Ecological site F128XY522WV

Tree	(1) Pinus echinata
Shrub	(1) Ilex collina
Herbaceous	Not specified

Landforms	(1) Bog (2) Mountain
Ponding duration	Brief (2 to 7 days)
Ponding frequency	None to frequent
Elevation	3000 – 3985 ft
Slope	0 – 3 %
Ponding depth	0 – 6 in
Water table depth	0 – 12 in
Aspect	Aspect is not a significant factor

Frost-free period (average)	150 days
Freeze-free period (average)	180 days
Precipitation total (average)	40 in

Parent material	(1) Woody organic material – sandstone
Drainage class	Very poorly drained
Permeability class	Moderate
Soil depth	16 – 47 in
Available water capacity (0-40in)	4.4 – 5.4 in
Soil reaction (1:1 water) (0-40in)	3.5 – 5.5
Subsurface fragment volume <=3" (Depth not specified)	0 – 25 %
Subsurface fragment volume >3" (Depth not specified)	10 – 55 %

Ecological dynamics

According to the DCR-DNH, these sites roughly correspond to their Appalachian Bog classification. The description of that system is as follows:

"The ecological dynamics of these naturally rare communities are not well understood, and many examples are currently suffering from shrub and tree invasions. Factors that may have been responsible for creating and maintaining open bogs include fire, grazing, beavers, and deep deposition of unstable soils.

Bog vegetation is frequently a mosaic of tree or shrub patches and herbaceous openings. Several compositional variants associated with geography and elevation have been documented in Virginia. Species common to most variants include great rhododendron (Rhododendron maximum), Catawba rhododendron (Rhododendron catawbiense), silky willow (Salix sericea), smooth alder (Alnus serrulata), cinnamon fern (Osmundastrum cinnamomeum var. cinnamomeum), tawny cottongrass (Eriophorum virginicum), prickly bog sedge (Carex atlantica), Fraser's marsh St. Johns-wort (Hypericum fraseri) , and brownish beaksedge (Rhynchospora capitellata). Species more restricted to low-elevation (below 900 m [3000 ft]) bogs of the Ridge and Valley and Cumberland Mountains include pitch pine (Pinus rigida), round-leaved sundew (Drosera rotundifolia var. rotundifolia), bushy bluestem (Andropogon glomeratus var. glomeratus), tussock sedge (Carex stricta), tuberous grass-pink (Calopogon tuberosus), yellow fringed orchid (Platanthera ciliaris), and Nuttall's reed-grass (Calamagrostis cinnoides)."

Because the ecological dynamics of this system are not well understood, no State and Transition Model was developed. This should be completed in future projects when field plots can be established.

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 text

Ecosystem states

1. Bog Vegetation

State 1
Bog Vegetation

To be Developed

Additional community tables

Rangeland health reference sheet

Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health is a qualitative assessment protocol used to determine ecosystem condition based on benchmark characteristics described in the Reference Sheet. A suite of 17 (or more) indicators are typically considered in an assessment. The ecological site(s) representative of an assessment location must be known prior to applying the protocol and must be verified based on soils and climate. Current plant community cannot be used to identify the ecological site.

Author(s)/participant(s)
Contact for lead author
Date	07/22/2026
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:

Download reference sheet

Natural ResourcesConservation Service

Ecological site F128XY522WV

Mesic Organic Mountain Bog Soils

Last updated: 5/14/2025 Accessed: 07/22/2026

Search

General information

MLRA notes

Ecological site concept

Table 1. Dominant plant species

Natural Resources
Conservation Service

Last updated: 5/14/2025
Accessed: 07/22/2026