Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Ecological site F088XY012MN

Very Dry Sandy Upland Coniferous Forest

Last updated: 8/12/2024
Accessed: 05/29/2026

Home / esd CATALOG / MLRA 088X / ecological site F088XY012MN

USC

Metric

General 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): 088X–Northern Minnesota Glacial Lake Basins

MLRA 88 consists of the lake beds of glacial Lakes Agassiz, Upham, and Aitkin. These vast glacial lake beds were formed by meltwaters associated with the last glaciation of the Wisconsin age. The large, flat, wet landscapes are filled with lacustrine lake sediments, wave-washed glacial till, and vast expanses of organic soils. This area is entirely in Minnesota and makes up about 11,590 square miles (30,019 square kilometers).

The western boundary of MLRA 88 with MLRA 56B is gradual. MLRA 56B is a portion of the Red River Valley that was formed by glacial Lake Agassiz and is dominantly prairie. The southern boundary of MLRA 88 with MLRA 57 consists of distinct moraines that formed from the glacial drift sediments of Late Wisconsin age. The eastern and southeastern boundaries are with portions of MLRAs 90A and 93A. These MLRAs are in a distinct glaciated region of sediments of the Rainy and Superior Lobes, and much of MLRA 93A is bedrock controlled (USDA-Ag Handbook 296, 2022).

Ecological site concept

This site is a very dry jack pine-red pine woodland and located on dunes, beach ridges, and outwash plains. Soils are course textured, well drained to excessively drained, and have a low available water capacity. The greater depth to water table differentiates this site from the Dry Sandy Upland Forest. Historically, fire was a common disturbance that influenced plant community composition.

Associated sites

F088XY012MN	Very Dry Sandy Upland Coniferous Forest The Dry Sandy Upland Coniferous Forest ecological site is located on uplands with soils that are course textured and moderately well drained to somewhat excessively drained. Available water capacity ranges from 2-5 inches. The depth to water table is shallower in the Dry Sandy Upland Coniferous Forest.

F088XY012MN

Very Dry Sandy Upland Coniferous Forest

The Dry Sandy Upland Coniferous Forest ecological site is located on uplands with soils that are course textured and moderately well drained to somewhat excessively drained. Available water capacity ranges from 2-5 inches. The depth to water table is shallower in the Dry Sandy Upland Coniferous Forest.

Similar sites

F088XY012MN	Very Dry Sandy Upland Coniferous Forest The Dry Sandy Upland Coniferous Forest ecological site is located on uplands with soils that are course textured and moderately well drained to somewhat excessively drained. Available water capacity ranges from 2-5 inches. The depth to water table is shallower in the Dry Sandy Upland Coniferous Forest.

F088XY012MN

Very Dry Sandy Upland Coniferous Forest

Table 1. Dominant plant species

Tree	(1) Pinus banksiana (2) Pinus resinosa
Shrub	(1) Vaccinium angustifolium (2) Amelanchier
Herbaceous	(1) Maianthemum canadense (2) Pteridium aquilinum

Download full description

Physiographic features

This upland site is located on dunes, beach ridges, and outwash plains. No flooding or ponding occurs. The available water capacity ranges from 2-4.5 inches (5 - 11 centimeters) and the vegetation consists of tree species tolerant of dry soil conditions.

Table 2. Representative physiographic features

Slope shape across	(1) Convex
Slope shape up-down	(1) Linear
Landforms	(1) Dune (2) Beach ridge (3) Outwash plain
Runoff class	Negligible to low
Flooding frequency	None
Ponding frequency	None
Elevation	590 – 2030 ft
Slope	1 – 8 %
Ponding depth	0 in
Water table depth	80 – 0 in
Aspect	Aspect is not a significant factor

Climatic features

The average annual precipitation is 25 to 28 inches (635 to 711 millimeters). Most of the rainfall comes from convective thunderstorms during the growing season. Snowfall generally occurs from October through April. The average annual temperature is 43 to 46 degrees F (6 to 8 degrees C). The mean frost free period ranges from 83 to 110 days, with the mean freeze-free period ranging from 117 to 135 days.

