Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Ecological site F043AY579ID
Ashy Mountain Slopes
30-45" PZ Cryic
Clearwater Mountains
Last updated: 10/14/2020
Accessed: 04/21/2026
-
Search
Major Land Resource Area or ecological site by name and/or ID.
PreviousSectionsNextGeneral information
Provisional. A provisional ecological site description has undergone quality control and quality assurance review. It contains a working state and transition model and enough information to identify the ecological site.
MLRA notes
Major Land Resource Area (MLRA): 043A–Northern Rocky Mountains
Major Land Resource Area (MLRA): 043A–Northern Rocky Mountains
Description of MLRAs can be found in: United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land Resource Regions and Major Land Resource Areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296.
Available electronically at: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ref/?cid=nrcs142p2_053624#handbookLRU notes
Most commonly found in LRU 43A10 (Clearwater Mountains). Also found in areas of 43A11 (Bitterroot Metasedimentary Zone). Climate parameters were obtained from PRISM and other models for the area. Landscape descriptors are estimated from USGS DEM products and their derivatives.
Classification relationships
Relationship to Other Established Classifications:
United States National Vegetation Classification (2008) – A3614 Abies lasiocarpa – Picea engelmannii Rocky Mountain Forest & Woodland Alliance
Washington Natural Heritage Program. Ecosystems of Washington State, A Guide to Identification, Rocchio and Crawford, 2015 – Subalpine – Montane Mesic Forest
Description of Ecoregions of the United States, USFS PN # 1391, 1995 - M333 Northern Rocky Mt. Forest-Steppe-Coniferous Forest-Alpine Meadow Province
Level III and IV Ecoregions of WA, US EPA, June 2010 – 15r Okanogan-Colville Xeric Valleys and Foothills, 15w Western Selkirk Maritime Forest, 15x Okanogan Highland Dry Forest, 15y Selkirk Mountains.Ecological site concept
This ESD in distinguished by an overstory of subalpine fir or mountain hemlock and a diverse understory. Shrubs include rustyleaf menzesia, sitka alder, blue huckleberry, big huckleberry, twinflower and grouse whortleberry. Forbs include Piper’s anemone, queencup beadlily, wild ginger, mountain arnica, Idaho goldthread, rattlesnake plantain, western meadowrue, coolwort foamflower and round leaved violet. These soils have developed in thick (>7 inches) Mazama tephra deposits over alluvium or residuum and colluvium from granitic and metamorphic rock. Some may have till associated with local montane glaciation. The soils range from moderately deep to very deep and have adequate available water capacity to a depth of 40 inches. The soils are moderately well or well-drained.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree (1) Abies lasiocarpa
(2) Tsuga mertensianaShrub (1) Vaccinium membranaceum
(2) Menziesia ferrugineaHerbaceous (1) Clintonia uniflora
(2) Xerophyllum tenaxPhysiographic features
Physiographic Features
Landscapes: Mountains, Foothills
Landform: mountain slopes, ridges, floodplains, stream terraces, structural benches
Elevation (m): Total range = 1085 to 2205 m
(3,560 to 7,230 feet)
Central tendency = 1435 to 1670 m
(4,700 to 5,475 feet)
Slope (percent): Total range = 0 to 85 percent
Central tendency = 25 to 45 percent
Aspect: Range: 230-10-175
Central tendency: 285-10-75Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Landforms (1) Mountains > Mountain slope
(2) Mountains > Ridge
(3) Mountains > Flood plain
(4) Mountains > Stream terrace
(5) Mountains > Structural bench
Flooding frequency None Ponding frequency None Elevation 4700 – 5475 ft Slope 25 – 45 % Water table depth 80 in Aspect NW, N, NE Table 3. Representative physiographic features (actual ranges)
Flooding frequency None Ponding frequency None Elevation 3560 – 7230 ft Slope 0 – 85 % Water table depth 24 – 80 in Climatic features
Climatic Features
Frost-free period (days): Total range = 35 to 125 days
Central tendency = 50 to 80 days
Mean annual precipitation (cm): Total range = 840 to 1985 mm
(33 to 78 inches)
Central tendency = 1265 to 1455 mm
(50 to 60 inches)
MAAT (C): Total range = 2.6 to 7.5
(37 to 46 F)
Central tendency = 4.5 to 5.7
(40 to 42 F)
Climate Stations: none">Influencing water features
Water Table Depth: 24 to >80 inches ( median >80 inches)<br />
<br />
Flooding: <br />
Frequency: None <br />
Duration: None<br />
<br />
Ponding: <br />
Frequency: None <br />
Duration: NoneSoil features
Representative Soil Features
This ecological site is associated with several soil components (e.g. Entic Cryandepts, Redraven, Andic Cryochrepts, Hucberit, Vaywood, Narnett, Trappercreek, Amook, Fico, McCay, Fluvents, Baldeagle, Andic Cryumbrepts, Meadowport, and Ericson). The soil components can be grouped into: Typic Haplocryands, Andic Haplocryepts, Andic Haplocryalfs, Typic Vitricryands, Andic Dystrocryepts, and Andic Humicryepts. These soils have developed in thick (>7 inches) Mazama tephra deposits over alluvium or residuum and colluvium from granitic and metamorphic rock. Some may have till associated with local montane glaciation. The soils range from moderately deep to very deep and have adequate available water capacity to a depth of 40 inches. The soils are moderately well or well-drained.
