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.
MLRA notes
Major Land Resource Area (MLRA): 102A–Rolling Till Prairie
The Rolling Till Prairie (102A) is located within the Central Feed Grains and Livestock Land Resource Region. It spans 3 states (Minnesota 58 percent, South Dakota 42 percent, and small part in North Dakota), encompassing over 16,000 square miles (Figure 1). The elevation ranges from approximately over 2,000 feet above sea level (ASL) on the Prairie Coteau in Northeastern South Dakota to about 1,000 feet ASL on lowlands. The dominate landform in this area are stagnation moraines, end moraines, glacial outwash plains, terraces, and flood plains. The area is dominated by till covered moraines. The stagnation moraines are gently undulating to steep and have many depressions and poorly defined drainages. Small outwash areas are adjacent to the watercourses. The Cretaceous Pierre Shale underlies the till in the most of the area. Precambrian rocks also occur at depth. Granite is quarried near Milbank, South Dakota and outcrops of Sioux Quartzite are common. (USDA-NRCS 2006).
The dominant soil order in this MLRA is Mollisols. The soils in the area dominantly have a frigid soil temperature regime, an aquic or udic soil moisture regime, and mixed mineralogy. They generally are very deep, well drained to very poorly drained. This area supports true prairie vegetation characterized by big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii), little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium), porcupinegrass (Hesperostipa spartea), and green needlegrass (Nassella viridula). Prairie cordgrass (Spartina pectinata) commonly grows in wet areas. (USDA-NRCS 2006).Classification relationships
Major Land Resource Area (MLRA): Rolling Till Prairie (102A) (USDA-NRCS 2006)
USFS Subregions: North Central Glaciated Plains Section (251B); Upper Minnesota River-Des Moines Lobe Subsection (251Ba); Outer Coteau des Prairies Subsection (251Bb); Northwest Iowa Plains Subsection (251Bd); Minnesota and Northeast Iowa Morainal-Oak Savannah Section (222M); Alexandria Moraine-Hardwood Hills Subsection (222Ma) (Cleland et al. 2007).
US EPA Level IV Ecoregion: Tewaukon/Big Stone Stagnation Moraine (46e), Prairie Coteau (46k), Prairie Coteau Escarpment (46l), Big Sioux Basin (46m), Minnesota River Prairie (46o), Des Moines Lobe (47b) , Lake Agassiz Plains (48d), Alexandria Moraines and Detroit Lakes Outwash Plain (51j) (USEPA 2013)Ecological site concept
The Deep Marsh Ecological Site typically represents the central portion of a wetland basin or depression on a glaciated prairie landscape with standing water up to 5 feet deep, and at least some tall, emergent vegetation like cattails, bulrushes and reeds. In most years there is at least some standing water but in drought years the basin surface may dry out yet retain groundwater within 1 foot of the surface.
Associated sites
R102AY001SD Shallow Marsh
These sites occur in a basin or closed depression. Soils are very poorly drained and the site will pond water until early summer in most years. The central concept soil series is Parnell and Oldham, but other series are included.
R102AY002SD Linear Meadow
These sites occur in drainageways or along the edges of closed depressions. Soils are poorly and very poorly drained which have a water table within 0 to 2 feet of the soil surface that persists longer than the wettest part of the growing season typically until the month of August. The central concept soil series are Vallers and Colvin, but other series are included.
R102AY006SD Limy Subirrigated
These sites occur along the edges of drainageways. Soils are somewhat poorly drained which have a water table within 2 to 5 feet of the soil surface that persists longer than the wettest part of the growing season typically until the month of August. Soils will effervesce with acid at or near the surface. The central concept soil series is Cubden, Hamerly, McKranz, but other series are included.
R102AY010SD Loamy
These sites occur on upland areas. The soils are well drained and have less than 40 percent clay in the surface and subsoil. The central concept soil series is Barnes, Forman, and Poinsett, but other series are included.
