Influence of Chaining Pinyon- Juniper
on Watershed Values in Utah

Project Report

Prepared by
Gerald F. Gifford

Utah Agricultural Experiment Station
in cooperation with
Bureau of Land Management

January 1, 1971

—t-
f=
ww

Title of Study: Effects of Pinyon-Juniper Conversion on Watershed Values
in Utah

Objectives:
A. To determine the water budget of natural stands of pinyon-juniper
and adjacent areas which have been cleared and/or seeded.

B. To determine the effects of vegetation conversion on soil physical
properties and soil stability.

C. To ecologically evaluate sites before and after as to phenology,
composition, and production of vegetation.

D. To evaluate the economics of conversion practices in terms of the
watershed values and multiple use relations,

E. To obtain data necessary for determination of hydrologic soil
cover complexes on the study sites.

Introductory Comment: This report is concerned with additional data
analysis and compilation which has resulted since the project report
dated November 15, 1969. As before, the report will provide information
to supplement previous reports as well as indicate progress to date.

Infiltrometer Studies: Data analyses are essentially complete on these
studies. One paper has been published (J. Range Mgt. 22: 110-114), one
paper is soon to be published, and a third paper has been submitted for
publication. Manuscripts of the latter two papers are included in the
Appendix.

Soil Studies: Soil analyses are nearly complete for characterizing soils
beneath each runoff plot. These analyses should be included in the April
1, 1971, project report.

Results from soil moisture studies will also be included in the
April 1 project report.

BLM Library

Denver Federal Center
Bldg. 50, OC-521

P.O. Box 25047
Denver, CO 80225

outlet ‘badeveraW n° hel asareente 19q inUL-noyni 9 ts ae, :

&
}

eee

Taqinut-=royniq to ebrist2 Isauten to tepbud y9I0w ord erie or a cee
| sbabese aa\bes berss!> ased over foinw ees anaveibs. bro

[si 2vriq los no noi tisvnes NOI IGI9PDOV Io etr297I9 ont oniartetob oT oy a
“ytiFidese {joe ‘bas: 23itv9qo19

ta
yoo fans Ae od 28 istts bas sisted ite alisulsve vi fevipetoss oT aS (
MO t6I9pev to nol JouboIqg baa Moi ti zogndo ara?
id i. Ad

en? jo omat fi poate, A fas naizrsvno> to esimonose sds oj6uleve of 1.4
. enol te! eo" seu afaittum bre zoufev isabaend

‘toe dipotorbyd to noiteqimszeab Not yise29D9n Sish nisido ot oS

-cotie2 ybute oft no eenot eqns yavoo i
61&b fenoitibbe dziw benisanca pi ta0ge7 eldT :Jasmno) yjosouborsAl a2 a us
S1O9S) To8i01q oft 9oni2z betivesr est doidw neitsiiqnos brs eleylsne ’

a

=
soijemotai sbiverq tfiw tyoGe71 sd? .210ted 2h fader .2i radmovow bejsb - »
-9ish oF 22979014 Ssteolbni es flow es stings 2u0ivaiq Jeome | qque 03" “1 ae
a De 6 7
¥

seals ao stelqmoo yilsitnaeas ois egey leans 6I60 ‘2olbus2 yotomar gli tee
ono. (AIF-OFL 28S (29M sponse -t) bodei{duq need. esd 1996q sn0 .eoi bute
107 beftimdue nsed aaa 8976q brid? 6 bas bed ai fduc sd o% gooe 2i ie a
07 ni babufoni oss exaqeq owt istte! ‘ods to etqii22u06M "Of teat Tduc nh)
.x toneqa, Bh

e

>|

2i ioc pnisivetosiets rol siafamor \its9n s16 2o02eylens lioe ‘pet buse fis
fitgA aft ni bebuloni od bluorie eo2ey!sne sestT .italg Vionuy Asse Aiesn

210981 tasjor, hat mS

673 ni bebuloni oad osis tliw @oibut2 siuteron Figg meat entiean

-Iyoqe1 sosferq I ae

pot

oo AD

Influence of Cryptogams (Lichens and Alaqae) on Hydrologic

Pronerties of Soils in Southeastern Utah

The soil analysis portion of this project phase has heen completed
and generalized results are civen in the table that follows. Soil samples
were taken at depths of 0-1/2 inch, 1/2-1 inch, and 1-? inches between
trees or in the onen from lichen stands in several conditions of development
or destruction:

1. Virgin stand (completely undisturbed)

2. ''ell developed stands in control area of fenced study area

3. Intermediately developed stand in control area

4, Pathways and water-ways within control area

5. Debris-in-place chaining

6. Chaining with windrowina

Values civen in Table show only trends as they are averages of
all three depths sampled. Statistical analyses are yet to be carried out.

Percent organic matter was calculated from ornanic carbon determined
using the sulfuric acid diaestion method. Preliminarv results show only
small differences which may not be sianificant.

Determination of pH showed the soils of all sites to be slightly
alkaline (around pH 7.3) with the soil from the virain stand slightly
more alkaline (7.6).

Differences in soil conductivity amona the sites are comnarable
except for a higher value from the windrowed chaining site. This would
indicate a slightly higher salt content in the surface soils.

fA determination of the amount of Ca plus !qg present was made and most
sites showed about 1.5 me/liter. The virgin lichen site and the windrowed

chaining showed hicher values of about 2.3 and 3.9 mea/liter resnectively.

ay

, V :
i >

s = ’
Gate i]
a i se

“* oe Rs a ‘
otnofoybwi ira) (osntA bas. ansdott) si tayo ponent

_— 7

rigtt! nundasoitue2 at vt ~ stron fs

0.

i npended. eortant f ns Aonb T-S\E ttont S\f-0 Fo pn 16 nl

¢

7

TA.
.
.

Snomnofaveb Fo anokd tino. f erever nt 2hnste nododt mov? feng ants a 10 ad
ay :

‘ mottouvdees 10°
(bodausethi viasetamgo) bese atonty e : zo am ;
S915 vida yeaa Yo sexs forties rt ebmase borofaveh Ia s 7
6996 Tovtnoa mt brete bsaofayeb vfeasibematet . an
sa16 fords nid3.h avenmrotey bne eysinitd of : ey
natn kei. oetq-nt-etrdst ¥ ; |
‘onk nese fe AF Fy: pnts!) ae

:. to 2ansyove a%6 very 26 ebnaws vino wod2e sfdeT. at navto 2outst’
io DOTII6I, od og sav 916 2eavisne [sattettst2. -bofange: oritqod saint Me iy

hentargtoh ports stnanro nov? batsfunls> 26" Totten atasoro gneast
vino wode etfueey vasatmifest .bodte OTT 200tb bios hw fue edt omtau.
Angatiinot2 sd ton vem tote zane Ths
+ MEtdnthe ad ot 2ette (fs to ef toe ots beware Ha to et seahmstalt «
vitrntle beste atovty eel mor? fto2 srt., ASPs (€, t lig bios) ant tas
ree oy : Q. X) onttedis s
af ges bal aaste “pty nom ‘Stvitoybnos fitoe at zeonoroTY
hfyor atdy, sete ontatarls botiotbnte elt. SOT? suf sy notp re te 107
.aftoa poste as at Yeatnoo tise rat tel viseorte ia

ten bers ong eo anton 6 aufa 6° ta. avons oid. +o natin} wile
howovbn iv ots bas ¢ sie beohall inrtisent 193.4 om ae uf |
ds Yo. aoufey opt

e ee i ; ? “fs
este yott "\non. Oy. Us ..<
‘ 4 ; : a :

BuL_dwes [LOS 40 sizlap Beau} vULQUaSsudeU SoLeYBAR Bue SanL[eA [Ly -

en een ee ee e

3°9 9°OL Mice 0°29 O°? ge°Z Sel Lo'U DULULBYD
paoupu t,;
8°2Z 0°6 b°vE 2°94 cv HAGA bL4L° Sil DULU LEYS

Bde | U-UL-SLugag

eaue 104}U09

9°¢ OL 3° SE o° 0S | aa | Peak Lvs" ou" ULYZLMA SARM
-A8je pue sAeMuze,
Raue LOuZUOD UL
8°¢ 7°6 9° 9€ O° 0S ie | Ge°l cvs" ULL pueys padoLsasp
Ale Ve Lpauuaquy
eoue Apnys
EA o 9 c° OP 9°€S or" L foes LOZ” L£3°0 pode} 40 our
jOuzUOD UL pues
padolaasp {ej
(pequnzsipun
Bh. 8 DEY 9° SP 82°e = WL 9€8" OL’ L AL a6 | GuWod)
puezs uLoui;
pull Z Aeia 4 4tis pues % Ss ([ /bau.) (9.S2 38) 49} 3 BY
sez essubby SLSAL PUY Le4nzXd] D4 HG (wd / Sou |) DLURDUY 8215S
WUE snid ty AZLALZONpUOY zUBdUS_

—s

~ Ye}j) UuezsesyuzNos
UL ZUSWdOLAASP wWebOGAAD CULqUOdGNS SL LOS edeyuns 30 SeLquedoud {edLWsYyd pue [RILSAydg ° / a, qey

2ffo2 costo 0 en iowa

== ee

“. r

= det! aed Rs $

Sd
-

ewiae? 3... sy SHVESoubnOD «=—s Snsa1e849
pi A fee eater’ dingy”

Ae ee I ee ——— ae a soe aeastieiialie: age em

ee teas ntoniv
ER. Ort vistefomes)
(hdd etbew

Lan

beqolovat: Effet! _
fortron mt baste | ra

beoact Yo RovK <
601s ybut2

etodsthamagat
haBt2 baqofayos
sexs fowtnos nf

| , 3.6 S.Az ae .f ef fan, on. f ntdsthe
. _§9%8 fo

: : ae

. . : . gosfaeat-2trtet . 7
; 88 %,2 a. $2 SA. f s.5 ate eles “ontateda =F 4

. | . “teeth bas : =
3.8 OF 8.¢ 7 t mye! |

» a
ne > - n a¢
| Biz 5:0 ; _ , ‘ haworbar! -*-
= . or Bae ANS 9-30 v". % .N esr. {2h onfntata. , -
5 Se a ee Se eae ee A eee eS ME i , oe Fee Aj : 7
Nffginse Troz 40 arttrsh sasilt antins2etmey eensteve sin esuf\ev TFA -

Soil textural analysis showed the soils of the several sites fall
in the sandy loam cateaqory. All sites were found to be similar in soil
texture except perhaps the windrowed chainina site which has more sand
than the rest. The same site has a slightly higher percent of water
Stable agaregates less than 2 mmd. The remainder of the sites showed
Similar agaregate percentages.

Some soils, when coated with orcanic residues, show resistence to
wetting. A cursory check for non-wettable properties was made at one
third, one, and fifteen atmospheres for all sites. There appear to be
no non-wettable properties inherent in the soils samnled at any of the
sites. However, no samples were taken from beneath litter accumulations

under trees.

Work yet to be completed

Infiltrometer runs will be made at each of the several sites and
runoff and sediment production will be examined. It has been observed that
when water is poured on the surface of the ground, the different crust
conditions behave quite differently; those with more crustal cover
resist disintegration better than poorly covered areas. This might
imply that the mechanical strenath of the crust and its ability to
break the force of falling water may be involved in the hydrologic role
of the crust.

In addition, permeability trials will be run on undisturbed cores.

- yas 6
7
5 "
¥ ,
H , -
a ri s - j
is * Beez : ‘ a t a
ae ot

me, }
f'st Sette tavewoe ond 0 altoe s ants bawore ata nia a ah

Tio2 at.wsftmte od os bavot O19W eat te [iA .yronst6> msof eck ee i
brs? avon 26d. Hotdw otte patatars howorbrte ont 2tise'i94 3q8ox9 owtxes 7 .

oie

x20. F0 inaa194 ‘yortntd visdghte. 8 26% o¢f2 oms2 ont. deer onlt i

*
a

beworle 2otk2 oft to s9bnt emer onT -bmm § nett ezof entsooveps ofdss2
ca? | . - 29padn8I19q stspaions wshimte
93 sonst ates, woyle ceoubr2ey Jinsoie rth betsns nary af toe: SH02_ a
0 36 sbsm ene 29t sree of 36339u-non to? Arena Nygaro mi) onttion

ge

od ot asaqs ersiT .2othe I's vot cova shade neogt ht bas eon bids

26é ie
‘ane
Sat. to: vob. 36. bolone: af toe ort ot Sasori zat treqern ofdsdton=non, on (>it

enorselumuoos setst! {¥soned ot nedst ete camer on: yTOVOHOH taste

rm | adefation. 9d: ot d
bas 2ette farevee ong +0 dose ts abs ad ‘If tw enw setomors ft
torts bavyoado nsed aac a

.bontmsxe ed j The norsaubord Fnomibe2 bas Y Tn
Sauts Inavettth ong eDavoww ott To Sostwwe Sid no bexuon ef yotew ve
* "9v09: [6teuD svom nd ty Szorls Vitnoystt th sttup aveitod 2nots thi
SAotm 27AT . 260718 bevevao ero0c nsdt rested tots sypetntetb sates

/ OS VOtftds 257 bas sews Bis 70 ttonste feornarioom oft sauts

sloy atnofovbyd ext ni Sovlovat ad yarn Vatew pat hist 70 -so10% 3

%

29709 bedwdetbaw mo mui od Tf iy efstys vatttdssmag nortibhe |

Runoff Plot Studies: No runoff events occurred at either site during
1969. Data from runoff events during 1970 are currently being analyzed,
and will be reported in the April 1 project report.

Tables 2, 3, 4, and 5 show rainfall amounts received at the Blanding
and Milford sites during 1969. Since runoff - producing storms were lack-
ing, only data from one recording and one nonrecording gage are shown.

Tables 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 show rainfall amounts received at the
two study sites during 1970. Data for all gages are included. Figure
1 shows general layout of the study area at Blanding. Aerial photos of
the Milford site have not been available since the photos are being current-
ly used in Denver for map making purposes.

Vegetation Studies: Tables 12 and 13 give tree, shrub, and ground cover
on debris-in-place and windrow runoff plots, respectively, at Blanding
during the 1968 season. Vegetation data for the Milford study area for
1968 was included in the April 1, 1969, project report.

Tables 14 and 15 give cover conditions on Blanding and Milford
runoff plots for the year 1969. There was quite a change in cover conditions
during the year 1967 to 1968.

Cover information for 1969 will be forthcoming in the April 1, 1971,
report.

Production data for 1969 and 1970 are given in Tables 16 and 17.
The large increase in production at both sites during 1970 over that
produced in 1969 is evident. It is of particular interest to note the
difference between the rabbit-grazed and rabbits excluded areas at Milford.
Particularly hard hit was the chain and windrow area. Figure 2 shows
a portion of a fenced 0.11 acre runoff plot in the windrowed area as
contrasted to the rabbit-grazed outside area.

Miscellaneous Studies: A small study of patterns of water movement over
and through P-J litter was done during 1969. The manuscript showing
results of this study is given in the appendix.

enivwb stiez yodtis te bat w250 ainave tony olf
, Sesyl sons enled yfinsiqw: os OFC! pniiub atnave °
ae gastens I “fingA sat poy

enibasig oft te bevisos1- ednuoms. ‘iterates wore @ brs e
“Adel gysw amete pniosuborg ~ Honuy soni 2: -C30! pnisub ;
swore 916 anse pnibioss non ene Ens pnibiese: one thn

edd ts bsvisag. edhien Hateten, sion tf bas ,Of .2 8 x a eal
a1wpia .bobulon? s15 eopsp iis’ 107 6360 Ofer palyub estia :
ta 20I0rMq-Is6ii9A “.enibrsla@ +6 sows vbute odt to tuoyel Is190

~3nevws> palsd 916. 200g add conta eldslicve nead Jon over edie parin onl.
: | ; beret ice eniaem qsa 10% Yevaed ai bee yf

Pt
Bigot

19V02 Metta bre dda. 99% vip. ff bre Sf zoldsT :zeib “pot

enibasis 36 ,yleviszeqes1 ,efolaq. Ttonw :worbniw bre 926i qg-ni -etre :

10 B26 yYbuste biotliM arts yo? Bieb nolsatepay -nozase B8Cf oft rage | a
»340997 Josio1q ,COCE .! Tia@A od ni bsbyfoni “eh

Siot!iM bes pribast9 no enoltibnos reves evie ef bas 8! esideT "
enoitibnos eves ni epnsds & etiup asw ataedT .C081 Tsay ont 10? 2t0%q Tony
8801 of [dOl assy of entree - "

eFVOL .f FingA oft mi pnimoodtirvot od ifiw 23°! 10% moi tennotnl sve be

.210997

‘Vf bos Of esfdet ni nsvio ois OTe! bre G02! 107 6té6b nol toubor4 |

Jett revo OT! pninub zotie dtod -t6 noi toubotg ni S26912ni spel oft

od4 S30n OF tee19Ini rsludit16q Fo 21 41 .3ndbive 2} de! ni. bsoube 1
-bDIOTTIM 36 26016 bebuloxs atiddss bis bossip-sidder er? nsewiad pares
aworle $ saupia .6916 worbniw bas: nieds oft sew. tid bred ylretusizyet a

26 6916 + hewobe Ive edt ni Foti tonut 9196 11.0 bsons? « Yo ei

3998 obi atuo boss1p-tiddsr att of betesryinc

15VO Inamevom tetew to enyetteg to ybus & Ifeme A

‘esibut? avosnst tare!
pniwode qin 22unem oT

-208!1 pnitub snob aew asdtil Lb L-49 dovortrds e
xfbnoqqe ets ni nevip al ybuse efds to es!

ee
~ =] ay 4
Lai) a

Py

Table .) .

Precipitation data from 8-inch recording gage at Blanding
pinyon-juniper study site, 1969

Date Total Rainfall (inches)
6-1-69 Start
6-11-69 .05
6-12-69 .05
6-17-69 .05
6-18-69 225
6-24-69 215
7-13-69 .63
7-16-69 .10
7-17-69 .07
7-18-69 .39
7-19-69 1.05
7-20-69 ale
7-23-69 .02
7-24-69 .38
7-29-69 No Record
8-11-69 .05
8-12-69 AVP:
8-14-69 20
8-15-69 01
8-16-69 03
8-17-69 02
8-18-69 05
8-20-69 04
8-24-69 .03
8-25-69 17
8-26-69 . 20
8-27-69 .02
8-29-69 -40
8-30-69 .03
8-31-60 02
9-1-69 02
9-3-69 01
9-4-69 .O1
9-6-69 ~45
9-17-69 08
10-1-69 -90
10-9-69 Off

oes

sta3e

20.
ae

26.

es.

ef.

£a.

Of.

YO.

Gz.
0.4

La

$0.

BE,
broosA of

20.

$0.

os.

10.

£0.

$0.

20.

"pO,

£0.

Ni.

0s.

‘$0.

Oh.

‘to.

$0,

80.

{0.
10...
eh. |

gn,
oe.

{2edoai) Listniet LsgsoT

gutheuite +8 9983 yathrooes doni-8. a pie nae

Rael vorke 4 ‘hute seta Hi | ox

ha pa
Sy dee ae) ve ihe

i ren rar "
i ce yj rhs es
a : % | aN PU
‘ = 1 = hy wap A
Tor ¥ —» ; .

Table 3 . Precipitation data from 8-inch non-
recording gage at Blanding pinyon-juniper
Study site, 1969

Date Total Rainfall (inches)
6-1-69 to 6-29-69 aah
6-29-69 to 7-12-69 0
7-13-69 to 7-28-69 edu
7-29-69 to 8-9-69 No Record
8-10-69 to 8-22-69 . 36
8-23-69 to 9-5-69 -90
9-6-69 to 9-17-69 at,

9-18-69 to 10-9-69 95

jit a:
-non rloai-8 mort stob ¢ ae
raqims(-moynig seria 38 oR8y ait
eset ate 4

| am]
4039 “ae
as 7
wpa

ae

(2eront) [I[etnisi {stoT

oe.

brooos! of
00-2-8 of 03-E8-8

@5-0-0F, oy 2d-B1-¢

. iene

Q3-C8-3 oF CB-f-d

“ ft

0a-SE-T OF Cd-€! > ss
@3-8$-" of eatin vi 4

8-0-8 OF ea-es-4 1"

Q3-S8-8 oF 03-01-8

(88, -VE-@ oF O8-0-2°

Table 4. Precipitation data from 8-inch recording
gage at Milford pinyon-juniper study site, 1969

Date Total Rainfall (inches)
5-18-69 Start
6-11-69 10
6-12-69 20
6-13-69 05
6-15-69 02
6-16-69 35
6-17-69 40
6-18-69 05
6-20-69 02
6-21-69 03
6-24-69 15
7-14-69 30
7-15-69 0S
7-17-69 Bo Wd
7-18-69 05
7-21-69 .04
7-22-69 ey
7-23-69 Aue
7-24-69 03
7-29-69 as
7-30-69 02
7-31-69 Aa ke
8-2-69 28
8-12-69 02
8-19-69 07
8-26-69 03
9-6-69 04
9-7-69 10
9-15-69 73
9-16-69 20
10-4-69 .03
10-9-69 12
10-16-69 35
10-17-69 LS
10-18-69 16
10-19-69 40
10-20-69 03

(eoronk) Eistaies Isto?

1522

sity doni-8 mor sxeb :
L .stie ybute goqinut- me sh me

rely

A RIN

Fy *
ee ne momen £8 me ~ mpm
,

oa
ee

@o- da oy
@d-bS-9
O=-A5-5
@6-21-T
@8-Vi-*.
00-31-
Ga-is-T
@a-S¢-%
20-28-f
Q8-hS-¥
2d-08-f
08-08-T
@0-[€-¢
2e-S-8
Gd-SI-8
0-1-8
: 2d-a8-8 ©
2d-a-0
09-t-0
@8-2)-@
@d-a7-0 .
Q3-h-Of
0d-0-01
20-aF -OL
8-Ti-OF-
ige-21-08
o-0L- Di

O- Us £

back

Table Ce Precipitation data from 8-inch nonrecording
gage at Milford pinyon-juniper study site, 1969.

Date Total Rainfall (inches)
5-18-69 to 6-24-69 1.49
6-25-69 to 7-10-69 0
7-11-69 to 7-25-69 87
7-26-69 to 8-8-69 oF
8-9-69 to 8-24-69 .07
8-25-69 to 9-6-69 .07
9-7-69 to 9-22-69 bvis
9-23-69 to 11-1-69 jeoe

11-2-69 to 12-15-69 . 26

4

Guided At fitaten Is3oT _

onibtoostnon foni-8 mor? aah |
-C0@Cl .etie vbute teqinuj-moynig bro ti

Ler en
= pane

.
' .

vO.