Fragment content of surface: 0 to 15 percent (median = 5%)
Content FragmentsTable 4. Representative soil features
Parent material (1) Volcanic ash
(2) Alluvium
(3) Colluvium – granite
(4) Colluvium – metamorphic rock
(5) Residuum – granite
(6) Residuum – metamorphic rock
Surface texture (1) Medial silt loam
(2) Gravelly, medial silt loam
(3) Medial loam
Drainage class Well drained Permeability class Moderate Depth to restrictive layer 80 in Surface fragment cover >3" Not specified Available water capacity
(0-40in)5.3 in Calcium carbonate equivalent
(0-60in)Not specified Electrical conductivity
(0-60in)Not specified Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-60in)5.8 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(10-60in)20 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(10-60in)20 % Table 5. Representative soil features (actual values)
Drainage class Moderately well drained to well drained Permeability class Slow to moderately rapid Depth to restrictive layer 20 – 80 in Surface fragment cover >3" 0 – 0.1 % Available water capacity
(0-40in)3.7 – 8 in Calcium carbonate equivalent
(0-60in)0 % Electrical conductivity
(0-60in)0 mmhos/cm Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-60in)4.5 – 7.3 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(10-60in)5 – 65 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(10-60in)0 – 50 % Ecological dynamics
Ecological Dynamics of the Site
Forests in this ESD have substantial herbaceous and shrub cover, and often have a closed canopy. Climax stands are dominated by subalpine fir and mountain hemlock. Large spruces persist for centuries in old-growth stands. A variety of species, including climax species and spruce, occur in early succession. Seral lodgepole pine can dominate in several habitat types, but it dies out 120 to 160 years after stand establishment (Cooper and others 1991). Western larch is common on sites with good drainage. Douglas-fir, grand fir, and western white pine occur on moderate sites, but rarely dominate. Whitebark pine intergrades with lodgepole pine at high elevations.
Most stands regenerate readily after fire. Species composition varies because of variation in drainage, moisture and temperature regimes, seed source, and fire history. Patchy, mixed-severity burns further complicate structural development and species composition. Where severe fires were less than about 160 years apart in presettlement times, lodgepole pine may dominate seral stands. Lodgepole pine may also codominate with Engelmann spruce, or may occur in combination with other seral species and climax species. Cold temperatures, wet soils, and luxuriant undergrowth favor early dominance by Engelmann spruce and climax species, especially if long fire-free intervals have excluded lodgepole pine. Stands that were drier before fire follow this pathway if water tables rise appreciably after canopy removal. (from Smith and Fischer, 1997, pp. 75-78)State and transition model
Custom diagramStandard diagram
More interactive model formats are also available. View Interactive Models
More interactive model formats are also available. View Interactive Models
Click on state and transition labels to scroll to the respective textEcosystem states
State 1 submodel, plant communities
State 1
Reference
Moist sites have substantial herbaceous and shrub cover, and often have a closed canopy. Climax stands are dominated by subalpine fir and mountain hemlock. Large spruces persist for centuries in old-growth stands. A variety of species, including climax species and spruce, occur in early succession. Seral lodgepole pine can dominate in several habitat types, but it dies out 120 to 160 years after stand establishment. Western larch is common on sites with good drainage.