Similar sites
R102AY001SD Shallow Marsh
The Shallow Marsh site is in a similar landscape position, but the site ponds water until early summer in most years. The Shallow Marsh site will have none to very little cattails and more prairie cordgrass than a Deep Marsh site.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree Not specified
Shrub Not specified
Herbaceous (1) Typha latifolia
(2) SchoenoplectusPhysiographic features
This site occurs on nearly level to concave depressions on
uplands and till plains.Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Slope shape across (1) Concave
Slope shape up-down (1) Concave
Landforms (1) Upland > Plain
Runoff class Very low Flooding duration Brief (2 to 7 days) to very long (more than 30 days) Flooding frequency None to frequent Ponding duration Long (7 to 30 days) to very long (more than 30 days) Ponding frequency Frequent Elevation 943 – 2082 ft Slope 0 – 1 % Ponding depth 6 – 47 in Water table depth 0 – 5 in Aspect Aspect is not a significant factor Climatic features
MLRA 102A is considered to have a continental climate – cold winters and relatively hot summers, low to moderate humidity, light rainfall, and much sunshine. Extremes in temperature may also abound. The climate is the result of this MLRA’s location near the geographic center of North America. There are few natural barriers on the Northern Great Plains and air masses move freely across the plains and account for rapid changes in temperature.
Annual precipitation typically ranges from 25 to 28 inches per year. The average annual temperature is about 43°F. January is the coldest month with average temperatures ranging from about 5°F (Mahnomen 1 W, Minnesota (MN)), to about 14°F (Tracy, MN). July is the warmest month with temperatures averaging from about 69°F (Mahnomen 1 W, MN), to about 73°F (Tracy, MN). The range of normal average monthly temperatures between the coldest and warmest months is about 62°F. This large annual range attests to the continental nature of this area's climate. Hourly winds are estimated to average about 11 miles per hour (mph) annually, ranging from about 13 mph during the spring to about 10 mph during the summer. Daytime winds are generally stronger than nighttime and occasional strong storms may bring brief periods of high winds with gusts to more than 50 mph.
Growth of cool-season plants begins in early to mid-March, slowing or ceasing in late June. Warm-season plants begin growth about mid-May and continue to early or mid-September. Greenup of cool-season plants may occur in September and October when adequate soil moisture is present.Table 3 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (characteristic range) 120-130 days Freeze-free period (characteristic range) 140-150 days Precipitation total (characteristic range) 30-30 in Frost-free period (actual range) 110-130 days Freeze-free period (actual range) 140-160 days Precipitation total (actual range) 20-30 in Frost-free period (average) 120 days Freeze-free period (average) 150 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) FOSSTON 1 E [USC00212916], Fosston, MN
-
(2) MAHNOMEN [USC00215012], Mahnomen, MN
-
(3) ROTHSAY [USC00217149], Rothsay, MN
-
(4) WADENA 3 S [USC00218579], Deer Creek, MN
-
(5) FERGUS FALLS [USC00212768], Fergus Falls, MN
-
(6) ORWELL DAM [USC00216228], Fergus Falls, MN
-
(7) DALTON 3S [USC00212015], Dalton, MN
-
(8) ALEXANDRIA MUNI AP [USW00014910], Alexandria, MN
-
(9) MELROSE [USC00215325], Melrose, MN
-
(10) GLENWOOD 2 WNW [USC00213174], Glenwood, MN
-
(11) ARTICHOKE LAKE [USC00210287], Correll, MN
-
(12) BENSON [USC00210667], Benson, MN
-
(13) MILAN 1 NW [USC00215400], Milan, MN
-
(14) SISSETON [USC00397742], Sisseton, SD
-
(15) SISSETON MUNI AP [USW00094993], Sisseton, SD
-
(16) BROWNS VALLEY [USC00211063], Beardsley, MN
-
(17) WILMOT [USC00399337], Wilmot, SD
-
(18) MILBANK 4 NW [USC00395536], Milbank, SD
-
(19) MORRIS WC EXP STN [USC00215638], Hancock, MN
-
(20) MONTEVIDEO 1 SW [USC00215563], Dawson, MN
-
(21) NEW LONDON [USC00215842], New London, MN
">Influencing water features
This ecological site is heavily influenced by hydrology. Water accumulates in this site from landscape position run off from above and provides the foundational soil and plant relationships found on this site.
