Characterization and comparison of soils inside and outside of grazing exclosures on Yellowstone
National Park's northern winter range
by John Richard Lane
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Soils
Montana State University
© Copyright by John Richard Lane (1990)
Abstract:
Paired plots at eight exclosures in Yellowstone National Park’s northern winter range were studied in
1986 and 1987 to determine differences in soil chemical and physical properties between areas
protected from grazing for 25 years and areas historically used as winter range by increasing numbers
of elk (Cervus elaphus). Soil surface bulk density, double ring infiltration, and nutrient analysis
sampling were conducted inside and outside of all exclosures. Five exclosures were selected for a
simulated rainfall study. The simulated rainfall was applied under three separate conditions inside and
outside of each exclosure. The first was with vegetation undisturbed, the second with vegetation
clipped, and the third with clipped vegetation and litter removed.
Differences in soil chemical properties showed no trend between inside and outside of exclosures. Soil
surface (0-5 cm) fine earth bulk density was higher outside most exclosures, four were significantly
different (P=0.10). Two exclosures had higher double ring infiltration rates on the grazed plots outside
the exclosures. One exclosure had significantly higher infiltration inside.
For the simulated rainfall study, all exclosures but one had higher runoff (lower infiltration) outside for
all three conditions. One exclosure in condition 1, vegetation undisturbed, had equal runoff inside and
out. No differences were significant for condition 1, differences at two exclosures were significant for
condition 2, vegetation clipped, and one exclosure for condition 3, vegetation and litter removed. All
exclosures showed a trend for higher sediment yield outside for all three conditions.
When exclosures were grouped by site characteristics no group showed a trend for differences in
nutrient analysis. Three of the four groups had significantly higher differences in fine earth bulk
density outside the exclosures and one had significantly higher double ring infiltration inside. No group
showed a significant difference for sediment yield from simulated rainfall. Surface runoff was
significantly higher outside the exclosures in two groups for the vegetation clipped treatment and one
group for the vegetation and litter removed.
Since no soils data were collected when the exclosures were established, no conclusions can be made
concerning trends over time for improvement or deterioration of soils due to grazing or protection from
grazing. CHARACTERIZATION AND COMPARISON OF SOILS INSIDE AND OUTSIDE
OF GRAZING EXCLOSURES ON YELLOWSTONE NATIONAL PARK’S
NORTHERN WINTER RANGE
by
John Richard Lane
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree
of
Master of Science
in
Soils
MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY
Bozeman, Montana
December 1990
ii
APPROVAL
of a thesis submitted by
John Richard Lane
This thesis has been read by each member of the thesis committee and has been found
to be satisfactory regarding content, English usage, format, citations, bibliographic style, and
consistency, and is ready for submission to the College of Graduate Studies.
/W
/"TfQ
f J/J/f
Date
_______
Chairperson, Graduate Committee
Approved for the Major Department
\\\lC k U 'C l
Date
Head, 'Major Department
Approved for the College of Graduate Studies
_
Date
^
Graduate Dedn
iii
STATEMENT OF PERMISSION TO USE
In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a master’s degree at
Montana State University, I agree that the Library shall make it available to borrowers under rules
of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission,
provided that accurate acknowledgement of source is made.
Permission for extensive quotation from or reproduction of this thesis may be granted by
my major professor, or in his/her absence, by the Dean of Libraries when, in the opinion of
either, the proposed use of the material is for scholarly purposes. Any copying or use of the
material in this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.
Signature
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
There is not enough space for me to acknowledge individually the numerous friends,
fellow students and faculty who helped motivate me throughout this project. To all of you, my
deepest gratitude. I would like to thank the following individuals and organizations, for without
their help and encouragement this study would not have been possible. Francis Singer and
Yellowstone National Park provided funding and support throughout the project. The Montana
Agricultural Experiment Station system provided additional funding and support. Julie Armstrong
and the MSU Soil Testing Laboratory provided instruction and help with nutrient analyses.
Ginger Schmid provided physical, technical and emotional support as a field assistant and
friend. Sandy Schultz, Matt Marsh, John Beyrau, Jay Wilkins and others provided assistance in
the field and carried numerous gallons of water. Committee members Doctors Gerald Nielsen
and Clayton Marlow provided indispensable encouragement, advice and expertise. Cliff
Montagne, my major professor deserves special recognition for his unending patience, advice,
and support throughout this project. All my committee members have a special enthusiasm for
both class work and field work that I hope to emulate throughout my professional career; thank
you. A special thanks go to my parents who started me on my journey for education and
learning and without whose love and support I would not be where I am today. And most of all,
thank you to Linda, who as a field assistant, editor, friend, confidant and companion was and is
without equal.
V
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
APPROVAL................................................................................................................................................
ii
STATEMENT OF PERMISSION TO U S E ....................................................... ' .................................
ill
ACKNOW LEDGEMENTS......................................................................................................................
iv
TABLE OF C O N T E N T S ...........................................................................................................................
v
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
..................................................................................................................................
...................................................................
vii
ix
x
IN TR O D U C TIO N ............................................................................................................
1
CO CD CD
LITERATURE R E V IE W .................
Soil Chemical Properties
Soil Physical Properties, Sediment Yield and Runoff
Plant Cover ...................................................................
CO 4^ CO CO
ABSTRACT................................................................................................................................................
MATERIALS AND METHODS . . .
Site S electio n .................
Geologic Parent Material
Soil Classification and Site Characteristics..............................................
Soil Fertility and Chemical Characterization ......................................................................
Bulk D en sity.....................
Sampling A p p aratu s................................................................................................
Laboratory Sand Calibration Procedures ............................................................
Field S a m p lin g ..........................................................................................................
Laboratory Analysis ................................................................................................
Infiltration..................................................................................................................................
Rainfall S im u la to r....................................................................................................................
Statistical A nalyses.................................................................................................................
10
13
13
13
14
14
15
17
17
20
R E S U LTS .............................................................................................................................................. •
Soil Chemical Characteristics ..............................................................................................
Gardiner East E xclosure.................................................................................. . • •
Gardiner West Exclosure.........................................................................................
Both Gardiner Exclosures . : ............................. ,,...................................................
Blacktail East Exclosure .........................................................................................
Blacktail West Exclosure.........................................................................................
Both Blacktail Exclosures .......................................................................................
Lamar Valley East E xclosure..................................................................................
Lamar Valley West Exclosure ................................................................................
Both Lamar Valley Exclosures................................................................................
Mammoth Exclosure................................................................................................
Junction Butte Exclosure .......................................................................................
21
21
21
21
22
23
23
24
25
25
31
31
32
vi
Table of Contents Continued
Page
Mammoth and Junction Butte Exclosures .......................................................... 32
Bulk Density and Infiltration................................................................................................... 33
Gardiner East E xclo su re......................................................................................... 33
Gardiner West Exclosure......................................................................................... 33
Both Gardiner Exclosures................................................
33
Blacktail East Exclosure ......................................................................................... 34
Blacktail West Exclosure......................................................................................... 34
Both Blacktail Exclosures ....................................................................................... 34
Lamar Valley East Exclosure.......................................................
34
Lamar Valley West Exclosure ................................................................................ 34
Both Lamar Valley Exclosures................................................................................ 36
Mammoth Exclosure..................................................................................................... 36
Junction Butte Exclosure ....................................................................................... 36
Mammoth and Junction Butte Exclosures .......................................................... 36
Rainfall Simulator Study .......................................................................................................
37
D IS C U S S IO N .........................................................................................................................................
40
CONCLUSIONS .........................................................................................................
42
LITERATURE CITED .............................................................................................................................
44
A PPEN D IC ES.........................................................................................................................................
48
A Site Soil Descriptions......................................
49
66
B Results of t-test analyses of soil chemical properties ...................
C Results of t-test analysis of physical properties and the rainfall simulator
study...........................................................................................................................
112
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
1. Average percent bare ground and litter inside and outside of the eight exclosures............
8
2. Elevation, annual precipitation, parent material and surface layer characteristics of
the study sites............................................................................................................................
12
3. Average concentration of nitrogen and organic matter for the eight exclosures. . . . . . . .
26
4. Average concentration of available phosphorus (P) and sulfur (S) for the eight
exclosures.....................................................................................................
27
5. Average concentration of sodium (Na), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), and
potassium (K) for the eight exclosures........................................................
28
6. Average concentration of iron (Fe), copper (Cu), zinc (Zn), and manganese (Mn) for
the eight exclosures.................................................................................................................
29
7. Average pH, electrical conductivity (EC) and sodium adsorption ratio (SAP) for the
eight exclosures......................................................................................
30
8. Average equilibrium infiltration rates from the double ring infiltrometers for the eight
exclosures..................................................................................................................................
37
9. Results of t-test analysis of nitrate-nitrogen and ammonia-nitrogen....................................
67
10. Results of t-test analysis of nitrate-nitrogen and ammonia-nitrogen
...................................
71
Results of t-test analysis of soil organic matter for the eight exclosures.............................
73
12. Results of t-test analysis of soil organic matter for the four groups.....................................
75
13. Results of t-test analysis of phosphorus' (P) and sulfur (S) for the eight exclosures. . . .
76
14. Results of t-test analysis of phosphorus and sulfur for the four groups..............................
80
15. Results of t-test analysis of sodium (Na), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), and
potassium (K) for the eight exclosures.................................................................................
82
16. Results of t-test analysis of sodium (Na), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), and
potassium (K) for the four groups...................
90
17. Results of t-test analysis of iron (Fe), copper (Cu), zinc (Zn) and manganese (Mn)
for the eight exclosures...........................................................................................................
94
11.
18. Results of t-test analysis of iron (Fe), copper (Cu), Zinc (Zn), and manganese (Mn)
for the four groups.................................................................................................................
102
viii
List of Tables Continued
Table
19. Results of t-test analysis of pH and electrical conductivity for the eight exclosures.
Page
..
106
20. Results of t-test analysis of pH and electrical conductivity for the four groups................
110
21. Results of t-test analysis of soil surface bulk density of the fine-earth fraction (< 2
mm) for the eight exclosures...............................................................................................
113
22. Results of t-test analysis of soil surface bulk density of the fine-earth fraction (< 2
mm) for the four groups.............................................
114
23. Results of t-test analysis of soil surface moisture content of bulk density samples
for the eight exclosures.........................................................................................................
115
24. Results of t-test analysis of soil surface moisture content for the four groups................
116
25. Results of t-test analysis of double-ring infiltration for the eight exclosures......................
117
26. Results of t-test analysis of double-ring infiltration for the four groups..............................
118
27. Results of t-test analysis of simulated rainfall sediment yield of all three plant-cover
conditions for the five exclosures........................................................................................
119
28. Results of t-test analysis of simulated rainfall surface runoff of all three plant-cover
conditions for the five exclosures........................................................................................
121
29. Results of t-test analysis of simulated rainfall sediment yield of all three plant-cover
conditions for the two groups..................................................................................
123
30. Results of t-test analysis of simulated rainfall surface runoff of all three runs for the
two groups...............................................................................................................................
124
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Page
1. Map showing the locations of the study sites in the northern winter range........................
11
2. Sketch of bulk density sampling apparatus...............................................................................
16
3. Sketch of rainfall sim ulator..........................................................................................................
18
4. Bulk density of the surface five cm for the eight exclosures..................................................
35
5. Bulk density of the surface 5 cm for the four groups..............................................................
35
6. Sediment yield and surface runoff of the eight exclosures for plant-cover condition
one, vegetation and litterintact................................................................................................
38
7. Sediment yield and surface runoff of the five exclosures for plant-cover condition
two, vegetation clipped............................................................................................................
39
8. Sediment yield and surface runoff of the five exclosures for plant-cover condition
three, vegetation and litterremoved.......................................................................................
39
ABSTRACT
Paired plots at eight exclosures in Yellowstone National Park’s northern winter range
were studied in 1986 and 1987 to determine differences in soil chemical and physical properties
between areas protected from grazing for 25 years and areas historically used as winter range
by increasing numbers of elk (Cervus elaohusl. Soil surface bulk density, double ring infiltration,
and nutrient analysis sampling were conducted inside and outside of all exclosures. Five
exclosures were selected for a simulated rainfall study. The simulated rainfall was applied under
three separate conditions inside and outside of each exclosure. The first was with vegetation
undisturbed, the second with vegetation clipped, and the third with clipped vegetation and litter
removed.
Differences in soil chemical properties showed no trend between inside and outside of
exclosures. Soil surface (0-5 cm) fine earth bulk density was higher outside most exclosures,
four were significantly different (P=0.10). Two exclosures had higher double ring infiltration
rates on the grazed plots outside the exclosures. One exclosure had significantly higher
infiltration inside.
For the simulated rainfall study, all exclosures but one had higher runoff (lower
infiltration) outside for all three conditions. One exclosure in condition I, vegetation undisturbed,
had equal runoff inside and out. No differences were significant for condition 1, differences at
two exclosures were significant for condition 2, vegetation clipped, and one exclosure for
condition 3, vegetation and litter removed. All exclosures showed a trend for higher sediment
yield outside for all three conditions.
When exclosures were grouped by site characteristics no group showed a trend for
differences in nutrient analysis. Three of the four groups had significantly higher differences in
fine earth bulk density outside the exclosures and one had significantly higher double ring
infiltration inside. No group showed a significant difference for sediment yield from simulated
rainfall. Surface runoff was significantly higher outside the exclosures in two groups for the
vegetation clipped treatment and one group for the vegetation and litter removed.
Since no soils data were collected when the exclosures were established, no
conclusions can be made concerning trends over time for improvement or deterioration of soils
due to grazing or protection from grazing.
I
I
INTRODUCTION
Yellowstone National Park is the world’s first national park. Its primary purpose as a
natural area is to maintain representative and unique ecosystems in as near pristine conditions
as possible (Houston, 1982). In addition to preserving ecosystems for their cultural and
scientific values as a biosphere reserve, Yellowstone Park is now viewed as a reservoir of
genetic diversity and as a baseline to which other exploited systems may be compared
(Houston, 1982).
Ecosystems are dynamic and some component populations may shift from one state to
another. Appropriate management criteria for natural areas are often the most difficult to
develop because these require considerable ecological and historical information. Major
ecological changes have occurred throughout the park since the introduction of European
culture. These changes have been brought about by climate variability, different levels of
grazing pressure, alteration of natural fire cycles and other natural and/or man-caused
influences. In Yellowstone, the area known as the Northern Winter Range has, in the past, been
subject to a variety of treatments to achieve management goals. Many of these goals and
treatments have been controversial.
Since 1968, the policy in Yellowstone has been that no wildlife population management
would be undertaken within the park. Under this natural regulation policy, big game populations
such as elk would be naturally regulated by natural forces. There is one drawback. Wolves and
mountain lions have been extirpated from the park and no hunting is allowed within the park.
Consequently, herbivores have no natural predators. Since 1968 the northern Yellowstone elk
herd has been increasing and now numbers around 20,000 animals (Singer, 1988). Because of
these numbers many people believe degradation of the park’s northern range is occurring, while
others believe there is no degradation.
Due to this controversy, the National Park Service implemented studies of elk habitat
2
use and overall ecology of the northern winter range. This investigation is just one of many to
determine how natural communities in the park are responding to existing management policies.
Specifically, this study was to I) determine if a difference in chemical and physical
properties exists inside and outside of ungulate grazing exclosures; and, 2) determine, using
simulated rainfall, if there is a difference in surface runoff and sediment yield inside and outside
the exclosures. Since there are no pre-exclosure soils baseline data to determine what effects
the increasing numbers of animals have on the soils over the years, this study compares paired
outside-of-exclosure grazed and inside-of-exclosure ungrazed plots at a point in time. It is not
designed to determine if the soil resource is changing due to either grazing or protection from
grazing.
3
LITERATURE REVIEW
Soil Chemical Properties
Few studies have been conducted to determine the influence of grazing versus no
grazing on soil chemical properties. Most show no significant difference between levels of most
nutrients in grazed and ungrazed soils. Bauer et al (1987) state "We are not aware of any
studies in the Northern Great Plains that compare soil properties in grazed virgin grassland to
nongrazed virgin relict grasslands." The authors use Virgin’ to represent non-cultivated lands,
and were trying to determine if soil chemical properties of grazed land could be used as a
comparison to detect changes due to cultivation. They found that for the properties studied,
differences were not consistently larger in either the grazed or relict (nongrazed) system. Two
elements used as a measure of soil organic matter showed opposite trends. Total nitrogen
content to a depth of 45.7 cm was higher in grazed than nongrazed areas. Organic carbon was
higher in the relict than grazed areas. Total phosphorus content to 45.7 cm was greater in relict
than grazed areas. Total P and inorganic P in the upper 7.6 cm was greater in the grazed than
nongrazed areas.
In a study on the mixed grass prairie of Saskatchewan, Lodge (1954) found that plots
protected from grazing for one year were not significantly different from grazed plots in total
nitrogen, Ph and organic matter. Available phosphorus was significantly higher on the grazed
treatment at two sites and the ungrazed treatment at one site; the fourth site had no differences.
Rhoades et al (1964) reported small and insignificant differences in organic matter and
soil nitrogen levels between grazing at different stocking rates and a 20 year old exclosure. On
the Texas plains, Wood and Blackburn (1984) found that soil organic matter content differed
slightly among six grazing treatments and two exclosures.
4
Soil Physical Properties. Sediment Yield and Runoff
There are many studies of the effects of grazing on soil bulk density, infiltration, runoff
and sediment yield. Most of these evaluate summer grazing by domestic livestock, mainly cattle
and sheep. There is little information on the effects of grazing during 1) the winter dormant
season and 2) early spring, by free ranging ungulates. At these times, soils may be either
covered by snow or undergoing freeze-thaw cycles. Some studies report higher bulk density
and lower infiltration with prolonged grazing and others report the opposite. Some authors
believe that differences in results are related to the influence of climate during the time of year
the study takes place. Even though these studies may not be directly comparable to the
northern range, they can be used as a starting point to determine if trends, such as higher bulk
density, lower infiltration, higher runoff and higher sediment yield, are evident with long term
winter grazing by elk.
Reed and Peterson (1961) found bulk density consistently higher and infiltration
consistently lower on grazed areas compared to ungrazed areas in the Northern Great Plains.
However, not all differences were statistically significant.
Knoll and Hopkins (1959) reported a higher infiltration rate and lower bulk density for
pastures ungrazed for 13 years compared to grazed pastures.
Laycock and Conrad (1967), in a study on the effect of cattle grazing on soil compaction
on high elevation ranges, found that soil bulk densities were similar in grazed plots and
exclosures, both in early and late summer, for most locations. Soil bulk density inside a 15 year
old exclosure was not different frqm that of the grazed plots outside the exclosure. The three
year old exclosures had a significantly higher summer increase in bulk density than grazed plots.
The authors reported a significant negative correlation between bulk density and both soil
organic matter and soil moisture. They attributed the differences among grazed and ungrazed
treatments to varying soil moisture conditions.
5
In a long term study in western Colorado on the effects of winter grazing by cattle and
sheep, Lusby (1970) reported runoff on plots ungrazed for 14 years to be 30% less than on
grazed plots. In an earlier report, Lusby (1965) determined that hillslope erosion has a seasonal
cycle in which winter freeze-thaw loosens the soil and summer rains compact it. Spring and
early summer livestock grazing causes an earlier and more pronounced compaction of the
loosened soil than grazing during late summer; ungrazed areas remain less compacted for a
longer period of time. Thompson (1968) reported that during the same study, infiltration rates
declined to a point lower than pretreatment level for both grazed and ungrazed plots. Infiltration
rates were higher on grazed than ungrazed plots, as was the case before the study began. All
plots, irrespective of grazing treatment, showed a slight improvement (decrease) in soil surface
bulk density measurements between 1958 and 1963. Bulk density was lower on ungrazed plots.
Thompson (1968) attributed declines in infiltration rates and variations in soil surface conditions
to low amounts of frost and shrink-swell action and maximum damaging influence by summer
thunderstorms prior to the data collection.
Rauzi (1963) found that water intake was highly correlated with total herbage and
surface mulch. A pasture ungrazed for 21 years had 4 times greater water intake than a heavily
grazed pasture and 1.8 times greater than a moderately grazed pasture.
In a study in northwestern Oklahoma to determine the effects of 20 years of different
grazing intensities on water intake, Rhoades et al (1964) found that bulk density was significantly
lower in plots ungrazed for 20 years versus in plots with low, medium and high stocking den­
sities. Water intake was inversely proportional to grazing intensity.
Tuckel (1984) in a study on the steppes of Turkey compared double ring infiltration rates
on grazed plots with plots protected for 30 years. Mean infiltration rate on grazed ranges was
slightly higher than on protected ranges; the differences were not significant.
Gamougoun et al (1984) in a three year study in New Mexico found that pastures
excluded from livestock grazing for 27 years had significantly higher infiltration rates than grazed
6
pastures. The nongrazed pastures had the lowest sediment production. However, results were
highly variable; all differences were not significant for all treatments for all years.
Wood and Blackburn (1984, 1981) found that some grazing treatments had significantly
higher bulk density measurements than pastures excluded from grazing for 20 years; others did
not.
A study by Orr (I960) on four bluegrass streambottom sites in the Blackhills found bulk
density greater on the grazed treatment at three of four sites. The fourth site had higher bulk
density inside the exclosure. The exclosures were five, seven, nine and 17 years old. He
determined that all exclosures, except perhaps the five year old exclosure, appeared to have
been in place for sufficient time for partial if not full recovery from soil compaction. In another
study, Orr (1975) stated that bulk density differences occurred only when there were significant
differences in field moisture content. He also believed that wide variations in climate are
somewhat responsible for the wide variations in earlier short term studies.
Packer (1963), in a study on the Gallatin elk herd winter range, found lowest bulk
densities on pristine plots that were protected from grazing by snowpack and highest bulk
densities on grazed plots. Plots protected from grazing for two years showed a significantly
lower bulk density than grazed plots. Although plots that were seeded and grazed had the
greatest bulk density, these plots showed the greatest decrease in bulk density after one year.
This occurred even though there was an abnormally high concentration of elk utilizing the
available forage. He attributed the decrease to an increase in root matter and to stooling of the
existing plants from the root crown rather than new seedling emergence. However, Packer did
not sample soil bulk density prior to establishment of the exclosures. With no pre-exclosure
baseline these results might also be interpreted as normal variation due to climatic factors as
reported by Orr (1975).
Many authors report that raindrop splash causes considerable runoff and erosion by
breaking down soil aggregates. These aggregates are then transported by drop splash and
7
surface flow. Some authors believe that aggregates are destroyed by splash with the resulting
soil particles deposited into pore spaces to effectively seal the soil surface (Ellison, 1950;
Osborn, 1954, 1952; Lowdermilk, 1930).
Numerous studies have been undertaken to determine what factors influence runoff and
sediment yield. Wood and Blackburn (1981), McCaIIa et al (1984a, 1984b), Lusby (1965), and
Thompson (1968) all reported that standing vegetation, litter, bare ground, total ground cover,
bulk density, initial soil moisture content, organic matter content, rock cover and climatic factors
had some influence on infiltration, runoff and sediment yield.
Increasing soil surface vegetative cover directly increases infiltration and decreases
runoff. In measuring sediment from high intensity natural rain storms Packer (1963) found that
about 70 percent ground cover and a maximum bulk density of 1.04 g /cm 3 appears to be a
requirement for preventing accelerated erosion and effective soil stabilization on the Gallatin elk
winter range.
