Fire Effects Information System (FEIS)
FEIS Home Page

SPECIES: Baccharis pilularis


   photo courtesy of
Rhizosphere Image Gallery
Steinberg, Peter D. 2002. Baccharis pilularis. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online]. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer). Available: [].


Baccharis pilularis ssp. consanguinea (DC.) C.B. Wolf [47]


chaparral broom
coyote brush
coyote bush
dwarf baccharis

The currently recognized scientific name of coyotebrush is Baccharis pilularis DC. (Asteraceae) [30,32]. The species is polymorphic, with a coastal prostrate form previously known as B. p. ssp. pilularis and a more widespread erect form previously known as B. p. ssp. consanguinea (DC.) C.B. Wolf [32]. The most recent taxonomic treatment of the genus has eliminated subspecies distinctions for coyotebrush because the 2 forms intergrade completely [32,45]. In this summary, where information is pertinent to only 1 former subspecies, the entity will be described as either the erect or prostrate form.


No special status

No entry


SPECIES: Baccharis pilularis
Coyotebrush occurs in the outer Coast Ranges from northern Baja California, Mexico, and San Diego County, California, north to Tillamook County, Oregon. The species also occurs in the Channel Islands and as isolated populations in the Cascade and Sierra Nevada foothills from Butte County to Tuolumne County, California [29,47]. Cal Flora provides a distributional map of coyotebrush.

FRES20 Douglas-fir
FRES21 Ponderosa pine
FRES22 Western white pine
FRES27 Redwood
FRES28 Western hardwoods
FRES34 Chaparral-mountain shrub
FRES42 Annual grasslands


3 Southern Pacific Border

K005 Mixed conifer forest
K006 Redwood forest
K009 Pine-cypress forest
K010 Ponderosa shrub forest
K011 Western ponderosa forest
K026 Oregon oakwoods
K028 Mosaic of K002 and K026
K029 California mixed evergreen forest
K030 California oakwoods
K033 Chaparral
K034 Montane chaparral
K035 Coastal sagebrush
K036 Mosaic of K030 and K035
K048 California steppe

232 Redwood
233 Oregon white oak
234 Douglas-fir-tanoak-Pacific madrone
244 Pacific ponderosa pine-Douglas-fir
245 Pacific ponderosa pine
246 California black oak
248 Knobcone pine
249 Canyon live oak
250 Blue oak-foothills pine
255 California coast live oak

109 Ponderosa pine shrubland
110 Ponderosa pine-grassland
201 Blue oak woodland
202 Coast live oak woodland
203 Riparian woodland
204 North coastal shrub
205 Coastal sage shrub
206 Chamise chaparral
207 Scrub oak mixed chaparral
208 Ceanothus mixed chaparral
214 Coastal prairie
215 Valley grassland
613 Fescue grassland

Coyotebrush is a dominant shrub in northern coastal scrub communities and a minor component of coastal beach communities, coastal sage scrub, chaparral, foothill woodlands, closed-cone pine forests, and mixed-evergreen forests. Coyotebrush grows in prostrate form in northern coastal scrub, a vegetation type present from southern Oregon to San Mateo County, California. Associated species of coyotebrush include San Diego bush monkeyflower (Diplacus auranticus), Monterey coast Indian paintbrush (Castilleja lattifolia), Pacific dewberry (Rubus vitifolius), open lupine (Lupinus varicolor), cow parsnip (Heracleum lanatum), seaside woollysunflower (Eriophyllum staechadifolium), salal (Gaultheria shallon), western pearlyeverlasting (Anaphalis margaritacea), coastal wormwood (Artemisia suksdorfi), and seaside fleabane (Erigeron glaucus) [47,59,65].

Coastal strand communities occur along most of the California coast on sandy beaches and dunes. Coyotebrush grows in a prostrate form with beach wormwood (Artemisia pycnocephala), silver burr ragweed (Ambrosia chamissonis), silky beach peavine (Lathyrus littoralis), bush lupine (Lupinus arboreus), chamisso bush lupine (Lupinus chamissonis), verbena (Abronia spp.), beach primrose (Camissonia cheiranthifolia), beach saltbush (Atriplex leucophylla), beach strawberry (Fragaria chiloensis), Douglas' bluegrass (Poa douglasii), California heathgoldenrod (Ericameria ericoides), and slenderleaf iceplant (Mesembryanthemum nodiflorum) [3,47]. In coastal sage scrub of the South Coast Ranges, coyotebrush grows in prostrate and erect forms. Coastal sage scrub associates include California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), white sage (Salvia apiana), black sage (S. mellifera), purple sage (S. leucophylla), eastern Mojave buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), lemonade sumac (Rhus integrifolia), California brittlebrush (Encelia californica), wedgeleaf horkelia (Horkelia cuneata), and golden-yarrow (Eriophyllum confertiflorum) [2]. Coyotebrush typically grows in erect form in chaparral, where associates include chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), California coffeeberry (Rhamnus californica), Nuttall's scrub oak (Quercus dumosa), birchleaf mountain-mahogany (Cercocarpus betuloides), Our Lord's candle (Yucca whipplei), California flannelbush (Fremontodendron californicum), hollyleaf cherry (Prunus ilicifolia), ceanothus (Ceanothus spp.), manzanita (Arctostaphylos spp.), and chaparral pea (Pickeringia montana) [4,7,47].