Wetland description
This ecological site may be classified as a Palustrine Emergent Semi-permanently flooded to intermittently exposed wetland according to Cowardin et al, 1979.
Soil features
The soils of the Deep Marsh ecological site formed in alluvium in depressions on uplands and plains, they are very poorly drained and have very low runoff and slow to very slow permeability. The soils on this site often have a ponded phase. The major soil series included in this ecological site are the Bigstone, Southam, Rauville, and Urness Soil Series, among others.
Table 4. Representative soil features
Parent material (1) Till
Surface texture (1) Silt loam
(2) Silty clay loam
Drainage class Very poorly drained to poorly drained Permeability class Slow to very slow Depth to restrictive layer 72 – 0 in Soil depth 80 – 0 in Surface fragment cover <=3" Not specified Surface fragment cover >3" Not specified Available water capacity
(0-60in)7.5 – 10 in Calcium carbonate equivalent
(0-40in)3 – 14 % Electrical conductivity
(0-40in)0 – 4 mmhos/cm Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-40in)7.1 – 8.4 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(0-40in)0 – 5 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(0-40in)0 – 1 % Ecological dynamics
The Deep Marsh Ecological Site typically represents the central portion of a wetland basin or depression on a glaciated prairie landscape with standing water up to 5 feet deep, and at least some tall, emergent vegetation like cattails, bulrushes and reeds. In most years there is at least some standing water but in drought years the basin surface may dry out yet retain groundwater within 1 foot of the surface. Within other classification systems, this ecological site generally corresponds with Stewart and Kantrud’s (1971) “Type IV wetland basin,” also called a “semipermanent pond or lake”; and with the “Palustrine Emergent Semipermanently Flooded to Intermittently Exposed Wetland” of Cowardin, et al. (1979).
Most uncultivated wetland basins in this MLRA have concentric bands of distinctly different vegetation corresponding with changes in soil and water depth. For example, while the center of the basin supports deep marsh vegetation, it is often surrounded by a zone of shallow marsh vegetation, which is in turn surrounded by a zone of wet meadow vegetation, eventually grading outward into upland soils and vegetation. Degree of slope, type of soils, and nature of the local hydrology tend to dictate the number and width of these concentric zones of vegetation.
Given the climatic extremes of the Great Plains with precipitation that ranges from drought to deluge, Deep Marsh wetland basins undergo cycles of flooding and drawdown with corresponding changes in vegetation.State and transition model
Custom diagramStandard diagramMore interactive model formats are also available. View Interactive Models
Click on state and transition labels to scroll to the respective textEcosystem states
T1A - Species invasion, flooding, and drought T1B - Drought and tillage T1C - Drainage T2A - Deep water or drought, prescribed grazing, prescribed burning, time T2B - Time and drought T2C - Drought and drainage T3A - Non-use, flooding, invasives, time, seeding T4A - Renovation/Restoration State 1 submodel, plant communities
1.1A - Excessive flooding, herbivory activity 1.2A - Drought 1.3A - Normal precipitation and time 1.4A - Return to normal precipitation patterns, and time State 2 submodel, plant communities
2.1A - Deep water, herbivory, prescribed grazing, and/or flooding 2.2A - Drought 2.3A - Normal precipitation and time 2.4A - Time State 3 submodel, plant communities
State 4 submodel, plant communities
State 1
Reference StateThis state represents what is believed to show the natural range of variability that dominates the dynamics of the ecological state prior to European settlement. This site, in the Reference State (State 1), is dominated by cattails and grass-like vegetation. Drought and flooding are major drivers between plant community phases, while herbivory by native ungulates and other wildlife and fire played a more minor role. Invasion of nonnative or hybrid cattails during the drawdown/bare soil phase will result in a transition to the Invaded State (State 2).
