegetation classification plot data  Accuracy assessment data and analysis  Dichotomous vegetation key  Photo-interpretation key

Maps are produced in Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates North American Datum 1983 (NAD 83) with a 1:24,000 scale and a minimum mapping unit of 0.5 hectares (1.24 acres). The vegetation maps must meet the National Map Accuracy Standards for positional accuracy, and the minimum class accuracy goal across all vegetation and land cover classes of 80 percent.

Upper Columbia Basin Network The specific decision to classify and map the vegetation within and adjacent to BIHO was made in response to guidelines set forth by the NPS Natural Resources Inventory and Monitoring Program and implemented by the Upper Columbia Basin Network (UCBN), which includes nine NPS units located in four states of the inland Northwest (Figure 1). The UCBN was organized to inventory and monitor status and trends for selected natural resources and the network facilitates collaboration, information sharing, and economies of scale in natural resource monitoring among its member parks.The inventory and monitoring information gathered by UCBN is used by NPS and park unit resource managers to guide management decisions, to inform scientific research, and to provide public education. One goal of the NPS service-wide monitoring program is to collect, manage, and provide resource data to better understand the dynamic nature and condition of park-managed ecosystems and to provide reference points for comparisons with other management types and possibly with altered environments. The development of a vegetation classification to the vegetation alliance/plant association level and associated GIS map and database for each park is viewed as a high priority in reaching this goal.

Figure 1. Map of UCBN showing the location of BIHO in the network.

Big Hole National Battlefield Big Hole National Battlefield is located in southwest Montana near the Idaho border and encompasses 665 acres (269 ha) that preserves and commemorates a famous battle between the U.S. Army and the Nez Perce tribe of Native Americans (Figure 2). The battle at Big Hole was part of a five-month conflict resulting from the Army’s orders to relocate the approximately 750 Nez Perce men, women and children to the Lapwai Reservation in Idaho. Pursued across 1,170 miles from the Wallowa Valley in Oregon to the Bear Paw Mountains in Montana the Nez Perce and the military fought in various minor skirmishes and 8 major battles including a surprise attack by the military on the encamped Nez Perce in the Big Hole Valley (Figure 3).

On August 9, 1877, U.S. Army and Montana citizen volunteers overtook the Nez Perce people in a pre-dawn attack as they camped next to the North Fork of the Big Hole River. The battle started with a broadside approach by the Army from the base of the mountain. As the soldiers reached the river they were bogged down by the thick foliage and the stiff resistance of the Nez Perce people. As the tide of battle turned in favor of the Nez Perce the soldiers retreated to edge of the timber and prepared for a siege. At the same time the Army’s only howitzer was captured further up the mountain slope. Throughout the two days of fighting both sides fought bravely but eventually the Nez Perce were able to pin down the solders buying them valuable time to bury their dead, gather their camp, and escape on horseback. During the siege, the Nez Perce harassed the solders from higher ground including one deadly sharpshooter famously positioned in two large conifer trees, now remembered as the Twin Trees area.

The number of Nez Perce killed and wounded as a result of this battle is unknown but estimates put the total between 80 and 90 with the majority being women and children. The military lost 29 men and 40 soldiers were wounded. The tactical victory by the Nez Perce at Big Hole was short- lived as the losses they suffered during this battle left them exhausted, cold, and hungry and two- months later the remaining Nez Perce surrendered at the Battle of Bear Paw on October 4, 1877.

Starting in 1910, the importance of the Big Hole Battlefield was recognized by the U.S. War Department and the U.S. Forest Service and an effort was made to preserve the sight. With just five acres around the Siege Area the Big Hole Battlefield National Monument was established and gradually enlarged through a series of land acquisitions including 200 acres in 1939 and further additions authorized by Congress in 1963. Today BIHO is managed by the National Park Service and the site includes most of the principal features of the battlefield including: the Howitzer Capture Site, the Siege Area, the Nez Perce Campsite, and the battle zone that includes the Twin Trees, Horse Pasture, and Retreat areas. In addition BIHO also maintains a Battlefield Monument, a battlefield overlook area, visitor center, NPS housing, various interpretive trails, a picnic area, and a portion of the Nez Perce National Historic Trail (Figure 4).

Located in Beaverhead County about 10 miles west of Wisdom, Montana, BIHO is bordered on the south by State Highway 43, Beaverhead National Forest on the west and north, and private ranches on the east. Flowing northeast, the North Fork of the Big Hole River is a prominent feature that meanders through the center of BIHO. The river and its floodplain form the flat, open Big Hole Valley that surrounds BIHO on the south, and east sides. Battle Mountain backed by the Anaconda Mountain Range, rises on the northwest side of BIHO and the high Ruby Bench is found on the southeast side (Figure 5 and 6). Beaverhead Mountains can be seen from BIHO to the southwest and the Anaconda Mountain Range is east of the battlefield.

Source: NPS Figure 2. Park Map of Big Hole National Battlefield.

Source: NPS Figure 3. Location Map of Big Hole National Battlefield and the Nez Perce National Historic Trail.

North Fork of the Big Hole River (looking East) Nez Perce Trail and Siege Area

Howitzer Capture Site (looking South) Visitor Center (left) and NPS Housing (right)

Camp Site and Escape Area (background) Twin Trees Area and River

Source: NPS and NMI Figure 4. BIHO cultural sites and landscape photos.

North Fork Big Hole River N

Battle Twin Mountain Trees Horse Pasture

Nez Siege Perce Area Camp Howitzer Capture Site Nez Perce Trail

BIHO Visitor Center Boundary

Highway 43 Park Housing

Source: NAIP 2011 Figure 5. BIHO overview map.

Anaconda Range N

Beaverhead National Forest

Battle Mountain Trail Creek North Fork Big Hole River BIHO

Private Ranchlands

Ruby Creek Highway 43

Big Hole Valley Ruby Bench

Source: USGS 10m DEM and NAIP 2011 Figure 6. BIHO 3d landscape overview map.

Natural Setting BIHO straddles the transition between the Bitterroot Mountains to the northwest and the broad flat floodplain of the Big Hole Valley to the south and east. This area was chosen by the Nez Perce as their campsite since it provided flat areas for their lodges, water and pasturage for their horses and nearby timber that could be used for making travois and lodge poles. Viewing BIHO from the visitor center on the east side of the park today reveals much of the same landscape that was present during the time of the battle. Notable is the very flat, Big Hole Valley landscape that is dissected by the winding Ruby and Trail Creeks as they merge to form the North Fork of the Big Hole River. Jutting up abruptly behind the river is Battle Mountain with two treeless slopes (Horse Pasture) split by a draw of conifer trees (Battle Gulch) that come to a point next to the western riverbank in the center of BIHO (Point of Timber) (NPS 2011a).

BIHO is aptly named for its location in Big Hole Valley, the highest and widest of the broad mountain valleys of western Montana. Big Hole Valley separates the Pioneer Mountains along its eastern margin from the southern Bitterroot Range on the west and was likely formed by a large gap that opened behind the Pioneer Mountains as they detached from the top of massive intrusive granite rock (batholith) to the west. The Big Hole Valley is oriented north to south and is bounded by the Bitterroot Mountains in the northwest, the Beaverhead Range in the southwest, and the Pioneer Range in the east. The valley is drained by the Big Hole River and its mountain fed tributaries. BIHO is located on the edge of this valley and contains examples of mountain slope, floodplain, and benchland topographic zones (NPS 2008).

The soils of BIHO are closely related to the alluvial valley deposits, windblown sand, ash and loess, and the mountain bedrock. Primary soils found on the mountain slopes include many calcium carbonates and are relatively shallow, having been formed from a variety of igneous, sedimentary, and metamorphic rocks. Additional soils have been deposited on the foothills from loess and volcanic ash. Valley bottom the soils are generally a mix of alluvium, alluvial fan deposits, landslide deposits, and glacial till. According to the USDA Soil Survey for the Big Hole area (Berger 2004) seven soil units (Table 1) are found at BIHO (Figure 7).

Table 1. Soil unit summary table for BIHO.

Map Unit BIHO BIHO BIHO Map Unit Name Topographic Position Symbol Location Acres % Hairpin-Libeg: stony-Monad, stony 6D 4 to15 percent slopes Benchland 68.9 10.4% complex 8E Libeg-Tiban: stony complex 8 to 35 percent slopes Floodplain 0.4 0.1% Wisdom-Shewag-Mooseflat 23B 0 to 4 percent slopes Floodplain 86.0 13.0% complex 40B Mooseflat loam 0 to 4 percent slopes Floodplain 159.2 24.1% Mountain 50E Libeg-Monad complex 8 to 35 percent slopes 118.2 17.9% Slope 53A Briston-Mussigbrod complex 0 to 2 percent slopes Benchland 72.6 11.0% Mountain 683P Maciver-Philipsburg-Tiban families complex alluvial fans 155.1 23.5% Slope

Source: USDA Web Soil Survey 2011 Figure 7. BIHO Soil Survey Map.

The high elevation and location of BIHO in southwestern Montana results in a semi-arid climate consisting of mild summers that reach 23.8 °C (74.8 oF) on average in July and cold winters that average -9 °C (15.8 oF) in January. Mean maximum and minimum temperate for BIHO range from -2.7° and -16.9 °C (27° and 1.5° F) in January to 25° and 2.7 °C (77° and 37° F) in July. The average annual precipitation for the Big Hole Valley area is about 30 cm (12 inches) with 80 cm (34.1 inches) of average seasonal snowfall (Berger 2004).

The North Fork of the Big Hole River along with Ruby and Trail Creeks are the prominent hydrological features of the battlefield. The slow drop of these streams in BIHO (about 15 feet per mile) has resulted in large areas of broad meandering river forming marshy bogs, sloughs and oxbow ponds. The perennial availability of this water has led to the creation of various irrigation canals to support nearby farming and ranching activities over the years. Evidence of these irrigation canals can still be seen at BIHO as linear berms and thin watercourses that dissect the eastern portions of the battlefield. Topographically, BIHO is generally considered to be in the conifer/alpine meadows ecoregion and the battlefield actually straddles the transition between the Big Hole and Eastern Batholith Level 4 ecological regions of the United States (Figure 8).

Source: CTI and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Figure 8. BIHO ecoregion location map.

Vegetation Three different landforms and life zones occur at BIHO consisting of the (1) mountain slope, (2) floodplain, and (3) bench areas (Figure 9). All three contain unique vegetation and also have plant species that occur across all three zones. Starting with BIHO’s highest elevation around 7,000 ft (1,923 m), the western edge of BIHO captures a portion of Battle Mountain’s eastern- facing toeslope. The majority of this foothill area is covered with second-growth lodgepole pine (Pinus contortus) forest along with small patches of Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) woodlands. Together all three species form a band of conifer forest along the western edge of BIHO that border two large sections of treeless mountain slope covered by mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana) steppe vegetation with bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis), and arrowleaf balsamroot (Balsamorhiza sagittata).

Battle Mountain

Mountain Slope

Bench Area Floodplain

Visitor Center

Source: CTI and USGS 30-meter DEM

Figure 9. Representative cross-section of BIHO’s topography showing life zones.

As the mountain slope ends abruptly at the edge of the North Fork of the Big Hole River the vegetation changes as conditions go from dry slope to mesic floodplain. Continuing throughout the center of the battlefield the river meanders in a haphazard fashion supporting thick stands of shining willow shrubs and trees (Salix lucida) interspersed with shrub marsh areas dominated by shrubby-cinquefoil (Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda) and herbaceous wetlands with mixes of sedges (Carex spp.) and Baltic rush (Juncus balticus). The river also represents the lowest area of the battlefield at 6,276 ft (1,913 m) and the sloughs and ox-bow ponds are common containing open, mixed grassland patches of meadow barley, (Hordeum brachyantherum), timber oatgrass (Danthonia intermedia), slender wheatgrass (Elymus trachycaulus), Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), Sandberg bluegrass (Poa secunda) and tufted hairgrass (Deschampsia cespitosa) herbaceous vegetation. Rising slightly in elevation from the river some small forest ravines occur containing small bands of lodgepole pine and patches of black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa) trees.

On the southeastern side of the floodplain the ground climbs toward the center of the valley. The top of the bench, roughly 100 feet above the river, is characterized by open shrublands and grasslands dominated by mountain big sagebrush with native bluebunch wheatgrass and Idaho fescue as both the shrub understory and principal grassland community species. This flat area or “bench” below the visitor center also contains small groves of quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) trees and patches of rubber rabbitbrush (Ericameria nauseosa).

Like many areas in the West, current and past ranching, mining, and settlement efforts have removed or altered some of the native trees and shrubs and opened the land for the introduction of non-native species. Although BIHO has escaped much of this disturbance, the bench and upper floodplain terraces at BIHO have examples of this activity as evidenced by the presence of non-native pasture grasses such as intermediate wheatgrass (Agropyron intermedium), red fescue (Festuca rubra), timothy (Phleum pretense), and smooth brome (Bromus inermis). In addition to these introduced grasses, BIHO is also concerned with other troublesome invaders including the aggressive spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa, C. stoebe), leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula), Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), and tansymustard (Descurainia pinata).

Since BIHO is managed “to maintain the historic lands and the natural resources in such a way that they approximate the scene in 1877 when the battle occurred" (NPS 1991) resource staff regularly engage in active vegetation management. Past control and management efforts at BIHO include willow burns to maintain tree size and sagebrush burns and logging of young trees to prevent encroachment on the Horse Pasture Area. Noxious weeds are also actively controlled through past herbicide treatments. Resource management efforts have also been used to help inventory and monitor the health of two rare and endangered plant species at BIHO. These include the rare native Lemhi penstemon flower (Penstemon lemhiensis) and camas (Camassia quamash), a bulb-producing lily that was an important historical food source to the Nez Perce (the abundance of camas is the main reason the Nez Perce set up camp at this location). Both plants are regularly inventoried and monitored to better understand the status and trends of their populations. Results of the battlefield inventories confirm that the park supports some of the largest known populations the Lemhi penstemon and camas populations over the last few years seem to seem to be stable or slightly increasing as a whole.

Figure 10 contains representative ground photographs of BIHO’s dominant vegetation communities by life zone.

High – 7,000 feet

Mountain Slopes Lodgepole Pine Forest Douglas Fir Forest

Mountain Slopes

Ponderosa Pine Woodland Mountain Big Sagebrush Steppe

Floodplain

Willow Shrubland and Woodlands Shrubby-cinquefoil Shrubland

Low – 6,200 feet

Source: All Photos -NMI Figure 10. Common BIHO vegetation types.

Low – 6,200 feet

Floodplain

Rush/Sedge Wet Meadow Tufted Hairgrass - Meadow Barley Mixed Grassland

Bench Area

Bluebunch Wheatgrass / Idaho Fescue Grassland Quaking Aspen Grove

Bench Area

Smooth Brome Grassland Black Cottonwood Woodland Stands Wet

Source: All Photos –NMI and NPS Figure 10. Common BIHO vegetation types (continued)

Woodlands and Forests Trees are common within BIHO and occur as both dense conifer forest and open deciduous woodlands. Tree communities can be generally split into three categories based on landform; these include mountain slope forests, short riparian woodlands, and forest groves extending from the floodplain to the upper bench area. The mountain slope forests are represented by second- growth lodgepole pine with small stands of ponderosa pine along the dry forest margins. Also present in this area are Douglas fir trees growing in slightly more mesic drainages and north- facing slopes. All three of the conifer species at BIHO intermix to some degree and have varied understories ranging from very sparse vegetation in more mature, dense stands to lush grass and shrub layers in open canopies. Common understory constituents include short snowberry (Symphoricarpos spp.), huckleberry (Vaccinium scoparium), Kinnikinnick (Arctostaphylos uva- ursi), and Oregon grape (Mahonia repens) shrubs. Also present are various forbs and graminoids including pinegrass (Calamagrostis rubescens), Geyer’s sedge (Carex geyeri), heart-leaf leopardbane (Arnica cordifolia), hawkweed (Hieracium spp.), and cinquefoil (Potentilla spp.)

Riparian trees at BIHO are primary mature shining willows along with occasional black cottonwoods and small stands of conifer (mainly lodgepole pine) trees. Riparian woodlands all share common mesic shrubs and graminoids in their understories including shrubby-cinquefoil, Baltic rush, tufted hairgrass, and sedges. Extending away from the river in the bench area are small forest groves of quaking aspen, lodgepole pine, and black cottonwood. Various upland and mesic shrubs and graminoids including mountain big sagebrush, Saskatoon serviceberry (Amelanchier alnifolia), bluebunch wheatgrass, and Kentucky bluegrass are common understory species of these bench woodlands.

Shrublands Shrublands at BIHO can also be divided between those that occur in riparian settings and those that grow in uplands. Common riparian shrubs consisting of shining willow, other willow species (Salix spp.) Saskatoon serviceberry, Wood’s rose (Rosa woodsii), and currents (Ribes spp.) are found along the streambanks and tributaries. Alongside the willows in some areas of the floodplain are moderate stands of short shrubby-cinquefoil. Upland shrublands consisting primarily of mountain big sagebrush can be found both on the mountain slopes (Horse Pasture) and in some areas of the upper bench. Native grasses consisting of bluebunch wheatgrass and Idaho fescue along with arrowleaf balsamroot are common associated species. In disturbed areas of BIHO rubber rabbitbrush is locally abundant.

Herbaceous Vegetation Herbaceous vegetation consisting of mesic meadows, floodplain marshes and open grasslands can be found across all of BIHO. On the drier mountain-side and on some bench slopes native grass communities dominated by bluebunch wheatgrass and Idaho fescue are common. Various forbs including arrowleaf balsamroot and lupines (Lupines spp.) are also present in this community ranging greatly in cover and density. Wetland marshes and bogs are common in the floodplain and contain dense, lush stands of almost pure Baltic rush, tufted hairgrass and Nebraska sedge (Carex nebrascensis). On slightly drier sites in the floodplain the sedges and rushes are replaced with mixed grassland stands of meadow barley, slender wheatgrass, and Kentucky bluegrass. Small mesic meadows consisting of sedges and rushes are also found around springs, seeps and small tributaries on Battle Mountain. Pasture and turf grasses can be

found at BIHO and are very common outside of the park. Kentucky bluegrass, smooth brome, intermediate wheatgrass, red fescue, and timothy can be found throughout BIHO and likely occur from past seeding efforts.

Sparse Vegetation True sparse vegetation communities are not found at BIHO but some dry slopes and rocky sites contain stunted mountain big sagebrush that appear sparse when compared to the denser shrublands in the surrounding areas. Also transitional areas that have been recently mowed, plowed or burned may contain very sparse vegetation cover when compared to more established sites (Figure 11).

Source: NMI Figure 11. Example of sparse mountain big sagebrush and transitional areas at BIHO.

Big Hole National Battlefield Vegetation Inventory Project BIHO is one of nine NPS units served by the UCBN Inventory & Monitoring Program. The UCBN initiated a vegetation mapping inventory for BIHO in 2006 as part of a larger effort to complete vegetation inventory maps for the network. An initial multi-year work plan was developed for the UCBN by Cogan Technology, Inc. (CTI). This work plan provided recommendations for completing the plant community classification, digital database, and map products for each of the nine UCBN parks; it received approval from the Washington DC Area Service Office (WASO) Inventory Coordinator in May 2006.

In September 2007 the UCBN entered into a contract with NMI to provide all of the vegetation mapping services designated by the work plan and to administer and coordinate the UCBN vegetation mapping projects for nine park units. CTI was retained by NMI as a sub-contractor to assist on the mapping and the creation of final products. NMI started the vegetation classification plot field data collection during the summer of 2010. Following the field data collection NMI contracted with the Idaho State University (ISU) and S.M. Stoller Corporation (Stoller) to provide the preliminary and final vegetation classification. Collectively NMI, CTI, ISU and Stoller were tasked with creating the BIHO classification and mapping products and the following datasets:

Spatial Data  Aerial and ortho-photography  Map classification based on BIHO-specific requirements  Map classification description and key  Spatial database of vegetation communities of BIHO  Digital and hardcopy maps of vegetation communities  Metadata for spatial databases  Complete accuracy assessment of spatial data Vegetation Information  Vegetation classification  Dichotomous field key of vegetation classes  Formal description for each vegetation class  Ground photos of vegetation classes  Field data in database format

Scope of Work The vegetation inventory for BIHO occurred within an approximate 7,037-acre (2,850-hectare) project area defined by the boundary of BIHO and a general 2-km (1.25-mi) radius (Figure 12). The final project area determination was based on management needs, financial constraints, and time limitations. The 2-km (1.25-mi) environs area was used in this project for inventory and monitoring purposes and to capture various management considerations including weed locations and possible dispersal sites and forest encroachment areas. Also the size of the environs corresponded to the size proposed in the work plan and matches the other vegetation mapping protocols in the UCBN.

Figure 12. Map of the BIHO vegetation project boundary and land boundary.

Methods

The vegetation mapping project at BIHO was considered to be in the “medium park” category based on the overall size of the project area (TNC and ESRI 1994b). As such, the standard methodology for sampling and mapping is to visit the NPS site and select representative vegetation communities for sampling. The representative vegetation sites are used to characterize the vegetation types and explain their distribution across the park without having to survey each stand of vegetation. Additionally, current National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) ortho- photos were used to create field maps and unique vegetation signatures were highlighted for potential sampling. In this way all of BIHO was systematically visited throughout the summer of 2010. Based on this approach the assignment of responsibilities was divided into five major steps following the 12-step guidance provided by the NVIP (NPS 2011b) and the flow chart of major steps produced for the NVIP by the USGS (Appendix A). These responsibilities included:

1. Plan, gather data, and coordinate tasks; 2. Survey BIHO to understand and sample the vegetation; 3. Classify the vegetation using the field data to NVCS standard associations and alliances and crosswalk types to recognizable map units; 4. Acquire current digital imagery and interpret the vegetation from this using the classification scheme and NVCS crosswalk; 5. Assess the accuracy of the final map product; and 6. Create the final project deliverables

All protocols for this project as outlined in the following sections are presented in documents produced by The Nature Conservancy (1994a, 1994b, and 1994c) and subsequent updates (Lea and Curtis 2010) for the NVIP and are served at: http://biology.usgs.gov/npsveg/standards.html.

Planning, Data Gathering and Coordination Based on the work plan and the contract commitments by UCBN, a series of preliminary project conference calls were held in 2009 culminating in the beginning of field work in 2010. Conference calls were attended by representatives from the principle team members (including NMI, CTI, UCBN, NPS and BIHO staff). The goals of the scoping process were to: (1) provide an overview of the National Vegetation Inventory Program; (2) learn about BIHO management issues and concerns; (3) discuss availability of existing data; (4) develop a schedule; (5) discuss procedural issues and data; (6) define potential cooperators; and (7) finalize the scope of the project.

As a result of the conference calls a 2-km (1.25-mi) environs was approved as the project boundary and review of the existing vegetation data and imagery yielded the following datasets to review for usefulness in this project: (1) UCBN Land cover classification (Wilson 2006) and (2) all NAIP imagery for the area. A reasonable schedule was set with the project completion scheduled for 12/31/11 (Table 1).

Table 2. Project timeline for the BIHO Vegetation Inventory Project. 2009 2010 2011 Planning and Scoping Acquire Imagery Field Data Collection Image Interpretation Vegetation Classification Local & Global Descriptions Spatial Database Plant Association Field Key Accuracy Assessment Final Report and Products

Specific work responsibilities were assigned to the following participants:

BIHO-UCBN-NPS Responsibilities  Provide oversight and project funding;  Provide BIHO plant list;  Supply digital boundary files and ancillary data files;  Assist with fieldwork and logistical considerations;  Work with Stoller, Inc. and Idaho State University to develop the vegetation classification;  Compile, review, and update drafts of the vegetation map, classification and report;  Accept the final products and close the project.

NMI Responsibilities  Provide project management;  Coordinate the field work with BIHO staff;  Collect representative plot data;  Collect less detailed observations about the draft vegetation map;  Write descriptions of the vegetation types occurring in BIHO;  Collect accuracy assessment data;  Provide a final report describing all aspects of the project;  Create a DVD with reports, metadata, guides, vegetation classification, plot data, spatial data, vegetation database (map), graphics, and ground photos.

S.M. Stoller Corporation and Idaho State University Responsibilities  Work with NPS to develop a vegetation classification for the study area based on the NVCS using quantitative analysis and ecological interpretation of the field data;  Write a field key to the vegetation types occurring in BIHO;  Provide guidance regarding the crosswalk of vegetation types to map units;  Review the local vegetation descriptions;  Review the final database containing the field data.

CTI Responsibilities  Help with overall project facilitation and coordination;  Verify vegetation and land use/land cover signatures on the imagery;  Develop map units linked to the NVCS;  Provide field maps and GIS support to the field crews;  Interpret and delineate the final vegetation and land use types;  Transfer and automate interpreted data to a digital spatial database;  Produce spatial layers of plot and accuracy assessment site locations;  Assist with the accuracy assessment by picking the stratified random target points, creating field maps, and providing GIS support;  Provide final report sections describing the mapping aspects of the project;  Provide a visual guide to the photo signatures of each map unit;  Document FGDC-compliant metadata for all vegetation data (FGDC 1998);  Assist in creating the project digital video disk (DVD).

Field Surveys Field methods used in this project followed NVIP standards (e.g., TNC and ESRI 1994a, 1994b, 1994c and Lea and Curtis 2010) and UCBN guidance. Important for future projects was the ability to gather consistent data that could contribute to understanding vegetation relationships across broader landscapes within all of the park units in the UCBN. In addition to the basic vegetation data collected at each plot, the UCBN and BIHO staff defined summary data fields and made suggestions for including additional information on the forms. Examples of the plot forms and individual data field descriptions appear in Appendix B.

The sampling area included all of BIHO and private lands in the environs were not visited. NMI field crews were trained and led by ecologists with experience sampling plant communities in national parks and other landscapes. The list of BIHO plant species was downloaded from the UCBN website (http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/units/ucbn/inventory) and known ecological systems, vegetation alliances, and preliminary plant associations were provided as a starting point for identifying and naming plant associations sampled in the field. The sampling goal was to collect between three and five classification plots in every vegetation alliance/plant association within the BIHO project area. However, some common associations were sampled more often and some rare types were sampled less often. An effort was made to achieve good spatial distribution of classification plots across the landscape and to capture the full range of variation of each plant association.

Once a representative plant community was located, a Relevé macroplot was laid out to capture stand characteristics. In this manner, transitional areas particularly ecotones were avoided. Highly disturbed areas were also avoided unless they supported a distinct or homogenous plant community. Classification plots were generally located in stands exceeding the minimum mapping unit (MMU) of 0.5 hectares. A few classification plots were sampled in smaller patches of distinctive vegetation or communities of rare species. Plot size and shape requirements were consistent with NVIP guidelines (TNC and ESRI 1994a). Classification plot size was determined by the physiognomy of the community being sampled (Table 3) and measuring tapes were used to outline the sampling area. BIHO plot shape was adjusted as needed to sample linear bands of

vegetation in drainage bottoms or other confined sites. Plot size and shape were recorded for all plots and representative photographs were acquired.