Meeuwig (1971a, 1970) determined that erosion is inversely related to soil surface cover.
The magnitude of erosion is primarily dependent on the proportion of the ground surface
unprotected from direct raindrop impact by plants, litter and stone. Soil organic matter favors
stability of fine-textured soils but tends to increase erosion of sandy soils.
Dadkhah and Gifford (1980) in a study on the influence of vegetation, rock cover and
trampling on infiltration rates and sediment production, reported that the most important factor
influencing sediment production was grass cover, and that 50 percent protective ground cover
was sufficient to provide adequate soil stabilization.
Johnston (1962) studied the effects of various types of cover on water-intake with four
treatments. Treatments were 1) check, 2) current growth of vegetation removed to ground level,
3) fresh mulch removed, and 4) all vegetation and mulch removed to ground level. The amount
of water absorbed and rate of intake was significantly higher on ,the undisturbed plots than those
from which vegetation, mulch and both were removed. Soil loss was negligible except where
8
bare ground was exposed.
Frank et al (1975) and Johnson and Gordon (1986) determined that the majority of
sediment yield, from their watersheds studied, is derived from snowmelt and rain on frozen soil.
Plant Cover
In conjunction with this soils study, Yellowstone National Park is conducting a
concurrent plant ecology study to determine long-term effects of grazing and protection from
grazing on the northern winter range. Percent bare ground and litter reported here is from
unpublished data gathered by Yellowstone National Park researchers (Singer, 1986; 1987).
All exclosures except Blacktail West had more bare ground outside of exclosures (Table
1). Litter is significantly higher (P=0.1) inside at all exclosures (Table 1). Greater amounts of
litter inside exclosures is most likely a result of lack of grazing.
Table I. Average percent bare ground and litter inside and outside of the eight exclosures.
Exclosure
Bare Ground
Litter
Inside Outside Inside* Outside
----------------------%-------------------
48.47 64.73'
7.53
Gardiner east
5.03
46.36 72.51'
Gardiner west
11.80 21.00 29.4
Blacktail east
6.09
28.80' 16.67
Blacktail west
33.07 38.13
12.53
Lamar Valley east
5.12
50.00 53.53
Lamar Valley west
2.90
19.30 50.30
Mammoth
2.37
6.64 36.60'
Junction Butte
* - Denotes significant difference at P=0.10.
1.23
1.96
3.30
0.42
0.93
0.93
30.70
4.10
9
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Site Selection
The study included eight grazing exclosure sites at five locations on the Northern Winter
Range of Yellowstone National Park. The Yellowstone National Park research staff installed 2
hectare (5 ac) exclosures in 1958 and 1961 to study the long term effects of winter grazing by
elk and bison on plant communities. This study was conducted within or adjacent to paired 10
X l O r n plots inside and outside of these exclosures. The paired plots were selected by
Yellowstone National Park researchers, in 1986 and 1987, for a concurrent plant ecology study.
Each pair was selected for similar soils, slope, aspect and plant composition. There were two
exclosures each in the Gardiner area, the Blacktail ponds area, and in the Lamar Valley area,
and one exclosure each in the Mammoth Hot Springs area and the Junction Butte area (Figure
1).
Geologic Parent Material
The geologic parent materials of soils at the study area are as follows:
Gardiner - Earthflow deposits consisting of material derived from sandstones and shales
(Pierce, 1973; USGS1 1975).
Blacktail - Pinedale glacial till including material from Absoraka volcanics, limestone,
precambrian crystalline rocks, and tuff (Pierce, 1973; USGS1 1975).
Lamar Valley - Pinedale glacial till formed from volcanic conglomerate, sandstone, tuff,
and well sorted breccia with localized influence of crystalline granite, limestone, and sandstone
(Pierce, 1974b; Prostka et al, 1975b).
Mammoth Hot Springs - Pinedale glacial till formed from detrital material (Pierce, 1973;
10
USGS, 1975).
Junction Butte - Pinedale glacial till formed from epiclastic volcanic breccia,
conglomerate, sandstone and tuffs with local influences of crystalline granite (Pierce, 1974a;
Prostka et al, 1975a).
Soil Classification and Site Characteristics
Soil profiles were described and samples collected within 10 m of the 10 x 10 m plant
ecology study plots to determine the soil type of the study plot. Profiles were described and
classified following national standards (Soil Survey Staff, 1975). Samples were collected from
each horizon and transported to the laboratory for water content and particle size distribution
analysis. Water content was determined gravimetrically by the formula: sample dry weight
subtracted from wet weight divided by dry weight. Particle size classes were determined by the
hydrometer method (Bouyoucos, 1936).
The northern winter range and the five study sites lie along an east-west elevational
gradient and receive different amounts of precipitation (Dirks and Mariner, 1982). Gardiner, the
easternmost site, is lowest and receives the least annual precipitation; the exclosures at Lamar
Valley have the highest elevation and receive a moderate amount of annual precipitation. Sites
at Mammoth, Blacktail and Junction Butte all have higher precipitation than Gardiner, with
Mammoth receiving the most (Table 2).
11
/
'y.
GALLATIN
NATIONAL FOREST
YELLOWSTONE
PARK
BOUNDARY
Gardinen
BIacktaH
M a m m o th
Junction Butte
RANGE
BOUNDARY------- -
w in t e r
Figure I. Map showing the locations of the study sites in the northern winter range.
Table 2 . Elevation, annual precipitation, parent material and surface layer characteristics of the study sites.
S ite
E le v a t io n
(m )
P r e c ip it a t io n
P a re n t
M a te r ia l
S u rfa c e
L a y e r T e x tu r e and (P e rc e n t C la y )
(n n )
I n s id e
O u ts id e
G a rd in e r
East
West
1676
1676
277
277
L a n d s lid e
D e p o s its
sandy c la y loam ( 2 2 )
c la y
(4 4 )
loam ( 2 2 )
sandy c la y
East
West
Lamar V a l le y
East
West
Mammoth
2042
2027
350
350
G l a c ia l
T ill
sandy loam ( 1 0 )
loam
(1 7 )
loam
loam
2195
2073
317
317
G la c ia l
T ill
loam
loam
(1 4 )
(2 8 )
loam ( 8 )
c la y loam
1951
421
G la c ia l T i l l
loam
(6 )
sandy loam ( 6 )
1890
400
G la c ia l T i l l
sand y loam ( 1 0 )
(2 2 )
(1 4 )
J u n c tio n B u tte
loam
loam ( 2 2 )
(1 4 )
(2 8 )
13
Soil Fertility and Chemical Characterization
Soil samples were collected from three depth increments, 0-15 cm, 15-30 cm, and 30-45
cm, at nine random locations inside the 10 x 1 0 m plots. At each plot, the nine samples for
each depth were combined to form three composite samples. Samples were collected by
excavating shallow pits and removing material from the pit walls. Only material passing through
a 2 mm sieve was saved for analysis. Samples were frozen within eight hours to minimize
nitrogen volatilization.
Electrical conductivity and pH were analyzed with glass electrodes in a 1:2 (soil:water) dilution.
Samples were analyzed for nitrate nitrogen following the cadmium reduction technique outlined
by Sims and Jackson (1971), and ammonia nitrogen by the colorimetric Berthelot reaction
(Technicon, 1975), on a Technicon Auto Analyzer II. Percent organic matter was determined
using the Sims-Haby colorimetric method (Sims and Haby, 1971). Available phosphorus was
determined using Olsen’s sodium bicarbonate extraction technique (Olsen, et al. 1954).
Available calcium, sodium, magnesium and potassium were determined by ammonium acetate
extraction (Bower, et al. 1952). The micro-nutrients copper, iron, zinc, and manganese were
determined by the DTPA-TEA extraction method modified from Lindsay and Norvel (1969).
Sulfur was analyzed following Bardsley and Lancaster (1965).
Bulk Density
Sampling Apparatus
Bulk density measurements and apparatus are as described by Cassidy (1981); a
modified version of method A. AASHO T 147-54 (AASHO, 1963), with sand being the volumetric
displacement material (Figure 2).
14
Laboratory Sand Calibration Procedures
Sand was poured through the ring stand assembly into a container (volume = 220.9
cm3) until the container was filled leaving a cone of sand projecting above the container top.
The excess sand was removed with a straight edge. Sand packing characteristics was
determined by dividing the weight of the sand in the container by the volume of the container.
Sand poured into the container through the funnel apparatus consistently packed to a bulk
density of 1.30 g /cm 3 (±.007). Using this value, the volume occupied by sand can be
determined as follows:
volume (cm3) = sand weight (g) x (1/1.30 g/cm 3).
To determine how much sand would be held above the ground surface by the thickness
of the sampling tray, sand was poured through the funnel apparatus until the base plate hole
was filled with sand and excess sand spilled on to the base. The excess sand was removed
with a straight edge and returned to the original container. That sand held in the base plate hole
was then removed and weighed to estimate how much sand was held above the ground surface
by the base plate hole. This value was determined to be 123.8 g.
Field Sampling
At each site, four subplots were selected adjacent to the 10 x 10 m plots for bulk density
sampling. Sampling depth was approximately five cm, to represent surface bulk density
characteristics. Field measurements were described as follows: The sampling tray was placed
on mineral soil after the removal of surface litter. A garden trowel was used to excavate a
circular hole through the cutout of the base plate. Roots projecting into the hole were clipped.
All excavated material (roots, coarse fragments, and soil) were sealed in bags for transport to
the laboratory. Sand from bags containing 1000 g of calibrated sand was poured into the
excavation through the funnel apparatus and leveled with a straight edge. Sand not occupying
15
the excavation was returned to the container and returned to the laboratory for weighing.
Laboratory Analysis
The sand remaining in each bag (corresponding to individual subplots) was weighed to
the nearest tenth of a gram. To this value, 123.8 was added to correct for the sand held above
the excavation by the base plate. The total was subtracted from the initial sand weight to
determine the amount of sand held in the excavation. The volume of the excavated sample was
calculated as shown in the previous section.
The excavated material was separated into three components; roots, coarse fragments,
and fines. A 2 mm sieve and root washer were used to separate the fine earth fraction from the
coarse fragments. A toothbrush was used to remove soil adhering to roots and coarse
fragments for the 1986 samples. For the 1987 samples a root washer was used to clean soil
material from roots and coarse fragments.
Bulk density of the fine earth fraction and the whole soil material was determined. The
volumes of the roots and coarse fragments were calculated based on their oven dry weights and
assumed bulk densities of 0.5 g /cm 3 and 2.65 g /cm 3 respectively. These values were
subtracted from the volume of the excavated material to give the volume of the fine earth
fraction. Assuming weight equals mass, dividing the weight of the fines by the volume of the
fines yielded the bulk density of the fine earth fraction. The bulk density of the whole soil
material was determined by dividing the weight of the total excavated material by the volume of
this material.
16
.15 CM
3 0 CM
Figure 2. Sketch of bulk density sampling apparatus. (From Cassidy, 1981)
17
Infiltration
At each site infiltration measurements were made for three subplots using double ring
infiltrometers (Johnson, 1963). Nested rings were driven into the mineral soil approximately 2-5
cm, after which surface litter was removed from the inner ring only. A piece of metal mesh
screen was placed within the inner ring and both rings were filled with water and allowed to sit
for 30 minutes before measurements were initiated.
A constant head of water was maintained in both rings during measurements; the rings
were refilled to this level after each reading. The vertical drop in water level was measured to
the nearest millimeter. Readings were made at I minute, 3 minutes, 5 minutes and each 5
minute interval for 60 minutes total time. The last three 5 minute readings were averaged,
converted to centimeters and multiplied by twelve to yield the final equilibrium infiltration rate in
centimeters per hour (cm/hr). A nearly constant rate of infiltration was generally reached after
approximately one-half hour.
Rainfall Simulator
A modified Meeuwig rainfall simulator (Figure 3)(Meeuwig, 1971b) was used to apply
1.27 cm of rain at an intensity of 2.54 cm per hour (1 in/hr) for 30 minutes at the 2 Gardiner
exclosures, 2 Blacktail exclosures, and Lamar Valley east exclosure. This particular storm
intensity was chosen to be equal to or greater than natural storm events; average natural storm
intensities are probably lower (Mohrman, 1988; Caprio, 1988). A more intense simulated storm
was not chosen because it was deemed too unrealistic for natural events.
18
155 cm
... m„„w,,,Ihrwwil
Figure 3. Sketch of rainfall simulator. (From Schmid 1988).
19
Portable rainfall simulators are limited to measuring the interrill stage of erosion only
(Schmid, 1986). The simulator used in this study had approximately 500 drip needles made
from hypodermic tubing in a 61 cm x 61 cm x 2.5 cm plexiglass water chamber. Simulated
raindrops fell from approximately 155 cm. Terminal velocity is not readily obtainable in the field
with most portable rainfall simulators (Young, 1979; Hudson, 1981); the simulator height brought
rain drop velocity as close to terminal velocity as practical.
A 66 cm x 66 cm plot frame was pounded 2 to 5 cm into the ground to reduce lateral
movement of water out of the plot. The plot frame was open on the down slope side to allow
water runoff and sediment to be tunneled into a collection can by a collection tray. The
collection tray had a 1.27 cm flange that was inserted into the soil until the tray was even with
the soil surface inside the plot frame. Dry, powdered bentonite was used to seal the tray edge
so that water and detached sediment did not flow under the collection tray instead of into the
collection can. When wet, the surface of the bentonite became fairly smooth allowing for almost
unrestricted movement of runoff and sediment across the contact.
Three rainfall events were undertaken on the same plot, under different conditions, each
approximately 15 minutes after the previous event. Condition 1 with vegetation undisturbed was
to approximate natural conditions. For condition 2, vegetation was clipped and left lying on the
surface to mimic the effects of trampling and compression by snow. Condition 3 was done with
the clipped vegetation and litter removed to evaluate the effect of no vegetative cover on surface
runoff and infiltration. Rainfall simulation was replicated three times adjacent to the 10 x 10 m
vegetation plots.
For each simulated rainfall event all water and suspended sediment running off the plot
plus sediment deposited in the runoff-collecting trough at the bottom of the plot frame was
collected. When the sediment had settled out, the excess water was siphoned off and sediment
was oven-dried and weighed. These values were converted to kg per hectare by the equation:
(g/4356 cm2) x (100,000,000 cm2/ha) x (1 kg/1000 g) = kg/ha.
20
Statistical Analyses
A t-test was used to compare the outside exclosure and inside exclosure means at each
exclosure. At locations with two exclosures at the same site (Gardiner, Blacktail and Lamar
Valley) data were pooled into outside exclosure and inside exclosure groups. The Mammoth
and Junction Butte data were also pooled because of their relatively similar average annual
precipitation, elevation, parent material and soil characteristics. The rainfall simulator study has
two pooled groups, Blacktail and Gardiner. Only one exclosure was sampled in Lamar Valley so
those results are presented by exclosure. All statistical differences reported are at the 90%
confidence level (p=0.10).
21
RESULTS
Soil Chemical Characteristics
Gardiner East Exclosure
There was no significant difference in NO3-N for any depth inside and outside the
exclosure; ammonia nitrogen and organic matter were significantly higher outside the exclosure
for the 30-45 cm depth (Table 3).
Sodium was significantly higher outside for the 15-30 cm and 30-45 cm depths. No
differences for Ca or Mg were significant. Potassium was significantly higher outside for the 3045 cm depth.
For the micronutrients studied only the difference in Mn for the 30-45 cm depth was
significant; it was higher inside.
There was no significant difference in pH or electrical conductivity (EC) for any depth.
The pH was greater outside the exclosure for both the 0-15 cm and 15-30 cm depths. Average
pH was 8.9 and was higher inside for the 30-45 cm depth. Electrical conductivity was slightly
higher outside for all depths. The EC in the 30-45 cm depth outside the exclosure ranged from
1.78 to 9.4 mmhos/cm and inside ranged from 0.68 to 7.48 mmhos/cm (Appendix B).
Gardiner West Exclosure
For the two measures of nitrogen only the NH4-N difference in the 0-15 cm depth was
significant; it was higher inside. Organic matter was significantly higher outside for the 15-30 cm
and 30-45 cm depths (Table 3). There was significantly more P outside the exclosure for the 015 cm depth. No differences in S or P were significant (Table 4).
There were no significant differences in Na levels between inside and outside the
22
exclosures. There was more Ca inside the exclosure for all depths. Differences for the 0-15 cm
and 15-30 cm depths were significant. There was significantly more Mg inside the exclosure for
the 0-15 cm depth. No differences in K were significant.
For the micronutrients, Fe was significantly higher outside the exclosure for all depths.
No differences in copper or zinc were significant. Manganese was higher outside for all depths;
only the difference in the 0-15 cm depth was significant.
Both pH and EC were higher inside the exclosure for all depths. The difference in the 015 cm depth was significant.
Both Gardiner Exclosures
There were no significant differences in NO3-N concentrations between inside and
outside of the exclosure. Nitrate nitrogen was higher outside for all depths. Ammonia nitrogen
was significantly higher inside for the 0-15 cm depth and higher outside for the 15-30 cm and
30-45 cm depth. Organic matter was higher outside for all depths; it was significant in the 15-30
cm and 30-45 cm depths.
Phosphorus was higher inside the exclosure for the 0-15 cm and 15-30 cm depths.
There was more sulfur outside for all depths. No differences in either P or S were significant.
Average Na, Ca, Mg, and P concentrations were consistently higher outside the
exclosure. Sodium and potassium concentrations were both significantly different in the 15-30
cm depth. Calcium and magnesium averages were both significantly different in the surface 015 cm depth.
For iron, copper, zinc and manganese, only the difference for Mn outside for the 0-15
cm was significant.
Soil pH was greater inside the exclosure for all depths, the 30-45 cm depth difference
was significant. Electrical conductivity was higher outside for all depths, no differences were
23
significant.
Blacktail East Exclosure
Both NO3-N and NH4-N levels were higher inside the exclosure for all depths. The
differences in NO3-N for the 0-15 cm and 15-30 cm depths were significant. There was no
significant difference in NH4-N levels. Organic matter was also greater inside the exclosure for
all depths. Only the 15-30 cm difference was significant.
Concentrations of P and S were greater inside the exclosure. None of the differences
were significant for P. The differences in S for the 15-30 cm and 30-45 cm depths were
significant.
Sodium and calcium concentrations were greater outside the exclosure for the 0-15 cm
depth. None of the differences were significant. There was more Mg and K outside the
exclosure for all depths. The differences in the 0-15 cm and 30-45 cm depths for both Mg and K
were significant.
The micronutrients Fe, Cu, Mn, and Zn were all higher outside the exclosure for all
depths. The difference in Fe was not significant. All differences for Ca were significant. The 3045 cm depth difference for Zn and the 0-15 cm depth difference for Mn were significant.
Differences in pH were not significant. Electrical conductivity was significantly higher
inside the exclosure for the 0-15 cm depth.
Blacktail West Exclosure
Nitrate and ammonia nitrogen were slightly higher outside the exclosure for the 0-15 cm
depth. No differences were significant. Organic matter was significantly higher outside the
exclosure for all depths.
There was significantly more P inside the exclosure for the 15-30 cm and 30-45 cm
24
depths. Sulfur was not significantly different in any depth.
Sodium was significantly higher inside the exclosure in the 0-15 cm depth. The 15-30
cm depth had almost equal amounts of Na inside and out. There was no significant difference
in Ca between inside and outside for any depth. Magnesium was significantly higher outside for
the 15-30 cm and 30-45 cm depths. Potassium was significantly higher outside for all depths.
There was significantly more Fe outside the exclosure for the 15-30 cm and 30-45 cm
depths. There were no significant differences in copper for any depth. There was significantly
more Zn outside for the 0-15 cm and 15-30 cm depth. The concentrations of Zn inside and
outside in the 30-45 cm depth were equal. Manganese concentrations were significantly higher
outside for the 15-30 cm and 30-45 cm depths.
Only the 30-45 cm depth had significantly higher soil pH inside the exclosure. There
was no significant difference in EC for any depth and all depths had an EC of less than 1
mmhos/cm.
Both Blacktail Exclosures
There was more of both forms of nitrogen inside the exclosure for all depths except the
30-45 cm depth where there was more NH4-N outside. Average soil organic matter was
consistently higher outside. The differences for N and OM were not significant in any depth.
There were no significant differences in P. Sulfur was significantly greater inside for the
15-30 cm depth.
The difference in calcium for the 0-15 cm depth was significantly higher outside. Both
magnesium and potassium were significantly higher outside the exclosure for all depths.
' Averages for iron, copper, zinc and manganese were higher outside for all depths. The
differences were significant for iron in the 15-30 cm and 30-45 cm depths and for Mn in the 0-15
cm depth.
25
Differences in pH and EC were not significant.
Lamar Valiev East Exclosure
Both NO3-N and NH4-N were higher inside the exclosure for all depths. No differences
were significant. There was significantly more OM inside the exclosure for the 0-15 cm depth ;
the 15-30 cm depth had almost equal amounts inside and out.
There was no significant difference in P or S inside and outside the exclosure.
Sodium and calcium were both higher outside the exclosure for all depths. The only
significant difference was for Ca in the 15-30 cm and 30-45 cm depths. Magnesium and
potassium were significantly higher inside in the 0-15 cm depth.
All of the micronutrients Fe, Cu, Mn and Zn were higher inside the exclosure for all
depths. Iron was significantly different in the 0-15 cm and 15-30 cm depths and copper was
significantly different in the 15-30 cm depth. No differences in Zn or Mn were significant.
Soils outside the exclosure had higher pH and EC than inside the exclosure. Only the
differences in pH for the 0-15 cm and 15-30 cm depths were significant.
Lamar Valiev West Exclosure
The only significant difference in nitrogen levels was in the 30-45 cm depth where NO3-N
was greater outside the exclosure. Organic matter was higher outside for all depths; no
differences were significant.
Phosphorus and sulfur show opposite trends for the three depths.
There was a
significant difference only for S in the 30-45 cm depth where there was more inside.
There was significantly more Ca inside the exclosure in the 30-45 cm depth. There was
significantly more Na in the 15-30 cm depth and Mg in the 15-30 cm and 30-45 cm depths.
Potassium was higher inside for all depths; differences were not significant.
26
Table 3. Average concentration of nitrogen and organic matter for the eight exclosures.
S o il
Depth
G a rd in e r east
0-15
1 5 -3 0
3 0-45
NO3
O utside
NHj I
In sid e
O u t s i d e I n s id e
.......... - u g / g ................
2 .7 1
2 .3 7
2 .1 8
1-4 1 .