Dominant plant species
-
cosmopolitan bulrush (Bolboschoenus maritimus), grass
-
broadleaf cattail (Typha latifolia), grass
-
hardstem bulrush (Schoenoplectus acutus), grass
-
softstem bulrush (Schoenoplectus tabernaemontani), grass
-
slender bulrush (Schoenoplectus heterochaetus), grass
-
white water crowfoot (Ranunculus aquatilis), other herbaceous
-
common bladderwort (Utricularia macrorhiza), other herbaceous
-
sago pondweed (Stuckenia pectinata), other herbaceous
-
water smartweed (Polygonum amphibium var. stipulaceum), other herbaceous
-
duckweed (Lemna), other herbaceous
Community 1.1
Normal Emergent PhaseHistorically, this phase of deep marsh vegetation consisted of scattered patches of broadleaf cattail and/or stands of bulrushes like hardstem, slender, softstem or prairie bulrush, interspersed with patches of open water supporting submerged or floating leaved aquatic plants like white water-crowfoot, common bladderwort, sago pondweed, water smartweed, and various duckweeds.
Community 1.2
Open-water PhaseThe transition to an open water phase is due to increased precipitation during wet years. Flooding will drown out cattails and bulrushes in certain areas, but some will still be present on the periphery of the wetland basin during this phase. Herbivory by muskrats or other native ungulates may also help speed the transition to this state. The central portion of the basin will have open water with various submerged and floating-leaved aquatic plants, like those mentioned above.
Community 1.3
Drawdown Bare-soil PhaseThe transition from an open water phase or normal emergent phase due to drought will result in bareground. Weedy annuals and short-lived perennials will invade the basin. Species such as cockleburs, swamp ragwort, rough barnyardgrass, and foxtail barley will replace the cattails and bulrushes.
Community 1.4
Natural Drawdown / Emergent PhaseThe return of normal precipitation and runoff will inundate the basin killing the annuals and other plants. Seeds of emergent wetland plants like cattails and bulrushes will be able to germinate and grow on mudflats or areas of very shallow standing water. As the water levels return to normal, cattails and bulrushes will colonize the site through rhizomatous growth and submerged and floating aquatic plants will be supported once again, leading to a transition back to the 1.1 Normal Emergent Community Phase with in the Reference State (State 1).
Pathway 1.1A
Community 1.1 to 1.2Excessive flooding results in an open water phase with mostly submerged species, and cattails/bulrushes around the periphery of the open water. Herbivory by muskrats or other native species may also decrease the amounts of cattails and lead to open water phases as well will shift this community to the 1.2 Open Water Phase within the Reference State (State 1).
Pathway 1.2A
Community 1.2 to 1.3Drought leads to a drawdown phase, where open water changes to bareground. Annuals and short-lived perennials colonize the bareground areas will shift this community to the 1.3 Drawdown/Bare Soil Phase within the Reference State (State 1).
Pathway 1.3A
Community 1.3 to 1.4Normal precipitation and time allows cattails to recolonize areas and will shift this community to the 1.4 Natural Drawdown/Emergent Phase within the Reference State (State 1).
Pathway 1.4A
Community 1.4 to 1.1Normal precipitation and time allows cattails and other vegetation to return to a normal emergent phase with areas of open water and will shift this community back to the 1.1 Normal Emergent Phase within the Reference State (State 1).
State 2
Invaded StateThis state is characterized by a shift from broadleaf cattail dominance to narrowleaf (Typha angustifolia) and hybrid (Typha x glauca) cattail dominance – both more invasive cattail species. The transition leads to a more cattail dominated state, decreasing the amount of bulrush species present in this state, and also allowing for Phragmites to invade as well. This state incorporates the same drought and deluge cycles as the reference state, but this state is dominated by invasive/nonnative vegetation.