Table 3. Plot sizes used for vegetation classification sampling at BIHO.

Vegetation Class Area (m2) Radius (m)

Forest and Woodland 400 22.6 Shrubland 400 22.6 Herbaceous 100 11.3

Following plot establishment, environmental data were recorded including: elevation, slope, aspect, landform, topographic position, soil texture and drainage, hydrologic (flooding) regime, and evidence of disturbance or wildlife use. The unvegetated surface was recorded as percent cover of each of the following types: bedrock, litter and duff, wood, bare soil, large rocks (>10 cm), small rocks (0.2-10 cm), sand (0.1-2 mm), lichens, mosses, and fungi.

Vegetation at each plot was visually divided into strata, with the height and canopy cover of all plant species estimated for each stratum. Physiognomic class, leaf phenology, and type of dominant stratum were recorded. The species comprising each stratum were listed and percent canopy cover estimated using a twelve-point cover scale (e.g. <1%, 1-5%, >5-15% …) (Daubenmire 1959). Additional species within the vegetation unit that occurred outside of sampled plots were listed separately. No attempt was made to identify individual non-vascular plant species. Species that were not identifiable in the field were collected for later identification. Species were recorded by scientific nomenclature familiar to researchers. Finally, a provisional vegetation type name was assigned to the classification plot.

Field crews collected the information for each of the vegetation classification plots in two ways: (1) a species list was developed and recorded on field forms by the team botanist, UTM coordinates, field notes header information (Identifiers/Locators), environmental descriptions and a plot map were also recorded on this form and (2) all other field data were collected with mobile Archer Field PCs. Following collection of physiognomic and environmental information, field crews used the Garmin GPS 76CSX receiver to record the southeast corner of the plot (no permanent markers were used). UTM NAD83 X-Y coordinates and elevation were recorded both manually on the plot forms and stored as waypoints in the GPS receiver. Four representative photos were acquired facing the four cardinal directions (N, E, S, and W) from the edge of the quadrant facing plot center. Field data collection was conducted from July 15 – 19 in 2010 and 95 vegetation classification plots were sampled (Figure 13).

Note: Plot Numbers are not sequential

Figure 13. Vegetation classification plot locations within the BIHO project area.

Vegetation Classification Field data were partially stored in Archer Field PCs with Windows Mobile 5.0 operating systems using DataPlus software. All data from the Archer PCs were transferred and managed in a Microsoft (MS) Access database. Electronic data were transferred directly from the data recorders (NMI created data dictionaries as needed) into Database Files (DBF). DBFs were reviewed by field crews for accuracy each night, then converted and stored in the appropriate database on a laptop computer. All additional field data not recorded electronically (such as field notes) were entered manually into the database for this project and separate databases were created as necessary. Upon completion of field surveys, all recorded data were entered into a MS Access relational database. The relational database is a modified PLOTS2 database initially developed specifically for the NPS NVIP so that the electronic data entry fields mirrored the standard paper field form. Data entry was facilitated by using drop-down menus for each plant species scientific name. Scientific names were updated according to the vascular plant list provided to the field crews as found on the UCBN website and in Appendix E.

Following data entry, quality assurance was performed to minimize errors associated with duplicate entries or erroneously selected plant names. Questions regarding unknown species, especially those with high cover, were resolved, as were other taxonomic issues including grouping subspecies and varieties judged to be ecologically similar. Data were regularly compiled and at the completion of the field work the final database was supplied to S.M. Stoller and ISU statisticians for quantitative analysis. A GIS data layer was also developed to document classification plot field locations

Quantitative analyses and analytical methods were employed by ISU and S.M. Stoller statisticians to determine the plant associations at BIHO. In summary, the classification team evaluated seven classification methods to analyze the 95 plots and 216 plant species recorded in the plots. During this stage the classification team identified average linkage as the most appropriate classification method for the BIHO data. Using the average linkage method they then identified 17 optimal clusters of vegetation for BIHO. Further refinement of one of the classes yielded 4 additional clusters of vegetation, resulting in a total of 20 potential vegetation associations for BIHO (Forman et al. 2011).

Sixteen of the 20 plant community clusters identified using the plot data were classified at the association level and four were classified at the alliance level. Alliance-level classes were used when: (1) there wasn’t enough plots in each of the representative clusters to characterize them as associations, (2) they had not been previously described at the association level in the NVCS, or (3) some combination of the previous two. Of the four Alliance-level classes, the Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa Temporarily Flooded Forest Alliance, Populus tremuloides Forest Alliance, and Pseudoroegneria spicata Herbaceous Alliance, were identified as such because there were not enough data available to adequately characterize the herbaceous component of the class and assign the plant community to an appropriate association. The Smooth Brome Semi- natural Herbaceous Alliance was not assigned an association-level class because the NVCS had not described associations within this alliance at the time the analyses were completed and there were not enough data available at this site to justify an association-level classification.

Ten of the 20 plant communities (associations or alliances) resulting from this classification were represented in the NVCS at the time the class list was compiled (NatureServe 2011). Fourteen classes were not listed in the NVCS at the association level, but were described within the range of variation of an appropriate NVCS alliance. Many of the associations not previously described in the NVCS were characterized by unique combinations of dominant species, which were represented in the NVCS (2011) individually or in combination with other dominant species. For example, Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana, Festuca idahoensis, and Pseudoroegneria spicata were all represented by previously described associations in the NVCS as stand-alone dominant species or in pair-wise combinations with one another.

Of the ten plant communities for which an appropriate NVCS class had been previously described, many fit the NVCS description well, while others deviated somewhat from the standard description. Deviations generally occurred as a result of a given class occurring outside of the previously described geographic range or having ranges of characteristic species cover different than those previously described in the NVCS. Of note, the Juncus balticus Herbaceous Vegetation Association at BIHO contains greater cover of Deschampsia caespitosa than suggested by the NVCS description; however, Deschampsia caespitosa was not co-dominant and did not meet the criteria for inclusion in the class name at BIHO, so this association was included even though it deviated from the currently described range of variability (Forman et al. 2011).

All plant nomenclature used in this study is that of the Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS) as reflected by the PLANTS Database (USDA -NRCS 2007). ITIS nomenclature is represented in the NVCS and the BIHO plant associations described herein. Naming the plant associations used indicator (dominant or diagnostic) species for each of the vegetative strata present. The indicator species of the upper strata was listed first, followed by successively lower strata (e.g., canopy, subcanopy, tall shrub, short shrub, herbaceous vegetation, etc.). Plant species that may only be occasionally present in the same stratum are separated by parentheses ( ). Species that always occurred in the same stratum (or were the same lifeform) are separated by a hyphen (-). Indicator species that occurred in different strata (or are a different lifeform) were separated by a slash (/). Alliance names were concluded with the word “Alliance” to differentiate them from association names. Plant association names incorporated the physiognomic class in which the association was classified (e.g., Forest, Woodland, or Herbaceous (FGDC 1997, 2008 and Forman et al. 2011).

The final products of the classification task included a field key and local plant association descriptions. The dichotomous field key to the BIHO plant associations was developed to assist users in identifying vegetation associations in the field, particularly during the accuracy assessment task (Appendix C). The local descriptions were based on the field data and provide BIHO characteristics for each plant association within the NatureServe template (Appendix D).

Digital Imagery and Interpretation Existing sources of imagery were evaluated for vegetation mapping and geodatabase development for BIHO. Among the current sources of imagery were NAIP ortho-photography products from 2006, 2009, and 2011. Since the mapping portion of this project was started in 2010, the 2009 1-meter resolution NAIP ortho-photo was deemed adequate for starting the vegetation mapping. The 2009 NAIP images for Beaverhead County, Montana were accessed and downloaded from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Geospatial Gateway website (http://datagateway.nrcs.usda.gov/). The 2009 NAIP product has 1-meter pixel resolution and has 4-bands allowing for display of the image as both true-color and color infrared formats (Figure 14). The entire 2009 NAIP county image was clipped to the project boundary and the clipped image was used do conduct the preliminary delineation and vegetation interpretation in anticipation of the accuracy assessment (AA) work to begin in the summer of 2011.

NAIP 2009 True-color 1-meter imagery

NAIP 2009 Color Infrared 1-meter imagery

Source: NAIP 2009 Figure 14. Example of the 2009 base-map imagery for BIHO.

Subsequent to the completion of the AA, the 2011 NAIP image was made available and this 1- meter, true-color product was downloaded and processed for BIHO (Figure 15). Since the 2011 image highlighted recent changes in the vegetation at BIHO, the 2011 NAIP basemap was used to update the vegetation mapping. All previous interpreted linework was modified accordingly and the final map product for BIHO is primarily based on the 2011 NAIP ortho-imagery.

Parking Lot North Fork of the Irrigation Canal Big Hole River

Upland Grasslands Bogs & Willows Forest Marshes Groves

Visitor Center

Park Road

Sagebrush Bench Area

Source: NAIP 2011

Figure 15. Example of the 2011 true-color base-map imagery for BIHO.

Using the 2009 and 2011 NAIP images, the mapping and photo-signature interpretation at BIHO involved a four-step process consisting of: (1) field reconnaissance; (2) map class development; (3) image processing and interpretation; and (4) spatial database development. Field reconnaissance was conducted by NMI staff during the field plot data collection. Paper field maps of the NAIP imagery were printed and vegetation notes were made on these by the field teams. The goal of the field reconnaissance was to provide site-specific data to familiarize the mapping team with BIHO vegetation patterns, plant community distribution, and land-use types. As the vegetation mapping progressed in 2011 additional feedback on the dominant and characteristic plant species was solicited from the field crews as needed.

All classification plot information sampled in 2010 was documented, summarized, and geo- processed into a GIS shapefile that could be overlain on the NAIP ortho-imagery. CTI created preliminary map classes (also known as map units) based largely on whether the vegetation surrounding the plot locations could be readily identified and delineated on the NAIP imagery (i.e. photo signature development). Once the photo signatures were inventoried they were matched or cross-walked back to the preliminary list of plant associations prepared in the project work plan. Supplemental land-use and land-cover classes (Anderson 1976, amended 2002) were added to classify non-vegetated areas such as developments, roads, streams, ponds, bare ground, and active agricultural areas. All obvious land-use features were manually digitized and incorporated with the project boundary into a draft GIS layer. Initial interpretation and mapping focused only on delineating obvious landforms (e.g., geologic exposures and land use) and physiognomic features (e.g., grasslands versus shrublands versus woodlands).

In 2011, CTI compared the initial map classes to both the 2011NAIP imagery and a draft of the final BIHO vegetation classification. New map classes were added as necessary with emphasis placed on the ability to accurately delineate homogenous polygons from the base ortho-imagery. In general, the level of detail possible in a vegetation map is limited by the imagery, the skill and experience of the interpreter and mapper, and the availability of supporting information. The relationships between the map classes and plant associations are often complex. In most cases, the BIHO map classes were derived on a 1 plant association or 1 vegetation alliance to 1 map class basis. However due to the limitations of the imagery and the lack of ground data on the surrounding private lands some of the photo signatures could not be accurately matched to existing associations. Mapping ambiguity was addressed by either scaling up the NVCS to the alliance level or combining similar associations/alliances into complexes or mosaics. Complexes were used when associations/alliances could not be discerned from each other. Conversely, mosaics were used when associations/alliances could be discerned but were so small and interspersed that individual polygon mapping would prove to be impractical.

All map classes were reviewed by NMI and CTI staff and based on the resulting suggestions some additional park-specific or “Park Specials” were defined as follows:

 A Mixed Weedy Semi-natural Herbaceous Vegetation Complex was added to delineate very disturbed areas in BIHO and similar areas in the environs;;  A Mixed Planted and Semi-natural Grassland Complex was added to delineate unknown grasslands in the environs;  The Pseudotsuga menziesii Forest Alliance was added to better distinguish small stands of Douglas fir from the other conifer types;  The Poa secunda Seasonally Flooded Herbaceous Alliance was added to better document small stands of Sandberg bluegrass from the other floodplain grasslands.

BIHO vegetation mapping continued in 2011 by importing the preliminary BIHO vegetation layer into eCognition software for segmentation comparisons. Automated imagery segments (polygons) were based in part on pixel reflectance and their relationship to neighboring pixels. By incrementally increasing segmentation size within the program, small image objects (i.e. preliminary polygons) were continuously merged into larger polygons. Completion of the segmentation was based on visual judgment of the analyst when obvious, distinct features were lost the previous segmentation was adopted as the final treatment.

Following segmentation, only those lines/polygons that matched the vegetation patterns within the BIHO project area were exported as ArcInfo shapefiles and converted into ArcInfo coverage format. The resulting coverages were refined through a series of smoothing routines until no obvious artificial or relict breaks in the lines were visible. Following smoothing, the line-work was manually cleaned to remove extraneous lines, very small polygons (<0.25 acre), and polygons that obviously split a homogenous stand of vegetation. The cleaned lines were overlain on the new 2009 NAIP imagery (and later the 2011 NAIP imagery) and visually inspected for completeness.

At this stage the mapping approach was switched from an automated process back to a manual interpretation effort. Using the classification plot data, field notes, and ancillary data final vegetation polygons were edited, split, and merged through on-screen digitizing to create consistent, homogenous polygons that matched the mapping units. Mapping progressed by first delineating known areas within BIHO and then into unsampled areas in the environs.

When the interpretation effort was considered complete, topology for the final polygon layer was built and attributed and then imported into a spatial database (geodatabase). Each polygon was attributed with a dedicated map unit name, code, and modifier. Polygon-specific modifiers included additional data on the height, density, and patterns of the dominant vegetation. Also polygons of disturbed sites were identified in a comments field along with any notable dominate understory or locally common plant species. Finally other map class data including the NVCS crosswalk and the land-use classes were added (Table 4).

Table 4. Polygon attribute items and descriptions. ATTRIBUTE DESCRIPTION

AREA* Surface area of the polygon in meters squared PERIMETER* Perimeter of the polygon in meters BIHO_VEG#* Unique code for each polygon BIHO_VEG-ID* Unique identification code for each polygon VEG_CODE Final Map Unit Codes – Project specific MAP_DESC Map Unit Common Description Name – Project specific DENS_MOD Modifier - Percent cover of the upper stratum layer in the polygon Percent cover classes: Very Sparse <10%, Sparse 10 - 25%, Open 25 - 60%, Discontinuous - Closed > 60% PTRN_MOD Modifier - Vegetation pattern within the polygon Vegetation pattern classes: Evenly Dispersed = Homogeneous Grouped Stands of Vegetation = Bunched / Clumped, String of Vegetation = Linear HT_MOD Modifier - Height range of the dominant vegetation layer Height classes: < 1, 1-5, 5-15, 15-30 & >30 meters CES_CODE Ecological Systems Code – NVCS derived (NatureServe) CES_NAME Ecological Systems Name – NVCS derived (NatureServe) NVCS_ELCODE Corresponding Association Code – NVCS derived (NatureServe) Association = Community Element Global Code – Elcode link to the NVCS ASSN_NAME Project Community Name - NVCS Association(s) ASSN_CNAME Project Common Community Name - synonym name of Association(s) NVCS_CODE NVCS Code - to NVCS Formation level ALL_CODE Alliance Name Code – NVCS derived (NatureServe) Alliance = Alliance Global Code – Alliance Link to the NVCS ALL_NAME Project Alliance Name = NVCS Alliance(s) ALL_CNAME Project Common Alliance Name = NVCS Alliance(s) FORMATION NVCS Formation = Formation name NVCS Code – Formation name SUBGROUP NVCS Formation Subgroup = NVCS Code – Subgroup name GROUP NVCS Formation Group = NVCS Code – Group name SUBCLASS NVCS Formation Subclass = NVCS Code – Subclass name CLASS Formation Class = NVCS Code – Class name LUC_II_GEN General Land Use and Land Cover Classification System Name Project specific based on Level I or II of Anderson et al. (1976) LUC_II Specific Land Use and Land Cover Classification System Name Project specific Level II or Level III of Anderson et al. (1976) COMMENTS Additional Comments about the Vegetation in Individual Polygons ACRES Surface area of the polygon in acres (*ArcInfo© default items)

Accuracy Assessment Following the vegetation map completion the accuracy assessment (AA) was conducted. AA is a statistical test of how well the vegetation map represents the vegetation on the ground. The AA compares field observations with the map class assignment. Errors occur when mapped polygon labels differ from field observations. Results of the AA allow users to evaluate the utility of the vegetation mapping data for particular applications. Accuracy assessment results are expressed in two forms (Hop et al. 2005): “producer’s accuracy” (the probability that an AA point was mapped correctly, also referred to as “errors of omission”), and “user’s accuracy” (the probability that the map represents what was found on the ground, also referred to as “errors of commission”). High producer’s accuracy combined with low user’s accuracy indicates that the map class is under-mapped or that it was confused with other map units and not sufficiently delineated. Conversely, low producer’s accuracy combined with high user’s accuracy indicates that a type is over-mapped or that more of this type was mapped than actually occurs on the ground.

The thematic accuracy of the vegetation map was assessed using the methodology and standards provided by the NVIP Accuracy Assessment Procedures manual (TNC and ESRI 1994c) and subsequently updated in version 2.0 (Lea and Curtis 2010). Assessment methodology included a four-step process consisting of a sample design, sample site selection, data collection, and data analysis. The design of the AA process followed the five possible scenarios provided in the first version of the field methods with stratified random targets placed in each map class based on their respective frequency and abundance. The AA included most vegetation map classes and was limited to lands within BIHO. Sample sizes for each evaluated map class were selected using the NVMP guidelines (TNC and ESRI 1994b). The design of the AA process followed the five possible scenarios with stratified random targets placed in each map class based on their respective frequency and abundance (Table 5).

All AA parameters were uploaded into a custom GIS program along with the vegetation layer. Following some reformatting of the data, the program automatically picked the various random target locations, buffered each 10 meters (33 feet) away from any polygon boundary, and 50 meters (164 feet) away from other AA points. Being able to choose minimum distance to polygon boundaries helped to minimize confusion and accounted for the horizontal error typically encountered in common GPS receivers (±5 m; [16 ft]). The resulting target locations were restricted to within the BIHO boundary by masking out the environs and any private in- holdings. Eleven land-use and geologic/bare rock map classes were excluded since they are essentially unvegetated.

Table 5. Sampling protocol for AA points.

Recommende # Area d # of Scenario Description Polygons (ac) Samples The class is abundant. It covers more than 50 hectares (124 acres) of the total area and consists A > 30 > 125 30 of at least 30 polygons. In this case, the recommended sample size is 30. The class is relatively abundant. It covers more than 50 hectares (124 acres) of the total area but consists of fewer than 30 polygons. In this case, B the recommended sample size is 20. The rationale < 30 > 125 20 for reducing the sample size for this type of class is that sample sites are more difficult to find because of the lower frequency of the class. The class is relatively rare. It covers less than 50 hectares (124 acres) of the total area but consists of more than 30 polygons. In this case, the recommended sample size is 20. The rationale for reducing the sample size is that the class occupies C > 30 < 125 20 a small area. At the same time, however, the class consists of a considerable number of distinct polygons that are possibly widely distributed. The number of samples therefore remains relatively high because of the high frequency of the class. The class is rare. It has more than 5 but fewer than 30 polygons and covers less than 50 hectares (124 acres) of the area. In this case, the recommended number of samples is 5. The rationale for reducing the sample size is that the class consists of small D polygons and the frequency of the polygons is low. 5-30 < 125 5 Specifying more than 5 sample sites will therefore probably result in multiple sample sites within the same (small) polygon. Collecting 5 sample sites will allow an accuracy estimate to be computed, although it will not be very precise. The class is very rare. It has fewer than 5 polygons and occupies less than 50 hectares (124 acres) of the total area. In this case, it is recommended that the existence of the class be confirmed by a visit to each sample site. The rationale for the Visit all and E < 5 < 125 recommendation is that with fewer than 5 sample confirm sites (assuming 1 site per polygon) no estimate of level of confidence can be established for the sample (the existence of the class can only be confirmed through field checking).

Accuracy assessment point data were collected at BIHO during the 2011 field season. Following target location selection, ecologists were provided with draft field maps, overview maps, map unit definitions, the field key to the plant associations (Appendix C), and digital GPS files containing the location of the AA targets. The ecologists traveled to the AA target sites and determined the vegetation association using the field key. At each target they recorded the primary, secondary, or tertiary associations that occurred within a roughly 50-meter radius. They also recorded height and cover of vegetation strata, environmental data, and percent canopy cover of the major species (see field form Appendix B). Other nearby vegetation types outside the 50-meter radius and any recent disturbance were also recorded. To better assist the analysis 4 digital photographs were acquired at each AA point, in the sequence of cardinal directions, N-E- S-W.

Data from 208 sampled AA sites were imported from the database into a GIS layer (Figure 16) then were visually compared in two steps to the vegetation map. The first step was to compare the AA points to the original target locations to check for erroneous points and remove these from further analysis. General errors in the data were recorded at this time, including documenting points that had GPS and location errors. The initial review confirmed that all BIHO AA sites were in the right target polygon and had the correct UTM coordinates associated with them. Nomenclature standards and other data management procedures were the same as for the classification plot data.

The second review step involved deciding between the primary and secondary call for the plant association as recorded by the field crew. In larger vegetation mapping projects such as Rocky Mountain National Park (Salas et al. 2004), AA analysis involved fuzzy logic which assigns different levels of accuracy based on the primary, secondary, and tertiary calls. However due to the confusion that fuzzy logic can cause, a simple binary assessment was conducted with the BIHO data. CTI assigned a final map unit for every point by choosing between the primary and secondary calls. Assignment was accomplished by first adding a new attribute to the point layer labeled “Final_Code” and then by comparing the assigned field names of the point with its corresponding location on the digital imagery. In most cases the primary vegetation map unit name assigned by the field crew was used. However some points were assigned the secondary field call based on one of the following reasons: (1) it appeared that the second call was the better choice due to the overhead perspective (e.g., a stand judged to be sparse woodland on the imagery vs. herbaceous vegetation in the field), (2) the data were actually recorded in a stand that was too small (i.e. inclusion), or (3) the second call better matched the ecological context (e.g. riparian woodland located next to a stream vs. upland woodland).

Figure 16. Location of the accuracy assessment (AA) points in BIHO.

Following AA data review the accuracy analysis was conducted. For BIHO the process was streamlined using methods developed from previous studies at Rocky Mountain National Park (Salas et al. 2004) and Wupatki National Monument (Hansen et al. 2004). Specifically many of the in-house GIS programs developed for these projects were used to compare the AA data, generate confidence intervals, Kappa statistics, and error matrices (contingency tables). Through this automated process, the final map units in the AA layer were compared to the map unit designations for their corresponding polygons. All statistics and calculations used to analyze these data are described at length in the program manuals (TNC and ESRI 1994c, Lea and Curtis 2010) and are summarized in Table 6. Final assessments for each point were recorded using an error matrix.

Table 6. Statistics used in AA analysis.

Statistic Formula Description

Where i is the land cover type, nii is the number of matches between map and reference data and ni+ is the User’s - nii total number of samples of i in the map. This formula is accuracy: n i the number of “correct” observations divided by the sum of the row. Where n+i = total number of sample of i in the reference Producer’s nii data. This formula is the number of “correct” accuracy n i observations divided by the sum of the column. Where zα = 1.645 (this comes from a table of the z-distribution at the significance level for a two-sided limit with a 90% confidence interval). The term 1/ (2n) is Confidence  pˆ(1 - pˆ) 1  the correction for continuity. The correction should be pˆ   z +  Interval n (2n) applied to account for the fact the binomial distribution   describes discrete populations  p = the sample accuracy (0 -1.0), n = the number of sites sampled.

r r Where N is the total number of sites in the matrix, r is N x  (  x )  ii  xi xi Kappa k  i1 i1 the number of rows in the matrix, xii is the number in Index 2 row i and column i, x is the total for row i, and x is the  ( x ) +i i+ N  xi xi total for column I.

Results

Vegetation Classification Over 216 plant species and varieties were documented during taxonomic inventories and classification plot and accuracy assessment field data collection (Appendix E). Based on the dominant/characteristic plant species and other factors the BIHO vegetation was further classified into 20 community types (16 plant associations and four vegetation alliances) (Forman et al. 2011). Just over 50% of the plant communities identified within BIHO are currently listed in the NVCS (NatureServe 2011) as associations. The remaining vegetation communities deviated only slightly from other known NVCS associations and could probably be refined with more data and analysis, these include:

1. Pinus ponderosa / Calamagrostis rubescens Woodland; 2. Salix lucida / Deschampsia cespitosa Woodland; 3. Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana / Festuca idahoensis - Pseudoroegneria spicata Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation; 4. Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana / Pseudoroegneria spicata - Achnatherum occidentale Shrubland; 5. Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda / Danthonia intermedia Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation; 6. Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda / Juncus balticus Temporarily Flooded Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation; 7. Ericameria nauseosa / Eriogonum umbellatum Shrubland; 8. Carex praegracilis - Geum triflorum Herbaceous Vegetation; 9. Danthonia californica - Phleum pratense Herbaceous Vegetation; 10. Deschampsia cespitosa Herbaceous Vegetation; 11. Hordeum brachyantherum - Elymus trachycaulus - Poa pratensis Herbaceous Vegetation

All of the preceding 11 types can be directly cross-walked to existing NVCS alliances (Table 7) and Table 8 lists the proposed 16 plant associations and four vegetation alliances by scientific name, common name, code, and number of plots/association-alliance; they are ordered by physiognomy: forests and woodlands, shrublands, herbaceous, and sparse vegetation.

The following is brief summary of the classification results by physiognomic group:

Forest and Woodland Associations Conifer woodlands and forests were common within BIHO on the upper mountain slopes and in some of the river draws. Three species of conifer were present including ponderosa pine, Douglas fir, and lodgepole pine. Intermixing of the conifer species was common although lodgepole pine was the most prevalent. Understory species included primarily pinegrass and mixed short shrubs. Douglas fir trees were not found to be a true community but the Douglas fir alliance was later added to help with mapping small stands. Communities of deciduous trees were exclusively found in the floodplain and upper bench areas of BIHO. In the floodplain, mature Shining willow trees were common with predominately shrubby-cinquefoil in the understory. Black cottonwood and quaking aspen trees were found only in a few small stands in the upper bench area and not enough data was available for accurate classification to the association level.

