• ABBREVIATION
• SYNONYMS
• NRCS PLANT CODE
• COMMON NAMES
• TAXONOMY
• LIFE FORM
• FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS
• OTHER STATUS
• AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION

ABBREVIATION:

ARTTRIV

SYNONYMS:

Artemisia tridentata var. vaseyana (Rydb.) Bovin [31,35,142]

Seriphidium vaseyanum (Rydb.) Weber [134]

NRCS PLANT CODE [126]:

ARTRV

COMMON NAMES:

mountain big sagebrush

TAXONOMY:

The currently accepted scientific name of mountain big sagebrush is Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana (Rydb.) Beetle (Asteraceae) [5,31,56].

There are 2 other widely distributed subspecies of big sagebrush (A. tridentata): basin big sagebrush (A. t. spp. tridentata) and Wyoming big sagebrush (A. t. spp. wyomingensis) [8,56,64]. There is substantial overlap in the distribution of big sagebrush species, and the 3 major subspecies sometimes tightly co-occur [74]. It is difficult to distinguish among them without chemical or molecular analysis [8,74,133,145]. Mountain big sagebrush contains chemical constituents that allow it to be distinguished from the other 2 major subspecies when subjected to an ultraviolet light test [74]. Morphological characteristics, especially leaf and shrub shape, have been relied upon to distinguish among big sagebrush subspecies [5,31,56]. Hybridization within these 3 subspecies of big sagebrush has been confirmed [42,43,46,73,74,115].

In addition to the 3 major subspecies mentioned above, at least 2 other subspecies of big sagebrush with limited distributions are recognized: A. t. spp. parishii [56] and A. t. spp. xericensis [64]. Each is commonly known as big sagebrush. Snowfield sagebrush has been classified both within the big sagebrush complex (A. t. spp. spiciformis) [45,64] and as a distinct species (A. spiciformis) [56].

In this report, the name "big sagebrush" is used when discussing the big sagebrush species complex. Infrataxa including mountain big sagebrush are referred to by the subspecific common names used above. Because the International Botanical Congress no longer recognizes varieties or forms of subspecies, forms and varieties within the vaseyana subspecies are treated here as A. t. spp. vaseyana. For more information about the species complex, please refer to the FEIS reports for other subspecies.

LIFE FORM:

Shrub

FEDERAL LEGAL STATUS:

No special status

OTHER STATUS:

No entry

AUTHORSHIP AND CITATION:

Johnson, Kathleen A. (2000, November). Artemisia tridentata spp. vaseyana. In: Remainder of Citation

• GENERAL DISTRIBUTION
• ECOSYSTEMS
• STATES
• BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS
• KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS
• SAF COVER TYPES
• SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES
• HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES

GENERAL DISTRIBUTION:

Mountain big sagebrush occurs from southern British Columbia and Alberta south to California, northern Arizona and northern New Mexico, west into central Oregon and Washington, and east into Montana, Wyoming and Colorado [11,53,56,71,86,97]. Small populations of mountain big sagebrush have been reported as far east as the Dakotas and Nebraska [5,47,61].

ECOSYSTEMS [44]:

FRES20 Douglas-fir
FRES21 Ponderosa pine
FRES23 Fir-spruce
FRES26 Lodgepole pine
FRES29 Sagebrush
FRES30 Desert shrub
FRES34 Chaparral-mountain shrub
FRES35 Pinyon-juniper
FRES36 Mountain grasslands

STATES:

AZ	CA	CO	ID	MT	NE	NV
NM	ND	OR	SD	UT	WA	WY
AB	BC

BLM PHYSIOGRAPHIC REGIONS [9]:

5 Columbia Plateau
6 Upper Basin and Range
8 Northern Rocky Mountains
9 Middle Rocky Mountains
10 Wyoming Basin
11 Southern Rocky Mountains
12 Colorado Plateau

KUCHLER PLANT ASSOCIATIONS [66] :

K005 Mixed conifer forest
K008 Lodgepole pine-subalpine forest
K010 Ponderosa shrub forest
K011 Western ponderosa forest
K012 Douglas-fir forest
K015 Western spruce-fir forest
K018 Pine-Douglas-fir forest
K019 Arizona pine forest
K020 Spruce-fir-Douglas-fir forest
K022 Great Basin pine forest
K023 Juniper-pinyon woodland
K024 Juniper steppe woodland
K026 Oregon oakwoods
K028 Mosaic of K002 and K026
K032 Transition between K031 and K037
K037 Mountain-mahogany-oak scrub
K038 Great Basin sagebrush
K039 Blackbrush
K051 Wheatgrass-bluegrass
K055 Sagebrush steppe
K056 Wheatgrass-needlegrass shrubsteppe
K063 Foothills prairie
K064 Grama-needlegrass-wheatgrass

SAF COVER TYPES [39]:

208 Whitebark pine
210 Interior Douglas-fir
211 White fir
218 Lodgepole pine
219 Limber pine
220 Rocky Mountain juniper
237 Interior ponderosa pine
238 Western juniper
239 Pinyon-juniper
247 Jeffrey pine
256 California mixed subalpine

SRM (RANGELAND) COVER TYPES [112]:

101 Bluebunch wheatgrass
102 Idaho fescue
104 Antelope bitterbrush-bluebunch wheatgrass
105 Antelope bitterbrush-Idaho fescue
107 Western juniper/big sagebrush/bluebunch wheatgrass
109 Ponderosa pine shrubland
110 Ponderosa pine-grassland
209 Montane shrubland
210 Bitterbrush
212 Blackbush
302 Bluebunch wheatgrass-Sandberg bluegrass
303 Bluebunch wheatgrass-western wheatgrass
314 Big sagebrush-bluebunch wheatgrass
315 Big sagebrush-Idaho fescue
316 Big sagebrush-rough fescue
317 Bitterbrush-bluebunch wheatgrass
318 Bitterbrush-Idaho fescue
319 Bitterbrush-rough fescue
320 Black sagebrush-bluebunch wheatgrass
321 Black sagebrush-Idaho fescue
322 Curlleaf mountain-mahogany-bluebunch wheatgrass
324 Threetip sagebrush-Idaho fescue
401 Basin big sagebrush
402 Mountain big sagebrush
403 Wyoming big sagebrush
404 Threetip sagebrush
405 Black sagebrush
406 Low sagebrush
408 Other sagebrush types
411 Aspen woodland
412 Juniper-pinyon woodland
413 Gambel oak
415 Curlleaf mountain-mahogany
416 True mountain-mahogany
420 Snowbrush
421 Chokecherry-serviceberry-rose
504 Juniper-pinyon woodland
509 Transition between oak-juniper woodland and mahogany-oak association
612 Sagebrush-grass

HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES:

Mountain big sagebrush occurs, often as a dominant in shrublands or codominant in savannah, over a range of habitats from montane parklands to warm desert fringes in western North America. This species is a common component of shrub patches in arid grasslands [60,70,89,108,127]. It occurs widely throughout Great Basin pinyon-juniper woodlands dominated by true pinyon (Pinus edulis), singleleaf pinyon (P. monophylla), and Utah juniper (Juniperus osteosperma) [123]. Mountain big sagebrush has been reported in association with numerous other tree species, including quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) [20,26,87,89], ponderosa pine (P. ponderosa) [53,60,100,108], lodgepole pine (P. contorta) [6,26], Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) [53,100], limber pine (P. flexilis) [6,53,100,101], subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) [78], and whitebark pine (P. albicaulis) [6,90,122]. Mountain big sagebrush may also occur in association with white fir (A. concolor) and Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii) [122].

Common plant associates in Idaho and Montana include Wood's rose (Rosa woodsii), mountain snowberry (Symphoricarpos oreophilus), green rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus), antelope bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata), and Rocky Mountain juniper. Associated grasses and forbs include Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis), cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), prairie Junegrass (Koeleria macrantha) green needlegrass (Nassella viridula), needle-and-thread grass (Hesperostipa comata), Sandberg bluegrass (Poa secunda), and bottlebrush squirreltail (Elymus elymoides) [63,70,84,147].

Common associated species reported for central and eastern Oregon and Washington are western juniper (J. occidentalis), ponderosa pine, Wyoming big sagebrush, gray low sagebrush (A. arbuscula ssp. arbuscula), antelope bitterbrush, wax currant (Ribes cereum), Idaho fescue, bottlebrush squirreltail, bluebunch wheatgrass, Sandberg bluegrass, Kentucky bluegrass, basin wildrye (Leymus cinereus), and cheatgrass [28,108,127,148].