Table 3 Representative climatic features

Frost-free period (characteristic range)	80-110 days
Freeze-free period (characteristic range)	120-140 days
Precipitation total (characteristic range)	30-30 in
Frost-free period (actual range)	80-110 days
Freeze-free period (actual range)	110-140 days
Precipitation total (actual range)	20-30 in
Frost-free period (average)	100 days
Freeze-free period (average)	130 days
Precipitation total (average)	30 in

Characteristic range

Actual range

Bar

Line

Figure 1. Monthly precipitation range

Characteristic range

Actual range

Bar

Line

Figure 2. Monthly minimum temperature range

Characteristic range

Actual range

Bar

Line

Figure 3. Monthly maximum temperature range

Bar

Line

Figure 4. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature

Figure 5. Annual precipitation pattern

Figure 6 Annual average temperature pattern

Climate stations used

(1) INTL FALLS INTL AP [USW00014918], International Falls, MN
(2) LITTLEFORK 10 SW [USC00214809], Big Falls, MN
(3) BIG FALLS [USC00210746], Big Falls, MN
(4) WASKISH 4NE [USC00218700], Big Falls, MN
(5) RED LAKE INDIAN AGCY [USC00216795], Ponemah, MN
(6) BAUDETTE INTL AP [USW00094961], Baudette, MN
(7) WARROAD [USC00218679], Warroad, MN
(8) EVELETH WWTP [USC00212645], Eveleth, MN
(9) HIBBING CHISHOLM HIBBING AP [USW00094931], Hibbing, MN
(10) FLOODWOOD 3 NE [USC00212842], Floodwood, MN
(11) SANDY LAKE DAM LIBBY [USC00217460], McGregor, MN
(12) GRAND RPDS FOREST LAB [USC00213303], Grand Rapids, MN
(13) POKEGAMA DAM [USC00216612], Cohasset, MN

Soil features

Soil parent materials include eolian sands and glaciofluvial deposits. Soils are somewhat excessively drained to excessively drained and very deep, with no water table occurring within 80 inches of the soil surface. The soil available water capacity is low and results in plant species that are highly tolerant of dry conditions.

Soils in the Very Dry Sandy Upland Coniferous Forest fall within the Alfisol and Entisol orders. These soils can be further classified as Inceptic Hapludalfs, Psammentic Hapludalfs, Lamellic Udipsamments, and Typic Udipsamments. Soil series within this ecological site include Zimmerman, Marquette, Graycalm, Sugarbush, Faunce, Menahga, Sartell, and Two Inlets.

Table 4. Representative soil features

Parent material	(1) Eolian sands (2) Glaciofluvial deposits
Surface texture	(1) Loamy fine sand (2) Loamy sand (3) Loamy very fine sand (4) Sand (5) Fine sand (6) Sandy loam
Drainage class	Somewhat excessively drained to excessively drained
Permeability class	Rapid
Depth to restrictive layer	80 – 0 in
Soil depth	80 – 0 in
Surface fragment cover <=3"	Not specified
Surface fragment cover >3"	Not specified
Available water capacity (0-40in)	2.1 – 4.4 in
Soil reaction (1:1 water) (0-10in)	5.1 – 7.3
Subsurface fragment volume <=3" (0-80in)	0 – 13 %
Subsurface fragment volume >3" (0-80in)	0 – 1 %

Ecological dynamics

This site is a very dry jack pine-birch woodland. Fire was a historical disturbance that influenced plant species composition. Young woodlands post-fire are dominated by jack pine and paper birch. Mature woodlands are pine dominated with an understory variability dependent upon the fire regime. (MN DNR, 2005)

State and transition model

More interactive model formats are also available. View Interactive Models
Click on state and transition labels to scroll to the respective text

Ecosystem states

1. Reference State

2. Logged State

T1A	-	Site is logged
R2A	-	Restoration inputs; forest stand management

State 1 submodel, plant communities

1.1. Mature Dry Pine Community

1.2. Early Successional Dry Pine Community

1.3. Mid Successional Dry Pine Community

1.1A	-	Severe Disturbance
1.2A	-	Absence of disturbance (55-75 Years)
1.3A	-	No severe disturbance > 75 Years
1.3B	-	Severe site disturbance