Community 1.1
ReferenceOverstory dominated by subalpine fir, Engelmann spruce and/or mountain hemlock. Where fire or site conditions have kept stands more open western larch, Douglas-fir, and lodgepole pine may be present. Understory will have subalpine fir, mountain hemlock, and Engelmann spruce where ground fires have been absent. Understory dominated by mesic forbs such as queencup beadlily, coolwort foamflower, Idaho goldthread, rattlesnake plantain and Pacific trillium.
Dominant plant species
-
subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa), tree
-
mountain hemlock (Tsuga mertensiana), tree
-
Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii), tree
-
western larch (Larix occidentalis), tree
-
Rocky Mountain Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca), tree
-
lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta var. latifolia), tree
-
grand fir (Abies grandis), tree
-
thinleaf huckleberry (Vaccinium membranaceum), shrub
-
rusty menziesia (Menziesia ferruginea), shrub
-
Sitka alder (Alnus viridis ssp. sinuata), shrub
-
Utah honeysuckle (Lonicera utahensis), shrub
-
common beargrass (Xerophyllum tenax), other herbaceous
-
darkwoods violet (Viola orbiculata), other herbaceous
-
bride's bonnet (Clintonia uniflora), other herbaceous
-
western meadow-rue (Thalictrum occidentale), other herbaceous
-
Piper's anemone (Anemone piperi), other herbaceous
-
sidebells wintergreen (Orthilia secunda), other herbaceous
-
western rattlesnake plantain (Goodyera oblongifolia), other herbaceous
-
Idaho goldthread (Coptis occidentalis), other herbaceous
-
fragrant bedstraw (Galium triflorum), other herbaceous
-
Pacific trillium (Trillium ovatum ssp. ovatum), other herbaceous
Community 1.2
Stand Initiation, Shrub/Herb PhaseStand replacing fires convert site back to shrub/herb phase with tree regeneration dependent on seed source and fire severity. Dense stands of lodgepole pine can be present if sufficient seed was available in the ground. Western larch can also establish quickly with sufficient seed source and bare soil. Mixed species stand could develop with all seral species present including Douglas-fir, larch, and lodgepole. Shrubs will re-sprout and compete with tree seedlings.
Community 1.3
Stem ExclusionDense stands of mixed or single tree species will develop and start to compete for space and nutrients.
Community 1.4
Understory Re-initiationAs stands mature mortality gaps occur from stand competition and insects create areas for understory release. Shrubs and herbs increase along with tree regeneration.
Pathway 1.1A
Community 1.1 to 1.2Stand replacing fire moving site back to the shrub/herb phase.
Pathway 1.2A
Community 1.2 to 1.3Time. Mixed or single seral species tree regeneration move out of the seedling/sapling phase into dense pole stands.
Pathway 1.3B
Community 1.3 to 1.2Stand replacing fire back to the shrub/herb phase.
Pathway 1.3A
Community 1.3 to 1.4Stands move out of the pole stage through competition opening up canopy gaps for understory shrubs and herbs to increase. Tree regeneration will include shade tolerant subalpine fir and Engelmann spruce.
Pathway 1.4A
Community 1.4 to 1.1Stands mature into mixed stand of seral species with some subalpine fir, mountain hemlock or Engelmann spruce in overstory and understory.
Pathway 1.4B
Community 1.4 to 1.2Stand replacing fire converts site back to the shrub/herb phase
State 2
Fire Exclusion
Lack of fire allows shade tolerant species (subalpine fir, mountain hemlock) to dominate site. Scattered large individuals of Engelmann spruce may persist in stand. Shrubs include fools huckleberry, and thinleaf huckleberry. Forbs include queencup beadlily, rattlesnake plantain, western meadowrue and beargrass. Shrubs such as fools huckleberry and thinleaf huckleberry will increase in absence of fire.
State 3
Lodgepole Pine
Lodgepole seedlings dominate stand soon after fire. When the prefire stand supported pines with serotinous cones, lodgepole pine seedlings often germinate in profusion the year after fire, with densities exceeding 10,000 per acre. When the prefire stand supported pines bearing mainly nonserotinous cones, restocking is slower. Douglas-fir regeneration is common on relatively warm sites. Engelmann spruce and subalpine fir also occur, but competition and shade from lodgepole seedlings suppress these species. Where fire return frequency is ~150 years PICO has potential to dominate reproduction and stand composition through several fire cycles.