Table 7. List of 11 proposed associations cross-walked to existing NVCS alliances at BIHO. NVC Association Name Alliance Name Alliance Code Pinus ponderosa / Calamagrostis rubescens Pinus ponderosa Woodland Alliance A.530 Woodland Salix lucida / Deschampsia cespitosa Salix lucida Temporarily Flooded A.647 Woodland Woodland Alliance Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana / Festuca Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana Shrub idahoensis - Pseudoroegneria spicata Shrub A.1526 Herbaceous Alliance Herbaceous Vegetation; Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana / Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana Pseudoroegneria spicata - Achnatherum A.831 Shrubland Alliance occidentale Shrubland Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda / Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda Shrub Danthonia intermedia Shrub Herbaceous A.1534 Herbaceous Alliance Vegetation Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda / Juncus Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda balticus Temporarily Flooded Shrub A.958 Temporarily Flooded Shrubland Alliance Herbaceous Vegetation Ericameria nauseosa / Eriogonum umbellatum Ericameria nauseosa Shrubland Alliance A.835 Shrubland Carex praegracilis - Geum triflorum Carex praegracilis Seasonally Flooded A.1419 Herbaceous Vegetation Herbaceous Alliance Danthonia californica - Phleum pratense Danthonia californica Herbaceous A.1254 Herbaceous Vegetation Alliance Deschampsia cespitosa Herbaceous Deschampsia caespitosa Seasonally A.1408 Vegetation Flooded Herbaceous Alliance Hordeum brachyantherum - Elymus Hordeum brachyantherum Temporarily trachycaulus - Poa pratensis Herbaceous A.2585 Flooded Herbaceous Alliance Vegetation

Shrubland Associations Mountain big sagebrush was the most common upland shrub forming shrub communities with bluebunch wheatgrass. A split between the various sagebrush types was be found with drier sites containing more Idaho fescue and mesic sites more western needlgrass (Achnatherum occidentale). Also some mountain big sagebrush along forest boundaries contained significant quantities of mountain snowberry. Small stands of rubber rabbitbrush occurred as shrublands but more often as shrub herbaceous types on disturbed sites, often in areas that experienced recent fires or clearing. Riparian shrublands were common in the floodplain and consisted of either young Shining willow in shrub-form (classified as woodlands but mapped as both) or shrubby- cinquefoil. The taller shining willow shrublands tended to have shrubby-cinquefoil in the understory and the shorter cinquefoil either had timber oatgrass or Baltic rush. Additional deciduous shrubs were found at BIHO but did not grow by themselves in stands large enough to call communities. These included serviceberry, mountain snowberry, chokecherry (Prunus virginiana) and other unidentified short willows.

Table 8. List of 16 plant associations and four vegetation alliances for BIHO.

Scientific Name Common Name Key Code NVCS Code N Forest and Woodland

PICO / Pinus contorta / Calamagrostis rubescens Forest Lodgepole Pine / Pinegrass Forest CEGL000139 9 CARU PIPO / Pinus ponderosa / Calamagrostis rubescens Woodland Ponderosa Pine / Pinegrass Woodland N/A 2 CARU Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa Temporarily Black Cottonwood Temporarily Flooded Forest POBA A.311 2 Flooded Forest Alliance Alliance

Populus tremuloides Forest Alliance Quaking Aspen Forest Alliance POTR A.274 1

SALU / Salix lucida / Deschampsia cespitosa Woodland Shining Willow / Tufted Hairgrass Woodland N/A 7

41 DECE

Shrubland

Mountain Big Sagebrush / Idaho Fescue - Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana / Festuca idahoensis ARTR / FEID Bluebunch Wheatgrass Shrub Herbaceous N/A 23 - Pseudoroegneria spicata Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation - PSSP Vegetation ARTR / Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana / Pseudoroegneria Mountain Big Sagebrush / Bluebunch PSSP - N/A 2 spicata - Achnatherum occidentale Shrubland Wheatgrass - Western Needlegrass Shrubland ACOC Mountain Big Sagebrush - Mountain ARTR - Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana - Symphoricarpos Snowberry / Bluebunch Wheatgrass SYOR / CEGL001038 4 oreophilus / Pseudoroegneria spicata Shrubland Shrubland PSSP Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda / Danthonia Shrubby-cinquefoil / Timber Oatgrass Shrub DAFR / N/A 7 intermedia Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation Herbaceous Vegetation DAIN Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda / Juncus balticus Shrubby-cinquefoil / Baltic Rush Temporarily DAFR / N/A 3 Temporarily Flooded Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation Flooded Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation JUBA

Scientific Name Common Name Key Code NVCS Code N Ericameria nauseosa / Eriogonum umbellatum Rubber Rabbitbrush / Sulphur-flower ERNA / N/A 1 Shrubland Buckwheat Shrubland ERUM

Herbaceous Vegetation

Smooth Brome Semi-natural Herbaceous Bromus inermis Semi-natural Herbaceous Alliance BRIN A.3561 1 Alliance

Carex nebrascensis Herbaceous Vegetation Nebraska Sedge Wet Meadow CANE CEGL001813 7

Carex praegracilis - Geum triflorum Herbaceous Clustered Field Sedge - Old Man's Whiskers CAPR - N/A 2 Vegetation Herbaceous Vegetation GETR

Danthonia californica - Phleum pratense Herbaceous California oatgrass - Timothy Herbaceous DACA - N/A 2 Vegetation Vegetation PHPR

Deschampsia cespitosa Herbaceous Vegetation Tufted Hairgrass Herbaceous Vegetation DECE N/A 2

Festuca idahoensis - Pseudoroegneria spicata Idaho Fescue - Bluebunch Wheatgrass FEID - PSSP CEGL001624 4 Herbaceous Vegetation Herbaceous Vegetation HOBR - Hordeum brachyantherum - Elymus trachycaulus - Poa Meadow Barley - Slender Wheatgrass - ELTR - N/A 1 pratensis Herbaceous Vegetation Kentucky Bluegrass Herbaceous Vegetation POPR

Juncus balticus Herbaceous Vegetation Baltic Rush Wet Meadow JUBA CEGL001838 13

Pseudoroegneria spicata Herbaceous Alliance Bluebunch Wheatgrass Herbaceous Alliance PSSP A.1265 2

Herbaceous Associations Grass and forb associations were common in woodland openings, on exposed slopes, in marshy bogs, and on benches. Common upland native species included bluebunch wheatgrass with and without Idaho fescue. Non-native grasses including smooth brome, timothy and Kentucky bluegrass often occurred in similar upland areas that showed evidence of possible cultivation, burning, or seeding in the past. Floodplain herbaceous vegetation included very wet marshes and standing water bogs with varying compositions of Baltic rush, Nebraska sedge, and clustered field sedge (Carex praegracilis). Slightly drier areas in the floodplain had less rush/sedges and contained more open stands of either Sandberg bluegrass, oatgrass or tufted hairgrass.

Classified plant associations were also placed into NatureServes ecological system classification to provide managers with a broader landscape perspective. The ecological system classification represents recurring groups of biological communities that are found in similar physical environments and are influenced by similar dynamic ecological processes, such as fire or flooding. They are intended to provide a classification unit that is readily mappable, often from remote imagery, and readily identifiable by conservation and resource managers in the field. Ecological systems at BIHO address only the natural landscape, as developed areas were are not currently classified. Thirteen ecological systems occur within the BIHO vegetation mapping project area based on this project (Forman et al. 2011) (Table 9).

Table 9. List of 13 ecological systems within BIHO.

Ecological System NVCS Code

Northwestern Great Plains Shrubland CES303.662

Columbia Plateau Scabland Shrubland CES304.770

Inter-Mountain Basins Big Sagebrush Shrubland CES304.777

Inter-Mountain Basins Montane Sagebrush Steppe CES304.785

Inter-Mountain Basins Semi-Desert Grassland CES304.787

Northern Rocky Mountain Ponderosa Pine Woodland and Savanna CES306.030

Northern Rocky Mountain Lower Montane, Foothill and Valley Grassland CES306.040

Northern Rocky Mountain Lower Montane Riparian Woodland and Shrubland CES306.804

Northern Rocky Mountain Subalpine-Upper Montane Grassland CES306.806

Rocky Mountain Alpine-Montane Wet Meadow CES306.812

Rocky Mountain Aspen Forest and Woodland CES306.813

Rocky Mountain Subalpine-Montane Riparian Shrubland CES306.832

Rocky Mountain Poor-Site Lodgepole Pine Forest CES306.960

Digital Imagery and Interpretation For BIHO, 27 map units (18 vegetated and 9 land-use/land-cover) were developed. The final list of map classes/units was directly cross-walked or matched to corresponding plant associations and land-use classes (Table 10). BIHO map classes represent a compromise between the detail of the NVCS, the needs for park management, and the limitations of the imagery. As a result, the mapping legend does not exactly match the NVCS. When the NVCS link was not feasible, descriptive local map units or park specials were created.

The following types represent the possible map scenarios that were encountered in the BIHO project: 1. One-to-one relationship = When a plant association or vegetation alliance had a unique photo signature and could be readily delineated on the imagery, the map unit adopted the plant association/vegetation alliance name or similar synonym. 2. One-to-many relationship = When related plant associations shared the same signature and could not be distinguished on the imagery, several plant associations were combined into a single complex. 3. Park Specials = When unique stands of vegetation did not have a corresponding NVCS plant association or vegetation alliance. 4. Land Use – Land Cover = Non-vegetated areas and vegetation types not recognized by the NVCS received Anderson et al. (1976, updated 2002) map unit designations.

BIHO map class comments and notes:  Pseudotsuga menziesii Forest Alliance was added based on documented locations;  Poa secunda Seasonally Flooded Herbaceous Alliance was added based on documented locations;  Mixed Planted and Semi-natural Grassland Complex was added to account for undocumented environs grasslands that did not show active cultivation on private lands and this class could be further defined based on additional data;  Mixed Weedy Semi-natural Herbaceous Vegetation Complex was added for highly disturbed site that may contain sparse cover of existing associations (i.e. smooth brome) and this class could be further defined based on additional data;  Young, thick stands of Pinus contorta / Calamagrostis rubescens Forest (i.e. doghair) were delineated and noted in the comments field of the GIS layer;  Short to tall shrublands make up most of the Salix lucida / Deschampsia cespitosa Woodland and Shrubland type at BIHO.

Please reference Appendix F for detailed descriptions and representative photographs for all vegetation map units.

Table 10. Assignment of map classes to NVCS plant associations/alliances. NVCS Association/Alliance(s) Map Class Map Class Name Assigned to Map Class (or Map Relationship Code Unit Description) Forest and Woodland

Pinus contorta / Calamagrostis -Pinus contorta / Calamagrostis PICO/CARU 1 : 1 rubescens Forest rubescens Forest

Pinus ponderosa / Calamagrostis -Pinus ponderosa / Calamagrostis PIPO/CARU 1 : 1 rubescens Woodland rubescens Woodland

Populus balsamifera ssp. -Populus balsamifera ssp. POBA trichocarpa Temporarily Flooded trichocarpa Temporarily Flooded 1 : 1 Forest Alliance Forest Alliance Populus tremuloides Forest -Populus tremuloides Forest POTR 1 : 1 Alliance Alliance Pseudotsuga menziesii Forest -Pseudotsuga menziesii Forest PSME 1 : 1 Alliance Alliance Salix lucida / Deschampsia -Salix lucida / Deschampsia SALU/DECE cespitosa Woodland and 1 : 1 cespitosa Woodland Shrubland

Shrubland -Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana / Festuca idahoensis – Pseudoroegneria spicata Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation -Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana Artemisia tridentata ssp. / Pseudoroegneria spicata - ARTRV 1 : Many vaseyana Shrubland Complex Achnatherum occidentale Shrubland -Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana - Symphoricarpos oreophilus / Pseudoroegneria spicata Shrubland -Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda / Danthonia intermedia Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. DAFR -Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda 1 : Many floribunda Shrubland Complex / Juncus balticus Temporarily Flooded Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation Ericameria nauseosa / -Ericameria nauseosa / Eriogonum ERNA/ERUM Eriogonum umbellatum 1 : 1 umbellatum Shrubland Shrubland

Herbaceous Vegetation

Bromus inermis Semi-natural -Bromus inermis Semi-natural BRIN 1 : 1 Herbaceous Alliance Herbaceous Alliance Danthonia californica - Phleum -Danthonia californica - Phleum DACA-PHPR 1 : 1 pratense Herbaceous Vegetation pratense Herbaceous Vegetation Deschampsia cespitosa -Deschampsia cespitosa DECE 1 : 1 Herbaceous Vegetation Herbaceous Vegetation Hordeum brachyantherum - -Hordeum brachyantherum – HOBR- Elymus trachycaulus - Poa Elymus trachycaulus - Poa 1 : 1 ELTR-POPR pratensis Herbaceous Vegetation pratensis Herbaceous Vegetation Mixed Planted and Semi-natural MXGRS N/A Park Special Grassland Complex

Poa secunda Seasonally Flooded Poa secunda Seasonally Flooded POSE 1 : 1 Herbaceous Alliance Herbaceous Alliance -Pseudoroegneria spicata Pseudoroegneria spicata - Herbaceous Alliance PSSP (Festuca idahoensis) Herbaceous -Festuca idahoensis – 1 : Many Vegetation Complex Pseudoroegneria spicata Herbaceous Vegetation Mixed Weedy Semi-natural WEED N/A Park Special Herbaceous Vegetation Complex -Juncus balticus Herbaceous Juncus balticus - Carex Vegetation (nebrascensis, pragracilis) Wet -Carex praegracilis - Geum triflorum WETM 1 : Many Meadow Herbaceous Vegetation Herbaceous Vegetation Complex -Carex nebrascensis Herbaceous Vegetation Land-Use / Land-Cover

STRM Stream / River Natural linear drainage features N/A

Man-made linear water conveyance CANL Canal / Ditch N/A systems Natural and small human-made POND Lake / Pond N/A water impoundments

RESD Residential Single-family housing N/A

AGRI Agricultural Business Ranch and farm facilities N/A

ROAD Transportation Paved and earthen roads N/A Tilled and cropped agricultural FILD Planted / Cultivated N/A fields Previously developed land, fallow TRANS Transitional N/A fields, roadsides, slash piles, etc… Visitor center, Housing Complex, FACL Facilities N/A Maintenance Yard, etc.

Vegetation Map The final BIHO vegetation map (Appendix G) consisted of 1,319 polygons totaling 7,037 acres (2,850 hectares) (Table 11). Average polygon size was 5.3 acres (2.2 hectares) that includes adjacent polygons that have the same map code but different density, height, or other attributes. The area within the supplied BIHO boundary totaled 665 acres (269 hectares) or 9% of the total project area. Of the total number of polygons, 91% represented vegetation map classes and 9% were land use classes. The most common BIHO map class was the Pinus contorta / Calamagrostis rubescens Forest (143 acres) (58 hectares) and Salix lucida / Deschampsia cespitosa Woodland and Shrubland had the largest number of polygons (48 polygons) (Figure 17). Across the entire project area the Pinus contorta / Calamagrostis rubescens Forest was also the most abundant (2,465 acres) (998 hectares) and the Juncus balticus - Carex (nebrascensis, pragracilis) Wet Meadow Herbaceous Vegetation Complex map class had the highest frequency with 205 polygons.

Source: NPS Figure 17. Pinus contorta / Calamagrostis rubescens Forest and Salix lucida / Deschampsia cespitosa Woodland and Shrubland at BIHO.

Table 11. Summary statistics for the BIHO map class polygons.

Big Hole Battlefield NB Total Project Area Map Code Map Unit Description Polygon Polygon Acres Hectares Acres Hectares Count Count PICO/CARU Pinus contorta / Calamagrostis rubescens Forest 28 142.5 57.7 153 2,464.9 998.3 PIPO/CARU Pinus ponderosa / Calamagrostis rubescens Woodland 8 16.7 6.8 11 31.0 12.6 POBA Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa Temporarily Flooded Forest Alliance 9 5.0 2.0 9 5.0 2.0 POTR Populus tremuloides Forest Alliance 2 1.1 0.4 2 1.1 0.4 PSME Pseudotsuga menziesii Forest Alliance 12 21.3 8.6 58 215.9 87.4 SALU/DECE Salix lucida / Deschampsia cespitosa Woodland and Shrubland 48 137.1 55.5 203 444.7 180.1 ARTRV Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana Shrubland Complex 33 119.5 48.4 98 471.8 191.1 DAFR Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda Shrubland Complex 30 38.4 15.6 77 128.8 52.2 ERNA/ERUM Ericameria nauseosa / Eriogonum umbellatum Shrubland 1 0.4 0.2 1 0.4 0.2 BRIN Bromus inermis Semi-natural Herbaceous Alliance 6 5.6 2.3 82 553.6 224.2 DACA-PHPR Danthonia californica - Phleum pratense Herbaceous Vegetation 5 5.2 2.1 8 11.2 4.5 DECE Deschampsia cespitosa Herbaceous Vegetation 13 7.0 2.8 58 95.5 38.7 HOBR-ELTR- Hordeum brachyantherum - Elymus trachycaulus - Poa pratensis Herbaceous 5 11.5 4.7 23 46.6 18.9

48 POPR Vegetation

MXGRS Mixed Planted and Semi-natural Grassland Complex 0 0 0 97 292.9 118.6 POSE Poa secunda Seasonally Flooded Herbaceous Alliance 3 3.1 1.3 3 3.1 1.3 Pseudoroegneria spicata - (Festuca idahoensis) Herbaceous Vegetation PSSP 36 59.2 24.0 94 249.6 101.1 Complex WEED Mixed Weedy Semi-natural Herbaceous Vegetation Complex 0 0 0 16 24.9 10.1 Juncus balticus - Carex (nebrascensis, pragracilis) Wet Meadow Herbaceous WETM 40 46.3 18.8 205 869.9 352.3 Vegetation Complex

Big Hole Battlefield NB Total Project Area Map Code Map Unit Description Polygon Polygon Acres Hectares Acres Hectares Count Count STRM Stream / River 8 16.7 6.8 12 55.6 22.5 CANL Canal / Ditch 5 5.0 2.0 22 95.7 38.8 POND Lake / Pond 2 1.3 0.5 10 4.2 1.7 RESD Residential 0 0 0 5 4.0 1.6 AGRI Agricultural Business 0 0 0 9 8.8 3.6 ROAD Transportation 3 12.0 4.9 4 63.9 25.9 FILD Planted / Cultivated 0 0 0 13 863.0 349.5 TRANS Transitional 3 1.5 0.6 43 26.9 10.9 FACL Facilities 3 4.1 1.7 3 4.1 1.7 Total Vegetation 279 624.4 252.1 1,198 5,910.9 2,393.9 Total Land-Use/Land Cover 24 40.6 16.4 121 1,126.2 456.1 Totals 303 665 268.5 1,319 7,037.1 2,850.0

Normally the standard minimum mapping unit for NPS vegetation mapping projects is defined as 0.5 hectare (1.24 acres). However, this is a nominal unit and due to the resolution of the imagery, it was reduced to ¼ acre (0.1 hectare) for wetland and other rare classes. This MMU size allowed for more detail in the mapping and allowed for better delineation of sites deemed important for BIHO management. The ability to recognize small patches of vegetation is reflected in the high number of polygons created and the average size of the polygons for some of the rarer types.

The BIHO vegetation map should more appropriately be considered a spatial database that also contains many additional polygon attributes not presented in the preceding table (i.e. density, height, and pattern). These data are difficult to convey in a table or on a two-dimensional map, but the different attributes can be combined in many ways and at different scales and resolutions to produce other products representing the full spectrum of vegetation diversity. For example, older, more mature stands of conifer trees can quickly be located by querying the GIS vegetation layer for the specific vegetation type and then reselecting only those polygons with high density (>60%) and the tallest height class (15 – 30 meters).

Figure 18 is an example of a fine scale (1:6,000-scale) BIHO vegetation map created from the GIS spatial database with the 2011 NAIP imagery as the background.

Legend PICO/CARU Pinus contorta / Calamagrostis rubescens Forest PIPO/CARU Pinus ponderosa / Calamagrostis rubescens Woodland POBA Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa Temporarily Flooded Forest Alliance POTR Populus tremuloides Forest Alliance PSME Pseudotsuga menziesii Forest Alliance SALU/DECE Salix lucida / Deschampsia cespitosa Woodland and Shrubland ARTRV Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana Shrubland Complex DAFR Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda Shrubland Complex ERNA/ERUM Ericameria nauseosa / Eriogonum umbellatum Shrubland BRIN Bromus inermis Semi-natural Herbaceous Alliance DACA-PHPR Danthonia californica - Phleum pratense Herbaceous Vegetation DECE Deschampsia cespitosa Herbaceous Vegetation HOBR-ELTR-POPR Hordeum brachyantherum – Elymus trachycaulus - Poa pratensis Herbaceous Vegetation MXGRS Mixed Planted and Semi-natural Grassland Complex POSE Poa secunda Seasonally Flooded Herbaceous Alliance PSSP Pseudoroegneria spicata - (Festuca idahoensis) Herbaceous Vegetation Complex WEED Mixed Weedy Semi-natural Herbaceous Vegetation Complex WETM Juncus balticus - Carex (nebrascensis, pragracilis) Wet Meadow Herbaceous Vegetation Complex STRM Stream / River CANL Canal / Ditch POND Lake / Pond RESD Residential AGRI Agricultural Business ROAD Transportation FILD Planted / Cultivated TRANS Transitional FACL Facilities

Figure 18. Example of the BIHO vegetation map layer.

Accuracy Assessment The 2011 AA yielded 208 points distributed throughout BIHO and these were used to access the thematic accuracy of the GIS vegetation layer. Using the AA GIS point file created from the AA point coordinates a preliminary error matrix was created and reviewed by CTI. During the review process all of the AA points whose primary plant association didn’t match their corresponding map class designation in the GIS layer were highlighted. These mis-matches were further investigated to see if the second, third or other vegetation call matched. Upon completion of the review a final error matrix was created (Table 12). The final assessment revealed an overall accuracy of 92%.

Examination of the final error matrix showed concentrations of user’s error among three map classes, possible reasons for this error are presented below:

1) The Pinus ponderosa / Calamagrostis rubescens Woodland had lower than expected accuracy (67%) and the 3 mis-matched points were always confused with the very similar Pinus contorta / Calamagrostis rubescens Forest type. The close resemblance of the canopy signature between these two conifer species likely explains most of this error. Another source of this error could be attributed to the intermixing of these two tree species in some areas of BIHO. 2) The Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda / Danthonia intermedia Shrubland Complex had just slightly lower acceptable accuracy (79%). The 4 mis-matched points in this type likely result from the difficulty in seeing sparse shrublands on the ortho-imagery. In one case sparse mountain big sagebrush wasn’t recognized and in the other three the sparse shrubby-cinquefoil did not have enough cover to warrant this map class designation. 3) The Pseudoroegneria spicata - (Festuca idahoensis) Herbaceous Vegetation Complex also had marginal error (76%) and 5 AA points were confused with various other map classes. Sources of this error likely resulted from similar grassland signatures, mixing of the dominant graminoid species, sampling in sparse shrubland with marginal shrub cover, and/or were sampled in small, un-mappable mesic inclusions.

General trends in the AA reveal the difficulty in obtaining sufficient numbers of AA points for very rare or small vegetation stands. Having few AA points decreases the confidence levels (i.e. makes them less accurate) and makes it difficult to assume the accuracy of these classes with any certainty. Other trends in the AA include: (1) the difficulty in separating similar looking conifer tree map classes, (2) the complexity of trying to accurately separate grasslands with minimal shrubs from sparse shrub types, and (3) attempting to reliably delineate different native and herbaceous vegetation/grassland types. Additionally, the differences/confusion between shrubland and herbaceous vegetation types can probably be explained by the difficulty in resolving the difference in scale and perspective between viewing vegetation on the imagery and assessing it on the ground. For example, field sampling could have occurred in small shrub pockets or in shrub canopy openings that were actually part of a larger, somewhat heterogeneous polygon.

Table 12. Final Contingency Table (Error Matrix) for BIHO.

Observed AA Point (Reference AA Ground Data)

V PHPR

POPR Total Users 90% Conf. - Map Class -

Accuracy Interval

BRIN

PSSP

POTR DAFR DECE POSE

PSME

POBA

WETM

HOBR

ARTR

PIPO/CARU

PICO/CARU

SALU/DECE ELTR

DACA ERNA/ERUM

PICO/CARU 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 100% 98% 100% P PIPO/CARU 3 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 67% 35% 98% r 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 100% 94% 100% e POBA d POTR 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 100% 75% 100% i PSME 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 100% 95% 100% c SALU/DECE 0 0 0 0 0 34 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 36 94% 87% 100% t ARTRV 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 26 96% 88% 100% d DAFR 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 15 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 19 79% 61% 97% M ERNA/ERUM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 100% 50% 100% a BRIN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 100% 88% 100% p DACA-PHPR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 6 100% 92% 100%

DECE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 8 100% 94% 100%

53 C l HOBR-ELTR-

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 4 100% 88% 100% a POPR s POSE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 100% 75% 100% s PSSP 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 16 1 21 76% 59% 94%

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 21 23 91% 79% 100% WETM Total 32 6 8 2 10 34 27 17 1 5 8 10 6 2 16 24 92% Overall Accuracy Producers 208 Total 91% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 93% 88% 100% 80% 75% 80% 67% 100% 100% 88% 87% 94% Accuracy Points 191 Correct 90% Conf. - 81% 92% 94% 75% 95% 99% 82% 72% 50% 41% 44% 54% 27% 75% 97% 74% Overall 90% Points Conf. 90% Kappa Level + 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Intervals Index

Instruction on Using the Accuracy Assessment Contingency Table: The contingency table or error matrix presents an array of numbers set out in rows and columns corresponding to a particular vegetation map unit relative to the actual vegetation type as verified on the ground. The column headings represent the vegetation classification as determined in the field and the row headings represent the vegetation classification taken from the vegetation map. The highlighted diagonal indicates the number of points assessed in the field that agree with the map label. Conversely, the inaccuracies of each map unit are described as both errors of inclusion (user’s or commission errors) and errors of exclusion (producer’s or omission errors). By reading across this table (i.e., rows) one can calculate the percent error of commission, or how many polygons for each map unit were incorrectly labeled when compared to the field data. By reading down the table (i.e., columns) one can calculate the percent error of omission, or how many polygons for that type were left off the map. Numbers “on the diagonal” tell the user how well the map unit was interpreted and how confident they can be in using it. Numbers “off the diagonal” yield important information about the deficiencies of the map including which types were: 1) over- mapped - commission errors on the right –more of this type was mapped than occurs at the site or 2) under-mapped - omission errors on the bottom – some of this type was mapped as other map units.

Discussion

Big Hole National Battlefield located in southwestern Montana features an unique mix of native conifer woodlands, sagebrush steppe and riparian vegetation. Adjacent to the battlefield is a mix of private ranches and federally-managed forest. The steep slopes, soil development patterns, and land use patterns resulted in moderate challenges to the classification and mapping effort. Challenges included some logistical considerations for field work due to working on exposed, steep slopes, and negotiating passage in and around the wet marshes. The inventory process described in this report although largely successful revealed opportunities for improvement that are discussed herein.

Approaches that worked well: Field data and local descriptions of the plant associations provided by project ecologists were extremely important ancillary data sources used by the GIS contractor to delineate map classes. The high-quality field data provided valuable on-site information for photo signature development and the high to moderate density of the plots provided a strong baseline to build the entire mapping model. Timely and high resolution base imagery is also essential to produce detailed and accurate maps. For mapping, the 2009 and 2011 NAIP imagery was important to this project, providing a timely, high resolution base product that resulted in a recent final map with high overall accuracy.

