Search Field Guide
Advanced Search
Montana Animal Field Guide

Montana Field Guides

Mountain Mahogany Woodland and Shrubland

Google for more images Google for web pages
Provisional State Rank: S4
* (see reason below)

External Links





State Rank Reason
This system is patchy and not common, but because occurrences are so dispersed, threats are also dispersed.
 

General Description

This ecological system occurs most frequently on moderately steep to very steep slopes in the mountain ranges of southwestern Montana, but extends as far north as the northern foothills of the Elkhorn Range and as far east as the Wolf Mountains on the Crow Indian Reservation. It occurs on rocky outcrops on south and southwestern aspects at 1,060-2,260 meters (3,500-7,400 feet) and forms small- to large-patch stands on dry and rocky soils. In Montana, this shrubland system is dominated by curl-leaf mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus ledifolius). Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopulorum) occurs throughout this system’s range and Utah juniper (J. osteosperma) occurs in the Pryor Mountains. Conifers such as Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), limber pine (Pinus flexilis) and ponderosa pine (P. ponderosa) may also occur in some stands. Other co-dominant shrubs include mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana), antelope bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata) and rubber rabbitbrush (Ericameria nauseosa). Other low shrubs such as snakeweed (Gutierrezia sarothrae) and fringed sage (Artemisia frigida) are common. Undergrowth is dominated by bunchgrasses, usually bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), needle and thread (Hesperostipa comata), Indian ricegrass (Achnatherum hymenoides) or Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis). Curl-leaf mountain mahoganyis a slow-growing, drought-tolerant species that generally does not re-sprout after fire. Prolonged drought, potential for increased fire severity and exotic species invasion are changing the dynamics of this system.


Diagnostic Characteristics

Forest and Woodland, vegetation cover greater than 10%, Montane to foothill elevations, Cercocarpus ledifolius


Similar Systems

Range
This ecological system occurs most frequently on moderately steep to very steep slopes in the mountain ranges of southwestern Montana, but it extends as far north as the northern foothills of the Elkhorn Range and as far east as the Wolf Mountains on the Crow Indian Reservation. Elsewhere in the western United States, this system occurs in hills and mountain ranges of the Intermountain West basins from the eastern foothills of the Sierra Nevada northeast to the foothills of the Bighorn Mountains.

Ecological System Distribution
Approximately 281 square kilometers are classified as Mountain Mahogany Woodland and Shrubland in the 2013 Montana Land Cover layers.  Grid on map is based on USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle map boundaries.



Montana Counties of Occurrence
BEAVERHEAD, BIG HORN, BROADWATER, CARBON, CARTER, CASCADE, DEER LODGE, GALLATIN, GRANITE, JUDITH BASIN, LEWIS AND CLARK, MADISON, MEAGHER, MINERAL, MISSOULA, PARK, POWDER RIVER, POWELL, RAVALLI, ROSEBUD, SANDERS, STILLWATER, SWEET GRASS, WHEATLAND

Spatial Pattern
Large Patch or Small Patch

Environment
This ecological system occurs as small- to large-patch stands on dry and rocky soils associated with moderately steep to very steep slopes, although occurrences on flat to gently sloping surfaces are also found in Montana. It is most prevalent on limestone outcrops where extensive stands develop, although it also occurs on other parent materials, generally as small patches. It can occur on all aspects but is most prevalent on south and southwestern aspects. This system’s observed elevation range within the state is 1,060-2,260 meters (3,500-7,400 feet). Climate within its distribution range in Montana is typical of mid-continental regions with long severe winters and hot, dry summers. This system is important winter range for deer and elk.

Vegetation

This shrubland system is dominated by curl-leaf mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus ledifolius). Rocky Mountain juniper (Juniperus scopulorum) occurs throughout this system’s range and Utah juniper (J. osteosperma) occurs in the Pryor Mountains. Conifers such as Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), limber pine (Pinus flexilis) and ponderosa pine (P. ponderosa) may also occur in some stands. Ponderosa pine stands within this system are mostly found in eastern Montana. Other co-dominant shrubs include mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana), antelope bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata), and rubber rabbitbrush (Ericameria nauseosa). Other low shrubs such as snakeweed (Gutierrezia sarothrae) and fringed sage (Artemisia frigida) are common. Undergrowth is dominated by bunchgrasses, usually bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), needle and thread (Hesperostipa comata), and Indian ricegrass (Achnatherum hymenoides).Other low shrubs such as broom snakeweed (Gutierrezia sarothrae) and fringed sage (Artemisia frigida) are common (Mueggler and Stewart, 1980).

Bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata) is the dominant grass throughout this system, although needle and thread (Hesperostipa comata) and Indian ricegrass (Achnatherum hymenoides) may be co-dominant on more xeric occurrences. Mesic occurrences are frequently dominated or co-dominated by Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis). Prairie junegrass (Koeleria macrantha) is a minor component. Due to the rocky and shallow substrates, undergrowth cover is relatively sparse, often with less than 20% cover. Common forbs include rosy pussytoes (Antennaria rosea), sulphur buckwheat (Eriogonum umbellatum), few-seed draba (Draba oligosperma), tufted fleabane (Erigeron cespitosus), Hood’s phlox (Phlox hoodii), and stoneseed (Lithospermum ruderale). Cacti such as plains pricklypear (Opuntia polyacantha)and Missouri foxtail cactus (Mammillaria missouriensis) are present on especially xeric sites. Within this system, cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) or other annual bromes and invasive weeds can be abundant.


