Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Ecological site F101XY011NY
Shallow Till Upland
Last updated: 10/03/2024
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): 101X–Ontario-Erie Plain and Finger Lakes Region
Most of the MLRA is a nearly level to rolling plain. Low remnant beach ridges are commonly interspersed with a relatively level lake plain in the northern part of the area. Drumlins (long, narrow, steep-sided, cigar shaped hills) are prominent in an east-west belt in the center of the area. The Finger Lakes Region consists of a gently sloping to rolling till plain. Elevation increases gradually from the shores of Lake Ontario and Lake Oneida to the Allegheny Plateau, the southern border of the area. The bedrock underlying this area consists of alternating beds of limestone, dolomite, sandstone, and shale of Ordovician to Devonian age. Most of the surface of the area is covered with glacial till or lake sediments. The texture of the lake sediments is silt, loam, or sand. Ancient beaches, formed at different lake levels, form ridges along the shoreline of Lake Erie and Lake Ontario. Stratified drift (eskers and kames) and glacial outwash deposits are in many of the valleys. A large drumlin field occurs in the Finger Lakes Region.
Classification relationships
USDA-NRCS (USDA, 2006):
Land Resource Region (LRR): L — Lake States Fruit, Truck Crop, and Dairy Region
Major Land Resource Area (MLRA): 101— Ontario-Erie Plain and Finger Lakes Region
USDA-FS (Cleland et al., 2007)
Province: 211 — Northeastern Mixed Forest Province (in part)
Section: 211J — Mohawk Valley (in part)
Subsection: 211Jd — Mohawk Valley
Province: 222 — Midwest Broadleaf Forest Province (in part)
Section: 222I — Erie and Ontario Lake Plain
Subsection: 222Ia — Lake Erie Plain
222Ib — Erie-Ontario Lake Plain
222Ic — Eastern Ontario Till Plain
222Id — Cattaraugus Finger Lakes Moraine and Hills
222Ie — Eastern Ontario Lake PlainEcological site concept
Landform/Landscape Position:
The site occurs on broad plains, hills, ridges, and knolls. Slopes range from 0 to 70 percent.
Soils:
The site consists of shallow, excessively drained to well drained soils formed in loamy till underlain by limestone or calcareous shale bedrock. Representative soils are Benson and Farmington mapped within MLRA 101.
Vegetation:
The reference community is cross-referenced with Mixed Hardwood Limestone Woodland (NatureServe: CEGL005059) and Sugar Maple - Chinquapin Oak Forest
(Natureserve: CEGL005010).Associated sites
F101XY012NY Till Upland
Till Uplands occur in less shallow areas
Similar sites
F101XY012NY Till Upland
Till uplands have deeper soils.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree (1) Acer saccharum
(2) Quercus muehlenbergiiShrub (1) Ostrya virginiana
(2) Amelanchier sanguineaHerbaceous (1) Waldsteinia fragarioides
(2) Trillium grandiflorumPhysiographic features
The site occurs on broad plains, hills, ridges, and knolls. Slopes range from 0 to 70 percent.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Landforms (1) Till plain > Till plain
(2) Hill
(3) Ridge
(4) Knoll
(5) Bench
Runoff class Medium to very high Flooding frequency None Ponding frequency None Elevation 89 – 1988 ft Slope 0 – 70 % Water table depth 16 – 72 in Aspect Aspect is not a significant factor Climatic features
The Koppen-Geiger climate classification of the area in which this MLRA occurs is
Dfb, Warm-summer humid continental. Rainfall occurs as high-intensity, convective thunderstorms in the summer. However, snow comprises most of the precipitation in this area. The frost-free-free period in this area averages 165 days and ranges from 130 to 200 days, with the coldest temperatures and the shortest frost-free periods occurring in the high-elevation areas in the eastern part of the MLRA.Table 3 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (characteristic range) 140-140 days Freeze-free period (characteristic range) 170-190 days Precipitation total (characteristic range) 40-40 in Frost-free period (actual range) 140-140 days Freeze-free period (actual range) 170-190 days Precipitation total (actual range) 40-40 in Frost-free period (average) 140 days Freeze-free period (average) 180 days Precipitation total (average) 40 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) SUNY ESF SYRACUSE [USC00308386], Syracuse, NY
-
(2) DELANSON 2NE [USC00302031], Delanson, NY
-
(3) ROCHESTER GTR INTL AP [USW00014768], Rochester, NY
-
(4) DUNKIRK CHAUTAUQUA AP [USW00014747], Dunkirk, NY
-
(5) LOCKPORT 3 S [USC00304844], Lockport, NY
">Influencing water features
NONE
Wetland description
NONE
Soil features
The site consists of shallow, well drained to excessively drained soils formed in loamy till underlain by limestone or calcareous shale bedrock. Representative soils are Benson and Farmington mapped within MLRA 101.