2a-0i-4 oF | 26-2 v
@3-2- . ot oncbtet

08-8-8 of co

— @d-28-S1 oF, Cd-S-if

oe ‘a bi

eS 1

©3-BS-8 oF 8-68 *
0d-3-8@ at ea 2558 7
©8-SS-@ o2 GB-T-8 ;

be
ie

Qd-f-11 of @B-28+0 — as '

1

Table &.

Precipitation data from 8-inch recording gages at Milford

study site, 1970.

Date Total Rainfall (inches)
Windrow Area Debris-in-Place
6-9-70 Start
6-10-70 0.18
6-12-70 0.04 Start (0.05)
7-4-70 0.28 0.40
7757-70 0.04 0.03
7-6-70 0.38 0.37
7-8-70 0.15 No record
7-10-70 0.03 0.03
7-18-70 0.11 0.14
7-20-70 0.12 0.13
7-21-70 0.52 0.53
7-22-70 0.67 0.70
7-23-70 0.05 0.08
7-24-70 0.31 0.28
7-25-70 0.35 0.31
7-26-70 0.28 Pe fe
7-29-70 Od be’ 0.08
8-5-70 0.13 No record
8-12-70 0.05 No record
8-13-70 0.47 No record
8-14-70 0.15 No record
8-17-70 1 Pee No record
8-18-70 0.39 0.38
8-20-70 0.31 0.31
8-21-70 0,02 0.02
8-26-70 0.03 0.04
8-27-70 Uiae 0.30
9-5-70 1.47 1.53
10-24-70 Off (storage gage charged)

Oe

Sseidonee dee

~+

{20.0) tnet2
08,0
£0.0

TE.9
nw ov
€0.0

41.9
€f'.9

E¢.0
OT .0
80.0
85.0

I

€.0

€f.0
80.0

bi0994
bIeD91
bi02e1
brios97
bio3e7

8

ov
ov
of

ou

ou
E.9

f€ 0
$0.0
#0.9
0€.0
Ee, f.

(bop rerio pep ep6109 2) ¥0

, eo
Sn Se SR eee ae Le ea et

feedsnt) Aetnton. Is3aT
631A wolbalW

ee -ieiitieetendinms =. ae

31632
Sf.0
#0.0
85.0
40.0
=
ef,

; lg

ve . Sd

‘ cf.0

A.

Table ki Precipitation data from 8-inch nonrecording gages at Milford,
debris in place area, 1970.

Date Total Rainfall (inches)
Gage A Gage B Gage C

6-10-70 to 6-24-70 0.03 0.03

6-24-70 to 7-9-70 0.98 La is: 0.98
729-70), to. 7=23-70 1.64 1.77 1.73
7-23-70 to 8-7-70 1.20 1.35 1.35
8-7-70 to 8-18-70 0.91 az? 1917
8-18-70 to 9-7-70 re 2.71 279
9-7-70 to 9-16-70 0.00 0.00 0.00
9-16-70 to 10-470 0.00 0.00 0.00

10-4+70 to 10-24-70 0.00 0.00 0.00

.biot!TM 36 29p6p pnibiossinONn donl<8 mon?

Bal

7
() €e
Re
fs

j ie

"ae
*
.

Tce oe

O-ds-2 ot 0

(1 ys i
Ott oF OF

ON-f-8 F of Ot
O-81-8 08 VF
Ot-T-2 oF OF-81-8
eee.
OF-8I-8 of OFatae
- OF-H-0f of OF dias
OT -NS-01 oF OFaAOF

Table B. Precipitation data from 8-inch nonrecording gages at Milford,
windrowed area, 1970.

6-24-70
7-9-70
(223240
8-7-70
8-18-70
el fat |
9-16-70

10-470

to

to

to

L770
7~23-70
8-7-70
8-18-70
9-7-70
9-16-70
10-4-70

10-24-70

gage A read 0.04 inches and

Date Total Rainfall (inches)
Gage A Gage B Gage C
12-16-69 to 3-28-70 3.05%
3-28-70 to 4-26-70 0.78%
4-26-70 to 5-23-70 0.54
5-23-70 to 6-9-70 0.80%
6-9-70 to 6-24-70 0.20 (For period 6-12-70 to 6-24-70,

gage B, 0.02 inches.)

1.26

*Single storage gage operated during this period.

1.00

1.69

wok

® =e
ty bYOTTIM:38 29969 pnibiose1mon donk<8 mort 636

ae

2. «OT s88-8°02 OF “81-3. boiteg 104). 08.0
bre 2edent #0.0 baer A spsp
-(. aoront $0.0, 8: p80

00.1 1G, 8 MONS | Oe pag 39 Odea
20.1 ey. ee ae i Of-esS-~ ox or 204

ra SA.f . ge. a oe Gree get
et. i a oa

Table q Precipitation data from 8-inch recording gages at Blanding
study site, 1970.

Date Total Rainfall (inches)
Windrow Area Debris-in-Place
6-14-70 Start Start
7-6-70 0.07 .07
7-8-70 0.08 .09
7-9-70 0.07 .07
7-10-70 0.09 .07
7-16-70 0.06 09
7-18-70 0.15 .16
8-1-70 0.00 .06
8-3-70 1,27 Vel?
8-4-70 0.81 0.72
8-6-70 0.14 0.17
8-8-70 0.02 0.02
8-16-70 1.00 0.76
8-19-70 0.75 0.69
8-20-70 0.28 0.32
9-4-70 0.10 0.10
5-5-70 0.35 0.35
9-12-70 0.45 0.50
10-7-70 0.06 0.07
10-8-70 0.05 0.05
10-22-70 0.40 0.44

10-26-70 Off {storage gages charged)

A

entbnasi¢ 36 29p6p pnibiesss dont-8 mort seb nH |

, Se aaa Yay BOTA wor ba iW

—- ae OD t-te Se ay Ae aS

t1iste2 sexe
~~ {0.6
€. 80.0

yo. 60.0

20.0

Table /Z, Precipitation data from 8-inch nonrecording gages at Blanding,
debris=in=place area, 1970.

Date Total Rainfall

Gage A Gage B
6-14-70 to 6-28-70 0.00 0.00
6-28-70 to 7-12-70 0.30 0.29
7-12-70 to 7-26-70 0.20 0.15
7-26-70 to 8-9-70 2.08 1.70
8-9-70 .to 8-22-70 1.94 1.92
8-22-70 to 9=2-70 0,01 0.01
9-2-70 to 9-14-70 0.93 0.94
9-14-70 to 9-29-70 0.00 0.00

9-29-70 to 10-26-70 0.58 0.56

eenibasié te 20p6p pnibroszoinon ron

: fistniss [stot .
G oped “are

me a mee ee

060.0
es.0

af,0

oT.

$e.
f0.0
#e.0
09.0

02.0

A spsd

ee te

90.0

OF -8S-3 i

: ee } .
i a = _—
; a 7
dais ica came re
i 4 a ipa bss
~s ; ob
anes -- hi a}, Y

75

§

Of-38-{ o8. OFS
OT-O-8 oF OF-35

OT~Sh-8 or OF ra
OT -$-2 of OF:
OFi-2 03 RSE
OT-08-2 of Of aitine
0-38-01 oF Of~ Sag

Table /}. Precipitation data from 8-inch nonrecording gages at Blanding,
windrow area, 1970,

Date Total Rainfall (inches)

Gage A Gage B
6-14-70 to 6-28-70 0.00 0.00
6-28-70 to 7-12-70 0,29 0.30
7-12-70 to 7-26-70 Q,2/ 8 Sh YY:
7-26-70 to 8-9-70 2.28 2.05
8-9-70 to 8-22-70 2.10 195
8-22-70 to 9-2-70 0.03 0.02
9-2-70 to 9-14-70 0.92 0.92
9-14-70 to 9-29-70 0.00 0.00
9-29-70 to 0.52 0.50

10-26-70

: 46 aspép pnibroreinon dont-8 moi steb noisesigns
lh +6 aepep Pp el wean | hes

Fa “ . ' hf te os

(2arlont) (tet rien IsioT_

§ Sp6p A Ts)
96.0 99,0
0€.0. e¢.0
¢f.0 ¥s.0
20. 8.8
od Of.s
£9.0 £0.90
g¢.0 se.0
00.0 10
02.0. $2.0

7 zi

hay,
(iw

st5e09

ov-Bsd- be
v
OY-st=t of nN -8

a
oy -as-4 of | oF -8-

7
M

Ot ~e8 ot oF ee
or-ss-8° of” OT-8 ‘
OV-8-2 oF OF -$8-8
OT-Hf-2 03 OFH8-2 a

(aed

or-es-e oF OT-8f-2"
OF -38-0f oF OT +es42

*

Figure yf :

General layout of Study area near Blanding, Utah. Circled n “bers indicate
location of raingages. Small crosses indicate approximate cations of 0.171]
acre runoff plots. Area A is a control, area B chained ar wvindrowed, area
C a control, and area D chained with debris in r?ace. Sca.e 1" = 1480 ft.

Table /?.. Tree, shrub, and ground cover (percent) on runoff plots at the
Fry Canyon (Blanding) study site, September 1, 1963. ¢éamdmower!
Ptot-data=th-Aprid 15-1969; Progress Renert-)s

Percent Cover

/ pdt wastes wsutethllenbald
Plot Transect No. ly Trees Shrub Ground 2/
Debris in
Place 19 fit. Pied 37.45 0.00 L 655770
Check #1 Juos 15.25 BG 36.30
ak Bp ae Pied 10.23 BG 64.86
Juos 54.63 0.06 L 5514
74 ft. Juos 8.44 0.00 BG 85.80
L Perot
Mean (xX) Pied 15.89 0.00 BG C2532
Juos 26.11 Li 37.68
Debris in
Place 1m £t. Pied 5.40 0.00 BG 66.40
Check #2 Juos 19.80 L 33.60
3e Ete Pied 9.41 0.00 BG 54776
Juos 30.39 L 45.30
7AREE, Pied 13.34 0.00 BG AST OF
Juos 43.32 Li S45, 95
Mean (x) Pied 9.38 0.00 BG 55.39
Juos 31.17 L 44.61
Debris in
Place
Check #3 19% fre Juos 52.38 0.00 BG 58.48
L Ain 52
53aft. Pied 11.62 0.00 BG 59.24
Juos 33.90 i 40.76
TATE . Juos 16.67 0.00 BG S258
He 17.45
Mean (x) Pied 3.54 0.00 BG 66.76

Juos 34.31 L 533.24

ct tn atoie Mom no ((3nankar) T9vOo bauer DAE. «

Ps
- mene 689% 61 qudmeaqor otk ybuse- aatbaee
; \S Tavon2. 39904 | \f eS
bao) . aes 2991T ‘= OV ssncgnar ime
NT 28 Tees | nn. eh. ft bokd | ae
HF Az Mi e&.2f 20 -
v Ww me | [ 9 £9 a i ee
t { © ] 1). { t Pa 5 |
08.28 Oe 00.0 h 22 #9
Hf. hf J
ee ng Na.9 02.2f box | + 3) gael
71 Pa : {i 4¢ nist ae
Ob 3A rv 0 0 ber Fi Of
Na. FF ; Tt any
PY .B2 4 i Th ‘ 32 >
fi et j PF : eat
é
: VO.e2 on 00.0 ME.g{ boi = 3 32 $2 pe
E0 she cr.z
QF #2 7 08.0 9B.2 bard “eed
la. bh- R | CL.1E 201
LOL LLL NGL LLL LDL ALLL LAL OL A ltt UE i em ce - + en ante Se a

h2.& beid
fe. bE aout -

“ie
7D 2

Table fe. Continued

Percent Cover

Plot Transect No. 1/ Trees Shrub Ground 2/
Debris in
Place 19 ft. Pied "15.52 0.00 BG 35425
Check #4 Juos 24.14 L 64.75
ES ae Pied 8.76 0.00 BG 51.24
Juos 42.48 L 48.76
ri ok gee Juos 29.79 0.00 BG 49.53
L 50.47
‘ean (x) Pied 8.09 0.00 BG 45.34
Juos 32.14 L 54.66
Debris in
Place Proatt . Juos 80.42 0.00 BG 18.44
Check #5 L 81.56
Se i ae Pied 14.36 0.90 BG tae
Juos 30.86 if 46.28
7a ft. Pied 2.85 0.00 BG 42.70
Juos 31.69 if 57.30
"ean (x) Pied 5.90 0.00 BG 38.29
Juos 47.66 i 61.71

i i

De-ris in Place

#1 L9Ert.. 0.0060 0.00 BG 49.71
L 50.01

Annual eae

35S auee 0.00 0.00 BG 56.20
L AS GL7

Annual ae

Ager ~L9

Te: Bie hel 0.90 9.00 BG 19.81
L 380.19

Mean (x) 0.00 0.00 BG 42.06
L S7 ie

Annual 0.99

~ NS

BF 2h
74.62

> bayord

———
4

iy

A A A ty tei

bb. AL
02.12

Sv .72
af ok

os 0.0
L
ot: 00.6

evo} 3noox9"

divx

96.9
00.0

An 4
- 7.0

00.0

0,0

es. oy Ad
[y . o f
omen LOLOL LLCO a a amo ‘i a ~—

iy .e8
{0.92
8s.

AS .d¢
1S eo

od
J
[surnh

oa
i
{sual
’ TyQA

90.0

“st ad
Utes

290TT

br. ae Poul
Ov.8 hat
2S. $8 eoul

QY.c$ 2out

20.8

._ ber
${.Sf eout

£6.08 zout,

Vw. bL Seks.
S£.0€ 2607

Leid

..2€ het

40.56 aout

ey

H0.8

Qn. £E 2 17) a

—-

ai stedet am
aoalt ~
e#% food

Table pee), Continued

Plot Transect No. 1/

Debris in Place
#2 19. tt.

5 OS oh ah

145 Lue

Mean (x)

Debris in Place
#3 ph Dee Ses

Dott.

aL

Mean (x)

Trees

0.00

0.90

Percent Cover

Shrubs Ground 2/

0.00 BG yieee
i Libs
Annual
Ager

0.00 BG AB.
L 56.
Annual
Ager

0.90 BG 40.
Li 59.
Annual

0.090 BG Sie
G 47
Annual 0
Ager 0

0.00 BG Gr.
b 36
Ager
Annual

9.00 BG &
L 80
Ager
Annual

0.00 BG AS.
fF S55
Ager

0.00 BG 4]
Li 57
Ager 0

= — | a
: TOVO)) 3ne> =
iene a

Cae
Asunné
TOBA

of
J
feunnsA

“er
i

!

» , Launnk
199/

ee rte ae ee

J
. » SORA

lsunnh

"9
J
’oRA
faust

ae
J
TOA

oa
J

ToOnA

IeunaA

SN — e

“3% bY

(x) Av’

re tee ee ee ee

- o9nf9 at eirdofi

.23 Of at
- aie SE
.
e

st

Table fo. Contiuved

Plot

Transect No. 1/

Debris in Place

#4

Lore

Rae

TESS sy

“ean (xX)

Debris in Place

#5

19 £t.

epee Gs

fib a ap

Mean (x)

0.00

0.09

Pied 0.06

0.00

0.00

0.00

Percent Cover

Shrub

0.00

Ground 2/
BG 84.
L 16.
Opuntia sp.
BG yp ie
L a he
Ager
BG 20%
L 79:
BG 58.
L Al.
Ager

BG
L

BG

U
Agcr
Annual

BG

L
Annual
Ager

BG

1
Ager
Annual

Oe
Opuntia sppo.

1/ Line transects across runoff plots at indicated distances measured from top

2/

oriplot.

BG category includes cryptogam cover on soil surface.
ostcosperma

BG = Bare Ground
L = Litter
Pied = Pinus edulis

Juos
Ager

= Juniperus
= Agropyron

cristatun

ma xvod tao9104 ar
; ie bieox aed 2eostT «=—§s—<ési‘é‘SNS:SCCSL gw: Sp amex’

ah

is 1 *s ce * ° -_ ——— a ok ca ee — 7 _
nf “4X .
AI. 48 ng 00.0 Cf. bai - 72 OF
er) SS. OF, . eek
ane 8. .ge nitnuq? .
80.1T . aa 00.0 10.9 33 ce
ed ea.ts I
\. Te. T2904
&2.0S Mi 19.9 00.0 23 AF
fA.8T r oJ :
| ‘. 88.82 na 19.0 A6.0 herd ates)
SI.is J
er .0 tTopA
EL .0qqe si tango ;
Zz, 99819 at attden
19.89 oa o0.n 00.0 -. -F% C1 en
CONE 3. J = ;
OL.c8 on one | 90.0 32 CE
es.Ve¢ J
4 Ct. TOnA
‘ Sc. i Bunith
Sh. B2 og 90.6 re 3% or a
20.0% ul
f<¢.f LesrreA has
Zo TIRA
C2. he anh 10.0 90.0 (X) mo"!
aD. bi m | e
ne. TIgh , .
ho.0 ToeunnA +, il .
rie = SS acal iniaatigee a... - a ar me = ee a at ee Oe

a ere ——-
qod mo7? bell aoanaveib. Kofta inl te 230la Yionwe ageron 2doeers79 on: y \.

; a: ean j 2 * ; Fy oO

“ Pe
12 ars “

me
ftoe fe Teves ms gota. bea 2 srost | a : :
inul = 2 : a
=

= . a = ae
- ’
y wy
.
7 :
. P ~
}

Table as Tree, shrub and ground cover (percent) on windrow runoff plots of the
Blanding study site, September, 1968.

a a nn ee a A ee

A

Percent Cover

Transect 2/
Plot Number"! Tree Shrub Ground—
Windrow 19 ft. 0.00 0.00 P 0.00
#1 Agcr SP ge"
L 8.05
Annual (A) 0.75
Unknown Z 0.94
BG 89.5]
33~f t 0.00 0.00 Ager 0.15
1 2.96
Annual (A) 0.02
Unknown Z 0.17
BG 96.70
Ju fr, An) 3.42 Agcr 0.36
L 3.96
BG 95.68
X 0.00 Pett Unknown Z 0.37
P 0.00
Ager 0.42
: 4.99
Annual (A) 0.26
BG 93.96
Windrow 19 ft. 0.00 0.00 Agcr 0.13
#2 L ee ys
Annual (A) 0.04
BG 94.51
33° ft. 0.00 0.00 Agcr 2.84
L 52
Annual (A) 0.38
BG 95.26
7h ft. 0.00 0.00 Ager 1.84
L 2.40
Annual (A) 0.55
Unknown Z 1.11
BG 95.10
x 0.00 0.00 Ager 1.60
L 3.08

Annual (A) 3.23
Unknown Z 0.37
BG 94.99

- 7

_ 7
.
-

‘93 Yo

ce

7 a

v 7
o ~
9 50 Sie
Ae TR Anges ‘

(20

iis : arierdrs f
a ar Lite a Pia 5
—

MRgmova.. dante " aant

ee eS ae —

i 60.0 Ol q | 00,0 00.9
2t.0 “TOpA
20.8: oe
ay.0 (A) IeunnA - 7
2.0 -% nwoniall
f2.e8 08

em — ME

af .0 TapA 90.0 00.0 30 8

o°.¢ ra
SO = 0 ( i) ; Bauer ca
{i:0 S$ nwontal
Ot Ac “~An

ee . _ - ~—- owe ee — —2.. ee eS ee ES ANAS a
a, a wid -_ i= ,
02. oy aE) . :

- 86,20 a4

Ye,90 § mworalnU ~ ote 96.0 . xX
00.0 q 2
$4.0 VPA .
sn

‘

“" @$.0 (A) levacia
thas "82. €@ 30 a
ét.0 be 69.0 00,0 a OF woabai
40.0

. (A)- LeunnA . as

S
os
=
s2)

130A 00.0 90.0 | 3? €8

&
a
—->

o-m0°

Table AZ continued

ee ee

Percent Cover

rr we ee ee ee ee

Transe¢t
Plot Number=/ Tree Sarub Ground=/
Windrow 19 ft. 0.05 0.CO Agcr 0.19
#3 L 11.67
BG 88.14
33 ft. 0.00 0.00 Ager 1.86
L 6.36
Annual (A) 0.37
BG 91.41
74 ft. 0.00 6.00 Ager 1.26
‘ 1.17
tanuel (B) 1.18
3% 47,39
x 1.00 0.00 Nace 1.10
L 9.73
Annual (A) 0.12
Annual (8B) 0.06
BG 89.01
Windrow 19 ft. 0.00 0.00 Ager 0.38
#4 , 2.67
Aniual (A) 0.19
BG 96.76
cic ae 9.00 1,06 Agcr 0.95
L 10,82
Annual (A) 0.19
BG 88 .04
fi ge 0.00 0.00 Ager 0.93
L 4 46
Annual (A) D354
Eriogonum spp. 1.11
BG 93.13
X 0.00 0.00 Ager 10.75
L 5.98
Annual (A) 0.25

Eriogonum spp. 0.37
BG 92.64

a ‘wos
ro Aeye Va

pa

a aS ¢ ; 7 oa ek Re
ines? = |, ene. aad a
OO te le 8 le es e+ | ele.
9

; = . r : -
\Spauora dunn

e1.0 vapA —s«é98*="LO

a
ee ©:
o

Bi ved 00,07

3 ° ae
Vé.0 _ (A) Peunna |
iH ife- Ay: |

om ee ee ee

re 1 3.0 00.0 tat

ee

320/) 00.0 9.0 ¥

I ee ~ a - - 8 ttf ti Tn te cm

C -

0 . (A) Teunns
30.9 - (8) IsunnA

e8 36

8E.0 VOpA © 00.0 00.0 23 01 = -worbatW

e?.Q. (A) Téuuna |
ay .02 26 : ae

LLL LLL LLL LLLLLLAL LLL LAL ALL LL OO CCARE TI
9 pA nC 09.0 Re ae Ao ee
of ae | | |
0. (a) Teunna Pim 9
88 a8 os 7 | | | ya

0, TPA * 00.0 00,0
0 (ay Agunna =
“998 —*. a ey,

+, See

is
-£@

ey .01

(A) init: "

ea

8e.

es.0
{é.0 my

/ 13. 2 a

Table oO Ronei hued
Percent Cover

Transe¢t /

Plot Number— Tree Shrub Ground—
Windrow 19 ft 0.00 0.00 Ager 0.96
#5 L Pal
BG 91.93
5 ah 0.00 0.00 Agcr 0.97
L 1.55
BG 97.48
74 ft 0.00 0.00 Agcr 0.39
L 1.93
BG 97.68
x 0.00 0.00 Ager 0.77
L 3.53
BG 95.70
Windrow 19 ft, Juos 21.21 0.00 L 58.33
Check #1 Pied 29.55 BG 41.67
Juos 16.42 6.90 L 41.79
oe oe pe Pied 15.49 BG 58.21
Juos 27.19 0.00 L 61.26
74 ft. Pied 33.89 BG 38.74
X Juos 21.61 2.30 L 53.79
Pied 33.89 BG 46.20
Windrow 19 ft. Juos 30.04 0.00 ‘i 29.84
Check #2 Pied 8.30 BG 70.16
S5ft Juos 1.19 0,00 L 6.75
BG 95,25
74 ft. Juos 6.84 0.00 L 14.89
BG 85.11
x Juos 12.69 0.00 L 17.16
Pied 2.60 BG 82.84
W indrow 19 ft. Pied 22.88 0.00 L 34.62
Check #3 BG 65.38
ce aa Juos 6.77 0.00 L 25 .53
Pied 12.77 Annual 0.19
BG 74.28
Juate Juos 22.90 0.00 L 56.36
BG 43.64
xX Juos 9.89 0.00 L 38.84
Pied 11 88 BG 61.10
Annual .06

————

ee ee

Fe
lS; Ae eos oe aoe i Vee la.