In Wyoming sagebrush steppe communities, mountain big sagebrush is commonly associated with Idaho fescue, antelope bitterbrush, needle-and-thread grass, spike fescue (Leucopoa kingii), sulphur eriogonum (Eriogonum umbellatum var. subalpinum) and silvery lupine (Lupinus argentius) [6,19,20].

Mountain big sagebrush is the most common sagebrush in the extensive Great Basin pinyon-juniper woodlands [123,144]. Associated species include true pinyon, singleleaf pinyon, ponderosa pine, Utah juniper, Rocky Mountain juniper (J. scopulorum), and Jeffrey pine (P. jeffreyi). Associated shrub species include Wyoming big sagebrush, basin big sagebrush, antelope bitterbrush, Gambel oak (Quercus gambelii), black sagebrush (A. nova), gray low sagebrush, and desert peach (Prunus andersonii). Associated species also include genera Chrysothamnus, Symphoricarpos, Cercocarpus, Ceanothus, Arctostaphylos, Physocarpus, Ribes, Rhus, and Cowania. Associated grasses are numerous, including Columbia needlegrass (Achnatherum nelsonii ssp. dorei), bottlebrush squirreltail, Sandberg bluegrass, bluebunch wheatgrass and cheatgrass [118,121,122,123,144,154].

Publications listing mountain big sagebrush as a dominant, codominant, or indicator species include the following:

Plant communities and habitat types in the Lava Beds National Monument, California [36]
Sagebrush-steppe habitat types in northern Colorado: a first approximation [41]
Grassland, shrubland, and forestland habitat types of the White River-Arapaho National Forest [54]
Sagebrush-grass habitat types of southern Idaho [57]
Plant associations of Region Two: Potential plant communities of Wyoming, South Dakota, Nebraska, Colorado, and Kansas [62]
Plant communities of the Similkameen Valley, British Columbia [78]
A preliminary classification of high-elevation sagebrush-grass vegetation in northern and central Nevada [85]
Aspen community types on the Caribou and Targhee National Forests in southeastern Idaho [89]
A preliminary classification and characterization of big sagebrush, Artemisia tridentata Nutt., communities in central Montana [116]
Shrub-steppe habitat types of Middle Park, Colorado [119]
Big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata vaseyana) and longleaf snowberry (Symphoricarpos oreophilus) plant associations in northeastern Nevada [124]
Grassland and shrubland habitat types of the Shoshone National Forest [125]
Taxonomic and ecological relationships of the big sagebrush complex in Idaho [147]
Sagebrush steppe [153]

• IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE
• PALATABILITY
• NUTRITIONAL VALUE
• COVER VALUE
• VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES
• OTHER USES AND VALUES
• MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS

IMPORTANCE TO LIVESTOCK AND WILDLIFE:

Reliance on the big sagebrush ecosystem by many wild animals for both food and cover has been documented and reviewed extensively [11,57,77,91,96,98,111,129,137]. Wildlife researchers have argued that the importance of sagebrush as forage, and effects of foraging on sagebrush are not fully appreciated [130,131,140]. Big sagebrush is eaten by domestic sheep and cattle, but has long been considered to be of low palatability to domestic livestock, a competitor with more desirable species, and a physical impediment to grazing [11,33,111].

PALATABILITY:

Wambolt [130,131] studied elk and mule deer preference for the 3 big sagebrush subspecies and black sagebrush. The study was conducted annually for 10 years on 2 sites in Yellowstone National Park. Each year approximately 2,500 leaders on 244 plants were examined for browsing. The percentage mountain big sagebrush leaders utilized during a given winter was as high as 91%. In all cases, mountain big sagebrush was used more than the other 3 taxa, with an average of 56.1% use. In 16 of the 20 samplings, use of mountain big sagebrush was significantly (P < 0.05) greater than that of Wyoming big sagebrush, the second most preferred taxon, which had an average of 38.6% use. Differences in preference among taxa were smallest during severest winters when more elk were present on the site.

Welch and Wagstaff [140] noted that mountain big sagebrush is a highly preferred and nutritious winter forage for mule deer. They argued that "The perception that big sagebrush is largely unsuitable and unused is due to low palatability to cattle and its ability to quickly mask evidence of use." The "Hobble Creek" low elevation, USDA cultivar [139] of mountain big sagebrush is preferred by both wintering domestic sheep and mule deer. The cultivar has not been found to contain substances that negatively influence preference or suppress grass cell wall digestion in ruminants [138,139,140].

NUTRITIONAL VALUE:

The Hobble Creek cultivar of mountain big sagebrush is a highly preferred sagebrush that exceeds most other winter forage values in energy, protein, phosphorus, and carotene. Winter crude protein content of the cultivar is 10%-11% of dry matter, winter in vitro digestibility is 52.6% of dry matter, winter phosphorus level is 0.21%, and total winter monoterpenoid content is 2.09%. A study comparing mule deer preference for the Hobble Creek cultivar against antelope bitterbrush indicated that mean usage did not differ after the first 2 measurements, but was significantly higher (P < 0.05) for the 2 final measurements. The sagebrush cultivar was significantly more digestible than antelope bitterbrush, and significantly higher in crude protein and phosphorus [138,139,140].

COVER VALUE:

The degree to which mountain big sagebrush provides cover for wildlife species has been reported as follows [32,33]:

	OR	UT	WY
pronghorn	-	fair	good
bighorn sheep	fair	-	-
elk	-	fair	fair
mule deer	good	fair	fair
white-tailed deer	-	-	poor
small mammals	-	good	good
nongame birds	-	good	good
upland game birds	-	good	good
water fowl	-	poor	good

VALUE FOR REHABILITATION OF DISTURBED SITES:

Mountain big sagebrush is easily propagated from seed under greenhouse, nursery, and common garden conditions [37,53,69,106,150,152] and has been successfully seeded directly into field sites [26,30,65,106,111,152].

The temperature for drying seeds for storage should not exceed 140 degrees Fahrenheit (60^oC). Humidity control is important for seed storage and should not exceed 32 to 40% [135,137]. Seed life in storage is about 5 years [111,137].

Mountain big sagebrush has also been successfully planted in field sites using nursery-grown bareroot and containerized stock [38,59,65]. After 3 years, percent survival of outplanted containerized seedlings in a Nevada study was as high as 80% in some plots [38]. Mountain big sagebrush has been propagated by tissue culture with limited success [95].

Please refer to the General Botanical Characteristics section of this report for more information about mountain big sagebrush regeneration.

Cotts and others [30] included mountain big sagebrush in a detailed study of revegetation methods for abandoned roads in Grand Teton National Park. They tested 14 treatments. After 2 growing seasons, treatments that included the addition of topsoil (collected locally), followed either by natural colonization of mountain big sagebrush, or seeded with locally collected seed from the same year, had much greater percent plant cover (P=0.05) than various other treatments. The most successful treatment, producing 7.3% cover, was a combination of vegetation removal, substrate scarification, topsoil application, and phosphorus application. Application of locally collected seed alone, following vegetation removal, produced a cover of 0.3%. Application of commercial seed alone following vegetation removal produced only a trace of mountain big sagebrush cover. Sites treated with a combination of locally collected seed with topsoil increased plant cover compared to various treatments without topsoil. More notably, mountain big sagebrush was the most dominant species to naturally colonize nonseeded, topsoiled treatments.

There is evidence that mountain big sagebrush is not aided by the addition of supplemental water and/or fertilizer under field conditions. In a Wyoming study where researchers applied water and ammonium nitrate to transplants on a reclaimed strip mine (regraded with original topsoil), for 3 successive years, there was no significant increase (P=0.05) in aboveground biomass [25].

OTHER USES AND VALUES:

Native peoples used big sagebrush leaves and branches for medicinal teas, and the leaves as a fumigant. Bark was woven into mats, bags and clothing [97].

MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

The ecology of mountain big sagebrush in the West has been altered by post-settlement increases or decreases in historical fire intervals and livestock grazing, widespread invasion by exotic annuals, and perhaps climate change [11,23,83,143]. Historical abundance of big sagebrush has been disputed. According to reviews [7,143] and a comparative examination of 20 historical photos from 3 states [66], big sagebrush was abundant and codominant with perennial bunchgrasses in pre-settlement times. Sagebrush species do not appear to have increased their range on a large scale, but reviewers agree that big sagebrush has increased in density in many places in response to excessive grazing and altered fire regimes. Regarding the sagebrush steppe ecosystem, West [143] makes the following remark: "Some of it has been so degraded by excessive livestock grazing and burning that its relationship to its origins is no longer easily recognizable."