Transition T1A
State 1 to 2
Reference
Fire ExclusionFire exclusion for long time periods will lead to an overstory of subalpine fir or mountain hemlock and Engelmann spruce with both species also in the understory. On the moister sites Engelmann spruce will be more prominent.
Transition T1B
State 1 to 3
Reference
Lodgepole PineStand replacing fir recurs over an interval <150 years. PICO is present as seed source in stand and successfully dominates regeneration.
Restoration pathway R2A
State 2 to 1
Fire Exclusion
ReferenceOverstory management and prescribed fire to increase seral species establishment.
Restoration pathway R3A
State 3 to 1
Lodgepole Pine
ReferenceOverstory management and fire suppression to increase species diversity
Additional community tables
Table 6. Community 1.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 7. Community 1.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 8. Community 1.3 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 9. Community 1.4 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Interpretations
Supporting information
References
-
. 1998. NRCS National Forestry Manual.
-
Cooper, S.V., K.E. Neiman, R. Steele, and D.W. Roberts. 1991. Forest Habitat types of Northern Idaho, A Second Approximation.
-
Finklin, A.I. 1983. Climate of Priest River Experimental Forest, northern Idaho. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-159. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, UT. 53.
-
Smith and Fischer. 1997. Fire Ecology of the Forest Habitat Types of Northern Idaho.
-
Williams, C.K., B.F. Kelley, B.G. Smith, and T.R. Lillybridge. October, 1995. Forested Plant Associations of the Colville National Forest.
-
Williams, C.K. and T.R. Lillybridge. 1983. Forested Plant Associations of the Okanogan National Forest
R6-Ecol-132b-1983.
Approval
Curtis Talbot, 10/14/2020
Rangeland health reference sheet
Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health is a qualitative assessment protocol used to determine ecosystem condition based on benchmark characteristics described in the Reference Sheet. A suite of 17 (or more) indicators are typically considered in an assessment. The ecological site(s) representative of an assessment location must be known prior to applying the protocol and must be verified based on soils and climate. Current plant community cannot be used to identify the ecological site.
Author(s)/participant(s) Contact for lead author Date 04/21/2026 Approved by Approval date Composition (Indicators 10 and 12) based on Annual Production Indicators
-
Number and extent of rills:
-
Presence of water flow patterns:
-
Number and height of erosional pedestals or terracettes:
-
Bare ground from Ecological Site Description or other studies (rock, litter, lichen, moss, plant canopy are not bare ground):
-
Number of gullies and erosion associated with gullies:
-
Extent of wind scoured, blowouts and/or depositional areas:
-
Amount of litter movement (describe size and distance expected to travel):
-
Soil surface (top few mm) resistance to erosion (stability values are averages - most sites will show a range of values):
-
Soil surface structure and SOM content (include type of structure and A-horizon color and thickness):
-
Effect of community phase composition (relative proportion of different functional groups) and spatial distribution on infiltration and runoff:
-
Presence and thickness of compaction layer (usually none; describe soil profile features which may be mistaken for compaction on this site):
-
Functional/Structural Groups (list in order of descending dominance by above-ground annual-production or live foliar cover using symbols: >>, >, = to indicate much greater than, greater than, and equal to):
Dominant:
Sub-dominant:
Other:
Additional:
-
Amount of plant mortality and decadence (include which functional groups are expected to show mortality or decadence):
-
Average percent litter cover (%) and depth ( in):
-
Expected annual annual-production (this is TOTAL above-ground annual-production, not just forage annual-production):
-
Potential invasive (including noxious) species (native and non-native). List species which BOTH characterize degraded states and have the potential to become a dominant or co-dominant species on the ecological site if their future establishment and growth is not actively controlled by management interventions. Species that become dominant for only one to several years (e.g., short-term response to drought or wildfire) are not invasive plants. Note that unlike other indicators, we are describing what is NOT expected in the reference state for the ecological site:
-
Perennial plant reproductive capability:
Print Options
Sections
Font
AAAAOther
PrintThe Ecosystem Dynamics Interpretive Tool is an information system framework developed by the USDA-ARS Jornada Experimental Range, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, and New Mexico State University.
Accessibility statement