Pe ats HRS se pr — a — eae; 1 esi ae ii
7 7 | tow : wats a oH
et me
cam ew

a 00.0

€&.82 ~~. 00.0°°"" ISPS cout...
3.18 24 "* 22,88 boiq . 1% Ave?

et. ft | j 02.8 = SHO aoub | ae
1.82 38 non RARE beIy.. -97% €€

as, 1d r 60.0 C1.tS 2out
a 25 Q8.€€ bold tt at

et .€2 J O€.8 “*° 18.18. 20yb | x

0S .de aa BB. EE. bsi4 saad
J 00.0 ° 80.0 zovt 3? Of = «worbniW ©

af OF ag 0€.8- boid S% Agerdd

oa, ee 4 -, @0.8 Ql.i 2oul.- 97 £2
; a Gan

- Q8.H1 > 00.0 48.8 zout Pre
ee ie es

4 . on a. 00.0 03, Sf. eouL
#8, S8 "7 .. . 08.5 “beta
A :

88.8 baid

1.2 zou
VV. St bois

Table /3 continued

Percent Cover

Transe .

Plot eet Tree Shrub npoonds)
Windrow 19 ft. Juos 24.12 0.00 L 41.18
Check #4 BG 58.82
a5 Tt: Juos 13.23 Artr-2.330 06 55.64
Pied 5.45 BG Lh 36
74 ft. Juos 16.54 Artr 12.06 L 38.72
Pied 3.31] BG 61.28
x Juos 17.96 Artr 4.80 L 45.18
Pied 2.92 BG 54.82
Windrow 19 ft. Juos 15.90 0.00 L 29.31
Check #5 BG 70.69
33 ft. Juos 14.53 L 41.68
Pied 18.55 0.00 BG 58.32
74 ft. Juos 3.04 L 30.74
Pied 18.60 0.00 BG 69.26
x Juos 11.16 0.00 L 33.91
Pied 12.38 BG 66.09

J/ Line transects across runoff plots at indicated distances measured from top
plot.

of

pavement
litter

rock

bare ground

Agcr
Artr

Agropyron cristatum

(eae came

Artemisia tridentata

28 000 2d €ES iA "88,81 eout SE
"* @&. ad aa. et. ee bai4

St.88 ee a ee ay
asia |: . ‘TELE baid

Si.2e 4 08.8 at5A d@.Cf 2aub
«$8 V He oa $@.$ bsid

1.28 ao ee 0@.2! eout -33 Of = worbaiW

ee AR aie 2out th €€
weer SEBS aa 00.0 22.81 boi

w.0g con ae a 40.6 2dub 27 Af.
O8.83° ae 99.0 08.8! bei

(2.88 Pe 3am 00.0 df.01 eowt —"
20.88 a8 BEST b9i4

eet
a

got mort bowwesem esaneteib beisdibni $6 etolg toaur 220196 2s 298ne1d tl
oer eae “af . = - F -tolq -_ big

A= 19pA snemevag’ = a
3 i = BANApA | sonst sy
° — camer 3a > P ‘= Aa
bruowe sted = aa’

Table /¢-. Tree, shrub and ground cover (percent) on runoff plots at the
Fry Canyon (Blanding) site, September 1, 1969.

1/ Percent Cover 2/

Plot Transect No. + Trees Shrubs Groun? =
Windrow #1 BESS $B ay 0.50 0.50 BG 5b 7),
L So ..59
Agcr 23.44
Sphaeralcea spp. #20
SES GS 0.00 0.00 BG 46.09
L lV 91
Ager 36.00
Caatts 0.00 0.00 BG 61.78
L 14.49
Ager 15.04
Artr g Ager 3.08
Arta 4.35
Eriogonum spp. Let/
*- Mean (x} 0.00 0.00 BG 48.20
L 24.00
Ager 24.83
Artr & Ager 1.03
Artnh 1.45
Sphaeralcea spp. 0.07
Friogonum spp. 0.42
Windrow #2 19 ft. 0.00 0.00 BG 53.290
L 17 #33
Ager 26.48
Sphaeralcea spp. 2.29
et C.« 0.00 0.00 BG AT £25
L 20.64
Ager SO ah
Sphaeralcea spp. 1.89
FEDS hase 0.00 0.00 BG 10.27
L 6.50
Ager 21.19

Sphaeralcea spp. 2.04

of3 30 230la Yronur fd (3099%9q) “"roveo, baworg, bas
.C90f .1 rodmosqe2 .otie (gailinpid)

re *
f ; \S Tove? trooto4 ae ree e
j +! 0rd adurde -gaort .; 5) OK topennrT

| a en te a a er a ee ee ee emmenmmanane . -

| Wee | oa 6.0 2.0 | 2) 8
an : ox J 7 4 “.

oa cS 199A i
Of. .age seolatoniq2 =~ meee: tn
20.3% - . @8 00.9 2 | 32 3
1@.%f J .
MM). a€ ToOnA
Bv.io- oa 0g..0 . 08,0 ; 732 8
Ob. Al Al ; aca .
bn .éi to0h aa = oe
60. 329A 6 x34" ae : . -
ceah oe ae At 7 - :
TS .f -qyqe curocoist ate
OS .88 | ie 00.9 00.0, (x) ines! i
AN. BS ra
t3.hs x39A .
20.1 TOBA % «ITA ;
@ se | TITA a
"9.0 .q@e soolstoeitue ©
$f. <qqe mumogofrt ;
— - — —s —e ——— - a » — — - - _ oe o— —— -« - ee <a +

00.22 4 90.9 . 00.0 33 OP!
ez.V1 i

Bb.as "tops

es.S .gqe sesletoeriqe

“22h og 90.0 00.0 32 8
+, 0S ‘ J > . :
£1.02 ToOgh .
08.1 .qqe seotsremiqe ~- a
sf .0N mM 00.0 60.9 ~t2 BY ‘

02.9 i
or.is TODA
a2 »99fetesdge |

Table Cf Continued

Percent Cover

Plot Transect No. 1/ Trees Shrubs Ground 2/
Mean (x) 0.00 0.00 BG 57.18
L 14.82
Ager Ee ie
Sphaeralcea spp. 2.07
Windrow #3 19. ft .00 0.00 BG 44.05
L PAS oS
Ager 30.62
Artr 2.46
be A eh . 00 0.00 BG 60.42
L 14.01
Ager aie
74 ft. .00 0.00 BG 192 31
L 48.92
Ager Sle
Mean (x) .00 0.00 BG 41.26
L 28.60
Ager Ph? cys
Artr 0.82
Windrow #4 Soe. .00 0.00 BG 58.02
L 18.89
Ager 22935
Sphaeralcea spp. »38
Saka . 38
TS i . 00 0.00 BG 54.84
L 15837
Ager 29.41
Saka 38
74 2b. .00 0.00 BG 14.49
L 35o21
Ager a2eed
“ean (x) .00 0.00 BG 52.48
L 22.49
Ager 24.65
Sphaeralcea spp. 0.13
Saka Uses

AS basiord "Sfiedé™ ego,
Ai .t2 ai 0. 00.0

eS |
€#.2°S

TO.8 .nq2 Aooisronsin2 |

20.8
va $s
So.0%
an.f
Ch. Od:
{O.h]
2.28
f.0i-
sO 8h
TV .£2

os .{h
00.8%
$e Qk
$3.0

ee ee

BE.
8. he
TE.c8
fh.es
aE.
OR, bt
iS .zé

ne ec
‘tm @ «

Bh. Se
Obs
20, a€
€5.0
2s.0

vi a 5 - J
~~ “Sanh

——

TO04
+A

a

oe

|

T9904

-qqe soolsgrosdec
b482

OT)

J

sonA

Rope

on
J
saga
oma
d

A

7 :

.qqe nooletss q

t9voD 3n9oteT

60,0

90.0

00.0

69.9

00.0

00.0

00.0

00.0

60.0

3% FE

7 BY

(%) neo’

.tt Ql

~31

3% 39

Table /d-. Continued

Plot

Windrow #5

Transect No. 1/

LUPrc,

Sou...

746;

Mean (x)

Trees

0.00

Percent Cover
Shrubs

0.90

ae Oe eS ee Ee

Debris in
Place #1

a op

7anct.

Mean (x)

Ground 2/

BG A fis
L AQ.
Ager 7
Aster spp. 8
BG 70%
L of
Ager 19%
Unknown

BG 49.
L 256
Ager 2%
BG 4S.
L 24.
Ager ZT
Aster spp. i
Unknown 0.
BE 29.
L 67
Ager Ze
BG 19
L 5%
Ager Ltt

Unknown perennial 5.

Sphaeralcea spp.

BS 14.
L 83.
Ager a
BG 2l\
L 68.
Ager as

Sphaeralcea spp. 0.
Unknown perennial 1.

Bree ie

16 eo ee ae

7 ane

ht.TI ; 4 — (ALO - 90.0
vo .08 = J
CL.veé a) TORA
OS .¢ -qGqe Totes
es.0t a 00.0 00.90
SE .@ t R
{8,0} _'-. S3gr
$2. sword
S6.eb ud 00.9 0.0;
0. 2S 4
Ge.2ek TORA
M9 2h | ne 00 ..0- n0.0 (x) nee"
YA. AS J
g2z.v$ ToaA
oe -aqe totes
er .# . mont!
ab etrded
e8.ef me 9.0 99,0° -3t Gf {* oonl4
C&. Td d
es. TOBA
18 .0f oe 90.9 99.0 - ” 383 SE
Be. J / >
bo. @F T2nA in |
0.2 fetnnoted mvental re: | ee

Te. -qq2 sosierosiq? .

“Sa

erat a 03.6 09,6 3 AT ‘ora
d€.E8 d -

Table TL#. Continued

Plot Transect No. 1/ Trees Shrubs Ground 2/
Debris in
Place #2 sh 0.00 0.00 BG 18.74
L 51.94
Agcr 24 SOL
Pied .19
Unknown perennial 1.56
Saka 2.87
Crvi 19
% hte 0.00 0.00 BG 59
L 87.89
Agcr yea
Friogonum spp. 4.30
74.4. 0.00 0.00 BG 7.00
L 78.40
Agcr 7.78
Aster spp. 6.82
liean (X) 0.00 0.90 BG 8.79
L 72.74
Ager | Ee
Pied 0.06
Saka 0.96
Eriogonum spp. 1.43
Crvi 0.96
Aster spp. iinwed
Unknown perennial 0.52
Debris in
Pisce 25 Toett. 0.00 0.00 BG a9f55
L 40.50
Ager 10-50
Saka 9.60
xe Ga FS 0.00 0.00 BG 3.08
L 86.32
Agcr 10.60
74-26, 0.00 0.00 BG 15232
L 64.76
Ager Fe
Saka 14275

Percent Cover

a

wasnt hesloteitibeinck citation: Manel
\s bear aduyr zesrt Vb .ol 329¢ne7T

s

Pe Bl ‘a a0. 69:0 37 OF
he.f2 df
£2.68 “ron
er. bars
de.L Istinesreq Avondr!
; ¥s.s Bin?
. er, ivr.

‘ez. ag 00.0 00.0 3? EE
OBE “d
Sst | ‘ron A
O£.8 —° .atie suitoqotr4

00.7 og - 00.0 on. <9
“OR. 8t. ia
“BT.5 tome

$8.3 2 Tete :

Ot .2 Da

~ BYST J
UNYES TDRA

a0. bot

WO 0 a sina

(a Eb 92 muroroit
. 86,0 ivr)
¥£.$ __ ‘eGqe toz2A

$2.0 lhinneteq awoniat

00.0 00.0 (x) fB9

—— RNG ay ee a a a —— ntti

Table /¢.

Plot

Debris in
Place #4

Debris in
Place #5

Continued

1/

Transect No.

Mean (x)

Poet t a

Set Va ee

74 ft.

Mean (x)

Pott.

ect.

iietts

Percent Cover

Trees Shrubs
0.00 0.00
9.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00

Ground 2/

BG q is.
L 63
Ager 8.
Saka 8.
BG LS.
L 60.
Agcr Lois
Saka LZ.
L 723
Ager 19.
Saka oe
Sphaeralcea spp. 4.
BG lL.
L 90.
Ager 4.
Sphaeralcea spp. 3.
BG Se
L 74.
Ager Vai
Sphaeralcea spp. 2.
Saka ae
BG 16.
L ram
Ager =
BG 19.
L 68.
Ager 10.
Unknown perennial 1.
BG 20.
L 50.
Agcr Los
Aster spp. 6.
Astragalus spp. Ls

\S beer

s.ef p
8,249 d
v.8 ‘ronA
£1.85 -- KAn2

Qv.ef ae og
Ma.ne J
E0.éf | Toga
ba.Sf 5182

rate J
<.ck. TAHA

eb.é | gilae-
00.6 .aqe nooletosiice .

i ae 249
{T.00 t
£0.? - oh
VS.é «que seolstrosdr2

at.af- Og
ab. TT d
2t.2 TORA

Ov .eF me
81.808 J
Of .08 ee ~
Se.1 lstonoeteq nvondtn

SOS og -

OF .d2 d

AT 21 Toph.

{f * oO ote - qe yoteA

zh. -Gq2 auleperteh —
Van

= — * yi a! Ps a ©
Poh P ree ay Oe
: —- .

" gave). gnarrad 2°82
“edierria

. 00.0 90.0

00.0 ° ° 9.0

On ; n % . ‘i a) ; 9

SS.c Ct on An.9 00.0
tc.8t° J

Is .$! - Sogn .

CO.8 .qqe seotetenria2 .

of .2 Bisse

On . uD ti) -0

00.0 60.0

00.0 00.0

“e0esT

32 GE

32 Bt

(*) ge’!

» 33 49

uk zitdor

2% ‘g0BfF a

Table /£-. Continued

Plot

Transect No. 1/

Mean (x)

Trees

0.00

Percent Cover

Shrubs

0.00

Ground 2/

BG 18.
L O's
Ager FG.
Aster spp. ee

Astragalus spp. Oy
Unknown perennial 0.

96
31
77
04
48
44

Line transects across runoff plots at indicated distances measured from top
of plot.

Bare Ground
Litter

Agropyron cristatum

Artemisia tridemtata

Salsola kali

1T9Vv0) CS Te ae woe, ah”
\$ baword edree 2oaaT: 0 JoveneTT .-
ee a a ee
00,84 oa O01. 00.0 (x) not! ik
{&.%a d .
Ty .al aad. tonA a
20.$ 2 tov2A Ca Pe

£5.9- . oe eulhandsed - g
hp.0 Ininnoreq monday
a ee Te SO A ee net A en a ee a on ne eden,

got mot?. bomenom asonateib: botnothbat te 2z0lq. Ti6mst azotob etooennt? anid oo
. toig to

te

bayott) oTsd = Ad: *F

woIsi + J Vv as
mujetaits notyqoTys = maga.

sin IMobIaF Biaimesth: = xI7h. ore

SS tied sioetsi isé- = - ‘Rise - “4

«

_
Table FS Tree, shrub, and ground cover (percent) on runoff plots at

Milford study site, September 1, 1969.

Percént Cover 2/

Transect
Plot ‘ Number 1/ Trees Shrubs. Ground
Debris in
Place #1 LL ea ape 0.00 Artr 9.73 BG 1.70
L 50.14
P 38.46
Agcr 1.33
Phho Oy.
Sphaeralcea spp. 3.86
Eriogonum spp. .84
Sihi 1.89
Lupine spp. 1.41
poet ks 0.00 Artr 1.20
Arno .55 BG 16.07
L 19.41
P 55.61
Ager 3.04
Phho 1.40
Eriogonum spp. uae
Sphaeralcea spp. 2.34
Unknowns Pe 4
74° 4£t, 0.00 0.00 BG , oly
L eh oul.
P 46.54
Agcr Lo eu
Phho 1.28
Sphaeralcea spp. 8.20
X 0.00 Artr BG 4.98
Arno L 33.69
P 46.87
Ager 6.49
Phho 1.08
Eriogonum spp. 0.62
Sphaeralcea spp. 4.80
Sihi 0.63
Lupine spp. 0.47
Unknowns 0.37

ee Sh

otist4
.@qe soolstesdge

; -Gqe munogoizxd Uf i |
e8.f . ede 4
an -qq2 oniqui
cy Oana ~. QSoE wah 00.0 3 8
vO.aL pa’: 22. omté ae
[Riek » de
[9.28 “ie, gee
b9.E.. . TonA
Ob. orid't

fo.£ .qqe munogoits
ME. .qqe sealntesiq2

aan enwoudnU

Ti.5 454 - OF 90.0 00.0 3% af
- l2.8&; - a
q $2 dh. 7 7. ; q ane

0&2 t93A

es .i AP ondd : ’

0§.8 .qge Bool erase

Table AG Continued

Percent Cover 2/

Transect
Plot Number 1/ Trees Shrubs Ground
Debris in
Place #2 pil Se 0.00 Arno 1.23 BG 0.00
Artr 4.31 L 36.65
P 56.36
Ager le 23
Phho bs
Chvi 4.31
Sphaeralcea spp. ae
RAY 54 Be 0.00 Arno 0.62 BG 10.50
L 18.88
P 58.59
Ager 1.66
Chvi a. OI
Sphaeralcea spp. 1.45
Eriogonum spp. 4.77
Phho 1.24
74 ft. 0.00 Arno 0.22 BG 6.48
L 36.56
P 43.29
Sphaeralcea spp. .66
Chvi 8.82
Unknowns 1.11
Lupine spp. ve
x 0.00 Artr BG 5.69
Arno L 30.70
P 52375
Ager 1.92
Sphaeralcea spp. 0.74
Chvi S435
Eriogonum spp. 1.59
Phho 0.82
Lupine spp. 0.07
Unknowns 0.37
Debris in
Place #3 hh i @ 208 0.00 0.00 BG 1267
L 7asi5
P 21.30
Agcr 74
Chvi 1.48
Lupine spp. 1.48
Sihi .18

a oe ons £3002 os |

» 4a

7 fe -

7 : ia 7 hy

a it * 7 ;

oy Teo y ’ 7 v ;
ore ~

. ar

oo ae > Pedant ae

60.0... a4 eS. omth 0.0 -32 OQ!
20.08 *- a . D2 20eR
3t.02 4 ae
ts.t d ‘ToRA : ae
a ar oreit ee
{e.3 iva ..
Sf. -qg2 seslstosdq2 -
02.61 | $3.0 ond 60.9 7-88
86.84 od }
£2.82 q
08.1 TORA
£e.$ iva)
.' @b.f .qge seolstesdqe
NTL 142 murogoiTa
a¢.f ond A,
84.3 . js 4 S$.0 orth 09.0 -3t BY
62.0% vite J _
es .éh q
de. .qg2 sealetenriq2
. $8.87 Evdd
€ f.t error nt}

-Qq2 oniqu!

Table TSE Continued

Transect

Plot Number 1/ Trees
SSnre: 0.00
tAUEe, 0.00
x

Debris in

Place #4 ibe t ea we 0.00
am ft. 0.00
7ACrt. 0.00

Percent Cover -

Shrubs

Arno 4.30

Arno 0.49

Arno 2.28

Arno 9.44

Arno 4.92

2/

Ground

BG

L

P

Ager

Chvi
Penstemon spp.

BG

L

P
Ager
Chvi

Sphaeralcea spp.

BG

L

E

Ager

Lupine spp.
Sihi
Penstemon spp.

Sphaeralcea spp.

Chvi

BG

5

P
Ager
Chvi

Sphaeralcea spp.

Sihi

BG

L

P
Ager
Chvi

Sphaeralcea spp.

BG

L

P
Ager
Phho

Sphaeralcea spp.

Lupine spp.
Sihi

NH OW

-eooo°crneoern ht

66.
sp

28.ef
'@d.$

80.4

20.$

O1.€
Yo.@h
Od. ih
@z.8
oe.f
$6.

Ga. d
23. Ad
é2.2$
hei
e.d
60.0
28.0

{2.1

me er a rte es tm ee ee

oe ee

Lage ome Jzns4

oe

J

Ras.

TOQA

ivi

-qq2 soolsteaice

ag

d

q

T2RA

-Gjze saiqul

bie

-qqe somstenst
-qqz s9olstesdqe
ivy

ne

8S.$ onmtéA

= -
Las $22. een ae >

33 OT

00.0
so
x
a mt 2inded
06.0 - 3% Cl bk contd

Table Ta Cont inued

Transect
Plot Number 1/
x
Debris in
Place #5 19 ft.
CHS eae
7a tt.
he

Trees

0.00

Pied 7.13

0.00

Juos 0.77

Shrubs

Arno

Artr
Arno

Artr
Arno

Artr
Arno

Ppa |

0.96

Percent Cover 2/

Ground

BG

L

P

Agcr

Phho
Sphaeralcea spp.
Lupine spp.

Sihi

Chvi

aw

NOrF POY’F UMN DN

BG

L

Pp

Ager
Lupine spp.
Unknowns
Chvi

nt

Me SIN WW OO

BG

0
L 33.
P 49.

4

Ager
Sihi

Lupine spp. Big
Unknowns 8.

BG % pd
HE Z0%
P 54.
Ager 6.
Chvi ae

Eriogonum spp.
Phho

BG

L

4

Ager

Chvi
Eriogonum spp.
Phho

Sihi

Lupine spp.
Unknowns

RW

WWOODOW ff WUT DO

es

arti

.qqe soolsisarlgq?

.qqe oftiqul
idle

tvaa.