1.3 6
1 .4 2
1 .02
0 .69
2 .08
3 .28
3 .04
3 .9 0
3 .7 1
3 .5 7
1.9 6
1 .5 8 "
1 .1 4 "
1.3 3
0 .77
0 .3 7
1.93
5.6 5
6 .58
3 .18
3.41
1 .1 6 "
0 .4 4
4.31
4.1 5
5.2 4
4 .6 1
1.3 0
1 .3 1
2 .3 5*
1 .4 9
1.6 7
0 .8 4
0 .92
1.25
0 .9 2
30-45
2.3 5
1.0 8
0 .8 0
B la c k ta i I east
0-15
0.4 4
1 5 -3 0
30-45
0 .2 0
0 .3 8
B l a c k t a i I west
0-15
1 5 -3 0
30-45
In s id e
(%)
2.1 0
3 .16
4 .2 5 '
1.2 8
1.05
1.0 0
G a r d i n e r west
0-15
1 5 -3 0
OM
O utside
0 .7 2
1 .3 4
1.24
1.04
1.82
1.24
3 .9 6
2 .6 8
0 .86
0 .60
0 .8 0
1.5 8
1.24
1 .8 9
1 .2 7
2 .7 4*
1.84*
1.5 6
0.9 3
Lamar V a l l e y e a s t
0-15
0 .42
1 5 -3 0
0 .13
0 .06
30-45
0.7 5
0 .56
4.6 5
6 .0 2
2 .69
0 .2 0
0.3 5
4 .7 4
3 .86
5.1 5
4 .14
2 .2 4
1 .4 9
3.78*
2.2 4
1.5 6
Lamar V a l l e y west
0-15
1.0 3
0 .4 2
15-30
30-45
0 .19"
3 .40
0 .2 0
0 .06
4 .7 4
3 .69
2 .9 0
7 .1 8
3.9 4
2 .94
5 .1 2
2 .9 3
2 .0 4
5 .0 8
3 .9 4
1.65
Mammoth
0-15
0 .2 0
0 .3 3
5.5 5
5 .0 8
0 .2 2
0 .3 1
0 .3 7
0 .3 2
6 .22
3 .42
5 .7 1
3 .89
3 .70"
4 .6 7
15-30
30-45
2 .79
1 .2 8
2 .4 6
1.63
Ju n ctio n B u tte
0-15
0 .3 3
0 .22
5 .3 0
4 .6 7
4 .0 7
3.41
15-30
0 .27"
0 .0 1
2.5 5
1.7 6
1 .3 8
1.2 2
30-45
0.6 5
0.3 4
3 .10
2 .15
1 .2 1*
0 .76
Numbers followed by
are s ig n ific a n tly higher than th e ir paired counterparts.
27
Table 4. Average concentration of available phosphorus (P) and sulfur (S) for the eight
exclosures.
S o il
Depth
P
O utside
S
I n s id e
O u t s id e
- u g / g -------------
I n s id e
G ard iner east
1 1 .2 1
0-15
15-30
12.86
3 0-45
62.41
16.29
8 .1 7
5.61
3 8 .70
51 5 .2 3
1 2 3 8 .2 3
5.5 3
2 5 .77
29 .13
G a r d i n e r west
0-15
16.36*
15-30
2.11
3 0-45
3 .3 7
5 .8 7
9 .94
1 0 .3 5
8 .1 3
3 7 .7 7
43 .72
2 3 .2 7
4 8 3 .6 7
61 2 .6 3
B la c k ta i I east
6 .7 9
0-15
5 .7 9
15-30
8 .7 5
5 .8 0
2 .1 3
1.5 8
2 .6 2
8.3 2*
3 0-45
5 .3 3
8 .8 7
14.80*
5 .3 9
3.11
18.00
1 0 .7 3
2 .5 3
7.1 5
4 .43
30 .30
3 .72
B l a c k t a i I west
6 .3 8
0-15
6.71*
15-30
5 .9 2*
3 0-45
11.47
Lamar V a l l e y
0 -15
15-30
3 0-45
east
8 .2 1
5 .10
5 .5 1
1 1 .0 2
6 .0 7
5 .49
2 .4 7
2 .6 2
4 .4 5
2.6 5
1.7 8
2 .08
Lamar V a l l e y
0-15
1 5 -3 0
3 0-45
west
6 .7 0
5 .6 5
5 .5 5
7 .4 4
5 .8 2
5 .49
4 .7 6
7 .5 8
7 .1 2
3 .48
7 .3 1
10.51
Mammoth
0-15
8 .1 5
10.86
3 .72
3 .9 4
15-30
3 0-45
5 .3 2
4 .34
6 .6 2
5 .9 1
15.00
26.04
3.01
22.84
J u n c t i on B u t t e
9 .73
0-15
6 .5 1
1 5 -3 0
6 .62
3 0-45
8 .4 4
5 .8 1
5 .0 5
3 .7 6
4 .6 4
2 0 .2 7
2 .1 8
3 .26
99 .69
Numbers followed by
are s ig n ific a n tly higher than th e ir paired counterparts
28
Table 5. Average concentration of sodium (Na), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), and potassium
(K) for the eight exclosures.
S o il
Depth
Na
Mg
Ca
O utside
I n s id e
G ard iner east
1 1 3 9 .6 0
0-15
15-30
2 0 9 3 .3 3 '
3 0-45
2 2 1 8 .6 7 '
3 5 1 .4 0
59 3 .4 0
450 9.6 7
6 9 7 7.0 7
4 665.73
597 8.0 7
76 0 .5 3
1 1 6 2 9 .0 0
6 5 4 0.8 7
3 2 2 .2 0
5 0 4 .8 7
98 5 .3 3
2893.33
6125.93
7140.47*
8 3 3 1 .9 3 '
1 8 9 0 8 .9 3
G a r d i n e r west
1 6 0 .2 7
0-15
1 5 -3 0
70 8 .3 3
3 0-45
7 1 9 .4 7
B la c k ta i I east
6 2 .67
0-15
15-30
3 5 .87
5 0 .00
3 0-45
B l a c k t a i I west
15 .07
0-15
16.20
15-30
3 0-45
19.80
O u t s id e
6208.13
I n s id e
...................... u g/g
3 2 .6 7
2113.33
5 1 .13
8 5 .80
2 717.73
1 8 0 8 .7 3
377 9.2 7
411 6.6 7
5386.17
K
O utside
In s id e
2 9 8 .8 7
1 6 0 .2 7
1 8 8 .4 7 *
2 1 6 .6 0
9 1 .60
1 4 4 6 .0 7 *
1 3 1 2 .3 3
1 3 5 5 .6 0
2 2 6 .8 0
2 1 0 .9 3
19 5 .2 7
29 7 .7 3
1 6 6 .0 0
3 8 2 .7 3 '
1 8 1 .4 7
4 4 7 .0 7 *
4 3 2 .2 7
24 9 .7 3
2 2 1 .1 3 *
1 3 7 .8 0 *
3 3 4 .0 0
1 3 2 .6 7
1 2 8 .7 3
88 .40
6 2 .4 7
2 1 4 .2 7
2 2 9 .2 7
4 0 7 .0 7 *
2 4 7 .0 7
2 9 4 .3 3 *
2 2 5 .6 7 *
12 0 .8 7
3 8 .6 7
O utside
54 6 .8 0
5 8 8 .4 7
5 9 8 .4 7
8 2 1 .3 3
1340.93
1 2 5 6 .3 3
20.53"
2112.87
1 9 7 3 .2 0
25 5 .3 3
16.53
2478.47
2 4 90.80
16.20
234 7.0 7
346 6.2 7
3 1 2 .6 7 *
3 0 9 .0 7 *
I n s id e
7 8 0 .2 7
6 8 5 .4 0
6 0 0 .5 3
13 0 .0 7
6 9 .13
2 0 8 .7 3
Lamar V a l l e y e a s t
0-15
2 0 .60
19.13
3 8 43.33
371 7.8
1026.40*
2 5 7 .5 3
3 5 1 .2 0 *
1 5 -3 0
2 2 .33
2 8 .53
4 5 7 0.4 0 '
5 0 7 4 .0 0 '
4012.53
4177.20
1 0 9 6 .1 3
1142.53
1 149.07
1 1 3 3 .1 3
2 1 4 .6 7
1 3 5 .2 7
24 2 .0 0
1 7 6 .8 7
6 4 6 .3 3
95 7 .5 3
1607.87*
6 3 8 .7 3
7 6 2 .0 7
3 9 8 .0 0
2 0 8 .0 7
4 2 6 .6 7
2 4 0 .6 7
86 5 .4 0
9 8 .87
1 4 0 .4 7
23 6 .4 0
18 6 .2 7
23 1 .2 0
1 9 8 .6 0
4 3 8 .2 7
2 8 3 .6 0
44 2 .2 0
35 6 .4 0
15 4 .6 7
1 7 4 .7 3
1 4 3 .0 0
1 7 8 .2 0
3 0-45
3 3 .53
3 6 .73
9 5 1 .2 7
Lamar V a l l e y west
0-15
2 3 .80
1 5 -3 0
7 5 .20
11 6 .8 7
3 0-45
2 1 .73
19.40
3 1 87.13
489 7.0 7
279 6.4 7
4 7 89.00
5 5 .2 7
480 1.2 7
5572.80*
Mammoth
0-15
15-30
2 4 .13
3 8 .20
50 .87
39 .40
2 137.93
3518.73
3 0-45
4 2 .60
36 .73
539 3.4 7
205 6.8 7
2071.53
5 442.60
Jun ctio n B u tte
3 1 .20
0-15
18.53
1 5 -3 0
27 .00
1747.27*
1 3 3 9 .4 0
3 4 2 .2 0
3 3 2 .6 0
3 1 5 .6 0
2 9 3 .9 3
3 5 .87
1 9 1 6.8 0 ’
1368.87
3 7 1 .8 7
4 1 3 .4 0
21 8 .5 3
23 2 .8 7
2 8 .00
50 .80
4422.93
4196.93
4 4 9 .6 0
4 6 2 .9 3
1 7 4 .3 3
1 8 7 .3 3
3 0-45
Numbers followed by
are s ig n ific a n tly higher than th e ir paired counterparts.
29
Table 6. Average concentration of iron (Fe), copper (Cu), zinc (Zn), and manganese (Mn) for
the eight exclosures.
S o il
Depth
Fe
O utside
G ard in er ea s t
10.03
0-15
1 5 -3 0
11.40
30-45
1 4 .47
G a r d i n e r west
14 .10 *
0-15
12.47*
15-30
12.20*
3 0-45
B la c k ta i I east
14 .06
0-15
1 5 -3 0
10.93
7 .36
3 0-45
B l a c k t a i I west
15.33
0-15
Zn
Cu
I n s id e
O utside
I n s id e
---------u g / g -
O u t s id e
Mn
In s id e
O utside
In s id e
13.10
14.50
15.83
2.8 3
1 .7 7
2 .4 3
2 .0 3
1 .5 7
1.83
0 .6 0
0 .37
0 .50
0 .50
0 .3 3
0 .8 3
7 .6 0
3 .23
2 .5 0
9 .5 3
4 .20
4 .80
8 .83
8 .1 3
1 .8 7
2 .0 0
2 .1 0
2 .6 0
2 .5 7
0 .6 0
0 .40
0 .4 7
1 .70
2 .77
0 .4 3
1 .23
14.27*
5 .2 0
3 .0 7
3 .4 3
1 .9 7
2 .37
2 .30
2 .3 8
2 .5 2
2 .4 0
2 .4 9*
10.51*
3 .3 4
2 .49
6 .6 2
1 .36
2.4 5
2 .2 2
1.2 2
8 .03
12.94
6 .2 5
3.85*
3 .7 4*
3.46*
9 .3 7
3 .0 0
2 .3 1
14.40
1 .1 7
1 .27
1.70*
0 .7 3
1 3 .57
11.80
15.93*
1 0 .5 3
1.1 7
13.70*
7 .2 3
6 .0 3
0 .9 0
0 .3 0*
0 .1 0
0 .1 0
12.53*
1 .10
0 .87
0 .1 0
9.87*
1 9.41*
1 6.73*
2 .4 7
2 .2 2
3 .19
3 .9 0*
0 .46
1 .63
1.25
4 .4 5
8 .0 7
4 .8 2
14.8 1
2 .5 7
3 .6 1
0 .76
2 .16
3 .70
4 .2 7
Lamar V a l l e y west
0 -15
15 .19
15-30
9 .1 6
30 .13 *
1 3.38*
1.1 7
3.3 2*
1.5 8
0 .6 7
2.9 0*
5 .62
1 .28
0 .3 2
0 .4 3
1.8 0
7 .8 1*
2 .9 4*
7 .2 4
9.0 2*
1 .5 0
1.40
0 .1 5
0 .28
2 .18
2 .3 9
10.36
15-30
3 0-45
Lamar V a l l e y e a s t
0-15
1 1 .7 5
11.35
15-30
3 0-45
3 0-45
13 .98
0 .8 0
7 .1 2
3 .7 0
Mammoth
0-15
3 0 .80
4 1 .2 9
2.4 0
3.21
2 .76
2 .4 1
8 .12
1 5 -3 0
17 .86
2 6 .78 *
2.0 4
3.1 8*
2 .09
3 0-45
7 .36
9.9 7*
1.5 7
2 .2 1
2 .48
1 .52
1.2 2
4 .4 7
1.8 2
3 .4 6*
2 .3 3
0 .2 1
1.0 9
8 .3 3
4 .9 5
7 -7 5 .
6.3 5
3 .2 0
2.4 4
Jun ctio n B u tte
0 -15
3 8 .3 9
2 4 .55
1 5 -3 0
38 .84
14.07
2.6 5
2 .4 9*
3 .0 5
1.4 9
2 .09
0 .6 7
3 0-45
12.27
2 .3 0
2 .4 5
0 .69
17.63*
Numbers followed by
are s ig n ific a n tly higher than th e ir paired counterparts.
4 .9 7
30
Table 7. Average pH, electrical conductivity (EC) and sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) for the eight
e x c lo s u r e s .
S o il
pH
D e p th
O u t s id e
SAR
EC
In s id e
O u t s id e
In s id e
------- m mhos/cm —
O u t s id e
I n s id e
G a r d in e r e a s t
0-15
15-30
30-45
8 .3 0
8 .5 8
8 .2 7
G a r d in e r w est
0-15
7 .3 7
15-30
30 -45
B la c k ta i I
8 .1 3
8 .3 2
0 .4 7
0 .8 2
2 .9 7
8.0 1
1 2 .0 3
1 0 .0 3
2 .3 8
3 .6 3
4 .5
7 .9 8
8 .5 3
8 .9 7
1 .0 8
3 .7 9
6 .4 6
8 .3 0
8 .4 8
8 .8 0
0 .2 9
0 .6 4
1.3 1
1.7 4
0 .9 5
1 .3 8
2 .8 1
3 .6 4
4 .1 0
4 .1 6
2 .5 7
3 .4 6
east
0-15
15-30
7 .6 0
8 .0 7
7 .8 6
8 .1 0
0 .2 0
0 .3 4
0 .2 8
0 .3 3
0 .6 2
0 .3 2
0 .3 7
0 .4 0
30 -45
8 .4 0
8 .4 5
0 .4 4
0 .4 1
0 .3 7
0 .5 7
6 .9 8
7 .3 7
7 .9 8
0 .3 2
0 .2 2
0 .3 4
0 .3 8
7 .3 0
7 .2 3
0 .2 6
0 .3 1
0 .1 5
0 .1 5
0 .1 9
0 .2 2
0 .1 6
0 .1 4
0-15
15-30
east
8 .1 3
8 .2 0
7 .6 1
7 .9 5
0 .5 3
0 .6 6
0 .4 9
0 .4 4
0 .1 5
0 .2 2
30 -45
8 .3 6
7 .8 6
0 .5 0
0 .6 2
0 .2 3
0 .1 2
0 .1 6
0 .2 0
La m a r V a l l e y
0-15
15-30
30 -45
w est
7 .8 6
7 .5 4
0 .3 9
0 .4 7
0 .4 7
0 .1 9
8 .1 9
8 .5 0
0 .3 5
0 .4 9
0 .5 6
0 .1 9
8 .4 4
8 .9 7
0 .4 9
0 .7 3
0 .1 3
0 .3 4
0-15
15 -3 0
7 .8 4
8 .1 7
7 .0 2
7 .4 9
1 .1 7
0 .2 4
0 .3 1
0 .3 5
0 .2 5
0.3 1
0 .5 3
0 .4 1
30 -45
8 .1 5
8 .1 7
0 .3 4
0 .4 4
0 .2 9
0 .2 5
B u tte
7 .1 3
6 .9 5
0 .1 7
0 .1 7
0 .3 4
0 .3 3
7 .6 0
0 .2 5
0 .4 1
0 .1 9
0 .7 2
0 .1 9
0 .2 0
0 .4 2
0 .3 7
B la c k ta i I
0-15
15-30
30 -45
w est
7 .2 0
Lam ar V a l l e y
Mammoth
J u n c t io n
0-15
15-30
30 -45
7.7 1
8 .4 3
8 .4 5
31
Micronutrients were all higher inside the exclosure except Cu for the 30-45 cm depth.
The differences in Fe were significant for all depths. Copper and Zn had significant differences
in the 0-15 cm depths and Mn was significantly different in the 0-15 cm and 15-30 cm depths.
Soil pH was higher outside the exclosure for all depths, though none were significant.
Electrical conductivity was significantly higher outside in the 30-45 cm depth.
Both Lamar Valiev Exclosures
There was significantly more NH4-N inside the exclosures in the 0-15 cm depth.
Average soil organic matter content was not significant for any depth.
Differences were not significant for either P or S.
Sodium was significantly higher outside the exclosure in the 15-30 cm depth. There was
significantly more Mg outside in the 30-45 cm depth and potassium was significantly higher
inside the exclosure in the 30-45 cm depth.
Average concentrations of Fe, Cu, Mn, and Zn were higher inside the exclosure for all
depths. All differences in the 0-15 cm depth were significant. Iron was also significantly different
in the 15-30 cm depth.
Soil pH and EC were higher outside in all depths except the 30-45 cm depth where EC
was higher inside. The differences in pH were significant for all depths; EC was significantly
different in the 15-30 cm depth.
Mammoth Exclosure
The was significantly more NO3-N outside the exclosure in the 0-15 cm depth. The 3045 cm depth had almost equal amounts of NO3-N inside and out and there was significantly
more NH4-N inside the exclosure. Soil organic matter was significantly higher outside in the 3045 cm depth.
32
Phosphorus was significantly higher inside the exclosure in the 0-15 cm depth.
Differences in S were not significant.
The only significant differences in Na, Ca, K, and Mg were for K, which is greater inside
in the 15-30 cm and 30-45 cm depths.
Iron was significantly higher inside the exclosure in all depths. Copper was significantly
higher inside in the 15-30 cm depth and Mn was significantly higher inside in the 30-45 cm
depth.
Soil pH was significantly higher outside the exclosure for the 0-15 cm and 15-30 cm
depths. Electrical conductivity was significantly higher inside in the 30-45 cm depth.
Junction Butte Exclosure
Nitrate and ammonia nitrogen were both higher outside the exclosufe for all depths.
The differences were significant for NO3-N in the 0-15 cm and 15-30 cm depths. Organic matter
was also higher outside the exclosure for all depths. The 0-15 cm and 30-45 cm depths were
significantly different.
None of the differences in P or S were significant.
There was no significant difference for Na, P, or Mg. Calcium was significantly higher
outside the exclosure in the 0-15 cm and 15-30 cm depths.
Iron was significantly higher outside for the 15-30 cm and 30-45 cm depths. There was
significantly more Cu outside for the 15-30 cm depth. There was significantly more Mn inside for
the 15-30 cm depth.
No differences in pH or EC were significant.
Mammoth and Junction Butte Exclosures
When values for both the Mammoth and Junction Butte exclosures were combined no
33
differences for N or OM were significant.
No differences for P or S were significant.
Calcium was significantly higher outside in the 15-30 cm depth. Potassium was
significantly higher inside in the 30-45 cm depth.
There was significantly more Fe and Cu inside in the 0-15 cm depth.
There were significantly higher pH values outside in the 0-15 cm and 15-30 cm depths.
Electrical conductivity differences were not significant.
Bulk Density and Infiltration
Results are presented in Figures 4 and 5 and Table 8.
Gardiner East Exclosure
Soils outside the exclosure had a higher average bulk density and lower infiltration rates
than inside. Differences in bulk density were significant but differences in infiltration were not.
Gardiner West Exclosure
Soil bulk density was slightly higher outside the exclosure and double ring infiltration
was also higher outside. Differences were not significant.
Both Gardiner Exclosures
The combined data indicate that soil surface bulk density was significantly higher outside
the exclosure. Infiltration rates were higher inside the exclosure; though not significantly.
34
Blacktail East Exclosure
Average soil surface bulk density was higher inside the exclosure. Infiltration rates were
higher outside. Differences were not significant.
Blacktail West Exclosure
Soils outside the exclosure had a higher average surface bulk density than soils inside.
Average infiltration rates were slightly higher inside. Differences were not significant.
Both Blacktail Exclosures
Soils outside the exclosure had a higher average soil surface bulk density than soil
inside. There was a higher infiltration rate inside the exclosure. Differences in bulk density and
infiltration were not significant.
Lamar Valiev East Exclosure
Average soil bulk density was significantly higher outside the exclosure. Average
infiltration rates were higher inside; differences were not significant.
Lamar Valiev West Exclosure
Soils outside the exclosure had a higher average bulk density. Average infiltration rates
were significantly higher inside.
BD inside
BD outside
* ind ic a te s s i g n f le a nt d if f e r e n c e at p = 0 . l 0
1.2
I
0.8
CO
o Q. 6
O)
0.4
0.2
0
G a rd in e r
East
West
B l a c k ta i l
Ea s t
W est
lE
1=
T vC
j Bunen
Sites
Figure 4. Bulk density of the surface five cm for the eight exclosures.
BD inside
BD outside
• I n d ic a te s s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e at p = 0 . l 0
_ ,,
Sites
Figure 5. Bulk density of the surface 5 cm for the four groups.
J u n c tio n B u tte
36
Both Lamar Valiev Exclosures
Average soil surface bulk density was significantly higher outside the exclosure.
Average double ring infiltration rates were higher inside; differences were not significant.
Mammoth Exclosure
Average soil surface bulk density was significantly greater outside the exclosure. Soils
inside the exclosure had greater rates of infiltration; differences were not significant.
Junction Butte Exclosure
There was significantly higher soil surface bulk density outside the exclosure. Average
infiltration rates were higher inside, though not significantly.
Mammoth and Junction Butte Exclosures
There was a significantly higher average soil bulk density outside the exclosures. There
was a significantly greater average infiltration rate inside the exclosure.
■ 37
Table 8. Average equilibrium infiltration rates from the double ring infiltrometers for the eight
exclosures.
Exclosure
Gardiner east
Gardiner west
Blacktail east
Blacktail west
Lamar Valley
west
Lamar Valley
east
Mammoth
Junction Butte
Treatment mean
cm /hr
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
1.093
5.333
15.867
12.800
8.136
7.068
14.533
20.400
6.667
13.468*
4.667
5.200
5.737
8.000
6.400
11.868
* Denotes significant difference at p=0.10.
Rainfall Simulator Study
All exclosures exhibited higher surface runoff and sediment yield outside for all three
runs (Figures 6, 7, and 8). Condition 1, with vegetation left undisturbed, had the lowest runoff
and sediment yield followed by condition 2, with vegetation clipped and left on the surface.
Condition 3, with the clipped vegetation and litter removed, had the highest runoff and sediment
yield. Of the five exclosures sampled the Gardiner exclosures had the highest values for both
runoff and sediment yield for each condition. Lamar Valley east had the lowest values for runoff
and sediment yield for condition 1 and the Blacktail east exclosure had the lowest values for
both sediment and runoff for condition 2 and 3.