Alliances and Associations
Alliances
  • (A.828) Curl-leaf Mountain-mahogany Shrubland Alliance
  • (A.586) Curl-leaf Mountain-mahogany Woodland Alliance

Dynamic Processes

Curl-leaf mountain mahogany is easily killed by fire at all intensities. Some shrubs may re-sprout following low-intensity fires, but these are typically low in vigor and do not persist. Regeneration is by seedling recruitment. High-intensity fires kill all standing shrubs and may also eliminate the seed bank on these sites. However, a lack of continuous fuels, sparse undergrowth, open stand structure, and low downed wood accumulations contribute to a low fire frequency within this system. Particularly in areas where fire has been suppressed, the absence of fire in curl-leaf mountain mahogany habitats has increased curl-leaf mountain mahogany abundance and successful regeneration in some areas of central, southwestern, and southeastern Montana (Gruell, 1982).

Curl-leaf mountain mahogany provides food and cover for a variety of wildlife species such as deer and elk. Some livestock (domestic goats, sheep, and cattle) use it in spring, fall, and/or winter, but rarely in the summer. In other areas of this system’s geographic range, heavy grazing practices have been observed to lead to a decrease in associated grasses and an increase in the spread of cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) (Young, 1989). Thus, sites invaded by cheatgrassare changing the dynamics of this system by increasing fire potential, severity, and spread.


Management

Excessive grazing can lower the cover of the most common perennial bunchgrasses in this system and lead to increase in the cover of prairie junegrass and needle and thread. Unpalatable shrubs such as fringed sage or snakeweed also increase under heavy grazing pressure. Severe grazing can lead to an abundance of cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa), or other noxious species capable of colonizing dry, rocky soils.


Restoration Considerations

Restoration strategies will depend on the type and intensity of the disturbance, and in the case of fire, on the degree of fire severity and fire recovery objectives. Light or moderately intensive burns can increase cover of native perennial bunchgrasses during the first two years following the fire on sites where there was good pre-fire condition with minimal exotic cover. However, severely burned sites will require replanting with curl-leaf mountain mahogany seedlings and other co-dominant shrubs, due to the slow recovery time within this system and low rates of natural seedling recruitment. Generally, larger container volume of nursery stock results in higher outplanting success; 20-cubic inch container stock is recommended for use on these sites. Curl-leaf mountain mahogany is rated as good to excellent for soil erosion control. Planting rates must be developed on a site-by-site basis to meet management objectives.

Successful restoration of native grasses within this system may be limited to sites where pre-fire cheatgrass cover was low. Fall germination and rapid elongation of roots provide cheatgrass with a competitive advantage over native perennial species (Harris 1967). Cheatgrass reduces growth of bluebunch wheatgrassseedlings and is capable of producing twice the root quantity during the first 45 days of growth (Aguirre and Johnson 1991). Prolific seed production also contributes to the competitive advantage of this species over native grasses. Thus, on sites that are heavily infested with cheatgrass prior to fire, seeding rates must be adjusted to include more competitive native grass species. Some selections of bluebunch wheatgrass that exhibit desirable growth characteristics may have promise for establishing this species on invaded sites.


Species Associated with this Ecological System
  • Details on Creation and Suggested Uses and Limitations
    How Associations Were Made
    We associated the use and habitat quality (high, medium, or low) of each of the 82 ecological systems mapped in Montana for vertebrate animal species that regularly breed, overwinter, or migrate through the state by:
    1. Using personal observations and reviewing literature that summarize the breeding, overwintering, or migratory habitat requirements of each species (Dobkin 1992, Hart et al. 1998, Hutto and Young 1999, Maxell 2000, Foresman 2001, Adams 2003, and Werner et al. 2004);
    2. Evaluating structural characteristics and distribution of each ecological system relative to the species’ range and habitat requirements;
    3. Examining the observation records for each species in the state-wide point database associated with each ecological system;
    4. Calculating the percentage of observations associated with each ecological system relative to the percent of Montana covered by each ecological system to get a measure of “observations versus availability of habitat”.
    Species that breed in Montana were only evaluated for breeding habitat use, species that only overwinter in Montana were only evaluated for overwintering habitat use, and species that only migrate through Montana were only evaluated for migratory habitat use.  In general, species were associated as using an ecological system if structural characteristics of used habitat documented in the literature were present in the ecological system or large numbers of point observations were associated with the ecological system.  However, species were not associated with an ecological system if there was no support in the literature for use of structural characteristics in an ecological system, even if point observations were associated with that system.  High, medium, and low habitat quality was assigned based on the degree to which the structural characteristics of an ecological system matched the preferred structural habitat characteristics for each species in the literature.  The percentage of observations associated with each ecological system relative to the percent of Montana covered by each ecological system was also used to guide assignments of habitat quality.  If you have any questions or comments on species associations with ecological systems, please contact Bryce Maxell at bmaxell@mt.gov or (406) 444-3655.