Important management considerations in sagebrush ecosystems include wildlife use, livestock grazing and overgrazing, fire frequency and hazard, exotic plant invasion and conversion of the ecosystem to other uses. Blaisdell and others [11] provide an extensive review and guidelines for integrating multiple uses of the sagebrush grasslands, including determining range condition and trend, and controlling sagebrush.

Perryman and Olson [99] argue that sagebrush control decisions are typically based on characteristics such as canopy cover, but should instead be based on ecologically based community-successional criteria. To aid managers they used annual growth rings to develop a quantitative model of age-stem diameter relationships for the 3 subspecies of big sagebrush. They sampled 75-80 stem cross-sections within 9 stands in regionally dispersed locations across Wyoming. Using the model, managers should be able to quickly assess the age (and perhaps successional status) of big sagebrush stands based on the stem diameter of large individuals. Stand age could then be compared with fire frequency information to determine if control practices should be implemented.

Because mountain big sagebrush often co-occurs with Wyoming big sagebrush and basin big sagebrush, please refer also to the Management Considerations section in FEIS reports for those subspecies.

• GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS
• RAUNKIAER LIFE FORM
• REGENERATION PROCESSES
• SITE CHARACTERISTICS
• SUCCESSIONAL STATUS
• SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT

GENERAL BOTANICAL CHARACTERISTICS

Mountain big sagebrush is a long-lived (50+ years), woody, aromatic, native, evergreen shrub [7,11]. Shrubs often appear flat-topped from a distance because of the nearly equal height of flowering stalks [68]. The fruit is a small, easily shattered achene that falls or is blown near the parent plant [111,151]. Root length of mature plants was measured to a depth of 6.5 feet (2 meters) in alluvial soils in Utah [105]. Greenhouse grown plants had roots 22.3 feet (6.8 meters) long at 6 months [136]. Mountain big sagebrush roots are colonized by fungi that form symbiotic vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizae [24,121]. Aboveground tissues host an unidentified, pathogenic snowmold fungus that decreases shrub cover and productivity [55,92].

RAUNKIAER [104] LIFE FORM:

Phanerophyte

REGENERATION PROCESSES:

Mountain big sagebrush usually flowers in late summer and fall, but some strains may flower as early as July. Seed matures from September through October [71]. Mature seeds fall or are blown from inflorescences during autumn and winter and emergence occurs in winter or spring [75,80,151]. Seeds are short-lived (less that 5 yr in warehouse) and probably do not form a persistent seed bank [82,151]. Average annual seed production in western Nevada was 29 pounds per 2.5 acres (1.3 kg/0.1 ha) over a 4 year period [154].

Recently harvested seeds are nondormant but require light for germination [82]. Cold, moist conditions and exposure to light increase germination [75,76,82]. Germination response varies between populations of mountain big sagebrush growing in different habitats. Meyer and others [80,81,82] observed strong, significant correlations (P < 0.05) between percent germination and climate variables (light and cold). Seed collections from habitats with long, severe winters germinated slowly and incompletely, whereas seed collections from sites with shorter, milder winters germinated rapidly and completely.

Results of a western Nevada seed bank study showed the number of (greenhouse) germinable seeds of mountain big sagebrush decreased sharply as winter progressed and fell below detectable levels by June. Seeds did not persist in the soil seed bank. For 4 consecutive years there were no detectable seed reserves in the soil from June to November. Dispersal began in December and hundreds of newly dispersed mountain big sagebrush seeds were counted in seed traps near individual plants. Seedling emergence in the study plots began in February, but all seedlings died by June. No successful seedling establishment of mountain big sagebrush (nor basin big sagebrush) was observed in any of the permanently marked plots during the 4 years of the study [151].

To examine yearly variation in germinability, Harniss and McDonough [51] quantified percent germination in unstratified, laboratory-germinated seeds collected from the same 10 plants of mountain big sagebrush for 3 consecutive years. They detected no significant (P < 0.05) year-to-year difference in average germination, which ranged from 11% to 17%.

Mountain big sagebrush can reproduce vegetatively by layering [7,8,53,71]. It does not resprout when aboveground tissues are killed by fire or other means [10,11,94].

SITE CHARACTERISTICS:

In the Intermountain west, mountain big sagebrush usually occurs in the upper elevational range of the big sagebrush zone in montane valleys and on foothills, slopes and high ridges [5,6,11,71,148]. In northerly parts of its range, this species occurs in mountain valleys and on mountain slopes and ridges as high as 9,840 feet (3,000 m) [71]. It has been reported as low as 2,600 feet (780 m) in Idaho. West and others [144] report that although mountain big sagebrush is the most common sagebrush in the Great Basin pinyon-juniper woodlands, only the wettest and coolest areas of the higher and larger mountain masses have mountain big sagebrush in their woodlands. Soils are moderately deep, well-drained, slightly acid to slightly alkaline and characterized by late-melting winter snow cover and summer moisture [6,11,19,20,71,124,144]. This shrub grows in full sun but tolerates shade, often occurring in association with mature conifers [96,144].

In a landscape-scale study in Wyoming, soils in topographic depressions occupied by mountain big sagebrush had higher organic matter, nutrients and microbial biomass than soils in more exposed (windblown) areas occupied by other vegetation, including basin and Wyoming big sagebrush. The effect was attributed to greater snow accumulation, leading to greater plant and litter biomass accumulation [19,20,21].

Elevations reported in the literature are as follows:

4,500 to 7,400 feet (1,370-2,255 m) in Arizona [58]
5,905 to 9,840 feet (1,800-3,000 m) in California [56,118]
7,760 to 8,480 feet (2,365-2,585 m) in Colorado [13]
2,560 to 8,990 feet ( 780-2,740 m) in Idaho [71,146]
3,770 to 7,810 feet (1,150-2,380 m) in Montana and British Columbia [3,68,78,97]
5,445 to 10,170 feet (1,660-3,100 m) in Nevada [82,118,121,124,154]
3,500 to 9,000 feet (1,066-2,740 m) in Oregon [148]
7,250 to 8,040 feet (2,210-2,450 m) in Wyoming[20,25,29]
4,690 to 8,990 feet (1,430-2,740 m) in Utah [26,82]

SUCCESSIONAL STATUS:

On a geologic time scale, the big sagebrush species have probably reached their maximum post-glacial spread [6].

According to Bunting [17] and references therein, most recent research indicates that big sagebrush is the climax species on its present-day range, and that invasion into other types is uncommon. Alterations of historic fire regimes have resulted in major successional changes in regions dominated by mountain big sagebrush and other sagebrush species, and the introduction of exotic annual grasses has modified the role of fire. In general, fire is less common, but in some cases it is more frequent.

In some areas, especially where fire suppression has been a factor, stands of mountain big sagebrush are being invaded by juniper woodlands [17,23,83], lodgepole pine [6] and Douglas-fir [3].

In the juniper woodlands of southern Idaho, western juniper has invaded large areas of mountain big sagebrush shrubland. Burkhardt and Tisdale [22,23] reviewed possible causes, including destruction of grassland via livestock grazing, increased seed dispersal by sheep, climate change and a reduction of the historic fire return interval. In field sites they examined seed dispersal mechanisms, fire history, and juniper seedling establishment, and concluded that succession of sagebrush-grass shrublands to juniper woodlands is directly related to cessation of periodic fires. In the same region, Hironoka and others [57] identified 10 climax habitat types dominated by mountain big sagebrush. Please see the Fire Ecology section of this report for more discussion of the Burkhardt and Tisdale study.

Beetle and Johnson [7] determined that most big sagebrush stands in Wyoming, including mountain big sagebrush, probably represent edaphic or topographic climax. Evidence indicates that stands were historically self-replacing after fire. In that area, mountain big sagebrush replaces pioneer grassland communities. Lodgepole pine, and occasionally Douglas-fir, were observed encroaching into established stands of mountain big sagebrush [6,7].

In Eastern Oregon and Washington, mountain big sagebrush forms climax shrub communities with snowberry, elk sedge, and Idaho fescue. Mountain big sagebrush climax shrublands occur in association with ponderosa pine and western juniper [60].

In southern British Columbia mountain big sagebrush sometimes dominates within openings in subalpine fir forests. These communities are characterized as edaphic climax [78].

Mountain big sagebrush is reported to have "a tendency" to increase in plant density or foliar cover following disturbance [57,146,147]. Beetle and Kendall [7] reported mountain big sagebrush has more potential for increasing in density than any other sagebrush species.

Please refer to the Fire Effects section of this report for information about short and long term responses of mountain big sagebrush to stand-replacing fires.

SEASONAL DEVELOPMENT:

A study of sagebrush phenology in southern Idaho [146] showed marked differences in dates and rates of development among taxa. Mountain big sagebrush began growth approximately 2 weeks later and ripened seed at least 2 weeks earlier than basin and Wyoming big sagebrush. Blaisdell and others [11] reported that some strains of mountain big sagebrush start blooming as early as July, and that seed matures from September through October.