Coyotebrush grows in erect form in shrub communities seral to foothill woodlands, closed-cone pine forests, and mixed-evergreen forests. In foothill woodlands coyotebrush, wedgeleaf ceanothus (Ceanothus cuneatus), California redbud (Cercis orbiculata), and rock gooseberry (Ribes quercetorum) are seral to gray pine (Pinus sabiana), Coulter pine (P. coulteri), blue oak (Q. douglasii), canyon live oak (Q. chrysolepis), coast live oak (Q. agrifolia), interior live oak (Q. wislizenii), valley oak (Q. lobata), California bay (Umbellularia californica), and California buckeye (Aesculus californica) [43,47]. Closed-cone pine forest associates include bishop pine (P. muricata), Monterey pine (P. radiata), Mexican pinyon (P. cembroides), Monterey cypress (Cupressus macrocarpa), and Gowen cypress (C. goveniana). Mixed evergreen forests include tanoak (Lithocarpus densiflorus), Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii), coast Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii), golden chinkapin (Chrysolepis chrysophylla), California bay, bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), canyon live oak, California black oak (Q. kelloggii), Pacific dogwood (Cornus nuttallii), and ceanothus [47].

Vegetation classifications describing coyotebrush-dominated communities include: [3,36,40,52,53,59]


SPECIES: Baccharis pilularis
Coyotebrush is a native evergreen shrub that grows in prostrate form on dunes and coastal areas with onshore winds and salt spray and in erect form at higher elevations inland [11,45]. Both forms are much-branched [11]. The matted growth form ranges from 4 to 6 inches  (10-15 cm) in height and 3 to 12 feet (1-4 m) wide [47]. The arborescent form grows up to 12 feet (4 m) high [11,47]. The prostrate form has smaller leaves with fewer dentations, but the forms are otherwise similar [47]. Female flowerheads are discoid and many flowered, without ray florets. They are 0.16 to 0.25 inch (0.4-0.63 cm) long, and clustered at branch tips or in leaf axils. Male flowers are slightly smaller [11,15,47]. Achenes are 0.039 to 0.079 inch (1-2 mm) long with a 0.24 to 0.39 inch- (6-10 mm) long pappus [29,47]. Seeds are very light, weighing on the order of 10-4 grams [12].

Coyotebrush grows a taproot up to approximately 10.5 feet (3.2 m) long; lateral roots are also well developed [9,68]. Individuals live 10 to 15 years, but basal sprouting and layering may extend this lifespan [30].


Breeding system: Members of the Baccharis genus are dioecious.

Pollination: Steffan [58] identified 55 insect species visiting male and female flowers in late September and early October. The most abundant species included Argentine ants (Linepithema humile), parasitic hymenoptera (Agathis gibbosa, Synopeas spp., and Dolichogenidea spp.), and honey bees (Apis mellifera).

Seed production: No information.

Seed dispersal: Achenes are dispersed primarily by wind, but also by mammals [48,68].

Seed banking: No information.

Germination: Coyotebrush seed germinates well on mineral soil and has no stratification or temperature requirement. Most germination occurs within about 15 to 30 days; germination rates within this time frame ranged from 40 to 92% in the greenhouse [48].

Seedling establishment/growth: Coyotebrush seedling growth is rapid during spring; high root growth rates continue as long as the taproot grows faster than moisture recedes. Mortality often results if roots fail to reach adequate moisture, so best establishment of coyotebrush in grasslands occurs in wet years [68]. Seedling establishment is best on mineral soil; coyotebrush is excluded or reduced by competition from grasses and other species that have larger seeds with more carbohydrate storage. DaSilva and Bartolome [12] found high soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus) seedling density reduced survivorship and growth of coyotebrush seedlings, particularly under low-moisture, controlled conditions. Growth rates over the 1st 9 weeks of life showed coyotebrush's high root:shoot ratio, typical of taprooted shrubs in dry areas. Results are summarized below (data are means).

Age of seedlings (days) Root (cm) Shoot (cm) Root: shoot ratio
6 9.0 0.15 6.0
13 4.0 0.3 13.3
17 5.6 0.4 14.0
35  6.0 0.5 12.0
49  12.0 2.0 6.0
56 26.0 2.0 13.0
63 50.0 2.5 20.0

Asexual regeneration: Coyotebrush sprouts from the root crown and roots. It may also grow roots where branch nodes contact soil [30].