Areas for Improvement: Inherent to all vegetation mapping projects is the need to produce both a consistent vegetation classification and a comprehensive set of map units. Typically, the systems are very similar, but when using a national classification such as the NVCS there is usually not a strict 1:1 correspondence. Nonconformity is due to the remote sensing nature of the interpretation and its ability to delineate map units based only on photo signatures. Subtle vegetation characteristics that can be seen on the ground are not necessarily the same as those apparent on the imagery. Canopy closure, shadows, soil reflections and the timing of the imagery acquisition can all impact the vegetation signatures. In the future if a more detailed map or classification is needed, especially for the complex sagebrush and herbaceous types, more field- based ground-truthing work could be concentrated or focused within selected units. Similarly, if more precision is needed for the delineation of the environs vegetation types (primarily herbaceous types) more sampling and ground-truthing of the map could be done if permission is granted by the landowners.

Field Survey The vegetation classification data driving this project should be used as the baseline from which to begin future vegetation studies. New field survey work in a judicious timeframe would improve both the classification (plant association descriptions) and mapping (refined linework) efforts. Using the accuracy assessment as a guide, map classes with lower accuracy could be further surveyed and boundaries delineated in the field to create a more accurate GIS layer. While it may appear that there are a large number of plant associations and vegetation alliances described for this relatively small area, some were only minimally sampled likely due to time and budget limitations. For example, some of the herbaceous vegetation types could be further examined throughout the growing season to document both the cool and warm season species in order to refine their stand composition. Also, accessing neighboring lands would allow new classification plot samples to be obtained increasing the confidence in these types, thereby strengthening the classification.

Classification In addition to private lands access the other main classification challenge at BIHO is documenting changes to plant life caused by insects, wildfire, drought, erosion, stream levels, prescribed burns, agricultural pressures (grazing, non-native plantings), logging, and other anthropogenic disturbance. Changes can include reduction of tree and shrub cover or outright removal and spread of invasive plant species. At all times, but especially after these events, new data should be collected to document vegetation changes over time. Overall more specialized and targeted data collection in affected areas would help to document any changes and would greatly increase the understanding of the landscape in general.

Of special consideration for future BIHO classification refinement would be the interesting mix of native graminoids, non-native grasses, and characteristic shrubs/trees found in the riparian floodplain. All of the mesic associations form intricate ecotones with much species overlap among the dominants. From a management perspective it is likely that broader groupings are desirable since the characteristic species in each type exhibit similar growth patterns and would respond similarly to preservation and control efforts. The complex nature of these types makes it more difficult to accurately classify the dominant species into discrete and meaningful associations. More classification work concentrating on abiotic and environmental aspects including characteristic soil types, habitats, and disturbance patterns may improve the ability to determine when single species should form separate associations and when they should be grouped with other similar species.

Digital Imagery and Mapping The vegetation map for BIHO was based primarily on the 2011 NAIP ortho-imagery. Therefore, all of the resulting mapping products correspond to the summer of 2011 timing of the image acquisition (i.e. snapshot in time). As the data are used, it should be remembered that fires and other changes to the landscape since 2011 are not included in this product. In the future it might be beneficial to update the map with newer imagery and GPS coordinates (perimeters) for major events (e.g. wildfire perimeters, insect infestation events, etc).

Accuracy Assessment An important and necessary aspect of this project is the accuracy assessment; collecting independent ground data determines the usefulness of the vegetation map. As such, users of this product should remember that the GIS mapping and the classification portions of this project were conducted separately from both the plot and AA field data collection. Employing divisions when completing tasks created some challenges related to communication among the teams, including: (1) adequately conveying changes to the vegetation classification based on finding potentially new vegetation types during the field portion of the AA, (2) thoroughly testing and adjusting the field key to remove confusing splits among similar types, (3) insuring that adequate sample sizes are collected for rare and infrequent types, and (4) avoiding having to collect more than the estimated 30 data points for common types.

Actual errors in the mapping likely stemmed from limitations within the ortho-photography (as previously described), natural changes in the vegetation between when sampling and the acquisition date of the imagery, dichotomous break errors in the field key, or the difficulty in establishing an overhead perspective to exactly match the ground view. Although the accuracy for BIHO assessed high, improvements can be made and users should fully explore and understand the sources of error as presented in the error matrix.

It is also important to understand that the mapping portion of this project is primarily a remotely sensed exercise and the field work was conducted on site, therefore all resulting products are scale dependent. In general the mapping portions should be viewed as a broader overview and the field data as site-specific. An analyst can enlarge the imagery beyond the 1:12,000-scale using GIS software and see more detail; however it should be remembered that the actual interpretation/mapping was conducted at this scale. As such, any work performed with this product at a finer scale (enlarged image) could lead to some uncertainty. In contrast, the field work was conducted at individual locations at one specific time and extrapolation using these locations to represent out-lying areas or using them to determine species presence at different times/seasons is less reliable. Database users should recognize scale limitations and balance research and modeling projects accordingly.

Future Recommendations This project represents the best efforts of a multi-disciplinary team over a short time period. In order to create the best possible “long-term” vegetation classification for BIHO and the most accurate and detailed GIS layer, this project should be viewed as a place to start or baseline rather than an end product. In other words, present and future NPS staff should be encouraged to scrutinize this project, building from its strengths and bolstering its weaknesses. One example would be to periodically perform field checking by examining the map in the field (use qualified NPS or contract staff), document changes, and incorporate changes into newer versions. Realizing that this project represents a snapshot in time, future research can help to understand the vegetation in and around BIHO and changes over time. The products presented herein will help direct future vegetation and land-use monitoring and management, as follows:

1. The diversity of plant species and dynamic nature of BIHO with respect to insect infestations, fire, stream flow fluctuations, and other outside influences warrants periodic field surveys by experienced ecologists. Working with and sampling more of the plant communities in the project environs would also be beneficial allowing for the possibility of discovering new associations, updating the descriptions of the current plant associations, and devising better landscape management strategies. All new information could be used to update both the GIS map layer (i.e. better delineation) and the classification (i.e. new associations).

2. Remote sensing does not replace on-the-ground knowledge provided by GPS-linked plots, observations, photographs, and ground verification. Time, topographic features, and funding limitations curtailed the amount of map ground-truthing performed. As research opportunities arise, maps should be examined in the field by experienced crews. Also GPS receiver data and other GIS layers (such as soils and geology) should be used to improve and update the spatial data. Data could be collected on a standard field form, stored, and then used to update the GIS layer on an annual basis. The vegetation map layer should not be viewed as static but should be updated with more current and accurate information.

3. To better understand the limitations of the map, the accuracy assessment data presented in the error matrices should be thoroughly reviewed by NPS staff. Map classes with low accuracy should be examined to determine if they could be improved with future studies using ground-truthing or other remote-sensing formats (i.e. fine-scale imagery, hyperspectral, etc). Also, landscape modeling may help to tease out the location of specific types based on specific habitat information. For some applications it may make sense to combine map classes into higher units, such as alliances or ecological systems to improve their accuracy.

4. For monitoring purposes, change over time could be addressed by similar remote sensing projects. New imagery acquired at regular intervals could be used to create up-to-date vegetation layers that could be overlain on this baseline vegetation and land-use layer. Any changes between the two layers could be extracted and analyzed. Also periodically and immediately following vegetation altering events new data should be collected and any changes noted in a new vegetation layer. That way, new vegetation map layers can be prepared on a regular basis to prevent the vegetation map from becoming out-dated over time.

5. In the future, resource management personnel could link the habitat for species of concern to specific associations and map units. These map units could be used to help locate potential sites of rare, endangered, or threatened species and communities in the field or identify areas for non-native plant removal or treatment. Known populations of threatened, endangered, or non-native species could be overlain on the vegetation map using point or small polygon layers to extract helpful plant community indicator data such as soils, slope, aspect, hydrology, etc.

Research Opportunities Having an accurate and current vegetation classification and map in a geodatabase presents many new and exciting research opportunities. Research could include expanding or linking the GIS layer to derive other information including fire models, habitat monitoring locations, guides for rare plant surveys, wildlife habitat structural analyses, and inventorying areas that are likely vectors for invasive species. The map could also be enhanced by overlaying other existing GIS layers including geology, hydrology, elevation, and soils. In this manner complex interactions between these layers could be examined and yield important information about growth rates, regeneration after disturbance, biomass distribution, and stream morphology among others. Through innovative analyses the vegetation layer could be used as a baseline for other ecological and climate-related studies including examining how the vegetation interacts with soil chemistry, pollution, paleontological/archeological sites, insect infestations, weather patterns, etc.

Literature Cited

Anderson, J.R., E. Hardy, J. Roach, and R. Witter. 1976. A land use and land cover classification system for use with Remote Sensor Data. Geological Survey Professional Paper 964. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Berger, Gary. 2004. Soil Survey of Big Hole Area – Part of Beaverhead County, Montana United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, in cooperation with the Montana Agricultural Experiment Station. http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov/Manuscripts/MT610/0/Big_Hole.pdf

Daubenmire, R. 1959. A canopy-coverage method of vegetational analysis. Northwest Science. 23: 69-82.

Forman, A.D., K. Aho, and J. Shive. 2011. Classification of Big Hole National Battlefield, Ne Perce National Historical Park, to support the vegetation mapping program: Big Hole National Battlefield. Northwest Management, Inc. Internal Report.

Federal Geographic Data Committee [FGDC]. 1997. Vegetation classification standard. Online, http://biology.usgs.gov/fgdc.veg/standards/vegstd.htm. Accessed 1 May 2010.

Federal Geographic Data Committee. 1998. Content standard for digital geospatial metadata, FGDC-STD-001-1998. Online: http://www.fgdc.gov/metadata/contstan.html. Accessed 1 May 2010.

Federal Geographic Data Committee. 2008. National Vegetation Classification Standard (Version 2). Document # FGDC-STD-005. Online, http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/projects/FGDC-standards-projects/vegetation. Accessed 1 May 2010.

Flahault, C. and C. Schroter. 1910. Rapport sur la nomenclature phytogeopraphique. Proceedings of the Third International Botanical Congress, Brussels 1:131-164.

Grossman, D.H., D. Faber-Langendoen, A.S. Weakley, M. Anderson, P. Bourgeron, R. Crawford, K. Goodin, S. Landaal, K. Metzler, K.D. Patterson, M. Pyne, M. Reid, and L. Sneddon. 1998. International Classification of Ecological Communities: Terrestrial Vegetation of the United States. Volume I. The National Vegetation Classification System: Development, Status, and Applications. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia.

Hansen, M., J. Coles, K. Thomas, D. Cogan, M. Ried, J. Von Loh, and K. Schulz. 2004. USGS-NPS National Vegetation Mapping Program: Wupatki National Monument, Arizona, Vegetation Classification and Distribution. Final Report. U.S. Geological Survey Southwest Biological Science Center. Flagstaff, Arizona.

Lea, C. and A. C. Curtis. 2010. Thematic accuracy assessment procedures: National Park Service Vegetation Inventory, version 2.0. Natural Resource Report NPS/2010/NRR—2010/204. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado.

National Park Service [NPS]. 1991. Fire Management Plan, Big Hole National Battlefield, Wisdom, Montana, February 18, 1991, DSC reports on microfiche, D-20, CCSO library.

National Park Service [NPS]. 1999. Natural Resource Challenge: The National Park Service’s Action Plan for Preserving Natural Resources. In-house publication. U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service, Washington, D.C. 21p.

National Park Service [NPS]. Upper Columbia Basin Network. 2008. Annotated Plant Species List. Available online at: http://Science.Nature.NPS.gov/im/units/ucbn/docs/NPSpecies/NPSpp_SpeciesLost_BIHO. Moscow, Idaho.

National Park Service [NPS]. 2011a. Big Hole National Battlefield. Available online at: http://www.nps.gov/BIHO.

National Park Service. [NPS]. 2011b, 12-Step Guidance for NPS Vegetation InventoriesWebsite. Available online at: http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/inventory/veg/docs/Veg_Inv_12step_Guidance_v1.1.pdf.

NatureServe Explorer. 2011. An online encyclopedia of life [Web application]. Version 7.0. Arlington, VA. Online, http://www.natureserve.org/explorer. Accessed April 2011.

Salas, D., J. Stevens, and K. Schulz. 2004. USGS-NPS National Vegetation Mapping Program: Rocky Mountain National Park. Final Report. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Remote Sensing and GIS Group Technical Memorandum 8260-05-02. Denver, Colorado.

The Nature Conservancy and Environmental Systems Research Institute [TNC and ESRI]. 1994a. NBS/NPS Vegetation Mapping Program: Final Draft, Standardized National Vegetation Classification System. Prepared for USDI – National Biological Survey and National Park Service. Arlington, Virginia.

The Nature Conservancy and Environmental Systems Research Institute [TNC and ESRI]. 1994b. NBS/NPS Vegetation Mapping Program: Final Draft, Field Methods for Vegetation Mapping. Prepared for USDI – National Biological Survey and National Park Service. Arlington, Virginia.

The Nature Conservancy and Environmental Research Systems Institute. [TNC and ESRI] 1994c. NBS/NPS Vegetation Mapping Program: Accuracy Assessment Procedures. Arlington, Virginia.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service [USDA –NRCS]. 2007. The PLANTS Database. Online, http://plants.usda.gov. Accessed 1 May 2006.

Wilson, G.M. 2006. Land cover classifications for Big Hole National Battlefield, Whitman Mission National Historic Site and Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area using ASTER imagery. Natural Resource Technical Report. National Park Service, Moscow, Idaho.

Appendix A - Components and Flow Diagram of the Vegetation Inventory Program

Source: Tom Owens, USGS

APP A.1

Appendix B - Field Data Forms and Instructions

IDENTIFIERS/LOCATORS

Plot Code Code indicating the specific plot within the vegetation polygon.

Surveyors Names of surveyors, with principal surveyor listed first.

Date Date the survey was taken; year, month and day.

BPU Code The biophysical unit identified.

Provisional Community Name Using the provisional classification of the park that was provided, assign the name of the vegetation type which most closely resembles this type. Enter the finest level of the classification possible. If it’s a new type, name it based on the two or three most dominant species in the plot.

Quad Name Appropriate name/scale from survey map used; use 7.5-minute quadrangle if possible.

Park Site Name Provisional name assigned by field worker that describes where the data were collected. It should represent an identifiable feature on a topographic map.

GPS Rover File Record the number of the file from the GPS unit.

Field UTM X Use GPS; do not estimate. If you can’t get a GPS reading, estimate coordinates from a topo map and note on the form that this method was used.

Field UTM Y Use GPS; do not estimate. If you can’t get a GPS reading, estimate coordinates from a topo map and note on the form that this method was used.

APP B.1

Error Error is recorded from the GPS unit.

Plot Length and Plot Width Enter width and length dimensions for square or rectangular plots. Choose the appropriate plot size based on the following:

Vegetation Class Standard Plot Dimensions PLOT AREA Forest 20 m x 20 m 400 m2 Woodland 20 m x 20 m 400 m2 Shrubland 20 m x 20 m 400 m2 Dwarf-shrubland (heath) 10 m x 10 m 100 m2 Herbaceous 10 m x 10 m 100 m2 Nonvascular 5 m x 5 m 25 m2

Photo numbers If photos of the plot have been taken at the time of sampling, indicate their numbers from the ones the camera assigns.

Plot Permanent Note if the plot has been permanently marked.

Plot Representativeness Does this plot represent the full variability of the polygon? If not, were additional plots taken? Note: we distinguish in this section the plot’s ability to represent the stand or polygon you are sampling as one component and the ability of this sample to represent the range of variability of the association in the entire mapping area. The former comment may be ascertained by reconnaissance of the stand. The latter comment comes only after some familiarity with the vegetation type throughout the mapping area and may be left blank if you have no opinion at this time.

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Elevation Elevation of the plot obtained from the GPS

Slope Measure the slope in percent using a clinometer.

APP B.2

Aspect Measure the aspect using a compass (be sure compass is set to correct for the magnetic declination).

Topographic Position Choose one:

INTERFLUVE (crest, summit, ridge). Linear top of ridge, hill, or mountain; the elevated area between two fluves (drainageways) that sheds water to the drainageways.

SHOULDER (shoulder slope, upper slope, convex creep slope). Geomorphic component that forms the uppermost inclined surface at the top of a slope. Includes the transition zone from backslope to summit. Surface is dominantly convex in profile and erosional in origin.

BACKSLOPE. Subset of midslopes that are steep, linear and may include cliff segments (fall faces).

FOOTSLOPE (lower slope, foot slope, colluvial footslope). Inner gently inclined surface at the base of a slope. Surface profile is generally concave and a transition between backslope and toeslope.

TOESLOPE (alluvial toeslope). Outermost gently inclined surface at base of a slope. In profile, commonly gentle and linear and characterized by alluvial deposition.

TERRACE Valley floor or shoreline representing the former position of an alluvial plain, lake, or shore.

CHANNEL (narrow valley bottom, gully, arroyo). Bed of single or braided watercourses commonly barren of vegetation and formed of modern alluvium.

BASIN FLOOR (depression). Nearly level to gently sloping, bottom surface of a basin.

Describe Topographic Position (Optional) Give more details here, if needed.

APP B.3

Cowardin System Indicate “upland” if the system is not a wetland. If the system is a wetland, check off the name of the USFWS system which best describes its hydrology and landform.

 Riverine: Below the high water mark on a moving water system (a creek bed). A community of Eleocharis on a sand bar would be in this category.  Palustrine: In the riparian zone. Plants regularly have wet roots through much of the summer. A community of willows and sedges would be in this category.  Lacustrine: Below the high water mark of a lake. The marshy debris on the edge of a lake would be in this category.

Assess the hydrologic regime of the plot using the descriptions below (adapted from Cowardin et al. 1979).

PERMANENTLY FLOODED - Water covers the land surface at all times of the year in all years. Equivalent to Cowardin's “permanently flooded.”

SEMIPERMANENTLY FLOODED - Surface water persists throughout growing season in most years except during periods of drought. Land surface is normally saturated when water level drops below soil surface. Includes Cowardin's Intermittently Exposed and Semipermanently Flooded modifiers.

SEASONALLY FLOODED - Surface water is present for extended periods during the growing season, but is absent by the end of the growing season in most years. The water table after flooding ceases and is very variable, extending from saturated to a water table well below the ground surface. Includes Cowardin's Seasonal, Seasonal-Saturated, and Seasonal- Well Drained modifiers.

SATURATED - Surface water is seldom present, but substrate is saturated to surface for extended periods during the growing season. Equivalent to Cowardin's Saturated modifier.

TEMPORARILY FLOODED - Surface water present for brief periods during growing season, but water table usually lies well below soil surface. Often characterizes floodplain wetlands. Equivalent to Cowardin's Temporary modifier.

INTERMITTENTLY FLOODED - Substrate is usually exposed, but surface water can be present for variable periods without detectable seasonal periodicity. Inundation is not predictable to a given season and is dependent upon highly localized rain storms. This modifier was developed for use in the arid West for water regimes of Playa lakes, intermittent streams, and dry washes, but can be used in other parts of the U.S. where

APP B.4

appropriate. This modifier can be applied to both wetland and non-wetland situations. Equivalent to Cowardin's Intermittently Flooded modifier.

UNKNOWN - The water regime of the area is not known. The unit is simply described as a non-tidal wetland.

Unvegetated Surface Estimate the approximate percentage of the total surface area covered by each category.

Soil Texture Using the key below, assess average soil texture.

Simplified Key to Soil Texture Soil does not remain in a ball when squeezed...... sand Soil remains in a ball when squeezed...... 2

Squeeze the ball between your thumb and forefinger, attempting to make a ribbon that you can push up over your finger. 2. Soil makes no ribbon...... …………………..…….…loamy sand 2. Soil makes a ribbon (may be very short)...... 3

3. Ribbon extends less than 1 inch before breaking...... 4 Add excess water to small amount of soil:

4. Soil feels smooth...... silt loam 4. Soil feels at least slightly gritty………………....……………….…5 Squeeze a moistened ball: 5. Cast is formed which can be handled CAREFULLY without breaking….……. sandy loam 5. Cast is formed which can be handled FREELY without breaking…… ………………loam

3. Ribbon extends 1 inch or more before breaking...... 6

5. Soil makes a ribbon that breaks when 1 to 2 inches long; cracks if bent into a ring...... 7

Add excess water to small amount of soil: 7. Soil feels at least slightly gritty.………………………………...... clay loam 7. Soil feels smooth...... silt

6. Soil makes a ribbon 2+ inches long; does NOT crack when bent into a ring………… 8 Add excess water to a small amount of soil:

8. Soil feels at least slightly gritty...... ………..clay 8. Soil feels smooth...... silty clay

APP B.5

HANDBOOK ON SOILS

In the field, soil texture is determined by the feel of a moist soil when it is rubbed between the thumb and fingers. While sand particles feel gritty, silt particles have a smooth velvety feel and clay is both sticky and plastic, an estimate of the relative proportions of the separates may be made. This procedure, of course, will not give the exact percentage of sand, silt, and clay, but, with a little practice on samples of known composition, the relative proportions of the individual separates can be closely estimated. Practice with known samples is the only way to acquire this knowledge.

The outstanding physical characteristics of the main textural grades as determined by the feel of the soil are described below.

1. Sandy Soil. A sandy soil is loose and single grained. The individual grains can be seen readily or felt. Squeezed in the hand when dry, it will fall apart when pressure is released. Squeezed when moist, it will form a cast, but will crumble when touched.

2. Sandy Loam Soil. A sandy loam soil contains much sand, but has enough silt and clay to make it somewhat coherent. Individual sand grains can be easily seen and felt. Squeezed when dry, it will form a cast which will readily fall apart; but if squeezed when moist a cast can be formed which will bear careful handling without breaking.

3. Loam Soil. A loam soil is about an equal mixture of the sand and silt with the clay content being between 7 and 27 percent. A loam is mellow with a somewhat sandy feel, yet fairly smooth and slightly plastic. Squeezed when moist, it will form a cast which can be handled freely without breaking.

4. Silt Loam Soil. A silt loam soil, when dry, may appear cloddy, but lumps are readily broken, and when pulverized, it feels soft and floury. When wet, the soil readily runs together. Either dry or moist, it will form casts which can be handled freely without breaking, but when moistened and extruded between the thumb and fingers, it will not form a ribbon, but will give a broken appearance.

5. Clay Loam Soil. A clay loam soil is fine-textured and usually breaks into clods or lumps that are hard when dry. When moist and extruded between the thumb and fingers, it will form a thin "ribbon" which will break readily, barely sustaining its own weight. The moist soil is plastic and will form a cast that will bear much handling. When kneaded in the hand, it does not crumble readily, but tends to work into a heavy, compact mass.

6. Clay Soil. A clay soil is fine-textured and usually forms very hard lumps or clods when dry and is plastic and sticky when wet. When the moist soil is ribboned out between the thumb and fingers, it will form a long flexible strip. A clay soil leaves a "slick’ surface on the thumb and fingers when rubbed together and tends to hold the thumb and fingers together due to the stickiness of the clay.

APP B.6

The characteristics described above are suggestive only, and will only apply to a group of similar soils. The characteristics of clay vary with the kind of clay mineral. For this reason, textural grades may exhibit different properties from region to region. For instance, clays of the montmorillonite group are very sticky and plastic; those of the oxide group are plastic and waxy with relatively little stickiness.

The preceding discussion has been directed to those soil particles whose diameters are less than 2 millimeters--the sands, silts, and clays. Soils may also contain larger sized particles that may be collectively called coarse fragments. These large particles may on occasion exceed the smaller soil particles in volume.

Soil Drainage

The soil drainage classes are defined in terms of (1) actual moisture content (in excess of field moisture capacity) and (2) the extent of the period during which excess water is present in the plant-root zone. It is recognized that permeability, level of groundwater, and seepage are factors affecting moisture status. However, because these are not easily observed or measured in the field, they cannot generally be used as criteria of moisture status. It is further recognized that soil profile morphology, for example mottling, normally, but not always, reflects soil moisture status. Although soil morphology may be a valuable field indication of moisture status, it should not be the overriding criterion. Soil drainage classes cannot be based solely on the presence or absence of mottling. Topographic position and vegetation as well as soil morphology are useful field criteria for assessing soil moisture status.

WELL DRAINED - The soil moisture content does not normally exceed field capacity in any horizon (except possibly the C) for a significant part of the year.

MODERATELY WELL DRAINED - The soil moisture content is in excess of field capacity for a small but significant period of the year.

POORLY DRAINED - The soil moisture content is in excess of field capacity in all horizons for a large part of the year.

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Leaf Phenology

Select the value which best describes the leaf phenology of the dominant stratum. The dominant stratum is the uppermost stratum that contains at least 10% cover.

EVERGREEN - Greater than 75% of the total woody cover is never without green foliage.

APP B.7

COLD DECIDUOUS - Greater than 75% of the total woody cover sheds its foliage in connection with an unfavorable season mainly characterized by winter frost.

MIXED: EVERGREEN & COLD DECIDUOUS - Evergreen and deciduous species generally contribute 25-75% of the total woody cover. Evergreen and cold-deciduous species are mixed.

PERENNIAL - Herbaceous vegetation composed of more than 50% perennial species.

ANNUAL - Herbaceous vegetation composed of more than 50% annual species.

Leaf Type Select the value which best describes the leaf form of the dominant stratum. The dominant stratum is the uppermost stratum that contains at least 10% cover.

BROAD-LEAVED - Woody vegetation primarily broad-leaved (generally contributes greater than 50 percent of the total woody cover).

NEEDLE-LEAVED - Woody vegetation primarily needle-leaved (generally contributes greater than 50 percent cover).

GRAMINOID - Herbaceous vegetation composed of more than 50 percent graminoid/stipe leaf species.

FORB (BROAD-LEAF-HERBACEOUS) - Herbaceous vegetation composed of more than 50% broad-leaf forb species.

PTERIDOPHYTE - Herbaceous vegetation composed of more than 50 percent species with frond or frond-like leaves. (Ferns)

Physiognomic Class Choose one: Forest: Trees with their crowns overlapping (generally forming 60-100% cover).

Woodland: Open stands of trees with crowns not usually touching (generally forming 25-60% cover). Canopy tree cover may be less than 25% in cases where it exceeds shrub, dwarf-shrub, herb, and nonvascular cover.

Shrubland: Shrubs generally greater than 2.5 feet tall with individuals or clumps overlapping to not touching (generally forming more than 25% cover, trees generally less than 25% cover). Shrub cover may be less than 25% where it exceeds tree, dwarf- shrub, herb, and nonvascular cover.

Dwarf-Shrubland: Low-growing shrubs usually under 2.5 feet tall. Individuals or clumps overlapping to not touching (generally forming more than 25% cover, trees and

APP B.8

tall shrubs generally less than 25% cover). Dwarf-shrub cover may be less than 25% where it exceeds tree, shrub, herb, and nonvascular cover.

Herbaceous: Herbs (graminoids, forbs, and ferns) dominant (generally forming at least 25% cover; trees, shrubs, and dwarf-shrubs generally with less than 25% cover). Herb cover may be less than 25% where it exceeds tree, shrub, dwarf-shrub, and nonvascular cover.

Nonvascular: Nonvascular cover (bryophytes, non-crustose lichens, and algae) dominant (generally forming at least 25% cover). Nonvascular cover may be less than 25% where it exceeds tree, shrub, dwarf-shrub, and herb cover.