Generalized findings for mountain big sagebrush derived from the Idaho study are as follows [146]:

late June	early shoot development
early July	medium shoot development
mid-July	full shoot development
mid- to late July	flowerheads green
early August	flowerheads yellow
early September	pollinating
late September	seeds ripe

• FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS
• POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY

FIRE ECOLOGY OR ADAPTATIONS:

Fire adaptations | Mountain Big Sagebrush : Mountain big sagebrush is readily killed by fire and requires at least 15 years to recover after fire [18]. Postfire establishment is from seed. Data from 1 study suggest that germination is stimulated by fire. Champlin [27] reported that mountain big sagebrush seedling emergence under greenhouse conditions was greater in field-burned (in situ) soil samples than in unburned soil samples. By contrast, seedling emergence of Wyoming big sagebrush was reduced in burned soils. Possible explanatory mechanisms might be related to those explored by Blank and Young [12]. They observed that smoke and compounds present in aqueous extracts of heated soils from beneath a sagebrush canopy increased the emergence of common associated plant species, though big sagebrush seeds were not among those tested.

There is other evidence that mountain big sagebrush seed germination and survival in the field may be quite low following fire. Please refer to the section titled Discussion and Qualification of Plant Response in the Fire Effects section of this report.

POSTFIRE REGENERATION STRATEGY [117]:

Ground residual colonizer (on-site, initial community)
Initial off-site colonizer (off-site, initial community)

• IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT
• DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT
• PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE
• DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE
• FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS

IMMEDIATE FIRE EFFECT ON PLANT:

Mountain big sagebrush is highly susceptible to injury from fire. Plants are readily killed in all seasons, even by light severity fires [10,11,93].

DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF FIRE EFFECT:

No entry

PLANT RESPONSE TO FIRE:

Mountain big sagebrush plants top-killed by fire will not resprout [10,94]. Regeneration of mountain big sagebrush is from on-site or off-site seed. Depending on circumstances of the environment and seed source, mountain big sagebrush seeds may sprout profusely the spring after burning [27,103], or very sparsely [10,50,67]. These relationships are not well understood. Seedlings can grow rapidly and may reach reproductive maturity within 3 to 5 years [18]. Where mountain big sagebrush is dominant and persistent (climax or long-term seral), fire often reduces its dominance and alters species composition for the first few years. If exotic species have not altered successional pathways, vegetation eventually reverts to its previous composition [1,11,17,88,94].

DISCUSSION AND QUALIFICATION OF PLANT RESPONSE:

Early Response - Mountain big sagebrush regeneration from seed varies in the 1st postfire year. A high elevation (7,200 feet (2,200 m)) shrub-grass community in western Wyoming was burned in September, 1983, and evaluated 1 year later. The fire completely eliminated mountain big sagebrush cover on 50% of the site. Mean density of mountain big sagebrush seedlings on burned, east-slope plots was as high as 1,090 per acre (2,691/ha), compared to 97 seedlings per acre (240/ha) on paired, unburned plots. Measurements on west-facing slopes were impaired by sampling difficulties [103].

In contrast to the Wyoming study, Young and Evans [151] found no germination stimulating effect following wildfire in a stand of mountain big sagebrush in western Nevada. The August fire consumed all standing woody material. In September of the same year they collected 1000 soil samples from the interior of the burn and subjected them to a greenhouse germination test. No sagebrush germinated in any samples. At the end of the growing season following the fire, mountain big sagebrush seedlings in the field site were detected at a density of 4/acre (10/ha.).

Also in contrast to the Wyoming study, managers in California burned a high elevation meadow (8,202 feet (2,500 m)) to reduce shrub encroachment. The following spring only trace numbers of new mountain big sagebrush seedlings were present. Mature shrub species were replaced by an early seral grass-forb community [50].

Response Over Time - Mountain big sagebrush may return to preburn density and cover within 15-20 years following fire, but establishment after severe fires may proceed more slowly [18]. On some sites mountain big sagebrush may recover slowly in the first years after fire. A southern Idaho sagebrush steppe site experimentally burned in August, 1936, was studied in subsequent decades [10,11,52]. The site was identified as a mountain big sagebrush habitat type, free of cheatgrass. The burned area was protected from grazing for a year following burning and grazed conservatively thereafter. To the advantage of desirable forage species, big sagebrush was practically eliminated, and reestablishment was slow during the first 9 years, but during the next 18 years big sagebrush cover increased greatly. Researchers' summary statements are excerpted here:

"Almost all important species of shrubs, grasses and forbs decreased in yield from 1948 to 1966 as the big sagebrush recovered its dominance after the burn...From observation, sagebrush in the vaseyana habitat type sometimes reinvades an area immediately following a burn; so control benefits do not always exist as long as they have on the 1936 burn. The length of time between control measures depends on grazing practices and the undefined weather variables that favor sagebrush seedling survival and establishment" [52].

Fraas and others [40] quantified the effects of prescribed fire on vegetation 8 years after burning in an antelope bitterbrush-mountain big sagebrush-bluebunch wheatgrass community in Montana. Mountain big sagebrush canopy cover and stem density in the burned plot remained low. Both parameters were significantly greater (P < 0.01) in the unburned plot, indicating a high fire-induced mortality coupled with lack of postburn seedling establishment.

FIRE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Prescribed fire can be an economically and ecologically sound method for meeting management objectives [11,17,18]. Low fine fuel loading is a common problem. Burning sagebrush shrubland may not result in intended increases in grass and forb production, but may instead result in unplanned and detrimental shifts in plant community composition. Concentrated large herbivore use should be expected and included in the planning process [17,40].

Fire does not result in substantial increases of herbaceous perennials on sites dominated by exotic annuals. The fuel load may be sufficient in such sites to sustain a fire, but the presence of annuals may prevent the establishment of perennial species. Annuals often increase following a fire, creating conditions where wildfires occur more frequently. Frequent fires prevent the reestablishment of shrubs and may reduce the existing perennial herb populations. Increasing the interval between fires allows time for perennials to establish, breaking the weed-perpetuating fire cycle [17].

In an Idaho prescribed burn conducted in winter, individual mountain and Wyoming big sagebrush plants burned easily when canopy fuel moisture was below 37%, air temperature was above freezing, relative humidity was below 45%, and skies were clear. In that study, only small areas burned because the canopy was not dense enough to carry fire. Where canopy cover was at least 50%, distance between plants was not greater than 50% of their average height, and effective wind speed was above 5 mph (8 km/hr), the fire carried successfully [93]. Britton and others [14] developed a big sagebrush canopy cover-herbaceous fuel load curve representing proportions of big sagebrush cover and herbaceous fuels needed to produce a successful burn.

Several monographs provide detailed information about managing fire in sagebrush. One of the monographs [15] provides information specific to mountain big sagebrush. The other 3 discuss mountain big sagebrush, but recommendations are general in scope, extending to other species of sagebrush.

Managing Intermountain rangelands--sagebrush-grass ranges [11]
Fire response of shrubs of dry forest habitat types in Montana and Idaho [96]
Guidelines for prescribed burning in sagebrush-grass rangelands in the northern Great Basin [18]
Fuel and fire behavior prediction in big sagebrush [15]

Please refer to other FEIS reports for discussions of fire management considerations for important co-occurring species, including Wyoming and basin big sagebrush, bitterbrush spp., bunchgrasses, and junipers. Related fire case studies for Wyoming big sagebrush and basin big sagebrush are available in the FEIS reports for those species.

