Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Ecological site F093AY011MN
Dry Sandy Upland Forest
Last updated: 9/06/2024
Accessed: 07/14/2026
-
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): 093A–Superior and Rainy Stony and Rocky Till Plains and Moraines
The Superior Stony and Rocky Loamy Plains and Hills, Western Part is located and completely contained in northeastern Minnesota. This area has both the highest and lowest elevations in the state, as well as some of the state’s most rugged topography (Ojakangas and Matsch, 1982). The MLRA was glaciated by numerous advances of the Superior, Rainy, and Des Moines glacial lobes during the Wisconsin glaciation as well as pre-Wisconsin glacial periods. The geomorphic surfaces in this MLRA are geologically very young (i.e., 10,000 to 20,000 years) and dominated by drumlin fields, moraines, small lake plains, outwash plains, and bedrock-controlled uplands (USDA-NRCS, 2022).
There are thousands of lakes scattered throughout the region that were created by these glacial events. Most of these lakes are bedrock-controlled in comparison to adjacent glaciated regions where glacial drift deposits are much thicker and the lakes occur in depressions atop the glacial drift (Ojakangas and Matsch, 1982). In contrast to adjacent MLRAs, the depth to the predominantly crystalline or sandstone bedrock in MLRA 93A is relatively shallow because the most recent glacial events were more erosional than depositional (Ojakangas and Matsch, 1982).Classification relationships
Major Land Resource Area (MLRA): Superior Stony and Rocky Loamy Plains and Hills, Western Part (93A)
USFS Subregions: Northern Superior Uplands Section (212L); North Shore Highlands Subsection (212Lb)
Relationship to Other Established Classifications:
FDn12-Northern Dry-Sand Pine Woodland, Fire-Dependent Forest/Woodland System, Northern Floristic Region, Minnesota Department of Natural ResourcesEcological site concept
This site is a dry jack pine-red pine woodland and located on outwash plains and moraines. Soils are course textured, well drained to excessively drained, and have a low available water capacity. Historically, fire was a common disturbance that influenced plant community composition. Jack pine, red pine, and balsam fir have frequent occurrence and moderately high cover on this site.
Associated sites
F093AY012MN Sandy Upland Forest
The Sandy Upland 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.
Similar sites
F093AY012MN Sandy Upland Forest
The Sandy Upland 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.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree (1) Pinus banksiana
(2) Pinus resinosaShrub (1) Vaccinium angustifolium
(2) AmelanchierHerbaceous (1) Maianthemum canadense
(2) Pteridium aquilinumPhysiographic features
This upland site is located on outwash plains and moraines. 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
Landforms (1) Outwash plain
(2) Moraine
Runoff class Low to high Flooding frequency None Ponding frequency None Elevation 1000 – 1750 ft Slope 0 – 60 % Water table depth 80 in Aspect Aspect is not a significant factor Climatic features
The average annual precipitation is 26-32 inches (66 to 81 centimeters). Measurable climatic variation (due to the lake effect) near some of Lake Superior may alter temperature and precipitation (Hillman & Nielsen, 2023). About 65 percent of the precipitation falls as rain during the growing season (May through September) and about 21 percent falls as snow. The freeze-free period averages about 130 days and ranges from 97 to 150 days (USDA-NRCS, 2022).
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) 40-110 days Freeze-free period (actual range) 100-150 days Precipitation total (actual range) 30-30 in Frost-free period (average) 90 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) GRAND PORTAGE [USC00213296], Grand Portage, MN
-
(2) WOLF RIDGE ELC [USC00219134], Finland, MN
-
(3) DULUTH [USW00014913], Duluth, MN
-
(4) ELY 25E [USC00212555], Ely, MN
-
(5) KETTLE FALLS [USC00214306], Voyageurs Natl Park, MN
-
(6) BRIMSON 2S [USC00210989], Brimson, MN
-
(7) KABETOGAMA [USC00214191], Orr, MN
">Influencing water features
This site is not influenced by riparian and wetland features.
Wetland description
N/A
Soil features
Representative soil series include Beargrease, Biwabik, Graycalm, Grayling, Rollins, and Shagawa. Soil parent materials include outwash plains and moraines. Soils are well drained to excessively drained and very deep. The soil available water capacity is low and results in plant species that are highly tolerant of dry conditions.