Coastal populations of the prostrate form of coyotebrush experience moderate temperatures with summer fog, seaspray, and heavy onshore winds [45]. Annual precipitation ranges from 9.8 to 17.7 inches (250-450 mm), with most falling between November and April [36]. Inland populations, which occur up to 2,460 feet (750 m) (occasionally up to 4,920 feet (1500 m)), are exposed to colder winters and hotter summers. Annual precipitation in these habitats ranges from 12 to 30 inches (305-762 mm) [45].

Coyotebrush occurs on a range of soil types but is best adapted to medium- to coarse-textured soils [63].

Coyotebrush is a shade-intolerant species. Along with other small-seeded coastal sage shrubs, it colonizes actively eroding or alluviating areas such as dunes and gravel bars. Exposed mineral soil gives coyotebrush an advantage over perennial grasses and chaparral shrubs [36]. Coyotebrush's successional status varies with habitat type [68]. In California grasslands, it is a late seral species that invades and increases in the absence of fire or grazing [30,56,68]. The rate of invasion is generally positively correlated with the amount of spring rainfall, because wet springs maximize early root growth. Coyote bush invasion of grasslands is of structural importance because it facilitates the establishment of other coastal sage species. Shrub cover subsequently increases numbers of rabbits and small mammals that reduce herbaceous vegetation and favor shrub development [25,54]. Thus, well-established coyotebrush stands generally have depauperate understories [30]. Coyotebrush is a common dominant in coastal sage scrub, but because seedling growth is poor in shade, coyotebrush does not regenerate under a closed shrub canopy [68].  Coast live oak, California bay, or other shade tolerant species replace coastal sage scrub and other coyotebrush-dominated areas, particularly when fire and grazing are excluded [49,68].

Generally coyotebrush-dominated scrub transition to mixed evergreen forest takes place in about 50 years and is reversible with periodic fire [27]. Coyotebrush can be a small component of early successional communities following clearcuts of tanoak, coast Douglas-fir, Pacific ponderosa pine, Pacific madrone, oak, incense cedar (Calocedrus decurrens), Pacific yew (Taxus brevifolia), and/or canyon live oak [24,43]

Coyotebrush seed is generally dispersed from October to January. Germination occurs after late fall or early winter rains [12]. Coyotebrush growth is slow until about March, when root and shoot growth rates increase with warmer temperatures and spring rains. Growth slows with declining soil moisture in late May [68]. Plants flower from July to October, and fruit ripens from September to November [12].  Rains in September typically allow a high rate of leaf addition [30]. Seasonal development is slightly later in inland than in coastal populations [48].


SPECIES: Baccharis pilularis
Fire adaptations: Coyotebrush is moderately fire tolerant [63]. In areas of high shrub density, heat at coyotebrush root crowns is often too low to cause mortality, and coyotebrush is able to resprout from the root crown and roots [30,42]. Fires in such communities reduce crown cover but are not likely to reduce shrub density [42]. Fires that occur in areas with low shrub density and high herbaceous biomass create enough heat at the root crown to girdle and kill plants [30,42]. In oak woodlands and chaparral, most postfire recovery of coyotebrush and other dominants is by sprouting. In coastal sage scrub, fire creates canopy gaps with exposed mineral soil that allow coyotebrush and other coastal sage scrub species (most of which also have small, light seeds) to establish from seed and outcompete herbaceous vegetation [36]. Postfire sprouting of is also an important method of regeneration in coastal sage scrub dominates such as coyotebrush and California sagebrush [35,66,67].

Fire regimes: Fire frequency largely determines the extent of grasslands, coastal sage scrub, chaparral, and oak woodlands and whether coyotebrush is present in each of these types. In grasslands, low fire frequency permits establishment of coyotebrush and the gradual exclusion of herbaceous species [27,64]. In coastal sage scrub, chaparral, and oak woodland, decreasing fire frequency allows coyotebrush to be replaced by more shade-tolerant species [64]. In mixed evergreen forests, closed-cone pine stands, and coast Douglas-fir stands, coyotebrush is only important in early seral vegetation after fire or logging [27]. Transition from coyotebrush scrub to mixed evergreen forest can occur in 50 years without fire. In some cases, however, tree recruitment is limited by crown closure, and fire exclusion does not result in type conversion but rather maintenance of a dynamic mosaic wherein reversion and succession allow both vegetation types to persist [8].