Artemisia tridentata spp. vaseyana: References

1. Akinsoji, Aderopo. 1988. Postfire vegetation dynamics in a sagebrush steppe in southeastern Idaho, USA. Vegetatio. 78: 151-155. [6944]

2. Arno, Stephen F. 1980. Forest fire history in the northern Rockies. Journal of Forestry. 78(8): 460-465. [11990]

3. Arno, Stephen F.; Gruell, George E. 1983. Fire history at the forest-grassland ecotone in southwestern Montana. Journal of Range Management. 36(3): 332-336. [342]

4. Arno, Stephen F.; Wilson, Andrew E. 1986. Dating past fires in curlleaf mountain-mahogany communities. Journal of Range Management. 39(3): 241-243. [350]

5. Beetle, A. A. 1960. A study of sagebrush: The section Tridentatae of Artemisia. Bulletin 368. Laramie, WY: University of Wyoming, Agricultural Experiment Station. 83 p. [416]

6. Beetle, Alan A. 1961. Range survey in Teton County, Wyoming. Part 1. Ecology of range resources. Bull. 376. Laramie, WY: University of Wyoming, Agricultural Experiment Station. 42 p. [417]

7. Beetle, Alan A.; Johnson, Kendall L. 1982. Sagebrush in Wyoming. Bull. 779. Laramie, WY: University of Wyoming, Agricultural Experiment Station. 68 p. [421]

8. Beetle, Alan A.; Young, Alvin. 1965. A third subspecies in the Artemisia tridentata complex. Rhodora. 67: 405-406. [422]

9. Bernard, Stephen R.; Brown, Kenneth F. 1977. Distribution of mammals, reptiles, and amphibians by BLM physiographic regions and A.W. Kuchler's associations for the eleven western states. Tech. Note 301. Denver, CO: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 169 p. [434]

10. Blaisdell, James P. 1953. Ecological effects of planned burning of sagebrush-grass range on the Upper Snake River Plains. Tech. Bull. 1975. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 39 p. [462]

11. Blaisdell, James P.; Murray, Robert B.; McArthur, E. Durant. 1982. Managing Intermountain rangelands--sagebrush-grass ranges. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-134. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 41 p. [467]

12. Blank, Robert R.; Young, James A. 1998. Heated substrate and smoke: influence on seed emergence and plant growth. Journal of Range Management. 51(5): 577-583. [29756]

13. Bonham, C. D.; Cottrell, T. R.; Mitchell, J. E. 1991. Inferences for life history strategies of Artemisia tridentata subspecies. Journal of Vegetation Science. 2(3): 339-344. [16599]

14. Britton, Carlton M.; Clark, Robert G.; Sneva, Forrest A. 1981. Will your sagebrush range burn? Rangelands. 3(5): 207-208. [517]

15. Brown, James K. 1982. Fuel and fire behavior prediction in big sagebrush. Research Paper INT-290. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 10 p. [543]

16. Brown, James K.; Smith, Jane Kapler, eds. 2000. Wildland fire in ecosystems: effects of fire on flora. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-vol. 2. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 257 p. [33874]

17. Bunting, Stephen C. 1990. Prescribed fire effects in sagebrush-grasslands and pinyon-juniper woodlands. In: Alexander, M. E.; Bisgrove, G. F., technical coordinator. The art and science of fire management: Proceedings of the 1st Interior West Fire Council annual meeting and workshop; 1988 October 24-27; Kananaskis Village, AB. Information Rep. NOR-X-309. Edmonton, AB: Forestry Canada, Northwest Region, Northern Forestry Centre: 176-181. [15519]

18. Bunting, Stephen C.; Kilgore, Bruce M.; Bushey, Charles L. 1987. Guidelines for prescribed burning sagebrush-grass rangelands in the northern Great Basin. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-231. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 33 p. [5281]

19. Burke, Ingrid C. 1989. Control of nitrogen mineralization in a sagebrush steppe landscape. Ecology. 70(4): 1115-1126. [7974]

20. Burke, Ingrid C.; Reiners, William A.; Olson, Richard K. 1989. Topographic control of vegetation in a mountain big sagebrush steppe. Vegetatio. 84(2): 77-86. [11178]

21. Burke, Ingrid C.; Reiners, William A.; Schimel, David S. 1989. Organic matter turnover in a sagebrush steppe landscape. Biogeochemistry. 7: 11-31. [11133]

22. Burkhardt, J. Wayne; Tisdale, E. W. 1969. Nature and successional status of western juniper vegetation in Idaho. Journal of Range Management. 22(4): 264-270. [564]

23. Burkhardt, Wayne J.; Tisdale, E. W. 1976. Causes of juniper invasion in southwestern Idaho. Ecology. 57: 472-484. [565]

24. Caldwell, Martyn M.; Eissenstat, David M.; Richards, James H.; Allen, Michael F. 1985. Competition for phosphorus: differential uptake from dual-isotope- labeled soil interspaces between shrub and grass. Science. 229: 384-385. [586]

25. Carpenter, Alan T.; West, Neil E. 1987. Indifference of mountain big sagebrush growth to supplemental water and nitrogen. Journal of Range Management. 40(5): 448-451. [3320]

26. Chambers, Jeanne C. 1989. Native species establishment on an oil drillpad site in the Uintah Mountains, Utah: effects of introduced grass density and fertilizer. Res. Pap. INT-402. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 9 p. [6885]

27. Champlin, Mark R. 1982. Big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) ecology and management with emphasis on prescribed burning. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University. 136 p. Dissertation. [9484]

28. Clarke, Sharon E.; Garner, Mark W.; McIntosh, Bruce A.; Sedell, James R. 1997. Section 3-Landscape-level ecoregions for seven contiguous watersheds, northeast Oregon and southeast Washington. In: Clarke, Sharon E.; Bryce, Sandra A., eds. Hierarchical subdivisions of the Columbia Plateau and Blue Mountains ecoregions, Oregon and Washington. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-395. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station: 56-113. [28539]

29. Cook, John G.; Hershey, Terry J.; Irwin, Larry L. 1994. Vegetative response to burning on Wyoming mountain-shrub big game ranges. Journal of Range Management. 47(4): 296-302. [23449]

30. Cotts, N. R.; Redente, E. F.; Schiller, R. 1991. Restoration methods for abandoned roads at lower elevations in Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming. Arid Soil Research and Rehabilitation. 5: 235-249. [16995]

31. Cronquist, Arthur; Holmgren, Arthur H.; Holmgren, Noel H.; [and others]. 1994. Intermountain flora: Vascular plants of the Intermountain West, U.S.A. Vol. 5. Asterales. New York: The New York Botanical Garden. 496 p. [28653]

32. Dealy, J. Edward; Leckenby, Donavin A.; Concannon, Diane M. 1981. Wildlife habitats on managed rangelands--the Great Basin of southeastern Oregon: plant communities and their importance to wildlife. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-120. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest and Range Experiment Station. 66 p. [786]

33. Dittberner, Phillip L.; Olson, Michael R. 1983. The plant information network (PIN) data base: Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. FWS/OBS-83/86. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 786 p. [806]

34. Donovan, Lisa A.; Ehleringer, James R. 1991. Ecophysiological differences among juvenile and reproductive plants of several woody species. Oecologia. 86(4): 594-597. [15481]

35. Dorn, Robert D. 1988. Vascular plants of Wyoming. Cheyenne, WY: Mountain West Publishing. 340 p. [6129]

36. Erhard, Dean H. 1979. Plant communities and habitat types in the Lava Beds National Monument, California. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University. 173 p. Thesis. [869]

37. Evans, Raymond A.; Young, James A. 1986. Germination profiles for five populations of big sagebrush. In: McArthur, E. Durant; Welch, Bruce L., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on the biology of Artemisia and Chrysothamnus; 1984 July 9-13; Provo, UT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-200. Ogden, UT: U.S. Dep. Agric., For. Serv., Intrmtn. Res. Stn.: 366-369. [883]

38. Everett, Richard L. 1980. Use of containerized shrubs for revegetating arid roadcuts. Reclamation Review. 3: 33-40. [11003]

39. Eyre, F. H., ed. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Washington, DC: Society of American Foresters. 148 p. [905]

40. Fraas, W. Wyatt; Wambolt, Carl L.; Frisina, Michael R. 1992. Prescribed fire effects on a bitterbrush-mountain big sagebrush-bluebunch wheatgrass community. In: Clary, Warren P.; McArthur, E. Durant; Bedunah, Don; Wambolt, Carl L., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on ecology and management of riparian shrub communities; 1991 May 29-31; Sun Valley, ID. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-289. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 212-216. [19124]

41. Francis, Richard E. 1983. Sagebrush-steppe habitat types in northern Colorado: a first approximation. In: Moir, W. H.; Hendzel, Leonard, tech. coords. Proceedings of the workshop on Southwestern habitat types; 1983 April 6-8; Albuquerque, NM. Abluquerque, NM: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southwestern Region: 67-71. [955]

42. Freeman, D. C.; Turner, W. A.; McArthur, E. D.; Graham, J. H. 1991. Characterization of a narrow hybrid zone between two subspecies of big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata: Asteraceae). American Journal of Botany. 78(6): 805-815. [15470]

43. Freeman, D. Carl; Graham, John H.; Byrd, David W.; [and others]. 1995. Narrow hybrid zone between two subspecies of big sagebrush, Artemisia tridentata (Asteraceae). III. Developmental instability. American Journal of Botany. 82(9): 1144-1152. [26180]

44. Garrison, George A.; Bjugstad, Ardell J.; Duncan, Don A.; [and others]. 1977. Vegetation and environmental features of forest and range ecosystems. Agric. Handb. 475. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 68 p. [998]