None of the differences for inside versus outside exclosures were statistically significant
for condition I for either runoff or sediment yield (Appendix B, Table 27 and Table 28). For
38
condition 2, vegetation clipped and left, Blacktail east, Gardiner east and Lamar Valley east had
significantly higher surface runoff outside the exclosures and none of the differences in sediment
yield were statistically significant. When the clipped vegetation and litter was removed (condition
3) surface runoff at Blacktail east and west and sediment yield at Blacktail east and Gardiner
west were significantly higher outside (Appendix ).
When the exclosures were grouped by site both the Blacktail and Gardiner groups had
greater sediment yield and surface runoff outside the exclosures (Appendix ). There were no
significant differences in sediment yield. There was no significant difference for condition 1
surface runoff. The difference in surface runoff for condition 2 was significant for both groups.
The Blacktail group also had significantly different surface runoff for condition 3.
Run o f f o u ts id e
I......I S e d i m e n t in s id e
S e d i m e n t o u ts id e
1600
700
1400
600
1200
6 00
I 1000
I
Run o f f inside
400
co
-C
800
3 00
600
400
200
0
200
100
0
Figure 6. Sediment yield and surface runoff of the eight exclosures for plant-cover condition
one, vegetation and litter intact.
39
H
R u n o ff o u t s id e
I ... I
S e d i m e n t o u t s id e
R u n o ff Inside
WM
S e d i m e n t inside
• I n d ic a te s s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e at p = 0 . i 0
4000 -
1000
3500 -8 0 0
3000 CO
CD
5
E
2500 -
-6 0 0
”
2000 1500 1000 500 B l a c k ta l l
Ea s t
Wes,
East
W est
L a m a r Va lle y
Ea s t
Sites
Figure 7. Sediment yield and surface runoff of the five exclosures for plant-cover condition two,
vegetation clipped.
I ,I
Run of f o u ts id e
tKMl
Run o ff inside
S e d i m e n t o u t s id e
WMi
S e d i m e n t Inside
I n d ic a te s s i g n i fi c a n t d i f f e r e n c e at p = 0 .l0
1400
G a rd in e r
East
West
B la c k ta ll
Ea s t
W est
L a m a r Va lley
Ea st
Sites
Figure 8. Sediment yield and surface runoff of the five exclosures for plant-cover condition
three, vegetation and litter removed.
40
DISCUSSION
Glacial till and landslide deposits have high variability due to their mode of deposition.
This leads to differences in soil texture and clay percentages inside and outside at most
exclosures (Appendix A). These differences may mask possible effects of grazing versus non­
grazing.
The results of this study are similar to several in the literature. Chemical properties and
nutrient levels were not affected by grazing versus non-grazing (Bauer et al 1987, Rhodes et al
1964, and Wood and Blackburn 1984).
The differences in surface bulk density and infiltration indicate some changes due to
either grazing or non-grazing. For the most part bulk density and infiltration results follow results
reported by Reed and Peterson (1961), Knoll and Hopkins (1959), and Wood and Blackburn
(1984, 1981) where bulk density was mostly higher and infiltration mostly lower outside of
exclosures, though all differences were not significant.
Two exclosures did not follow the bulk density and infiltration trends. The Gardiner west
exclosure had higher bulk density and also higher infiltration outside. There was 44% clay inside
the exclosure in the surface layer compared to 22% outside. As the soil becomes wet it swells
and in effect reduces the pore spaces and sizes which limits infiltration. This may explain the
lower infiltration inside. The Blacktail east exclosure had higher bulk density and lower
infiltration inside the exclosure. The inside exclosure soil had a sandy loam surface (Appendix
A), which should have a higher infiltration. There is no apparent explanation for this dichotomy.
The results in runoff and sediment yield were predictable from the site characteristics.
The Gardiner site had the finest textured soil. In this soil raindrops may break aggregates apart.
The resultant fines may then clog surface pores, reducing infiltration and increasing runoff and
sediment yield. The Gardiner east site also had the highest surface bulk density of any of the
exclosures (1.06 g /cm 3), which could limit infiltration. For all three conditions the Gardiner site
41
had the greatest runoff and sediment yield. It is logical that condition I, with vegetation intact,
would contribute the least amount of sediment and runoff. The higher runoff and sediment yield
of outside exclosure treatments seems to be related to both the higher bulk densities and higher
amount of bare ground outside the exclosures. The sites with higher surface runoff and
sediment yields had higher bulk densities outside the exclosures. This was also reflected by the
percent bare ground and litter inside and outside of exclosures. Since there was more bare
ground outside there was a greater likelihood of raindrops striking bare ground; thus a higher
possibility of splash impact and soil movement.
Three exclosures had significantly higher runoff in condition 2, clipped vegetation and
litter left on the surface, though differences in sediment yield were not significant. A possible
explanation for this could be that the vegetation and litter were acting as conduits. The
simulated rainfall was landing on this vegetation and running downhill into the collection tray and
was not striking the ground surface.
According to Packer (1963), for winter range sites along the Gallatin River, bulk density
must be below 1.04 g /cm 3 and there must be 70% protective ground cover to stabilize the soil
surface and protect it from erosion. Dadkhah and Gifford (1980) suggest that 50% ground cover
is enough to provide adequate soil stabilization. Soil surface bulk densities both inside and
outside of the exclosures fall below that threshold level except at the Gardiner east outside site
(Appendix C).
If ground cover can be considered as the inverse of bare ground, then all of the
inside of exclosure sites and five of the outside sites exceed the level recommended by Dadkhah
and Gifford (1980) and four inside and three outside exclosure sites exceed Packer’s 1963
recommendation. Using Dadkhah and Gifford’s recommendation the majority of these sites are
not susceptible to erosion. Packer’s recommendations suggest that almost half of these sites
are not susceptible to erosion. It is very doubtful that any sediment reaches the stream
channels. The microtopography of the area and general Iandforms suggest that any interrill
erosion or sediment generated by overland flow is trapped before moving too far.
42
CONCLUSIONS
A study of the effects of grazing versus nongrazing on soil chemical and physical
properties was conducted inside and outside of grazing exclosures on the northern winter range
of Yellowstone National Park. There were no trends in soil chemical property differences across
all sites. Some sites had higher levels inside the exclosure for some elements but not for others.
Seven of eight exclosures had higher bulk densities outside the exclosures. Most double ring
infiltrometer measurements were inversely correlated with soil bulk density. Infiltration
measurements were lower outside at most exclosures. Sediment yield and surface runoff from
simulated rain was higher outside at all exclosures for three plant cover-soil treatments.
These results display some statistically significant differences as well as nonsignificant
trends. The following points should be considered to determine if the trends may have true
meaning.
1. Seasonality affects the processes operating on the winter range. Soil chemical properties,
nutrient levels, and physical properties may vary by season. Likewise, effects of grazing may
vary by season. Further sampling could be keyed to season, or even to individual weather
events such as intense rainstorms.
2. Due to high natural variability, the p values used in this study may be unrealistic. A p value
of 0.3 or 0.4 may be more realistic for determining effects of grazing on landscapes with highly
variable soil parent materials and differences in weather and grazing patterns from year to year.
3. This study contrasts conditions inside and outside of exclosures. If the sites were used as
winter range in the past, then the ungrazed conditions inside the exclosures are not "natural".
Therefore it might be more appropriate to contrast different levels of grazing, rather than no
grazing, with the current outside of exclosure situation.
4. Since there were no pre-exclosure data, it is difficult to know which amount of the differences
are due to current grazing conditions and which are due to elimination of grazing.
43
LITERATURE CITED
44
LITERATURE CITED
AAHSO. 1963. Standard methods of test for field determination of density in place. T l 47-54
method A._ln the Asphalt Institute (ed.) Soils manual for design of asphalt pavement
structures. Manual Series No. 10. p.215-218. The Asphalt Institute. College Park, MD.
Bauer, A., C.V. Cole, and A L. Black. 1987. Soil property comparisons in virgin grasslands
between grazed and nongrazed management systems. Soil Sc!. Soc. Am. J. 51:176-182.
Bardsley, C.E. and J.D. Lancaster. 1965. Sulfur, jn C A . Black, et al. (eds) Methods of soil
analysis. Part I. Agronomy 9:1111-1113. Am. Soc. of Agron., Madison,Wl.
Bower, C A ., R.F. Reitemeir, and N. Fireman. 1952. Atomic Absorption determination of extract.
Exchangeable cation analysis of saline and alkaline soils. Soil Sci. 73:251-261.
Bouyoucos, C.J. 1936. Directions for making mechanical analysis of soils by the hydrometer
method. Soil Sci. 42:225-229.
Caprio, J. 1987. Personal communication. State Climatologist, Montana State University,
Bozeman, MT.
Cassidy, E.W. 1981. The effects of mechanized slash piling on soil bulk density and infiltration
rates at five forested sites in northwestern Montana. M.S. Thesis. Montana State
University, Bozeman, MT. 185 p.
Dadkhah, M. and G.F. Gifford. 1980. Influences of vegetation, rock cover, and trampling on
infiltration rates and sediment production. Water Resources Bull. 16:979-986.
Day, P.R. 1965. Hydrometer method of particle size analysis, jn CA. Black, et al. (eds) Methods
of soil analysis. Part 1. Agronomy 9:562-567. Am. Soc. of Agron., Madison, Wl.
Dirks, RA., and B.E. Mariner. 1982. The climate of Yellowstone and Grand Teton National
Parks. US Dept, of Interior. National Park Service. National Park Service Occasional
Paper No. 6.
Ellison, W.D. 1950. Soil erosion by rainstorms. Science 111:245-249.
Frank, E.C., H.E. Brown, and J.R. Thompson. 1975. Hydrology of Black Mesa watersheds,
western Colorado. USDA For. Ser. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-13. Rocky Mountain For. and
Range Exp. Stn., Fort Collins, Colo.
Gamougoun, N.D., R.P. Smith, M.K. Wood, and R.D. Pieper. 1984. Soil, vegetation and
hydrologic responses to grazing management at Fort Stanton, New Mexico. J. Range
Manage. 37:538-541.
Houston, D.B. 1982. The northern Yellowstone elk: Ecology and Management. Macmillan
Publishing Co., Inc. New York, N.Y.
Hudson, N.W. 1981. Soil Conservation: Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca, N.Y.
45
Johnson, A.J. 1963. A field method for measurement of infiltration. Geological survey water- .
supply paper 1544-F. U.S. Dept, of the Interior. Geologic Survey. 10p.
Johnson, C.W. and N.D. Gordon. 1986. Sagebrush rangeland erosion and sediment yield. Proc.
Fourth Federal Interagency Sedimentation Conference. Vbl I. Las Vegas, Nevada. 24-27
March, 1986.
Johnston, A. 1962. Effects of grazing intensity and cover on the water-intake rate of Fescue
grasslands. J. Range Manage. 15:79-82.
Knoll, G. and H.H. Hopkins. 1959. The effects of grazing and trampling upon certain soil
properties. Kansas Academy of Sci. 62:221-231.
Laycock, W.A. and P.W. Conrad. 1967. Effects of grazing on soil compaction as measured by
bulk density on a high elevation cattle range. J. Range Manage. 20:136-140.
Lindsay, W .L, and W.A. Norvell. 1969. Determination of copper, iron, manganese, and zinc in
soils. Agron. Abst. p. 84.
Lodge, R.W. 1954. Effects of grazing on the soils and forage of mixed prairie in southwestern
Saskatchewan. J. Range Manage. 7:166-170.
Lowdermilk, W.C. 1930. Influence of forest litter on runoff, percolation and erosion. J. Forestry.
28:474-491.
Lusby, G.C. 1970. Hydrologic and biotic effects of grazing and nongrazing near Grand Junction,
Colorado. J. Range Manage. 23:256-260.
____________ . 1965. Causes of variations in runoff and sediment yield from small drainage
basins in western Colorado. USDA Misc. Publ. 970. Paper no. 14.
McCaIIa, G.R., W.H. Blackburn, and LB. Merrill. 1984a. Effects of livestock grazing on infiltration
rates, Edwards Plateau of Texas. J. Range Manage. 37:265-269.
McCaIIa, G.R., W.H. Blackburn, and LB. Merrill. 1984b. Effects of livestock grazing on sediment
production, Edwards Plateau of Texas. J. Range Manage. 37:291-294.
Meeuwig, R.O. 1971a. Soil stability on high elevation rangeland in the intermountain area. USDA
For. Ser. Res. Pap. INT-94.
. 1971b. Infiltration and water repeilency in granitic soils. USDA For. Ser. Res. Pap.
INT-111.
. 1970. Sheet erosion on intermountain summer ranges. USDA For. Ser. Res. Pap.
INT-85.
Mohrman, J. 1988. Personal communication. Hydrologist, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming.
Olsen, S.R.,C.V. Cole, F.S. Wanatabe, and AL. Dean. 1954. Estimation of available phosphorus
in soils by extraction with sodium bicarbonate. U.S. Dept. Agric. Circ. #939. 19p.
46
Orrl H.K. 1975. Recovery from soil compaction on Bluegrass range in the Black Hills. Trans.
Amer. Soc. Agr. Engrs. 18:1076-1081.
________ .
1960. Soil porosity and bulk density on grazed and protected Kentucky
Bluegrass range in the Black Hills. J. Range Manage. 13:80-86.
Packer, P.E. 1963. Soil stability requirements for the Gallatin elk winter range. J. Wildlife Manage.
27:401-410.
Pierce, K.L. 1974a. Surficial geologic map of the Abiathar Peak and parts of adjacent quad
rangles, Yellowstone National Park, Wy and MT. Misc. Geologic Investigations MAP I646. USGS. Reston, VA.
______ ,______. 1974b. Surficial geologic map of the Tower Junction quadrangle and part of the
Mount Wallace quadrangle, Yellowstone National Park, WY and MT. Misc. Geologic
Investigations. MAP I-647. USGS. Reston, VA.
_________ 1973. Surficial geologic map of the Mammoth quadrangle and part of the
Gardiner quadrangle, Yellowstone National Park, WY and MT. MAP 1-641. USGS,
Washington, DC.
Prostka, H.J., E.T. Ruppel, and R.L Christiansen. 1975a. Geologic map of the Abiathar Peak
quadrangle, Yellowstone National Park, WY and MT. Geologic Quadrangle Map-1244.
. USGS., Reston, VA.
Prostka, H.J., H.R. Blank, R.L. Christiansen, and E.T. Ruppel. 1975b. Geologic map of the Tower
r Junction quadrangle, Yellowstone National Park, WY and MT. Geologic Quadrangle
Map-1247. USGS., Reston, VA.
Rauzi, F. 1963. Water intake and plant composition as effected by differential grazing on
rangeland. J. Soil Water Conser. 18:114-116.
Rauzi, F., C .L Fly, and E.J. Dyksterhuis. 1968. Water intake on midcontinental rangelands as
influenced by soil and plant cover. USDA Tech. Bull. 1390.
Reed, M.J. and RA. Peterson. 1961. Vegetation, soil and cattle responses to grazing on
Northern Great Plains range. USDA Tech. Bull. 1252.
Rhoades, E.D., LF. Locke, H.M. Taylor, and E.H. Mcllvan. 1964. Water intake on a sandy range
as affected by 20 years of differential cattle stocking rates. J. Range Manage. 17:185190.
Schmid, G .L 1988. A rainfall simulator study of soil erodibility in the Gallatin National Forest,
southwest Montana. M.S. Thesis. Montana State University, Bozeman, MT. 72p.
____________ . 1986. Montana State University, Bozeman, MT. Personal communication.
Sims, J.R., and V.A. Haby. 1971. Simplified colorimetric determination of soil organic matter. Soil
Sci. 112:137-141.
47
Sims, J.R., and G.D. Jackson. 1971. Rapid analysis of soil nitrate with chromotropic acid. Soil
Sci. Soc. Am. J. 35:603-606.
Singer, F. 1988. Personal communication. Biologist, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming.
Soil Survey Staff. 1975. Soil Taxonomy. Agric. Handbook No. 436. USDA Soil Conserv. Service.
754p: '
Technicon. 1975. Technicon lnd. Method No. 355-74W, Ammoniacal Nitrogen/BD Digests. Sept:
1975.
Thompson, J.R. 1968. Effect of grazing on infiltration in a western watershed. J. Soil Water
Conserv. 63-65.
Tukel, T. 1984. Comparison of grazed and protected mountain steppe rangeland in Ulukisla,
Turkey. J. Range Manage. 37:133-135.
Tyers, D.B. 1981. The condition of the northern winter range in Yellowstone National Park - A
discussion of the controversy. MS Professional Paper. Montana State University.
United States Geological Survey. 1975. Geologic map of Yellowstone National Park. Misc.
Geologic Investigations. Map 1-711. USGS., Washington, DC.
Van Havern, B. 1983. Soil bulk density as influenced by grazing intensity and soil type on a short
grass prairie site. J. Range Manage. 36:586-588.
Warren, S.D., W.H. Blackburn, and C A. Taylor. 1986a. Effects of season and stage of rotation
cycle on hydrologic condition of rangeland under intensive rotation grazing. J. Range
Manage. 39:486-491.
Warren, S.D., T .L Thurow, W.H. Blackburn, and N.E. Garza. 1986b. The influence of livestock
trampling under intensive rotation grazing on soil hydrologic characteristics. J. Range
Manage. 39:491-495.
Wood, M.K., and W.H. Blackburn. 1984. Vegetation and soil responses to cattle grazing systems
in the Texas rolling plains. J. Range Manage. 37:303-308.
____________ . 1981. Sediment production as influenced by livestock grazing in the Texas rolling
plains. J. Range Manage. 34:228-231.
Young, R.A. 1979. Interpretations of rainfall simulator data. _|n, Proceedings of the rainfall
simulator workshop. Tucson, AZ. March 7-9, 1979. USDA-SEA, ARM-W-10. pgs 108-112.
48
APPENDICES
49
Appendix A
Site Soil Descriptions
50
Exclosure: Gardiner east
Inside
Slope - 35%
Aspect - northeast
Parent Material - Landslide deposits
A 0 to 7 cm - pale brown (10YR 6/3 ) gravelly clay, dark brown (I OYR 3 /3 ) moist; weak fine
granular structure; slightly hard, friable, sticky and plastic; pH 8; common medium roots; clear
wavy boundary.
Bw 7 to 25 cm - pale brown (10YR 6/3 ) gravelly clay loam, dark brown (10YR 4/3) moist;
moderate medium subangular biocky structure; hard, firm, sticky and plastic; pH 8.5; common
medium roots; gradual wavy boundary.
Bk 25 to 58 cm - light yellowish brown (10YR 6/4) very gravelly clay, brown (10YR 5/3) moist;
moderate medium subangular biocky structure; hard, firm, sticky and plastic; strongly
effervescent; pH 8.5; common coarse and medium roots; gradual wavy boundary.
C l 58 to 82 cm - light gray (10YR 7/2) gravelly clay, yellowish brown (10YR 5 /4 ) moist; weak
medium subangular biocky structure; slightly hard, friable sticky and plastic; pH 8.5; few coarse
roots; gradual wavy boundary.
C2 82 to 100 cm - light yellowish brown (I OYR 6/4) gravelly clay, brown (10YR 5/3) moist;
massive; hard, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; pH 8.5.
Notes: Soil temperature at 50 cm 16° C (60° F).
51
Exclosure: Gardiner east
Outside
Slope - 31%
Aspect - northeast
Parent Material - Landslide deposits
A 0 to 5 cm - pale brown (10YR 6 /3) sandy clay loam, dark brown (10YR 3 /3 ) moist; weak fine
granular structure; slightly hard, very friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; pH 8; many very
fine and common fine roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bw 5 to 25 cm - pale brown (10YR 6/3 ) gravelly clay, dark brown (10YR 3 /3 ) moist; moderate
medium subangular blocky structure; slightly hare, firm, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; pH 8;
common fine and medium and many very fine roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bt 25 to 47 cm - yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) gravelly clay, dark brown (10YR 4 /3 ) moist;
moderate medium to coarse subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, friable, sticky and plastic;
slightly effervescent; pH 8; many very fine roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bk 47 to 76 cm - pale brown (10YR 6 /3) gravelly sandy clay loam, dark brown (I OYR 4/3) moist;
weak fine subangular blocks breaking to single grain; slightly hard, friable, sticky and plastic;
strongly effervescent; pH 8; common very fine roots; clear smooth boundary.
Ck 76 to 93 cm - yellowish brown (10YR 5/6) gravelly clay, brown (10YR 5 /3 ) moist; moderate
very fine subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, friable, slightly sticky and plastic; violently
effervescent; pH 8; common very fine roots.
Notes: Soil temperature at 50 cm 18° C (65° F), air temperature 26° C (79° F). Carbonates
coating coarse fragments beginning at 47 cm. Clay skins are common from 25 to 47 cm.
52
Exclosure: Gardiner west
Inside
Slope - 1 8 %
Aspect - northeast
Parent Material - Landslide deposits
A 0 to 5 cm - pale brown (I OYR 6 /3) gravelly sandy clay loam, very dark grayish brown (1OYR
3 /2 ) moist; weak fine granular structure; soft, very friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; pH
7; common very fine, fine and medium roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bt 5 to 19 cm - pale brown (10YR 6/3 ) clay, dark brown (I OYR 3/3) moist; moderate medium to
coarse subangular blocky structure; very hard, very firm, sticky and plastic; pH 8; common very
fine, fine and medium roots; clear wavy boundary.
Bk 19 to 38 cm - light yellowish brown (10YR 6 /4 ) extremely gravelly sandy clay loam, dark
yellowish brown (10YR3/6) moist; weak fine subangular blocky structure; very hard, very firm,
sticky and plastic; strongly effervescent; pH 8; common very fine roots; clear smooth boundary.
C l 38 to 60 cm - light yellowish brown (10YR 6/4) extremely gravelly sandy clay loam, dark
yellowish brown (10YR 4 /4 ) moist; massive; very hard, very firm, sticky and plastic; pH 8; clear
smooth boundary.
C2 60 to 73 cm - very pale brown (10YR 7/4) extremely gravelly clay loam, dark yellowish brown
(10YR 4 /4 ) moist; massive; very hard, very firm, sticky and plastic; pH 8.
Notes: Soil temperature at 50 cm 18° C (65° F), air temperature 22° C (72° F). The nutrient
sampling pits varied widely from >50% coarse fragments to <10% coarse fragments.
53
Exclosure: Gardiner west
Outside
Slope - 1 3 %
Aspect - northeast
Parent Material - Landslide deposits
A 0 to 5 cm - light gray (10YR 7/2) loam, brown (10YR 4 /3 ) moist weak; medium granular
structure; loose, loose, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; pH 8; common fine and coarse and
many very fine roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bw1 5 to 29 cm - pale brown (10YR 6/3) clay, dark brown
(10YR 3 /3 ) moist; weak to medium coarse subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, sticky and
plastic; pH 8; common coarse and fine and many very fine roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bz 29 to 43 cm - light gray (10YR 7/2) clay, brown (I OYR 4/3) moist; massive; very hard, very
firm, sticky and plastic; accumulation of soft masses of gypsum; pH 8; common fine roots; clear
smooth boundary.
C 43 to 82 cm - light gray (10YR 7/2) silty clay loam, brown (10YR 5/3) moist; massive; very
hard, very firm, sticky and plastic; pH 8.
Notes: Soil temperature at 50 cm 20° C (68° F), air temperature 29° C (85° F). Soil at depth is
wet and heavy; surface is dry very fine dust. The nutrient sampling pits had variable amounts of
coarse fragments.