One study of vegetation dynamics in coastal sage scrub, grassland, and oak woodland near Santa Barbara found without fire or livestock grazing, coastal sage scrub was replaced by oak woodland at a rate of 0.3% annually. Grassland to coastal sage scrub transition occurred at a rate of 0.69% per year, and oak woodland reverted to grassland at a rate of 0.08% per year. On burned areas without livestock grazing or on unburned sites with livestock grazing, rates of transition of grassland to coastal scrub and coastal scrub to oak woodland were lower. On areas burned without grazing or grazed without burning the rate of oak woodland reversion to grassland was higher than on areas with neither burning nor grazing [8].

Coastal sage and coastal scrub: These community types are fire-dependent, with prominent shrubs establishing by seed and sprouting [35,36,66,67]. It is a flammable vegetation type that may burn 1 to 2 years after fire if dry conditions exist. With fire in less than 5-year intervals, or with overgrazing, coastal scrub generally reverts to annual nonnative grassland  [34,59]. Fire exclusion in coastal sage scrub and mesic chaparral communities allows coast live oak, California bay, and other shade tolerant species to increase in density and reduce understory diversity and abundance [44,64]. In the absence of fire, coast live oak recruitment in chaparral and grassland is commensurate with their aerial extents; in coastal sage scrub, however, coast live oak recruitment exceeds that expected by chance alone. This is primarily because coyotebrush is a nurse shrub for shade-tolerant tree seedlings, particularly coast live oak and California bay. With tree development, coyote bush is reduced or excluded [8].

Chaparral: Coyotebrush is generally absent from mature chaparral, but after fire it occurs with other relatively short-lived shrubs and sub-shrubs including California sagebrush, rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus spp.), California brittlebrush, yerba santa (Eriodictyon spp.), eastern Mojave buckwheat, golden-yarrow,  monkeyflower (Mimulus spp.), and others [26]. Shade created by abundant sprouting of chaparral shrubs limits coyotebrush seedling establishment; seedlings are most abundant in gaps where nonsprouting shrubs are eliminated and mineral soil is exposed [34,69]. As in coast scrub associations, high fire frequency can create annual grasslands of native and nonnative species [34].

Coastal prairie: Fire exclusion in coastal prairie allows coyotebrush establishment, with best establishment in wet years [39,68]. Complete conversion of purple needlegrass (Nassella pulchra) tussock grassland to coyotebrush/ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus) stands has been observed with 24 years of fire exclusion [39]. Coyotebrush forms a closed canopy in about 2 to 3 years after invasion [30]. Keeley [34] maintains that California prairies that have been invaded by shrubs were, in most cases, disclimaxes maintained by fires set by Native Americans.

Greenlee and Langenheim [23] described fire regimes of potential coyotebrush habitats in the Monterey Bay area; their results are summarized below. In all habitats there was a large decrease of fire frequency in the recent era, beginning in 1929 with restrictions against burning. "Probable mean fire interval" refers to estimates of fire intervals that are derived from historical or very limited physical evidence.

Fire regime Vegetation where burning concentrated Vegetation where burning incidental Recorded or calculated mean fire intervals (years) Probable mean fire intervals (years)
Lightning   Prairies   1-15
  Coastal sage   1-15
  Chaparral   10-30
  Oak woodland   10-30
Mixed evergreen     15-30
Redwood forest   135  
Aboriginal (until approximately 1792) Prairies   1-2  
Coastal sage   1-2  
  Chaparral 18-21  
Oak woodland   1-2  
  Mixed evergreen   50-75
  Redwood forest 17-82  
Spanish (1792 to 1848)   Prairies   1-15
  Coastal sage   1-15
Chaparral   19-21  
  Oak woodland   2-30
  Mixed evergreen   50-75
  Redwood forest 82  
European-American (1847 to 1929)   Prairies   20-30
  Coastal sage   20-30
  Chaparral 10-27  
  Oak woodland 50-75  
Mixed evergreen   7-29  
Redwood forest   20-50  
Recent (1929 to present)   Prairies   20-30
  Coastal sage 155  
  Chaparral 155  
  Oak woodland 225  
  Mixed evergreen 215  
  Redwood forest 130  

Fire return intervals for plant communities and ecosystems in which coyotebrush occurs are presented below. Find further fire regime information for the plant communities in which this species may occur by entering the species name in the FEIS home page under "Find Fire Regimes".

Community or Ecosystem Dominant Species Fire Return Interval Range (years)
California steppe Festuca-Danthonia spp. < 35 [51]
Pacific ponderosa pine* Pinus ponderosa var. ponderosa 1-47 [1]
coastal Douglas-fir* Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii 40-240 [1,46,55]
California mixed evergreen Pseudotsuga menziesii var. m.-Lithocarpus densiflorus-Arbutus menziesii < 35 
California oakwoods Quercus spp. < 35 [1]
coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 2 to 75 [23]
canyon live oak Quercus chrysolepis <35 to 200 
blue oak-foothills pine Quercus douglasii-Pinus sabiniana <35 
Oregon white oak Quercus garryana < 35 [1]
California black oak Quercus kelloggii 5-30 [51
redwood Sequoia sempervirens 5-200 [1,17,61]
*fire return interval varies widely; trends in variation are noted in the species summary

