Natural Resources
Conservation Service
-
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.
Click to explore map
Figure 1. Mapped extent
Areas shown in blue indicate the maximum mapped extent of this ecological site. Other ecological sites likely occur within the highlighted areas. It is also possible for this ecological site to occur outside of highlighted areas if detailed soil survey has not been completed or recently updated.
MLRA notes
Major Land Resource Area (MLRA): 096X–Northwestern Michigan Fruit Belt
This area is dominated by outwash plains and moraines. Lake plains, till plains, drumlins, and sand dunes are found locally across the area. The terrain is steep on stream carved moraines, ice contact ridges, and sand dunes, and flat on outwash plains and lake plains. Elevation ranges from 177 to 369 m (580 to 1210 ft). Local topographic relief averages 11 m (35 ft) in the south to 20 m (65 ft) in the north and ranges up to a maximum of 158 m (520 ft) at Empire Bluff (Sleeping Bear Dunes). Much of the area rises sharply from the lakeshore to the adjoining hilltops. The Manistee River is the longest river in this area. Its trout fishery is maintained by constant inflow of cool ground water from the porous sand dominated landscape. The Pine and Pere Marquette Rivers also occur in this MLRA. Surficial topography are formed of glacial deposits except for local areas with dune building near Lake Michigan. Most of the bedrock surface is at or below the elevation of Lake Michigan, and is exposed in only in limited extents near Charlevoix. The bedrock, all Paleozoic in age, is the Traverse Group and the Dundee Limestone. These Silurian-Devonian rocks are mostly limestone and dolomite with some interbedded shale, chert, and anhydrite stringers. The drumlin belts in the northern portion of the area is the most affected by the limestone nearer to the surface in terms of carbonates in the till.
About two-thirds of this area is in small, privately owned holdings, and one-third consists mostly of State forests. The forests are used mainly for timber production and recreation. The growth of orchard crops and other crops and dairy and beef operations are important enterprises in the area. Forage and feed grains for dairy and other livestock are the principal crops. Asparagus, wheat, oats, corn, and hay are commonly grown in the area. Orchard products include sweet and tart cherries, apples, plums, and peaches. The Manistee National Forest and Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore are among the more notable conservation lands in the area. Nordhouse Dunes Wilderness Area is within the Manistee National Forest. Sections of the Pere Marquette, Pine, and Manistee Rivers, and Bear Creek have been designated as National Wild and Scenic Rivers.
Summary of existing land use:
Upland Forest (52%)
Hardwood (38%)
Conifer (11%)
Agricultural (15%)
Swamps and Marshes (13%)
Developed (13%)Classification relationships
According to the USFS (Bailey) system of ecoregions, the site is located mostly within 212Ha (Oceana Sandy Lake Plains and Dunes) and 212Hb (Manistee Sandy Outwash Plain) subsections. According to the EPA (Omernik) system of ecoregions, the site is located in 50ag (Newaygo Barrens) and northern 56d (Michigan Lake Plain) level IV ecoregions. This site is outside the environmental range of the Kotar system. This site corresponds to the Complex lowland ecological land type phases 50-59, in the USFS Ecological Land Type system.
Ecological site concept
The central concept of Wet Floodplain is lowlands adjacent to a river or stream, periodically flooded, sometimes of long duration during the growing season or with a high watertable, and capable of supporting hydric vegetation (poorly drained or wetter). Site in moderate annual snowfall belt, mostly south of Manistee River, where fire was locally important. Area has a more southern flora than sites further north. Vegetation trending towards floodplain forest.
Associated sites
R096XY002MI Great Lakes Marsh
F096XB025MI Floodplain
Similar sites
R096XY002MI Great Lakes Marsh
F096XA013MI Snowy Wet Floodplain
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree (1) Acer saccharinum
(2) Fraxinus pennsylvanicaShrub (1) Lindera benzoin
Herbaceous (1) Matteuccia struthiopteris
Physiographic features
Site is located on floodplains eroded through glacial till or outwash.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Landforms (1) Flood plain
Runoff class Negligible to low Flooding duration Brief (2 to 7 days) to very long (more than 30 days) Flooding frequency Occasional to very frequent Elevation 577 – 1201 ft Water table depth 0 – 10 in Aspect Aspect is not a significant factor Climatic features
Mean annual temperatures are 7.1 to 8.5 °C (45 to 47 °F). The warmest six months average 15.5 to 16.5 °C (60 to 62 °F). Mean July temperatures range from 20.0 to 21.1 °C (68 to 70 °F). Mean January temperatures range from -6.7 to -3.9 °C (20 to 25 °F). The maximum monthly average daily highs are 25.5 to 28.1 °C (78 to 83 °F). The minimum monthly average daily lows are -11.2 to -7.3 °C (12 to 19 °F). Mean annual precipitation ranges from 850 to 920 mm (33 to 36 in). Prevailing winds pick up moisture from the Great Lakes in the form of lake effect rain and snow showers during fall and winter seasons, and in the form of fog during spring and summer. Thunderstorm intensity is reduced by temperature inversions over the lake during the spring and early summer when lake water is cools the air flowing over it. Average 0 °C (32 °F) frost-free season ranges from 108 to 161 days. Average -2 °C (28 °F) freeze-free season is 141 to 194 days increasing in length from north to south and decreasing in length from the lakeshore inward. Mean annual snowfall ranges from 1.6 to 2.5 m (60 to 100 in). Mean annual extreme minimum temperatures range from -29 to -18.9 °C (-20 to -2 °F), or hardiness zones 4b to 6b.