54
Exclosure: Blacktail east
Inside
Slope - 1 8 %
Aspect - southeast
Parent Material - Glacial till
A 0 to 18 cm - dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) gravelly sandy loam, very dark grayish brown
(10YR 3/2 ) moist; weak very fine granular structure; soft, very friable, slightly sticky and slightly
plastic; pH 8; common very fine and fine and few medium roots; gradual smooth boundary.
Bk 18 to 32 cm - brown (10YR 5/3 ) very gravelly loam, dark yellowish brown (10YR 3/4) moist;
weak very fine subangular blocks breaking to weak fine granular structure; soft, very friable,
nonsticky and nonplastic; slightly effervescent; pH 8; common fine roots; gradual irregular
boundary.
Ck 32 to 71 cm - light gray (10YR 7/2) extremely gravelly loam, light brownish gray (10YR 6/2)
moist; massive; soft, very friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; violently effervescent; pH 8.5;
few fine roots.
Notes: Soil temperature at 50 cm 13° C (55° F), air temperature 16° C (60° F).
55
Exclosure: Blacktail east
Outside
Slope - 25%
Aspect - southeast
Parent Material - Glacial till
A 0 to 18 cm - dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) moist;
strong very fine granular structure; loose, very friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; pH 7;
common very fine roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bw 18 to 46 cm - brown (10YR 4/3 ) very gravelly loam, dark brown (10YR 3 /3 ) moist; weak fine
platy breaking to strong fine granular structure; slightly hard, friable, sticky and plastic; pH 7.5;
common very fine roots; abrupt smooth boundary.
Ck 46 to cm - yellowish brown (I OYR 5/4) very gravelly loam, brown (10YR 5 /3 ) moist;
moderate fine subangular biocky breaking to strong very fine granular structure; slightly hard,
friable, nonsticky and nonplastic; strongly effervescent; pH 8; few very fine roots;
Notes: Soil temperature at 50 cm 13 C (55° F), air temperature 16° C (60° F). Coarse fragments
are coated with carbonates on the underside in the Bw horizon and all over in the Ck horizon.
56
Exclosure: Blacktail west
Inside
Slope - 36%
Aspect - southeast
Parent Material - Glacial till
Al 0 to 12 cm - dark brown (10YR 4 /3) gravelly loam, very dark grayish brown (I OYR 3/2)
moist; weak very fine granular structure; loose, friable, nonsticky and nonplastic; pH 7.5; many
very fine, fine and medium roots; clear smooth boundary.
A2 12 to 25 cm - dark brown (10YR 3/3 ) gravelly loam, dark brown (10YR 3 /3 ) moist; weak fine
granular structure; loose, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; pH 7.5; many fine and
medium roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bwl 25 to 43 cm - yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) gravelly loam, dark brown (10YR 4/3) moist;
gravelly sandy loam; weak fine subangular structure; loose, friable, slightly sticky and slightly
plastic; pH 8; many very fine and fine roots; clear wavy boundary.
Bk 43 to 60 cm - pale brown (10YR 6/3) and brown (10YR 5/3), brown (10YR 5/3) moist;
gravelly sandy loam; weak fine subangular blocky structure; loose, friable, nonsticky and
nonplastic; violently effervescent; pH 8; many very fine and fine roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bk2 60 to 74 cm - light gray (10YR 7/2) and pale brown ( I OYR 6/3) gravelly sandy loam, pale
brown (10YR 6 /3 ) moist; single grain; loose, loose, nonsticky and nonplastic; violently effer­
vescent; pH 8; common many and coarse roots.
Notes: Soil temperature at 50 cm 17° C (62° F), air temperature 26° C (78° F). Coarse fragments
are coated with carbonates on the underside in the Bw horizon and all over in the Ck horizon.
57
Exclosure: Blacktail west
Outside
Slope - 35%
Aspect - southeast
Parent Material - Glacial till
At 0 to 11 cm - dark brown (10YR 3 /3 ) gravelly loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2)
moist; weak fine granular structure; loose, loose, nonsticky and nonplastic; pH 8; common very
fine, fine and coarse roots; clear smooth boundary.
A2 11 to 23 cm - dark brown (10YR 3/3 ) gravelly loam, very dark grayish brown (I OYR 2/2)
moist; weak fine subangular biocky structure; loose, loose, nonsticky and nonplastic; pH 8;
many very fine, fine and medium roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bw 23 to 43 cm - dark brown (10YR 3/3 ) gravelly loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2)
moist; moderate medium subangular biocky structure; slightly hard, friable, nonsticky and
nonplastic; pH 8; many fine and common medium roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bk 43 to 71 cm - pale brown (10YR 6/3) very gravelly sandy loam, brown (I OYR 4/3) moist;
moderate coarse subangular biocky structure; hard, firm, nonsticky and nonplastic; violently
effervescent; pH 8; common fine and medium roots; clear smooth boundary.
C 71 to 100 cm - light gray (10YR 7/2) very gravelly sandy loam, dark brown (10YR 4/3) moist;
weak fine subangular blocks parting to single grain structure; slightly hard, firm, nonsticky and
nonplastic; violently effervescent; pH 8; common fine and medium roots.
Notes: Soil temperature at 50 cm 17° C (63° F), air temperature 24° C (75° F).
/
58
Exclosure: Lamar Valley East
Inside
Slope - 22%
Aspect - southwest
Parent Material - Glacial till
A 0 to 18 cm - gray (10YR 5 /1 ) loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3 /2 ) moist; moderate fine
granular structure; soft, friable, slightly sticky and plastic; pH 8; many very fine and fine roots
few medium roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bk1 18 to 31 cm - brown ( 10YR 5/3 ) gravelly clay loam, olive brown (2.5Y 4 /4 ) moist; strong
medium subangular blocky structure; soft, friable, slightly sticky and plastic; strongly
effervescent; pH 8.5; few very fine, fine and medium roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bk2 31 to 47 cm - pale brown (10YR 6/3) gravelly loam, brown (I OYR 4 /2 ) moist; strong
medium subangular blocky structure; soft, friable, sticky and plastic; violently effervescent; pH
8.5; few fine and medium roots; gradual smooth boundary.
Ck 47 + cm - light yellowish brown (10YR 6/4) clay loam, pale brown (10YR 6 /3 ) moist; strong
medium subangular blocky structure; soft; friable sticky and plastic; violently effervescent; pH
8.5.
Notes: Soil temperature at 50 cm 10° C (5o° F), air temperature 10° C (50° F). Carbonates are
evident throughout the profile.
59
Exclosure: Lamar Valley East
Outside
Slope - 25%
Aspect - southwest
Parent Material - Glacial till
A 0 to 14 cm - very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2) loam, very dark brown (I OYR 2/2) moist;
strong fine granular structure; soft, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; pH 8; many very
fine and common fine and medium roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bk1 14 to 25 cm - dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4) loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR3/2)
moist; strong fine granular structure; soft, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; strongly
effervescent; pH 8; many very fine and common fine and medium roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bk2 25 to 40 cm - pale brown (10YR 6/3) gravelly loam, brown (10YR 4 /3 ) moist; strong fine
subangular blocky structure; soft, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; strongly effervescent;
pH 8; common very fine and few fine roots; clear smooth boundary.
Ck 40 + cm - pale yellow (2.5YR 7/4) loam, pale brown (10YR 6.3) moist; strong fine granular
structure; soft, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; strongly effervescent; pH 8.
Notes: Soil temperature at 50 cm 9° C (48° F), air temperature 8° C (46° F). Carbonates are
very abundant throughout the bottom three horizons.
60
Exclosure: Lamar Valley West
Inside
Slope - 35%
Aspect - southwest
Parent Material - Glacial till
A 0 to 15 cm - very dark grayish brown (10YR 3 /2 ) loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2)
moist; moderate fine subangular blocky structure; soft, friable, slightly sticky and plastic; pH 8;
many very fine and common fine and medium roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bw1 15 to 27 cm - very dark grayish brown (10YR 3 /2 ) clay loam, very dark grayish brown
(10YR 3/2); strong fine subangular blocky structure; hard, friable, slightly sticky and slightly
plastic; pH 8; many very fine and common fine and medium roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bw2 27 to 46 cm - very dark grayish brown (10YR 3 /2 ) gravelly clay loam, very dark grayish
brown (10YR 3 /2 ) moist; moderate medium subangular blocky structure; hard, friable, slightly
sticky and plastic; pH 8; many very fine and common fine and medium roots; abrupt smooth
boundary.
Ck 46 to 100 cm - brown (10YR 4 /3 ) very gravelly clay loam, dark brown (10YR 3/3) moist;
strong medium subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, very friable, slightly sticky and slightly
plastic; pH 8; many very fine roots.
Notes: Soil temperature at 50 cm 10° C (50° F), air temperature 20° C (68° F). Coarse fragments
have calcium carbonate deposits on the lower side throughout the profile. The C horizon
contains soft masses of carbonates throughout the horizon.
61
Exclosure: Lamar Valley West
Outside
Slope - 50%
Aspect - southwest
Parent Material - Glacial till
A 0 to 15 cm - dark grayish brown (I OYR 4/2) clay loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2)
moist; strong fine subangular blocky structure; very firm, friable, slightly sticky and slightly
plastic; pH 8; many very fine and fine roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bwl 15 to 30 cm - dark brown (10YR 3/3 ) gravelly clay loam, very dark grayish brown
(10YR3/2) moist; strong medium subangular blocky structure; firm, friable, slightly sticky and
slightly plastic; pH 8; many very fine roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bw2 30 to 44 cm - brown (I OYR 4/2 ) very gravelly loam, dark brown (10YR 3 /3 ) moist;
moderate medium subangular blocky structure;
pH 8; common very fine roots; abrupt wavy
boundary.
C 44 + cm - dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4) very gravelly loam, dark yellowish brown (1OYR
4 /4) moist; strong fine granular structure; slightly hard, friable, nonsticky and slightly plastic;
slightly effervescent; pH 8; common very fine roots.
Notes: Soil temperature at 50 cm 10° C (50° F), air temperature 12° C (54° F). Starting at about
20 cm and continuing throughout the profile there are various shades of green and rusty red
colors from decomposed rocks. There are distinct deposits of calcium carbonates on the
underside of coarse fragment in all horizons, however only the bottom horizon has a fine earth
fraction reaction with dilute HCI.
62
Exclosure: Mammoth
Inside
Slope -5%
Aspect - east by northeast
Parent Material - Glacial till
At 0 to 12 cm - dark brown (10YR 3/3 ) very gravelly loam, very dark brown (I OYR 2/2) moist;
weak medium granular structure; soft, friable, nonsticky and nonplastic; pH 7; common very fine,
fine and medium roots; clear gradual boundary.
A2 12 to 25 cm - brown (10YR 4 /3) very gravelly loam, very dark grayish brown (10YR 3/2)
moist; moderate medium subangular blocky structure; soft, friable, slightly sticky and slightly
plastic; pH 7.5; common very fine and fine and few medium roots; clear wavy boundary.
Bk 25 to 58 cm - light gray (10YR 7/2) extremely gravelly loam, grayish brown (10YR 5/2) moist;
weak medium subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, firm, slightly sticky and slightly plastic;
violently effervescent; pH 8.5; few fine and medium roots; clear gradual boundary.
BC 58 to 75 cm - very pale brown (I OYR 7/3) extremely gravelly loam, light brownish gray
(10YR 6 /2 ) moist; weak medium subangular blocky structure; strongly effervescent; pH 8.
Notes: Soil temperature at 50 cm 8° C (48° F), air temperature 10° C (50° F).
63
Exclosure: Mammoth
Outside
Slope - 8%
Aspect - east
Parent Material - Glacial till
A 0 to 14 cm - brown (I OYR 4/3 ) gravelly sandy loam, very dark brown (I OYR 2/2) moist;
moderate fine granular structure; soft, friable, slightly sticky and nonplastic; pH 6.5; common
very fine, fine and coarse roots; clear smooth boundary.
Bt 14 to 27 cm - grayish brown (10YR 4/3 ) very gravelly sandy loam, very dark grayish brown
(10YR3/2) moist; moderate medium subangular blocky structure; soft, friable, slightly sticky and
nonplastic; pH 7; common very fine and fine and few coarse roots; clear smooth boundary.
Btk 27 to 59 cm - light gray (10YR 7/2) extremely gravelly sandy loam, grayish brown (2.5Y 5/2)
moist; moderate coarse subangular blocky structure; hard, firm, slightly sticky and nonplastic;
violently effervescent; pH 8; few fine and medium roots.
Notes: Soil temperature at 50 cm 110 C (52° F), air temperature 18° C (65° F). Clay films are
present from 14 to 59 cm.
64
Exclosure: Junction Butte
Inside
Slope - 1 0 %
Aspect - north
Parent Material - Glacial till
A 0 to 10 cm - dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4) gravelly sandy loam, dark brown (I OYR 3/3)
moist; weak medium granular structure; loose, loose nonsticky and nonplastic; pH 7; many very
fine and fine roots; clear wavy boundary.
Bw1 10 to 32 cm - brown (10YR 4/3 ) very gravelly sandy loam, dark brown (10YR 3/3) moist;
weak fine subangular blocky structure; loose, loose, nonsticky and nonplastic; pH 7; many very
fine and fine roots; gradual wavy boundary.
Bw2 32 to 58 cm - light brownish gray (10YR 6/2) very gravelly sandy loam, brown (I OYR 5/3)
moist; moderate medium subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, very friable, nonsticky and
nonplastic; pH 8; common very fine and few fine roots; clear wavy boundary.
C 58 to 74 cm - light gray (10YR 7/2 ) very gravelly sandy loam, brown (10YR 5 /3 ) moist; weak
fine subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, very friable, nonsticky and nonplastic; strongly
effervescent; pH 8; few medium roots.
Notes: Soil temperature at 50 cm 9° C (48° F), air temperature 10° C (50° F).
65
Exclosure: Junction Butte
Outside
Slope - 3%
Aspect - northeast
Parent Material - Glacial till
At 0 to 13 cm - dark brown (I OYR 3/3 ) gravelly loam, very dark brown (10YR 2 /2 ) moist; weak
very fine subangular blocky structure; loose, loose, nonsticky and nonplastic; pH 6.5; many very
fine and fine and common medium roots; clear wavy boundary.
A2 13 to 22 cm - brown (10YR 4/3 ) gravelly sandy loam, dark brown (I OYR 3 /3 ) moist; weak
fine subangular blocky structure; soft, loose, nonsticky and nonplastic; pH 7; many very fine and
fine roots; gradual wavy boundary.
Bk 22 to 49 cm - pale brown (10YR 6/3 ) gravelly sandy loam, grayish brown (10YR 5/2) moist;
moderate fine angular blocky structure; slightly hard, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic;
violently effervescent; pH 8; common very fine and fine roots; clear wavy boundary.
Ck 49 to 66 cm - pale brown (I OYR 6/3 ) gravelly sandy loam, brown (10YR 5 /3 ) moist; weak
fine subangular blocky structure; slightly hard, friable, slightly sticky and slightly plastic; violently
effervescent; pH 8; common very fine and few fine roots.
Notes: Soil temperature at 50 cm 13° C (55° F), air temperature 16° C (60° F). Very stony.
Appendix B
Results of t-test analyses of soil chemical properties
67
Table 9. Results of t-test analysis of nitrate-nitrogen and ammonia-nitrogen
for the eight exclosures.
DEPTH
(cm)
Gardiner east
NO
0-15
15-30
30-45
NH
0-15
15-30
30-45
Gardiner west
NO
0-15
15-30
30-45
NH
0-15
15-30
30-45
Treatment
N
MIN
MAX
MEAN STD DEV
-------------------------- ug/g------------------------
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
1.170
1.000
0.760
0.830
0.830 .
0.920
2.000
1.670
0:920
1.330
1.000
1.080
1.667
1.280
0.837
1.053
0.917
1.000
0.438
0.348
0.080
0.254
0.085
0.080
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
2.250
0.600
2.050
2.050
2.050
3.550
3.100
2.900
2.600
3.880
2.450
4.700
2.717
2.100
2.367
3.160
2.183
4.250
0.431
1.300
0.284
0.975
0.231
0.614
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
1.080
1.500
0.830
0.750
0.660
0.570
1.420
3.400
1.000
1.500
0.750
1.090
1.250
2.353
0.917
1.083
0.720
0.803
0.170
0.965
0.085
0.382
0.052
0.264
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
2.800
1.500
2.700
2.400
2.700
2.420
5.350
2.700
5.050
4.450
5.210
3.810
3.900
2.083
3.710
3.277
3.567
3,040
1.311
0.601
1.209
1.057
1.424
0.707
P
0.2977
0.2320
0.2840
0.4790
0.2476
0.0055
0.1228
0.5015
0.6202
0.0945
0.6646
0.5968
68
Table 9. Continued.
DEPTH
(cm)
Blacktail east
NO
0-15
15-30
30-45
NH
0-15
15-30
30-45
Blacktail west
NO
0-15
15-30
30-45
NH
0-15
15-30
30-45
Treatment
N
MIN
MAX
MEAN STD DEV
---------------- --------- ug/g------------------------
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
1.110
0.230
0.520
0.160
0.240
0.160
2.530
0.560
1.940
0.230
0.560
0.670
1.927
0.437
1.163
0.197
0.440
0.380
0.734
0.180
0.719
0.035
0.174
0.262
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
3.890
3.100
4.370
3.570
3.890
2.860
9.580
7.340
6.740
5.790
5.320
6.500
6.577
5.647
5.240
4.310
4.607
4.153
2.858
2.245
1.305
1.282
0.715
2.036
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.920
0.750
0.750
0.830
0.660
0.480
1.190
1.710
0.830
0.920
0.830
0.660
1.040
1.243
0.803
0.860
0.747
0.600
0.137
0.481
0.046
0.052
0.085
0.104
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.840
1.300
1.490
1.300
1.120
1.120
1.770
2.420
2.330
1.960
1.400.
1.490
1.243
1.817
1.893
1.583
1.273
1.243
0.477
0.565
0.421
0.340
0.142
0.214
P
0.0269
0.0807
0.7579
0.6805
0.4282
0.7344
0.5199
0.2309
0.1315
0.2505
0.3771
0.8493
69
Table 9. Continued.
DEPTH
(cm)
Treatment
N
MIN
MAX
MEAN STD DEV
---------------- ----------uq/ 9 ------------ —---------
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.500
0.310
0.110
0.110
0.040
0.040
0.670
0.500
0.390
0.170
0.860
0.110
0.557
0.417
0.203
0.130
0.350
0.063
0.098
0.097
0.162
0.035
0.445
0.040
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
4.480
3.690
5.000
4.210
3.690
2.900
8.040
5.270
5.450
5.000
4.510
4.740
6.017
4.653
5.150
4.737
4.137
3.863
1.829
0.845
0.260
0.456
0.415
0.923
Lamar Valley west
NO
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
30-45
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
1.110
0.700
0.040
0.240
0.030
0.170
7.930
1.360
0.400
0.700
0.110
0.240
3.397
1.030
0.203
0.417
0.060
0.193
3.926
0.330
0.182
0.248
0.044
0.040
3
3
3
3
3
3
5.680
3.690
2.900
3.160
2.370
2.110
8.040
6.580
5.220
.4.480
3.290
3.430
7.177
4.740
3.937
3.690
2.940
2.900
1.301
1.599
1.180
0.697
0.498
0.697
Lamar Valley east
NO
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
30-45
inside
outside
NH
0-15
15-30
30-45
NH
0-15
15-30
30-45
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
P
0.1539
0.4852
0.3288
0.3063
0.2443
0.6643
0.3569
0.2960
0.0178
0.1100
0.7708
0.9394
70
Table 9. Continued.
DEPTH
(cm)
Treatment
N
MIN
MAX
MEAN STD DEV
-------------------------- ug/g------------------------
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.320
0.160
0.160
0.160
0.010
0.270
0.360
0.230
0.620
0.310
0.780
0.390
0.333
0.197
0.367
0.223
0.317
0.313
0.023
0.035
0.234
0.078
0.408
0.067
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
4.610
4.130
3.420
3.180
2.370
2.470
6.740
6.740
4.370
12.050
4.610
3.890
5.713
5.553
3.893
6.217
3.703
3.417
1.067
1.321
0.475
5.053
1.179
0.820
Junction Butte
NO
inside
0-15
outside
inside
15-30
outside
inside
30-45
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.2OO
0.320
0.010
0.240
0.200
0.010
0.230
0.350
0.020
0.320
0.470
1.160
0.220
0.330
0.017
0.267
0.340
0.650
0.017
0.017
0.006
0.046
0.135
0.586
4.040
4.510
1.450
1.920
0.500
2.390
5.450
6.160
1.980
3.570
3.100
3.570
4.667
5.297
1.760
2.547
2.153
3.097
0.718
0.828
0.276
0.894
1.437
0.624
Mammoth
NO
0-15
15-30
30-45
NH
0-15
15-30
30-45
NH
0-15
15-30
30-45
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
.
P
0.0049
0.3702
0.9895
0.8783
0.4722
0.0747
0.0015
0.0007
0.4224
0.3757
0.2189
0.3558
71
Table 10. Results of t-test analysis of nitrate-nitrogen and ammonia-nitrogen
for the four groups.
DEPTH
(cm)
Gardiner
NO
0-15
15-30
30-45
NH
0-15
15-30
30-45
Blacktall
NO
0-15
15-30
30-45
NH
0-15
15-30
30-45
Treatment
N
MIN
Inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
1.080
1.000
0.760
0.750
0.660
0.570
2.000
3.400
I-O(M)
1.500
1.000
1.090
1.458
1.817
0.877
1.068
0.818
0.902
0.375
0.875
0.086
0.291
0.125
0.205
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
2.250
0.600
2.050
2.050
2.050
2.420
5.350
2.900
5.050
4.450
5.210
4.700
3.308
2.092
3.038
3.218
2.875
3.645
1.087
0.906
1.076
0.912
1.186
0.889
inside
outside
Inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
0.920
0.230
0.520
0.160
0.240
0.160
2.530
1.710
1.940
0.920
0.830
0.670
1.483
0.840
0.983
0.528
0.593
0.490
0.677
0.548
0.497
0.365
0.208
0.215
inside
outside
Inside
outside
Inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
0.840
1.300
1.490
1.300
1.120
1.120
9.580
7.340
6.740
5.790
5.320
6.500
3.910
3.732
3.567
2.947
2.940
2.698
3.448
2.558
2.028
1.713
1.883
2.053
MAX
MEAN
-ug/g-------
STD DEV
P
0.3784
0.1524
0.4151
0.0614
0.7610
0.2320
0.1007
0.1008
0.4175
0.9210
0.5799
0.8360
72
Table 10. Continued.
DEPTH
(cm)
Lamar Valley
NO
0-15
15-30
30-45
NH
0-15
15-30
30-45
Treatment
N
MIN
inside
outside
inside.