State 2 submodel, plant communities

2.1. Logged community

2.2. Invaded Community

2.1A	-	Invasive species established
2.2A	-	Eradication of invasive species

State 1
Reference State

This is a dry jack pine - red pine woodland on course textured soils. Sites occur on undulating sandy outwash plains, lake plains, and moraines. Historically, the site was influenced by fire events which occurred approximately every 40-50 years. (MN DNR, 2005).

Dominant plant species

jack pine (Pinus banksiana), tree
red pine (Pinus resinosa), tree
eastern white pine (Pinus strobus), tree
white spruce (Picea glauca), tree
paper birch (Betula papyrifera), tree
quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), tree
lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium), shrub
serviceberry (Amelanchier), shrub
roughleaf ricegrass (Oryzopsis asperifolia), grass
Canada mayflower (Maianthemum canadense), grass

Community 1.1
Mature Dry Pine Community

This community is characterized by a lack of severe disturbance for over 75 years. The plant community composition is dominated by red pine. Jack pine, white pine, white spruce, and paper birch are also present. (MN DNR, 2005)

Dominant plant species

red pine (Pinus resinosa), tree
jack pine (Pinus banksiana), tree
eastern white pine (Pinus strobus), tree
white spruce (Picea glauca), tree
paper birch (Betula papyrifera var. papyrifera), tree

Community 1.2
Early Successional Dry Pine Community

This young woodland community is 0-55 years of age and generally dominated by jack pine. Red pine, quaking aspen, paper birch, and white pine are also on site. (MN DNR, 2005)

Dominant plant species

jack pine (Pinus banksiana), tree
red pine (Pinus resinosa), tree
quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), tree
paper birch (Betula papyrifera var. papyrifera), tree
eastern white pine (Pinus strobus), tree

Community 1.3
Mid Successional Dry Pine Community

The mid successional woodland stage (55-75 years of age) is characterized by a decline in jack pine and an increase in red pine and white pine. (MN DNR, 2005)

Dominant plant species

red pine (Pinus resinosa), tree
eastern white pine (Pinus strobus), tree

Pathway 1.1A
Community 1.1 to 1.2

A severe disturbance, such as a catastrophic fire, will transition the reference community to an early successional community.

Pathway 1.2A
Community 1.2 to 1.3

Time and natural plant community growth will transition the site to community 1.3.

Pathway 1.3A
Community 1.3 to 1.1

Time and natural plant community succession will transition the community to a mature, established wood over 75 years of age.

Pathway 1.3B
Community 1.3 to 1.2

A severe disturbance, such as a major fire event, will transition the community back to an earlier successional stage.

State 2
Logged State

Removal of canopy species for timber harvest creates an open canopy and a highly disturbed understory. Shrubs will dominate post logging. A very dense shrub layer can impede tree regeneration. Heavy machinery are a common seed source for non-native species

Dominant plant species

serviceberry (Amelanchier), shrub
prickly rose (Rosa acicularis), shrub
smooth rose (Rosa blanda), shrub
beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), shrub
prairie willow (Salix humilis), shrub
blueberry (Vaccinium), shrub
poverty oatgrass (Danthonia spicata), grass
ricegrass (Oryzopsis), grass

Community 2.1
Logged community

With the canopy removed, the initial post-logging community will be dominated by shrubs.

Dominant plant species

beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), shrub
serviceberry (Amelanchier), shrub
blueberry (Vaccinium), shrub
prairie willow (Salix humilis), shrub
poverty oatgrass (Danthonia spicata), grass
ricegrass (Oryzopsis), grass

Community 2.2
Invaded Community

This community is identified by the presence of non-native plant species. Heavy machinery and soil disturbance provide an opportunity for invasives to become established. The invasive species on site will depend on the seed source.

