Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Ecological site F088XY014MN
Clayey Upland Wet-Mesic Hardwood Forest
Last updated: 8/12/2024
Accessed: 07/10/2026
-
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): 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).Classification relationships
Relationship to Other Established Classifications:
MN DNR Native Plant Community (MN DNR, 2003); the reference community of this Provisional Ecological Site is most similar to:
MHn47 Northern Rich Mesic Hardwood Forest
MHc37 Central Mesic Hardwood Forest (Western) **Located in the Hardwood Hills subsection from Becker County north to Polk County in the northern tip of MIM – Naytahwaush & MahkonceEcological site concept
Clayey Upland Wet-Mesic Hardwood Forest sites typically occur on summit, shoulders and backslope hillslope positions on moraines and till plains, and occasionally on gentle to steeper sloping areas of glacial lake plains. These sites typically exist on soils with fine textured clayey and silty textures of clay, silty clay, silty clay loam, silt loam, very fine sandy loam or loamy very fine sand within a depth of 50 centimeters.
Associated sites
F088XY008MN Wet Mixed Forest
These sites occur on footslope and toeslope hillslope positions, drainageways surrounded by uplands or on the edge of uplands grading to very poorly drained peatland soils. These sites typically exist on loamy and occasionally sandy moraines and till plains. Parent material is calcareous fine to loamy textured glacial till, stratified material and occasionally sandy.
Similar sites
F088XY015MN Loamy Upland Wet-Mesic Mixed Forest
These sites occur on summit, shoulders and backslope hillslope positions on moraines and till plains. These sites typically exist on soils with loamy textures of loam, sandy loam, sandy clay loam or fine sandy loam within a depth of 50 centimeters. The underlying parent material is generally medium textured till, sandy loam till or stratified materials with generally less than 35 percent rock fragments within a depth of 100 centimeters.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree (1) Acer saccharum
(2) Tilia americanaShrub (1) Prunus virginiana
(2) Corylus cornutaHerbaceous (1) Athyrium
(2) Aralia nudicaulisPhysiographic features
Clayey Upland Wet-Mesic Hardwood Forest sites typically occur on summit, shoulders and backslope hillslope positions on flats, moraines, and till plains, and occasionally on gentle to steeper sloping areas of glacial lake plains.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Slope shape across (1) Linear
Slope shape up-down (1) Convex
Landforms (1) Flat
(2) Till plain
(3) Moraine
(4) Hillslope
(5) Glacial lake
Runoff class Medium to very high Flooding frequency None Ponding frequency None Elevation 1020 – 1710 ft Slope 1 – 4 % Ponding depth 0 in Water table depth 12 – 24 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 86 to 110 days, with the mean freeze-free period ranging from 119 to 136 days.
Table 3 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (characteristic range) 90-110 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 rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 1. Monthly precipitation range
Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 2. Monthly minimum temperature range
Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 3. Monthly maximum temperature range
BarLineFigure 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) CAMP NORRIS DNR [USC00211250], Beltrami Isl State for, MN
-
(8) WARROAD [USC00218679], Warroad, MN
-
(9) EVELETH WWTP [USC00212645], Eveleth, MN
-
(10) FLOODWOOD 3 NE [USC00212842], Floodwood, MN
-
(11) GRAND RPDS FOREST LAB [USC00213303], Grand Rapids, MN
-
(12) POKEGAMA DAM [USC00216612], Cohasset, MN
-
(13) LEECH LAKE [USC00214652], Bena, MN
">Influencing water features
This site is not prone to ponding or flooding. Fine soils may perch water, leading to a water table within 30 inches of the surfaces.
Soil features
These sites typically exist on soils with fine textured clayey and silty textures of clay, silty clay, silty clay loam, silt loam, loam, fine sandy loam, loamy fine sand, very fine sandy loam or loamy very fine sand within a depth of 50 centimeters. The underlying parent material is generally fine or medium textured glacial till; or fine textured clayey or silty glacial lacustrine sediments with generally less than 5 percent rock fragments within a depth of 100 centimeters.
Soils in the Clayey Upland Wet-Mesic Hardwood Forest fall within the Alfisol and Mollisol orders. Soil series within this ecological site include Ashlake, Taylor, Alango, Suomi, Kooch, Grasston, Longsiding, Haystore, Morcom, Dalbo, Lahti, Mahkonce, and Thistledew.Table 4. Representative soil features
Parent material (1) Till
(2) Glaciolacustrine deposits
Surface texture (1) Loam
(2) Silty clay
(3) Silt loam
(4) Fine sandy loam
(5) Loamy fine sand
(6) Very fine sandy loam
(7) Clay
(8) Silty clay loam
(9) Loamy very fine sand
Drainage class Somewhat poorly drained to moderately well drained Permeability class Very slow to moderately slow 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)4.2 – 8 in Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-10in)5.1 – 7.3 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(0-80in)0 – 8 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(0-80in)0 – 1 % Ecological dynamics
Plant communities typically include sugar maple, basswood, and often yellow birch, also can include paper birch, ironwood, northern red oak, black ash, balsam fir, and white spruce. Understory typically includes sugar maple, basswood and ironwood saplings as well as beaked hazelnut, fly honeysuckle, mountain maple, and chokecherry; with the forb layer including lady fern, wild sarsaparilla, Clayton’s sweet cicely and hairy solomon’s seal to mention a few.
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 textEcosystem states
T1A - Mechanical removal of tree species for timber harvest. State 1 submodel, plant communities
1.1A - Lack of fire/blow downs (35-95 years) 1.2A - Increased low intensity fire frequency and blow downs (<35 years) 1.2B - Lack of fire/blow downs (95-195 years) 1.3B - Stand replacing fire 1.3A - Increased low intensity fire frequency and blow downs (<95 years) State 2 submodel, plant communities
2.1A - Planting of desired species and herbicide use. 2.2A - Harvest of tree species upon desired growth stage. State 1
Reference StateThe reference state consists of three forest communities in varying successional phases.