————— os eins
f 3
F

———

1, D8

re

ropa

qqe onmioul
Savona

ryvqo

-
T2pA

b2.1 tasA E1.% bot

P38. ona

ELS woe

a¢.@ t#tA VT.0 2onl

TV.0 omrd

00.0

eel

mi eiaded

13 Gf 2% so6t4
9% EE

a
on) ON

Table Si Continued

Percent Cover

Transect
Plot Number Tree Shrub Ground
Windrow #1 iS ft. 0.00 0.00 BG 61.63
L 3.06
P 12.50
Ager 22. 261
34 ft. 0.00 Arno 2.85 BG 6.85
L 20.24
P 49.81
Ager 20 are
Unknowns 1.14
Sphaeralcea spp. 1.14
74 ft. 0.00 Arno 0.95 BG 51483
L Lo22
P 22.98
Ager 9.47
x BG 40.13
L 13.01
P 28.43
Agcr 4726/7
Sphaeralcea spp. 0.38
Unknowns 0.38
Windrow #2 tony Ce 0.00 0.00 BG 67 .00
L 4.60
Ager 14.40
Eriogonum spp. 11420
Lupine spp. 2.60
Phho .20
Sa5it. 0.00 0.00 BG S9750
L 22651
Ager 12.60
Friogonum spp. 4.96
Phho 83
if oy 0.00 0.00 BG 53.64
L 11.36
Agcr 23.41
Eriogonum spp. 10.23
Sphaeralcea spp. 1.14
Chvi ree

P ta, fa og
; 00, JI
02.84 4
: fa.8 TOHA
—— ss Ba 28.8 oma 00.0° = .3
pe ee. &F.0¢ J
J [8.8 A
4 S¥..a8 tog
; cli! anworAsg)
4 BLL. .apge s9olsranig2
EB.12 08 28.0 onxA 00.0 32 Bt
Sv.2f i : «
ag. SS 4
Xb.@ TOA
Er.08 Dg x
£0.24 a
EB. BS 4
Oey | Tosh
82.0. .qqe seolnresdq?
90.8 oe 00.0 06.06 . 3% Of St worbsi¥
Oa, h al w. . 4 es x
OP. af situ & or eee
OS. 41 qe munogotad
6a.§ -qqe oniqul
Of. ” Od
0.62 ae 00.0 00.0 33 8
1é.$$ 4 2
03.51 tog
ae, b qqe munogois’
28. eds
ba.t2 ; oe
oe. {1 ;
[h.é¢
éS. 04
AL.L

Ss . j

Table Hee Continued

Percent Cover

Transect
Plot Number Tree Shrub Ground
X BG 59.98
L 1Z./6
Ager 16.80
Eriogonum spp. 8.80
Sphaeralcea spp. 0.38
Chvi 0.07
Phho 0.34
Lupine spp. 0.87
Windrow #3 LUST 0.00 0.00 BG 90.76
Ager BAYS.
Penstemon spp. 1.66
BEG Rey 0.00 0.00 BG 70.85
L 10.62
Ager 17.76
P bt
74 ft. 0.00 0.00 BG 68.89
L 17
Agcr Deis
Penstemon spp. 8.02
x BG 76.83
L 9.33
P 0.26
Ager 10.35
Penstemon spp. Bee
Windrow #4 105 ft. 0.00 0.00 BG 37.19
L Fo 8
Ager 18odd
Lupine spp. 15.80
Unknowns 19
Eriogonum spp. 3.66
RES ae 0.00 0.00 BG 48.74
L 19.93
Agcr 24.95
Lupine 6.38

08.81 og
: 08.8 -qqe munogoitd
8€.0 .qge sooinrondge

\ 4 ¥0.0 ivdd
5 eg “bE.0 Bi olds
%8.9 sage sriqul
7 a 7 Qf i 4 -
“at. 0e : Ba 06.0 00.9 . 3% C1 é% worbalW
? 82.9 . TogA ; ; |

a0:i -gq2: somesens4
23.90% : og 00.9 60.0 32 &
$0.01. a 3 = ahs
ov.ti tonal
1" Se q
e8.80 | oa. 00.0 00.0 - 32 BY.
vE.UL J :
$v.2 Tagh
0.8 -qq2 ome teme4d

S ER. at ae x
tz.e d
os.0 4
22.01 —
gs.t -qqz Home teqo1

re

' 90.0 00.0 72. @f 6° B* ~wotbai

J

Table ie Continued

Percent Cover

Transect
Plot Number Tree Shrub Ground
74nEt. 0.00 0.00 BG 73.66
L 84
Ager 9.92
Lupine spp. 15.58
X BG 53.20
L 15.27
Ager 17.66
Lupine spp. 12.59
Eriogonum spp. Leed
Unknowns 0.06
Windrow #5 Li Dey @ ai 0.00 0.00 BG 79.19
L a OE
Ager 9.83
Eriogonum spp. Deas
Sauer. 0.00 0.00 BG 89.66
FE 2ca0
Ager 8.04
74 ft. 0.00 0.00 BG 82.48
Ager Liese
x, BG 83.77
L 2.44
Ager 11.80
Eriogonum spp. 1.99

1/ Line transects across runoff plots at indicated distances measured from

top of plot.
2/ BG = bare ground Agcr = Agropyron cristatum
"P= pavement Phho = Phlox hoodii

L = litter Sihi = Sitanion hystrix

R = rock Chvi = Chrysothamnus

qe eniqui

OS. £2 8 %

WS.ek J

00.41 TOMA

e@c.Sf age omigqui

ss.f <qq2 munogoitd

60.90 enwondtnil

er.et ae 00.0 00.0 - 32 Cf 2% worbril
‘© 2 d

€38.@ ‘ToRA

ve.2 -qq2 munopoist

43.08 oa 09.0 00.6 3% SE

0%. J

£G.8 Toga {

85.88 38 00.0 00.0 3d BT

S$2.tl TIgA

TV.28 oa P3 Abs
B.S cag

03,11 To3yA

ee.f -qqe mumogoixd

$e

mot? bo wwesen mrompicn ee feaactemnieam 38 etolq Ttonws ezot28 atooennts onid

Table (J. Mean oven-dry yields (lbs./acre) for various treatments at
each study site. Clipping data taken during September, 1969.

Site Treatment
Control Chain and Chain, debris
Windrow in place

--- ee ee ee lhs/acre, oven dry - -------

ii an

Blanding 2.6 (forb) 379.2 (grass) 160.6 (grass)
2.6 (sagebrush) 14.4 (forb) Boe CLOT)
Seo 384.6 195.9
Milford 4.0 (grass) 130.4 (grass) 41.5 (grass)
ZA oe LOLO) Loe (tori) LLOS 2. (torp)
47.1 (sagebrush) 2.9 (sagebrush) 85.4 (sagebrush)

74.6 145.5 va A |

3% etwamsnets euoktey to% (owne\.edL) eas ‘eth -hiiee nest .\ oldst
C801 ,codmeseo? grinub’ molest e366. artnet warke sip dose

TO AA LE ON ete ea et eR tl Ee serra on mame

__Sromeeat oe

eixdob ie OWS ALERAD - EOXTHOO
sanigq nt weoap ier FM a? wis
ae tS re YIb sovo oTon\edt ~ ss ee ee eo
(aenre) 2.001 (azar) S.OTE (dot) 3.8 gnthaeia
eee (ot) BB (damaiegae) 0.8 9
aul | 0, BBE Se .

(22079) 2.ip - (seary) b.08S (zantn) GB btobhe’ .

(dtod) S$ OLE (riro}) €.81 | (tot) 2.28
(deutdagee) b.c8_ (deartagse) P.8 { de nemagee £8
I. TEs 2,281 - aoe

- - y
CE ER I NS et Oe « A ET A ES St A a | ~ihy hN -s in=n-9 gen ne FDNRRS Beseianeesie

Table ii

Site

Blanding

Milford --

Milford --

Mean oven-dry yields (1bs./acre) for various treatments at

each study site.

Treatment
Control Chain and
Windrow
4.8 (forb) 533.0 (qrass)
10.6 (forb)
543.6
oo een n en enn -- eee eee Rabbit Grazed
1.7 (grass 147.2 (arass)
14.0 (forb) 30.2 (forb)
41.1 (sagebrush) 0.4 (sagebrush)
56.8 177.8

omens eee ee Rabbits Excluded

493.7 (grass)
62.7 (forb)

2% weet (sagebrush)
558.7

No rabbit-proff
fencing in
control area.

en ne ne

Clipping data taken during September, 1970.

Chain, Debris
in Place

404.2 (grass)

87.9 (forb)

492.1

78.2 (arass)
334.4 (forb)

126.5 (sagebrush)
530.7

539:

165.6 (grass)
498.1 (forb)
125.6 (sagebrush)
789.3

Figure of . Upper part of 0.1] acre runoff plot and adjacent area showing
influence of rabbit grazing outside rabbit-proof fencing.

eniwore seis Ingosibe bas tolq Tonvy
-pnione® Yoorg-tiddex ob
oF ; a z| f a Vig

i

b

7

-

La
ay

7
ae

7 Cae
: Infiitration and Erogion Studies on

+ Pisywn-Juniser Conversion $/:

7 re in Sowtiiern 'ltah lf
Mee. ‘ 13 i
Avete«
4 - ;
24 a 1 P oz = ¢ » |
Wmivers it 3 za
APPEND IX
d %,
a This study cooperation F
> ee
7 lan? "anagem tract No 293;
, /

e Their Suppert'§

vi»
| SeeRHOR, Loven
ihe ;

Xt O4399A

Infiltration and Erosion Studies on
Pinyon-Juniper Conversion Sites

in Southern Utah V/

Gerald F. Gifford, Gerald Williams, George B. Coltharp
Assistant Professor, Graduate Research Assistant,
and Assistant Professor (Range Watershed Science)
respectively, Range Science Department, Utah State

University, Logan, Utah 84321.

/ this study was in cooperation with the Bureau of
Land Management, Contract No. 14-11-0008-23837.
Their support is gratefully acknowledged. Journal
Paper No. 944, Utah Agricultural Experiment

Station, Logan, Utah.

to 29%byse. noizotd brs. noises Lital

7: | | 29312 moierevne) teqinul-noyaid

1 \L desu mtsittuo? ai

qissi3fo) .A sgro9), .emegELi biked ,Sro¥tid .1 blexed
-_ at cinsderzeh dotesesf 936ubs1) , toaedtoxt gnsgetee
) rey (eons benerotsa sore) yoezetord tastete2eA bas
| 932 dna basin niteqe? ooneioe® ogash ,ylevistseqeet

| > | . . ~fSens desu easgol. «tietovial

to used ont itiw aottstesqooo at es ybusa eis .
-Te8s- -8000-If-B1 .o4 toetgnod -, snemogeiet! basd
cee pene ee yilutetstp “et” dtogqque shod
pe nonin ye Lerustvoitgr sist" RQ. of 5

I AST - (Bg

Highlight

Infiltration and sediment data from small-plot studies (325
infiltrometer plots) utilizing high intensity simulated rainfall
indicate that areas cleared of pinyon-juniper trees and seeded to
grass in southern Utah generally show no consistent decrease or in-
crease in sediment yields or infiltration rates at a given point. Of
14 sites studied, four indicated decreased infiltration rates and
two indicated increased infiltration rates during one or more time
intervals at specific points on the treated areas; one site had
Significantly higher sediment yields from points on the treated areas.

These results nearly parallel those obtained during similar

studies of 14 pinyon-juniper sites in central Utah.

teigitigit ——-

2$t) eotbute solq-tLane mort stab inomibse brs. odteesheh .
1 | Uistater aces itengsai figzdd eaisttisy (es0Kq mate
| os bsbeer bts @eas3 toqiout-noyniq to bossola 2sets tsi? otsoibni 7
“fe: To , senate Dense tonos oft worle Nilerencg deft mrodtuoz me 22ax
0 Intog novig 6 3a 25387 mot tonst that to eblety Jupmibse at 9289T9
base ,2078r ‘hdllaieniiant Ailesiibilal botsoibit Tok ,.botbuse zonte ws
omit stom ro.ano gnitwbh 2ets1 noitets£itat hee noroni hceeathiads ows
-had otie ono jenots hetgett oft mo etn Log otigene $s elavistat |

.26978 botnexd oft do etiitieg mori ebloiy tnomkbez rors Ett yitusottingte

vel iinte gaitub:be nkerdo oaonds {olletaq scan etiveot seeiT

das tatones fi vate Teqtame- negate Si to cobbuse

fo Fe

Introduction

Millions of acres of pinyon-juniper lands are located throughout
the westerm United States. Within the past 20 years, numerous large-
scale pinyon-jupjper conversion programs have been initiated. These
programs have created a demand for increased knowledge concerning range
and watershed values as influenced by vegetation manipulations in this
type.

The authors, in a recently completed infiltrometer study of 14
chained pinyon-juniper sites in central Utah, have shown that conversion
of pinyon-juniper to grassland (regardless of length of time since
treatment) does not necessarily increase or decrease infiltration rates
or always reduce sediment yields from a given point on treated areas
(Williams, Gifford, and Coltharp, 1969).

In another study, Gifford and Tew (1969) have found increased
permeabilities of surface soils from a chained and windrowed site in
southwestern Utah 6 months following treatment. Soils from another
site in southeastern Utah (same study). showed a similar trend, although
it was statistically Significant. Mechanical disturbance associated
with double chaining with debris in place did not significantly increase
surface soil permeabilities at either site.

Little change in surface runoff and soil moisture patterns has
been found following clearing of pinyon-juniper in Arizona (Skau, 1964;
Brown, 1965; Collings and Myrick, 1966).

The objective of this project was to Study infiltration rates and
sediment production at given points on converted and nearby untreated

pinyon-juniper sites in southern Utah.

Pworkguori2 bitendt eon abel. ahead £6
tenet? “Sisotromun ,21s9y OS tesq ont asta iit ante ing
ozo? .betetsini need evad emargoxq noietavaos |
ognst girimrsoqo9 onbofwond boesoroni tot beameb = betKe19
ud ni anotteluqinsm notistonov yd beonsultal es eoulev been Bae
pee

hI to ybute rotomors itn hevesquem vitieoot 6 ni ,erosdgus ody
notetovnes tsd3 swode oved HI; {erane9 ni astie toqihwt-aowrig bonita
oonie omit 20 Asgnol to séotbnsgon) braleentg of. roqiewt-nowniq %o
2o38t noftsrshtai senotgeb x0 gesotont ylitseeesen son 2go0b (insaases9
Rots bstsots to triog freovig #8. mort ablory snomibs? egoubort ineiaaee “0

-(2e .qtsdsiod bas ,brodaia sat alam

bozsetomi bauot ovad (woe wr bis brottid + vbuse todsons us 4

eS
ak este boworbaiw bins banteds 8 not alice oostrue to ziti sidsomieg -
| orion nov 2fio2 .tnomsco1d gniwof to? adtmom & sett! rroveomilsuoe :

fguodsis , baoxs asfimie s hewore (ybute omp2) Aes sce’ wad este
beseisozes oomedsuse tb {soinsdzeM Jasoitingie eiissiseisere “om si
eesetoni visanaitingie ton bib ooaly al eitdeb aisiw gninisds 2 tdvob dsiw ar
oti roltio 32 eoisidsomreq lioe ooatr2
eat anaetteq onuseton Lice bow toms sostiié ni ognerdos atssid
joer . U8A2) nos ith at soe rt-noyig to gaits ls gatwollo® bao? ased
i Eh rae -(aeer eal Su agiiite -eaet eword
bats 2o7eT otters Etat ybuse of as 398 torq edits —-
bossottng wsn9@ bas boro vitos wo aaniog pre $a moktot |

~~ sirestoube a saa ‘x0

Methods

A Rocky Mountain infiltrometer (Dortignac, 1951) was utilized to
Simulate high intensity (3 in./hr or greater) rainfall on plots approxi-
mately 2.5-ft.% in area. Fourteen treated and nearby untreated pinyon-
juniper sites near Blanding and Milford, Utah were sampled with 325
infiltrometer plots during the summer of 1968. Tables 1 and 2 give a
brief description of each site.

All plots were pre-wet a minimum of 2 to 3 hours before infiltro-
meter runs began. Runoff was measured at selected time intervals
during each infjiltrometer run. Simulated rainfall was applied to each
plot until a constant runoff rate was reached (generally 25 minutes were
sufficient).

Sediment was measured by collecting total runoff plus sediment from
each plot, mixing thoroughly, and finally obtaining a l-quart sample.
The water was then evaporated off, sediment oven-dried, and sample
weights converted to tons per acre.

Soils in the study sites were derived from colluvium, alluviun,
residium, and eolian of mainly sedimentary and volcanic rocks (Milford

area) and sandstones and shales (Blanding area).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Pinyon-juniper sites near Blanding, Utah

Table 3 shows mean infiltration rates (in./hr.) during specified
time intervals and Figure 1 denotes relative differences in sediment
production from treated and nearby untreated conditions on six pinyon-

juniper sites studied near Blanding, Utah. As noted from Table 1, age

of besility enw (eet as cae Pacman dcop
+ oe Re
-ixorqe ‘eolq mo [Istaber (x9sa9m5 x0 s\n) Vah nognt dl at tum
yo’ tues Ma a Fj ‘
+aoynig botaertnu ydtsen bas beaaons n9933H0 918 ni ° as oar

i altinoes sate: ee

ase daiw batten 198" fast bro t i bas i sie tants bre a rae
8 ovig S bon I 2eIdeT .80@L Yo Toamue ot git tab esolq: yTemors |
| otie sage to noiseitoesb roied

-ottiiint drvoted enued & of S to amusmist ita & fow-oTq oTow s0fq rh

2igvivink omit botooise ts boruesoa 2aw Toms aged aut ot00
‘ dose of betiqgs 2sw istatet botsiumi® mre xosonons Lit ‘toes gnitub n

eTow 2etumim eS yflisranog) berloset 2a4 oa ies tastenoeo 5 ‘phan solg

. (Saokoktiee
tiort Juomtbee euigq Somer istoa anisseifoa W botueson ‘_s tiiemibe? :
.olqmse Ixavip-{ & gnintatdo ylfeni? bas Udguortods ania .3ofq done . V4
Ui siquexz brs ,boitb-aove toontbse ,tto hets1roqeve rots 28w t938W ont -
.9T98 —_ emot OF bostovuos ztigiew ey

.tmivul ls musi visd loo mort bevizeb orow zetia ybute oda PT: alio® co
brotiiM) 2A9OT ainsolov bras wxadnomtbor iene ‘to im ELO9 bas ,mutbizet |

. (sors, eT eataide bas eonotebnse Dens (sors
ie a

wor 22u3eTd GUA 2TaU2aA

: et * ee gnibrstd zsen zoite
Bee Pisses enimub . ait\. ni) 20981 solse13{itnt sion | awote 4 =
jnomibee at esomorana ib ashimeeryio® sor0n0b i Lowa wae els totni

te os
rnovatg xte 0

7

iss cit 4

exe y i det

of treatment varied from 1 to 8 years,

U.S.U. (Utah State University) study site. No significant differ-
ences in infiltration rates are indicated between treated and untreated
conditions during any time interval on the area which had been double
chained with debris left in place (item 1, Table 3). However, on the
area with debris windrowed, the untreated area showed significantly
higher infiltration rates during the time interval 8 to 18 minutes
following start of simulated rainfall. There were no significant
differences between treated and untreated areas with regard to sediment
production.

Area 149, Brush Basin, Peters Point #1, and Peters Point #2. No
Significant differences between treated and untreated conditions are
indicated for either infiltration rates (Table 3) or sediment yields
(Figure 1).

Alkali Ridge. At the Alkali Ridge site, the following four ex-
closures were located within the treated area: (1) everything excluded,
(2) rabbits only, (3) deer only, and (4) deer and rabbits only. As
noted in Table 3, infiltration rates were significantly greater after
approximately 6 minutes of simulated rainfall in the deer-only ex-
closure and on the treated area (outside exclosures) after 8 minutes.
Similarly, in the exclosure excluding everything, a significantly higher
infiltration rate was observed during the 8 to 23-minute interval. A
significantly higher infiltration rate was indicated for the deer-and-
rabbit-only exclosure during the time interval 18 to 23 minutes. No
significant infiltration rate differences were noted between treated and
untreated conditions as related to the rabbits-only exclosure, though

the trend was the same as noted above.

“(ty

my a
'

~tottib Insotlingie of odiz xbuse (ytiexoviny
betser sia brs bosses neewxed bormsibat od eors1 4

atduob asod bed doidw sexs ofly ito tevraani omit yan actu enoisibnos
ents fo .revenedl be ‘older “ a93i) cali! ni tal aindeb ssw bonkaita

ae

7

on 4 |
§ a

wae

KtsunaiPingie bowode SOIR bagnonanis ans _beworbniv eindab saw ‘sexs ie
astumia Gi oF 8 Lowsoatt omit odd qrtitub 29387 noi sess ikiat rertgid 7
snaoitingie on oToW (oxo figates hatslumtie to siete aiwol od
snomibse of bayer fai 28976 heseseaint’ bre ‘botnets meowsed ‘eonnersttib
| | enh NS 5
OA Sh jniod ax9 494 mn ih tn anton etoted nized A dewurd Ses soxh

OI6 antoistbnoo baseorsau bas besiior3 neewied eeoneTathib jaeotLingie

abteie $19 mibee to (f oldat) rode noksexstitot none tot hatiacdhent

. (L sTugit) | 7 if

“Ko ae laa ois .9tia ogbit LisdiA. odd 3A .2gbi_LteAtA a
bobirloxs amis yrove a ‘sere betsott eft nidtiw betesol grow eomvee!s :
2A HARD, id bas ia (d) brs .¥lno te9b (2) etal, etiddes (Ss) .
tetis 19.2497 ‘el oneaitingte STOW 2975 cotsexs iting m sidsT ni betor | ‘
~x9 ylno- 2996 odd * itetnise bosslumie to. eo tus ba ad Vatenierems: es | fel
-eosunie 8: ‘teTts daasuiied 2x9 “ebtedvo) BOTS bossert ofa no bas wuiteds ; i

ie 2 \anaatiagi B cahiiacrowe gtibutoxs ‘aiue2oLoxe vols aed Pree e
A levregnt oauatm-88 - § ois gins iesb bavy sede e6u, ces aoisens1 ini |
~brs-roch oft. 162, betaotha 2aw 9987 nbiset? bit. todgid visnapitingiz Ms
ol ensue es oF nt leviesnt omit nee: gcitoh, —— “aorsidex |

bas bosses noowsod boson stew 2s9r97927 tb~ odax noi vous ht {|

i , 981201 99 Mlngeesiddan ods 93 botsier 26 _ 200
oa ao ae al

oe ey
ane.
fl

As noted in Figure 1, sediment yields are significantly greater
from untreated conditions than from the deer-and-rabbits-only enclosure
and the everything-exc lmled exclosure. Differences were not significant
between the other treated vs. untreated conditions though the untreated

conditions, appeared to yield’more sediment in each case.

Pinyon-juniper sites near Milford, Utah

Table 4 shows mean infiltration rates during specified time intervals
and Figure 2 denoted relative differences in sediment production from
treated and untreated conditions on eight sites near Milford, Utah. As
noted from Table 2, age of treatment varied from 1 to 8 years.

Arrowhead Mine and Indian Peaks Pi peyo, and 4. As noted in Table
4 the infiltration rate during the 3 to 4 minute time interval in Indian
Peaks #1 site was Significantly greater on the untreated area. No
Significant differences in infiltration rates between treated and
untreated conditions were demonstrated for any other time intervals on
Indian Peaks numbers 1,2,3 and 4, or Arrowhead Mine. Also, as noted in
Figure 2, there were no significant differences in sediment production
between treated and untreated conditions on any of the above areas.