45. Goodrich, Sherel; McArthur, E. Durant; Winward, Alma H. 1985. A new combination and a new variety in Artemisia tridentata. The Great Basin Naturalist. 45(1): 99-104. [1034]

46. Graham, John H.; Freeman, D. Carl; McArthur, E. Durant. 1995. Narrow hybrid zone between two subspecies of big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata: Asteraceae). II. Selection gradients and hybrid fitness. American Journal of Botany. 82(6): 709-716. [26072]

47. Great Plains Flora Association. 1986. Flora of the Great Plains. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. 1392 p. [1603]

48. Gruell, G. E.; Loope, L. L. 1974. Relationships among aspen, fire, and ungulate browsing in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. Lakewood, CO: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Rocky Mountain Region. 33 p. In cooperation with: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Region. [3862]

49. Gruell, George E. 1985. Fire on the early western landscape: an annotated record of wildland fire. Northwest Science. 59(2): 97-107. [15660]

50. Hargis, Christina; McCarthy, Clinton. 1986. Vegetation changes following a prescribed burn on a Great Basin meadow. In: Transactions of the Western Section of the Wildlife Society. 22: 47-51. [15955]

51. Harniss Roy O.; McDonough, W. T. 1976. Yearly variation in germination in three subspecies of big sagebrush. Journal of Range Management. 29(2): 167-168. [1084]

52. Harniss, Roy O.; Murray, Robert B. 1973. 30 years of vegetal change following burning of sagebrush-grass range. Journal of Range Management. 26(5): 322-325. [1086]

53. Harvey, Stephen John. 1981. Life history and reproductive strategies in Artemisia. Bozeman, MT: Montana State University. 132 p. M.S. thesis. [1102]

54. Hess, Karl; Wasser, Clinton H. 1982. Grassland, shrubland, and forestland habitat types of the White River-Arapaho National Forest. Final Report. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 335 p. [1142]

55. Hess, Wilford M.; Nelson, David L.; Sturges, David L. 1985. Morphology and ultrastructure of a snowmold fungus on sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata). Mycologia. 77(4): 637-645. [1143]

56. Hickman, James C., ed. 1993. The Jepson manual: Higher plants of California. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1400 p. [21992]

57. Hironaka, M.; Fosberg, M. A.; Winward, A. H. 1983. Sagebrush-grass habitat types of southern Idaho. Bulletin Number 35. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho, Forest, Wildlife and Range Experiment Station. 44 p. [1152]

58. Hodgkinson, Harmon S. 1989. Big sagebrush subspecies and management implications. Rangelands. 11(1): 20-22. [6265]

59. Jacobson, Tracy L. C.; Welch, Bruce L. 1987. Planting depth of Hobble Creek Mountain big sagebrush seed. The Great Basin Naturalist. 47(3): 497-499. [3027]

60. Johnson, Charles G., Jr.; Clausnitzer, Roderick R.; Mehringer, Peter J.; Oliver, Chadwick D. 1994. Biotic and abiotic processes of Eastside ecosystems: the effects of management on plant and community ecology and on stand and landscape vegetation dynamics. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-322. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 66 p. (Everett, Richard L., assessment team leader; Eastside forest ecosystem health assessment; Hessburg, Paul F., science team leader and tech. ed., Volume III: assessment. [23002]

61. Johnson, Kendall L. 1979. Basic synecological relationships of the sagebrush types on the high plains of Montana, Wyoming and the Dakotas. In: The sagebrush ecosystem: a symposium: Proceedings; 1978 April; Logan, UT. Logan, UT: Utah State University, College of Natural Resources: 42-49. [1281]

62. Johnston, Barry C. 1987. Plant associations of Region Two: Potential plant communities of Wyoming, South Dakota, Nebraska, Colorado, and Kansas. 4th ed. R2-ECOL-87-2. Lakewood, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. 429 p. [3519]

63. Kaltenecker, Julie; Wicklow-Howard, Marcia. 1994. Microbiotic soil crusts in sagebrush habitats of southern Idaho. Report prepared for the Eastside Ecosystem Management Project. Walla Walla, WA: Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project. 48 p. [26455]

64. Kartesz, John T. 1994. A synonymized checklist of the vascular flora of the United States, Canada, and Greenland. Volume I--checklist. 2nd ed. Portland, OR: Timber Press. 622 p. [23877]

65. Klott, James H.; Ketchum, Chris. 1991. The results of using "Hobble Creek" sagebrush on two fire rehabilitations. Idaho BLM Technical Bulletin 91-1. Boise, ID: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 12 p. [19869]

66. Kuchler, A. W. 1964. United States [Potential natural vegetation of the conterminous United States]. Special Publication No. 36. New York: American Geographical Society. 1:3,168,000; colored. [3455]

67. Kuntz, David Edward. 1982. Plant response following spring burning in an Artemisia tridentata subsp. vaseyana/ Festuca idahoensis habitat type. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho. 73 p. Thesis. [1388]

68. Lackschewitz, Klaus. 1991. Vascular plants of west-central Montana--identification guidebook. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-227. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 648 p. [13798]

69. Long, Lynn E. 1986. Container nursery production of Artemisia and Chrysothamnus species. In: McArthur, E. Durant; Welch, Bruce L., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on the biology of Artemisia and Chrysothamnus; 1984 July 9-13; Provo, UT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-200. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 395-396. [1469]

70. Marlow, Clayton B; Pogacnik, Thomas M; Quinsey, Shannon D. 1987. Streambank stability and cattle grazing in southwestern Montana. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 42(4): 291-296. [2888]

71. McArthur, E. Durant; Blauer, A. Clyde; Plummer, A. Perry; Stevens, Richard. 1979. Characteristics and hybridization of important Intermountain shrubs. III. Sunflower family. Res. Pap. INT-220. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 82 p. [1571]

72. McArthur, E. Durant; Monsen, Stephen B.; Welch, Bruce L. 1987. Shrubs and forbs for revegetation plantings in the sagebrush ecosystem. In: Onsager, Jerome A., ed. Integrated pest management on rangeland: State of the art in the sagebrush ecosystem. ARS-50. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service: 28-39. [3331]

73. McArthur, E. Durant; Mudge, Joann; Van Buren, Renee; [and others]. 1998. Randomly amplified polymorphic DNA analysis (RAPD) of Artemisia subgenus Tridentatae species and hybrids. The Great Basin Naturalist. 58(1): 12-27. [28609]

74. McArthur, E. Durant; Sanderson, Stewart C. 1999. Cytogeography and chromosome evolution of subgenus Tridentatae of Artemisia (Asteraceae) American Journal of Botany. 86(12): 1754-1775. [34931]

75. McDonough, W. T.; Harniss, R. O. 1974. Effects of temperature on germination in three subspecies of big sagebrush. Journal of Range Management. 27(3): 204-205. [1597]

76. McDonough, W. T.; Harniss, R. O. 1974. Seed dormancy in Artemisia tridentata nutt. subspecies vaseyana Rydb. Northwest Science. 48(1): 17-20. [1598]

77. McGee, John M. 1979. Small mammal population changes following prescribed burning of mountain big sagebrush. In: Johnson, Kendall L., ed. Wyoming shrublands: Proceedings of the 8th Wyoming shrub ecology workshop; 1979 May 30-31; Jackson, WY. Laramie, WY: University.wof Wyoming, Division of Range Management, Wyoming Shrub Ecology Workshop: 35-46. [1600]

78. McLean, Alastair. 1970. Plant communities of the Similkameen Valley, British Columbia. Ecological Monographs. 40(4): 403-424. [1620]

79. Meinecke, E. P. 1929. Quaking aspen: A study in applied forest pathology. Tech. Bull. No. 155. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 34 p. [26669]

80. Meyer, Susan E.; Monsen, Stephen B. 1991. Habitat-correlated variation in mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana) seed germination patterns. Ecology. 72(2): 739-742. [15484]

81. Meyer, Susan E.; Monsen, Stephen B. 1992. Big sagebrush germination patterns: Subspecies and population differences. Journal of Range Management. 45(1): 87-93. [17776]

82. Meyer, Susan E.; Monsen, Stephen B.; McArthur, E. Durant. 1990. Germination response of Artemisia tridentata (Asteraceae) to light and chill: patterns of between-population variation. Botanical Gazette. 151(2): 176-183. [15525]

83. Miller, Rick; Rose, Jeff. 1998. Pre- and post-settlement fire return intervals on Intermountain sagebrush steppe. In: Annual report: Eastern Oregon Agricultural Research Center. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University, Agricultural Experiment Station: 16-17. [29194]