Table 3 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (characteristic range) 100-110 days Freeze-free period (characteristic range) 130-140 days Precipitation total (characteristic range) 30-40 in Frost-free period (actual range) 90-120 days Freeze-free period (actual range) 120-150 days Precipitation total (actual range) 30-40 in Frost-free period (average) 110 days Freeze-free period (average) 130 days Precipitation total (average) 40 in Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 2. Monthly precipitation range
Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 3. Monthly minimum temperature range
Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 4. Monthly maximum temperature range
BarLineFigure 5. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature
Figure 6. Annual precipitation pattern
Figure 7 Annual average temperature pattern
Climate stations used
-
(1) MONTAGUE 4 NW [USC00205567], Montague, MI
-
(2) BALDWIN [USC00200446], Baldwin, MI
-
(3) HESPERIA 4 WNW [USC00203769], Hesperia, MI
-
(4) MANISTEE 3SE [USC00205065], Manistee, MI
-
(5) HART 3 WSW [USC00203632], Hart, MI
">Influencing water features
Site subject to seasonal flooding during the growing season, at long enough duration to exclude flood sensitive species. Seasonal high water table generally within the depth of a majority of roots, less that 25 cm.<br />
Soil features
Soils are very poorly drained to poorly drained variable textures that are seasonally flooded. They are commonly classified Mollic Psammaquents, Fluvaquentic Medisaprists, and Typic Medisaprists, and commonly mapped as Glendora, Kerston, and Carlisle series or components. The top 50 cm has a typical pH of 6.6 and is 45% sand and 28% organic matter. At depth, pH ranges up to 6.8, and texture averages 55% sand and 15% clay. Depth to impeded hydraulic conductivity or root restrictive layers averages >200 cm. Depth to carbonates averages >200 cm.
Table 4. Representative soil features
Parent material (1) Alluvium
Surface texture (1) Sand
(2) Silt
(3) Loam
Drainage class Very poorly drained to poorly drained Permeability class Slow to moderately rapid Soil depth 79 – 0 in Surface fragment cover <=3" 0 – 1 % Surface fragment cover >3" 0 – 1 % Available water capacity
(0-39.4in)1.97 – 9.84 in Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-19.7in)5.5 – 7 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(0-59.1in)0 – 5 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(0-59.1in)0 – 1 % Ecological dynamics
Wet Floodplain tends to share the same ecological dynamics as Natureserve/Landfire system, Central Interior and Appalachian Floodplain Systems. Stand replacing fires were very rare, with light surface fires occurring every 130-500 years. Frequent flooding may transport nutrients and enhance vegetation growth. Severe flooding may occasionally uproot trees and create canopy openings. Overstory was dominated by flood tolerant species like poplar (Populus spp.) and willow (Salix spp.) in flood scoured areas, and silver maple (Acer saccharinum) and green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) in stable areas. The wet, relatively high base soils support a productive understory that tolerates moderate periods of inundation. common species include the thicket forming red-osier dogwood (Cornus sericea) and the ostrich fern (Matteuccia struthiopteris). Warmer areas of this site support spicebush (Lindera benzoin).
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 textState 1 submodel, plant communities
Communities 2 and 5 (additional pathways)
State 2 submodel, plant communities
State 3 submodel, plant communities
State 4 submodel, plant communities
State 1
Reference StateDominant plant species
-
silver maple (Acer saccharinum), tree
-
green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), tree
-
ostrich fern (Matteuccia struthiopteris), other herbaceous
Community 1.1
Floodplain Forest: Acer saccharinum - Ulmus americana / Onoclea sensibilis Floodplain ForestCommunity 1.2
Wet MeadowCommunity 1.3
Shrub-ThicketCommunity 1.4
Emergent MarshCommunity 1.5
Inundated Shrub SwampPathway 1.1A
Community 1.1 to 1.2Temporary prolonged inundation.
Pathway 1.1B
Community 1.1 to 1.3Clearcut/Blowdown.
Conservation practices
Early Successional Habitat Development/Management Forest Stand Improvement Pathway 1.2A
Community 1.2 to 1.1Succession.
Conservation practices
Tree/Shrub Site Preparation Tree/Shrub Establishment Pathway 1.2B
Community 1.2 to 1.3Succession.