Dominant plant species

common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica), shrub
Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), other herbaceous
purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), other herbaceous

Pathway 2.1A
Community 2.1 to 2.2

Invasive species are introduced to the site and become established.

Pathway 2.2A
Community 2.2 to 2.1

Management inputs will be required to eradicate non-native plant species.

Transition T1A
State 1 to 2

This transition represents the removal of canopy species and severe understory disturbance.

Restoration pathway R2A
State 2 to 1

Restoration inputs, such as timber stand management activities, can transition the Logged State back to State 1.

Additional community tables

Table 5. Community 1.1 plant community composition

Group	Common name	Symbol	Scientific name	Annual production ()	Foliar cover (%)

Table 6. Community 1.2 plant community composition

Group	Common name	Symbol	Scientific name	Annual production ()	Foliar cover (%)

Table 7. Community 1.3 plant community composition

Group	Common name	Symbol	Scientific name	Annual production ()	Foliar cover (%)

Table 8. Community 2.1 plant community composition

Group	Common name	Symbol	Scientific name	Annual production ()	Foliar cover (%)

Table 9. Community 2.2 plant community composition

Group	Common name	Symbol	Scientific name	Annual production ()	Foliar cover (%)

Supporting information

Inventory data references

This is a provisional ecological site, and as such no field plots were inventoried for this project. A review of the scientific literature and expert opinion was used to develop the plant communities and ecological dynamics contained within the state and transition model. Future field verification is needed to refine the plant communities and ecological dynamics described in this ecological site description.

Other references

Cleland, D.T.; Avers, P.E.; McNab, W.H.; Jensen, M.E.; Bailey, R.G., King, T.; Russell, W.E. 1997. National Hierarchical Framework of Ecological Units. Published in, Boyce, M. S.; Haney, A., ed. 1997. Ecosystem Management Applications for Sustainable Forest and Wildlife Resources. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. pp. 181-200.

Faber-Langendoen, D., editor. 2001. Plant communities of the Midwest: Classification in an ecological context. Association for Biodiversity Information, Arlington, VA. 61 pp. + appendix
(705 pp.).

Flaccus, E. and L.F. Ohmann. 1964. Old-growth Northern Hardwood Forests in Northeastern Minnesota. Ecology 45:3, 448-459.

Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 2005. Field Guide to the Native Plant Communities of Minnesota: the Laurentian Mixed Forest Province. Ecological Land Classification Program, Minnesota County Biological Survey, and Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program. St. Paul, Minnesota.

Minnesota Department of Agriculture. Minnesota Noxious Weed List. Available online at:
https://www.mda.state.mn.us/plants-insects/minnesota-noxious-weed-list; accessed June 2022.

Minnesota Department of Transportation. 2020. Available online at:
https://www.dot.state.mn.us/roadsides/vegetation/pdf/noxiousweeds.pdf; accessed June 2022.

Mitsch, WJ. and J.G. Gosselink. 2007. Wetlands, fourth ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York, NY.

NatureServe. 2013a. Associations and Alliances of USFS Section 212L in Minnesota. NatureServe, St. Paul, Minnesota.

Smith, W.R. 2008. Trees and Shrubs of Minnesota. University of Minnesota Press. Minneapolis, MN.

United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Non-Native Invasive Species in the Border Lakes Region. Available online at: https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5209114.pdf; accessed June 2022.

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2022. 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.

Contributors

Anita Arends, ESI Specialist, Springfield, IL
Mike Rokus, SSOL, Duluth, MN
Kade Anderson, NRCS Ecologist, Duluth, MN
Landon Wolter, Rangeland Management Specialist for North Central Region

Approval

Suzanne Mayne-Kinney, 8/12/2024

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	05/29/2026
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:

Download reference sheet

Natural ResourcesConservation Service

Ecological site F088XY012MN

Very Dry Sandy Upland Coniferous Forest

Last updated: 8/12/2024 Accessed: 05/29/2026

Search

General information

MLRA notes

Ecological site concept

Associated sites

Similar sites

Table 1. Dominant plant species

Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Last updated: 8/12/2024
Accessed: 05/29/2026