Dominant plant species
-
narrowleaf cattail (Typha angustifolia), grass
-
hybrid cattail (Typha ×glauca), grass
-
reed (Phragmites), grass
Community 2.1
Emergent PhaseThis phase is dominated by narrowleaf/hybrid cattails with minor amounts of bulrush. Phragmites may also invade during this state. This phase has less open water and more continuous stands of cattails.
Community 2.2
Open Water PhaseThis phase is similar to Reference State (State 1) condition except water must be deeper or cattails must be grazed cut or crush down and then inundated in order to reach a deep-water phase.
Community 2.3
Drawdown Bare-soil PhaseThe transition from an open water phase to the drawdown/bare ground phase occurs due to drought. The bare ground will be invaded by exotic weedy annuals and short-live perennials such as barnyardgrass, foxtail barley, and chenopods.
Community 2.4
Natural Drawdown / Emergent PhaseOnce normal precipitation patterns have returned, the native wetland seedbank will try to recolonize the site with bulrushes and cattails, but windblown seeds from narrowleaf and hybrid cattails and Phragmites will most likely compete with the natives for space.
Pathway 2.1A
Community 2.1 to 2.2Deep water, herbivory, prescribed grazing, and/or flooding lead to an open water phase. Deeper water than than the Reference State (State 1) is needed to drown out narrowleaf/hybrid cattails. An alternative to deeper water is haying/chopping, fire, and/or crushing cattails prior to flooding to drown out those cattail species will shift this community to the 2.2 Open Water Phase within the Invaded State (State 2).
Pathway 2.2A
Community 2.2 to 2.3Drought leads to bareground, and exotic annual weeds compete with native annuals to colonize the bareground will shift this community to the 2.3 Drawdown/Bare Soil Phase within the Invaded State (State 2).
Pathway 2.3A
Community 2.3 to 2.4Normal precipitation and time is needed to recolonize the basin with emergent vegetation. Native seed bank species compete with wind-blown seeds of narrowleaf cattail and Phragmites to colonize the area and will shift this community to the 2.4 Natural Drawdown/Emergent Phase within the Invaded State (State 2).
Pathway 2.4A
Community 2.4 to 2.1Time allows cattails and other vegetation to return to a normal emergent phase with areas of open water and will shift this community back to the 2.1 Emergent Phase within the Invaded State (State 2).
State 3
Crop Production StateThis state is characterized by the production of annual crops. This community phase only occurs during extreme drought years when basin is dry enough to be cropped.
Dominant plant species
-
corn (Zea mays), grass
-
common wheat (Triticum aestivum), grass
-
common oat (Avena sativa), grass
-
soybean (Glycine max), other herbaceous
Community 3.1
Annual Cropping SystemThis plant community developed with the use of a variety of tillage systems and cropping systems for the production of annual crops including corn, soybean, wheat, oats and a variety of other crops.
State 4
Altered Production StateThis state is characterized by the production of annual crops due to drainage by mechanical means. This state is highly altered and will never return to the Reference State (State 1).
Dominant plant species
-
corn (Zea mays), grass
-
common wheat (Triticum aestivum), grass
-
common oat (Avena sativa), grass
-
soybean (Glycine max), other herbaceous
Community 4.1
Annual Cropping SystemThis plant community developed with the use of a variety of tillage systems and cropping systems for the production of annual crops including corn, soybean, wheat, oats and a variety of other crops.
Transition T1A
State 1 to 2Invasion of nonnative cattails and phragmites along with flooding and drought may lead to the Invaded State (State 2).
Transition T1B
State 1 to 3Times of drought will dry out the site, which may allow tillage and annual cropping to commence and may lead to the Crop Production State (State 3).
Transition T1C
State 1 to 4Drainage of basin may allow for the basin to be cropped and may lead to the Altered Production State (State 4). Restoration of this state may occur, but natural pathways have been altered and site will never return to Reference State (State 1).