Tall shrub, adventitious bud/root crown
Small shrub, adventitious bud/root crown
Initial off-site colonizer (off-site, initial community)


SPECIES: Baccharis pilularis
Fire is most detrimental to coyotebrush when high temperatures are present at stem bases. These conditions girdle and kill root crowns, particularly those less than 1 inch (2.5 cm) in diameter. Conversely, fires with peak temperatures at canopy height only top-kill coyotebrush. McBride and Heady [42] compared the effects of 2 types of fire on coyotebrush: 1 group had aerial portions burned, simulating a crown fire in a mature shrub community, and 1 group had bases burned, simulating a prairie fire with herbaceous fuels. All 11 individuals exposed to simulated crown fire sprouted from the root crown within 5 weeks. Of 11 individuals exposed to simulated prairie fire, 8 died, and small-diameter stems were most susceptible to fire. The authors stated fire could be effective in reducing coyote bush invasion of grasslands when succession was in early stages, but mature coyotebrush stands could not be removed by fire. A field study, however, found prescribed fire in mixed native and nonnative grassland was ineffective in reducing coyotebrush invasion. Coyotebrush cover and litter (as well as those of associated shrubs) were reduced, but shrub density was unchanged [37].

No entry.

Coyotebrush sprouts from the root crown  and roots after top-kill by fire [28,42]. If communities burn during recovery, coyotebrush can be nearly eliminated, as sprouting ability is lessened with reburning [34,59]. 

Coyotebrush establishes well from seed following fire. The seeds are light, easily dispersed, and germinate well on mineral soil [48,68]. One study of coastal chaparral near Santa Barbara found postfire seedling density of coyotebrush averaged 1,787 per acre (4,425/ha) 1 year after fire [69].

No entry

Prescribed fire in coastal sage scrub has been recommended to reduce fuel loading and risk of property-damaging wildfire, and to reduce establishment of coast live oak and other trees [64]. Prescribed burning has been used in coastal prairie to reduce invasion of coyotebrush and other shrubs [19,42]. Fire managers in southern California have made fire control lines in riparian woodlands when planning broadcast burning of adjacent chaparral and coastal scrub. Control lines are burned to create a fuelbreak [13]. Green's [22] 1981 report offers much information on prescribed fire planning, fuels, ignition techniques, and fire behavior in California shrub communities.

Beyers and Wirtz [6] suggested the endangered California gnatcatcher could potentially be adversely affected by prescribed burning in coastal sage scrub. The species requires approximately 50% shrub cover and over 3.3 feet (1 m) in shrub height for nesting territories. Under optimal conditions, this stand structure may be achieved in 4 or 5 years after fire. If connectivity exists between burned and unburned habitats, prescribed fire can be used without adverse impact. The authors recommend maintaining both mature and burned scrub areas to reduce fuel loads while mitigating impacts to shrub-dependent species such as the California gnatcatcher.

From the perspective of protecting property from fire, fuel modification is of greatest value in the immediate area around development. Recommendations for property protection include: planting trees away from structures, trimming low branches, selecting less flammable landscaping species, using nonflammable construction materials, and, where trees already grow near homes, removing overhanging branches [14,18]. See the Firewise website for specific recommendations. Domestic goat grazing (at a rate of 240 goats/acre (600 goats/ha) for 1 day), in conjunction with prescribed fire, has been used to reduce fuel loading and continuity in dense shrub communities housing developments [62].


SPECIES: Baccharis pilularis
Livestock seldom browse mature coyotebrush, but cattle sometimes uproot seedlings [42,68]. Trampling and grazing generally limit coyotebrush establishment in grasslands. Fencelines often become ecotones between grasslands and coyotebrush scrub [42].

Palatability/nutritional value: Coyotebrush has low protein value and low palatability to grazers and browsers [63]. Little evidence is found of livestock browsing mature shrubs [42].

Cover value: Coyotebrush establishment in grasslands improves cover for rabbits and other small mammals that graze herbaceous biomass. Increasing small mammal populations thus facilitate shrub development and/or establishment and reduce the rate of reversion to grassland. Coyote bush/grassland ecotones often have a boundary of bare ground maintained by small mammal grazing [41].

Coyotebrush has been used for restoration and erosion control projects. It can be established from seed, bare root plantings, and containerized stock  [48,63]. Restoration projects where coyotebrush is planted from containers are most successful in the long term if a sex ratio of 1:5 (males to females) is used [15]. If adjacent sites have viable populations, natural establishment can be as effective as seeding [10]. The dwarf form of coyotebrush is most commonly used as a hardy cover shrub on slopes [11].