U.S.U. study site. No significant differences in infiltration
rates are shown (Table 4) between the area which had been double chained
with debris left in place and the untreated area. The area with windrowed
debris had a significantly lower infiltration rate than the untreated
area during the time interval 13 to 28 minutes following start of
Simulated rainfall. The probably resulted because vegetative cover was
lacking on the newly windrowed area.

Significantly more sediment was moved from the windrowed area than

pa f ; ; a we ay o i
,.2 pin 7 ts (2 mae |
fe t boven :

totsotg Wf sneaitingiy Oth sata inom thor yy : sai

y gassilingie tom orew eesnorstt id ,axueolaxs botmt vas ansicrove on |

stu2z0fons Uno-asidder-has-teab ott sort ast ahd

wo : a

-
aT
sas

/_ bossattiny oi -iiquorls at iin betsersnw .2v botasty -rorito- cont a

. .sa89 ifoso mi tnomihoe oxrow bloly oy eee

Ju3ll_.broRLiH reo apie zoqinut-nowilt
aiavrotni emit baitroeqe wee z2oset “fokbsexd Lita .aom: aworde S ofdaT
mott noitauhorg sromrboe ni enouensttih evitsiot betomeb ¢ stag tt bas
cA .dgtll .byotliM nod 2etie Mdgie ao enoftibnos botsetsiw bre Lotsort
.egeov 2 of I mort be itev Snomtnots’ 26 ogs S$ eldsT mori bosom
eotdsT sit betan 2A «Bb bas .é.S. 18 2ise4 asibel bul bie omit bsodworxA
npibal ai: levzetat eit osunim & of & oft gaikah eter sotsarsliinkg oft & -
of users betsertas oft mo toteotg ylins.itiagiz. enw ote 1% adaod
bus besae1t aoowted eets1 solstersiitas of e9onene?tib Iasoi tingle .
‘go eleviretni omrt sito yor 10% vesexaéioms vio eno rhnes en
ni baton es ,oelA _omi bsotwo van TO e bns £8, f eradmun eiseT msibal
' nottauborg, Jnamibee mt anonorst9 ib rns ritfirie or 919% oroilt «8 otugit .
:essts. eyods edt to var no aot sibsi00 botseriau bas betset? nvaytod —
‘bentaito efidsob neod bed do itiw s0%8 93 noawted (2 aida) mved2 ots 20787
hevothniw dtiv sem ofT = .SoTK hoseou3nv sat bina Joslq mi Zt0L e2ixdeb isiw ™
” betse rtm off meds e367. noise stint rewol’ “ylones iting ie 8 bet eixdsb
to sunte geben lem, zogumia es os fi Lavxedie: omit ont. may: ‘Bors
26 L9VOS. SYEISIAQOV peritod betivest videdorq oft . So a bore

‘i. «BOVE bewerthatw: «iw it ost r
Pe re rat

‘adit sors bewoxbabee @

‘i hovew 2nw snoutboe: ‘BT OM «

from untreated areas. Sediment yields from the chained with debris in
place area were similar to those from untreated areas.

Jockey's. The treated area showed significantly higher infiltra-
tion rates for all time intervals during Simulated rainfall. In addition,
and somewhat unexpectedly, significantly higher sediment was yielded from
the treated area.

Indian Creek Conservation Area. In contrast to the Jockey's area,
the untreated area shows significantly higher infiltration rates during
the 5 to 6-minute time interval and all time intervals after 8 minutes
of simulated rainfall. No significant differences in sediment yields

were apparent between treated and untreated conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Infiltration and sediment data collected with a Rocky Mountain
infiltrometer on 14 sites in southern Utah indicate that areas cleared
of pinyon-juniper trees and seeded to grass show no consistent decrease
or increase in sediment yields or infiltration rates at a given point.
Of 14 sites studied, four (all with debris windrowed) indicated decreased
infiltration rates during one or more time intervals at points on the
treated portion. Two sites indicated increased infiltration rates
during one or more time intervals at points on the treated area. Eight
sites showed no significant differences in infiltration rates between
points for the treated and untreated conditions. As for sediment yields,
one site had significantly less yield from points on the treated area
and two sites had significantly higher sediment yields from points on
the treated areas.

These findings are similar to the results recently reported from

mk ekxdeb Asin bouinds of sox ebtoty 200m “<
29°88 easeaiiaal ‘moxt ines of + |
“sts litni zovinit snsoitingie. howolle sets betsety ae 7
<tOistibbs ot Ltfentse bovatuaile: onitwh .2levieini emis ffs ser ater t
moxt hebioiy enw imoniboe tasty id YLansottiopte cat dsdwemoz Laci

(hy

: hi | ‘.so%8 bosnets oft
8918 2'vadooL ad3 of Senxdn09 nl Bonk cot sevreenoo toot? ne ibit

gniteb eo2a7 noksex3{ tint “rorigidl (Linnoitingte cia ners be teerrsms ide
2otunim 3 rots ateviosni emit Lis bas Levassat souk" ‘otumim-a 03 2 oft

2bloiy snomibee ni woadacaneea®: inpoitingie om ‘itoteier betelumie to

and eliain botsetinu: ‘has borson noguted TAQ TAGTS neue

2yor2us3M09 a eke :
nissasom ee 8 dtiw boyoalloo stsb. Fromibog bits noi ser tI Etat

betssia asers sass oxsatbni Assy. ntedtyoe mi aetie Af He tosomots Litas
92897190b snetetenos on wore e2stg 02, Seber hos avert reqiaut-aoysig: to
THiog MeV ER & 38 20381 nok switiitai pp mre promi bee” at casera 20
beeseT29b bodsotbni (bewotbriw 2itdob: siw ils} mo? vbotbuse zosie eh 10 i
odd no etniog 3s elsvresni omit stom to ono gaint eoser notsers tial
2e3st moitetsiitai beerotoni botsotbai aesiz swt nok tog” betsett
jigit .sers betsett eft mo atatog te alsvrsstsni oni's oTom 10 one sana’
noowsed 2o7st mottextlitni ni esonotott tb aso ititigee ‘on boworle eoste |
.ebloix Inomither, 10% eh - 2083 Lhnt09 beseorsau bres joseox ods tot atniog
sos bosaer? rit no aaniog mgt. bioty 2zol ciatsottingie bat otie ono
no eantoq 1 nox? chien siaatbor: tiseasiiaaale aoe ea’ ;
hi.

morrt — qils oF telinte ove unt

a study of 14 sites in central Utah (Williams, Gifford, and Coltharp,
1969). After study of 28 treated pinyon-juniper sites (of various age
since treatment) throughout Utah (involving approximately 550 infiltro-
meter plots), it may be concluded that generally infiltration and
erosion rates at a given point have not been particularly affected as

a result of treatment practices. If there are treatment effects, they
may be either positive or negative.

It is well known that many biotic, edaphic, and climatic variables
interact to determine infiltration and erosion rates at a point on given
landscapes. All of the above infiltrometer data are being further ana-
lyzed to determine those factors important in determining or predicting
point infiltration rates and sediment yields on pinyon-juniper sites.
Such analyses should aid in future predictions of the effect at a given
point that certain vegetation conversion practices have on watershed

parameters.

j
- r]
! Aare

is 4
‘< a ne io,
"7 ‘

eqriada io? bea \browid caaheTLaMy isa Tecan eae aie

Fatip ‘Gc

diet

-

tala lati nae elotsakxonggs gnéviowes fst wcainltiae ;
“bas noiser ttn «lioteneg red bebyfoneo od xan $t ere

egs 2uortmay #0)’ corte roqinut-nowniq hetsor? es’ %

ah ° a hesootts’ acai oles ton vad tniog covig’ s ts 20385 nokeov ie
aged . 2399739 ‘Se m7 ets sro 31 299f398Tq Jnomipott Yo Tiuest &
i ‘ ee a I a mies .evisegon to eudsteny, sadsio od yom
os evidsitay 2itsmtfo bes ,oidqebs .obtoid ‘aba ssid amond iow ah 31
fevin no triog.s vs 20281 nolzo%9 bits qoitaisiitini asitmnasels aid potest)
~ fs wedsya gated sis Bis tostomottiitni ovods oft to LIA -zecanebial
ani raihoxg 10 gnimiaes 3% ib mt ‘smayroqat 2r03304 eAQids PAIRED ot bosyl
.2osie teqinus( arora no 2blery ion bee brit 20381 sigksens ita sutoq

aevig B 38 jet is of? to ‘gnokta liber otutut at bis Teo may soue

“ haderosew {10 oved 299i 196%q solerovaes ecivasigen nissr99 ‘dant tniog

219 7emstRq

*

LITERATURE CITED

Brown, H.E. 1965. Preliminary results of cabling Utah juniper, Beaver
Creek Watershed Evaluation Project. In Proceedings, 9th Annual
Arizona Watershed Symposium, Tempe, Arizona, Sept. 22, p. 16-21.

Collings, M.R., anf R.M. Myrick. 1966. Effects of juniper and pinyon
eradications on stream flow from Corduroy Creed Basin, Arizona.
U.S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Papaer 491-B. 12 p.

Gifford, G.F., and R.K. Tew. 1969. Influence of pinyon-juniper
eradication and water quality on permeability of surface soils.
Water Resources Res. 5(4): 895-899.

Skau, C.M. 1964. Soil moisture storage under natural and cleared stands
of alligator and Utah juniper in northern Arizona. U.S. Forest
Service, Rocky Mt. Forest §& Range Expt. Sta. Res. Note RM-24 3p.

Williams, G., G.F. Gifford, and G.B. Coltharp. 1969. Infiltrometer
studies on treated vs. untreated pinyon-juniper sites in central

Utah. J. Range Mgt. 22(2): 110-114.

an oem

Sevse8 toqinut det gaildss to etiveor eraninitont azet aN vont
Teunnk dae <2gtibsssord al .ta9tor4 Holiautava ieifexoaeH vox
18-d! -q -SS .3q92 .snosivA .oqmoT <muk 2oqarye tells sie enosi4A

noynig bas reqkivi to etaeFt3 age! Astra M.A tne , AL a .2unkf09
-BiositA .aiesd beet) yo¥ubrod mort wolt aserse no englte5ibese
jy Ct H-10e r9eqet 4tox9 —" . food 2, u :
toqyinut-aoyniq to’ stent! ener weT NH bas — D sbro8ti0
.2fioe odstave to utilidsomog: ito estloup Totsw bas ‘mitevatake a
P8-208 :(B)2 aon zeotuoeel TotsH * ae
eliast2 berssls ‘hed istusen ‘tebny ognrose otusetom tto2 -h0e! wn a) woke
Jzo101 .2.U .snosivA sroition ai toginut dszU bns annagitbe 40

qe aS MS 330% 208 Bie .Iqx2 sgnst 3 sesr07 aM whoolt .soivre2
rotemorslital .eaer tails tod 4.0 baw .b1o¥2id 1.0 venetian

Isttiso ni 2exte req iniss{- noyniq bessotsny -2v seteees fo eoibuse

MEE-OLE :(S)SS .3gM opmeh .L .destl

Factors Influencina Infiltration and Erosion

on Chained Pinyon-Juniner Sites in Utah

Gerald “illiams, Gerald F. Gifford, Georae B. Coltharn VY

Definine those factors which influence infiltration rates is requisite
to understanding hydrologic behavior of the 61.4 million acres (Nortignac, 1°69)
of pinvon-juniner in western ''nited States. “'any factors have been
recocnized as influencina infiltration, but studies of semi-arid wildland
Situations have been limited.

Nilliams, Gifford, and Coltharp (196°) and Gifford, \‘illiams, and
Coltharp (1970) have reported infiltration rate differences at random
points between 28 chained and nearby unchained pinyon-juniner sites in
central and southern Utah. Sediment yields were also measured. Results
of the studies indicate that conversion of pinyon-juniper cover to
orassland has not necessarily increased infiltration rates or always
reduced sediment yields at a civen noint on such lands. Similar findings
have resulted from small watershed studies in Arizona (Brown, 1970).

This study renorts the influence of several vecetal and edanhic
factors on infiltration and sediment production rates of pinyon-juniper

(Pinus mononphylla-Juniperus os teosperma ) sites in Utah.

a a Sa

VY ‘eather Bureau River Forecast Center, Salt Lake City, !'tah, 84116,
and “latershed Science Unit, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, 84321

ee

nOrpoNT hea notte! Pal-nakoneuftal evotoey
‘et at 2ekt2 tonteul—yovelt beatedd wo

ME easetefod .d onvo2 , brotha 7 bfeted pambht th! bere?

| ettetuno 2f astey nofssrs (ftat conouttnt ote ood ont g20ilt ontatted
(OA2f edonnti107} eova6e not iit. b.19 ont to sotvered otraforbyit onthnssetohn ot
aood ava’ atotset wens . 20872 hatin!) ayedesu nt seatnut-novita to
bas titty bi6-tmoe Fo eothude sud eNotteva fiat ontoneultnt 26 box tanaos7
| | .besint! asec oved anotseua te
bas .21sFAIH’ .buotti9 bas (2021) arsdsfad bas poroVtto .anahINhy
mobrsy 35 RoMNVTtTTh ater norsewTTtat hasvoqet oven (ocr) eect Too
nt 2ott2 yantout-sovata hentsiony vised bins hantars AS noowtod agaton
ot fveot -beyuenen o2fs avo abfaty tnemtbe2 des!) avertuoe nts fevtris |
OF T9v09 Yaqtnut-noyntd to notersvnoo Isvit otsotbat 2atbute otf to .
evsuls vo. eates notte stat heessant vlfyse2anan ton ase bnateasin
apntbntt vitet2 .ebrisl dove no taton novin s 48 ebfoty dneathae’ besubar
; cover .o78) srDsty at 2etbyte borevetsw [Tene mort hottveey over! 7
otrosbe bas fntonoy fexvee to aoneultat sit 2tvonsy ybute otnT

reqtaul-noyata to 20387 nottouborq tasmthse2 brs nottert i fiat no 2yot257

ASI nt eatte (gm anoteo auisetoul-st iyegonon aunts)

=

_etedne? Jesoerol yovis ussrw!

eOFThS . Anti evdtd.eded af aeataot ME
| vin'! sted2 ‘fet! . Stall soneia’ berets

TSEDS . stot) .m6QO) ed

Abstract. Pelationships between vecetal and edaphic factors and infiltration
rates and erosion as measured on 550 infiltrometer nlots from ninyon and
juniper sites in Utah were analyzed by multiple rearession analysis.

Those factors apnearina most frequently in the equations for predictina
infiltration rates (reaardless of tire interval) included total porosity

in the 9-3 inch layer of soil, percent bare soil surface, soil texture

in the 0-3 inch layer of soil, and crown cover. The ability to predict
infiltration rates (as determined by pe ) varied with time and geographic

location. ‘iot only did ne

vary, but independent variables explainina such
variance also changed with time and location. Factors influencina sediment
discharge were so variable from one geoqgranhic location to another that

no consistent relation was found.

notiert! at bas zvoto03 diane bas fstenoy noswi antienottstet
bas noynin mort atota setonort fink ore no boww269n 2«.nofivine tne
atevisns roteeetne fargo va besyfens ovow dsdt! at eatte onte -
entjathara Ts) 2nottsnins or at vitmounor? s20n ontyesans 2notae? seutt- ae
ys teor09 Tedot hebufant (f svisini ontt 0 2zeatbisner) ests notterd! ttat

a _

oqusxet Ftoz ,osstw2 Ftoe ost tnodien ,ftoe to rovel sont f-0 ott at
Sather of yttttds Sat .19¥09 mor bas .ftoz Fo toys! dont €-0 odd-nt.
attasimoan bas nts Atty botyey ( 34 vit boittendteh es) 2ote1 notisatlitat. ag
loue pine tons 2s f Istrnv saobnecabnt tud .vev Sy bib yfno toi .nobkteool
Jnamt hee ogtoneut ni e108 983 .notseco! bns outt Attw beonsdo o2fs sansitey
tert Yordtons ot notesso! atenginey S10 nontt afdsiyev 02° 979" sprEioz ib

.bayot 207 hottsiay tnasetenos of

Methods

A Rocky “ountain infiltrometer (Nortianac, 1951) vas utilized to
Simulate high intensity (three in/hr or qreater) rainfall on nlots
approximately 2.5 ft? in size. Twenty-eiaht treated and 28 nearby untreated
pinyon-juniner sites were sampled with a total of 559 infiltrometer plots
near Price, Eureka, “ilford and 8landina, Utah, durina the summers of 1967
and 1968. Descriptions of the sites have been aiven previously ("illiams,
Gifford, and Coltharp, 1969: Gifford, "illiams and Coltharn, 1970).

A11 plots were pre-wet a minimum of 2-3 hours before infiltrometer
runs beaan. Runoff was measured at selected time intervals durina each
infiltrometer run. Simulated rainfall ‘vas applied to each plot until a
constant runoff rate was reached.

Sediment was measured by collectina total runoff nlus sediment from
each plot, mixing thorouchly, and finally obtaining a l-oquart sample.

The water was then evanorated off, sediment oven-dried, and sample weiahts
converted to tons per acre.

Soil surface characteristics of each nlot included nercent bare
surface soil, nercent litter, percent rock (soil narticles ocreater than
two millimeters in diameter), and percent basal area of plants. These
soil surface characteristics were measured with a point cuadrat frame
which covered an entire infiltrometer plot. The quadrat frame contained
199 points; therefore, each strike equalled 1 percent coveraqe.

Venaetal crown cover determinations were made in two ways. The first
method utilized the noint quadrat frame, and crown cover measurements

were taken concurrently with soil surface characteristic measurements.

- od bastitpe- aed (12°T - mato") sadsrond tat nisi00" ee
rete

atofa na ffstaisy (notes x0 ai\nt sett) yitenodat of: fmt va

ei
+ ny eee

seeccatiaoe viwson PS ‘bas botsats IHoko-ysngeT -oste nt Sq 2 Ss vi . pane
asofa wotonoys fink O42 to retot a iste botemse | oven zatte pa -
TAF Yo erommie oct ontaub . 63" on tiast® bas bot tt stows .90f19 eon
~amet flit) vfsuotvers movin ased ovad eotte erit to anottatises ae Bl ons
(OVE perveiitfod bas amehtfil .drotthe hii ements Tod ns bot 89
satomowt {Fink evoted ewor €-8 to cwintntn 6 . topmane oto atofq [ ‘
dase onfaub afsvisint ovtt bataofor te pomuenom 26% Poni anos! anu
§ [tink tola fone ot hstiads ase [Istnisy botsfunte Uy aatenors Hai
-bodosen anv sen ‘Yom tastenoo
matt Inenibo2 eutn tronuy [tos onttoof too ve bowuesem >A " $naatho? |
.oforge wichipen 5 pntsteto yifantt bas evidowotods ontxtn sofa ~

atitotow ofemse bre ehotth-neve tnomthse .Ho badsroasve ost 26 19360 out

NDS ‘x9q enot od botyswnd | i
.. ayed fasten bsbufont halle ‘fase to sobtabvedsenans eodhut toe | :

nant yeteotn eafottyen ftoz) toot dnsove9 eTessit tanooven .ftoz sastive | a
azoT .ainsta to sore [neat Sneotsg bas .(vetomath nf evotomi (ite ows |

anss? terbsun tetod 6 dite bewesen anaw aotte tretos sro eoptiwe Ifo2

bontstnos obyt Sstbsup oT = .Jofo sasonors Th int svttins a6 beravoo fatty
-opevaves tnsovee fF ‘pot fsuns odtate dose rovotorent reanton oof
sont? off .2vew oud cit ober ove 2notisatinetob “vod fRMOAD tetiey -

The second method consisted of clipping each plot. The total veaetal
cover was bagged, then taken to the lab and oven dried for 24 hours. This
oven dry weiaht (tons/acre) was used as an index of vecetal crown cover.

Percent rock 7 2mmd and soil texture were determined from disturbed
soil samples collected from the ton 3 inches of soil immediately adjacent
to each plot or from the plot itself. Soil texture was determined by the
hydrometer method (Pouyoucos, 1962).

Bulk density was determined from undisturbed samples taken from each
plot with a Uhland soil sampler. Samples were returned to the laboratory
and oven dried at 105 dearees centicrade for 24 hours.

The percentage of water stable sand-sized (0.02-2 millimeter diameter)
soil agereaates in sieved soil samnles was determined hy using a modified
Bouyoucos hydrometer method in which the Calgon was omitted.

Organic matter was determined by the loss on ignition method.

Soil porosity was measured on undisturbed soil samples prior to
bulk density determinations. Porosity vas determined at two moisture
levels, one at oven dry conditions and the other at 30 cm tension.
Measurenents were made using a technique similar to that ewloyed by
Hoover, Olson, and “letz (1954).

Percent moisture of the surface soil of each nlot was determined
five minutes after an infiltrometer run was completed. The soil moistur?
by weight was determined by weighing the samnle in wet condition, oven

drying at 195 degrees C for 24 hours, then weishing again.

Analysis of Variables

An area-wise multiple rearession analysis was utilized in analyzing

infiltration-erosion relationships within and among the four major

: am ei
_ feteosv [stot afT tata Hosn oatant fs to povetane i + bno:
atiT 207 BS 407 beith nove na6 def ott of aedad nor onned Zo oa
.18V09 nore TRtonay to xobat nip 26 beau bei (e40\enot) Hote nw
hoduteth movt horkeyetoh ever ovutiet Troe bas’ bras ‘<do01 fnsovet
tneseths vfotsthont ftoz tn eovont & ant ont ont badoot Tos eofqnise aye
ot vd hentoriatsh apy ewdxat Tro? /tfoett tofa ont mon? bi tolaq toKe a3
| ; . (Saof 2oguowe”) bodten natenotbys
dose mort goaded 2efnrse bodwwdefhan mot baditertadal egy yitenab Mud
wvioteiodsf ont of berytoy sve aatrnn? .ratonee fto> bret dU fn atte Fotq
“apo 8S q9% obeintdnes 200%! 29 ts boty navo bas
(yetomsth totemt Tl im S280, (r) beste-bnse ofdete totew to ongdnsoyo0 ont
hatttbom 6 pateu vd betiteistoh 26y esfouse [roe bovete at sadaoonns ltoe
pd sbostimo es nop ted oi!t datty at borton setomorhyad 209oYLiod
hotter nots tart no 220f oft yd bontimeteb 2 eB sodden stage 7
ot “ofa eafeanse: Troe bodwdethav do bowense 2a vttzowne Tho? | |
aius2fom ows $6. hontrrateb 260" ysteoto9 -2nottentistab wit enab tfud | j
dotenot ma '0€ 36 vrlto ont bas ondittbn0s yb nyo de ano .2tovel 1 ni
vd hovel oro tedt of veftate cuptarsed 6 oateu’ oben ene 2tnori1u269" oe |
| } (h2°f) stot bas .no2lO .tevooll
hentryvateb 2e~ tole dase to Troe sostuii2 oft to sistetom $n9919%
swuteton {toz ofl .botefamos es iu nagonors i tint as 19978 2etuntm ovt?
nevo , nots hbnos tow nt stqmse’ ont pntdptow vd bentirstob 26M tiintow vd

. intsps util not . atuod M 407 3 — aT ts on tyr
i i

- agli to 2iayfenk —

e*

seoaraphic locations. Other independent variables besides those described
under !’ethods included site, treatment (untreated vs. treated) and total
silt plus clay in the surface three inches of soil. The total number of
independent variables was then increased to 40 (Table 1) by includira
squared and cubed values of those independent variables where preliminary
oraphing procedures indicated non linear relationshins.