Transition T2A
State 2 to 1Deep water or drought may help the invaded phase return to a more native state within the Reference State (State 1). Narrowleaf/hybrid cattails cannot withstand deep water phases, or drought. A combination of many management types such as prescribe grazing, prescribe burning, and well-timed climate occurrences may allow the site to return to a non-native state (but not likely).
Transition T2B
State 2 to 3Time and drought will dry out the site, which may allow tillage and annual cropping to commence and may lead to the Crop Production State (State 3).
Transition T2C
State 2 to 4Drainage and drought of basin may allow for the basin to be cropped and may lead to the Altered Production State (State 4). Restoration of this state may occur, but natural pathways have been altered and site will never return to Reference State (State 1).
Transition T3A
State 3 to 2Non-use and flooding will allow invasive water-loving plants to revegetate the site over time. Seeding with native vegetation may also speed this process.
Transition T4A
State 4 to 2Restoration/renovation of the site by plugging ditches will return this site back to a vegetated state. The site will have been altered too much to allow a restoration back to the Reference State (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 1.4 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 9. Community 2.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 10. Community 2.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 11. Community 2.3 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 12. Community 2.4 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 4.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Interpretations
Supporting information
Inventory data references
There is no NRCS clipping data and other inventory currently available for this site. Information presented here has been derived using field observations from range-trained personnel. Those involved in developing this site include: Stan Boltz, Range Management Specialist, NRCS; and Dave Ode, Botanist/Plant Ecologist (retired) State of South Dakota.
Other references
Aber, J.S., S.W. Aber, F. Pavri, E. Volkova, and R.L. Penner II. 2006. Small-format aerial photography for assessing change on wetland vegetation, Cheyenne Bottoms, Kansas. Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science 109: 47-57.
Apfelbaum, Steven I. 1985. Cattail (Typha spp.) Management. Natural Areas Journal 5(3): 9-17.
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. 92 pps.
Cowardin, Lewis M., Virginia Carter, Francis C. Golet, and Edward T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. US Fish and Wildilfe Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Washington, DC.
Cressey, Ryann. 2016. Changes in wetland conditions and wetland plant communities in the Prairie Pothole Region after 50 years. M.S. Thesis, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD. 139 pp.
Dix, Ralph L. and Fred E. Smeins. 1967. The prairie, meadow and marsh vegetation of Nelson County, North Dakota. Canadian Journal of Botany 45: 21-58.
Errington, Paul L., Roger J. Siglin and Robert C. Clark. 1963. The decline of a muskrat population. Journal of Wildlife Management 27: 1-8
Hayward, Herman E. 1928. Studies of plants in the Black Hills of South Daktoa. Botanical Gazette 85(4): 353-412.
Hubbard, Daniel E., David A. Beck, and Bryan D. Schultz. 1988. Chemical constituents and IVDDM of hybrid cattail from a South Dakota prairie pothole. Wetlands 8(2): 179-192.
Kantrud, Harold A. 1986. Effects of vegetation manipulation on breeding waterfowl in prairie wetlands – a literature review. Fish and Wildlife Technical Report #3. US Fish & Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. 15 pp.
McIntosh, Arthur C. 1931. A botanical survey of the Black Hills of South Dakota. Black Hills Engineer 19(3): 157-277.
Metcalf, Franklin P. 1931. Wild-Duck Foods of North Dakota Lakes. USDA Technical Bulletin No. 221, Washington, DC. 72 pp.
Miklovic, Stefanie. 2000. Typha angustifolia management implications for glacial marsh restoration. Restoration and Reclamation Review 6(2): 1-11.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (2005). Field Guide to the Native Plant Communities of Minnesota: The Prairie Parkland and Tallgrass Aspen Parklands Provinces. Ecological Land Classification Program, Minnesota County Biological Survey, and Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program. MNDNR St. Paul, MN.