Table 4. Representative soil features
Parent material (1) Till – limestone, sandstone, and shale
(2) Dolomite
Surface texture (1) Silt loam
(2) Channery silt loam
(3) Loam
(4) Channery loam
(5) Very channery loam
Family particle size (1) Loamy
(2) Loamy-skeletal
Drainage class Moderately well drained to somewhat excessively drained Depth to restrictive layer 12 – 20 in Soil depth 10 – 20 in Surface fragment cover <=3" Not specified Surface fragment cover >3" Not specified Available water capacity
(Depth not specified)1 – 3 in Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(Depth not specified)5.1 – 7.8 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(Depth not specified)3 – 32 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(Depth not specified)0 – 18 % Ecological dynamics
The reference community is cross-referenced with Mixed Hardwood Limestone Woodland (NatureServe: CEGL005059) and Sugar Maple - Chinquapin Oak Forest
(Natureserve: CEGL005010).
Natural disturbances include wind, ice storms, and insect damage. Areas of low relief have been converted to agricultural land use such as pastureland, hayland, cropland, or used for timber. The site is susceptible to establishment of invasive species such as Japanese barberry, bush honeysuckle, multiflora rose, garlic mustard, and Japanese stiltgrass especially in disturbed areas.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
States 2 and 5 (additional transitions)
State 1 submodel, plant communities
State 2 submodel, plant communities
State 3 submodel, plant communities
State 4 submodel, plant communities
State 1
Reference - Mixed Hardwood Forest or WoodlandThe reference community is cross-referenced with Mixed Hardwood Limestone Woodland (NatureServe: CEGL005059) and Sugar Maple - Chinquapin Oak Forest
(Natureserve: CEGL005010).
Characteristics and indicators. Site was not cleared or cultivated historically.
Community 1.1
Old Growth Mixed Hardwood ForestMature closed canopy forest.
Community 1.2
Young ForestPathway P1.1
Community 1.1 to 1.2Wind, ice storm,, insect damage.
Pathway P1.2
Community 1.2 to 1.1Time; succession
State 2
Managed Timber ForestRemoval of trees of commercial value. Invasive species may be present.
Community 2.1
Timber Managed ForestForest managed for timber, primarily oak species. Depending on type of management birch, beech, and maple may dominate following commercial timber harvest.
State 3
InvadedInvasive species abundant. Minimally managed forest.
Community 3.1
Forest with invasive speciesNon-native and invasive species present (Japanese barberry, multiflora rose, bush honeysuckle, stiltgrass.
State 4
PasturelandSite converted to pasture for livestock grazing or hay production.
Resilience management. Must be managed (grazed, mowed, etc.) to maintain pastureland.
Community 4.1
Introduced grasses and forbs for grazing, hay production, or wildlifeCommunity 4.2
Woody plant encroachmentPathway P4.1
Community 4.1 to 4.2Lack of management (mowing, grazing, prescribed fire)
Pathway P4.2
Community 4.2 to 4.1Mowing, brush management, prescribed fire.
Conservation practices
Brush Management Prescribed Burning State 5
Restored and/or Minimally Managed ForestRestored forest or second-growth forest.
Characteristics and indicators. Site was cleared and/or cultivated historically.
Transition T1A
State 1 to 2Timber harvest.
Key drivers
-
Timber management
Transition T1B
State 1 to 3Establishment of invasive species.
Transition T1C
State 1 to 4Land use conversion.
Conservation practices
Land Clearing Restoration pathway R2A
State 2 to 1Ecological restoration.
Conservation practices
Forest Stand Improvement Forest Land Management Transition T2A
State 2 to 4Land use conversion
Conservation practices
Land Clearing Restoration pathway R2B
State 2 to 5Restoration pathway R3A
State 3 to 1Invasive species management/removal.
Conservation practices
Invasive Plant Species Control Transition T3A
State 3 to 4Land use conversion.
Restoration pathway R4B
State 4 to 5Ecological restoration.
Transition T5A
State 5 to 4Land use conversion.
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 2.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 8. Community 3.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 9. Community 4.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 10. Community 4.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Interpretations
Supporting information
Inventory data references
Site Development and Testing Plan: Future work to validate the vegetation information in this provisional ecological site description is needed. This will include field activities to collect low and medium intensity sampling and analysis of that data. Field reviews should be done by soil scientists and vegetation specialists. A final field review, peer review, quality control, and quality assurance reviews of the ESD will be needed to produce the final approved level document. Reviews of the project plan are to be conducted by the Ecological Site Technical Team.
Other references
Cleland, D.T., J.A. Freeouf, J.E. Keys, G.J. Nowacki, C. Carpenter, and W.H. McNab. 2007. Ecological Subregions, Sections, and Subsections of the Coterminous United States. USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report WO-76. Washington, DC.
Edinger, G.J., Evans, D.J., Gebauer, S., Howard, T.G., Hunt, D.M., and A.M. Olivero, A.M. (eds.). 2014. Ecological Communities of New York State, Second Edition, A revised and expanded edition of Carol Reschke's Ecological Communities of New York State. New York Natural Heritage Program, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, NY.
NatureServe 2018. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org. (Accessed: January 2019).
USDA-NRCS [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.
USDA-NRCS [United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service] 2016. National Soils Information System (NASIS) [Software] Version 7.x. USDA, Kansas City, MO.
USNVC [United States National Vegetation Classification]. 2017. United States National Vegetation Classification Database, V2.01. Federal Geographic Data Committee, Vegetation Subcommittee, Washington DC. http://usnvc.org/explore-classification/ (Accessed: 2018).Contributors
Joshua Hibit
Approval
Greg Schmidt, 10/03/2024
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 05/21/2020 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