Seed can be collected with a cloth and is best if dried in a warm ventilated room or in sun without wind. Sometimes the pappus is removed before planting. In nurseries, seeds are sown in fall or early spring using sandy soil or a vermiculite, perlite, and sphagnum moss mix [48].

The dwarf form of coyotebrush is a common ornamental groundcover in the Southwest that is fire-resistant when watered [14,31,48].

Coastal sage scrub is present in about 15% of its former habitat, primarily because of agricultural, industrial, and residential development [59]. Mature coyotebrush stands in coastal sage scrub are generally replaced by shade-tolerant species, and maintenance of coast scrub, if desired, requires periodic disturbance [68]. 

Coyotebrush facilitates coastal scrub development in grassland. Grazing and/or prescribed fire have been recommended where the management objective is grassland maintenance [68].

Coyotebrush is susceptible to 2,4-D [50].

Coyotebrush commonly supports galls created by the host- specific midge Rhopalomyia californica [45].

Baccharis pilularis: References

1. Arno, Stephen F. 2000. Fire in western forest ecosystems. In: Brown, James K.; Smith, Jane Kapler, eds. Wildland fire in ecosystems: Effects of fire on flora. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-vol. 2. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 97-120. [36984]

2. Axelrod, Daniel I. 1978. The origin of coastal sage vegetation, Alta and Baja California. American Journal of Botany. 65(10): 1117-1131. [5563]

3. Barbour, Michael G.; Johnson, Ann F. 1977. Beach and dune. In: Barbour, M. G.; Major, J., eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley and Sons: 223-261. [27610]

4. Bentley, Jay R. 1967. Conversion of chaparral areas to grassland: techniques used in California. Agric. Handb. 328. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 35 p. [195]

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

6. Beyers, Jan L., Wirtz, William O., II. 1997. Vegetative characteristics of coastal sage scrub sites used by California gnatcatchers: implications for management in a fire-prone ecosystem. In: Greenlee, Jason M., ed. Proceedings, 1st conference on fire effects on rare and endangered species and habitats; 1995 November 13-16; Coeur d'Alene, ID. Fairfield, WA: International Association of Wildland Fire: 81-89. [28126]

7. Bjorndalen, Jorn Erik. 1978. The chaparral vegetation of Santa Cruz Island, California. Norwegian Journal of Botany. 25: 255-269. [7851]

8. Callaway, Ragan M.; Davis, Frank W. 1993. Vegetation dynamics, fire, and the physical environment in coastal central California. Ecology. 74(5): 1567-1578. [21675]

9. Canadell, J.; Jackson, R. B.; Ehleringer, J. R.; [and others]. 1996. Maximum rooting depth of vegetation types at the global scale. Oecologia. 108(4): 583-595. [27670]

10. D'Antonio, Carla M.; Howald, Ann M. 1990. Evaluating the effectiveness of hydroseed mixes, topsoil conservation and other revegetation techniques: a case study in Santa Barbara Co., California. In: Hughes, H. Glenn; Bonnicksen, Thomas M., eds. Restoration `89: the new management challenge: Proceedings, 1st annual meeting of the Society for Ecological Restoration; 1989 January 16-20; Oakland, CA. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Arboretum, Society for Ecological Restoration: 338-348. [14710]

11. Dale, Nancy. 1986. Flowering plants: The Santa Monica Mountains, coastal and chaparral regions of southern California. Santa Barbara, CA: Capra Press. In cooperation with: The California Native Plant Society. 239 p. [7605]

12. DaSilva, Paul G.; Bartolome, James W. 1984. Interaction between a shrub, Baccharis pilularis subsp. consanguinea (Asteraceae), and an annual grass, Bromus mollis (Poaceae), in coastal California. Madrono. 31(2): 93-101. [3198]

13. Dougherty, Ron; Riggan, Philip J. 1982. Operational use of prescribed fire in southern California chaparral. In: Conrad, C. Eugene; Oechel, Walter C., technical coordinators. Proceedings of the symposium on dynamics and management of Mediterranean-type ecosystems; 1981 June 22-26; San Diego, CA. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-58. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station: 502-510. [6055]

14. East Bay Municipal Utility District. 1992. The fire-fighting landscape. Oakland, CA: East Bay Municipal Utility District. 3 p. Pamphlet. [17664]

15. Evans, J. Michael. 1987. Direct seeding and container plant installation techniques: justification for simultaneous use in revegetation. In: Rieger, John P.; Williams, Bradford K., eds. Proceedings of the second native plant revegetation symposium; 1987 April 15-18; San Diego, CA. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Arboretum, Society for Ecological Restoration & Management: 28-31. [4091]

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

17. Finney, Mark A.; Martin, Robert E. 1989. Fire history in a Sequoia sempervirens forest at Salt Point State Park, California. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 19: 1451-1457. [9845]