The five denendent variables vere chosen to represent certain
important asnects of natural hich intensity convectional thunderstorms.
Dependent variables included infiltration rate durina the 3-4 minute time
interval (this variable gives an indication of infiltration rates at the
onset of a high intensity convectional storm), infiltration rate durina
the 8-13 minute time interval (this variahle sives the infiltration rate
perhaps midway through a typical convectional storm), infiltration rate
durine the 33-38 minute time interval (this time interval represents the
final or constant infiltration rate), erosion in tons per acre per inch
of runoff, and total water retained on a plot for 49 minutes (this variable
gives the integrated retention capability of the soil).

Stepwise multiple rearession equations were developed for each of
the four chosen geocraphical areas in Utah: (1) East central part
(Price area), (2) west central part (Eureka area), (3) southvest rortion
(Milford area), and (4) southeast portion (8landing area). Fiaqure 1 is
a map showino location of infiltrometer studies. In addition, commosite
multiple regression equations were derived from all infiltrometer plots

taken throughout the state.

hottra20b sort 2shtged 26fistisy snabagaphat soit‘ “2not 3800 - pias |
Tstod brs (hottort ‘av hotesvinu) tnamtecrd cette soot ie i < |
to re'nun fetos oT -ftn2 to zartont samt gaptiwe ont at lo see |
na Foulont yi ef: ofdsT) O8 ot bezsorant nat 26y' eofdstrsyv itll . +
crantattain § erorhs 2ifdstesy tnsbnoqebat seodt Yo esuTsv devua bne beveund ;
. antdenottefoy asonit non hateothat zonubso0v9 ontdgee,
NtsIVSS Inez we oF. aszerd3 19" sold ttsy snabnoqsb ovit oft
.emrvot2rshoudd fanottooveos \Stengsnt tora fevuser to 2399026 dnahronat
ontt otuate B-€ sid ontiwh ots aottenst Fant bebu font sof dsivey -tnobrsaa
od $8 2etny otters tt tat to notisotbat 6 savin ofdstysy pret) Favrssat
pats 9367 sottert Hat «(mote [snottoevens vitenotat inka 6 to tone
at 67 nottert tat ott eovin sfesivev 2tdt) feviotat ott osueta CF-8 otlt
ates not serst rint (rote. Fanntssevnoo f satavs 5 dovor's vevhin.2qphion 7 ’
oat 2tnezo1ae1 Taviotnt smts aids) Favrosnt omit otuntm ME-88 ot pabywb | ;
font i9q S198 eq anos nt not2ots lesen nottsrtlttat Instenoo ve fentt |
sidetwsy 2ttt) 2otuntm Of oT toin 5 M0 bontatoy votew {5303 bas ,Ttonut To
i . (Troe oid te yi FT teense nofineger. botaipoiat ont 2avin
to fose yo? bodefavalh eraw anottsupe ‘nota2sy0e" ofats fw s2twqss2 F

trisq Tartnes #287 (fF) sea at 26976 Tsatdasin0se aseods io? oat
notsion t2eenltuoe (E)- (8978 6Aow3 ) en Isvtneo + 2gn. {$) .{sorxs aot)
2? f owott .(s0m patbnsf#) wafiion t2sodsuo2 (0) bas: (8076 bro? TF")
ostzocmog ,notttbbs al .estbute tetancvslitat to notisool ontwode gam: 6
ajoln vetomorsfttat ffs mov? beviash ove enotteuns aot —-
ates? OS ot nots

oe

aL

Table 1. Variables related to infiltration and erosion that were measured
on each infiltrometer plot

Dependent Variables

Y,; Infiltration rate (3-4 minute time interval)

Yo Infiltration rate (8-13 minute time interval)

Y3 Final infiltration rate

Yq Erosion (tons per acre per inch of runoff)

Ye Total water retained on infiltrometer plots after 40 minutes

Independent Variables

X} Site (assigned a value from 1 to 28)

Xo Treatment (untreated vs chained, and assigned a value of 1 and 2
respectively)

Xz Oraanic matter (% in top 3 inches of soil)

Xq Organic matter (%) squared

Xe Organic matter (%) cubed

Xe Bare soil (%)

Xz Bare soil (%) squared

Xg Crown cover (%) measured

Xg Crown cover (%) squared

Xig Rock cover (%) > 2 mm

X17 Rock cover (%) squared

Xo Litter cover (%)

X13 Litter cover (%) squared

X14 Plant bases (% area coverage)

X15 Plant bases (%) squared

X16 Soil moisture (% at 30 cm tension)

X17. Soil moisture (% at 30 cm tension) squared

X1g Soil moisture (% at 30 cm tension) cubed

X1g Total porosity (%)

Xoq Total porosity (%) squared

X91 Total porosity (%) cubed

Xoo Bulk density (gms/cc)

X53 Bulk density (ams/cc) squared

Xoq Porosity at 30 cm tension

Xo5 Porosity at 30 cm tension squared

Xog Crown cover (dry wt., tons/acre)

X97 Crown cover (dry wt., tons/acre) squared

Xog Crown cover (dry wt., tons/acre) cubed

X9q Soil moisture (% in top 3 inches of soil 5 minutes after completion of
infiltrometer run)

X3q Soil moisture (%) squared

X31 Soil (%).< 2mm in 0-3 inch layer of soil

bsweson oyow tadd notzove brs —— of bote

zoldetasy pres

(fsvistnt sat? osuntm b-£) stay pene
(févvatnt ontt otuntm €f-8) ster notiss!lh
‘eter norssys (hat
(*tonuy toon? w4q o496 Yor enos) pie nate
aie Oh yatts etalq wstomoxdl ttt no hontai vas eN fssoT

2oftatapl tnobr abrsgésbn
oe

{es of [ we ouTav § banotens) atte

S bis f to onfsv 5 bsipt226 bas .bantsds av botssitau) InomtsoxT
(vfovitooqest

({ioz to aaron? € aot at &) voddem otnsowd

borsup2 it “ostam otnseW

" Bodug, yoston atnsp40

- (2) -Ero2 9169

hovsup2 (X%) Fro2 ors?

_berwesom {X) yove: nwotd.

> betsupe (2) ysves word

' ma §$.< (0X) weves A008

hevsupe (2) yeveo A208

&) Yevoo tettiS gt

‘Poreupe (2) wavos erst --¢(X

(apevavo> sais 2) 2o2e6d tnsf9 | arx

hovsupe (X) goesd dnslG 3px

(ote m2 O€ ts 5 gwutetom-fto2 arXx

énttai ‘to

=O
ose

> ar
ee ©

be wsUN2

nofenss ma OF 36 &) otwtetom [ro2: yk
— hedys

sofanat mo O€ 36.8) swtetom fie. gpk

: tS ysieovog. [630T-* ‘op %

borsup2 (¥) yt Feotoq FsdoT : goXk

bedua (% ySteowoq fatoT.- rex

~ (29\ , IVA ex
ovine deter. ystensb aAfud
noftenss mo O€ 36 yth20%0"%

bovsuri2 notanst win NM 36 y¥tte2o0v09 |

raed de «- 3 Yb) Yovod mwo1d a

boreune (o706\eno¢ ed ID) Tav0o ewer) ee

badus (s¥os\enot ..Iw Le intr "piped .
to nétieranss 193%5 293untm 2 Ttoz to ona & aos I

. betsup ; at ae
ttoz to vaya tonit e-0 at ans x) Hie
a : 7”
a Sid

|

f 4
; ah oe :
+f iy . _y

av
-

ie S
- oo
ae

Soil (%) squared
Soil (%) cubed
Soil sized aggregates (%) < 2mm in 0-3 inch layer of soil
Soil sized aggregates (%) squared

Rock (%4)77 2 mm in 0-3 inch layer of soil

Rock (%) squared
Total silt plus clay (%
Total silt plus clay (
Total silt plus clay (

) in 0-3 inch layer of soil
%) squared
%) cubed

SS eee

[toe to rovel dant €-0 at mnS =) we ssromne
. ba tsun2
‘fhoz to towel fant £-0. at aad et

herreuipe. a).
oe to vows! dant £-0 nt (r veld auto #fte tetot ‘
oe ins housune (2) yao eufo tite fs ero eex
.. , badus (2) ‘ale eulq tft2 [ssoT i

. —_ -
OO ee eee emeens ermniene mee —— Pe See be ee cee: . i ee ees
: + ; as ;
- 7
mm"
Daa |
ae

Results and Discussion

Infiltration Rate During 3-4 Minute Time Interval. The multiple
regression models presented below (Tables 2-6) include variables which
each explained 1} percent or more of the variance associated with the
given dependent variable in the original model which utilized 40
independent variables.

Price Area. At the Price area, 51 percent of the variability associated
with infiltration rates during the 3-4 minute time interval was accounted
for by utilizing 40 independent variables (Table 2). Of the 40 variables,
only 12 explained 1 percent or more each of the variability. Six variables
each accounted for two percent or more of the variability. Consideration
of only the 12 variables explainina 1 percent or more of the variability
associated with 3-4 minute infiltration rates yields an R2 of .38.

The initial infiltration rates of a soil are frequently rather
variable. This is understandable when factors influencing initial wetting,
incipient ponding, and start of overland flow are considered. Timing of
these events is not uniform from plot to plot and could be a contributing
factor to variability associated with infiltration rates during the 3-4
minute time interval.

Eureka Area. The 40 variable multiple regression model accounted for 62
percent of the variability associated with infiltration rates during the
3-4 minute time interval within the Eureka area. Of the 40 independent
variables, 15 explained 1 percent or more each of the variability while

nine explained 2 percent or more each.

nofeause td bas astuzen

oft stun svt fsviptet omtT osunttt §-€

dotde: 2ofdstrey Abifoat (aS 2afdet) vofod botnanedy etobon’ Zoro
ott. “itty. botston2e8 sanstisy od Fo o70m 10: tasoT9N 2 neg ae

ON bosFfity' dotde febom Isatetvo odd at ofdstiey anabroneb nevip >
.2atdatvey tnobraoqebat

hotstoozes wititdstyey oft %o tngo1eq [2 .sove sated oft tA .soA a0 Be

bosavesos 2sw fsvtetni omtt otuntm b-€ oft ontyub 2ose1 nofiewi tint adie. oo :

<2ofdstisy O8 ofS 79 .{S ofdsT) ealdstyvev tnsbnasqebnt O8 pntstitsy yd sO?

_ ell, apes,

2oldsrysy xf2 .vstftdstvsy ott to toss ston Yo tnsoven [ bentsiqxs Sf yino . P..
nottayobtanod .vttf{tdsivsy sdt to stom Yo fneoved owt wot betnunoss. doR-.
Vit fidstiy att.to svom yo tneoredq ontntetqxe, eof datvey Sf ont. yfne Yo ..
f.:-70 “A ne ablety 2atsr otter? tint otuntm S-€ dgiw bodstooras- | -
vorts? yfinouport os. [fro2 6 to este noidevslitat [stsint ont . |
-pntistow fetstat -onfonoultet? exotost ner sfdsbastzisbnw at 2tat “,oldsisev “al
to ontmiT: .bewsbtenos cvs wolt basfyevo to trst2 brs nthe tenbabal _
onftudtstnes 6 od bluoo bre gofq of Joia mort mottay ton ef 2ineve szond ._
S-£ sat oath 2etes aotiertt rte. id te hosstoozes ysifidstysy oF totos?
fevestat omtt odunte
$3 vet betnve2as Tobon nokeestney ofgitium oldsiasy 08 oT (ASMA Slows.
oft pattub 2otsy notes tint Asher betstooe2s ysil rdstvev ont to ins o9¢q ‘
Sngbrieqobnt Ob ody. 70 606 GDH sid ntritiw Tevratnt “a BE:
of tity vide tvey: ant Yo dase stom-1o Inooteq § bontsiqxe ef 2 ia :
.12969:.9710m Yo “tneoT8g: S b are i

Uniformity of soil conditions in the Eureka area may account for
the higher coefficient of determination. The authors noticed that sites
within this geographic location contained fev rocks over 2 mm in diameter
in the top 3 inches of soil. This could be expressed in less erratic
responses in magnitude of dependent variables to changes in magnitude of
independent variables.
Blanding Area. Forty variables explained only 32 percent of variation
associated with infiltration rates during the 3-4 minute time interval
at the Blanding area. Eleven variables each accounted for 1 percent or
more of the variation while only five accounted for 2 percent or more each.
Milford Area. Similar to the Blanding area, a rather low percentage of the
variance in early infiltration rates was accounted for (R2=. 41), Fach
of eight variables accounted for one percent or more of the variability
while six accounted for 2 percent or more variability each.
Composite of all Areas. A model covering all four ceographic locations
accounted for 43 percent of the variability associated with infiltration
rates durina the 3-4 minute time interval. Fiaht variables accounted
for 1 percent or more each of variability while only three explained 2 or
more percent each.
Summary. The preceding five equations utilizing 40 dependent variables
explained from 32 percent to 62 nercent of the variance associated with
infiltration rates during the 3-4 minute time increment. Of the 40
dependent variables, only treatment and sand sized water stable aagregates
(between .02 and 2 millimeters in diameter) in the top three inches of
soil (either singularly, squared, or cubed), failed to explain 1 percent

or more of the variance in any of the multiple rearession equations.

rd

. ae

10? Jnvos2s ¥Em S996 BOW ott at ‘anorsthnos fh .
2osi2 tend beotton e2vorjus eAT .notsentareteb to sites

_ Yetonsth at mm §. 1evo atooy west bontatnon mio? ‘tibet at ob i
ofisrise 220f nt hoeesyaxe ad bfuon 2tdT . Shoe 40 2ortont £ 0? ons ‘ -

MN Lee haf:
to shustapsm at 2eansdo of esfdsiaey gnobsasqeb +0 obud tone nt zaenonasy .

.2ofdstysy uabasqabat

nottsinsy %o InoqIeg SE yfno bentsfaxe 2afdstrsv yIv07 .s21h patinata

ide Aes

feviatnt omnis agunim &-€ off pakwb 20¢87 nottsrti fot dttw batetaozes
© Insoveq f tot bstnvooos dose 2aldstysv navel] . 696 prtbasla ant ts
F288 ston IO Jnso19q § TOT bodnwoIDE ovtt yfno STtrtw avttetrey oil %0 oom
ay To snsineorsq wof volisy 6 , sot ontbastS ont ot ref tmt2 697A brott Hi
dag? ih. = 759). 10? hosmuoo96 esw 2otey otters tint vives nf gonstrey
vitlidstyav oft Yo oven to taozved sno 40% bodnudvos 2oldsinrsv tiptoe to
-fo68 vsti tdstysv svom 40 trooreq § 187 bstnwooss xt2 of itrlw
anotjsoo! atrasynoon wot [fs ontieves Ishon A 26074 \ 116 t0 o$t20nmo9
notsei thee Attw hetstoozes ytFl tdstysv ot to tneo%q E8 Ot betnuesss
hognuos96 2eldsiaav Hot] .fsviednt amit ofuntm d-£ ot onfwb 2oter
‘10. S bonksfaxe. sevdd vino ofitdw vttltestiev to dose oom +0 fnooveq fT +07
.f1969 Jno0189 510m
esfdsirsv tnshasqab 98 patstitiv enottéuie svi t patboasia oT -\temmue
tiv botétaozas songtyev oft to Jngavati $2 oF tno219q SE mot bentsiaxs -
on og 70 . .Snomeront omts stuntm 8-€ oft onivwh 20361 notiersi tint
2s3 eps Taps sldste wetew beste base bas tnomsso1} yIno .2ofdetisy tInebneqob
to eortant eons. qod oft. at (totoinsth ‘nf evotont{ {tm $ bas SO. ecrtal
jnooueq | ntsfoxs oF bol ist ‘« (bsdud- yo . bovsune exirefupnte voritte) 1
. enottsyps .noteesines sfatstum-ods to yns at sonsty6y ont to on

Figure 1. flap of Utah showing the four geographic locations which were
studied (Price, Eureka, Blanding, and Milford, Utah).

stew date enotiasol atriqevbo0o0 wot oft ectwods dati to qa:
{Asti cans bis ‘eon brats 5191) .99119) betbute .

Aa

It is possible that effects of sand sized aagqreqates are not apparent
during the initial stages of an infiltration run. These effects become
important when they are considered Simultaneously with the rearrangement
of soil particles into blocking laraer pores. This phenomenon could
become more important following a longer period of simulated rainfall.

The followina four variables explained more than one percent of
the variance in at least three out of five of the prediction equations:

(1) total porosity (0-3 inches soil depth), (2) percent bare soil,
(3) silt plus clay percent (0-3 inches depth), and (4) percent soil < 2mmd,
cubed (0-3 inches depth).

Infiltration Rate During the 8-13 Minute Time Interval
Price Area. The 40 variable model explained 62 percent of the variability
associated with infiltration rates during the 8-13 minute time interval.
Fourteen variables each explained J] percent or more of the resultant
variation, while each of seven accounted for 2 percent or more of the
variation (Table 3).
Eureka Area. Sixty-five percent of the variance was explained by the
40 variables in the Eureka area. One percent or more of the variability
was explained by each of 12 variables with seven exnlaining 2 percent or
more each.

Blanding Area. The 40 variable model for Blandina yielded an R2 = .59

with 14 variables each explaining one percent or more of the variance and
five explaining 2 percent or more each.
Milford Area. The 40 variable multiple regression model explained 66

percent of the variance associated with infiltration rate during the

ee |

ais He
: Siaal

sinrndiia ‘ton 246 2o7snev808 ‘boxte base Xo atnorts su 0 aes ;
qmesed 2t29¥e s2udt ut sottexst htt me to eonste totstat aso
Snomepnsriss oad H3te ylevoonssfumte borebi anos oe vars nore 9
bios nonemansita akiT .2e00 wos! pntioold oda eafotttsq ae :
Setter betslunte2 “to botreq yepnof 5 pntwoFfot Snssroqnt oor enoged

to Jneav9q ano nBit oven bentsfaxs 2oldsttsy wot oatwot fot oT

, =
-
7

—
ae

:enottauns nottotbord sit to ovtt. to: tuo cowl tase ts at. sonsiev ont
ftoe asd tnaovea (S$) .{fsasb [to2 eacont ¢-0) ysteov0, esata (1

ean > hoe dnox: om (8) bas .{dtoob earont £0) Snest89 velo 2uta $ft2 (ey
- (taste 2ortont £-9) bbodua

Sevyetnt omtt tT ssunt_€f-8 oft Pn kw ate notsertthtot
vit te shisy oft to frieze £4 bantaigxs [abor oldstrev ‘On ott ba oots4
fevreset nts otuntm £128 oft prtaub 2otat nottsrat tat ati batstso2e |
ined fueor ort} %o ovom 40 tnga1en T bentsiqxe ross eof dsinsy Ase wOT
atid +0 som 40 tnao14 S$ Yo? botnu0[26 navee2 to oep ol tee enotistysy —
Ae otdet) nottstysy
ae vd hantitien 26 Sanairav: oft to Insoyoq ovit-vanie: BOTA sews
vi tT Fdstysy ort 0 910m 40 dnoa%aq on0 .897%6% som odd at eofdsttsy Ob
"0 treated S$ onintstaxe nove2 i3tw 2oldstysv Si Yo nose vd bontstqxs 26w
| . fone orto"
2. = "9 nb bobfaty onithnsta rot fobom ofdsirsy Ob off .noyh patbaala
bis constysy oft to s4om 10 dnso1sq sno pstntélaxa dose 2ofdsivey Bf ritiv
ako stom 10 tneatsq § entat leat
a9 bsntsfaxe Tabor nokeeonsy afqtttun ofdsitey ns oft oon §
“oft on feb otéy nobisrs tint “id Fey ~aaade conto ond Yo jns

ee "i
a

ee a | ees x |

8-13 minute time interval. Thirteen independent variables each accounted
for at least 1 percent of the variability while seven accounted for at
least 2 percent each.

Composite of Four Areas. A surprising low nercentage of variability
associated with infiltration rates during the 8-13 minute time interval
was explained using 40 variables. Forty-six nercent was explained with
Six variables explaining 2 percent or more each of the variance while
only seven accounted for 1 percent or more each of the variance.

summary. The preceding five multiple rearession model equations explained
from 46 to 66 percent of variation associated with the 8-13 minute
infiltration rate.

Percent bare soil surface squared accounted for 1 percent or more
of the variation in four of the five equations for this particular time
interval. Crown cover (percent), percent rock (0-3 inches), total
porosity, and soil moisture percent (5 minutes followine infiltrometer
run) each explained 1 percent or more of variability in three out of five
multiple regression model equations.

The importance of these variables to infiltration rates is
understandable. Effects of crown cover and/or bare soil may become of
increasing importance as the time from the beginning of an infiltrometer
run is increased. Percent rock in the surface 3 inches of soil and total
porosity manifest an influence on soil moisture primarily through their
effects on permeability and hydraulic conductivity in the subsoil.
Conceivably these factors would show an importance once the soil surface

is wetted and moisture begins percolating through subsurface soils.

oe ee EEE ea aE De bate ee ee

Soil moisture percent of the soil 5 minutes after the end of an
infiltration run reflacts an interrelation of soil shvsical conditions.
Soil acarecation, organic matter contert, micro nores, etc. influence
the maqnitude of this factor. These factors all have an influence on
infiltration rates of the soil throuchout an infiltration run as vell

as during the 8-13 minute time interval.