Table 4. Representative soil features
Parent material (1) Drift
(2) Outwash
Surface texture (1) Sand
(2) Very stony loam
(3) Sandy loam
(4) Loamy sand
(5) Cobbly sandy loam
Drainage class Well drained to excessively drained Permeability class Rapid to very rapid Depth to restrictive layer 80 in Soil depth 80 in Surface fragment cover <=3" 0 – 10 % Surface fragment cover >3" 0 – 15 % Available water capacity
(0-60in)2 – 4.5 in Sodium adsorption ratio
(Depth not specified)Not specified Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-40in)4.5 – 7.3 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(Depth not specified)0 – 60 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(Depth not specified)0 – 50 % Ecological dynamics
This site is a 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). Jack pine (Pinus banksiana) occurs over a broad range of glacially scoured bedrock and outwash sand plains, with cover ranging from sparse to dense, depending on habitat features. On sand plain habitats, the combination of physiognomy, floristics, and disturbance factors can be used to further distinguish the denser forests with blueberries (Vaccinium spp.) and feathermoss (Pleurozium schreberi) from more open stands, maintained by a 25 to 50 year fire rotation, where oaks (Quercus spp.), little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium), and other prairie forbs may be common (Faber-Langendoen 2001).
The Dry Sandy Upland Forest ecosite exhibits compositional change during the course of stand maturation. Under the model of succession for this ecological site species achieved dominance by outliving shorter-lived trees as the stand matures. The natural pattern of tree mortality and replacement was the partial loss of trees on a rotation of approximately 50 years. Stand-replacing fire was infrequent with an estimated rotation of 170 years although it is an important driver of many dominant tree species on this site. Stand-replacing windthrow was rare with an estimated rotation of approximately 610 years. Gaps in the canopy also drive the natural succession as species vie for dominance (MN DNR 2022).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 - Site is logged and disturbed R2A - Restoration inputs; forest stand management State 1 submodel, plant communities
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
2.1A - Invasive species established 2.2A - Eradication of invasive species State 1
Reference StateThis 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
-
lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium), shrub
-
serviceberry (Amelanchier), shrub
-
roughleaf ricegrass (Oryzopsis asperifolia), grass
-
Canada mayflower (Maianthemum canadense), other herbaceous
Community 1.1
Mature Dry Pine CommunityThis 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) Surface fires on a rotation of about 50 years could have maintained the mixture of red and jack pine by regenerating patches of jack pine, leaving red pine residuals as seed trees, and killing fire-sensitive balsam fir. Maintenance disturbances allow for continued establishment of red pine to the point where old woodlands may develop a supercanopy of large-diameter red pines over younger cohorts of jack pine. Surface fires determine the understory composition of this community (MN DNR, 2022).
Dominant plant species
-
red pine (Pinus resinosa), tree
-
eastern white pine (Pinus strobus), tree
-
jack pine (Pinus banksiana), tree
-
lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium), shrub
-
roughleaf ricegrass (Oryzopsis asperifolia), grass
-
pipsissewa (Chimaphila umbellata), other herbaceous
-
eastern teaberry (Gaultheria procumbens), other herbaceous
-
kinnikinnick (Arctostaphylos uva-ursi), other herbaceous
-
trailing arbutus (Epigaea repens), other herbaceous
Community 1.2
Early Successional Dry Pine CommunityThis 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) This community happens after fire and rarely windthrow (MN DNR, 2022).
Dominant plant species
-
jack pine (Pinus banksiana), tree
-
red pine (Pinus resinosa), tree
-
lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium), shrub
-
serviceberry (Amelanchier), shrub
-
beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), shrub
-
northern bush honeysuckle (Diervilla lonicera), shrub
-
roughleaf ricegrass (Oryzopsis asperifolia), grass
-
western brackenfern (Pteridium aquilinum), other herbaceous
-
Canada mayflower (Maianthemum canadense), other herbaceous
-
pipsissewa (Chimaphila umbellata), other herbaceous
-
eastern teaberry (Gaultheria procumbens), other herbaceous
-
kinnikinnick (Arctostaphylos uva-ursi), other herbaceous
-
trailing arbutus (Epigaea repens), other herbaceous
Community 1.3
Mid Successional Dry Pine CommunityThe 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) Some white spruce seedlings may become established during this period (MN DNR, 2022).