Sparse Vegetation: Abiotic substrate features dominant. Vegetation is scattered to nearly absent and generally restricted to areas of concentrated resources (total vegetation cover is typically less than 25% and greater than 0%).

Strata, Height Class, Cover Class, Diagnostic Species Visually divide the community into vegetation layers (strata). Indicate the average height class of the stratum in the first column, using the Height Scale on the form. Enter the average percent cover class of the whole stratum in the second column, using the Cover Scale on the form. Height and Cover classes are also listed below.

Trees are defined as single-stemmed woody plants, generally 15 feet in height or greater at maturity and under optimal growing conditions. Shrubs are defined as multiple-stemmed woody plants generally less than 15 feet in height at maturity and under optimal growing conditions.

List the dominant species in each stratum.

Animal Use Evidence Comment on any evidence of wildlife (i.e., tracks, scat, gopher or prairie dog mounds, etc.). Notes on domestic animals should be made in the field below.

Natural and Anthropogenic Disturbance Comment on any evidence of natural or anthropogenic disturbance and specify the source.

Environmental Comments Enter any additional noteworthy comments on the environmental setting. This field can be used to describe site history such as fire events (date since last fire or evidence of severity) as well as other disturbance or reproduction factors

Other Comments Any miscellaneous comments.

APP B.9

Species/Strata/Percent Cover Table

The main use of the strata information is to categorize the plots by life form, in order to subset the data into forest, woodland, shrublands, and herbaceous plots for analysis. It is imperative that things be called the same throughout the data set.

Starting with the uppermost stratum, list all the species present and their cover class using the scale provided below. If a species is in the tree layer (single-stemmed woody plants, generally 15 feet in height or greater at maturity), list whether it is T1 (emergent tree), T2 (tree canopy), or T3 (tree sub-canopy). If a species is in the shrub layer, note if S1 (tall shrub), or S2 (short shrub), or S3 (dwarf shrub). If in the ground layer, note if H (herbaceous) or N (nonvascular). Some species will be in more than one layer. For example, Cottonwoods might have one or two especially tall specimens, which would be in the T1 (emergent tree) layer. Then the majority of the mature trees would be in T2 (tree canopy). The saplings that are coming up in the understory would be in the T3.

Seedlings are defined as trees less than “breast height” or less than 4.5 feet tall. Seedlings between knee height and breast height should be labeled as being in the short shrub layer (S2), and those below knee height should be labeled as being in the dwarf shrub layer (S3).

Cover Scale for Species Percent Cover

Use the cover scales provided on the forms.

APP B.10

APP B.11

APP B.12

APP B.13 APP

APP B.14

APP B.15

Appendix C - Dichotomous Key to BIHO Plant Associations

Dichotomous Key to the Classification

The field key to plant communities for BIHO and environs follows. The key is structured into physiognomic classes (or lifeform groups). These classes do not constraint the classification per se; rather they are employed to assist in applying the classification. In the field, different expressions of a given plant association may occur as different physiognomic classes. Given this, associations may be found through multiple pathways within the key.

Use of the Key To use the field key most effectively, identify a representative, homogeneous stand of vegetation. Work through the entire hierarchy of the key, beginning with Key to Lifeform Groups, to each sequential dichotomous lead. Estimate plant cover on an area of approximately 405 m2. If a satisfactory determination is not made in stands with low total cover consider adjusting diagnostic species cover break-points downward. Assignment of individual species to lifeform follows USDA, NRCS (2007).

In the key the term relative cover is used. In this context relative cover refers to the proportional abundance of the given species (or group of species) with respect to the total abundance of the associated group. The value is calculated by dividing the percent cover of the species under consideration by the total cover of the respective group of species. For example, the relative cover of native graminoid species is calculated as follows: (sum of native graminoid species cover within the sample) / (total cover of all graminoids within the sample) = (relative native graminoid composition).

Key to Lifeform Groups 1a) Tree canopy cover (alone or combined) >10%, Forest and Woodland 1b) Tree canopy cover <10%, lead 2a. 2a) Shrub canopy cover >10%, Shrublands and Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation 2b) Shrub canopy cover <10% 3a) Herbaceous canopy cover >10%, Herbaceous Vegetation

APP C.1

BIHO Plant Community Key

1a Trees are common to abundant, providing at least 10% absolute canopy cover Forest and Woodland Vegetation Classes pg 1 1b Trees are absent to sparse; when present, individuals are scattered with less than 10% absolute canopy cover 2a Shrubs are common to dominant; herbaceous species may range from sparse to codominant Shrubland and Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation Classes pg 1 2b Herbaceous species clearly dominate the plant community; shrubs may be present, but don’t contribute substantial cover Herbaceous Vegetation Classes pg 2

Forest and Woodland Vegetation Classes

1a Dominant tree species are evergreen 2a Pinus contorta is the most abundant tree species Vegetation Class 12: PICO / CARU 2b Pinus ponderosa is the most abundant tree species Vegetation Class 13: PIPO / CARU 1b Dominant tree species are cold deciduous 3a Dominant tree species are generally associated with riparian features 4a Salix lucida is the most abundant tree species Vegetation Class 6: SALU / DECE 4b Populus balsamifera is the most abundant tree species Vegetation Class 17: POBA 3b Populus tremuloides is the dominant tree species Vegetation Class 16: POTR

Shrubland and Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation Classes

1a Dominant shrub species are cold deciduous 2a Dasiphora fruticosa, a facultative wetland species, dominates the shrub stratum 3a Danthonia intermedia is the most abundant herbaceous species Vegetation Class 3: DAFR / DAIN 3b Juncus balticus is the most abundant herbaceous species Vegetation Class 14: DAFR / JUBA 2b Upland species dominate the shrub stratum 4a Ericameria nauseosa and/or Eriogonum umbellatum are the most abundant shrub species Vegetation Class 15: ERNA / ERUM 4b Symphoricarpos oreophilus is the most abundant shrub species Vegetation Class 1d: ARTR – SYOR / PSSP 1b Artemisia tridentata is the dominant shrub species

APP C.2

5a Symphoricarpos oreophilus ranges from abundant to co-dominant in the plant community Vegetation Class 1d: ARTR – SYOR / PSSP 5b Symphoricarpos oreophilus ranges from sparse to absent from the plant community 6a Achnatherum occidentale, is abundant, contributes substantial cover to the herbaceous layer Vegetation Class 1c: ARTR / PSSP – ACOC 6b Achnatherum occidentale is sparse to absent from the herbaceous layer Vegetation Class 1b: ARTR / FEID – PSSP

Herbaceous Vegetation Classes

1a The herbaceous community is dominated by a graminoid 2a A rush or sedge dominates the plant community 3a Juncus balticus is the dominant species Vegetation Class 5: JUBA 3b A sedge is the dominant species 4a Carex praegracilis dominates the plant community Vegetation Class 7: CAPR – GETR 4b Carex nebrascensis dominates the plant community Vegetation Class 9: CANE 2b A grass dominates the plant community 5a The dominant grass is native 6a The plant community occurs in a wet meadow 7a Bunchgrasses dominate the plant community 8a Deschampsia cespitosa is the most abundant grass species Vegetation Class 10: DECE 8b Hordeum brachyantherum and/or Elymus trachycaulus are the most abundant species Vegetation Class 11: HOBR – ELTR - POPR 7b Danthonia californica dominates the plant community Vegetation Class 4: DACA - PHPR 6b The plant community is dominated by Pseudoroegneria spicata and/or Festuca idahoensis, which generally favor upland sites 9a Festuca idahoensis ranges from abundant to co-dominant and contributes substantial cover to the plant community Vegetation Class 1a: FEID - PSSP 9b Festuca idahoensis is sparse or absent from the plant community Vegetation Class 2: PSSP 5b The dominant grass is introduced 10a The dominant species is rhizomatous 11a Bromus inermis is the most abundant species Vegetation Class 8: BRIN 11b Poa pratensis is the most abundant species 12a Hordeum brachyantherum and/or Elymus trachycaulus are abundant, and contribute substantial cover to the plant community Vegetation Class 11: HOBR – ELTR - POPR

APP C.3

12b Hordeum brachyantherum and Elymus trachycaulus are sparse or absent from the plant community 13a Juncus balticus is abundant, contributes substantial cover to the plant community Vegetation Class 5: JUBA 13b Deschampsia cespitosa is abundant, contributes substantial cover to the plant community Vegetation Class 10: DECE 10b Phleum pretense is the dominant species 14a Deschampsia cespitosa is abundant, contributes substantial cover to the plant community Vegetation Class 10: DECE 14b Deschampsia cespitosa is sparse or absent from the plant community Vegetation Class 4: DACA - PHPR 1b The plant community is dominated by a forb 15a Geum triflorum is the most abundant forb species 16a Carex praegracilis is abundant, contributes substantial cover to the plant community Vegetation Class 7: CAPR - GETR 16b Carex praegracilis is sparse or absent from the plant community 17a Danthonia intermedia is abundant, contributes substantial cover to the plant community Vegetation Class 3: DAFR / DAIN 17b Pseudoroegneria spicata and/or Festuca idahoensis contribute substantial cover to the plant community Vegetation Class 1a: FEID – PSSP 15b Balsamorhiza sagittata is the most abundant forb species Vegetation Class 1b: ARTR / FEID - PSSP

APP C.4

Appendix D - BIHO Plant Association Descriptions

A1a Idaho Fescue – Bluebunch Wheatgrass Herbaceous Vegetation Festuca idahoensis - Pseudoroegneria spicata Herbaceous Vegetation

Description This grassland is characterized by the co-dominance of Festuca idahoensis and Pseudoroegneria spicata; Poa secunda may be abundant in some stands as well. Other commonly associated graminoid species include Carex filifolia, Danthonia intermedia, Leymus cinereus, Koeleria macrantha, Hesperostipa comata, and Achnatherum occidentale. Forb species composition varies, depending on aspect and topographic location. Total forb cover ranges from low to moderate. Geum triflorum may be abundant and additional forb species common to this vegetation type include; Achillea millefolium, Arenaria congesta, and Phlox hoodii. Scattered low-stature shrubs may also be present and common species include Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus, Ericameria nauseosa, and Artemisia tridentata. Invasive, non-native species are often present and are even abundant in heavily disturbed stands. This grassland generally occurs on gently rolling to flat topography, but can be found on relatively steep slopes as well. It tends to occur more on northerly exposures at lower elevations and on southerly exposures at the higher elevations. Soils are primarily deep and dark-colored, with varying degrees of calcium carbonate deposition.

CONSERVATION RANK G4 DATABASE CODE CEGL001624

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (n = 4, xx) Tree None Shrub Artemisia tridentata (big sagebrush) IV.2 Dwarf-shrub None Graminoid Festuca idahoensis (Idaho fescue) V.21, Pseudoroegneria spicata (bluebunch wheatgrass) V.8, Koeleria macrantha (prairie Junegrass) V.1, Danthonia intermedia (timber oatgrass) IV.3, Poa pratensis (Kentucky bluegrass) IV.2, Achnatherum occidentale (western needlegrass) IV.1, Carex filifolia (threadleaf sedge) III.8 Forb Geum triflorum (old man's whiskers) V.9, Potentilla gracilis (slender cinquefoil) V.6, Achillea millefolium (common yarrow) V.3, Arenaria congesta (ballhead sandwort) V.2, Eriogonum umbellatum (sulphur-flower

APP D.1 Northern Rocky Mountain Lower Montane, Foothill and Valley Grassland buckwheat) V.2, Potentilla glandulosa (sticky cinquefoil) IV.4, Erigeron corymbosus (longleaf fleabane) IV.1

RANGE Big Hole National Battlefield, Nez Perce Historical Park Enter Big Hole specific data. Global This grassland is known from eastern Washington, southern Idaho, western Montana, Wyoming, and southern Alberta.

COMMENTS Heavy grazing can significantly alter the species composition of this association. Pseudoroegneria spicata will decrease in abundance, and Festuca idahoensis will follow suit if heavy use continues for many seasons. Several less-palatable forb species will either invade or increase in abundance, such species may include; Achillea millefolium, Erigeron compositus, Gaura coccinea, and Geum triflorum. In addition, several non-native species may invade.

APP D.2

Mountain Big Sagebrush / Idaho Fescue – Bluebunch A1b Wheatgrass Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana / Festuca idahoensis - Pseudoroegneria spicata Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation

Description

This association is dominated by Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana. Other shrubs are usually present, but no one species consistently so, and other shrub species generally contribute little to total vegetative cover. The understory of this plant community is dominated by grasses; Festuca idahoensis and Pseudoroegneria spicata typically have t he highest cover values in the herbaceous stratum. Other common grass species may include; Poa secunda, Koeleria macrantha, and Carex spp. Forbs can be quite diverse and some of the more abundant species may include; Eriogonum umbellatum, Lupinus spp., Balsamorhiza sagittata, Lithospermum ruderale, and Solidago missouriensis. Non-native grass and forb species are common in disturbed areas. This plant community can occur across a range of slopes and aspects, usually on the upper part of the slope, and on ridgetops, with northeast- to south-facing aspects. Soils are generally deep, with texture ranging from loams to gravely clays.

CONSERVATION RANK N/A DATABASE CODE N/A

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (n = 23, xx) Tree None Shrub Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana (mountain big sagebrush) V.18 Dwarf-shrub None Graminoid Festuca idahoensis (Idaho fescue) V.15, Pseudoroegneria spicata (bluebunch wheatgrass) V.13, Koeleria macrantha (prairie Junegrass) V.4, Carex filifolia (threadleaf sedge) IV.6 Forb Hieracium cynoglossoides (houndstongue hawkweed) V.4, Solidago missouriensis (Missouri goldenrod) V.3, Arenaria congesta (ballhead sandwort) V.1, Eriogonum umbellatum (sulphur-flower buckwheat) V.1, Achillea millefolium (common yarrow) IV.1, Antennaria microphylla (littleleaf pussytoes) IV.1, Crepis acuminata (tapertip hawksbeard) IV.1, Frasera albicaulis (whitestem frasera) IV.1, Lupinus sericeus (silky lupine) IV.1, Balsamorhiza sagittata (arrowleaf balsamroot) III.4, Lithospermum ruderale (western stoneseed) III.2

APP D.3 Inter- Mountain Basins Montane Sagebrush Steppe

RANGE Big Hole National Battlefield, Nez Perce Historical Park Enter Big Hole specific data. Global This is a common, abundant and widespread sagebrush community type in the western U.S. It is known from Nevada, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado and possibly Utah.

COMMENTS This association was not recognized in the National Vegetation Classification (NVC) and had not been documented or described by NatureServe (2011) at the time this document was produced. Therefore, the plant community description is based on limited data from the Big Hole Battlefield and on related plant communities that have been previously described. The descriptions provided herein may vary slightly from similar plant communities found elsewhere due to the local scale at which data were collected and the lack of a published standard in the NVC.

APP D.4

Mountain Big Sagebrush / Bluebunch Wheatgrass – A1c Western Needlegrass Shrubland Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana / Pseudoroegneria spicata – Achnatherum occidentale Shrubland

Description This association is dominated by Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana. Other shrubs are usually present, but no one species consistently so, and all generally with low cover. Pinus contorta may also occur sporadically in and around stands of this vegetation type, typically where it boarders woodlands. The herbaceous undergrowth is dominated by grasses; Achnatherum occidentale and Pseudoroegneria spicata usually contributes the highest cover to the herbaceous stratum. Other component grass species may include Phleum pratense, Danthonia intermedia, Koeleria macrantha, and Carex spp. Common forbs include Potentilla gracilis, Geranium viscosissimum, Antennaria microphylla, Pyrrocoma uniflora, Eriogonum umbellatum, Lupinus spp., Balsamorhiza sagittata, Lithospermum ruderale, and Solidago spp. Non-native grass and forb species are common in disturbed areas. This plant community can occur across a range of slopes and aspects, usually on the upper part of the slope, and on ridgetops, with northeast- to south-facing aspects. Soils are generally deep, with texture ranging from loams to gravely clays.

CONSERVATION RANK N/A DATABASE CODE N/A

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (n = 2, xx) Tree Pinus contorta (lodgepole pine) V.1 Shrub Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana (mountain big sagebrush) V.30 Dwarf-shrub None Graminoid Achnatherum occidentale (western needlegrass) V.10, Pseudoroegneria spicata (bluebunch wheatgrass) V.10, Carex geyeri (Geyer's sedge) V.3, Phleum pratense (timothy) V.1, Danthonia intermedia (timber oatgrass) III.5, Bromus carinatus (California brome) III.3, Festuca idahoensis (Idaho fescue) III.3, Koeleria macrantha (prairie Junegrass) III.3, Poa pratensis (Kentucky bluegrass) III.3 Forb Geranium viscosissimum (sticky purple geranium) V.2, Pyrrocoma uniflora (plantain goldenweed) V.2, Potentilla gracilis (slender cinquefoil) V.1, Senecio serra (tall ragwort) III.5, Antennaria microphylla (littleleaf pussytoes) III.3, Grindelia squarrosa (curlycup gumweed) III.3, Lupinus sericeus (silky lupine) III.3, Solidago canadensis (Canada goldenrod) III.3, Solidago missouriensis (Missouri goldenrod) III.3

APP D.5 Northern Rocky Mountain Lower Montane, Foothill and Valley Grassland

RANGE Big Hole National Battlefield, Nez Perce Historical Park Enter Big Hole specific data. Global This general vegetation type is a common, abundant and widespread sagebrush community in the western U.S. It is known from Nevada, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado and possibly Utah.

APP D.6

Mountain Big Sagebrush – Mountain Snowberry / A1d Bluebunch Wheatgrass Shrubland Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana - Symphoricarpos oreophilus / Pseudoroegneria spicata Shrubland

Description

This low-stature shrubland is dominated by a combination of Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana and Symphoricarpos oreophilus, sometimes one is more dominant than the other, but both always present. Other shrubs which may also occur include; Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus, Ribes spp., and Rosa woodsii. The understory ranges from sparse to moderate in terms of herbaceous cover, mostly from native bunchgrasses. Pseudoroegneria spicata is always present and usually the most abundant grass. Other common grasses include; Festuca idahoensis, Poa secunda, and Koeleria macrantha. Cover from forbs is generally low and species composition may vary from one stand to another. Some species which occur with the greatest constancy include; Achillea millefolium, Balsamorhiza sagittata, Solidago missouriensis, Phlox longifolia, Lithospermum ruderale, Eriogonum umbellatum as well as a large variety of others which occur sporadically with very low cover values. This sagebrush community generally occurs on southern exposures. Soils are deep and tend to have fine loam texture with gravel fragment up to 30%.

CONSERVATION RANK G5 DATABASE CODE CEGL001038

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (n = 4, xx) Tree None Shrub Symphoricarpos oreophilus (mountain snowberry) V.35, Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana (mountain big sagebrush) V.19 Dwarf-shrub Rosa woodsii (Woods' rose) V.2 Graminoid Pseudoroegneria spicata (bluebunch wheatgrass) V.14, Festuca idahoensis (Idaho fescue) V.4, Koeleria macrantha (prairie Junegrass) IV.1, Poa pratensis (Kentucky bluegrass) III.2 Forb Solidago missouriensis (Missouri goldenrod) V.2, Achillea millefolium (common yarrow) V.1, Phlox longifolia (longleaf phlox) V.1, Eriogonum umbellatum (sulphur-flower buckwheat) IV.1, Frasera albicaulis (whitestem frasera) IV.1, Lithospermum ruderale (western stoneseed) IV.1

APP D.7 Northern Rocky Mountain Lower Montane, Foothill and Valley Grassland

RANGE Big Hole National Battlefield, Nez Perce Historical Park Enter Big Hole specific data. Global This association is known from northern Nevada, Idaho, and Wyoming and may also occur in Utah.

COMMENTS None.

APP D.8

A2 Bluebunch Wheatgrass Herbaceous Alliance Pseudoroegneria spicata Herbaceous Alliance

Description This alliance is characterized as a bunchgrass grassland with minor cover of forbs and often sparse cover of shrubs. Pseudoroegneria spicata dominates or co-dominates the plant community while other graminoids are usually present with low cover; component species may include; Achnatherum occidentale, Koeleria macrantha, Carex microptera, Calamagrostis rubescens or any number of other locally abundant regionally appropriate grasses. Artemisia tridentata may occur sporadically with low total cover. Forbs are highly variable and may a wide variety of species may occur, including; Eriogonum umbellatum, Balsamorhiza sagittata, Geranium viscosissimum, Arenaria congesta, and Potentilla spp. Sites where this plant community may occur include ridges and slopes, occasionally alluvial fans, scree slopes, sloped rocky cliff faces, and bedrock outcrops of any aspect, although southerly and westerly aspects are most common in the northwestern part of the geographic range. This alliance grows over a very broad elevational range. Stands grow on well-drained, often shallow, and frequently gravelly or rocky soils generally of loam, clay loam, silt loam, or sandy loam textural classes.

CONSERVATION RANK N/A DATABASE CODE A.1265

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (n = 2, xx) Tree None Shrub Artemisia tridentata (big sagebrush) V.1 Dwarf-shrub None Graminoid Pseudoroegneria spicata (bluebunch wheatgrass) V.25, Achnatherum occidentale (western needlegrass) V.3, Koeleria macrantha (prairie Junegrass) V.2, Calamagrostis rubescens (pinegrass) III.8, Carex microptera (smallwing sedge) III.3 Forb Arenaria congesta (ballhead sandwort) V.1, Eriogonum umbellatum (sulphur-flower buckwheat) V.1, Balsamorhiza sagittata (arrowleaf balsamroot) III.3, Geranium viscosissimum (sticky purple geranium) III.3, Potentilla glandulosa (sticky cinquefoil) III.3, Potentilla gracilis (slender cinquefoil) III.3

APP D.9 Inter-Mountain Basins Semi-Desert Grassland

RANGE Big Hole National Battlefield, Nez Perce Historical Park Enter Big Hole specific data. Global This grassland alliance is widespread and occurs throughout the western U.S. and adjacent Canada, and extends east into the mid-central states and as far north as Alaska.

COMMENTS None.

APP D.10

Shrubby-cinquefoil / Timber Oatgrass Shrub Herbaceous A3 Vegetation Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda / Danthonia intermedia Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation

Description

Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda dominates the shrub canopy of this vegetation type. Stands generally exhibit moderate canopy cover. Graminoid cover is highly variable, although Danthonia intermedia is the most common species, followed by lesser amounts of Festuca idahoensis and Achnatherum occidentale. Carex species are present in most stands of this vegetation community. Stands that have been grazed in the past have higher quantities of Poa pratensis and Phleum pratense than those with little or no grazing history. Forb cover is typically moderate and forb species may be quite diverse. This association is a montane shrubland that occurs on both mesic and subxeric sites. Stands occur on valley floors and shallow slopes. Some stand may occur in a semipermanently flooded area on silt loam soils, while others occur on moderately well- to well-drained clay loams.

CONSERVATION RANK N/A DATABASE CODE N/A

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (n = 7, xx) Tree None Shrub Dasiphora fruticosa (shrubby cinquefoil) V.20 Dwarf-shrub None Graminoid Danthonia intermedia (timber oatgrass) V.8, Phleum pratense (timothy) V.7, Achnatherum occidentale (western needlegrass) V.3, Festuca idahoensis (Idaho fescue) V.3, Carex praegracilis (clustered field sedge) V.2 Forb Geum triflorum (old man's whiskers) V.7, Galium boreale (northern bedstraw) V.4, Potentilla gracilis (slender cinquefoil) V.3, Achillea millefolium (common yarrow) V.1, Camassia quamash (small camas) V.1, Penstemon procerus (littleflower penstemon) V.<1, Potentilla glandulosa (sticky cinquefoil) IV.1, Trifolium longipes (longstalk clover) IV.1, Fragaria virginiana (Virginia strawberry) III.2

APP D.11 Northwestern Great Plains Shrubland

RANGE Big Hole National Battlefield, Nez Perce Historical Park Enter Big Hole specific data. Global This type is likely present in Wyoming and Montana.

APP D.12

A4 California Oatgrass – Timothy Herbaceous Vegetation Danthonia californica – Phleum pratense Herbaceous Vegetation

Description This is a moderately tall, grassland community. The dominant species are Danthonia californica and Phleum pretense , which generally occur with almost equal cover. Other common native graminoid species include Agrostis gigantea, Juncus arcticus, Luzula multiflora, and Carex species. Forbs cover ranges from moderate to abundant in this herbaceous vegetation type. Common native forbs include Camassia quamash, Potentilla gracilis, Senecio integerrimus, Rumex species, and Achillea millefolium. Some areas are characterized by camas blooms in the spring. This community occupies flat, valley bottom landscapes, generally with little topographic relief. Hummocks are common and some locations and are absent from others. Soils are usually fine-grained pluvial clays, moderately permeable to impermeable, with a high winter and spring water table. Mild, wet winters and hot, dry summers are typical of the climate for this vegetation type.

CONSERVATION RANK N/A DATABASE CODE N/A

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (n = 2, xx) Tree None Shrub None Dwarf-shrub None Graminoid Danthonia californica (California oatgrass) V.14, Phleum pratense (timothy) V.13, Juncus arcticus (arctic rush) V.8, Carex microptera (smallwing sedge) V.5, Agrostis gigantean (redtop) III.5, Luzula multiflora (common woodrush) III.3 Forb Potentilla gracilis (slender cinquefoil) V.6, Camassia quamash (small camas) V.3, Achillea millefolium (common yarrow) V.1, Penstemon procerus (littleflower penstemon) V.1, Rumex paucifolius (alpine sheep sorrel) V.<1, Potentilla diversifolia (varileaf cinquefoil) III.5, Senecio integerrimus (lambstongue ragwort) III.3

APP D.13 Columbia Plateau Scabland Shrubland

RANGE Big Hole National Battlefield, Nez Perce Historical Park Enter Big Hole specific data. Global This community is likely present across the entire range of Danthonia californica (western U.S. and Canada), as Phleum pratense is found througout the entire U.S.

APP D.14

A5 Arctic rush (Baltic Rush) Wet Meadow Juncus arcticus (Juncus balticus) Herbaceous Vegetation

Description This broadly defined association is characterized by a low, typically dense graminoid layer dominated by the rhizomatous perennial, Juncus arcticus. Carex praegracilis is often present as well. Common local grasses include; Deschampsia cespitosa and Phleum pratense. Forb cover is generally low but common species may include Achillea millefolium, Artemisia ludoviciana, Potentilla gracilis, Senecio integerrimus, Trifolium longipes, and Camassia quamash. Many other forb species may also be locally present. Shrubs and dwarf-shrubs are not common; however, Artemisia frigida cover may be significant in some stands, and occasional Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda individuals may occur. Some stands may be co-dominated by the introduced perennial sod grasses such as Poa pratensis. This broadly defined and widespread herbaceous wetland community occurs as small, dense patches on flat to gently sloping sites near seeps and streams. Soils are also variable and range from sandy well-drained to poorly drained silty clay loam or silty clay alluvium to organic muck; however, soils tend to be finer-textured and alkaline. Sites with sandy soils are usually saturated for part of the growing season or have high water tables. Cobbles and gravel are common on many sites.

