Skip to content
A sweeping vista of grasslands.
Grasslands
Annual Grasslands Health Assessment Condition, Trend & Confidence

Annual

Central
Significant concern condition, declining trend, and low confidence
Coastal
Significant concern condition, declining trend, and low confidence

Perennial

Central
Significant concern condition, declining trend, and moderate confidence
Coastal
Significant concern condition, no change in trend, and low confidence
Overview:

Grasslands are a vital part of the region’s ecosystems, providing habitat for multitudes of different plant and animal species. However, California’s grasslands have undergone one of the most dramatic shifts worldwide, with native grasslands—once dominated by diverse perennial bunchgrasses and forbs—largely replaced by non-native annual grasses. Today, only fragments of native grassland remain.

This assessment looked at non-native annual and native perennial grasslands separately to better understand differences in their ecological health. Unfortunately, many past surveys did not distinguish between these grassland types, limiting confidence in these assessments. However, based on what is known, the overall extent of grasslands across the EHA Study Area is in relatively good condition; however, the quality of native perennial grasslands is concerning. Key metrics in the Central EHA Study Area such as native forb richness, native grass cover, and residual dry matter are of significant concern, however native forb cover remains in good condition. Much less is known about the conditions or trends of perennial grasslands in the Coastal EHA Study Area. Non-native, annual grasslands in both study areas are likewise in a condition of significant concern for native forb cover and richness.

To improve management, more detailed monitoring is needed that tracks perennial grasslands separately. Non-native annual grasslands can benefit from carefully managed disturbance, such as grazing, to maintain plant diversity, while native perennial grasslands require tailored conservation and monitoring to ensure their survival and recovery.

Annual Grasslands metrics, with their respective condition, trend, and confidence.
Central Study AreaCoastal Study Area
Metric 1: Proportion grassland per subwatershed area: All grasslands
ConditionGood Good
TrendNo ChangeNo Change
ConfidenceModerateModerate
Metric 2: Percent cover native forbs: Annual grassland (<10% native grasses)
ConditionSignificant ConcernSignificant Concern
TrendDecliningDeclining
ConfidenceLowLow
Metric 3: Native forb richness: Annual grassland (<10% native grasses)
ConditionSignificant ConcernSignificant Concern
TrendDecliningDeclining
ConfidenceLowLow
Metric 4: Residual dry matter: Annual grassland (<10% perennial grasses)
ConditionSignificant ConcernSignificant Concern
TrendNo ChangeNo Change
ConfidenceModerateModerate
Perennial Grasslands metrics, with their respective condition, trend, and confidence.
Central Study AreaCoastal Study Area
Metric 1: Percent cover Stipa pulchra in perennial grassland (>10% native grass/S. pulchra)
ConditionSignificant ConcernUnknown
TrendDecliningUnknown
ConfidenceModerateLow
Metric 2: Percent cover native forbs: Perennial grassland (>10% native grass/S. pulchra)
ConditionSignificant ConcernUnknown
TrendDecliningUnknown
ConfidenceModerateLow
Metric 3: Native forb richness: Perennial grassland (>10% native grass/S. pulchra)
ConditionSignificant ConcernUnknown
TrendDecliningUnknown
ConfidenceModerateLow
Metric 4: Residual dry matter: Perennial grassland (>10% native grass/S. pulchra)
ConditionSignificant ConcernSignificant Concern
TrendNo ChangeNo Change
ConfidenceLowLow
Symbology used show overall condition, trend, and confidence of each indicator
Back To Top