84. Monsen, Stephen B.; Anderson, Val Jo. 1995. A 52-year ecological history of selected introduced and native grasses planted in central Idaho. In: Proceedings, 17th international grassland congress; 1993 February 8-21; Palmerston North, New Zealand. [Place of publication unknown]: [Publisher unknown]: 1740-1741. [25664]

85. Mooney, Melissa Jane. 1985. A preliminary classification of high-elevation sagebrush-grass vegetation in northern and central Nevada. Reno, NV: University of Nevada. 123 p. Thesis. [1689]

86. Morris, Melvin S.; Kelsey, Rick G.; Griggs, Dave. 1976. The geographic and ecological distribution of big sagebrush and other woody Artemisias in Montana. Proceedings of the Montana Academy of Sciences. 36: 56-79. [1695]

87. Mueggler, W. F. 1985. Vegetation associations. In: DeByle, Norbert V.; Winokur, Robert P., eds. Aspen: ecology and management in the western United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-119. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station: 45-55. [11907]

88. Mueggler, Walter F. 1976. Ecological role of fire in western woodland and range ecosystems. In: Use of prescribed burning in western woodland and range ecosystems: Proceedings of the symposium; 1976 March 18-19; Logan, UT. Logan, UT: Utah State University, Utah Agricultural Experiment Station: 1-9. [1709]

89. Mueggler, Walter F.; Campbell, Robert B., Jr. 1982. Aspen community types on the Caribou and Targhee National Forests in southeastern Idaho. Res. Pap. INT-294. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 32 p. [1713]

90. Mumma, John W. 1990. High-mountain resources on National Forest lands. In: Schmidt, Wyman C.; McDonald, Kathy J., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on whitebark pine ecosystems: ecology and management of a high-mountain resource; 1989 March 29-31; Bozeman, MT. Gen Tech. Rep. INT-270. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 49-52. [11674]

91. Nagy, Julius G. 1979. Wildlife nutrition and the sagebrush ecosystem. In: The sagebrush ecosystem: a symposium: Proceedings; 1978 April; Logan, UT. Logan, UT: Utah State University, College of Natural Resources: 164-168. [1729]

92. Nelson, D. L.; Sturges, D. L. 1986. A snowmold disease of mountain big sagebrush. Phytopathology. 76(9): 946-951. [1740]

93. Neuenschwander, L. F. 1980. Broadcast burning of sagebrush in the winter. Journal of Range Management. (33)3: 233-236. [1746]

94. Neuenschwander, L. F. [n.d.]. The fire induced autecology of selected shrubs of the cold desert and surrounding forests: A-state-of-the-art-review. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho, College of Forestry, Wildlife and Range Sciences. In cooperation with: Fire in Multiple Use Management, Research, Development, and Applications Program, Northern Forest Fire Laboratory, Missoula, MT. 30 p. Unpublished manuscript on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT. [1747]

95. Neville, Walter M.; McArthur, E. Durant. 1986. Preliminary report on tissue culture propagation of big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata). In: McArthur, E. Durant; Welch, Bruce L., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on the biology of Artemisia and Chrysothamnus; 1984 July 9-13; Provo, UT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-200. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 397-398. [1750]

96. Noste, Nonan V.; Bushey, Charles L. 1987. Fire response of shrubs of dry forest habitat types in Montana and Idaho. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-239. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 22 p. [255]

97. Parish, Roberta; Coupe, Ray; Lloyd, Dennis, eds. 1996. Plants of southern interior British Columbia. Vancouver, BC: Lone Pine Publishing. 450+ p. [35949]

98. Peek, James M.; Riggs, Robert A.; Lauer, Jerry L. 1979. Evaluation of fall burning on bighorn sheep winter range. Journal of Range Management. 32(6): 430-432. [1863]

99. Perryman, Barry L.; Olson, Richard A. 2000. Age-stem diameter relationships of big sagebrush and their management implications. Journal of Range Management. 53(3): 342-346. [35851]

100. Pfister, Robert D.; Kovalchik, Bernard L.; Arno, Stephen F.; Presby, Richard C. 1977. Forest habitat types of Montana. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-34. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 174 p. [1878]

101. Plummer, A. Perry. 1976. Shrubs for the subalpine zone of the Wasatch Plateau. In: Zuck, R. H.; Brown, L. F., eds. High altitude revegetation workshop: No. 2: Proceedings; 1976; Fort Collins, CO. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University: 33-40. [1899]

102. Pyle, William H.; Crawford, John A. 1996. Availability of foods of sage grouse chicks following prescribed fire in sagebrush-bitterbrush. Journal of Range Management. 49(4): 320-324. [26885]

103. Raper, Bob; Clark, Bob; Matthews, Marion; Aldrich, Ann. 1985. Early effects of a fall burn on a western Wyoming mountain big sagebrush-grass community. In: Sanders, Ken; Durham, Jack, eds. Rangeland fire effects: Proceedings of a symposium; 1984 November 27-29; Boise, ID. Boise, ID: U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Idaho State Office: 88-92. [1938]

104. Raunkiaer, C. 1934. The life forms of plants and statistical plant geography. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 632 p. [2843]

105. Richards, J. H.; Caldwell, M. M. 1987. Hydraulic lift: substantial nocturnal water transport between soil layers by Artemisia tridentata. Oecologia. 73(4): 486-489. [16213]

106. Richardson, Bland Z.; Monsen, Stephen B.; Bowers, Diane M. 1986. Interseeding selected shrubs and herbs on mine disturbances in southeastern Idaho. In: McArthur, E. Durant; Welch, Bruce L., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on the biology of Artemisia and Chrysothamnus; 1984 July 9-13; Provo, UT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-200. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 134-139. [1973]

107. Romme, William H. 1982. Fire and landscape diversity in subalpine forests of Yellowstone National Park. Ecological Monographs. 52(2): 199-221. [9696]

108. Rose, Jeffrey A.; Eddleman, Lee E. 1994. Ponderosa pine and understory growth following western juniper removal. Northwest Science. 68(2): 79-85. [23145]

109. Sapsis, David B. 1990. Ecological effects of spring and fall prescribed burning on basin big sagebrush/Idaho fescue--bluebunch wheatgrass communities. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University. 105 p. Thesis. [16579]

110. Schultz, Brad W. 1987. Ecology of curlleaf mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus ledifolius) in western and central Nevada: population structure and dynamics. Reno, NV: University of Nevada. 111 p. Thesis. [7064]

111. Shaw, Nancy L.; Monsen, Stephen B. 1990. Use of sagebrush for improvement of wildlife habitat. In: Fisser, Herbert G., ed. Wyoming shrublands: Aspen, sagebrush and wildlife management: Proceedings, 17th Wyoming shrub ecology workshop; 1988 June 21-22; Jackson, WY. Laramie, WY: Wyoming Shrub Ecology Workshop, University of Wyoming, Department of Range Management: 19-35. [22929]

112. Shiflet, Thomas N., ed. 1994. Rangeland cover types of the United States. Denver, CO: Society for Range Management. 152 p. [23362]

113. Shultz, Leila M. 1986. Comparative leaf anatomy of sagebrush: ecological considerations. In: McArthur, E. Durant; Welch, Bruce L., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on the biology of Artemisia and Chrysothamnus; 1984 July 9-13; Provo, UT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-200. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 253-264. [2140]

114. Shultz, Leila M. 1986. Taxonomic and geographic limits of Artemisia subgenus tridentatae (Beetle). In: McArthur, E. Durant; Welch, Bruce L., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on the biology of Artemisia and Chrysothamnus; 1984 July 9-13; Provo, UT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-200. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 20-28. [2141]

115. Shumar, Mark L.; Anderson, Jay E. 1986. Gradient analysis of vegetation dominated by two subspecies of big sagebrush. Journal of Range Management. 39(2): 156-159. [2142]

116. Smith, Darrel Wayne. 1969. A preliminary classification and characterization of big sagebrush, Artemisia tridentata Nutt., communities in central Montana. Bozeman, Montana: Montana State University. 68 p. M.S. thesis. [2165]

117. Stickney, Peter F. 1989. Seral origin of species originating in northern Rocky Mountain forests. Unpublished draft on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT; RWU 4403 files. 10 p. [20090]

118. Tausch, R. J.; Tueller, P. T. 1990. Foliage biomass and cover relationships between tree- and shrub- dominated communities in pinyon-juniper woodlands. The Great Basin Naturalist. 50(2): 121-134. [15528]

119. Tiedeman, James A.; Francis, Richard E.; Terwilliger, Charles, Jr.; Carpenter, Len H. 1987. Shrub-steppe habitat types of Middle Park, Colorado. Res. Pap. RM-273. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 20 p. [2329]