CONSERVATION RANK G5 DATABASE CODE CEGL001838

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (n = 13, xx) Tree None Shrub Dasiphora fruticosa (shrubby cinquefoil) V.1 Dwarf-shrub None Graminoid Juncus arcticus (arctic rush) V.20, Deschampsia cespitosa (tufted hairgrass) IV.9, Poa pratensis (Kentucky bluegrass) IV.6, Carex praegracilis (clustered field sedge) IV.3, Phleum pratense (timothy) IV.3 Forb Potentilla gracilis (slender cinquefoil) V.2, Senecio integerrimus (lambstongue ragwort) IV.4, Trifolium longipes (longstalk clover) IV.3, Achillea millefolium (common yarrow) IV.1, Camassia quamash (small camas) IV.1

APP D.15 Rocky Mountain Alpine-Montane Wet Meadow

RANGE Big Hole National Battlefield, Nez Perce Historical Park Enter Big Hole specific data. Global This arctic rush wet meadow community is found widely throughout the western United States, ranging from South Dakota and Nebraska west to Washington, south to California, and east to New Mexico. It also occurs in western Canada.

COMMENTS This association is considered by some to be a grazing-induced community because Juncus arcticus is tolerant of grazing (low palatability when mature) and typically increases with grazing disturbance. Nearly pure stands of Juncus arcticus may indicate that the site was heavily grazed at some point in the past.

APP D.16

A6 Shining Willow / Tufted Hairgrass Woodland Salix lucida / Deschampsia cespitosa Woodland

Description

Typically found as dense, and nearly impenetrable thickets, stands of this association are characterized by Salix lucida , over an understory of Salix geyeriana and Salix drummondiana. While herbaceous species diversity can be moderate, the more dense shrub and tree cover prevents light from reaching the soil surface resulting in relatively low understory cover. Solidago canadensis is the most frequently associated forb, while Deschampsia cespitosa is generally the most abundant graminoid. This association occurs in a variety of landscapes and hydrologic regimes across its range. Stands occur on wide floodplains in foothill canyons of high order streams, to low order, moderate-gradient, perennial and intermittent streams in relatively narrow V-shaped foothill valleys. Stands are also known from headwater spring and seep-fed channels. The association typically occurs on stable sites, such as low to moderately high stream terraces with silty, sandy, or clayey soils derived from alluvium. CONSERVATION RANK N/A DATABASE CODE N/A

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (n = 7, xx) Tree Salix lucida (shining willow) V.28 Shrub Salix drummondiana (Drummond's willow) V.12, Salix geyeriana (Geyer willow) V.11 Dwarf-shrub None Graminoid Deschampsia cespitosa (tufted hairgrass) V.8 Forb Solidago canadensis (Canada goldenrod) V.6

APP D.17 Rocky Mountain Subalpine-Montane Riparian Shrubland

RANGE Big Hole National Battlefield, Nez Perce Historical Park Enter Big Hole specific data. Global This willow-dominated community type is likely found throughout the western United States and Canada where the ranges of all three species overlap.

APP D.18

Clustered Field Sedge – Old Man’s Whiskers Herbaceous A7 Vegetation Carex praegracilis – Geum triflorum Herbaceous Vegetation

Description This community is dominated by the perennial forb, Geum triflorum. The shrub layer is usually absent, but Dasiphora fruticosa may occur sporadically is some stands. The herbaceous layer is species rich and may be highly variable from one stand to another. The most widespread graminoid species are; Carex species, Danthonia intermedia, Phleum pratense, Achnatherum occidentale, and Juncus arcticus. In some stands, the forb component is extensive; Eriogonum umbellatum, Geranium viscosissimum, and Potentilla spp. are typically the most abundant species after Geum triflorum. Sites are open with no obstruction to the sun, and can range from dry to moist. This association may occur in climate regimes common to a range of ecoregions from plains to subalpine meadows, with no preference to aspect. Soils are often gravelly.

CONSERVATION RANK N/A DATABASE CODE N/A

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (n = 2, xx) Tree None Shrub Dasiphora fruticosa (shrubby cinquefoil) V.1 Dwarf-shrub None Graminoid Carex praegracilis (clustered field sedge) V.10, Danthonia intermedia (timber oatgrass) V.4, Phleum pratense (timothy) V.4, Achnatherum occidentale (western needlegrass) V.3, Juncus arcticus (arctic rush) III.8, Carex filifolia (threadleaf sedge) III.3 Forb Geum triflorum (old man's whiskers) V.30, Geranium viscosissimum (sticky purple geranium) V.8, Potentilla gracilis (slender cinquefoil) V.4, Eriogonum umbellatum (sulphur-flower buckwheat) V.3, Potentilla glandulosa (sticky cinquefoil) V.3, Fragaria virginiana (Virginia strawberry) V.2, Galium boreale (northern bedstraw) V.1, Achillea millefolium (common yarrow) V.<1, Erigeron speciosus (aspen fleabane) V.<1, Hieracium cynoglossoides (houndstongue hawkweed) III.5, Trifolium longipes (longstalk clover) III.3

APP D.19 Rocky Mountain Alpine-Montane Wet Meadow

RANGE Big Hole National Battlefield, Nez Perce Historical Park Enter Big Hole specific data. Global This community type is likely found throughout the range of the dominant forb, Geum triflorum. It is found as far north as British Columbia and Alberta and as far south as New Mexico.

APP D.20

A8 Smooth Brome Semi-natural Herbaceous Alliance Bromus inermis Semi-natural Herbaceous Alliance

Description

This community is characterized by an herbaceous layer that is heavily dominated by the non-native tall grass, Bromus inermis. The shrub layer is usually absent, though Dasiphora fruticosa, Artemisia ludoviciana and Rosa woodsii may occur sporadically around the edges of dense grass patches. Other graminoid species are common and occur with low cover values; some of the most frequently occurring graminoids include; various Carex spp., Deschampsia cespitosa, and Elymus trachycaulus. Forbs generally contribute very little total cover to the herbaceous layer and component species can be quite variable from one stand to another. This community is found in wet to moderately dry, open sites in plains, foothills, montane and subalpine zones with no particular aspect or elevation constraints. Often used as forage in hayfields and pastures, smooth brome is fairly drought resistant and can be found on sandy and stony soils as well as those with better structures.

CONSERVATION RANK N/A DATABASE CODE A.3561

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (n = 1, xx) Tree None Shrub Dasiphora fruticosa (shrubby cinquefoil) V.2, Artemisia tridentata (big sagebrush) V.<1 Dwarf-shrub None Graminoid Bromus inermis (smooth brome) V.75, Carex microptera (smallwing sedge) V.1, Carex praegracilis (clustered field sedge) V.1, Deschampsia cespitosa (tufted hairgrass) V.<1, Elymus trachycaulus (slender wheatgrass) V.<1 Forb Galium boreale (northern bedstraw) V.1, Geranium viscosissimum (sticky purple geranium) V.1, Senecio integerrimus (lambstongue ragwort) V.1, Camassia quamash (small camas) V.<1, Erysimum cheiranthoides (wormseed wallflower) V.<1, Penstemon procerus (littleflower penstemon) V.<1, Potentilla gracilis (slender cinquefoil) V.<1

APP D.21 Rocky Mountain Alpine-Montane Wet Meadow

RANGE Big Hole National Battlefield, Nez Perce Historical Park Enter Big Hole specific data. Global Introduced from Europe, Bromus inermis has spread across the US and southern Canada and is common on dry, disturbed sites in plains to montane zones, from BC and Alberta to New Mexico.

COMMENTS None.

APP D.22

A9 Nebraska Sedge Wet Meadow Carex nebrascensis Herbaceous Vegetation

Description This wetland vegetation class is characterized by a moderately dense to dense perennial graminoid layer which is dominated or co-dominated by Carex nebrascensis. Stands can range from monocultures of Carex nebrascensis to relatively diverse mixtures of graminoids and forbs. Other graminoid species that occur regularly in this vegetation type include; Juncus arcticus, Calamagrostis canadensis, and Poa pratensis. Forb cover is generally low, but may range to moderate in especially moist locations. Forbs can be diverse in these plant communities and common forbs include; Mertensia ciliate, Angelica arguta, and Senecio triangularis, as well as other locally abundant species. Thistles such as Cirsium arvense and Cirsium vulgare may also be common. Individual shrubs occur sporadically and Pinus contorta may occur occasionally within and around the edges of this community. Stands form open meadows that occur along the margins of streambanks, flat floodplains, and lakes, often forming a band along the alluvial terrace. Stands have also been noted from marshy areas surrounding springs and below seeps on lower hillslopes. This association is often found on well-developed soil, but occurs on a wide variety of soil types ranging from saturated organics to drier, more mesic soil types. Soils tend to be fine-textured alluvium, ranging from sandy, silty loam, clay loam, or clay to organic and are typically gleyed and mottled near the surface because of the high water table during most of the growing season.

CONSERVATION RANK G4 DATABASE CODE CEGL001813

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (n = 7, xx) Tree Pinus contorta (lodgepole pine) III.8 Shrub None Dwarf-shrub None Graminoid Carex nebrascensis (Nebraska sedge) V.36, Calamagrostis canadensis (bluejoint) IV.9 Forb Mertensia ciliata (tall fringed bluebells) IV.2, Angelica arguta (Lyall's angelica) IV.1, Senecio triangularis (arrowleaf ragwort) III.4

APP D.23 Rocky Mountain Alpine-Montane Wet Meadow

RANGE Big Hole National Battlefield, Nez Perce Historical Park Enter Big Hole specific data. Global This sedge-dominated meadow type is widely distributed from the western Great Plains into the western mountains of the United States, ranging from South Dakota and Montana to as far west as Washington, south to California and east to New Mexico.

COMMENTS This vegetation type is widely distributed, but many examples have been heavily grazed by cattle, lowering their floristic quality.

APP D.24

A10 Tufted Hairgrass Herbaceous Vegetation Deschampsia cespitosa Herbaceous Vegetation

Description

This association is typified by an herbaceous layer dominated by Deschampsia cespitosa, a perennial bunchgrass, which forms an open canopy of culms and nodding panicles. Typically Deschampsia cespitosa strongly dominates the herbaceous layer without significant co-dominants. Additional graminoid species associated with this vegetation type include; Carex spp., Alopecurus pratensis, Elymus trachycaulus, Juncus arcticus, Phleum pratense, and Poa spp. Common forbs include Ligusticum tenuifolium, Polygonum bistortoides, Lupinus polyphyllus, and various other locally abundant species. This vegetation type often occurs adjacent to perennially saturated sedge wetlands dominated by Carex aquatilis, Carex simulata, Carex utriculata, and others. Stands also generally grade into drier meadows of forbs (Senecio integerrimus, Achillea millefolium, and others) and grasses (Festuca, Muhlenbergia, Poa spp.). Poa pratensis may be abundant to co-dominant in disturbed stands. This plant association occurs in moist, low-gradient valley bottoms throughout the mountainous areas of the western United States. Deschampsia cespitosa requires relatively cool, moist conditions. Typically, stands occur in areas of abundant snowfall where snowmelt saturates soils from late spring through early summer. The vegetation occurs at higher elevations in the southern part of its range and in dry interior locations. Communities occur in the alpine tundra where stands grow in snowmelt basins and around the edges of alpine wetlands. At lower elevations, it occurs as wetlands, requiring wet or moist soils throughout most of the growing season. Soils are diverse. In perennially wet soils, stands of this association occur on sand or gravel lenses which allow adequate aeration of roots. In sites with seasonal drought, the vegetation generally occurs on finer-textured soils which drain slowly and retain moisture.

CONSERVATION RANK G4 DATABASE CODE CEGL001599

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (n = 2, xx) Tree None Shrub Salix geyeriana (Geyer willow) III.3 Dwarf-shrub None Graminoid Deschampsia cespitosa (tufted hairgrass) V.28, Phleum pratense (timothy) V.9, Poa pratensis (Kentucky bluegrass) V.8, Alopecurus pratensis (meadow foxtail) V.4, Juncus arcticus (arctic rush) V.4 Forb

APP D.25 Rocky Mountain Alpine-Montane Wet Meadow

Lupinus polyphyllus (bigleaf lupine) V.15, Solidago canadensis (Canada goldenrod) V.15, Ligusticum tenuifolium (Idaho licorice-root) V.8, Senecio integerrimus (lambstongue ragwort) V.5, Taraxacum officinale (common dandelion) V.2, Galium boreale (northern bedstraw) V.1, Trifolium longipes (longstalk clover) V.1, Geum macrophyllum (largeleaf avens) V.<1

RANGE Big Hole National Battlefield, Nez Perce Historical Park Enter Big Hole specific data. Global This association is known from throughout the western U.S. and Alberta, Canada.

COMMENTS This association is adapted to moist and wet soils which are seasonally flooded by snowmelt and retain moisture throughout the growing season. However, stands usually occur on sites without permanent surface water. Stands appear to be tolerant of moderate-intensity ground fires and late-season livestock grazing.

APP D.26

Meadow Barley – Slender Wheatgrass – Kentucky A11 Bluegrass Herbaceous Vegetation Hordeum brachyantherum – Elymus trachycaulus – Poa pratensis Herbaceous Vegetation

Description This association is characterized by moderate to dense cover of the perennial grasses Hordeum brachyantherum, Elymus trachycaulus, and Poa pratensis, which typically form a continuous layer with moderate to high cover. Cover of less abundant associated graminoids varies and may include Carex microptera, Danthonia californica, Deschampsia cespitosa, and Poa secunda. Forb diversity and cover is variable from one stand to another and common species may include; Potentilla gracilis, Camassia quamash, Epilobium spp., Claytonia lanceolata, and various vernal annuals. Introduced species such as Poa pratensis, Rumex crispus, and Taraxacum officinale are common in some stands. This association is found widely scattered throughout mountain, basin, foothill, and valley locations. The association is found along both intermittent and perennial streams, but most commonly it occurs in ephemerally moist to semipermanently saturated, often spring-fed, meadows and swales. It occurs in low- to moderate-gradient valley bottoms that range from very narrow to very wide with clayey, silty, or fine loamy soil. It is a small-patch community, generally less than 1 acre. Parent materials are sandstones and shale that have eroded and deposited as secondary stream alluvium.

CONSERVATION RANK N/A DATABASE CODE N/A

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (n = 1, xx) Tree Salix lucida (shining willow) V.2 Shrub Salix drummondiana (Drummond's willow) V.2, Salix geyeriana (Geyer willow) V.2, Ribes lacustre (prickly current) V.1 Dwarf-shrub Rosa woodsii (Woods' rose) V.2 Graminoid Elymus trachycaulus (slender wheatgrass) V.10, Hordeum brachyantherum (meadow barley) V.10, Poa pratensis (Kentucky bluegrass) V.10, Carex microptera (smallwing sedge) V.5, Agrostis gigantea (redtop) V.2, Deschampsia cespitosa (tufted hairgrass) V.2, Carex douglasii (Douglas' sedge) V.1 Forb Claytonia lanceolata var. lanceolata (lanceleaf springbeauty) V.5, Achillea millefolium (common yarrow) V.2, Polygonum douglasii (Douglas' knotweed) V.2, Potentilla gracilis (slender cinquefoil) V.2, Rumex crispus (curly

APP D.27 Northern Rocky Mountain Subalpine-Upper Montane Grassland

dock) V.2, Thlaspi arvense (field pennycress) V.2, Arnica chamissonis (Chamisso arnica) V.1, Geranium viscosissimum (sticky purple geranium) V.<1, Phacelia heterophylla (varileaf phacelia) V.<1, Spiranthes romanzoffiana (hooded lady's tresses) V.<1

RANGE Big Hole National Battlefield, Nez Perce Historical Park Enter Big Hole specific data. Global This association occurs in widely scattered mountain and basin locations ranging from the northern half of the Great Basin in Nevada through Idaho, Montana and extending into southwestern Wyoming. Hordeum brachyantherum occurs across western North America so this association is likely more widespread in small patches.

COMMENTS This association was not recognized in the National Vegetation Classification (NVC) and had not been documented or described by NatureServe (2011) at the time this document was produced. Therefore, the plant community description is based on limited data from the Bear Paw Battlefield and on related plant communities that have been previously described. The descriptions provided herein may vary slightly from similar plant communities found elsewhere due to the local scale at which data were collected and the lack of a published standard in the NVC.

APP D.28

A12 Lodgepole Pine / Pinegrass Forest Pinus contorta / Calamagrostis rubescens Forest

Description This upper montane and subalpine conifer association is characterized by a Pinus contorta-dominated tree canopy with a grassy understory. The tree canopy varies from open to nearly closed and is often solely dominated by Pinus contorta. However, in some stands scattered Abies lasiocarpa, Picea engelmannii, Pinus albicaulis, Pseudotsuga menziesii, Populus tremuloides, or Pinus flexilis trees may be present, especially in the subcanopy. Scattered dwarf- and short shrubs are often present, but they seldom form a distinct layer. Common dwarf- and short shrubs may include Amelanchier alnifolia, Mahonia repens, Prunus virginiana, Symphoricarpos oreophilus, and Vaccinium scoparium. The moderately dense herbaceous layer is dominated by the perennial graminoids Calamagrostis rubescens and Carex geyeri. The herbaceous layer is densest in openings between trees. Other common herbaceous species include Arnica cordifolia, Lupinus argenteus and/or sericeus, and Geranium viscosissimum. This association is found in the upper montane and subalpine zone of the central and northern Rocky Mountains. It is more common east of the Continental Divide. It typically occurs on cool, dry sites on rolling topography with gentle to moderately steep slopes, benches and valley bottoms where soils are better developed. Soils are gravelly, sandy, silt loams, or clay-based, derived from a variety of parent materials and ground cover is dominated by litter with low cover of rock and bare ground.

CONSERVATION RANK G5 DATABASE CODE CEGL000139

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (n = 9, xx) Tree Pinus contorta (lodgepole pine) V.43, Pseudotsuga menziesii (Douglas-fir) V.8 Shrub None Dwarf-shrub Vaccinium scoparium (grouse whortleberry) III.7 Graminoid Calamagrostis rubescens (pinegrass) V.24, Carex geyeri (Geyer sedge) V.7

Forb Arnica cordifolia (heartleaf arnica) IV.1, Lupinus sericeus (silky lupine) IV.1

APP D.29 Rocky Mountain Poor-Site Lodgepole Pine Forest

RANGE Big Hole National Battlefield, Nez Perce Historical Park Enter Big Hole specific data. Global This association occurs in the upper montane and subalpine zone of the central and northern Rocky Mountains.

COMMENTS Following stand-replacing fires, Pinus contorta will rapidly colonize and develop into dense stands of even-aged trees. Over time, many of these stands can succeed to dominance by other, more shade-tolerant conifer species, while other stands have a canopy that is dominated by more persistent Pinus contorta that is successfully regenerating, especially on more extreme sites.

APP D.30

A13 Ponderosa Pine / Pinegrass Woodland Pinus ponderosa / Calamagrostis rubescens Woodland

Description

This woodland association is dominated in all size classes by the needle-leaved evergreen tree, Pinus ponderosa. Regeneration of ponderosa is episodic, which results in patchy stands. Other conifers like Pseudotsuga menziesii or Pinus contorta may be present as seedlings or saplings, but in small amounts, and they apparently will not become dominant. A few scattered shrubs may occur, but total cover of shrubs is low. The herbaceous layer is lush and dominated by the perennial, rhizomatous grass Calamagrostis rubescens. The perennial grass, Pseudoroegneria spicata, is also common, and Carex geyeri is almost always present. Perennial forbs range from sparse to moderate and commonly include; Hieracium cynoglossoides, Arnica cordifolia, Lupinus argenteus, Frasera albicaulis, Balsamorhiza sagittata, Antennaria microphylla, Achillea millefolium, and Fragaria virginiana. This association occurs at moderate elevations on primarily flat sites with shallow soils. Occasionally sites are on topography of rolling to undulating ridgetops, or upper and middle slopes. Soils are derived from residuum and colluvium of igneous, sedimentary and metamorphic rocks, typically with a mantle of volcanic ash and/or loess. Textures vary from sandy loams through silt loams to clay (usually in the B horizons), and most soils are rocky in all sub-surface horizons.

CONSERVATION RANK N/A DATABASE CODE N/A

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (n = 2, xx) Tree Pinus ponderosa (ponderosa pine) V.8, Pinus contorta (lodgepole pine) V.5, Pseudotsuga menziesii (Douglas-fir) V.1 Shrub Symphoricarpos oreophilus (mountain snowberry) V.2 Dwarf-shrub None Graminoid Calamagrostis rubescens (pinegrass) V.15, Pseudoroegneria spicata (bluebunch wheatgrass) V.6, Festuca idahoensis (Idaho fescue) III.3 Forb Hieracium cynoglossoides (houndstongue hawkweed) V.4, Antennaria microphylla (littleleaf pussytoes) V.3, Arnica cordifolia (heartleaf arnica) V.2, Balsamorhiza sagittata (arrowleaf balsamroot) V.2, Frasera albicaulis (whitestem frasera) V.2, Penstemon procerus (littleflower penstemon) V.1, Achillea millefolium (common yarrow)

APP D.31 Northern Rocky Mountain Ponderosa Pine Woodland and Savanna

V.<1

RANGE Big Hole National Battlefield, Nez Perce Historical Park Enter Big Hole specific data. Global This woodland association is known primarily from the Ochoco and Blue mountains in central and northeastern Oregon and may occur occasionally in Washington, Idaho, and Montana.

APP D.32

Shrubby-cinquefoil / Baltic Rush Temporarily Flooded A14 Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda / Juncus balticus Temporarily Flooded Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation

Description

These riparian shrublands form an open to moderately dense, low-shrub layer dominated by Dasiphora fruticosa ssp . floribunda with a moderate understory of graminoids. The herbaceous layer is typically diverse and is usually dominated by the rush, Juncus arcticus. Deschampsia cespitosa is also consistently present with low to moderate cover values. Other characteristic graminoids may include; Koeleria macrantha, Agrostis gigantean, Calamagrostis canadensis, Danthonia intermedia, and Poa secunda. Numerous forb species may be present such as Antennaria spp., Geum triflorum, Penstemon procerus, Potentilla gracilis, Solidago canadensis, Senecio serra, and Arnica chamissonis. With heavy grazing Achillea millefolium, Fragaria vesca, Juncus arcticus and Potentilla gracilis increase in cover. Exotics such as Poa pratensis and Taraxacum officinale may also be common in heavily grazed/disturbed stands. This montane to subalpine shrubland association is widespread on stream terraces above the channel, on drier edges of wetlands, on broad gently sloping valley bottoms and floodplains, on moderately steep mesic slopes near springs, and near glacial depressions. Aspect is variable. Soils are typically derived from alluvium and are deep, fine-textured, but vary from sandy loam to clay loam. Gleying and mottling are common. Sites have a high water table that fluctuates seasonally.

CONSERVATION RANK N/A DATABASE CODE N/A

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (n = 3, xx) Tree None Shrub Dasiphora fruticosa (shrubby cinquefoil) IV.7 Dwarf-shrub None Graminoid Deschampsia cespitosa (tufted hairgrass) V.4, Koeleria macrantha (prairie Junegrass) V.3, Juncus arcticus (arctic rush) IV.10, Agrostis gigantea (redtop) IV.5, Calamagrostis canadensis (bluejoint) IV.3, Danthonia intermedia (timber oatgrass) IV.3, Poa pratensis (Kentucky bluegrass) IV.2

Forb Senecio serra (tall ragwort) V.5, Arnica chamissonis (Chamisso arnica) V.3, Achillea millefolium (common

APP D.33 Rocky Mountain Alpine-Montane Wet Meadow

yarrow) V.2, Collomia linearis (tiny trumpet) V.1, Potentilla gracilis (slender cinquefoil) V.1, Penstemon procerus (littleflower penstemon) IV.2, Solidago canadensis (Canada goldenrod) IV.2, Eriogonum umbellatum (sulphur- flower buckwheat) IV.1, Fragaria vesca (woodland strawberry) IV.1, Geum triflorum (old man's whiskers) IV.1, Taraxacum officinale (common dandelion) IV.1

RANGE Big Hole National Battlefield, Nez Perce Historical Park Enter Big Hole specific data. Global This montane riparian shrubland association is widespread in the Rocky Mountain region from Colorado to Montana west into Oregon and Utah.

APP D.34

Rubber Rabbitbrush / Sulphur-flower Buckwheat A15 Shrubland Ericameria nauseosa / Eriogonum umbellatum Shrubland

Description Total vegetation cover of this association is generally low to moderate and the plant community is characterized by an open shrub canopy dominated by Ericameria nauseosa. Other shrubs may occur sporadically in the overstory, although species composition is variable and cover is sparse. Cover of the herbaceous layer is low to moderate and often equals or exceeds cover of the shrub stratum. Eriogonum umbellatum, a perennial forb, generally dominates the herbaceous understory. Achnatherum occidentale, Festuca idahoensis, Koeleria macrantha, Danthonia intermedia, and Poa secunda are among the most common graminoid species in this vegetation type. Additional forbs are often variable in terms of species composition, may contribute substantial vegetative cover, and often include both introduced and native species. This association generally occurs in areas which have experienced disturbance. Rabbitbrush-dominated communities often result from wildland fires in sagebrush steppe ecosystems. Slopes range from gentle to moderately steep. Soils have textures ranging from silt loam to sandy loam to loamy sand, and bare soil characerizes most of the unvegetated ground surface.

CONSERVATION RANK N/A DATABASE CODE N/A

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (n = 1, xx) Tree None Shrub Ericameria nauseosa (gray rabbitbrush) V.10, Dasiphora fruticosa (shrubby cinquefoil) V.2 Dwarf-shrub Artemisia ludoviciana (white sagebrush) V.2 Graminoid Achnatherum occidentale (western needlegrass) V.5, Festuca idahoensis (Idaho fescue) V.5, Koeleria macrantha (prairie Junegrass) V.5, Danthonia intermedia (timber oatgrass) V.2, Poa secunda (Sandberg bluegrass) V.2 Forb Eriogonum umbellatum (sulphur-flower buckwheat) V.15, Arenaria congesta (ballhead sandwort) V.5, Hieracium cynoglossoides (houndstongue hawkweed) V.5, Solidago missouriensis (Missouri goldenrod) V.5, Achillea millefolium (common yarrow) V.2, Geum triflorum (old man's whiskers) V.2, Sedum spp. (stonecrop) V.2, Symphyotrichum foliaceum (alpine leafybract aster) V.2, Phacelia heterophylla (varileaf phacelia) V.1, Potentilla glandulosa (sticky cinquefoil) V.1 Potentilla gracilis (slender cinquefoil) V.1

APP D.35 Inter-Mountain Basins Big Sagebrush Shrubland

RANGE Big Hole National Battlefield, Nez Perce Historical Park Enter Big Hole specific data. Global This association likely occurs as isolated patches throughout the western U.S. as all of the diagnostic species are common and widespread. The range of this association is probably restricted to areas that have been impacted by disturbance.

COMMENTS This association was not recognized in the National Vegetation Classification (NVC) and had not been documented or described by NatureServe (2011) at the time this document was produced. Therefore, the plant community description is based on limited data from Hagerman Fossil Beds and related plant communities that have been previously described. The descriptions provided herein may vary slightly from similar plant communities found elsewhere due to the local scale at which data were collected and the lack of a published standard in the NVC.