    Suggested Uses and Limitations
    Species associations with ecological systems should be used to generate potential lists of species that may occupy broader landscapes for the purposes of landscape-level planning.  These potential lists of species should not be used in place of documented occurrences of species (this information can be requested at: http://mtnhp.org/requests/default.asp) or systematic surveys for species and evaluations of habitat at a local site level by trained biologists.  Users of this information should be aware that the land cover data used to generate species associations is based on imagery from the late 1990s and early 2000s and was only intended to be used at broader landscape scales.  Land cover mapping accuracy is particularly problematic when the systems occur as small patches or where the land cover types have been altered over the past decade.  Thus, particular caution should be used when using the associations in assessments of smaller areas (e.g., evaluations of public land survey sections).  Finally, although a species may be associated with a particular ecological system within its known geographic range, portions of that ecological system may occur outside of the species’ known geographic range.

    Literature Cited
    • Adams, R.A.  2003.  Bats of the Rocky Mountain West; natural history, ecology, and conservation.  Boulder, CO: University Press of Colorado.  289 p.
    • Dobkin, D. S.  1992.  Neotropical migrant land birds in the Northern Rockies and Great Plains. USDA Forest Service, Northern Region. Publication No. R1-93-34.  Missoula, MT.
    • Foresman, K.R.  2001.  The wild mammals of Montana.  Special Publication No. 12.  Lawrence, KS: The American Society of Mammalogists.  278 p.
    • Hart, M.M., W.A. Williams, P.C. Thornton, K.P. McLaughlin, C.M. Tobalske, B.A. Maxell, D.P. Hendricks, C.R. Peterson, and R.L. Redmond. 1998.  Montana atlas of terrestrial vertebrates.  Montana Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, University of Montana, Missoula, MT.  1302 p.
    • Hutto, R.L. and J.S. Young.  1999.  Habitat relationships of landbirds in the Northern Region, USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station RMRS-GTR-32.  72 p.
    • Maxell, B.A.  2000.  Management of Montana’s amphibians: a review of factors that may present a risk to population viability and accounts on the identification, distribution, taxonomy, habitat use, natural history, and the status and conservation of individual species.  Report to U.S. Forest Service Region 1.  Missoula, MT: Wildlife Biology Program, University of Montana.  161 p.
    • Werner, J.K., B.A. Maxell, P. Hendricks, and D. Flath.  2004.  Amphibians and reptiles of Montana.  Missoula, MT: Mountain Press Publishing Company. 262 p.

Original Concept Authors
Natureserve Western Ecology Team (NatureServe ed. date 25Jan2007)

Montana Version Authors
L.K. Vance, T. Luna, M. Hart

Version Date
1/17/2010

References
  • Classification and Map Identifiers

    Cowardian Wetland Classification: Not applicable

    National Vegetation Classification Standard:
    Class Mesomorphic Tree Vegetation (Forest and Woodland)
    Subclass Temperate Forest
    Formation Cool Temperate Forest
    Division Western North America Scrub Woodland and Shrubland
    Macrogroup Western North America Pine-Juniper Woodland

    NatureServe Identifiers:
    Element Global ID 28611
    System Code CES304.772, Inter-Mountain Basins Mountain Mahogany Woodland and Shrubland

    National Land Cover Dataset:
    43: Mixed Forest

    ReGAP:
    4303: Inter-Mountain Basins Mountain Mahogany Woodland and Shrubland


  • Additional ReferencesLegend:   View WorldCat Record   View Online Publication
    Do you know of a citation we're missing?
    • Aguirre, Lucrecia, and Douglas A. Johnson. 1991. "Influence of Temperature and Cheatgrass Competition on Seedling Development of Two Bunchgrasses". Journal of Range Management. 44 (4): 347-354.
    • Gruell GE. 1982. Fires' influence on vegetative succession--wildlife habitat implications and management opportunities. In: Eustace CD, editor. Proceedings: Montana Chapter of the Wildlife Society. Billings, MT: The Wildlife Society; p 43-50.
    • Harris, G. A. 1967. Some competitive relationships between AGROPYRON SPICATUM and BROMUS TECTORUM. Ecological Monographs 37:89-111.
    • Mueggler, W. F. and W. L. Stewart. 1980. Grassland and shrubland habitat types of western Montana. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-66, Intermountain Forest and Range Exp. Sta., Ogden, Utah. 154 pp.
    • Young JA. 1989. Intermountain shrubsteppe plant communities--pristine and grazed. Western raptor management symposium and workshop: Proceedings: 1987 October 26-28; Boise, ID. Scientific Technical Series No. 12. Washington DC: National Wildlife Federation; p 3-14.

Login Logout
Citation for data on this website:
Mountain Mahogany Woodland and Shrubland — Inter-Mountain Basins Mountain Mahogany Woodland and Shrubland.  Montana Field Guide.  Retrieved on October 22, 2014, from http://FieldGuide.mt.gov/displayES_Detail.aspx?ES=4303
 
There are currently 7 active users in the Montana Field Guide.