Infiltration Pate Purina the 33-33 Vinute Tine Interval
Price Area. The final infiltration rate was considered reached after
33 minutes of the infiltration run. ''tilizine this tire interval, 68
nercent of the variahility in infiltration rates vas explained with 406
indenendent variahiles at the Price area (Table 4). Fach of 12 variables
accounted for 1 nercent or more of the variability while nine exnlained
2 nercent or more each.
Fureka frea, Oniv 47 rercent of the variability associated sith the
infiltration rate durina the 33-38 minute tire interval is exnlained
usina 49 variables for the Eureka area. Of this 47 nercent, each of
eicht variables exnlain 2 nercent or more variation each.
Rlandina “rea. Similar to the Eureka area, a rather small nercentace of
the variability is explained in the model develoned. Only 45 percent is
explained utilizing 40 variables. Ff these 40 variahles, nine account
for 1 "ercent or more each of variability while only four account for
2 nercent or more each.
Milford Area. Seventy nercent of variability associated with the 33-38
minute time interval was exnlained in the recression model at the ‘ilford
area. ‘line denendent variables accounted for at least ? nercent each of

the variability and 11 explained 1 nercent or more each.

ee ae ia Se Eee a eel aE Se eee 0 mel eee ee SEER aes

Composite of al] Areas. Only AB nercent of the variability was exnlained

in the 40 variable model utilizina 559 nlots from all areas combined.
Ten variables accounted for 1 nercent or rore each of the variability
while each of four exnlained 7? nearcent or rore.
summary. The nrecedina multinle rearession models, develoned for nradictina
infiltration rates for the 33-38 minute time interval of an infiltration
run, explained from 45 to 79 percent of the variability associated with
infiltration rates measured durina this time interval. Ff the 49
incenendent variables used to develon these rodels only tvo explained 1
percent or more of the variability in three or more riodel questions.
Crown cover (tors ner acre) explained 1 percent or more of the variability
in three out of five model equations and crown cover (tons per acre)
squared explained 1 nercent or more variability in four of the five
equations. fAcain, this relationshin can he attributed te the nrotection
against raindron imnact afforded by crovn cover. ‘s one rrocresses
further into an infiltration run. the duration of annlied rainfall increases,
thus sivina a creater opnortiunity for destruction of soil surface features
which normally promote infiltration. Surface runoff and infiltration
tosather transnort smaller narticles into lareer pores, thereby creatira
conditions canahle of imnadina infiltration rates.

The only variable (either sinaularly or sauared) which cid not
axniain | -ercent or more of the variability in anv of the five rearession

equations *as percent basal area.

== ===> SS SS Sa QS SeSCa=~ —— =e =a aaa ioe

Erosion-Tons per “cre per Inch of Runoff. This narameter was measured
for each of the four areas and a comnosite of the four areas.
Price Area. For the Price area only 33 nercent of tho variability
associated with erosion in tons ner acre ner inch of runoff was ripigee
usina a 40 variable multinle rearession analvsis (Table 5). Each of
twelve variables accounted for 1 nercent or more of the variability and
four exnlained at least 2 percent each.
Eureka Area. A substantially hicher nercentace of variability was
explained in the 40 variable model in the Fureka area for erosion in tons
ner acre ner inch of runoff. Sixty-three percent of the variability
was explained with each of eiaht variables exnlainina 1 percent or more
of the variance and seven accountire for 2 nercent or more each.
Blanding Area. Forty-nine percent of the variability associated with
this dependent variable was exnlained in the 49 variable reoression model.
Of the 4N variables, 1 nercent or more of the variation was exnlained bv
each of 13 variables and 2? nercent or more was exniained bv each of 19
variables.
"ilford ‘rea. Acain very little of the variability associated with erosion
rates in tons per acre per inch of runoff was exnlained in the multiple
recression model. Thirty-four vercent of the variability was explained
usina 49 variables, with seven independent variables accountina for 1
percent or more each of this variability and only two variables exnlainina
2 mnercent or more each.
Comnosite of all Areas. nlv 2° nercent of variability associated with
erosion was explained with a 40 variable model. fA model of this nature

could not be successfully utilized for predictina erosion. Only five

eS

hoyuenorm ane yetanaigea etaT Pon? to font: 19, on S42" 9
L816 wo? eff Fo other 6 bn. 2nevn wot ‘dt ¥0 fone, 9
| vat Ttdeiiey edt Yo snaoven €F “fino nore oti? silt eh cron notyt

5 ae co ’

bitdietails 26'' ttanwy *o wont 120 9905 190 orot ot sohooye ot be heistonzes

¥o “okD .. (F afdeT) aiavtont not azoynan ofers fry ofdstasy ON 6 are
bas vititesiney ot to. oven to toovon f sot hotnuooos 2ofdetisy ovfeut

69 tnoorree S$ tesef $6 bentefaxo. wot

26 VItT tisiisy to onstaooise saint yifettistedua t 50h eto

enot at ndteors tot save slow att nt Fohom oftsivey 0% ont. at bonte faxes
vst tt ‘atrsy ond Fo trosreq nont't-waxt? tomy to Mont dan 108 190

ston Yo tneoied T ontatsfoxe eoldstrey Stinte Yo"tone tte honts taxa 26!

foc over 19 tapgvee S$ to? onttaucsos noven- bes. fans f6v and to

thy botatooresn vettt istrsy os ¥o tnooren entn-ytvo} . .s9tA. ontbnstei
fe ob a2eiNEY ofds tray Os ont at ar cate Texs esi < ishisv. Sashaeqob: aha”
vl bomtsfeke any AoTtsivey tt to oor xO tneaven f., 201s Psy las 93 70
ny to ftopa ve henits fnxe Pe BFOM v9 dnaoree S bee: 2ofesirvsy ef to dose
, } zatdstrey
a
nofzor doh begs booees esbtideduey: on, +6 BIgett wey area’ .6a18 byot tit
sfntstus' ots at bantsfaxe ene Mom 70 rlont toa s06 -Ye80 nod at 20387
hontslaxe’ 2a vit Ttdeiney ong % sasgree "Wor ve+tdT. Sobor notzeetnan
tet yO? pokirmoas eatdetany tiasnat rover Ative: - aol de hrsy an paten
onftntslaxe 2efesivev ont vine bee vstfidetrsy” atnt. to fons orion 10. denon
) : ——
itty botston2es vetitdstiav to tnoove °S via enon A ffs 0 9 tao —
owiten ett to fohow A ,fobor ofdstysy 98 s nthe bonbatone 26 6

-1959 @¥Om ws

hid

vit vino .poteore: ant sathow 40 boxt i tou vi fotebs9aus

nee Ti eee ie

variables accounted for more than 1 nercent each of the variability,

and only three variahles accounted for 2 nercent or more each.

Summary. Utilizine five multiple reoressicn equations, ?9 to 63 vercent of
variability associated with erosion in tons ner acre ner inch of runoff

was explained. fF the five equations. only the one develoned for the
Eureka area exnlained more than 49 percent of the variation associated

with erosion. Equations developed for Price, “ilford, and a composite

of all areas explained 34 nercent or less of the measured variability.

Such results indicate the extreme comnlexities in factors affectina
erosion. Interactions amona factors or lack of measurement of contributina
factors could be a cause for such low exnlained percentaces.

Bulk density and site were the only tivo variables that anneared ir
three or more multinle recression equations. The fact that site exerts
an influence indicates that certain unmeasured site conditions are
contributina to unexplained variability.

It is unusual that no variables pertainina to crown cover (either
percent coveraae or tons ner acre) or acareaate stability explained 1
percent or more of the variability in anv of the equations. It is
possible that aacrenates areater than ? mm diameter are of more importance
than anagreaates less than 2 mm diameter for vredictina erosion losses.
There is also the nossibility that stabilitv of soil anarenates is a
function of season of samplinc, as shown tv Bisal and Ferauson (1968).

Euaations developed for predictina erosion cenerally indicate
that most of the 40 factors should be supplemented with other site factors

hefore a successful prediction model can he develoned.

Total Mater (Inches) Petained on Each Infiltrometer Plot After 40 ‘‘inutes.
Price Area. Sixty-five percent of the variability associated ith total
water retained on each plot was explained utilizina 49 variables at the
Price area (Table 6). Fourteen variables axnlained at least 1 nercent
of this variahilitv “ith seven variables exnlainina 2? nercent or more.
Eureka Area. The multiple rearession model exnlained 60 nercent of the
variability associated with this particular hvcrolocic parameter.

Thirteen variables explained at least 1 nercent each of the variability
hile six accounted for at least 2 percert each.

Blanding Area. Only 47 percent of the variability in total water retained
on each infiltrometer plot after 40 minutes was accounted for by 49
variables in the Blanding area. fF this variability 1 percent or more

was accounted for by each of 11 variables. and ? nercent or more was
explained by each of four variables.

Milford Area. Sixty-nine percent of the variability in total water
retained was accounted for utilizing the 49 variable equation at the
ilford area. Thirteen variables each accounted for 1 percent or more

of the variability while nine exnlained 2 percent or more.
Comnosite of all Areas. Fifty percent of the variability associated with
total water retained on each plot was exnlained in the 40 variable model.
Tyo nercent or more of this variability was exnlained by each of five
variables and 1 nercent or more was exnlained bv each of 19 variables.
Summary. The nreceding five multiple rearession equations explained from
47 to 69 nercent of the variability associated ith total water retained on

a plot during a 40 minute infiltrometer run. %f the 40 variables used,

a plot durina a 49 minute infiltrometer run. fF the 49 variables used,
only two did not exnlain (either singularly, ¢cuared, or cubed) 1 nercent
or more of the variahility in at least one of the model eauations. The

two are bulk density and percent basal area coverage. Cron coveracde in
tons per acre accounted for 1 percent or more of the variability in al]
five equations and this same variable squared anneared in four out of

five equations. ‘‘icro-norosity (nores retaining water at 30 cm tension)
and macro-porosity (porosity at 30 cm tension) explained at least 1 nercent
of the variability in three out of five equations.

The relative importance of these variables is understandable. The
importance of crown cover has previously been discussed. The fact that
crown cover in tons per acre appears in all five of the multinle rearession
equations for total water retained on each nlot substantiates evidence
indicating its increasing importance as one nrooresses further into an
infiltration run. Percent soil moisture 5 minutes followina an infiltrometer
run also appeared in four out of five prediction equations. The retention
of soil moisture after 5 minutes of drainage is related to infiltration
phenomena as it is influenced by hydraulic conductivity of the soi]
sample. Micro and total porosity influence the amount of water retained

on each plot through their effect on subsurface water movement.

Conclusions
Studies of factors influencina infiltration and erosion on 28
chained pinyon-juniper sites throughout central and southern Utah have
shown that geographic location, time of the event, and the parameter of
interest (infiltration rate, erosion, or total water retained on plot)

are important considerations in such determinations.

—— — SS — _——— EE —_—— a= eS na ——_ es Ss a. - &

Table 7 shows percent variance in infiltration rates, total water
retained, and sediment production explained by 40 variable multiple
regression equations during different time periods within an infiltrometer
run. 'ithin a aiven time period the explained variance in infiltration
rates may vary considerably with aeoaranhic location (3-4 minute and 33-38
minute time intervals). At other times (8-13 minute time interval) the
response amona locations may be rather uniform.

Explained variance associated with infiltration rates at a given
location is not uniform amonaq varyine time intervals.

Lumping all ceographic locations together oenerally tends to minimize
effectiveness of the predictive equations, regardless of the dependent variable.

Not only does the ability to explain variance associated with
infiltration change with time and geographic location, but the parameters
explaining such variance also chanae with time and location. This is
shown in that 8 to 12 variables, 7 to 14 variables, and 9 to 12 variables
explained more than one percent variance in infiltration rates during the
3-4 minute, 8-13 minute and 33-38 minute time intervals, respectively.

Such variation was also shown in predictina total sediment discharge

and to a lesser extent in predicting total water retained on the plots.

Those variables anpearing in most of the equations for predicting infiltration
rates during a agiven time period were similar for the 3-4 minute and 8-13
minute time intervals, but changed completely for the 33-38 minute
infiltration rate. Important variables influencina total water retained

on the plots were similar to factors influencing infiltration rates during

the 33-38 minute time interval. Those factors appearina most frequently

in the equations for predicting infiltration rates (regardless of time
interval) include total porosity in the 0-3 inch layer of soil, percent
bare soil surface, soil texture in the 0-3 inch layer of soil, and crown
cover. Percent bare soil may be particularly important on many of our
semi arid ranceland watersheds, esnecially as related to annual runoff
values (Lusby, 1970; Branson and “wen, 1970).

Factors influencing sediment discharae in this study were so variable
from one geographic location to another that no consistent relation was
found. This findina was similar to studies in the big sagebrush
(Artemisia tridentata) type in Nevada (Gifford and Skau, 1967). Much
additional work is needed in this field of study.

Based on the above, it is imnortant that ranae and forest hydrolocists
workina in the pinyon-juniner and other veaetation tynes recognize the
complexity which exists in relation to hydrologic phenomenon. Though
limitations exist on small plot estimates of infiltration (Hickok and
Osborn, 1969), this study indicates that quidelines prepared for hydrologic
analysis on pinyon-juniper sites similar to those sampled in this study
should take into consideration the geographic area, the parameter of

interest, and where applicable, the timing of an event.

enid to 2eefbisper) sti needed
tnos1eq -fic2z to vavsf dont €-0 ant nt vtteoveq reat
mova bné ,fine to tavs! dont £-0 ont mt owsxet Troz .s 2
quo %o vrs no Inetiont vivelyotivea od vem [toe ovsd snes 0
Yronuy (sunns ot botsfer 25 vifstgones , 2bodetetey basfennet bias tmee
-(OCOT . now bas noansyS 2OTCF .ydeud) 2auisv
sfdstyev og sve yvbuse atdt ot onvsdoath tnoamtboe pntoneuf tnt 203957

2s notiefey inetetenos on decd vtortons 03 nottsool stdostpesp sno mot
fewidopse ofc oft ni eatouse ot veltat2 ese ontbat? 2taT -bavot

dow’ .(S5°f .usd2 bas brottta) shevell at oqvs (stsinobtyd Btetmes)
-ybute to bfet? etry at bebosn at row fenotttbbs 7
2tztnofovbye Jeet0t bas snnsy tert tnstroomt 2t tt .evods oft no boesd .
oils 9s tnooe' zeqys notistooav vorto bas tactnut-noyata ond af ontdiow
fovoniT .nonomonsda atoofoybyid of nottsfor nt et2txe Notte yt txofqmos
bas JodDk4) moftsydlftat to eoteamtteo tofo Ffamz ao tetxe ancttettmtt”
stpofortbys! tot bersce tq 2entfobtun Jedd esseotbnt ybuse etit .(CaeT .miodel
vout2 2nd’ of befamne o2odd of asfinte 2odte vootaut-nowtte no 2fevlans
to sotams+ng ont .6916 2ifesynoep oft notis ysbrenos ognt sted bluode —

.tneve m6 to onimtt oft .oldsotiaas ovedw bas .tesysdat

Ps ,e,

“pq p)

References

Bisal, F., and '!. S. Ferauson, Monthly and yearly chanaes in aqarecate
size of surface soils. Canad. J. Soil Sci. 48, 159-164, 1968.

Bouyoucos, &. J., Hydrometer method for making particle size analysis
of soils, Acron. J. 54, 464-465, 1962.

Branson, F. A., and J. B. Owen, Plant cover, runoff, and sediment yield
relationships on f‘ancos shale in western Colorado, \!ater Pesources
Research 6, 783-790, 1970.

Brown, H. E., Status of pilot watershed studies in Arizona, Proc. A.S.C.E.,
J. Irria. and Drainage Div. 96 (IR1), 11-23, 1970.

Dortignac, E. J., Desian and operation of Pocky "fountain infiltrometer,
Forest Service, Rocky lit. Forest & Range Experiment Station, Paper
Noses. 607.4. 1951.

Dortignac, E. J., Water yield from pinyon-juniner woodland, In “ater
Yield in Relation to Environment in the Southwestern United States,
A.A.A.S. Symposium, Sul Ross State Colleae, Alnine, Texas, 74 p., 1969.

Gifford, G6. F., and C. ™. Skau, Influence of various rangeland cultural
treatments on runoff and sediment production from the bia sage type,
Eastgate Basin, Nevada, Proceeding Third Annual American Water
Resources Conference, November 8-10, San Francisco, 137-148, 1967.

Gifford, G. F., G. Williams, and G. B. Coltharp, Infiltration and erosion
studies on pinyon-juniper conversion sites in southern Utah, J.

Ranae Mgt. (accepted for publication).

Hickok, PR. B., and H. 8. Osborn, Some limitations on estimates of infiltration

as a basis for predicitng watershed runoff, Trans. A.S.A.E. 12, :

1969.

Hoover, i!. D., D. F. Olson, and L. J. Metz, Soil sampling for pore space

and nercolation, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Expt. Sta.,
Ashville, 29 »., 1954.

Lusby, G. C., Hydrologic and biotic effects of arazina vs. non-arazing

near Grand Junction, Colorado, J. Range Mat. 23, 256-269, 1970.
Williams, G., G. F. Gifford, and G. 5. Coltharp, Infiltrometer studies
on treated vs. untreated pinvon-juniper sites in central Utah,

J. Range Nat. 22, 110-114, 1969.

(ZE° = ZY S@ALD SalqeLuen Op JO UOLSNLOUT) pL = zu

SEyiguca + fxzon000°0 + °€xzv00'u -
*x100°0 + x960°0 - Ahyzoo-o + ®!xtoo00'0 - “xego-o - Sxpto 4 Ylyieura - Exttoco - sz-L = 44

Rouy DULpUe|Y

(Z9° = zi SSALD SOL qelLueA Op 40 UOLSNLIUT) gg" = aa

xot'0 + *xotc - Yl ycgrg 4 fy iuor0 + levezry + 02

Oeooao'o + °

cl L

X2Z0°O + XZ00G°O -

9€ v L

a 3 X7O0"U - °x20u"0 - ““X6LG°O - “X9LO°U + 22°2 = “A

X$000°0 + ce

X€80°0 + ~“xZu000°0 -

Rauy eyeuN

(LS% = 24 S8ALD SaLqeluerA Oy 40 uoLSN{SUj) ger = zt

fey iz0°0 + €eyygor0 - *xsuuo'o + 2xploro -
Povo - €xgart + Sxgzovo + S2xig0'9 - Slyizyrg + Plyziey + Slysyorg - Byvto°o - opt = by

eauy adtdg

eine I eS ee eee
*LeAWaQUL SUILD

aynulw y-E ay. HuLunp ‘ae O}eU UOLPEUZLLJUL GULYSLpaud wos /i suoLjenba UOLSsaubau SLdLIEN, *Z aLqe,

“SO|LGeLUPA 40 BULYSLE @ AOS | SLGEL 99S “SaLqeLweA Gy PSZLLLAN YOLYM LApOwW LeUuLYLYO 9Y4

ur §, yim paqeLoosse aouetueA 32 JO auoW UO JUadVAad | PaULeLGXa aL yelLueA QuapuauapuL yoRZ -

/\

3 SGALL Sa[qeLueA Ob JO UOLSN[SU]) EE° = iu

OY a9qqo00°0 - 8x900°0 - 2xoz0°0 - 2xppo + Slxgecura - 4xeu00'o + 2xevu'o - 'xgeu'o + Beth = LA

(€v°

SPauy LLe $0 O}LSOdUO)

zi SOALE SOLqGeLUeA Op JO UOLSNLIUT) fZ° = i

Clyaio'¢ + Sygquau'u + Olxezoru - LxoL'o + Bory = LA

(Lt°

9va10°0 - E€xgq000°0 + 2€xyo0'0 - 4¢xoz0'0

Bouyy pAos | bil

panuiquo) ‘2 aLqeL

—— ——_— Es

0

“x100°0 A eee UUUDeL

(65° = {t S8ALD Sa_geLueA Gp JO UOLSN[DUT) /E° = zi
©

lyptco - Ulygporg - 4¢xo5°L + 2xay'a - S®xguu'u + %xgou0'o +

a Shysoo7o - “xto000°0 + Olxzoocc + 4xeoou00'0 + °¢xoLo'o - "xzeu'u - LOL = A

Rou DULpUeLE

(G9% = zi S8ALD SSLGeLUPA Yy JO UOLSNLOUT) ZG° = zi
Elycggu'u + &xzuo'G + 2®xpuuu'u + @xLS"0 +
Of soo0'0 + “xeL’o - 2¢xte7o + 4xov000'0 + O@xez'o - ©€xzaouu'u - 2xtoc'u - Y’xLuug'a - 2°L = %A

Rouy ByYeUNy

(29° = {8 SeALd SaLyeLAeA Oy 40 UOLSRLOUL) Gy’ = u

Ey o00°0 + Lxgoa'o + Vexvoo'u + Exzeora + 2xLOO"U - CeXLLO'U +

OL S

xeo0'0 + 2“xyo0'o - Veyoto + 2'xso0ro - 4xeo000'u - Y*x90000'0 + Sxeouu's + PExiu'u - vere = %A

Pau BLU

"{RAUSZUL UL

OPNULW Ef[-g dy} DuLuNp (4) BTOU UOLZOUZLLJUL OULZOLPSud UO4 /T SUOL}ZeNbKS UOLSSOUDAU BLGLALN,, “E A2LqeL

=> —_ eS SS So be SS eae aE Sn mentien d — ——— oe Dee, EEE ee eee eee Ameer OO —— i.

“SO1GeLUeA JO HULYSLL B AOS | BLGRL Svs *Se_geLwea Up PSZLLLIN YOLYM Lapow LeULOLUO

aud UL Ch UTLA pdLELIOSSE DIUELULA SY JO SUOW UO JUsONad | PeULeLGXa BLqelLueA JUapusdepul YyIeq /i

—-_ Ss @_

(90°

y¥ S@ALL Saygetwea Qy JO UOLSNLDUT) ye’ = #
é
-Zlygiot + 8xpto'o + 4xeuouo0'0 - Lxolovu + ZL° = SA

OvxLucooU’O + BExvEo"O - FExsLO'C

SPauy [Le JO a2Lsodiuo)

Re SOALL SOLGeLMeA Oy $O UOLSNLOUT) yg’ = zu

Zélygso-o + Sxeco'o + 2xotru - Fexyuru + bExzuoro +

(99°

L€x100°0 + 8fxop'0 - S€xgoo'u + 4exeLo'o - [xzoo000' - Slxsocro - S%xsuuue'o - ®Lxzuou'G - 6L’6 = A

Baty PAOSL bi

panuiquoy “¢ aLqey

—_ ————— steele EEE __—— ——— a SS EE” EEE nll —— —_—_—- aE SE ——_ ——E— ———E—E—E

(Sy° = a S8ALD SOLGeLUeA Qp JO UOLSN|OUT) GE"

"
x.