18. Franklin, Scott E. 1997. Chaparral management techniques for development: public and governmental perceptions. In: Greenlee, Jason M., ed. Proceedings, 1st conference on fire effects on rare and endangered species and habitats; 1995 November 13-16; Coeur d'Alene, ID. Fairfield, WA: International Association of Wildland Fire: 145-148. [28131]

19. Gaidula, Peter. 1978. A summary of controlled burning programs within the California State Park System. Unpublished report on file at: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT. 2 p. [26464]

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

21. Gray, John T. 1983. Competition for light and a dynamic boundary between chaparral and coastal sage scrub. Madrono. 30(1): 43-49. [3763]

22. Green, Lisle R. 1981. Burning by prescription in chaparral. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-51. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 36 p. [19800]

23. Greenlee, Jason M.; Langenheim, Jean H. 1990. Historic fire regimes and their relation to vegetation patterns in the Monterey Bay area of California. The American Midland Naturalist. 124(2): 239-253. [15144]

24. Hagar, Donald C. 1960. The interrelationships of logging, birds, and timber regeneration in the Douglas-fir region of northwestern California. Ecology. 41(1): 116-125. [34500]

25. Halligan, J. Pat. 1974. Relationship between animal activity and bare areas associated with California sagebrush in annual grassland. Journal of Range Management. 27(5): 358-362. [10851]

26. Hanes, Ted L. 1977. California chaparral. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Major, Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley and Sons: 417-469. [7216]

27. Heady, Harold F.; Foin, Theodore C.; Hektner, Mary M.; [and others]. 1977. Coastal prairie and northern coastal scrub. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Major, Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley and Sons: 733-760. [7211]

28. Hellmers, Henry; Ashby, William C. 1958. Growth of native and exotic plants under controlled temperatures and in the San Gabriel Mountains California. Ecology. 39(3): 416-428. [19679]

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

30. Hobbs, R. J.; Mooney, H. A. 1987. Leaf and shoot demography in Baccharis shrubs of different ages. American Journal of Botany. 74(7): 1111-1115. [6148]

31. Hodel, D. R.; Pittenger, D. R. 1994. Responses of eight groundcover species to renovation by mowing. Journal of Environmental Horticulture. 12(1): 4-7. [40564]

32. Kartesz, John T.; Meacham, Christopher A. 1999. Synthesis of the North American flora (Windows Version 1.0), [CD-ROM]. Available: North Carolina Botanical Garden. In cooperation with the Nature Conservancy, Natural Resources Conservation Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [2001, January 16]. [36715]

33. Keeley, Jon E. 1991. Seed germination and life history syndromes in the California chaparral. The Botanical Review. 57(2): 81-116. [36973]

34. Keeley, Jon E. 2002. Native American impacts on fire regimes of the California coastal ranges. Journal of Biogeography. 29(3): 303-320. [41422]

35. Keeley, Jon E.; Keeley, Sterling C. 1984. Postfire recovery of California coastal sage scrub. The American Midland Naturalist. 111(1): 105-117. [5587]

36. Kirkpatrick, J. B.; Hutchinson, C. F. 1980. The environmental relationships of Californian coastal sage scrub and some of its component communities and species. Journal of Biogeography. 7: 23-38. [5608]

37. Klinger, Rob; Messer, Ishmael. 2001. The interaction of prescribed burning and site characteristics on the diversity and composition of a grassland community on Santa Cruz Island, California. In: Galley, Krista. E. M.; Wilson, Tyrone P., eds. Proceedings of the invasive species workshop: The role of fire in the control and spread of invasive species; Fire conference 2000: the first national congress on fire ecology, prevention, and management; 2000 November 27 - December 1; San Diego, CA. Misc. Publ. No. 11. Tallahassee, FL: Tall Timbers Research Station: 66-80. [40678]

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

39. Langstroth, Robert Peter. 1991. Fire and grazing ecology of Stipa pulchra grassland: a field study at Jepson Prairie, California. Davis, CA: University of California. 75 p. Thesis. [27349]

40. Latting, June, ed. 1976. Symposium proceedings--plant communities of southern California. Special Publication No. 2. Berkeley, CA: California Native Plant Society. 164 p. [1414]

41. Martinez, Enrique; Fuentes, Eduardo. 1993. Can we extrapolate the California model of grassland-shrubland ecotone? Ecological Applications. 3(3): 417-423. [40562]

42. McBride, Joe; Heady, Harold F. 1968. Invasion of grassland by Baccharis pilularis DC. Journal of Range Management. 21: 106-108. [28359]

43. McDonald, Philip M. 1999. Diversity, density, and development of early vegetation in a small clear-cut environment. Res. Pap. PSW-RP-239. Albany, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station. 22 p. [36204]

44. Mensing, Scott A. 1998. 560 years of vegetation change in the region of Santa Barbara, California. Madrono. 45(1): 1-11. [30134]