120. Tisdale, E. W.; Hironaka, M.; Fosberg, M. A. 1969. The sagebrush region in Idaho: a problem in range resource management. Bulletin 512. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho, College of Agriculture, Agricultural Experiment Station. 15 p. [7514]

121. Trent, James D.; Svejcar, Tony J.; Blank, Robert R. 1994. Mycorrhizal colonization, hyphal lenghts, and soil moisture associated with two Artemisia tridentata subspecies. The Great Basin Naturalist. 54(4): 291-300. [25507]

122. TRW Environmental Safety Systems Inc. 1999. Appendix C: Descriptions of land cover types found within on near Yucca Mountain and the potential transportation corridors and facilities. In: Environmental baseline file for biological resources. B00000000-01717-5700-00009 REV 00. Civilian Radioactive Waste Management System: Management and Operating Contractor, [Online]. Available: http://www.ymp.gov/documents/biology/appendixc.htm [2000, November 6]. [35852]

123. Tueller, Paul T.; Beeson, C. Dwight; Tausch, Robin J.; [and others]. 1979. Pinyon-juniper woodlands of the Great Basin: distribution, flora, vegetal cover. Res. Pap. INT-229. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 22 p. [2367]

124. Tueller, Paul T.; Eckert, Richard E., Jr. 1987. Big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata vaseyana) and longleaf snowberry (Symphoricarpos oreophilus) plant associations in northeastern Nevada. The Great Basin Naturalist. 47(1): 117-131. [3015]

125. Tweit, Susan J.; Houston, Kent E. 1980. Grassland and shrubland habitat types of the Shoshone National Forest. Cody, WY: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Shoshone National Forest. 143 p. [2377]

126. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1994. Plants of the U.S.--alphabetical listing. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 954 p. [23104]

127. Vaitkus, Milda R.; Eddleman, Lee E. 1991. Tree size and understory phytomass production in a western juniper woodland. The Great Basin Naturalist. 51(3): 236-243. [16869]

128. Vincent, Dwain W. 1992. The sagebrush/grasslands of the upper Rio Puerco Area, New Mexico. Rangelands. 14(5): 268-271. [19698]

129. Wambolt, C. L.; Creamer, W. H.; Rossi, R. J. 1994. Predicting big sagebrush winter forage by subspecies and browse form class. Journal of Range Management. 47(3): 231-234. [23240]

130. Wambolt, Carl L. 1995. Elk and mule deer use of sagebrush for winter forage. Montana Ag Research. 12(2): 35-40. [27101]

131. Wambolt, Carl L. 1996. Mule deer and elk foraging preference for 4 sagebrush taxa. Journal of Range Management. 49(6): 499-503. [27222]

132. Wang, Han; Byrd, David W.; Howard, Jeffrey L.; [and others]. 1998. Narrow hybrid zone between two subspecies of big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata: Asteraceae). V. Soil properties. International Journal of Plant Science. 159(1): 139-147. [28641]

133. Weber, William A. 1987. Colorado flora: western slope. Boulder, CO: Colorado Associated University Press. 530 p. [7706]

134. Weber, William A.; Wittmann, Ronald C. 1996. Colorado flora: eastern slope. 2nd ed. Niwot, CO: University Press of Colorado. 524 p. [27572]

135. Welch, Bruce L. 1996. Effects of humidity on storing big sagebrush seed. Res. Pap. INT-RP-493. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 5 p. [30477]

136. Welch, Bruce L. ;Jacobson, Tracy L. C. 1988. Root growth of Artemisia tridentata. Journal of Range Management. 41(4): 332-334. [4559]

137. Welch, Bruce L.; Briggs, Steven F.; Johansen, James H. 1996. Big sagebrush seed storage. Res. Note INT-RN-430. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 3 p. [30478]

138. Welch, Bruce L.; McArthur, E. Durant. 1979. Feasibilty of improving big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) for use on mule deer winter ranges. In: Goodin, J. R.; Northington, David K., eds. Arid land plant resources: [Date and location of symposium unknown]. Lubbock, TX: International Center for Arid and Semi-Arid Land Studies: 451-473. [2482]

139. Welch, Bruce L.; McArthur, E. Durant; Nelson, David L.; [and others]. 1986. `Hobble Creek'--a superior selection of low-elevation mountain big sagebrush. Res. Pap. INT-370. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station. 10 p. [2485]

140. Welch, Bruce L.; Wagstaff, Fred J. 1992. 'Hobble Creek' big sagebrush vs. antelope bitterbrush as a winter forage. Journal of Range Management. 45(2): 140-142. [18250]

141. Welch, Bruce L.; Wagstaff, Fred J.; Roberson, Jay A. 1991. Preference of wintering sage grouse for big sagebrush. Journal of Range Management. 44(5): 462-465. [16608]

142. Welsh, Stanley L.; Atwood, N. Duane; Goodrich, Sherel; Higgins, Larry C., eds. 1987. A Utah flora. The Great Basin Naturalist Memoir No. 9. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University. 894 p. [2944]

143. West, Neil E. 1988. Intermountain deserts, shrub steppes, and woodlands. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Billings, William Dwight, eds. North American terrestrial vegetation. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press: 209-230. [19546]

144. West, Neil E.; Tausch, Robin J.; Rea, Kenneth H.; Tueller, Paul T. 1978. Taxonomic determination, distribution, and ecological indicator values of sagebrush within the pinyon-juniper woodlands of the Great Basin. Journal of Range Management. 31(2): 87-92. [2521]

145. Wilt, F. Martin; Geddes, Jason D.; Tamma, Rama V.; [and others]. 1992. Interspecific variation of phenolic concentrations in persistent leaves among six taxa from subgenus Tridentatae of Artemisia (Asteraceae) Biochemical Systematics and Ecology. 20(1): 41-52. [34701]

146. Winward, A. H.; Tisdale, E. W. 1977. Taxonomy of the Artemisia tridentata complex in Idaho. Bulletin Number 19. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho, College of Forestry, Wildlife and Range Sciences, Forest, Wildlife and Range Experiment Station. 15 p. [2590]

147. Winward, Alma H. 1970. Taxonomic and ecological relationships of the big sagebrush complex in Idaho. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho. 79 p. Ph.D. dissertation. [2583]

148. Winward, Alma H. 1980. Taxonomy and ecology of sagebrush in Oregon. Station Bulletin 642. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University, Agricultural Experiment Station. 15 p. [2585]

149. Young, James A.; Evans, Raymond A. 1981. Demography and fire history of a western juniper stand. Journal of Range Management. 34(6): 501-505. [2659]

150. Young, James A.; Evans, Raymond A. 1986. Seedling establishment of five sources of big sagebrush in reciprocal gardens. In: McArthur, E. Durant; Welch, Bruce L., compilers. Proceedings--symposium on the biology of Artemisia and Chrysothamnus; 1984 July 9-13; Provo, UT. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-200. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station: 370-374. [2662]

151. Young, James A.; Evans, Raymond A. 1989. Dispersal and germination of big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) seeds. Weed Science. 37: 201-206. [7235]

152. Young, James A.; Evans, Raymond A. 1989. Reciprocal common garden studies of the germination of seeds of Big Sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata). Weed Science. 37: 319-325. [8692]

153. Young, James A.; Evans, Raymond A.; Major, Jack. 1977. Sagebrush steppe. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Major, Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley & Sons: 763-796. [4300]

154. Young, James A.; Evans, Raymond A.; Palmquist, Debra E. 1989. Big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) seed production. Weed Science. 37: 47-53. [6676]

155. Houston, Douglas B. 1973. Wildfires in northern Yellowstone National Park. Ecology. 54(5): 1111-1117. [32013]

156. Miller, Richard F.; Rose, Jeffery A. 1995. Historic expansion of Juniperus occidentalis (western juniper) in southeastern Oregon. The Great Basin Naturalist. 55(1): 37-45. [29339]

157. Miller, Richard F.; Svejcar, Tony J.; Rose, Jeffrey A. 2000. Impacts of western juniper on plant community composition and structure. Journal of Range Management. 53(6): 574-585. [36578]

158. Martin, R. E.; Johnson, Arlen H. 1979. Fire management of Lava Beds National Monument. In: Linn, Robert M., ed. Proceedings, 1st Conference on scientific research in the National Parks: Vol. 2; 1976 November 9-12; New Orleans, LA. National Park Service Transactions and Proceedings Series. No. 5. Washington, D.C.; U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service: 1209-1217. [37727]

Related categories for SPECIES: Artemisia tridentata spp. vaseyana | Mountain Big Sagebrush