Lyue0'o -

Olysageg - Llyzgorg + 4¢xs0°6 + 8@xzz79 - %xeicz - ZHxsuuru - SExeoocu'e - 4®xpuuuo'o - Lety = ©A

Rou DULpURLg

(47° = 2¥ S®ALD SalqeLueA Gy 4O UOLSNLDUT) 62, = zu
élygzu'o + %&xzuu'u + %¢xE9°O +

S€xpoco’d + SXLOG'O - Olxgo0"'o - SxpOu0'U + X8e‘U + 9exye'o + EExeguuu'U - Pexeuu'o + Go'L = A

Pauy exouN4

(89° = 2u SOALL SaLqeLueA Oy gO UOLSNLDUT) 2y° = zu
Ceveuan'o +: exscoccu - [xeouog'o + Sxgood'a + %xz00000'0 +
Llyieoo0°0 + 8¢xog0'0 + @xizo'o + @lxpzorc + 4xe0000'0 + VExzouro + ®lxtuuu'o - voy = ©A

Rau) adLud

"1RANSQUL OWL

aynulw ge-¢E BYyy HuLlunp (£4) B}RU UOLZOUZLLJUL DULZOIpsud uos /T SUOLZENbY UOLSSeAbIU BLGLILN) “py s_qes

“SOLGeLARA 30 DULYSL] B AOL | SLGeL BIS “sojqeLueA YP POZLLLIN YOLY Lapow LeuLdiuo

Oy} UL a UFEM poPeLoosse souRiWeA 242 JO auoW 4O JUddUad | pouLe{dxa v{qeluea YUuepusdapuL yoe3 /i

em Rn tac mne nn nn Sear a Os Kv oie 4 Py pe es

(97° = ju SeALd salqelueA Up yo UoLSNLoUZ) YE" = i
Y¥yeyoua'u - Syggory +
BEyge"9 - %yzto-o - Ley6erg - Myyo'y + Zh eiorg 4 “xtooou'u - Yxeuu'u - 'xigra + iste = £4

Seduy [Le JO o}LSOduO

(OL° = 54 S®ALD sayqetuen Gy $0 UOLSNLDUT) YO" = Ly

aig
Chazy + Myzore + “yore -

*Expg0'0 - Bexep-o - €yeog-o + “x6oua'g + xto00"G - Olyotroro - Alytooro + Myguauure - opoL = &

Body POs | bry

Fa a Ee ie es we

panutjuo) “yp ayqry

— =!

(vE° zu SOALD SALYyeLueA Uy 4O UOLSNLIUT) EZ° = 2u

fy, 000°0 + &x900000070 + Pfxsto‘v - 4txzcoo'u + ©@xgttu - bxezuto - xezoro + os°t = "A

Rady PAOS LL,

(S?°

zu SEALB SALqeLUeA Oy JO WOLSNLDUT) ZE* = gd

6lygg-g9 + Peyayy - S¢yzogry + Fkxecu - 8!xvoou0's -
O2yeyg'g - Llyzoo°9 + €€xeo0000'0 + Lxegoro - xav'a + [Vxecueoo'o + exvoou'u + "xZpu'0 - EOL = MA

Pouy OULpUe[g

(€9° = yu SOALH SaLqeLueA Op JO UOLSNLUT) LG° = Zu
62y590°9 + S€yz99°0 - Yxso0°0 + Sxizoro - ©lxipco - Vxet'o + Sexee'u - °xzZEO + ZL7o = VA

Pouy eyxauny

(€€° = gy SeALD Sal qeLuea Oy JO UOLSALIUT) BL* = Za
Elysguoro - *¢xge'6 - ©¢xgerz +
hy ggcore:--Lexvesccooa +:5¢xeag0'0.- 2Exzuccu - S@xtoo8'9 - @lyeeo-u + 4xvo0u'0 + 2xee0°O - L9°6 = VA

Rody dILug

eg ecient ceases sea RPP ES CSA AIS LD eT OT ATTA GTEC C EET EID CITED ELSES LTO

(M4) jgounu jo youl vad aude ued suo} uL UuoLsOua GuLydtpeud 4o4 fi SUOLZENDS UOLSSeUDeA SLGLFLNW °G OLGeL

SOLGeLUCA 4O HULASL{ © UOJ | SLR] Bay, “SALGeLURA Op PAZLLLIN YyoLyw Lapow LeuLbLu

au uL VA yQLM paqeLdosse aoURLURA OY 4O BuOU UO yUadUad | pauLe|Udxa ageLueA JUapUaaapUL Yydeq /T

—

(62° = zu SOALB SaLqeLueA Up JO UOLSN{IUT) ZZ° = au

Vyaqo0'0 + export - Blxioogo'a + Elxtgue'u - “xeturo - 9¢°2 = VA

SPauy [Le JO 9}FLSodwo9

panutju0j *g aLqeL

(47° = gu SeALD Sa_qelueA Oy 40 uoLSN[UT) €€° = zu

L Ex guuru + 4¢xv6'9 +

Ulyzq-q - SEyeqgo'0 + 8exz0°s - 2xtz71-- 2xsoo0'o - 'xzusuoore - "xzt0°v - %yguuuore - ore = 7A

XS0°O -

Pouy DULpURIg

69° = 54 SOALL SOLGeLUeA Op JO UOLSN|SIUT) 9G° = 5Y
é 4

Ely ooo0 + efx tour o + Ly7e0"0 + Ey 2uu0"O + 02 zGu0"0 ~

re ‘ © 97
Of covo'o + “xyo0'o - Oxzgo'o + ®xzoo0'o + xzvoc’v - ©&xzvo00'0 - “Expouo'o + 2°xeL"0 + 9°L = 7A

Rouy exY9UNG

(9° = 2u SPALb SOLqGeLueA Op 4O UOLSN[SUT) Cy’ = au

6€y ooo'o + texezoro + Mxequuo'o + 8extovu'e + 7xper0 +

Llycoooo'o + “@yce't - 8¢xs5°0 + Oxsoo'o + P@xsto-o - "xptovo - 2txtouro + Exezutu + @XLeUrU - PL = 7A

Rady ddLdg

*SoUNuULui UY AdZZe SOLA

A2PSHUOUZLLJUL UO (SAaYydUL) pauLezZaU YaZeM [2307 HULJOLpeud 4oy /I SUOLZENDA UOLSSSUHdd BLGLFLNy °9 ALqey

eS ee i ——S— Datel aE = oe! ae acl EE aaea™—

*“SapgqelueA JO Bulzsly & YOS | SLGeL eES “SALGeLURA Uy PAZLILLYN YOLYM LopOow {eULDLUO

SY UL GA UZLM pazeLOOSse soueLUeA 2yz JO BuO! UC ZUsDUad | poULeLdxa alqgeLueA JUapuadapuL yoey /i

(OG' = zu SOALE sa_qeluen Oy yO UoLSN|oUI) Ub’ = zu
OV, uuuue'a + 88x2zor0 -

2

%xgo0'o - 42x62°0 - %xoz'0 + 4'xgucuo'o - @!x.00°0 + 4xLooo'e + %xzt'o - ‘xgouru + €4°2 = 7A

seouy LLe $0 3qzLsoduo)

(69° = zd SOALD SBLGeLAeA Op JO UOLSNLIUT) U9" = Zu
Clysigto + %xeore + 4xoz'o - 2xeporo - txguouo'o +
9lyeg7o + [ypo000°0 + Pxtoo00'0 - Slyztovo - B&xez-o - O€xpauru + 4&xguou'u + OMxEuouU'e - S9°S = SA

Pady PAos [hi

———

penutquo) °9 aygey

D0 + pg XTO0H0.0 + apkstO. 6 <a - alle 0 + pp¥AON0.9.+ QgXE0900,0 aia * sat 7

(Pa, = 30 assets zatdstrey 08 to $0 wtestl) Son = Sh

enbvA {fs to atteoamo?

A ee a eee

= ¢qX0S. O. gg% 1.8 + SPAREN. - gp Xr 00, 0 -+ Xf000,0 + sXtf.0 - abe + E018 ' av

YoOORANAH

SR Crk ; ee

(02. = 39 aavip sofdsiysy OS -to sotaufont) fp, = “A

i = —— te + eee a ———

oft nt -a¥ tdtw botstooees-sensiisy of} to oom 1c tnsov@ I -hontelqxe oftstysy dnobmanshni. dasa flosa 7

_ ”

2oldetisy to patzert s sot: frstieT ce? . 20Tdainey 8 bostittu -aotiy Toba santa jee

62 0S 90 TY Ep 9} | Sodwo)

ve 69 OL 79 Lv Pony PAOS L bis

6v LY Sv 6S of Rouy vULpURLg

£9 09 Ly SY c9 Bouy exYOUNG

ce G9 89 A) LS RPoUyy BDLud

($JOUNU JO YdUL/aude/Su0z) ( S@youl) "ULW BE-EE “uLW E1-g “ULW pre UOL}ZRD07
UOLZINPOUd PUSUILPIS $39ld Lyd euvoas

UO PaULezad4 ~ LRAUSJUL DIL} 9PeU UOL BRAZIL LJUT

4dzeM [220]

*SUOLZeNbDA|
UOLSS2UDeU ALdLZLNW B_qelLueA Op Aq pouLe,axd UolZONpoud jUSWLpas puke *sqO{d UdouOULLJUL

UO POULezoA W9ZeM 1270} “(°uy/*UL) SOPeU UCLPeUZLLJUL UL (QOL X 2) DOURLUPA JUddINaG “f/f BLGe]

wey tt Ladvaht) ste nctenateint at toor yy sonstysv 4
| ¥ ON yd bonis tae neitouborg taentbsz bas .2tofa +a

*

; ‘tadiow i Isto? |

ig bon Fetes Esyrsiat okt oey nottsyst Hat

os... Morsay Inomtbs2 2tol> — ie . action
1 —{¥ton Mo Mont ros\ snot) “fesronty ‘rath op-fe itm €f-8 fang *

— a ee - ee me owe a ee oe

23° 88 ws serv’ sot

oA 2a sa

a ee cane eneemene tie

Some Water Movement Patterns Over And

Through Pinyon-juniper Litter L/

Gerald F. Gifford

Assistant Professor, Range Watershed
Science, Range Science Department

Utah State University, Logan, Utah 84321

1/ This study was in cooperation with the Bureau
of Land Management, Contract 14-11-0008-2837.
Their support is gratefully acknowledged.
Journal Paper No. 972, Utah Agricultural

Experiment Station, Logan, Utah

ba; tovo anioits4 Jenaneil roJ0ih ood
“Ml nosh. rag imut-noynt4 aon ei |

a sence bs

broRtio 4 bis320 °

herlerstali ON Rah .Tozaetord Shetereea é
FuamITBySe 9519 T92 sanad ,eonsice 4 vid

—fSEa8. dat! .asgod " vsketovin atet2 ist 7

usored odd tttiw mofsexeqoos at esw ybuse etaT W
rs¢- hae f{-)f toeTI NOD « inémegenstt bred to
_bogbe twos. yiliutetatg- et rogue ttodT

imnssinoixgs fst .Sv@ .of toqa Lsamwol

fez) ,manol ,noisese Jnomi-reqxa

Highlight

Fluorescent dye patterns depicting water movement over and through
pinyon-juniper litter accumulations varied somewhat according to canopy
density of the trees. Where the canopy was closed, or nearly so, the
dye was confined to the surface 1 inch of litter, with no lateral
movement indicated. Where the tree canopy was broken or open, dye was
found to a maximum depth of 6 inches beneath the litter and lateral
downhill movement of at least 25 inches was indicated on the litter
surface. Where dye had penetrated the litter, both a streaked and a

uniform (even wetting front) pattern of water movement were observed.

sae

guorsa bas tavo ‘$nomevom TosoW gai s9iqob ewtos ing doula

Nis
gh 9D ’

\ronss o3 gatbrosss tndwomoe bei'tsv enoi te Lumiso8 sort voate

"ae

ods 608, -tt89R TO ibodots eeu eatians. ott ered 20073 outa Io %
Senet on tiw \ressil to tomi £ gootupe orld ot bom inos
2ew ob « <A19go ro modord eew YqOnRS sett aft otodW tonieaitieals i
r iexe ses bas t9s3if os fisoned 2odont a to dagab mumixem 8 or panrot

const ot m0 avandia 2sw aovcttt 2$ tesel ae to te9me vont {Liawob

& brs bodsotie ‘s s tod ,rottil ails botszteneq bed anh orerfi oontaue
‘

: . z ]
bovieado stow Iromevom tojew to are ting {Inor? gaistew move) mrolins

ae
i
vi

a.

Introduction

Patterns of water movement in natural plant communities have been
of interest for many years. Such patterns may exist due to unique
Spatial and temporal characteristics of rainfall, because of character-
istics of the flora which influence interception, transpiration, etc.,
and/or because of soil characteristics peculiar to a given site.

Importance of liter as a hydrologic factor in the pinyon-juniper
(P-J) type has been noted by Scholl (1969). He found that resistance
to wetting in the surface soils of a P-J watershed near Flagstaff,
Arizona, increased from completely wettable in open areas to highly
nonwettable in the litter under the juniper canopy. Similar findings
have occurred in other vegetation types. Apparently organic unknowns
which accumulate from litter decomposition or fungal activity cause the
wettability problems.

The purpose of this study was to study patterns of water movement
over and through pinyon-juniper leaf litter.
Methods

Water movement was traced on a pjnyon-juniper (Pinus monophylla,
P. edulis--Juniperus osteosperma)site in Southeastern Utah (45 miles
west of Blanding, Utah) through use of two water soluble fluorescent dyes,
Pyranine 1/ ana Kiton Yellow 2/, Pyranine will fluoresce in damp
soil and Kiton Yellow fluoresces in the dry state.

During mid-June of 1969, 27 bands of dye powder (1 part Kiton Yellow
to 1 part Pyranine) about 3 inches wide were put on the litter covered

interspaced between suitable pinyon-juniper trees (Figure 1). The dyes

are 4 we ‘

} } yal 7 ber A oe togl
ore 7 oe

_ 1990. overt 209 toga, dnelq, 4sausor ‘a srgmovon Today to 2
abate of ouh saxo Ysa: ents t38y tou m PE BOY ean ps 7 |

a,

R pete to seunved {states to sotreixosgesed, Evrognos a
"
| “yeots: wo} sexiqeans? Cita ecemiiteb il ‘Brit od? to agtiet

Af
‘Se

*
.otte movig n of ‘tei luset eoMettes aera tie io otincod ‘to\brs a

togy i tise ~ porn oft of t6I2982. sigolortngd § 28, oti to soe sioqml
eonkieless 3 His bono? on -(@80T) iloroe vd boson oad cad ogy (easy
| Madege lt: 1s90 botlexosey L-9 5s to sites oats ont th gniszow ot
_) Mlnigist 63 289 i18 tote ni ofdastow (descend mort beaeroni enos tah,
2gribnit t6Limi2 ; Seah roqinuy oft tobi rortil edz at leas sean 7 e:
enmonlsys diagr0 CanetegiA _ songs ites ital tedto nt bermo2.:0 war Fi 7

ont S289 Vatvidos a to moLtieaqmooeb cessit mort ote iumison dot

emal dor (ilidarsam
Inomovom . tothw to entoaseq ‘but2 oF = aw akon 2idt to ezoquug ont

pi oT

2O3SiL Yad teqinu(-noygiq dauoxds an T92v0
ry rH

Si Lytgorom euni®) toqinu{-oynig 6 £0” ema’ 2ew JnemeVvom: “rosa ‘ ; ae
* Ls ® ae 7
2olim eb). fist} movenorlsuce ft 01 ke (amroqeoos20 nla a 2 |

ek we as
<20xb treoestoult ‘pidutas 938i owt Io stu dguords (dsjU cee ae

a -
cmsh, sat soveroul? thie a. ‘MS wolls¥ mgs Ea bre: Me “4 ;

vegn3e YIb ons ni: coeeneae bist ip a i
wolleY inisit dened abiog oyb to etn ws .@oer 30 pram

ie a.

bersvo. +e $28. ont - eee otow sbiw sotto: é suo coe a e

Figure 1. Litter accumulation beneath two adjacent juniper trees. A
band of dye powder would run from the base of one tree to the

base of the other.

tof ams votre 7
a | ot 16 ft sear
Yuasa Buy. to os

7) ee ry

were applied from a salt shaker at a rate of about 200 g/m2, as recommended
by Reynolds (1966). The dye transects varied from 48 to 170 inches in
length and each ran from the base of one tree to the base of a nearby
adjacent one. Maximum depth of litter was approximately 2.5 inches,

with an average of about 1.5 inches.

In early September trenches were excavated along 20 randomly
selected bands to cae vertical dye penetration patterns. The remaining
7 bands were used to study water movement patterns over the litter surface.
All measurements were made at night using a battery powered UVL-21
ultra-violet lamp.

Results

Penetration of dye into the litter was variable and type of pattern
appeared related to tree canopy density. Where canopies were closed,
or nearly so, the dye was confined to the surface 1 inch of litter with
no lateral movement indicated. Since total rainfall during the study
period meagured only 3.80 inches, throughfall and foliage drip was
probably minimal under the closed canopies.

Where canopies were somewhat broken, dye patterns indicated rather
nonhomogeneous vertical water movement, as shown in Figure 2. Similar
irregular drainage patterns in woodland environments have been shown
by Voigt (1960), Rutter (1964) and Reynolds (1966). Little or no dye
movement was indicated next to either pinyon or juniper tree trunks,
indicating that perhaps stemflow is rather insignificant in this type.
Maximum depth of dye penetration beneath the litter surface along any

excavated transect was 6 inches.

’ ss |
” 4 uF i Bi!

_ ay

le Li

bebaammoset es ,.Sm\y 00S sila: hl & 38 rolade thse 8
ni eodomi OTE of 8b mort beixav esosenass xb oT et OE EY,

s vdtsen & to ozed ort sd sets ono to pend onl sort ast oss = sn i weit “a

: 1 geedoni 2.$ <onambxongye, 200 ossit to ityqob mumixen ers tr ; ;

| . _,Redont 2.1 auodn 20 ogerevs am Ast s
yimobret as ant pormvgoxo etew 2edonots redaeaqe2 yitse nl | ey

| wisubiidiil oat .antotiag not saxs0n8q eyb [aotirev ‘nia ot ebasd botooloe

_sonttue testil ody revo entos3eq anh zetcw yhute 03 bee evrow abrisd ¥
is hoxewog wretisd 6 gates Sain te obam orou ‘e3iemewesom LIA 4

4

a amet toloty-sttiy
| atiueos

giettsq to sqys bas dedekube si yotsil odd ont pat to noigarteno4 |
eae vib eeigouss sie .ytiensb yqonss 9973 ot borsiox berseqqs :

dtiw rossit to oni soa true odd o3 bonftn0a 260! eyb sid .92 ore = . : 7
" ybute ot gaitub Listeisr Intos gone boaaa ib jnomevonm [stetal om “ie

: 26w sian egsifet baa Li stdevord3 ‘eedtont 08.€ yino both sem boiteq |
eekqonas bezels, ‘oils tobrus isminim uldsdotq

rk

+ vodisr : boneatba antotisq. exb .matord 2ndwanoe oTow di bemens ote

seltake .f oxugit si nworle’ 28. Sromevon totaw Laoitrev woqnogaanars

awore need eves zdnomnoxivns ‘bneiboow mk ented 38q “ogsintatb

t

Beka
av of 10 olsséd taper), ebLomyon brs (pees) rey4uh “oaer) sgio’ vd ;

Ateied 991d 4 regia 70 royaig roltis of ron | beaaatbnk i mnmevon

INCHES

oe as

)

regular broken canopy

irregular broken canopy

INCHES
Tolle Leto Tenn

Examples of some vertical dye penetration patterns through
P-J litter. Arrows indicate that portion of dye band over
which the canopy was open.

Figure 2.

—— wy \y wy —

,
~ te (we wee '
i—
_- ee >
:= 4
"—~) & pigect i 3
—————— ¥
at 5 a % ~
: _ | ~—?- ,
'
—. Td
b
a |
:
le — ——aton! Oe
; {
i
‘
» ao ot i
- ‘
. iad
t

. '
a
—— a “@

*

smoz to eslamuxt” hy
= ; i
. eworth. ._totett a
saw Yqonny” oat dokaw: |

“+ Some lateral flow over the litter surface also occurred where
canopies were broken or open. Maximum indicated distance of overland
flow was 25 inches, with vertical penetration into the litter of 1
inch or less. There were no indications of lateral flow within the
litter cover. The overland flow may result when litter accumulations
become dry and unwettable.
Conclusions

The influence of litter on hydrologic behavior of natural plant
communities is not well defined. This study has shown that patterns
of water movement upon and through pinyon-juniper litter are variable
and are somewhat related to tree canopy density. Where the canopy is
open, water may move uniformly through the litter or along pathways
which result in a streaked dye pattern. Where water cannot penetrate the

litter, then overland flow may occur for at least short distances.

ae op ieee
aia 8

busitevo to eonstelb besnoibnk auméxatt neyo xo nro%h ord ste

be

stedw herrueD6 o@fs boetiue novsit ols pe

{ to 19d9il offs Ota noiterionsy {soitdzov dtiv aortonk 28 ass 4
eat nidtiw wolt ‘Latetel to enoissoibai on orow sveeT -2eept to .dos
fer
‘enoits tusivoyn. 193i! nedw tivest ysm wolt baslteve oT sm

.ofds3townu ‘bis ‘Gb a
jkéiq Lerten to totveded oigolorbyd mo tettil to someultat odT
antotisq tet swode eect ybute ei .Komtteb Liew gon ak eobtinie

efdsitsy ots x9ttil sociqwt-noyatq dguords bas .eoqu tmomevon rosew 2 te
2i yqonen ond oto .ytiensh yqomea estt of besser dedwomog ots F

ayswii dnd Snoin to tet7il odd dguotdt uimtod tru Sovom Yel Tetsw Mm ve
i, Ae.

ait ots teneq jonas tovaw ored = .ertesteq oyb boisexse & me tiueot f

hall

Laeonaseib “Prode tesel 3s rot mw220 vem wolt baaiteve meds pene .

Literature Cited

Reynolds, E.R.C. 1966. The percolation of rainwater through soil
demonstrated by fluorescent dyes. J. Soil Sci. 17:127-132.
Rutter, A.J. 1964. Studies in the water relations of Pinus sylvestris

in plantation conditions. II. The annual cycle of soil mogsture

change and derived estimates of evaporation. J. Appl. Ecol. 1:29-44.
Scholl, D.G. 1969. Soil wettability in Utah juniper stands. Paper

presented at A.A.A.S. meeting, Pullman, Washington, August 18-22.
Voigt, G.K. 1960. Distribution of rainfall under forest stands.

Forest Sci. 9: 2-10.

M datie ; pee adslur,

itemieeiiusaamaaas tefooteg ofl .8a0! fat i <2
SEL-TSUNL .i98 fo? .L .20yb indeaiiia: srten = 4
usieertg mail % stmt eter tt al 208
oTuseiom {ioe Yo efoyo faunas oft «IT .emoidibaes
MaRS L «food .Lqgh .L .qotsstoqeve to exasmiszas tection
T9649 -ebaste xoqiaut det) ni (tilidsstew Lio® .eeer sae
SS-8E eupuh .worgnidesl .meiilut .yaksoom .2.AA.A te betmoeomq
.abaste see10% ebay iisiniss to noksudinsetd O0er LD agi
OL-8 :@.408 seoro ome!
ie vont ee ay Py
; Sa,

a, eee
Sat, Eee

= phe:

ae = ee

ee
Wren ogee

ee be 2 ae
ia ute att ett
Alay got

tea fi

~

me
~
a
me,
.
ee