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
0.500
0.310
0.040
0.110
0.030
0.040
7.930
1.360
0.400
0.700
0.860
0.240
1.977
0.723
0.203
0.273
0.205
0.128
2.931
0.400
0.154
0.223
0.324
0.080
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
4.480
3.690
2.900
3.160
2.370
2.110
8.040
6.580
5.450
5.000
4.510
4.740
6.597
4.697
4.543
4.213
3.538
3.382
1.555
1.145
1.012
0.779
0.773
0.902
6
6
6
6
6
6
0.200
0.160
0.010
0.160
0.010
0.010
0.360
0.350
0.620
0.320
0.780
1.160
0.277
0.263
0.192
0.245
0.328
0.482
0.065
0.077
0.242
0.062
0.272
0.416
6
6
6
6
6
6
4.040
4.130
1.450
1.920
0.500
2.390
6.740
6.740
4.370
12.050
4.610
3.890
5.190
5.425
2.827
4.382
2.928
3.257
0.995
0.996
1.219
3.818
1.450
0.675
Mammoth/Junction Butte
NO
inside
0-15
outside
inside
15-30
outside
inside
30-45
outside
NH
0-15
15-30
30-45
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
MAX
MEAN STD DEV
-ug/g--------
P
0.3238
0.5412
0.5864
0.0367
0.5410
0.7533
0.7523
0.6124
0.4674
0.6913
0.3643
0.6260
73
Table 11. Results of t-test analysis of soil organic matter for the eight exclosures.
DEPTH
(cm)
Gardiner east
0-15
15-30
30-45
Gardiner west
0-15
15-30
30-45
Blacktail east
0-15
15-30
30-45
Blacktail west
0-15
15-30
30-45
Treatment
N
MIN
MAX
MEAN
STD DEV
P
'%
inside
outside
Inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
1.270
0.980
0.790
0.670
0.450
1.080
1.670
1.600
1.210
2.110
0.900
1.670
1.423
1.343
1.027
1.407
0.693
1.360
0.216
0.338
0.215
0.721
0.227
0.298
inside
outside
inside
outside
Inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
1.140
1.330
0.620
1.530
0.300
0.900
1.640
2.430
0.840
1.600
0.450
1.530
1.330
1.957
0.767
1.577
0.367
1.140
0.271
0.566
0.127
0.040
0.076
0.341
Inside
outside
Inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
2.600
2.770
2.110
0.960
1.470
1.140
3.970
3.440
2.510
1.810
1.530
1.530
3.407
3.183
2.350
1.303
1.490
1.313
0.717
0.361
0.212
0.448
0.035
0.199
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
2.600
3.550
1.400
2.510
0.730
1.530
2.770
4.230
1.740
2.860
1.270
2.190
2.683
3.983
1.557
2.743
0.930
1.843
0.085
0.363
0.172
0.202
0.296
0.331
0.7472
0.4308
0.0365
0.1586
0.0005
0.0185
0.6650
0.0216
0.2036
0.0040
0.0015
0.0236
74
Table 11. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Treatment
N
MIN
MAX
MEAN
STD DEV
Lamar Valley east
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
30-45
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
3.650
2.510
2.030
1.810
1.080
1.080
3.870
3.050
2.350
2.640
1.920
2.190
3.777
2.690
2.243
2.240
1.557
1.493
0.114
0.312
0.185
0.416
0.431
0.607
Lamar Valley west
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
30-45
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
5.030
4.680
2.600
2.600
1.270
1.740
5.180
5.660
2.680
3.140
1.880
2.350
5.080
5.123
2.653
2.930
1.653
2.040
0.087
0.497
0.046
0.289
0.334
0.305
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
4.750
4.230
2.190
2.190
1.470
1.210
5.490
5.180
2.860
3.240
1.740
1.400
5.083
4.673
2.457
2.793
1.627
1.280
0.375
0.478
0.355
0.542
0.140
0.104
Junction Butte
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
30-45
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
3.240
3.870
0.960
1.140
0.730
0.960
3.650
4.230
1.440
1.600
0.810
1.400
3.410
4.070
1.223
1.380
0.757
1.210
0.214
0.183
0.243
0.231
0.046
0.226
Mammoth
0-15
15-30
30-45
P
%
0.0048
0.9905
0.3569
0.8888
0.1773
0.2128
0.3076
0.4192
0.0264
0.0154
0.4638
0.0272
75
Table 12. Results of t-test analysis of soil organic matter for the four groups.
DEPTH
(cm)
Gardiner
0-15
15-30
30-45
Blacktail
0-15
15-30
30-45
Lamar Valley
0-15
15-30
30-45
Treatment
N
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
1.140
0.960
0.620
0.670
0.300
0.900
1.670
2.430
1.210
2.110
0.900
1.670
1.377
1.650
0.897
1.492
0.530
1.250
0.225
0.535
0.213
0.466
0.235
0.310
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
2.600
2.770
1.400
0.960
0.730
1.140
3.970
4.230
2.510
2.860
1.530
2.190
3.045
3.573
1.953
2.023
1.210
1.578
0.604
0.536
0.467
0.848
0.360
0.379
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
3.650
2.510
2.030
1.810
1.080
1.080
5.180
5.660
2.680
3.140
1.920
2.350
4.428
3.907
2.448
2.585
1.605
1.767
0.720
1.383
0.255
0.495
0.349
0.524
6
6
6
6
6
6
3.240
3.870
0.960
1.140
0.730
0.960
5.490
5.180
2.860
3.240
1.740
1.400
4.247
4.372
1.840
2.087
1.192
1.245
0.956
0.463
0.728
0.859
0.486
0.162
Mammoth/Junction Butte
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
30-45
inside
outside
MIN
MAX
MEAN STD D EV
--------------- %-------------------------
P
0.2757
0.0174
0.0011
0.1403
0.8630
0.1152
0.4316
0.5613
0.5433
0.7791
0.6034
0.8037
76
Table 13. Results of t-test analysis of phosphorus (P) and sulfur (S) for the eight exclosures.
DEPTH
(cm)
Treatment
N
MIN
MAX
MEAN
STD D EV
P
--------------u g /g -r-----------------------
Gardiner east
0-15
15-30
30-45
S
0-15
15-30
30-45
Gardiner west
P
0-15
15-30
30-45
S
0-15
15-30
30-45
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
13.200
5.280
6.660
3.700
4.080
8.640
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
1.300
13.300
5.533
6.735
6.600
80.800
38.700
38.097
10.100
41.000
25.767
15.455
6.400 1289.500 515.233 681.489
17.900
39.000
29.133
10.616
82.700 2058.000 1238.233 1029.566
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
2.700
9.240
1.320
1.620
1.220
2.200
21.700
15.160
10.020
19.720
7.660
92.080
16.293
11.213
8.173
12.860
5.607
62.413
4.699
5.231
1.705
8.254
1.847
46.652
8:840
20.320
26.440
2.780
27.840
5.140
5.867
16.360
9.940
2.107
10.353
3.373
3.075
6.179
14.294
0.602
15.149
1.557
9.500
41.500
5.100
13.700
24.600 1400.000
7.800
57.900
37.000 1756.000
14.650
89.200
23.267
8.133
483.667
37.767
612.633
43.717
16.461
4.827
793.568
26.458
990.192
39.894
0.2790
0.3900
0.1028
0.2118
0.2815
0.1117
0.0580
0.3967
0.4717
0.2012
0.3858
0.3763
77
Table 13. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Blacktail east
r
0-15
15-30
30-45
S
0-15
15-30
30-45
Treatment
N
MIN
MAX
MEAN
STD DEV
P
— u g /g -------------------------
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
5.760
5.000
3.460
3.460
4.240
2.700
11.680
8.080
7.180
8.840
6; 760
4.620
8.747
6.793
5.800
5.767
5.333
3.720
2.960
1.601
2.037
2.771
1.293
0.966
inside
outside
Inside
outside
Inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
2.180
0.920
6.020
0.600
14.050
7.820
3.400
3.620
10.950
2.180
15.400
10.280
2.620
2.130
8.317
1.577
14.800
8.867
0.677
1.372
2.482
0.854
0.687
1.270
inside
outside
Inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
4.740
5.340
2.780
5.920
2.000
5.140
5.920
7.880
3.580
7.880
3.180
6.700
5.393
6.380
3.113
6.707
2.527
5.920
0.600
1.331
0.416
1.036
0.600
0.780
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
5.100
4.700
2.700
3.100
1.800
3.600
28.300
8.700
19.900
6.700
21.600
66.500
18.000
7.150
10.733
4.433
11.467
30.300
11.817
2.147
8.656
1.973
9.908
32.508
0.3717
0.9874
0.1583
0.6086
0.0113
0.0021
Blacktall west
P
0-15
15-30
30-45
S
0-15
15-30
30-45
0.3068
0.0051
0.0039
0.1927
0.2864
0.3915
Table 13. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Treatment
N
Lamar Valley east
r
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
30-45
inside
outside
MIN
MAX . MEAN STD DEV
------------- ug/g---------- -------------
3
3
3
3
3
3
8.460
6.120
5.000
5.060
4.240
5.060
12.460
10.040
7.080
5.180
6.440
5.980
11.020
8.213
6.067
5.100
5.493
5.513
2.223
1.974
1.041
0.069
1.132
0.460
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
.3
3
3
1.300
1.920
1.300
2.150
0.950
2.850
3.350
3.080
2.250
3.220
3.150
7.420
2.650
2.467
1.783
2.617
2.083
4.450
1.169
0.583
0.475
0.548
1.102
2.575
Lamar Valley west
P
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
30-45
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
6.160
6.120
5.500
4.860
5.180
4.860
8.080
7.860
6.160
6.120
5.800
5.980
7.440
6,700
5.820
5.653
5.493
5.547
1.109
1.005
0.330
0.691
0.310
0.601
3
3
3
3
3
3.050
4.020
5.780
6.400
8.000
6:100
4.300
5.820
9.800
8.580
11.850
8.350
3.477
4.763
7.310
7.577
10.510
7.123
0.713
0.940
2.175
1.100
2.175
1.139
S
0-15
15-30
30-45
S
0-15
15-30
30-45
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
P
0.1773
0.1838
0.9787
0.8199
0.1174
0.2171
0.4399
0.7253
0.8980
0.1319
0.8589
0.0753
79
Table 13. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Treatment
N
MIN
MAX
MEAN STD DEV
-------------------------- ug/g------------------------
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
10.040
6.800
4.720
4.400
4.720
3.080
11.680
10.040
8.400
6.360
7.080
5.540
10.860
8.147
6.627
5.320
5.913
4.340
0.820
1.688
1.844
0.985
1.180
1.231
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
2.880
3.220
1.980
2.680
20.700
20.800
5.550
4.100
3.980
27.880
26.280
28.680
3.937
3.723
3.013
15.003
22.843
26.043
1.419
0.453
1.002
12.609
3.006
4.541
Junction Butte
P
inside
0-15
outside
15-30
inside
outside
inside
30-45
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
7.540
9.420
5.500
5.680
3.460
5.060
9.600
10.040
6.120
7.240
6.620
8.180
8.440
9.733
5.807
6.513
5.047
6.620
1.054
0.310
0.310
0.785
1.580
1.560
0.480
3.350
3.380
4.400
6.780
1.180
2.580
6.280
3.820 223.820
18.620
23.080
2.183
3.760
3.260
4.637
99.687
20.273
1.508
0.557
3.065
1.884
112.691
2.443
Mammoth
P
0-15
15-30
30-45
S
0-15
15-30
30-45
S
0-15
15-30
30-45
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
P
0.0664
0.3399
0.1853
0.8164
0.1760
0.3664
0.1111
0.2208
0.2870
0.1647
0.5438
0.2894
80
Table 14. Results of t-test analysis of phosphorus and sulfur for the four groups.
DEPTH
(cm)
Gardiner
P
0-15
15-30
30-45
S
0-15
15-30
30-45
Blacktail
P
0-15
15-30
30-45
S
0-15
15-30
30-45
Treatment
N
MIN
—
MAX
MEAN STD DEV
------------- ug/g------------------------
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
2.700
5.280
1.320
1.620
1.220
2.200
21.700
20.320
26.440
19.720
27.840
92.080
11.080
13.787
9.057
7.483
7.980
32.893
6.725
5.845
9.156
. 7.879
9.996
43.786
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
1.300
5.100
10.100
6.400
17.900
14.650
41.500
80.800
1400.000
1289.500
1756.000
2058.000
14.400
23.417
254.717
276.500
320.883
640.975
14.862
29.499
561.157
504.424
703.121
923.418
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
4.740
5.000
2.780
3.460
2.000
2.700
11.680
8.080
7.180
8.840
6.760
6.700
7.070
6.587
4.457
6.237
3.930
4.820
2.650
1.336
1.974
1.940
1.782
1.438
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
2.180
0.920
2.700
0.600
1.800
3.600
28.300
8.700
19.900
6.700
21.600
66.500
10.310
4.640
9.525
3.005
13.133
19.583
11.269
3.187
5.847
2.073
6.542
23.689
P
0.4739
0.7563
0.2041
0.5189
0.9450
0.5146
0.6983
0.1462
0.3635
0.2631
0.0277
0.5348
81
Table 14. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Treatment
N
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
6.160
6.120
5.000
4.860
4.240
4.860
12.460
10.040
7.080
6.120
6.440
5.980
9.230
7.457
5.943
5.377
5.493
5.530
2.513
1.627
0.704
0.533
0.742
0.479
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
1.300
1.920
1.300
2.150
0.950
2.850
4.300
5.820
9.800
8.580
11.850
8.350
3.063
3.615
4.547
5.097
6.297
5.787
0.977
1.439
3.339
2.826
4.866
2.305
6
6
6
6
6
6
7.540
6.800
4.720
4.400
3.460
3.080
11.680
10.040
8.400
7.240
7.080
8.180
9.650
8.940
6.217
5.917
5.480
5.480
1.572
1.390
1:265
1.031
1.335
1.772
0.480
5.550
3.220
4.400
1.180
6.780
2.580
27.880
3.820 223.820
18.620
28.680
3.060
3.742
3.137
9.820
61.265
23.158
1.624
0.455
2.044
9.862
82.794
4.541
MIN
MAX
MEAN STD DEV
ug/g------------------------
P
Lamar Valley
P
0-15
15-30
30-45
S
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mammoth/Junction Butte
P
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
30-45
inside
outside
S
0-15
15-30
30-45
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
0.1774
0.1471
0.9210
0.4553
0.7644
0.8212
0.4266
0.6620
1.0000
0.3456
0.1351
0.2866
82
Table 15. Results of t-test analysis of sodium (Na), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), and
potassium (K) for the eight exclosures.
DEPTH
(cm)
Treatment
Gardiner east
Na
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
30-45
inside
outside
Ca
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mg
0-15
15-30
30-45
K
0-15
15-30
30-45
N
MIN
3
245.200
3
278.800
3
447.800
3 1354.000
3
575.600
3 2040.000
MAX
MEAN
.<«/ y------
426.200
1752.000
734.000
2950.000
936.000
2500.000
351.400
1139.600
593.400
2093.333
760.533
2218.667
STD DEV
94.497
767.370
143.165
804.443
180.386
246.587
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
753.400
157.000
638.800
335.200
549.600
579.400
823.400
789.400
738.400
747.000
664.200
626.000
780.267
546.800
685.400
588.467
600.533
598.467
37.729
340.930
50.107
221.643
58.351
24.426
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
207.600
113.000
72.400
106.200
48.800
163.600
234.600
447.600
123.200
207.600
99.600
221.200
216.600
298.867
91.600
160.267
69.133
188.467
15.588
170.363
27.577
51.034
26.873
29.595
4349.400 5008.800 4665.733
330.512
1121.000 6395.000 4509.667 2940.880
5064.000
7553.400 5978.067 1370.122
3043.200 9030.000 6977.067 3407.914
6204.000
7035.800 6540.867
437.849
5021.000 16090:000 11629.000 5838.484
P
,
0.1522
0.0335
0.0012
0.9316
0.6621
0.2067
0.3038
0.5010
0.9576
0.4517
0.1097
0.0066
83
Table 15. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Treatment
Gardiner west
Na
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
30-45
inside
outside
Ca
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mg
0-15
15-30
30-45
K
0-15
15-30
30-45
N
MIN
3
3
3
3
3
3
126.000
116.200
313.400
330.800
686.000
495.400
MAX
694.000
240.800
762.000
1238.000
1574.000
946.000
MEAN
322:200
160.267
504.867
708.333
985.333
719.467
STD DEV
322.153
69.847
231.397
472.347
509.825
225.310
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
6623.000
7781.200 7140.467
588.857
2377.800 3868.800 2893.333
845.236
7065.000 9527.200 8331.933 1232.663
4688.400
7146.600 6125.933 1281.023
8161.400 40032.400 18908.933 18294.402
5218.200
7288.400 6208.133 1038.052
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
1345.400
590.000
1180.000
1137.400
1329.000
1165.000
1564.600
1152.400
1386.000
1478.600
1369.000
1337.000
1446.067
821.333
1312.333
1340.933
1355.600
1256.333
110.687
294.166
114.849
179.884
23.036
86.495
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
241.400
123.200
150.200
177.200
163.600
119.800
349.600
298.800
190.800
261.600
244.800
244.800
297.733
226.800
166.000
210.933
208.733
195.267
54.238
91.966
21.745
44.675
41.352
66.413
P
0.4428
0.5395
0.4551
0.0020
0.0981
0.2962
0.0262
0.8278
0.1271
0.3140
0.1923
0.7804
84
Table 15. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Treatment
N
MIN
3
3
3
3
3
3
23.600
24.400
28.000
30.600
48.200
23.600
49.200
123.200
65.800
41.200
145.200
78.200
32.667
62.067
51.133
35.867
85.800
50.000
14.341
53.417
20.272
5.300
52.045
27.344
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
1526.200
1909.400
2808.800
2307.400
5314.800
2263.200
1975.800
2278.000
5226.400
2985.600
5506.400
5167.400
1808.733
2113.333
3779.267
2717.733
5386.067
4116.667
246.038
187.411
1277.343
360.848
104.801
1609.932
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
133.800
358.800
224.000
404.000
273.600
367.000
267.400
416.600
265.400
532.000
385.200
490.600
181.467
382.733
249.733
447.067
334.000
432.267
74.569
30.153
22.461
73.557
56.366
62.091
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
101.400
203.000
85.800
117.000
50.800
93.600
163.800
253.600
93.600
156.000
74.200
206.800
128.733
221.133
88.400
137.800
62.467
132.667
31.911
28.181
4.503
19.630
11.700
64.232
Blacktail east
Na
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
30-45
inside
outside
Ca
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mg
0-15
15-30
30-45
K
0-15
15-30
30-45
MAX
MEAN
ug/g----------
STD DEV
P
0.4093
0.2755
0.3511
0.1632
0.2382
0.2446
0:0123
0.0113
0.1123
0.0198
0.0132
0.1360
85
Table 15. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
' Treatment
Blacktail west
Na
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
30-45
inside
. outside
Ca
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mg
0-15
15-30
30-45
K
0-15
15-30
30-45
N
MIN
MAX
MEAN
STD DEV
------------------------------ ug/ q ---------------------------
3
3
3
3
3
3
18.800
14.400
10.000
12.200
14.400
17.600
22.000
15.400
20.800
18.800
18.800
22.000
20.533
15.067
16.533
16.200
16.200
19.800
1.617
0.577
5.746
3.516
2.367
2.200
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
1817.000
1995.800
2408.600
2297.800
2310.000
2236.200
2094.400
2322.400
2550.400
2661.200
4121.400
2433.400
1973.200
2112.867
2490.800
2478.467
3466.267
2347.067
141.973
181.878
73.552
181.709
1004.312
100.863
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
178.200
233.400
180.400
278.000
99.600
273.600
233.400
271.600
284.600
354.400
182.400
333.200
214.267
255.333
229.267
312.667
130.067
309.067
31.254
19.720
52.400
38.687
45.526
31.375
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
224.600
356.400
75.800
268.400
15.000
200.800
261.600
451.000
167.000
319.200
75.800
248.200
247.067
407.067
120.867
294.333
38.667
225.667
19.735
47.658
45.609
25.417
32.560
23.786
P
0.0053
0.9358
0.1221
0.3536
0.9185
0.1272
0.1266
0.0908
0.0050
0.0058
0.0045
0.0013
86
Table 15. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Treatment
MIN
MAX
.3
3
3
3
3
3
12.000
14.800
20.800
21.800
28.000
30.600
30.600
24.400
23.600
51.800
29.600
43.800
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
Lamar Valley east
Na
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
30-45 .
inside
outside
Ca
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mg
0-15
15-30
30-45
K
0-15
15-30
30-45
N
MEAN
ug/g--------- --
STD DEV
19.133
20.600
22.333
33.533
28.533
36.733
10.029
5.103
1.419
16.032
0.924
6.649
3560.600
3781.600
3833.200
4268.200
3892.200
4607.200
3818.600 3717.800
3915.200 3843.333
4179.600 4012.533
4725.200 4570.400
4445.000 . 4177.200
5661.200 5074.000
137.937
67.374
173.525
261.739
276.801
537.216
3
3
3
3
3
3
1002.200
898.200
1107.000
1068.800
1065.000
1067.600
1044.400
987.800
1203.000
1128.800
1173,600
1231.200
1026.400
951.267
1149.067
1096.133
1133.133
1142.533
21.772
47.032
49.088
30.353
59.351
82.660
3
3
3
3
3
3
316.000
222.400
218.600
203.000
132.600
85.800
386.400
300.400
257.600
234.200
214.600
179.600
351.200
257.533
242.000
214.667
176.867
135.267
35.200
39.571
20.637
17.023
41.389
47.110
P
0.8325
0.2945
0.1018
0.2296
0.0370
0.0620
0.0660
0.1874
0.8806
0.0375
0.1515
0.3146
87
Table 15. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Treatment
N
MIN
3
3
3
3
3
3
18.200
22.600
14.800
27.000
14.800
63.200
25.200
26.200
25.200
102.800
129.200
216.600
21.733
23.800
19.400
75.200
55.267
116.867
3.500
2.078
5.303
41.889
64.124
86.455
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
2491.800
2550.800
4231.200
3980.600
5329.600
4703.000
3398.400
3708.000
5595.000
5410.600
5749.600
4990.400
2796.467
3187.133
4789.000
4897.067
5572.800
4801.267
521.303
587.177
714.976
795.608
217.731
163.836
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
631.000
550.200
747.000
807.200
768.400
1285.200
654.200
698.200
777.800
1036.800
979.800
1897.200
638.733
646.333
762.067
957.533
865.400
1607.867
13.395
83.341
15.411
130.257
106.769
307.359
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
413.600
382.400
183.400
171.600
117.000
74.200
441.000
421.400
273.200
253.600
160.000
136.600
426.667
398.000
240.667
208.067
140.467
98.867
13.744
20.637
49.747
41.745
21.768
33.189
Lamar Valley west
Na
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
30-45
inside
outside
Ca
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mg
0-15
15-30
30-45
K
0-15
15-30
30-45
MAX
MEAN
ug/g-----------
STD DEV
P
0.4289
0.0840
0.3777
0.4374
0.8696
0.0080
0.8836
0.0613
0.0168
0.1158
0.4337
0.1436
88
Table 15. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Mammoth
Na
0-15
15-30
30-45
Ca
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mg
0-15
15-30
30-45
K
0-15
15-30
30-45
Treatment
N
MIN
MAX
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
19.200
21.800
29.600
24.400
15.600
28.800
77.200
28.000
54.400
54.400
67.600
69.400
50.867
24.133
39.400
38.200
36.733
42.600
29.366
3.372
13.192
15.143
27.332
23.213
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
1880.000
2123.200
2027.400
1924.200
5064.200
5278.000
2373.800
2160.000
2093.600
4688.200
5764.400
5572.800
2056.867
2137.933
2071.533
3518.733
5442.600
5393.467
275.088
19.465
38.221
1430.187
353.515
157.436
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
224.000
195.200
185.800
138.200
172.000
137.000
244.200
279.200
217.200
234.200
177.000
185.800
231.200
236.400
198.600
186.267
174.733
154.667
11.280
42.023
16.484
48.000
2.532
27.044
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
374.600
401.800
308.200
273.200
160.000
132.600
491.600
476.000
390.200
304.400
203.000
156.000
442.200
438.267
356.400
283.600
178.200
143.000
60.586
37.116
42.855
18.013
22.247
11.915
MEAN
ug/g----------
STD DEV
P
0.1923
0.9226
0.7910
0.6374
0.1546
0.8367
0.8461
0.6955
0.2699
0.9282
0.0534
0.0731
89
Table 15. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Treatment
Junction Butte
Na
inside
0-15
outside
15-30
inside
outside
inside
30-45
outside
Ca
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mg
0-15
15-30
30-45
K
0-15
15-30
30-45
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
N
MIN
MAX
MEAN
STD DEV
------------------------------ ug/g---------------------------
20.800
23.600
15.600
16.400
38.200
21.800
30.600
41.200
56.200
21.800
71.200
38.600
27.000
31.200
35.867
18.533
50.800
28.000
5.393
9.042
20.300
2.873
17.829
9.224
3 1231.200
3 1614.600
3 1341.800
3 1629.400
3 2189.600
-3 3612.200
1408.200
1821.000
1386.000
2211.600
5469.600
5115.800
1339.400
1747.267
1368.867
1916.800
4196.933
4422.933
94.850
115.131
23.715
291.171
1759.091
758.698
3
3
3
3
3
3
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
310.000
295.000
330.600
338.200
418.400
377.000
356.400
377.800
482.400
404.000
542.000
559.600
332.600
342.200
413.400
371.867
462.933
449.600
23.223
42.601
76.835
32.927
68.656
96.875
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
292.600
256.000
203.000
199.000
163.800
152.200
296.600
351.200
261.400
249.800
218.600
191.200
293.933
315.600
232.867
218.533
187.333
174.333
2.309
51.940
29.223
27.357
28.207
20.026
P
0.5276
0.2170
0.1205
0.0091
0.0314
0.8481
0.7491
0.4380
0.8553
0.5104
0.5687
0.5506
90
Table 16. Results of t-test analysis of sodium (Na), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), and
potassium (K) for the four groups.