APP D.36

A16 Quaking Aspen Forest Alliance Populus tremuloides Forest Alliance

Description The vegetation of this association is structurally simple but may be compositionally complex. The canopy is dominated by Populus tremuloides, with occasional occurrences of conifer species (Pinus contorta, Pseudotsuga menziesii). Shrubs are virtually absent from this type. The herbaceous layer is characterized by the presence of several species of mesic tall forbs, accompanied by a mixture of low forbs and graminoids. The unifying characteristic of this type is the presence and diversity of forbs, the absence of distinct shrub layers, and a lack of substantial amounts of conifers in the tree layer. No one member of the forb functional group is consistently dominant or even present, but as a group they generally equal the cover of the graminoid layer, which also does not have a consistent dominant species but can be a mix of several species. Stands occupy flat to gently sloping, moist to wet sites, often adjacent to streams. Slope positions are topographically low-lying, such as toeslopes or lower sidehills, flats, valley bottoms, and stream terraces. They are generally found on concave landforms where moisture can accumulate, rarely on convex topography. Aspect is variable, but many easterly or northerly stands are reported in the literature. Soils underlying this community type are derived from alluvial deposition of a variety of parent materials. The soils are deep, well-drained loams, sandy loams to clay loams in texture.

CONSERVATION RANK N/A DATABASE CODE A.274

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES (n = 1, xx) Tree Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen) V.75, Amelanchier alnifolia (Saskatoon serviceberry) V.1, Pinus contorta (lodgepole pine) V.1, Pseudotsuga menziesii (Douglas-fir) V.1 Shrub None Dwarf-shrub Artemisia ludoviciana (white sagebrush) V.1, Mahonia repens (creeping barberry) V.1 Graminoid Elymus trachycaulus (slender wheatgrass) V.2, Poa pratensis (Kentucky bluegrass) V.2, Pseudoroegneria spicata (bluebunch wheatgrass) V.2, Phleum pratense (timothy) V.1 Forb Achillea millefolium (common yarrow) V.2, Antennaria racemosa (raceme pussytoes) V.2, Hieracium cynoglossoides (houndstongue hawkweed) V.2, Potentilla gracilis (slender cinquefoil) V.2, Fragaria vesca (woodland strawberry) V.1, Galium triflorum (fragrant bedstraw) V.1, Solidago missouriensis (Missouri goldenrod)

APP D.37 Rocky Mountain Aspen Forest and Woodland

V.1, Trifolium repens (white clover) V.1, Penstemon procerus (littleflower penstemon) V.<1, Taraxacum officinale (common dandelion) V.<1

RANGE Big Hole National Battlefield, Nez Perce Historical Park Enter Big Hole specific data. Global This deciduous forest association occurs in the southern and central Rocky Mountains and plateaus and mountains of the Colorado Plateau and extends into the Jarbidge and Independence Mountains of northeastern Nevada.

COMMENTS None.

APP D.38

Appendix E - Plant Species List for BIHO

[Source: UCBN 2008]

Family Scientific Name Common Name Pinaceae Abies grandis GRAND FIR Asteraceae Achillea millefolium Yarrow Asteraceae Achillea millefolium ssp. lanulosa YARROW Asteraceae Achillea millefolium ssp. lanulosa var. lanulosa white yarrow Poaceae Achnatherum richardsonii Richardson needlegrass, Richardson's needlegrass Ranunculaceae Actaea rubra WESTERN BANEBERRY Lamiaceae Agastache urticifolia NETTLE-LEAF GIANT HYSSOP Asteraceae Agoseris aurantiaca var. aurantiaca ORANGE AGOSERIS Asteraceae Agoseris glauca var. dasycephala PALE AGOSERIS Asteraceae Agoseris glauca var. glauca PALE AGOSERIS Poaceae Agropyron caninum var. majus SLENDER WHEATGRASS Poaceae Agropyron cristatum CRESTED WHEATGRASS Poaceae Agropyron spicatum BLUEBUNCH WHEATGRASS Poaceae Agrostis alba var. alba Redtop Poaceae Agrostis idahoensis IDAHO BENTGRASS Poaceae Agrostis pallens seashore bentgrass Poaceae Agrostis scabra ROUGH BENTGRASS Liliaceae Allium geyeri var. tenerum GEYER'S ONION Poaceae Alopecurus aequalis STREAM FOXTAIL Poaceae Alopecurus alpinus ALPINE FOXTAIL Poaceae Alopecurus pratensis MEADOW FOXTAIL Brassicaceae Alyssum alyssoides PALE ALYSSUM Brassicaceae Alyssum desertorum DESERT ALYSSUM Rosaceae Amelanchier alnifolia var. alnifolia Service Berry Boraginaceae Amsinckia menziesii FIDDLENECK Boraginaceae Amsinckia retrorsa Rigid fiddleneck Asteraceae Anaphalis margaritacea PEARLY EVERLASTING Primulaceae Androsace filiformis SLENDER ANDROSACE Apiaceae Angelica arguta COMMON ANGELICA Asteraceae Antennaria anaphaloides TALL PUSSYTOES Asteraceae Antennaria dimorpha LOW PUSSYTOES Asteraceae Antennaria microphylla ROSE PUSSYTOES Asteraceae Antennaria racemosa RACEME PUSSYTOES Brassicaceae Arabis glabra TOWER ROCKCRESS Brassicaceae Arabis holboellii var. retrofracta HOLBOELL ROCKCRESS Brassicaceae Arabis nuttallii NUTTALL ROCKCRESS Brassicaceae Arabis sparsiflora var. sparsiflora FEWLEAF ROCKCRESS Viscaceae Arceuthobium americanum American dwarf mistletoe, lodgepole pine dwarf mistletoe Viscaceae Arceuthobium campylopodum AMERICAN DWARF MISTLETOE Ericaceae Arctostaphylos uva-ursi KINIKINNICK Caryophyllaceae Arenaria congesta var. congesta BALLHEAD SANDWORT Caryophyllaceae Arenaria congesta var. lithophila BALLHEAD SANDWORT Asteraceae Arnica chamissonis ssp. chamissonis MEADOW ARNICA Asteraceae Arnica chamissonis var. interior Chamisso arnica Asteraceae Arnica cordifolia var. cordifolia

APP E.1

Family Scientific Name Common Name Asteraceae Arnica fulgens HILLSIDE ARNICA Asteraceae Artemisia frigida FRINGED SAGEWORT Asteraceae Artemisia ludoviciana var. latiloba CUDWEED SAGEWORT Asteraceae Artemisia rigida Stiff sage Asteraceae Artemisia tridentata BIG SAGEBRUSH Asteraceae Aster chilensis ssp. adscendens CREEPING ASTER Asteraceae Aster foliaceus var. lyallii Asteraceae Aster occidentalis var. occidentalis WESTERN ASTER Fabaceae Astragalus canadensis var. mortonii CANADA MILKVETCH Fabaceae Astragalus miser var. praeteritus MILK VETCH Asteraceae Balsamorhiza sagittata ARROW LEAF BALSAMROOT Brassicaceae Barbarea orthoceras AMERICAN WINTERCRESS Poaceae Beckmannia syzigachne AMERICAN SLOUGHGRASS Brassicaceae Berteroa incana HOARY FALSE ALYSSUM Poaceae Bromus carinatus var. linearis MOUNTAIN BROME Poaceae Bromus inermis var. pumpellianus Pumpelly's brome Poaceae Bromus japonicus JAPANESE BROME Poaceae Bromus tectorum CHEATGRASS Poaceae Calamagrostis canadensis var. canadensis BLUEJOINT REEDGRASS Poaceae Calamagrostis inexpansa var. inexpansa NORTHERN REEDGRASS Poaceae Calamagrostis rubescens PINE REEDGRASS Callitrichaceae Callitriche anceps Callitrichaceae Callitriche palustris spiny waterstarwort, spring waterstarwort, vernal water starwort Liliaceae Calochortus nuttallii SEGO LILY Liliaceae Camassia quamash common camas, small camas Liliaceae Camassia quamash var. quamash Common Camas Onagraceae Camissonia subacaulis diffuseflower evening-primrose, longleaf suncup, northern eveningprimrose Campanulaceae Campanula parryi Bellflower Campanulaceae Campanula rotundifolia HAREBELL Brassicaceae Cardamine pensylvanica PENNSYLVANIA BITTERCRESS Asteraceae Carduus nutans MUSK THISTLE Cyperaceae Carex aurea GOLDEN SEDGE Cyperaceae Carex concinnoides NORTHWEST SEDGE Cyperaceae Carex douglasii DOUGLAS SEDGE Cyperaceae Carex filifolia THREADLEAF SEDGE Cyperaceae Carex geyeri ELK SEDGE Cyperaceae Carex microptera SMALLWING SEDGE Cyperaceae Carex nebrascensis NEBRASKA SEDGE Cyperaceae Carex pachystachya chamisso sedge, thickhead sedge Cyperaceae Carex pellita woolly sedge Cyperaceae Carex petasata LIDDON'S SEDGE Cyperaceae Carex praegracilis CLUSTERED FIELD SEDGE Cyperaceae Carex praticola meadow sedge, northern meadow sedge Cyperaceae Carex rossii ROSS SEDGE Cyperaceae Carex utriculata Northwest Territory sedge

APP E.2

Family Scientific Name Common Name Scrophulariaceae Castilleja cusickii HAIRY INDIAN PAINTBRUSH Scrophulariaceae Castilleja miniata var. miniata SCARLET INDIAN PAINTBRUSH Scrophulariaceae Castilleja sulphurea Sulfur paintbrush Asteraceae Centaurea biebersteinii spotted knapweed Caryophyllaceae Cerastium arvense FIELD CHICKWEED Caryophyllaceae Cerastium vulgatum BIG CHICKWEED Chenopodiaceae Chenopodium album LAMBS QUARTER Pyrolaceae Chimaphila menziesii MENZIE'S PIPSISSEWA Pyrolaceae Chimaphila umbellata common pipsissewa, pipsissewa Pyrolaceae Chimaphila umbellata var. occidentalis COMMON PIPSISSEWA Asteraceae Chrysothamnus nauseosus gray rabbitbrush Asteraceae Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus Douglas rabbitbrush, Douglas' rabbitbrush, green rabbitbrush Asteraceae Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus var. viscidiflorus yellow rabbitbrush Asteraceae Cirsium arvense Canada thistle Asteraceae Cirsium arvense var. horridum CANADA THISTLE Asteraceae Cirsium eatonii Eaton's thistle Asteraceae Cirsium hookerianum WHITE THISTLE Asteraceae Cirsium scariosum Elk Thistle Asteraceae Cirsium vulgare BULL THISTLE Portulacaceae Claytonia lanceolata var. lanceolata WESTERN SPRINGBEAUTY Scrophulariaceae Collinsia parviflora SMALL-FLOWERED BLUE- EYED-MARY Polemoniaceae Collomia linearis NARROW-LEAVED COLLOMIA Convolvulaceae Convolvulus arvensis creeping jenny, European bindweed, field bindweed Orchidaceae Corallorrhiza mertensiana WESTERN CORAL-ROOT Orchidaceae Corallorrhiza trifida EARLY CORAL-ROOT Asteraceae Crepis acuminata ssp. acuminata TAPERTIP HAWKSBEARD Asteraceae Crepis intermedia Hawksbeard Asteraceae Crepis runcinata ssp. runcinata DANDELION HAWKSBEARD Asteraceae Crepis runcinata var. runcinata DANDELION HAWKSBEARD Boraginaceae Cryptantha torreyana TORREY'S CRYPTANTHA Poaceae Danthonia californica CALIFORNIA OATGRASS Poaceae Danthonia intermedia TIMBER OATGRASS Poaceae Danthonia unispicata ONESPIKE OATGRASS Rosaceae Dasiphora floribunda shrubby cinquefoil Ranunculaceae Delphinium bicolor LOW LARKSPUR Ranunculaceae Delphinium depauperatum SLIM LARKSPUR Ranunculaceae Delphinium occidentale Poaceae Deschampsia caespitosa var. caespitosa Brassicaceae Descurainia pinnata green tansymustard, pinnate tansy mustard, pinnate tansymustard Brassicaceae Descurainia richardsonii var. sonnei RICHARDSON TANDYMUSTARD Brassicaceae Descurainia sophia flaxweed tansymustard, flixweed, flixweed tansymustard Primulaceae Dodecatheon conjugens var. viscidum SHOOTING STAR Primulaceae Dodecatheon pulchellum darkthroat shootingstar, darkthroat shootingstar, Southern shootingstar

APP E.3

Family Scientific Name Common Name Primulaceae Dodecatheon pulchellum var. pulchellum Brassicaceae Draba nemorosa WOODS DRABA Brassicaceae Draba stenoloba ALASKA DRABA Cyperaceae Eleocharis acicularis NEEDLE SPIKE-SEDGE Cyperaceae Eleocharis palustris COMMON SPIKE-RUSH Poaceae Elymus cinereus var. cinereus Basin Wildrye Poaceae Elymus glaucus var. glaucus Poaceae Elymus trachycaulus ssp. trachycaulus slender wheatgrass Onagraceae Epilobium angustifolium Fireweed Onagraceae Epilobium glandulosum var. glandulosum GLANDULAR WILLOW-HERB Onagraceae Epilobium paniculatum var. paniculatum Onagraceae Epilobium watsonii var. parishii WATSON'S WILLOW-HERB Equisetaceae Equisetum arvense Field Horsetail Asteraceae Ericameria nauseosa var. speciosa Rubber Rabbitbrush Asteraceae Erigeron compositus var. glabratus FERNLEAF FLEABANE Asteraceae Erigeron corymbosus PURPLE DAISY FLEABANE Asteraceae Erigeron divergens var. divergens Asteraceae Erigeron speciosus var. speciosus OREGON FLEABANE Polygonaceae Eriogonum strictum Strict Buckwheat Polygonaceae Eriogonum umbellatum Buckwheat Polygonaceae Eriogonum umbellatum var. majus sulphur-flower buckwheat Asteraceae Eriophyllum lanatum Woolly sunflower Asteraceae Eriophyllum lanatum var. integrifolium WOOLLY ERIOPHYLLUM, WOOLY ERIOPHYLLUM Geraniaceae Erodium cicutarium alfilaree, alfilaria, California filaree Brassicaceae Erysimum asperum PLAINS WALLFLOWER Asteraceae Eurybia conspicua eastern showy aster Asteraceae Eurybia integrifolia thickstem aster Poaceae Festuca altaica Altai fescue, rough fescue Poaceae Festuca idahoensis IDAHO FESCUE Poaceae Festuca rubra ravine fescue, red fescue Poaceae Festuca saximontana var. saximontana Rocky Mountain fescue Rosaceae Fragaria vesca Woods Strawberry Rosaceae Fragaria virginiana var. glauca Virginia strawberry Gentianaceae Frasera albicaulis var. albicaulis PURPLE FRASERA Liliaceae Fritillaria pudica YELLOW BELL Rubiaceae Galium bifolium THINLEAF BEDSTRAW Rubiaceae Galium boreale NORTHERN BEDSTRAW Rubiaceae Galium trifidum SWEET SCENTED BEDSTRAW Rubiaceae Galium triflorum fragrant bedstraw, sweet bedstraw, sweetscented bedstraw Onagraceae Gayophytum ramosissimum GROUND SMOKE Gentianaceae Gentiana affinis EXPLORERS GENTIAN Geraniaceae Geranium viscosissimum sticky geranium, sticky purple geranium Geraniaceae Geranium viscosissimum var. viscosissimum STICKY GERANIUM Rosaceae Geum macrophyllum Large-leaved avens Rosaceae Geum macrophyllum var. macrophyllum LARGELEAF AVENS

APP E.4

Family Scientific Name Common Name Rosaceae Geum triflorum old man's whiskers, prairie smoke, prairiesmoke Rosaceae Geum triflorum var. ciliatum PRAIRIE SMOKE Polemoniaceae Gilia aggregata Scarlet gilia Polemoniaceae Gilia aggregata var. aggregata Poaceae Glyceria borealis NORTHERN MANNAGRASS Poaceae Glyceria grandis AMERICAN MANNAGRASS Orchidaceae Goodyera oblongifolia RATTLESNAKE PLANTAIN Asteraceae Grindelia squarrosa CURLYCUP GUMWEED Asteraceae Grindelia squarrosa var. serrulata curlycup gumweed, curly-cup gumweed, curlytop gumweed Asteraceae Haplopappus uniflorus SINGLEHEAD GOLDENWEED Apiaceae Heracleum maximum common cowparsnip, cow parsnip, cowparsnip Hydrophyllaceae Hesperochiron pumilus DWARF HESPEROCHIRON Asteraceae Hieracium albiflorum WHITE HAWKWEED Asteraceae Hieracium cynoglossoides HOUND TONGUE HAWKWEED Poaceae Hierochloe odorata COMMON SWEETGRASS Poaceae Hordeum brachyantherum MEADOW BARLEY Poaceae Hordeum jubatum FOXTAIL BARLEY Hydrophyllaceae Hydrophyllum capitatum var. capitatum WATER LEAF Solanaceae Hyoscyamus niger BLACK HENBANE Asteraceae Ionactis alpina crag aster, Lava aster Asteraceae Ionactis stenomeres Rocky Mountain aster Iridaceae Iris missouriensis ROCKY MOUNTAIN IRIS Rosaceae Ivesia gordonii GORDON'S IVESIA Juncaceae Juncus balticus var. montanus WIRE RUSH Juncaceae Juncus ensifolius var. ensifolius Juncaceae Juncus longistylis LONG-STYLED RUSH Cupressaceae Juniperus communis var. montana COMMON JUNIPER Poaceae Koeleria macrantha junegrass, prairie Junegrass Boraginaceae Lappula squarrosa bristly sheepburr, European stickseed Brassicaceae Lepidium perfoliatum CLASPING PEPPERWEED Brassicaceae Lepidium ramosissimum BRANCHED PEPPERWEED Poaceae Leucopoa kingii spike fescue, spike-fescue Portulacaceae Lewisia pygmaea pygmaea Portulacaceae Lewisia rediviva BITTERROOT Apiaceae Ligusticum tenuifolium SLENDER-LEAVED LICORICE- ROOT Polemoniaceae Linanthus septentrionalis NORTHERN LINANTHUS Boraginaceae Lithospermum ruderale WESTERN GROMWELL Poaceae Lolium pratense meadow fescue, meadow ryegrass Apiaceae Lomatium cous MOUNTAIN LOMATIUM Apiaceae Lomatium macrocarpum LARGE-FRUIT LOMATIUM Apiaceae Lomatium triternatum ssp. platycarpum Apiaceae Lomatium triternatum var. platycarpum NINELEAF LOMATIUM Caprifoliaceae Lonicera caerulea BLUEFLY HONEYSUCKLE Caprifoliaceae Lonicera involucrata Black twin-berry

APP E.5

Family Scientific Name Common Name Caprifoliaceae Lonicera involucrata var. involucrata TWINBERRY HONEYSUCKLE Fabaceae Lupinus argenteus var. laxiflorus silvery lupine Fabaceae Lupinus caespitosus var. utahensis Utah lupine Fabaceae Lupinus polyphyllus var. burkei WASHINGTON LUPINE Fabaceae Lupinus sericeus var. sericeus silky lupine Fabaceae Lupinus wyethii WYETH'S LUPINE Juncaceae Luzula multiflora var. multiflora common woodrush Asteraceae Madia glomerata CLUSTER TARWEED Berberidaceae Mahonia repens Creeping Oregon Grape Liliaceae Maianthemum stellatum false Solomons seal, starry false lily of the vally, starry false Solomon's seal Malvaceae Malva neglecta Mallow Asteraceae Matricaria discoidea disc mayweed, pineapple weed, pineappleweed Fabaceae Melilotus alba WHITE SWEET CLOVER Fabaceae Melilotus officinalis YELLOW SWEETCLOVER Lamiaceae Mentha arvensis FIELD MINT Ericaceae Menziesia ferruginea var. glabella Boraginaceae Mertensia ciliata MOUNTAIN BLUEBELL Boraginaceae Mertensia oblongifolia languid-lady, oblongleaf bluebells Asteraceae Microseris nutans NODDING MICROSERIS Polemoniaceae Microsteris gracilis var. gracilis Scrophulariaceae Mimulus guttatus guttatus Monkey flower Scrophulariaceae Mimulus moschatus var. moschatus MUSK MONKEY-FLOWER Caryophyllaceae Moehringia lateriflora blunt-leaf grove-sandwort, bluntleaf sandwort, grove sandwort Chenopodiaceae Monolepis nuttalliana POVERTY WEED Monotropaceae Monotropa hypopithys many-flower Indian-pipe, pinesap Portulacaceae Montia chamissoi WATER SPRINGBEAUTY Portulacaceae Montia linearis NARROW-LEAVED SPRINGBEAUTY Poaceae Muhlenbergia richardsonis mat muhly, soft-leaf muhly Boraginaceae Myosotis stricta strict forget me not, strict forget- me-not Ranunculaceae Myosurus aristatus SEDGE MOUSETAIL Haloragaceae Myriophyllum spicatum var. exalbescens AMERICAN MILFOIL Hydrophyllaceae Nemophila breviflora BABY BLUE-EYES Asteraceae Nothocalais nigrescens meadow prairie-dandelion Nymphaeaceae Nuphar polysepala MOUNTAIN YELLOW POND-LILY Orobanchaceae Orobanche corymbosa CLUSTERED BROOMRAPE Orobanchaceae Orobanche fasciculata TUFTED BROOMRAPE Scrophulariaceae Orthocarpus tenuifolius OWLCLOVER Scrophulariaceae Pedicularis contorta var. contorta COILED PEDICULARIS Scrophulariaceae Pedicularis contorta X parryi Scrophulariaceae Pedicularis groenlandica ELEPHANT'S HEAD Scrophulariaceae Pedicularis parryi PARRY'S LOUSEWORT Scrophulariaceae Penstemon albertinus ALBERTA PENSTEMON Scrophulariaceae Penstemon lemhiensis LEMHI PENSTEMON

APP E.6

Family Scientific Name Common Name Scrophulariaceae Penstemon procerus var. procerus SMALL-FLOWERED PENSTEMON Scrophulariaceae Penstemon rydbergii RYDBERG'S PENSTEMON Apiaceae Perideridia gairdneri YAMPA Apiaceae Perideridia oregana Yampah Hydrophyllaceae Phacelia franklinii FRANKLIN'S PHACELIA Hydrophyllaceae Phacelia heterophylla var. heterophylla VIRGATE PHACELIA Poaceae Phleum pratense TIMOTHY Polemoniaceae Phlox longifolia LONGLEAF PHLOX Polemoniaceae Phlox muscoides MOSS PHLOX Pinaceae Picea engelmannii ENGELMANN SPRUCE Pinaceae Pinus albicaulis WHITEBARK PINE Pinaceae Pinus contorta LODGEPOLE PINE Pinaceae Pinus ponderosa PONDEROSA PINE Boraginaceae Plagiobothrys scouleri var. hispidulus meadow popcorn-flower, sleeping popcornflower Plantaginaceae Plantago lanceolata buckhorn plantain, english plantain, lanceleaf Indianwheat Plantaginaceae Plantago major broadleaf plantain, buckhorn plantain, common plantain Plantaginaceae Plantago major var. major BROADLEAF PLANTAIN Orchidaceae Platanthera dilatata var. albiflora scentbottle Poaceae Poa arida plains bluegrass Poaceae Poa palustris FOWL BLUEGRASS Poaceae Poa pratensis KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS Poaceae Poa secunda big bluegrass, Sandberg bluegrass, Sandberg's bluegrass Polygonaceae Polygonum bistortoides Mountain bistort, WESTERN BISTORT Polygonaceae Polygonum douglasii DOUGLAS' KNOTWEED Polygonaceae Polygonum douglasii var. douglasii DOUGLAS'S KNOTWEED Polygonaceae Polygonum polygaloides WHITE-MARGINED KNOTWEED Salicaceae Populus tremuloides QUAKING ASPEN Salicaceae Populus trichocarpa Black Cottonwood Potamogetonaceae Potamogeton berchtoldii BERCHTOLD'S PONDWEED Potamogetonaceae Potamogeton epihydrus RIBBONLEAF PONDWEED Rosaceae Potentilla diversifolia var. diversifolia VARILEAF CINQUEFOIL Rosaceae Potentilla glandulosa gland cinquefoil, sticky cinquefoil Rosaceae Potentilla glandulosa var. intermedia GLAND CINQUEFOIL Rosaceae Potentilla gracilis var. elmeri NORTHWEST CINQUEFOIL Rosaceae Potentilla gracilis var. fastigiata northwest cinquefoil, Nuttall cinquefoil, Nuttall's cinquefoil Rosaceae Potentilla gracilis var. flabelliformis fanleaf cinquefoil, slender cinquefoil Rosaceae Potentilla norvegica NORWEGIAN CINQUEFOIL Rosaceae Prunus virginiana var. melanocarpa Chokecherry Pinaceae Pseudotsuga menziesii DOUGLAS FIR Pyrolaceae Pyrola asarifolia var. asarifolia WINTERGREEN Pyrolaceae Pyrola chlorantha GREEN-FLOWERED WINTERGREEN

APP E.7

Family Scientific Name Common Name Pyrolaceae Pyrola secunda var. secunda SIDE-BELLS WINTERGREEN Asteraceae Pyrrocoma integrifolia manysted goldenweed Ranunculaceae Ranunculus flammula SPEARWORT BUTTERCUP Ranunculaceae Ranunculus glaberrimus var. ellipticus SAGEBRUSH BUTTERCUP Ranunculaceae Ranunculus gmelinii var. hookeri SMALL YELLOW WATER- BUTTERCUP Ranunculaceae Ranunculus longirostris eastern white water-crowfoot, longbeak buttercup, long-beak water-crowfoot Ranunculaceae Ranunculus macounii var. macounii MACOUN'S BUTTERCUP Ranunculaceae Ranunculus uncinatus var. uncinatus LITTLE BUTTERCUP Grossulariaceae Ribes aureum golden currant Grossulariaceae Ribes cereum var. pedicellare squaw currant, whisky currant, white squaw currant Grossulariaceae Ribes hudsonianum var. petiolare HUDSON GOOSEBERRY Grossulariaceae Ribes inerme WHITE-STEMMED GOOSEBERRY Grossulariaceae Ribes lacustre SWAMP CURRENT Grossulariaceae Ribes viscosissimum var. viscosissimum STICKY CURRENT Brassicaceae Rorippa islandica var. islandica Rosaceae Rosa woodsii var. woodsii Woods Rose Polygonaceae Rumex acetosella SHEEP SORREL Polygonaceae Rumex crispus Curly Dock Polygonaceae Rumex paucifolius FEW-LEAVED DOCK Salicaceae Salix drummondiana DRUMMOND WILLOW Salicaceae Salix geyeriana var. geyeriana GEYER WILLOW Salicaceae Salix lasiandra var. caudata BLACK WILLOW Salicaceae Salix rigida var. mackenzieana YELLOW WILLOW Saxifragaceae Saxifraga odontoloma brook saxifrage, streambank saxifrage Saxifragaceae Saxifraga oregana var. montanensis OREGON SAXIFRAGA Saxifragaceae Saxifraga oregana var. subpetala OREGON SAXIFRAGA Crassulaceae Sedum lanceolatum var. lanceolatum LANCE-LEAF STONECROP Crassulaceae Sedum stenopetalum YELLOW STONECROP Selaginellaceae Selaginella densa var. scopulorum COMPACT SELAGINELLA Asteraceae Senecio integerrimus var. exaltatus LAMBSTONGUE GROUNDSEL Asteraceae Senecio serra TALL BUTTERWEED Asteraceae Senecio triangularis var. triangularis ARROWLEAF GROUNDSEL Elaeagnaceae Shepherdia canadensis BUFFALO BERRY Caryophyllaceae Silene douglasii DOUGLAS' SILENE Caryophyllaceae Silene douglasii var. douglasii Douglas' campion, seabluff catchfly Caryophyllaceae Silene menziesii var. viscosa Menzies' campion Brassicaceae Sisymbrium altissimum TUMBLEMUSTARD Iridaceae Sisyrinchium angustifolium COMMON BLUE-EYED GRASS Poaceae Sitanion hystrix var. brevifolium SQUIRREL TAIL Asteraceae Solidago canadensis var. salebrosa CANADA GOLDENWEED Asteraceae Solidago gigantea Smooth goldenrod Asteraceae Solidago missouriensis var. missouriensis MISSOURI GOLDENWEED