Conservation practices
Tree/Shrub Site Preparation Tree/Shrub Establishment Pathway 1.2D
Community 1.2 to 1.4Permanent inundation.
Pathway 1.2E
Community 1.2 to 1.5Shrub establishment; permanent inundation.
Conservation practices
Tree/Shrub Establishment Pathway 1.3A
Community 1.3 to 1.1Succession.
Conservation practices
Tree/Shrub Site Preparation Tree/Shrub Establishment Pathway 1.3B
Community 1.3 to 1.2Temporary prolonged inundation.
Pathway 1.3C
Community 1.3 to 1.4Permanent inundation.
Pathway 1.3C
Community 1.3 to 1.5Permanent inundation.
Pathway 1.4A
Community 1.4 to 1.2Drop water table.
Pathway 1.4C
Community 1.4 to 1.5Temporary drop water table; shrub establishment.
Pathway 1.5A
Community 1.5 to 1.2Drop water table; shrub mortality.
Conservation practices
Brush Management Pathway 1.5C
Community 1.5 to 1.4Temporary drought; shrub mortality.
State 2
Cultural StateCommunity 2.1
Sustainable Crop, Pasture, or PlantationCommunity 2.2
Unsustainable Cultural PhaseCommunity 2.3
Conservation FeatureCan be a grassed waterway, conservation reserve, a small patch pollinator garden, or other land taken out of its primary cultural production to mitigate or reduce impacts of adjacent land use, and is not by itself a permanent restoration of a complete native biological community and associated ecosystem services.
Pathway 2.1A
Community 2.1 to 2.2Revert to unsustainable cultural practices.
Pathway 2.1B
Community 2.1 to 2.3Establish conservation feature.
Conservation practices
Conservation Cover Grassed Waterway Pathway 2.2A
Community 2.2 to 2.1Implement sustainable cultural practices.
Conservation practices
Conservation Crop Rotation Cover Crop Nutrient Management Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Pathway 2.2B
Community 2.2 to 2.3Establish conservation feature.
Conservation practices
Conservation Cover Grassed Waterway Pathway 2.3A
Community 2.3 to 2.1Implement sustainable cultural practices.
Conservation practices
Conservation Crop Rotation Cover Crop Nutrient Management Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Pathway 2.3B
Community 2.3 to 2.2Revert to unsustainable cultural practices.
State 3
Seminatural Drained StateCommunity 3.1
Ruderal Drained Meadow & ShrubCommunity 3.2
Exotic Ruderal Drained ForestPathway 3.1A
Community 3.1 to 3.2Succession
Pathway 3.2A
Community 3.2 to 3.1Blowdown/clearcut.
Conservation practices
Early Successional Habitat Development/Management Forest Stand Improvement State 4
Seminatural StateCommunity 4.1
Ruderal Wet Meadow & Shrub SwampCommunity 4.2
Exotic Ruderal Swamp ForestPathway 4.1A
Community 4.1 to 4.2Succession.
Pathway 4.2A
Community 4.2 to 4.1Blowdown/clearcut.
Conservation practices
Early Successional Habitat Development/Management Forest Stand Improvement Transition T1A
State 1 to 2Drain; clear vegetation; cultivate domesticated species.
Transition T1B
State 1 to 3Drain; clear vegetation, invasive species introduced.
Transition T1C
State 1 to 4Clear vegetation, invasive species introduced.
Restoration pathway R2
State 2 to 1Restore hydrology; remove domesticated species; restore native species.
Conservation practices
Brush Management Restoration and Management of Rare and Declining Habitats Wetland Wildlife Habitat Management Wetland Restoration Herbaceous Weed Control Transition T2A
State 2 to 3Abandon, succession.
Transition T2B
State 2 to 4Restore hydrology; abandon; succession.
Conservation practices
Wetland Restoration Restoration pathway R3
State 3 to 1Restore hydrology; control invasive species; restore native species
Conservation practices
Brush Management Restoration and Management of Rare and Declining Habitats Wetland Wildlife Habitat Management Wetland Restoration Herbaceous Weed Control Transition T3A
State 3 to 2Clear vegetation; cultivate domesticated species.
Transition T3B
State 3 to 4Restore hydrology.
Conservation practices
Wetland Restoration Restoration pathway R4
State 4 to 1Control invasive species; restore native species.
Conservation practices
Brush Management Restoration and Management of Rare and Declining Habitats Wetland Wildlife Habitat Management Herbaceous Weed Control Transition T4A
State 4 to 2Drain; clear vegetation; cultivate domesticated species.
Transition T4B
State 4 to 3Drain.
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 1.4 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 9. Community 1.5 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 10. Community 2.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 11. Community 2.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 12. Community 2.3 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 13. Community 3.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 14. Community 3.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 15. Community 4.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 16. Community 4.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Interpretations
Supporting information
Contributors
Gregory J. Schmidt
Approval
Greg Schmidt, 9/11/2024
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 08/18/2026 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