DEPTH
(cm)
Gardiner
Na
0-15
15-30
30-45
Ca
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mg
0-15
15-30
30-45
K
0-15
15-30
30-45
Treatment
N
MIN
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
694.000
116.200
313.400
330.800
575.600
495.400
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
753.400
157.000
638.800
335.200
549.600
579.400
1564.600
1152.400
1386.000
1478.600
1369.000
1337.000
1113.167
684.067
998.867
964.700
978.067
927.400
372.098
322.052
352.412
449.950
415.466
364.785
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
207.600
113.000
72.400
106.200
48.800
119.800
349.600
447.600
190.800
261.600
244.800
244.800
257.167
262.833
128.800
185.600
138.933
191.867
56.997
128.649
46.411
51.091
82.579
46.135
MAX
336.800
1752.000
762.000
2950.000
1574.000
2500.000
MEAN
ug/g ----------
212.934
649.933
549.133
1400.833
872.933
1469.067
STD DEV
724.722
178.795
961.022
363.517
847.885
4349.400
7781.200 5903.100 1421.157
1121.000 6395.000 3701.500 2128.154
5064.000 9527.200 7155.000 1738.069
3043.200 9030.000 6551.500 2349.316
6204.000 40032.400 12724.900 13410.498
5021.000 16090.000 8918.567 4783.505
P
0.3338
0.0586
0.1445
0.0613
0.6239
0.5273
0.0584
0.8865
0.8269
0.9234
0.0715
0.2004
91
Table 16. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Blacktail
Na
0-15
15-30
30-45
Ca
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mg
0-15
15-30
30-45
K
0-15
15-30
30-45
MAX
MEAN
ug/g ----------
STD DEV
Treatment
N
MIN
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
18.800
14.400
10.000
12.200
14.400
17.600
49.200
123.200
65.800
41.200
145.200
78.200
26.600
38.567
33.833
26.033
51.000
34.900
11.290
42.476
23.168
11.498
50.387
23.972
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
1526.200
1909.400
2408.600
2297.800
2310.000
2236.200
2094.400
2322.400
5226.400
2985.600
5506.400
5167.400
1890.967
2113.100
3135.033
2598.100
4426.167
3231.867
200.975
165.170
1073.709
287.170
1230.260
1407.219
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
133.800
233.400
180.400
278.000
99.600
273.600
267.400
416.600
284.600
532.000
385.200
490.600
197.867
319.033
239.500
379.867
232.033
370.667
54.200
73.406
37.759
90.454
120.733
80.556
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
101.400
203.000
75.800
117.000
15.000
93.600
261.600
451.000
167.000
319.200
75.800
248.200
187.900
314.100
104.633
216.067
50.567
179.167
69.021
107.692
34.006
88.110
25.471
66.868
P
0.5199
0.4771
0.4958
0.0630
0.2640
0.1486
0.0087
0.0057
0.0414
0.0363
0.0161
0.0013
92
Table 16. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Treatment
Lamar Valley
Na
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
.30-45
inside
outside
Ca
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mg
0-15
15-30
30-45
K
0-15
15-30
30-45
N
MIN
6
6
6
6
6
6
12.000
14.800
14.800
21.800
14.800
30.600
MAX
30.600
26.200
25.200
102.800
129.200
216.600
MEAN
ug/g-----------
20.433
22.200
20.867
54.367
41.900
76.800
STD DEV
6.867
3.901
3.826
36.408
43.122
70.242 .
P
0.5958
0.0489
0.3241
-
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
2491.800
2550.800
3833.200
3980.600
3892.200
4607.200
3818.600
3915.200
5595.000
5410.600
5749.600
5661.200
3257.133
3515.233
4400.767
4733.733
4875.000
4937.633
609.073
518.562
630.389
559.118
796.191
385.347
inside
outside
inside
outside .
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
631.000
550.200
747.000
807.200
768.400
1067.600
1044.400
987.800
1203.000
1128.800
1173.600
1897.200
832.567
798.800
955.567
1026.833
999.267
1375.200
212:948
177.647
214.452
113.659
165.750
324.779
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
316.000
222.400
183.400
171.600
117.000
74.200
441.000
421.400
273.200
253.600
214.600
179.600
388.933
327.767
241.333
211.367
158.667
117.067
47.747
81.951
34.071
28.741
35.668
41.543
0.4477
0.3539
0.8658
0.7716
0.4885
0.0301
0.1453
0.1306
0.0924
93
Table 16. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
MAX
19.200
21.800
15.600
16.400
15.600
21.800
77.200
41.200
56.200
54.400
71.200
69.400
38.933
27.667
37.633
28.367
43.767
35.300
22.966
7.227
15.434
14.528
22.030
17.706
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6 1231.200
6 1614.600
6 1341.800
6 1629.400
6 2189.600
6 3612.200
2373.800
2160.000
2093.600
4688.200
5764.400
5572.800
1698.133
1942.600
1720.200
2717.767
4819.767
4908.200
433.930
226.362
385.916
1273.555
1324.105
723.010
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
224.000
195.200
185.800
138.200
172.000
137.000
356.400
377.800
482.400
404.000
542.000
559.600
281.900
289.300
306.000
279.067
318.833
302.133
57.890
69.213
127.718
108.118
163.725
173.615
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
292.600
256.000
203.000
199.000
160.000
132.600
491.600
476.000
390.200
304.400
218.600
191.200
368.067
376.933
294.633
251.067
182.767
158.667
89.807
78.385
75.195
41.222
23.265
22.622
N
Mammoth/Junction Butte
Na
0-15
inside
6
outside
6
inside
6
15-30
6
outside
inside
6
30-45
6
outside
Ca
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mg
0-15
15-30
30-45
K
0-15
15-30
30-45
MEAN
ug/g-----------
STD DEV
MIN
Treatment
P
0.2784
0.3094
0.4799
0.2492
0.0962
0.8887
0.8448
0.7017
0.8643
0.8591
0.2417
0.0989
94
Table 17. Results of t-test analysis of iron (Fe), copper (Cu), zinc (Zn) and manganese (Mn) for
the eight exclosures.
DEPTH
(cm)
Gardiner east
Fe
0-15
15-30
30-45
Cu
0-15
15-30
30-45
Zn
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mn
0-15
15-30
30-45
Treatment
N
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
11.900
6.100
12.600
8.800
14.700
8.800
14.100
12:600
16.800
14.600
17.000
17.300
13.100
10.033
14.500
11.400
15.833
14.467
1.114
3.459
2.128
2.946
1.150
4.907
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
1.600
0.700
1.400
1.000
1.400
0.900
2.900
6.300
1.700
2.600
2.500
3.200
2.033
2.833
1.567
1.767
1.833
2.433
0.751
3.029
0.153
0.802
0.586
1.328
inside
outside
inside
outside
. inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.400
0.200
0.300
0.200
0.400
0.300
0.600
1.200
0.400
0.500
1.400
0.600
0.500
0.600
0.333
0.367
0.833
0.500
0.100
0.529
0.058
0.153
0.513
0.173
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
8.100
5.800
3.300
2.300
3.800
2.000
12.400
10.300
4.700
4.800
6.000
3.500
9.533
7.600
4.200
3.233
4.800.
2.500
2.483
2.381
0.781
1.365
1.114
0.866
MIN
MAX
MEAN STD DEV
-ug/g--------
P
0.2176
0.2137
0.6631
0.6800
0.6932
0.5136
0.7638
0.7415
0.3465
0.3855
0.3470
0.0476
95
Table 17. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Gardiner west
Fe
0-15
15-30
30-45
Cu
0-15
15-30
30-45
Zn
0-15.
15-30
30-45
Mn
0-15
15-30
30-45
Treatment
N
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
7.000
10.200
6.600
11.500
5.800
11.400
10.000
16.100
9.200
13.800
9.500
13.300
8.833
14.100
8.133
12.467
8.033
12.200
1.607
3.378
1.361
1.193
1.966
0.985
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
1.600
1.200
1.800
1.500
2.300
1.500
4.400
2.800
3.700
2.600
3.100
2.900
2.600
1.867
2.567
2.000
2.767
2.100
1.562
0.833
1.002
0.557
0.416
0.721
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.200
0.200
0.100
0.200
0.300
0.200
0.900
1.000
4.700
0.500
2.900
0.800
0.467
0.600
1.700
0.400
1.233
0.433
0.379
0.400
2,600
0.173
1.447
0.321
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
2.800
12.300
1.800
2.400
2.000
1.400
3.900
16.000
2.100
8.700
2.800
3.900
3.433
14.267
1.967
5.200
2.367
3.067
0.569
1.861
0.153
3.208
0.404
1.443
MIN
MAX
MEAN
ug/g-------
STD DEV
P
0.0713
0.0143
0.0304
0.5127
0.4400
0.2378
0.6965
0.4363
0.4028
0.0006
0.1561
0.4639
98
Table 17. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Blacktail east
Fe
0-15
15-30
30-45
Cu
0-15
15-30
30-45
Zn
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mn
0-15
15-30
30-45
MIN
Treatment
N
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
10.940
12.940
8.260
8.930
4.910
6.250
16.980
14.950
10.270
12.270
6.920
8.260
12.947
14.057
9.377
10.933
6.250
7.367
3.476
1.023
1.023
1.767
1.160
1.023
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
2.050
3.690
2.210
3.400
1.110
2.460
2.540
4.100
2.620
4.140
1.810
4.790
2.297
3.853
2.377
3.743
1.357
3.453
0.245
0.217
0.215
0.373
0.393
1.202
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
1.200
2.210
0.980
0.800
1.570
3.310
3.090
4.330
1.490
1.710
3.170
2.453
2.517
2.220
3.030
1.217
2.490
1.110
0.497
1.837
2.403
0.460
0.827
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
5.900
9.590
2.740
2.840
2.100
2.230
7.490
11.490
3.490
3.930
2.510
2.670
6.620
10.507
3.003
3.340
2.317
2.490
0.806
0.952
0.422
0.551
0.208
0.251
MAX
MEAN
-u g /g ——
STD DEV
P
0.6624
0.2566
0.2797
0.0012
0.0054
0.0452
0.9289
0.809
0.0797
0.0057
0.4425
0.3691
0.8801
Table .17. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Blacktail west
Fe
0-15
15-30
3Q-45
Cu
0-15
15-30
30-45
Zn
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mn
0-15
15-30
30-45
Treatment
N
MIN
MAX
MEAN
STD DEV
P
--------------------------- U y / y
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
12.810
12.910
10.100
12.300
5.700
9.500
15.710
17.410
11.000
1:8.300
6.700
14.300
14.410
15.343
10-533
15.933
6.033
12.533
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
1.200
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.700
0.700
1.400
1.300
1.200
1.300
1.000
1.100
1.267
1.167
1.100
1.167
0.867
0.900
0.115
0.153
0.100
0.153
0.153
0.200
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.700
1.400
0.100
0.200
0.100
0.000
0.800
2.300
0.100
0.400
0.100
0.200
0.733
1.700
0.100
0.300
0.100
0.100
0.058
0.520
0.000
0.100
0.000
0.100
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
10.600
12.100
6.000
10.700
3.300
6.900
12.800
14.500
9.000
15.800
4.300
11.600
11.800
13.567
7.233
13.700
3.700
9.867
1.114
1.286
1:570
2.666
0.529
2.581
1.473 .
2.272
0.451
3.194
0.577
2.639
0.5827
6.0441
0.0141
0.4169
0.5614
0.8298
0.0328
0.0257
1.0000
0.1464
0.0224
0.0154
98
Table 17. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Treatment
N
MIN
3
3
3
3
3
3
17.980
10.590
. 16.350
10.720
14.340
10.990
21.650
12.730
16.960
12.060
15.620
16.750
19.413
11.750
16.733
11.347
14.810
13.983
1.966
1.081
0.334
0.674
0.704
2,887
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
2.780
2.030
3.350
1.770
1.810
1.720
3.850
2.950
4.620
2.990
4.880
3.260
3.193
2.467
3.900
2.220
3.610
2.570
0.575
0.462
0.652
0.670
1.602
0.782
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.730
0.700
0.700
0.340
0.390
0.590
3.270
0.960
2.170
0.620
5.000
0.870
1.633
0.807
1.247
0.460
2.163
0.757
1.420
0.136
0.804
0.144
2.482
0.147
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
6.370
6.610
3.050
3.910
2.640
2.800
9.020
7.870
5.760
4.830
5.280
4.350
8.073
7.117
4.820
4.450
4.277
3.697
1.478
0.665
1.534
0.480
1.429
0.803
Lamar Valley east
Fe
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
inside
30-45
outside
Cu
0-15
15-30
30-45
Zn
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mn
0-15
15-30
30-45
MAX
MEAN STD DEV
-ug/g--------
P
0.0041
0.0002
0.6542
0.1648
0.0363
0.3698
0.3720
0.1700
0.3829
0.3639
0.7112
0.5750
99
Table 17. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Treatment
N
MIN
3
3
3
3
3
3
24.330
13.670
10.860
7.770
8.040
6.570
34.370
17.430
16.290
10.860
9.650
8.040
30.130
15.190
13.383
9.160
9.023
7.237
5.199
1.981
2.735
1.568
0.862
0.744
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
3.160
1.110
1.020
1.110
1.110
1.150
3.610
1.200
2.170
1.640
1.720
1.850
3.333
1.170
1.580
1.287
1.400
1.500
0.242
0.052
0.576
0.306
0.306
0.350
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
2.630
0.420
0.170
0.060
0.110
0.030
3.090
1.010
0.860
0.760
0.390
0.250
2.903
0.673
0.427
0.320
0.280
0.150
0.242
0.304
0.377
0.383
0.149
0.111
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
6.810
. 5.060
2.200
1.760
1.870
1.680
9.390
6.280
3.800
1.830
3.090
3.090
7.807
5.627
2.943
1.797
2.387
2.177
1.386
0.615
0.806
0.035
0.631
0.792
Lamar Valley west
Fe
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
30-45
inside
outside
Cu
0-15
15-30
30-45.
Zn
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mn
0-15
15-30
30-45
MAX
MEAN STD DEV
-ug/g -—-
P
0.0097
0.0811
0.0532
0.0001
0.4755
0.7227
0.0006
0.7457
0.2915
0.0672
0.0690
0.7378
100
Table 17. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Mammoth
Fe
0-15
15-30
30-45
Cu
0-15
15-30
30-45
Zn
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mn
0-15
15-30
30-45
Treatment
N
MIN
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
38.390
27.020
23.660
16.960
9.380
6.920
45.760
33.030
28.350
18.970
10.940
7.590
41.293
30.803
26.787
17.853
9.973
7.367
3.926
3.294
2.708
1.023
0.844
0.387
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
2.790
2.130
3.110
1.640
1.720
1.190
3.850
2.790
3.240
2.790
3.070
2.130
3.210
2.407
3.183
2.037
2.213
1.573
0.563
0.343
0.067
0.653
0.745
0.493
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.010
2.350
1.330
1.390
0.510
1.930
3.830
3.510
1.690
3.170
2.290
3.410
2.417
. 2.757
1.517
2.090
1.227
2.483
2.095
0.653
0.180
0.949
0.939
0.808
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
8.950
7.520
4.710
3.520
2.880
1.450
12:580
8.890
5.420
5.830
4.500
2.060
10.363
8.113
4.970
4.473
3.463
1.813
1.944
0.703
0.391
1.207
0.900
0.321
MAX
MEAN STD DEV
-ug/g--------
P
0.0239
0.0059
0.0082
0.1020
0.0386
0.2833
0.7990
0.3620
0.1533
0.1331
0.5336
0.0403
101
Table 17. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Treatment
N
MIN
3
3
3
3
3
3
33.700
37.720
12.870
24.330
10.270
16.290
41.740
39.060
15.140
25.000
15.620
18.300
38.837
38.390
14.073
24.553
12.277
17.630
4.461
0.670
1.141
0.387
2.915
1.160
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
2.790
2.420
1.420
2.050
2.010
2.130
3.440
2.990
1.640
2.830
2.830
2.420
3.047
2.650
1.493
2.487
2.447
2.297
0.346
0.300
0.127
0.398
0.413
0.150
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
1.370
1.870
0.010
0.160
0.800
0.180
3.730
2.470
0.420
1.450
1.550
1.430
2.330
2.090
0.210
0.670
1.090
0.690
1.240
0.330
0.205
0.686
0.403
0.656
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3,
3
3
3
7.080
7.900
5.310
4.440
1.790
2.270
8.240
8.740
7.090
5.290
3.350
3.930
7.750
8.327
6.350
4.950
2.437
3.197
0.601
0.420
0.927
0.450
0.813
0.847
Junction Butte
Fe
inside
0-15
outside
15-30
inside
outside
inside
30-45
outside
Cu
0-15
15-30
30-45
Zn
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mn
0-15
15-30
30-45
MAX
MEAN STD DEV
-ug/g--------
P
0.8719
0.0001
0.0418
0.2109
0.0144
0.5862
0.7622
0.3286
0.4233
0.2445
0.0772
0.3271
102
Table 18. Results of t-test analysis of iron (Fe), copper (Cu), Zinc (Zn), and manganese (Mn) for
the four groups.
DEPTH
(cm)
Gardiner
Fe
0-15
15-30
30-45
Cu
0-15
15-30
30-45
Zn
CMS
15-30
30-45
Mn
0-15
15-30
30-45
Treatment
N
MIN
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
7.000
6.100
6.600
8.800
5.800
8.800
14.100
16.100
16.800
14.600
17.000
17.300
10.967
12.067
11.317
11.933
11.933
13.333
2.644
3.783
3.836
2.093
4.509
3.400
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
1.600
0.700
1.400
1.000
1.400
0.900
4.400
6.300
3.700
2.600
3.100
3.200
2.317
2.350
2.067
1.883
2.300
2.267
1,139
2.056
0.843
0.631
0.684
0.973
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
0.200
0.200
0.100
0.200
0.300
0.200
0.900
1.200
4.700
0.500
2.900
0.800
0.483
0.600
1.017
0.383
1.033
0.467
0.248
0.420
1.807
0.147
0.995
0.234
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
2.800
5.800
1.800
2.300
2.000
1.400
12.400
16.000
4.700
8.700
6.000
3.900
6.483
10.933
3.083
4.217
3.583
2.783
3.709'
4.121
1.323
2.454
1.529
1.109
MAX
MEAN STD DEV
-ug/g--------
.
P
0.5723
0.7368
0.5572
0.9730
0.6787
0.9466
0.5707
0.4122
0.2044
0.0777
0.3428
0.3239
103
Table 18. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Blacktail
Fe
0-15
15-30
30-45
Cu
0-15
15-30
30-45
Zn
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mn
0-15
15-30
30-45
MAX
MEAN STD DEV
--ug/g--------
Treatment
N
MIN
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
10.940
12.910
8.260
8.930
4.910
6.250
16.960
17.410
11.000
18.300
6.920
14.300
. 13.678
14.700
9.955
13.433
6.142
9.950
2.518
1.727
0.950
3.582
0.828
3.349
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
1.200
1.000
1.000
1.000
0.700
0.700
2.540
4.100
2.620
4.140
1.810
4.790
1.782
2.510
1.738
2.455
1.112
2.177
0.590
1.481
0.715
1.434
0.378
1.597
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
0.700
1.400
0.100
0.200
0.100
0.000
3.308
3.090
4.326
3.030
1.714
3.170
1.592
2.109
1.159
1.352
0.657
1.296
1.175
0.638
1.641
1.262
0.678
1.411
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
5.900
9.590
2.740
2.840
2,100
2.230
12.800
14.500
9.000
15.800
4.300
11.600
9.210
12.037
5.118
8.520
3.008
6.178
2.967
1.958
2.535
5.930
0.838
4.360
P
0.4302
0.0442
0.0222
0.2895
0.2998
0.1426
0.3662
0.8240
0.3417
0.0800
0.2251
0.1105
104
Table 18. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Lamar Valley
Fe
0-15
15-30
30-45
Cu
0-15
15-30
30-45
Zn
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mn
0-15
15-30
30-45
Treatment
N
MIN
MAX
MEAN STD DEV
-------------------------- ug/g------------------------
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
17.960
10.590
10.860
7.770
8.040
6.570
34.370
17,430
16.960
12.060
15.620
16.750
24.772
13.470
15.058
10.253
11.917
10.610
6.842
2.364
2.531
1.612
3.247
4.149
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
2.780
1.110
1.020
1.110
1.110
1.150
3.850
2.950
4.620
2.990
4.880
3.260
3.263
1.818
2.740
1.753
2.505
2.035
0.402
0.769
1.385
0.692
1.590
0.798
inside
outside .