Dominant plant species
-
jack pine (Pinus banksiana), tree
-
red pine (Pinus resinosa), tree
-
eastern white pine (Pinus strobus), tree
-
lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium), shrub
-
serviceberry (Amelanchier), shrub
-
beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), shrub
-
roughleaf ricegrass (Oryzopsis asperifolia), grass
-
brackenfern (Pteridium), other herbaceous
-
western brackenfern (Pteridium aquilinum), other herbaceous
-
Canada mayflower (Maianthemum canadense), other herbaceous
-
pipsissewa (Chimaphila umbellata), other herbaceous
-
eastern teaberry (Gaultheria procumbens), other herbaceous
-
kinnikinnick (Arctostaphylos uva-ursi), other herbaceous
-
trailing arbutus (Epigaea repens), other herbaceous
Pathway 1.1A
Community 1.1 to 1.2A severe disturbance, such as a catastrophic fire, will transition the reference community to an early successional community.
Pathway 1.2A
Community 1.2 to 1.3Time and natural plant community growth will transition the site to community 1.3.
Pathway 1.3A
Community 1.3 to 1.1Time 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 1.2A severe disturbance, such as a major fire event, will transition the community back to an earlier successional stage.
State 2
Disturbed StateRemoval 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. Human and recreational activities can also lead to seed sources of non-native species being established (MN DNR 2005). The management trend for this ecological site has been to convert stands to red pine plantations whenever possible and a significant portion of its historic range was converted. Logging without conversion has resulted in woodlands dominated by quaking aspen, balsam fir, and paper birch. Managing stands primarily for balsam fir or jack pine increases the risk of windthrow due to the trees not being wind-firm. Managing stands in the absence of surface fire increases the risk of losing jack pine and red pine as a potential crop trees. (MN DNR 2022).
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 communityWith the canopy removed, the initial post-logging community will be dominated by shrubs.
Dominant plant species
-
serviceberry (Amelanchier), shrub
-
prickly rose (Rosa acicularis), shrub
-
smooth rose (Rosa blanda), shrub
-
beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), shrub
-
chokecherry (Prunus virginiana), shrub
-
prairie willow (Salix humilis), shrub
-
blueberry (Vaccinium), shrub
-
poverty oatgrass (Danthonia spicata), grass
-
ricegrass (Oryzopsis), grass
Community 2.2
Invaded CommunityThis 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
-
serviceberry (Amelanchier), shrub
-
blueberry (Vaccinium), shrub
-
rose (Rosa), shrub
-
honeysuckle (Lonicera), shrub
-
common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica), shrub
-
glossy buckthorn (Frangula alnus), shrub
-
cypress spurge (Euphorbia cyparissias), other herbaceous
-
knotweed (Polygonum), other herbaceous
-
common St. Johnswort (Hypericum perforatum), other herbaceous
Pathway 2.1A
Community 2.1 to 2.2Invasive species are introduced to the site and become established.
Pathway 2.2A
Community 2.2 to 2.1Management inputs will be required to eradicate non-native plant species.
Transition T1A
State 1 to 2This transition represents the removal of canopy species and severe understory disturbance.
Restoration pathway R2A
State 2 to 1Restoration 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 (%) Interpretations
Supporting information
Inventory data references
No field plots were established for this project. A review of the scientific literature and professional experience were used to approximate the plant communities for this provisional ecological site. Information for the state-and-transition model was obtained from the same sources. All community phases are considered provisional based on these plots and the sources identified in ecological site description. Future field verification will refine the plant communities described in this project.
References
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.
Hillman, A., & Nielsen, S. E. (2023). Lake Superior’s summer cooling of shorelines and adjacent inland forests: Implications for refugia of boreal forests and disjunct Arctic–Alpine plants. Ecology and Evolution, 13(12). doi:10.1002/ece3.10833
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 Natural Resources. 2022. Northern Dry-Sand Pine Woodland - FDn12. Available online at https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/forestry/ecs_silv/npc/fdn12.html. last accessed December 2023.
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, Former ESI Specialist, Springfield, IL
Mike Rokus, SSOL, Duluth, MN
Kade Anderson, NRCS Ecologist, Duluth, MNApproval
Suzanne Mayne-Kinney, 9/06/2024
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 09/06/2024 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