45. Miller, William B.; Weis, Arthur E. 1999. Adaptation of coyote brush to the abiotic environment and its effects on susceptibility to a gall-making midge. Oikos. 84(2): 199-208. [40240]

46. Morrison, Peter H.; Swanson, Frederick J. 1990. Fire history and pattern in a Cascade Range landscape. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-254. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 77 p. [13074]

47. Munz, Philip A. 1973. A California flora and supplement. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1905 p. [6155]

48. Olson, David F., Jr. 1974. Baccharis L. baccharis. In: Schopmeyer, C. S., technical coordinator. Seeds of woody plants in the United States. Agric. Handb. 450. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service: 244-246. [7463]

49. Parikh, Anuja; Gale, Nathan. 1998. Coast live oak revegetation on the central coast of California. Madrono. 45(4): 301-309. [30607]

50. Parker, Robert, compiler. 1982. Reaction of various plants to 2,4-D, MCPA, 2,4,5-T, silvex and 2,4-DB. EM 4419 [Revised]. Pullman, WA: Washington State University, College of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension. 61 p. In cooperation with: U.S. Department of Agriculture. [1817]

51. Paysen, Timothy E.; Ansley, R. James; Brown, James K.; [and others]. 2000. Fire in western shrubland, woodland, and grassland ecosystems. In: Brown, James K.; Smith, Jane Kapler, eds. Wildland fire in ecosystems: Effects of fire on flora. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-42-volume 2. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station: 121-159. [36978]

52. Paysen, Timothy E.; Derby, Jeanine A.; Black, Hugh, Jr.; [and others]. 1980. A vegetation classification system applied to southern California. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-45. Berkeley, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station. 33 p. [1849]

53. Philbrick, Ralph N., Haller, J. R. 1977. The southern California islands. In: Barbour, Michael G.; Malor, Jack, eds. Terrestrial vegetation of California. New York: John Wiley and Sons: 893-906. [7210]

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

55. Ripple, William J. 1994. Historic spatial patterns of old forests in western Oregon. Journal of Forestry. 92(11): 45-49. [33881]

56. Rowntree, Lester B. 1994. Afforestation, fire, and vegetation management in the East Bay Hills of the San Francisco Bay Area. Yearbook, Association of Pacific Coast Geographers. 56: 7-30. [39750]

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

58. Steffan, Shawn A. 1997. Flower-visitors of Baccharis pilularis De Candolle subsp. consanguinea (De Candolle) C.B. Wolf (Asteraceae) in Berkeley, California. Pan-Pacific Entomologist. 73(1): 52-54. [40563]

59. Stephenson, John R.; Calcarone, Gena M. 1999. Mountain and foothills ecosystems: habitat and species conservation issues. In: Stephenson, John R.; Calcarone, Gena M. Southern California mountains and foothills assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-172. Albany, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station: 15-60. [35514]

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

61. Stuart, John D. 1987. Fire history of an old-growth forest of Sequoia sempervirens (Taxodiaceae) forest in Humboldt Redwoods State Park, California. Madrono. 34(2): 128-141. [7277]

62. Tsiouvaras, C. N.; Havlik, N. A.; Bartolome, J. W. 1989. Effects of goats on understory vegetation and fire hazard reduction in coastal forest in California. Forest Science. 35(4): 1125-1131. [9767]

63. U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Resource Conservation Service. 2002. PLANTS database (2002), [Online]. Available: /. [34262]

64. Van Dyke, Eric; Holl, Karen D.; Griffin, James R. 2001. Maritime chaparral community transition in the absence of fire. Madrono. 48(4): 221-229. [41368]

65. Westman, W. E. 1983. Xeric Mediterranean-type shrubland associations of Alta and Baja California and the community/continuum debate. Vegetatio. 52: 3-19. [12000]

66. Westman, W. E.; O'Leary, J. F.; Malanson, G. P. 1981. The effects of fire intensity, aspect and substrate on post-fire growth of Californian coastal sage scrub. In: Margaris, N. S.; Mooney, H. A., eds. Components of productivity of Mediterranean climate regions--basic and applied aspects. The Hague, Netherlands: Dr. W. Junk Publishers: 151-179. [13593]

67. Westman, Walter E. 1981. Diversity relations and succession in Californian coastal sage scrub. Ecology. 62(1): 170-184. [6128]

68. Williams, K.; Hobbs, R. J. 1989. Control of shrub establishment by springtime soil water availability in an annual grassland. Oecologia. 81(1): 62-66. [39461]

69. Zedler, Paul H.; Scheid, Gerald A. 1988. Invasion of Carpobrotus edulis and Salis lasiolepis after fire in a coastal chaparral site in Santa Barbara County, California. Madrono. 35(3): 196-201. [4814]

FEIS Home Page