NatureServe. 2017. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life. Version 7.1. Ecological Association Comprehensive Report for Typha spp.-Schoenoplectus acutus Mixed Herbs Midwest Marsh. NatureServe, Arlington, VA. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org (Accessed 25 June, 2018).
Nelson, Noland F. and Reuben H. Dietz. 1966. Cattail control methods in Utah. Utah Department of Fish and Game Publication No. 66-2. 31 pp.
Over, William H. 1932. Flora of South Dakota: An Illustrated checklist of flowering plants, shrubs and trees of South Dakota. University of South Dakota, Vermillian, SD. 161 pp.
Pound, Rosco and Frederick E. Clements. 1900. The Phytogeography of Nebraska. 2nd Ed. Published by The Seminar, Lincoln, NE. 442 pp.
Rydberg, Per Axel. 1896. Flora of the Black Hills of South Dakota. Contributions from the U.S. National Herbarium. Vol. III, No. 8. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
Saunders, DeAlton. 1899. Ferns and Flowering Plants of South Dakota. South Dakota Agricultural Experment Station Bulletin 64. pp. 102-227.
Schultz, Bryan d., Daniel E. Hubbard, Jonathan A. Jenks, and Kenneth F. Higgins. 1994. Plant and waterfowl responses to cattle grazing in two South Dakota semipermanent wetlands. Proceedings of the South Dakota Academy of Science 73:121-134.
Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Official Soil Series Descriptions. Available online. Accessed March 2018.
Steenis, J.H., H.P. Cofer, and L.P. Smith. 1959. Studies on cattail management. Pages 149-155, IN: Transactions of the Northeast Wildlife Conference, 10th Annual Meeting, Montreal, Canada.
Stewart, Robert E., and Harold A. Kantrud. 1971. Classification of natural ponds and lakes in the glaciated prairie region. U.S. Fish. Wildl. Serv., Resour. Publ. 92. 57 pp.
Stewart, Robert E., and Harold A. Kantrud. 1972. Vegetation of prairie potholes, North Dakota, in relation to quality of water and other environmental factors. U.S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Pap. 585-D. 36 pp.
Stukey, Ronald L. and D.P. Salamon. 1987. Typha angustifolia in North America: a foreigner masquerading as a native. American Journal of Botany 74(5): 757.
United States Department of Agriculture – Natural Resource Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS). 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. 672pps.
USDA, NRCS. National Soil Information System, Information Technology Center, 2150 Centre Avenue, Building A, Fort Collins, CO 80526. (http://soils.usda.gov/technical/nasis/)
USDA, NRCS. 2018. The PLANTS Database (http://plants.usda.gov, 27 March 2018). National Plant Data Team, Greensboro, NC 27401-4901 USA.
Van der Valk, Arnold G. and C.B. Davis. 1978. The role of seed banks in vegetation dynamics of prairie glacial marshes. Ecology 59: 322-335.
Visher, Stephen S. 1912. Plants of the Pine Ridge Reservation. Bulletin of the South Dakota Geological and Biological Survey 5: 84-108.
Visher, Stephen S. 1914. A Preliminary Report on the Biololgy of Harding County Northwestern South Dakota. South Dakota Geological Survey Bulletin No. 6. State Publishing Company, Pierre, SD. 126 pp.Contributors
Stan Boltz
Lance Howe
Steve WinterApproval
Suzanne Mayne-Kinney, 5/05/2025
Acknowledgments
Contact for Lead Authors: Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS), Redfield Soil Survey Office Redfield, SD; Lance Howe (Lance.Howe@usda.gov), Soil Survey Office Leader, USDA-NRCS, Redfield, SD; and Steve Winter (Steven.Winter@usda.gov), Soil Scientist, USDA-NRCS, Redfield, SD Additional Information Acknowledgment: Jason Hermann (Jason.Hermann@usda.gov), Area Rangeland Management Specialist, USDA-NRCS, Redfield, SD; Dave Ode, Botanist/Plant Ecologist (retired) State of South Dakota.
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 01/02/2025 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