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
0.730
0.420
0.170
0.060
0.110
0.030
3.270
1.010
2.170
0.760
5.000
0.870
2.268
0.740
0.837
0.390
1.222
0.453
1.146
0.223
0.719
0.270
1.881
0.352
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
6.370
5.060
2.200
1.760
1.870
1.680
9.390
7.870
5.760
4.830
5.280
4.350
7.940
6.372
3.882
3.123
3.332
2.937
1.290
0.997
1.502
1.485
1.431
1.096
P
0.0034
0.0029
0.5566
0.0023
0.1492
0.5337
0.0094
0.1836
0.3485
0.0401
0.3999
0.6043
105
Table 18. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Treatment
N
MIN
6
6
6
6
6
6
33.700
27.020
12.870
16.960
9.380
6.920
45.760
39.060
28.350
25.000
15.620
18.300
40.065
34.597
20.430
21.203
11.125
12.498
3.992
4.668
7.207
3.734
2.297
5.674
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
2.790
2.130
1.420
1.640
1.720
1.190
3.850
2.990
3.240
2.830
3.070
2.420
3.128
2.528
2.338
2:262
2.330
1.935
0.427
0.318
0.930
0.543
0.553
0.513
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
0.010
1.870
0.010
0.160
0.510
0.180
3.830
3.510
1.690
3.170
2.290
3.410
2.373
2.423
0.863
1.380
1.158
1.587
1.540
0.590
0.736
1,074
0.651
1.182
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
7.080
7.520
4.710.
3.520
1.790
1.450
12.580
8.890
7.090
5.830
4.500
3.930
9.057
8.220
5.660
4.712
2.950
2.505
1.925
0.531
0.988
0.855
0.951
0.950
Mammoth/Junction Butte
Fe
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
inside
30-45
outside
Cu
0-15
15-30
30-45
Zn
0-15
15-30
30-45
Mn
0-15
15-30
30-45
MAX
MEAN STD DEV
-ug/g--------
P
0.0542
0.8196
0.5945
0.0203
0.8698
0.2293
0.9388
0.3546
0.4534
0.3299
0.1047
0.4354
106
Table 19. Results of t-test analysis of pH and electrical conductivity for the eight exclosures.
DEPTH
(cm)
Gardiner east
pH
0-15
15-30
30-45
EC
0-15
15-30
30-45
Gardiner west
pH
0-15
15-30
30-45
EC
0-15
15-30
30-45
Treatment
N
MIN
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
7.650
8.000
8.200
8.050
8.750
8.000
8.350
8.500
8.900
8.900
9.150
8.800
7.983
8.300
8.533
8.583
8.967
8.267
0.351
0.265
0.351
0.465
0.202
0.462
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.448
0.237
0.672
0.620
0.676
1.780
0.516
1.680
. 0.940
7.450
7.480
9.400
0.473
1.079
0.817
3.793
2.967
6.460
0.037
0.751
0.135
3.441
3.909
4.097
inside
outside
inside
. outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
8.200
7.200
8.050
7.900
8.300
8.300
8.400
7.650
8.800
8.300
9.100
8.350
8.300
7.367
8.483
8.133
8.800
8.317
0.100
0.247
0.388
0.208
0.436
0.029
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.484
0.236
0.062
0.552
0.660
0.672
0.960
0.364
7.750
1.520
9.550
2.480
0.645
0.292
2.811
0.948
3.643
1.384
0.273
0.065
4:287
0.507
5.115
0.963
.
MAX
MEAN
STD DEV
P
0.2803
0.8890
0.2087
0.2356
0.2087
0.3455
0.0037
0.2409
0.1278
0,0944
0.4964
0.4940
107
Table 19. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Blacktail east
pH
0-15
15-30
30-45
EC
0-15
15-30
30-45
Blacktail west
pH
0-15
15-30
30-45
EC
0-15
15-30
30-45
Treatment
N
MIN
MAX
MEAN
STD DEV
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
7.680
7.480
7.940
7.990
8.420
8.280
8.160
7.770
8.210
8.150
8.510
8.540
7.860
7.597
8.103
8.070
8.453
8.400
0,262
0.153
0.144
0.080
0.049
0.131
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.244
0.152
0.308
0.276
0.380
0.340
0.308
0.236
0.348
0.464
0.428
0.532
0.283
0.201
0.329
0.343
0.409
0.436
0.034
0.044
0.020
0.105
0.026
0.096
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
6.850
7.100
7.300
7.150
7.800
7.050
7.200
7.400
7.400 .
7.550
8.100
7.350
6.983
7.200
7.367
7.300
7.983
7.227
0.189
0.173
0.058
0.218
0.161
0.157
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.218
0.248
0.164
0.188
0.218
0.200
0.516
0.444
0.360
0.289
0.432
0.520
0.383
0.319
0.264
0.226
0.306
0.337
0.152
0.109
0.098
0.055
0.112
0.165
P
0.2067
0.7432
0.5457
0.0642
0.8399
0.6663
0.2174
0.6355
0.0043
0.5808
0.5861
0.8040
108
Table 19. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Treatment
N
MIN
3
3
3
3
3
3
7.460
8.010
7.920
8.150
7.180
8.330
7.740
8.320
7.970
8.280
8.210
8.410
7.607
8.127
7.953
8.203
7.857
8.360
0.140
0.169
0.029
0.068
0.586
0.044
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.412
0.436
0.416
0.524
0.420
0.444
0.608
0.584
0.468
0.876
0.976
0.576
0.489
0.531
0.437
0.656
0.617
0.501
0.104
0.082
0.027
0.192
0.311
0.068
Lamar Valley west
pH
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
30-45
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
7.350
7.640
7.990
8.300
8.460
8.600
7.820
8.010
8.320
8.540
8.560
9.300
7.540
7.863
8.190
8.443
8.497
8.967
0.248
0.197
0.176
0.127
0.055
0.351
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.364
0.280
0.456
0.416
0.472
0.544
0.424
0.416
0.492
0.556
0.480
0.576
0.387
0.355
0.471
0.491
0.475
0.565
0.033
0.069
0.019
0.070
0.005
0.018
Lamar Valley east
pH
0-15
inside
outside
15-30
inside
outside
30-45
inside
outside
EC
0-15
15-30
30-45
EC
0-15
15-30
30-45
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
MAX
MEAN
STD DEV
P
0.0148
0.0042
0.2122
0.6185
0.1222
0.5623
0.1512
0.1128
0.6597
0.5077
0.6597
0.0012
109
Table 19. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Treatment
N
MIN
MAX
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
6.900
7.440
7.460
7.960
8.060
7.370
7.160
8.240
7.550
8.290
8.280
8.630
7.020
7.843
7.493
8.167
8.167
8.147
0.131
0.400
0.049
0.180
0.110
0.679
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.220
0.196
0.272
0.084
0.396
0.300
0.384
3.103
0.396
0.372
0.496
0.400
0.309
1.173
0.348
0.245
0.444
0.343
0.083
1.671
0.067
0.147
0.050
0.052
Junction Butte
PH
inside
0-15
outside
inside
15-30
outside
inside
30-45
outside
3
3
3
3
3
3
6.790
7.000
7.370
7.520
8.340
8.410
7.190
7.220
7.980
7.900
8.600
8.450
6:950
7.127
7.600
7.707
8.447
8.427
0.212
0.114
0.332
0.190
0.136
0.021
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.128
0.136
0.184
0.184
0.256
0.352
0.244
0.216
0.212
0.308
1.420
0.440
0.169
0.175
0.195
0.251
0.725
0.407
0.065
0.040
0.015
0.063
0.614
0.048
Mammoth
pH
0-15
15-30
30-45
EC
0-15
15-30
30-45
EC
0-15
15-30
30-45
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
MEAN
STD DEV
P
0.0276
0.0033
0.9623
0.4219
0.3326
0.0712
0.2718
0.6540
0.8138
0.9093
0.2061
0.4207
110
Table 20. Results of t-test analysis of pH and electrical conductivity for the four groups.
DEPTH
(cm)
Gardiner
pH
0-15
15-30
30-45
EC
0-15
15-30
30-45
Blacktail
PH
0-15
15-30
30-45
EC
0-15
15-30
30-45
Treatment
N
MIN
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
7.650
7.200
8.050
7.900
8.300
8.000.
8.400
8.500
8.900
8.900
9.150
8.800
8.142
7.833
8.508
8.358
8.883
8.292
0.289
0.560
0.332
0.405
0.317
0.294
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
0.448
0.236
0.062
0.552
0.660
0.672
0.960
1.680
7.750
7.450
9.550
9.400
0.559
0.685
1.814
2.371
3.305
3.922
0.198
0.643
2.924
2.616
4.089
3.849
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6.850
6
. 7.100
6
7.300
6 ■
7.150
6
6
. 7.800
7.050
6
8.160
7.770
8.210
8.150
8.510
8.540
7.422
7.398
7.735
7.685
8.218
7.813
0.522
0.262
0.415
0.447
0.279
0.656
6
6
6
6
6
6
0.516
0.444
0.360
0.464
0.432
0.532
0.333
0.260
0.297
0.284
0.358
0.386
0,113
0.098
0.073
0.099
0.092
0.132
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
•
0.218
0.152
0.164
0.188
0.218
0.200
MAX
MEAN
STD DEV
P
0.2583
0.4994
0.0074
0.6558
0.7388
0.7933
0.9239
0.8448
0.1939
0.2592
0.8074
0.6734
111
Table 20. Continued
DEPTH
(cm)
Lamar Valley
pH
0-15
15-30
30-45
EC
0-15
15-30
30-45
15-30
30-45
STD DEV
N
MIN
MAX
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
7.350
7.640
7.920
8.150
7.180
8.330
7.820
8.320
8.320
8.540
8.560
9.300
7.573
7.995
8.072
8.323
8.177
8.663
0.184
0.218
0.172
0.160
0.511
0.401
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
6
6
6
6
6
6
0.364
0.280
0.416
0.416
0.420
0.444
0.608
0.584
0.492
0.876
0.976
0.576
0.438
0.443
0.454
0.573
0.546
0.533
0.089
0.118
0.028
0.158
0.212
0.057
6
6
6
6
6
6
6.790
7.000
7.370
7.520
8.060
7.370
7.190
8.240
7.980
8.290
8.600
8.630
6.985
7.485
7.547
7.937
8.307
8.287
0.162
0.473
0.220
0.302
0.189
0.456
6
6
6
6
6
6
0.128
0.136
0.184
0.084
0.256
0.300
0.384
3.103
0.396
0.372
1.420
0.440
0.239
0.674
0.271
0.248
0.585
0.375
0.102
1.190
0.094
0.101
0.419
0.057
Mammoth/Junction Butte
pH
inside
0-15
outside
inside
15-30
outside
inside
30-45
outside
EC
0-15
MEAN
Treatment
inside
outside
inside
outside
inside
outside
P
0.0047
0.0253
0.0964
0.9399
0.0981
0.8902
0.0342
0.0284
0.9230
0.3940
0.6883
0.2516
Appendix C
Results of t-test analysis of physical properties and the rainfall simulator study.
113
I
Table 21. Results of t-test analysis of soil surface bulk density of the fine-earth fraction (< 2
mm) for the eight exclosures.
Treatment
N
MIN
MAX
MEAN
STD DEV
------------------------g /cm 3---------- ------------
P
Gardiner east
inside
outside
4
4
0.530
0.720
0.670
1.260
,
0.610 K
1.060
0.059
0.242
0.0111
Gardiner west
inside
outside
4
4
0.460
0.590
0.850
1.150
0.672
0.860
0.202
0.238
0.2749
Blacktail east
inside
outside
4
4
0.850
0.680
1.140
1.000
0.975
0.805
0.139
0.148
0.1455
Blacktail west
inside
outside
4
4
0.570
0.580
1.010
1.080
0.762
0.805
0.184
0.210
0.7709
Lamar Valley east
4
inside
4
outside
0.580
0.590
0.670
1.010
0.625
0.835
0.039
0.181
0.0636
Lamar Valley west
4
inside
4
outside
0.520
0.590
0.860
0.850
0.650
0.732
0.157
0.113
0.4268
Mammoth
inside
outside
4
4
0.280
0.660
0.640
0.790
0.462
0.705
0.147
0.059
0.0222
Junction Butte
inside
outside
4
4
0.590
0.810
0.830
1.040
0.662
0.895
0.114
0.107
0.0247
114
Table 22. Results of t-test analysis of soil surface bulk density of the fine-earth fraction (< 2 mm)
for the four groups.
P
MEAN
STD DEV
0.850
1.260
0.641
0.960
0.142
0.246
0.0608
0.570
0.580
1.140
1.080
0.869
0.805
0.189
0.168
0.487
0.520
0.590
0.860
1.010
0.637
0.784
0.107
0.150
0.0413
Mammoth/ J unction Butte
inside
8
0.280
0.660
outside
8
0.830
1.040
0.562
0.800
0.162
0.129
0.0059
N
MIN
MAX
Gardiner
inside
outside
8
8
0.460
0.590
Blacktail
inside
outside
8
8
Lamar Valley
inside
outside
8
8
Treatment
115
Table 23. Results of t-test analysis of soil surface moisture content of bulk density samples for
the eight exclosures.
MAX
-------------%.
MEAN
STD DEV
P
N
MIN
Gardiner east
inside
outside
4
4
11.920
7.540
17.480
20.130
15.605
13.248
2.510
6.252
0.5102
Gardiner west
inside
outside
4
4
8.330
7.430
13.770
14.340
11.342
11.190
2.249
2.868
0.9360
Blacktail east
inside
outside
4
4
5.240
4.350
6.200
5.960
5.790
4.957
0.408
0.696
0.0847
Blacktail west
inside
outside
4
4
1.760
1.560
1.840
2.120
1.800
1.850
0.033
0.233
0.6850
Lamar Valley east
4
inside
4
outside
9.020
9.610
14.300
12.760
10.760
11.435
2.399
1.422
0.6455
Lamar Valley west
4
inside
4
outside
10.680
13.890
17.180
20.920
13.805
16.358
2.877
3.128
0.2749
Treatment
Mammoth
inside
outside
4
4
6.850
3.000
13.580
4.870
10.010
3.998
3.009
0.843
0.0085
Junction Butte
inside
outside
4
4
8.250
12.730
15.000
17.270
12.143
14.218
2.902
2.109
0.2913
116
Table 24. Results of t-test analysis of soil surface moisture content for the four groups.
Treatment
N
MIN
MEAN
MAX
STD DEV
P
%
Gardiner
inside
outside
8
8
8.330
7.430
17.480
20.130
13.474
12.219
3.172
4.636
0.5376
Blacktail
inside
outside
8
8
1.760
1.560
6.200
5.960
3.795
3.404
2.150
1.729
0.6944
Lamar Valley
inside
outside
8
8
9.020
9.610
17.180
20.920
12.283
13.896
2.943
3.462
0.3322
Mammoth/Junction
inside
8
8
outside
6.850
3.000
15.000
17.270
11.076
9.107
2.965
5.662
0.3983
117
Table 25. Results of t-test analysis of double-ring infiltration for the eight exclosures.
Treatment
N
MIN
MAX
MEAN
STD DEV
------------------------cm/hr-----------------------
P
Gardiner east
inside
outside
3
3
1.200
0.400
13.200
2.040
5.333
1.093
6.816
0.849
0.345
Gardiner west
inside
outside
3
3
7.600
9.200
18.400
21.200
12.800
15.867
5.411
6.110
0.551
Blacktail east
inside
outside
3
3
5.604
8.004
9.024
8.400
7.068
8.136
1.892
0.229
0.387
Blacktail west
inside
outside
3
3
18.000
10.000
24.000
21.200
20.400
14.533
3.175
5.897
0.204
Lamar Valley east
3
inside
3
outside
1.200
2.800
10.800
6.400
5.200
4.667
4.996
1.804
0.870
Lamar Valley west
3
inside
3
outside
9.204
4.800
18.000
7.600
13.468
6.667
4.404
1.617
0.066
Mammoth
inside
outside
3
3
6.000
4.800
9.600
6.804
8.000
5.737
1.833
1.008
0.134
Junction Butte
inside
outside
3
3
7.200
5.600
19.200
7.596
11.868
6.399
6.428
1.056
0.220
118
Table 26. Results of t-test analysis of double-ring infiltration for the four groups.
Treatment
N
MIN
MAX
MEAN
STD DEV
------------------------c m /h r----------------------
P
Gardiner
inside
outside
6
6
1.200
0.400
18.400
21.200
9.067
8.480
6.857
8.983
0.901
Blacktail
inside
outside
6
6
5.604
8.004
24.000
21.200
13.734
11,335
7.667
5.119
0.538
Lamar Valley
inside
outside
6
6
1.200
2.800
18.000
7.600
9.334
5.667
6.185
1.883
0.195
Mammoth/Junction Butte
inside
6
6.000
4.800
6
outside
19.200
7.596
9.934
6.068
4.729
0.992
0.078
119
Table 27. Results of t-test analysis of simulated rainfall sediment yield of all three plant-cover
conditions for the five exclosures.
MEAN
STD DEV
kg/ha-------
P
N
MIN
MAX
Gardiner east
Condition 1
inside
outside
3
3
34.870
47.860
106.690
157.960
63.763
92.500
37.911
57.928
0.5119
Condition 2
inside
outside
3
3
68.830
62.140
183.000
213.690
119.757
140.100
58.073
75.869
0.7310
Condition 3
inside
outside
3
3
89.570
123.400
515.810
289.930
287.337
185.880
214.773
90.714
0.4929
Gardiner west
Condition 1
inside
outside
3
3
79.800 447.180
359.690 1067.590
257.973
614.017
183.938
393.770
0.2289
Condition 2
inside
outside
3
3
62.730 517.060
506.580 1456.320
342.717
919.983
244.897
486.658
0.1404
Condition 3
inside
outside
3
3
225.460 653.170 469.127
838.680 1621.600 1199.107
220.000
395.133
0.0490
Treatment
120
Table 27. Continued
STD DEV
P
11.070
26.137
3.279
25.508
0.3676
8.340
• 31.180
6.027
14.873
3.157
14.234
0.3526
2.660
18.270
0.887
11.077
1.536
6.665
0.0613
25.970
113.720
129.940
39.160
75.313
64.598
52.186
0.4928
3
.3
3.300
39.690
64.010
68.490
24.490
50.490
34.255
15.692
0.2980
3
3
4.380
25.830
68.910
100.730
26.173
72.867
37.013
40.966
0.2168
Lamar Valley east
Condition 1
3
inside
3
outside
0.000
0.000
48.600
51.970
16.200
19.337
28.059
28.422
0.8984
Condition 2
inside
outside
3
3
40.870
7.070
72.690
111.090
57.567
67.303
15.968
53.925
0.7792
Condition 3
inside
outside
3
3
0.000
55.530
93.670
131.160
39.873
94.057
48.362
37.835
0.2011
N
MIN
MAX
Blacktail east
Condition 1
inside
outside
3
3
7.400
9.260
13.710
55.480
Condition 2
inside
outside
3
3
2.430
4.940
Condition 3
inside
outside
3
3
0.000
5.110
Blacktail west
Condition 1
inside
outside
3
3
Condition 2
inside
outside
Condition 3
inside
outside
Treatment
0.000
MEAN
kg/ha
-
121
Table 28. Results of t-test analysis of simulated rainfall surface runoff of all three plant-cover
conditions for the five exclosures.
Treatment
Gardiner east
Condition 1
inside
outside
N
MIN
MAX
MEAN
■----------- milliliters------
STD DEV
P
313.000 564.000 425.667 127.453
234.000 3427.000 1540.333 1673.739
0.3142
Condition 2
inside
outside
3
960.000 1280.000 1120.000 160.000
4546.000 3400.667 1080.289
2400.000
3
0.0224
Condition 3
Inside
outside
3 2200.000 4269.000 2929.667 1161.448
3 1988.000 4034.000 3111.667 1037.753
0.8495
3
3
Gardiner west
Condition 1
inside
outside
3
3
800.000 1570.000 1263.333
1340.000 1570.000 1481.667
408.207
123.929
0.4255
Condition 2
inside
outside
3
3
1606.000 2612.000 2229.333 544.472
1606.000 4053.000 2768.667 1228.029
0.5251
Condition 3
inside
outside
3 2360.000 3370.000 2982.667 544.574
3 2360.000 5153.000 3488.333 1471.717
0.6065
122
Table 28. Continued
Treatment
N
MIN
MAX
MEAN
STD DEV
P
Blacktail east
Condition 1
inside
outside
3
3
65.000
200.000
217.000
300.000
138.667
250.333
76.107
50.003
0.1009
Condition 2
inside
outside
3
3
134.000
450.000
367.000
534.000
211.667
486.333
134.523
43.132
0.0281
Condition 3
inside
outside
3
3
0.000
300.000
200.000
900.000
88.333
578.000
102.021
302.410
0.0565
Blacktail west
Condition 1
inside
outside
3
3
217.000
568.000
640.000
211.000
398.333
310.875
217.859
0.4409
Condition 2
inside
outside
3
3
0.000 860.000 420.000
425.000 1641.000 1082.000
430.349
613.895
0.2009
Condition 3
inside
outside
3
3
117.000 384.000 279.333
940.000 1400.000 1166.667
142.535
230.072
0.0047
83.333
83.333
144.338
76.376
1.0000
0.000
-
Lamar Valley easl
Condition 1
3
inside
3
outside
0.000
0.000
250.000
150.000
Condition 2
inside
outside
3
3
134.000 566.000 283.333 244.927
450.000 2576.000 1748.667 1138.677
0.0948
Condition 3
inside
outside
3
3
0.000 475.000 ' 280.667 248.991
65.000 2831.000 1483.000 1384.328
0.2128
123
Table 29. Results of t-test analysis of simulated rainfall sediment yield of all three plant-cover
conditions for the two groups.
Treatment
N
MIN
MAX
STD DEV
MEAN
■ixy/iiu..... .
P
Gardiner
Condition 1
inside
outside
6
6
34.870 447.180
47.860 1067.590
160.868
353.258
159.447
380.734
0.2802
Condition 2
inside
outside
6
6
62.730 517.060
62.140 1456.320
231.237
530.042
200.629
528.680
0.2246
Condition 3
inside
outside
6
6
89.570 653.170
123.400 1621.600
378.232
692.493
218.461
611.336
0.2631
Blacktail
Condition 1
inside
outside
6
6
0.000
9.260
113.720
129.940
25.115
50.725
43.706
45.553
0.3438
Condition 2
inside
outside
6
6
2.430
4.940
64.010
68.490
15.258
32.682
23.992
23.666
0.2341
Condition 3
inside
outside
6
6
0.000
5.110
68.910
100.730
13.530
41.972
27.217
42.831
0.1998
124
Table 30. Results of t-test analysis of simulated rainfall surface runoff of all three runs for the
two groups.
Treatment
N
MIN
MAX
MEAN
----------- milliliters------
STD DEV
P
Gardiner
Condition 1
inside
outside
6
6
313.000 1570.000 844.500 532.594
234.000 3427.000 1511.000 1061.950
0.1994
Condition 2
inside
outside
6
6
960.000 2612.000 1674.667 705.695
1606.000 4546.000 3084.667 1090.807
0.0240
Condition 3
inside
outside
6 2200.000 4269.000 2956.167 811.820
6 1988.000 5153.000 3300.000 1157.461
0.5646
Blacktail
Condition 1
inside
outside
6
6
0.000
200.000
568.000
640.000
174.833
324.333
206.261
162.961
0.1938
Condition 2
inside
outside
6
6
0.000 860.000
425.000 1641.000
315.833
784.167
307.147
507.875
0.0821
Condition 3
inside
outside
6
6
0.000 384.000
300.000 1400.000
183.833
872.333
152.428
402.135
0.0029