Dominant plant species
-
sugar maple (Acer saccharum), tree
-
paper birch (Betula papyrifera), tree
-
American basswood (Tilia americana), tree
-
quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), tree
-
yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis), tree
-
northern red oak (Quercus rubra), tree
-
black ash (Fraxinus nigra), tree
-
balsam fir (Abies balsamea), tree
-
white spruce (Picea glauca), tree
-
beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), shrub
-
mountain maple (Acer spicatum), shrub
-
American fly honeysuckle (Lonicera canadensis), shrub
-
chokecherry (Prunus virginiana), shrub
-
wild sarsaparilla (Aralia nudicaulis), other herbaceous
-
common ladyfern (Athyrium filix-femina), other herbaceous
-
Clayton's sweetroot (Osmorhiza claytonii), other herbaceous
-
hairy Solomon's seal (Polygonatum pubescens), other herbaceous
Community 1.1
Sugar Maple/Paper Birch/Basswood (Early Successional)Young forests recovering from fire or wind, notable sugar maple dominance with earlier successional species (0-35 years).
Dominant plant species
-
sugar maple (Acer saccharum), tree
-
paper birch (Betula papyrifera var. papyrifera), tree
-
American basswood (Tilia americana), tree
Community 1.2
Sugar Maple/Paper Birch/Aspen (Mid-Successional)A transitional period marked with a decline in paper birch, aspen, and basswood. Along with development of yellow birch, white pine, and white spruce seedlings become developed (35-75 years).
Dominant plant species
-
sugar maple (Acer saccharum), tree
-
paper birch (Betula papyrifera), tree
-
quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), tree
Community 1.3
Sugar Maple/Yellow Birch/Paper Birch (Late Successional)Mature forest with prominent mixed canopy (75+ years).
Dominant plant species
-
sugar maple (Acer saccharum var. saccharum), tree
-
yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis var. alleghaniensis), tree
-
paper birch (Betula papyrifera var. papyrifera), tree
Pathway 1.1A
Community 1.1 to 1.2Lack of fire/blow downs (35-95 years)
Pathway 1.2A
Community 1.2 to 1.1Increased low intensity fire frequency and blow downs (<35 years)
Pathway 1.2B
Community 1.2 to 1.3Lack of fire/blow downs (95-195 years)
Pathway 1.3B
Community 1.3 to 1.1Stand replacing fire
Pathway 1.3A
Community 1.3 to 1.2Increased low intensity fire frequency and blow downs (<95 years)
State 2
Logged StateRemoval of tree species for timber harvest leaves an open canopy with very disturbed understory vegetation. Shrubs dominate immediately post logging and often prevent tree's from re-establishing quickly.
Dominant plant species
-
beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), shrub
-
American fly honeysuckle (Lonicera canadensis), shrub
-
mountain maple (Acer spicatum), shrub
-
chokecherry (Prunus virginiana), shrub
Community 2.1
Post-LoggingRemoval of tree species for timber harvest leaves an open canopy with very disturbed understory vegetation. Shrubs dominate immediately post logging and often prevent tree's from re-establishing quickly.
Dominant plant species
-
beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta var. cornuta), shrub
-
American fly honeysuckle (Lonicera canadensis), shrub
-
mountain maple (Acer spicatum), shrub
-
chokecherry (Prunus virginiana), shrub
Community 2.2
SeededReseeded to a forested site with desired timber species.
Dominant plant species
-
red pine (Pinus resinosa), tree
-
eastern white pine (Pinus strobus), tree
Pathway 2.1A
Community 2.1 to 2.2Planting of desired species for future timber harvest and herbicide use to prevent shrubs from dominating.
Pathway 2.2A
Community 2.2 to 2.1Harvest of tree species upon desired growth stage.
Transition T1A
State 1 to 2Mechanical removal of tree species for timber harvest.
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 (%) Interpretations
Supporting information
Inventory data references
Information presented was derived from Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Field Guide to the Native Plant Communities of Minnesota, USDA-NRCS soil survey information, and USDA Plants Database.
Other references
Cleland, D.T.; Freeouf, J.A.; Keys, J.E., Jr.; Nowacki, G.J.; Carpenter, C; McNab, W.H. 2007. Ecological Subregions: Sections and Subsections of the Conterminous United States.[1:3,500,000], Sloan, A.M., cartog. Gen. Tech. Report WO-76. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.
Eggers, Steve D. and Donald M. Reed. 1997. Wetland Plants and Plant Communities of Minnesota and Wisconsin. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (2003). 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. MNDNR St. Paul, MN.
Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Official Soil Series Descriptions. Available online. Accessed March 2018.
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.
USDA, NRCS. 2018. The PLANTS Database (http://plants.usda.gov, 27 March 2018). National Plant Data Team, Greensboro, NC 27401-4901 USA.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2013. Level III and IV ecoregions of the continental
United States: Corvallis, Oregon, U.S. EPA, National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, map scale 1:3,000,000, https://www.epa.gov/eco-research/level-iii-and-iv-ecoregions-continental-united-states.Contributors
Ezra Hoffman, Ecological Site Specialist, NRCS North Central Region
Kade Anderson, Ecological Site Specialist, NRCS North Central Region
Patty Burns, Soil Scientist at NRCS Bemidji Soil Survey Office
Stacey Clark, Former NRCS Regional Ecologist for Regions 10 & 11
Landon Wolter, Rangeland Management Specialist for North Central RegionApproval
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 07/10/2026 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