APP E.8

Family Scientific Name Common Name Asteraceae Solidago mollis ashy goldenrod, soft goldenrod, velvety goldenrod Sparganiaceae Sparganium angustifolium NARROW-LEAVED BUR-REED Caryophyllaceae Spergularia rubra RED SPURRY Rosaceae Spiraea betulifolia WHITE SPIREA Orchidaceae Spiranthes romanzoffiana var. romanzoffiana Caryophyllaceae Stellaria calycantha var. bongardiana NORTHERN CHICKWEED Caryophyllaceae Stellaria longipes var. altocaulis LONGSTEM CHICKWEED Asteraceae Stenotus lanuginosus var. andersonii Anderson's goldenweed, Anderson's mock goldenweed Poaceae Stipa occidentalis var. minor WESTERN NEEDLEGRASS Caprifoliaceae Symphoricarpos albus common snowberry, snowberry (common) Caprifoliaceae Symphoricarpos albus var. laevigatus COMMON SNOWBERRY Caprifoliaceae Symphoricarpos oreophilus var. utahensis ROUND LEAF SNOWBERRY Asteraceae Tanacetum vulgare COMMON TANSEY Asteraceae Taraxacum laevigatum SMOOTH DANDELION Asteraceae Taraxacum officinale blowball, common dandelion, dandelion Asteraceae Tetradymia canescens GRAY HORSEBRUSH Ranunculaceae Thalictrum occidentale WESTERN MEADOW RUE Poaceae Thinopyrum intermedium intermediate wheatgrass Poaceae Thinopyrum ponticum rush wheatgrass, tall wheatgrass Brassicaceae Thlaspi arvense Fanweed Brassicaceae Thlaspi fendleri WILD CANDY TUFF Brassicaceae Thlaspi montanum var. montanum alpine pennycress, alpine pennygrass Liliaceae Tofieldia glutinosa Bog lily Asteraceae Tragopogon dubius COMMON SALSIFY Fabaceae Trifolium longipes var. reflexum LONGSTALK CLOVER Fabaceae Trifolium repens WHITE CLOVER Poaceae Trisetum wolfii wolf trisetum, Wolf's trisetum Typhaceae Typha latifolia broadleaf cattail, cattail, cattail (common) Lentibulariaceae Utricularia macrorhiza common bladderpod, common bladderwort, greater bladderwort Ericaceae Vaccinium caespitosum Dwarf huckleberry Ericaceae Vaccinium membranaceum thinleaf huckleberry Ericaceae Vaccinium scoparium GROUSE WHORTLEBERRY Valerianaceae Valeriana dioica MARSH VALERIANA Valerianaceae Valeriana sitchensis SITKA VALERIANA Liliaceae Veratrum viride GREEN FALSE HELLEBORE Scrophulariaceae Verbascum thapsus big taper, common mullein, flannel mullein Verbenaceae Verbena stricta hoary verbena, hoary vervain, tall vervain Scrophulariaceae Veronica americana AMERICAN BROOKLINE Scrophulariaceae Veronica peregrina var. xalapensis PURSLANE SPEEDWELL Scrophulariaceae Veronica serpyllifolia var. humifusa THYMELEAF SPEEDWELL Violaceae Viola adunca var. adunca WESTERN VIOLET

APP E.9

Family Scientific Name Common Name Violaceae Viola nuttallii Nuttall violet, Nuttall's violet, yellow prairie violet Violaceae Viola palustris MARSH VIOLET Violaceae Viola vallicola var. major valley violet Dryopteridaceae Woodsia oregana WOODSIA Liliaceae Zigadenus venenosus var. gramineus DEATH CAMAS

APP E.10

Appendix F - Photo Interpretation Mapping Conventions and Visual Key

Big Hole National Battlefield - Map Units

This appendix describes the map units for the Big Hole National Battlefield (BIHO) Vegetation Inventory Project. Its purpose is to:

. Describe the vegetation of each map unit; . Provide a representative ground photograph/image for each map unit; . Describe the link between each map unit and the revised U.S. National Vegetation Classification System (NVCS); . Provide visual examples of each map unit with digital overhead images and delineated overlays.

The map units for BIHO were based on a combination of NVCS plant associations, unique plant stands (i.e. Park Specials), the limitations of the digital imagery, and land use / land cover classes. The vegetation described in this section reflects the classification designed specifically for this project. Non-vegetated and land-use map units are not described in this key but polygon distribution maps are provided. For more information on the development of the mapping convention for BIHO please reference the mapping sections of this report and the digital information (i.e. lookup tables, metadata, etc.) included on the project DVD.

This key uses the physiognomic grouping of each map unit starting with forest and woodland types. Each map unit is fully described by a variety of characteristics and features: (1) common species found in the individual map classes, (2) the NVCS crosswalk (if applicable) to associations and/or alliance(s), (3) a description of the mapping concept, (4) a representative ground photograph, (4) a distribution map for each mapping unit across the study area, and (5) an imagery snapshot with representative polygon outlines on the 2011National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) true-color basemap. Many of the map unit descriptions rely on the vegetation classification plot data collected in 2010. The sample ground photographs were taken during the 2010 classification plot data collection or during the 2011 accuracy assessment by Northwest Management, Inc. (NMI) field crews.

APP F.1

Forests and Woodlands Map Code Pinus contorta / Calamagrostis rubescens Forest PICO/CARU Lodgepole Pine / Pinegrass Forest Representative Ground Photo Common Species Pinus contorta, Pseudotsuga menziesii, Calamagrostis rubescens, Symphoricarpos oreophilus, Vaccinium scoparium, Arctostaphylos uva-ursi, Mahonia repens, Arnica cordifolia, Senecio integerrimus, Carex geyeri

NVCS Association - Pinus contorta / Calamagrostis rubescens Forest

Description Lodgepole pine forests of various ages covered most of Battle Mountain and the western environs of the mapping project area. Sparse stands also occurred in wooded draws on the bench and upper terrace areas along streambanks and next to the BIHO visitor center. The majority of this type was dense with limited understory consiting primarily of pinegrass with scattered short shrubs. When lodgepole occurred in sparse settings other species like mountain big sagebrush was present. Along forest margins and in meisc settings other conifer species including ponderosa pine and Douglas fir were present and often intermixed. Due to the similarity in the canopies of these tree conifer speceies some confusion may have occurred between then in the mapping. On the 2011 NAIP ortho-imagery this map unit signature appeared as raised, dark green spots (pine trees) interspersed with light green to tan understory color in the canopy openings.

Range and Distribution Photo Signature Example

APP F.2

Map Unit Pinus ponderosa / Calamagrostis rubescens Woodland PIPO/CARU Ponderosa Pine / Pinegrass Woodland Representative Ground Photo

Common Species Pinus ponderosa, Pinus contorta, Pseudotsuga menziesii, Calamagrostis rubescens, Symphoricarpos oreophilus, Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana Festuca idahoensis, Pseudoroegneria spicata

NVCS Association - Pinus ponderosa / Calamagrostis rubescens Woodland

Description Ponderosa pine woodlands at BIHO were limited to a few open stands on Battle Mountain along the lodgepole pine forest edge. In these settings the ponderosa pine intermixed with lodgepole pine and Douglas fir trees and formed communities with pinegrass, bluebunch wheatgrass, needle and thread and Idaho fescue. On the 2011 NAIP ortho-imagery this signature appeared as raised, dark green spots (pine trees) interspersed with tan or brown splotches (grasses) in the canopy openings. The other conifer map units may have been confused with this type during the mapping and other small polygons of mostly lodgepole pine may exist in the environs.

Range and Distribution Photo Signature Example

APP F.3

Map Unit Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa Temporarily Flooded Forest Alliance POBA Black Cottonwood Temporarily Flooded Forest Alliance Representative Ground Photo Common Species Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa, Pseudotsuga menziesii, Pinus contorta, Amelanchier alnifolia, Poa pratensis, Achillea millefolium, Solidago missouriensis, Pseudoroegneria spicata, Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana

NVCS Alliance - Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa Temporarily Flooded Forest Alliance

Description Black cottonwood forest stands were small in size and rare in the mapping area, occurring only along terraced drainages and as forest groves close to the BIHO visitor center. The mapping signature for this unit includes large cottonwood tree canopies appearing as dark green spots. Understory composition was somewhat dry and varied by stand location with willows, short shrubs and various graminoids among the most common. In some areas, quaking aspen, Douglas fir and lodgepole pine were co-dominant in the canopy and some confusion may occur between these species.

Range and Distribution Photo Signature Example

APP F.4

Map Code Populus tremuloides Forest Alliance POTR Quaking Aspen Forest Alliance Representative Ground Photo Common Species Populus tremuloides, Pseudotsuga menziesii, Pinus contorta, Artemisia ludoviciana, Amelanchier alnifolia, Potentilla gracilis, Antennaria racemosa, Elymus trachycaulus, Poa pratensis, Calamagrostis rubescens, Phleum pratense

NVCS Alliance - Populus tremuloides Forest Alliance

Description Quaking aspen only occurred at BIHO as one forest grove (two patches) in a draw next to the visitor center. In these two polygons the quaking aspen occurred in somewhat mesic conditions with a mixed understory of short shrubs and various grasses. Polygons representing this map unit exhibited the characteristic dark green color with white specks (tree limbs and trunks) of quaking aspen in the overstory. The similar texture and color of quaking aspen trees to black cottonwood may have resulted in some misclassification between them. Other pockets of quaking aspen may occur in the vicinity of BIHO, especially on Battle Mountain, but were not large enough to be recognizable on the NAIP imagery.

Range and Distribution Photo Signature Example

APP F.5

Map Unit Pseudotsuga menziesii Forest Alliance PSME Douglas Fir Forest Alliance Representative Ground Photo Common Species Pseudotsuga menziesii, Pinus ponderosa, Pinus contorta, Vaccinium scoparium, Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana, Pseudoroegneria spicata, Calamagrostis rubescens

NVCS Alliance - Pseudotsuga menziesii Forest Alliance

Description Douglas-fir trees occurred in the project area as both sparse woodlands on dry slopes with a grass understory and as dense forests with little understory in more mesic environments. Since Douglas fir trees often intermixed with lodgepole and ponderosa pine trees this type was not classified to an association but the corresponding NVCS alliance was later added to help with the mapping. Douglas-fir trees expressed a dark green, pointed, coarse-pebbly photo signature on the true color imagery. Open stands supported high understory cover resulting in a photo signature of rough dark green (trees and shadows) against a smooth tan (grass) background color. Stands of this map unit may be confused with the other coniferous map units.

Range and Distribution Photo Signature Example

APP F.6

Map Unit Salix lucida / Deschampsia cespitosa Woodland and Shrubland SALU/DECE Shining Willow / Tufted Hairgrass Woodland and Shrubland Representative Ground Photo Common Species Salix lucida, Salix lasiandra, Salix drummondiana, Salix gereriana, Dasiphora fruticosa, Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana, Deschampsia cespitosa, Poa pratensis, Phleum pratense, Carex nebrascensis, Juncus balticus, Agrostis stolonifera,Geum triflorum

NVCS Association - Salix lucida / Deschampsia cespitosa Woodland

Description Shining and associated willow species formed long, linear bands of riparian tall shrubland along Ruby Creek, Trail Creek, and the North Fork of the Big Hole River. Willow species were often intermixed and some hybridiziation may occur within BIHO (although Shining willow was eventually the species classified in the NVCS). Also the NVCS type for shining willow is a woodland type but some of the willow stands at BIHO are tall shrubland so shrubland was added to the map unit name. At BIHO, willow shrubs varied in density from thick stands with little understory to open stands with mixes of wetland and upland graminoids in the ground layer. Willow shrubs appeared as light green pebbles with black shadows against a smooth tan to green understory signature on the 2011 NAIP ortho-imagery.

Range and Distribution Photo Signature Example

APP F.7

Shrublands Map Unit Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana Shrubland Complex ARTRV Mountain Big Sagebrush Shrubland Complex Representative Ground Photos Common Species Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana, Mahonia repens, Amelanchier alnifolia, Festuca idahoensis, Pseudoroegneria spicata, Achnatherum occidentale, Symphoricarpos oreophilus, Balsamorhiza sagittata, Hieracium cynoglossoides, Lithospermum ruderale, Achillea millefolium

NVCS Associations - Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana / Festuca idahoensis – Pseudoroegneria spicata Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation - Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana / Pseudoroegneria spicata – Achnatherum occidentale Shrubland - Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana - Symphoricarpos oreophilus / Pseudoroegneria spicata Shrubland

Description Mountain big sagebrush complex includes all sagebrush associations found at BIHO. Mixed native bunchgrasses and various forbs were common in the big sagebrush understory throughout the entire project area. Other shrubs were sometimes present with this type including mountain snowberry on Battle Mountain and shrubby-cinquefoil on the bench and terrace areas. Big sagebrush varied in height across BIHO ranging from > 0.5 meter on benches to low-growing (< 0.5 m) on mountain slopes. Mountain big sagebrush also had a variable photo signature ranging from dispersed medium-sized gray dots against a light green or gray background to a homogenous gray mottled texture on a light tan background. The short stature and sparseness of some stands of this type may have caused mapping confusion with the native graminoid map units.

Range and Distribution Photo Signature Example

APP F.8

Map Unit Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda Shrubland Complex DAFR Shrubby-cinquefoil Shrubland Complex Representative Ground Photo Common Species Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda, Danthonia intermedia, Geum triflorum, Salix lucida, Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana, Poa secunda, Pseudoroegneria spicata, Festuca idahoensis, Juncus balticus

NVCS Associations - Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda / Danthonia intermedia Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation - Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda / Juncus balticus Temporarily Flooded Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation

Description Shrubby-cinquefoil is a common riparian short shrub that occurs as patches and stands along the North Fork of the Big Hole River floodplain. Stands of this type are typically intermixed with the various wetland graminoids and forms intricate riparian mosaics with shining willow shrublands. The low-growing nature of shrubby-cinquefoil created a light tan to dark green photo signature that was smooth in texture. DAFR’s signature on the 2011 NAIP ortho-imagery is similar to wetland herbaceous vegetation and may have resulted in some errors in polygon attribution between this type and the various mesic and upland graminoid map units.

Range and Distribution Photo Signature Example

APP F.9

Map Unit Ericameria nauseosa - Eriogonum umbellatum Shrubland ERNA/ERUM Rubber Rabbitbrush / Sulphur-flower Buckwheat Shrubland Representative Ground Photo Common Species Ericameria nauseosa, Eriogonum umbellatum, Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda, Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana Poa pratensis, Hieracium cynoglossoides, , Pseudoroegneria spicata, Festuca idahoensis,

NVCS Association - Ericameria nauseosa / Eriogonum umbellatum Shrubland

Description This unique short shrub stand was only found at BIHO in one location on a dry upland bench. In this setting, rubber rabbitbrush was the dominant shrub although other short shrubs were common including buckwheat. The presence of rubber rabbitbrush may indicate that there was some past disturbance here that led to this distinctive assemblage of short shrubs and mixed grasses. Since no other data was collected in this type, the ERNA/ERUM map class was only used to attribute one polygon (although other small patches of this type may occur at BIHO). The polygon of this shrub type had a smooth tan appearance on the 2011 NAIP ortho-imagery due to the reflectance from bare ground and cobble. The short stature and tan color of the ERNA/ERUM map unit made it very similar in appearance to grasslands and may have led to some mapping confusion between them.

Range and Distribution Photo Signature Example

APP F.10

Herbaceous Vegetation Map Unit Bromus inermis Semi-natural Herbaceous Alliance BRIN Smooth Brome Semi-natural Herbaceous Alliance Representative Ground Photo Common Species Bromus inermis, Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana, Phleum pratense, Poa pratensis

NVCS Association - Bromus inermis Semi-natural Herbaceous Alliance

Description The smooth brome map unit represents planted grassland stands found around BIHO facilities and surrounding areas to the east. Polygons of this type likely represent sites that were seeded with smooth brome following development activities, planted for pasture and hay, or represent escaped stands that have invaded native grasslands. On the 2011 NAIP ortho-imagery the smooth brome map unit was characterized by a light green to tan signature with heavy mottling (appearing as circles in some areas). Polygons of smooth brome stands may also include small inclusions of other grassland and herbaceous types and more ground-truthing work could be done in the environs to help differentiate this type from the other native graminoid map units and the mixed grass complex type.

Range and Distribution Photo Signature Example

APP F.11

Map Unit Danthonia californica - Phleum pratense Herbaceous Vegetation DACA-PHPR California oatgrass - Timothy Herbaceous Vegetation Representative Ground Photo Common Species Danthonia californica, Phleum pretense, Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana, Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda, Geum triflorum, Salix lucida, Poa secunda, Pseudoroegneria spicata, Festuca idahoensis, Juncus balticus, Carex spp.

NVCS Association - Danthonia californica - Phleum pratense Herbaceous Vegetation

Description California oatgrass mixed with timothy were a rare floodplain grassland association only documented in a few polygons at BIHO. This type likely forms a broad floodplain ecotone with the other mesic graminoid and shrub types, especially the shrubby-cinquefoil and tufted hairgrass map units. An effort was made to separately map DACA-PHPR from the others with some success. More classification and ground-truthing work could be done to further establish this type as a separate entity at BIHO. On the 2011 NAIP ortho-imagery stands of California oatgrass with timothy appeared as lush stands that had a smooth green signature with some dark brown mottling (swirls).

Range and Distribution Photo Signature Example

APP F.12

Map Unit Deschampsia cespitosa Herbaceous Vegetation DECE Tufted Hairgrass Herbaceous Vegetation

Common Species Representative Ground Photo Deschampsia cespitosa, Danthonia californica, Phleum pretense, Pseudoroegneria spicata, Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana, Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda, Geum triflorum, Salix lucida, Poa secunda, Festuca idahoensis, Juncus balticus, Carex spp.

NVCS Association - Deschampsia cespitosa Herbaceous Vegetation

Description Tufted hairgrass communities were fairly common in drier pockets in the floodplain zone at BIHO. Like the DACA-PHPR type, this map unit shared many of the same graminoid and shrub species found throughout the bottomlands. DECE polygons typically contained moderate cover of tufted hairgrass long with other grasses and some short shrubs. An attempt was made to separate this floodplain grassland type from the similar DACA-PHPR, DAFR, HOBR-ELTR-POPR, POSE and WETM map units but some overlap likely occurs. On the 2011 NAIP ortho-imagery this type was mapped partially by landscape position in drainage bottoms and partially by its characteristic mottled, olive-green color signature.

Range and Distribution Photo Signature Example

APP F.13

Map Unit Hordeum brachyantherum - Elymus trachycaulus - Poa pratensis Herbaceous Vegetation HOBR-ELTR-POPR Meadow Barley - Slender Wheatgrass - Kentucky Bluegrass Herbaceous Vegetation

Representative Ground Photo Common Species Hordeum brachyantherum, Elymus trachycaulus, Poa pratensis, Deschampsia cespitosa, Danthonia californica, Phleum pretense, Pseudoroegneria spicata, Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda, Festuca idahoensis, Juncus balticus, Carex spp.

NVCS Association - Hordeum brachyantherum - Elymus trachycaulus - Poa pratensis Herbaceous Vegetation

Description This grassland map unit was fairly common on the upper floodplain terraces along the North Fork of the Big Hole River. Meadow barley with slender wheatgrass and Kentucky bluegrass type had many of the same species as the other BIHO grassland types but may represent a more disturbed or planted community. On the 2011 NAIP ortho-imagery this type was mapped based on its smooth, tan color and its location on the upper floodplain margin. HOBR-ELTR-POPR was similar in appearance to the PSSP and some overlap in mapping likely exists.

Range and Distribution Photo Signature Example

APP F.14

Map Unit Mixed Planted and Semi-natural Grassland Complex MXGRS Representative Ground Photo Common Species Poa pratensis, Agropyron spp. Bromus tectorum, Festuca rubra, Phleum pretense, Bromus inermis, Unknown Species

NVCS Association - [No Association – Park Special]

Description This map unit represents previously planted pastures and cultivated lands in the BIHO environs that were probably seeded at one time with non-native grasses. This map unit was used to map dry fields where the primary grass species could not reliably be recognized on the 2011 NAIP ortho-imagery. It is likely that polygons of this type represent fallow fields or fields that were not being hayed during the timing of the NAIP imagery. Based on similar studies the presence of non-native wheatgrasses usually exhibits a dark brown-tan (mocha) color similar to what was found outside BIHO. Old agricultural tillage and irrigation lines were also sometimes apparent in polygons of this type. No classification data was collected in these areas and more ground- truthing in the future would greatly aid in distinguishing these areas from the smooth brome, weedy and bluebunch grassland map units.

Range and Distribution Photo Signature Example

APP F.15

Map Unit Poa secunda Seasonally Flooded Herbaceous Alliance POSE Sandberg Bluegrass Seasonally Flooded Herbaceous Alliance Representative Ground Photo Common Species Poa secunda, Pseudoroegneria spicata, Festuca idahoensis, Koeleria macrantha

NVCS Alliance - Poa secunda Seasonally Flooded Herbaceous Alliance

Description Three polygons of Sandberg bluegrass were verified during the accuracy assessment stage and the NVCS alliance was subsequently added to the BIHO classification to describe these areas. In these polygons Sandberg bluegrass was the dominant grass species and was often associated with prairie junegrass (Koeleria macrantha). On the 2011 NAIP ortho-imagery the polygons of this type appeared very similar to the other grassland types with a smooth, light tan color. More ground- truthing in the future would greatly aid in distinguishing Sandberg bluegrass areas from the PSSP and other BIHO grassland map units.

Range and Distribution Photo Signature Example

APP F.16

Map Unit Pseudoroegneria spicata - (Festuca idahoensis) Herbaceous Vegetation Complex PSSP Bluebunch Wheatgrass – (Idaho fescue) Herbaceous Vegetation Complex

Common Species Representative Ground Photo Pseudoroegneria spicata, Festuca idahoensis, Calamagrostis rubescens, Rosa woodsii, Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana, Potentilla glandulosa, Potentilla gracilis, Geum triflorum, Geranium viscosissimum, Balsamorhiza sagittata

NVCS Associations - Pseudoroegneria spicata Herbaceous Alliance - Festuca idahoensis - Pseudoroegneria spicata Herbaceous Vegetation

Description Bluebunch wheatgrass with or without Idaho fescue was a common upland grassland type found throughout the mountain slope and upper bench areas of BIHO. Stands were somewhat patchy in distribution and were often intermixed with sparse mountain big sagebrush shrubs and variety of forbs including arrowleaf balsamroot. Non-native species, including Kentucky bluegrass were sometimes present in low cover. The density of PSSP varied from sparse on thin soils to moderately dense on loams and other deeper soils. The photo signature for this map unit appeared smooth and mottled (swirled) due to the lack of shrubs and varied in color from brown, to light tan, and gray depending on soil color.

Range and Distribution Photo Signature Example

APP F.17

Map Unit Mixed Weedy Semi-natural Herbaceous Vegetation Complex WEED Representative Ground Photo Common Species Poa pratensis, Bromus tectorum, Unknown Species

NVCS Association - [No Association – Park Special]

Description The weedy complex map unit was used exclusively at BIHO to map disturbed areas in the environs that likely contain early successional annual vegetation or scabby patches of non-native grasslands. Since no classification plot data was collected in these areas the exact species composition is unknown at this time. More ground-truthing (with permission from the landowner) would allow for better classification and description of this type. On the NAIP imagery stands of weedy vegetation with sufficient cover (>20%) had a characteristic smooth, orange-tan color. The tan color of this type was used to distinguish it from transitional areas (white and gray) that had less than 20% cover of vegetation.

Range and Distribution Photo Signature Example

APP F.18

Map Unit Juncus balticus - Carex (nebrascensis, pragracilis) Wet Meadow Herbaceous Vegetation Complex WETM Baltic Rush – Sedge (Nebraska, Clustered Field) Wet Meadow Herbaceous Vegetation Complex

Representative Ground Photo Common Species Juncus balticus, Carex nebrascensis, Carex praegracilis, Geum triflorum, Calamagrosits canadensis, Senecio triangularis, Heracleum maximum, Solidago cynoglossoides, Deschampsia caespitosa

NVCS Associations - Juncus balticus Herbaceous Vegetation - Carex nebrascensis Herbaceous Vegetation - Carex praegracilis - Geum triflorum Herbaceous Vegetation

Description This herbaceous wetland type was common at BIHO in mesic floodplains and in woodland canopy openings. Polygons of this type typically contained pure stands of sedges or Baltic rush. Stands of all the associations included in this map unit were fairly indistinguishable from one another on the imagery and more ground-truthing could be done to further spate stands dominated by sedges from those with rush. Drier versions of this type had similar wetland species as the shrubby-cinquefoil map unit and some confusion may have occurred between the two. On the NAIP imagery this type was mapped partially by its landscape position in the floodplain and drainages and partially by its characteristic smooth, light green color with blue streaks (water).

Range and Distribution Photo Signature Example

APP F.19

LAND COVER – LAND USE

Stream / River Lake / Pond

Canal / Ditch Residential

APP F.20

Agricultural Business Planted / Cultivated

Transportation Transitional

APP F.21

Facilities

APP F.22

Appendix G - Final BIHO Vegetation Map

APP G.1

The Department of the Interior protects and manages the nation’s natural resources and cultural heritage; provides scientific and other information about those resources; and honors its special responsibilities to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and affiliated Island Communities.

NPS 341/113955, April 2012

National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior

Natural Resource Stewardship and Science 1201 Oakridge Drive, Suite 150 Fort Collins, CO 80525 www.nature.nps.gov

EXPERIENCE YOUR AMERICA TM