Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Ecological site F140XY028NY
Moist Till Upland
Last updated: 10/01/2024
Accessed: 09/13/2026
-
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): 140X–Glaciated Allegheny Plateau and Catskill Mountains
This MLRA is a glaciated area of low relief dominated by broad expanses of nearly level, sandy deltas and shallow lacustrine basins or plains punctuated by low hills of glacial till. Rivers and streams have cut relatively deep but narrow valleys across the plain. Elevation ranges from 80 to 1,000 feet, increasing gradually from the St. Lawrence River southward and from Lake Champlain to the east and west. Local relief generally is less than 30 feet, but glacial till ridges, till plains, and some outwash terraces rise 15 to 80 feet above the adjacent plains.
This area has been glaciated, and a thin mantle of till covers most of the bedrock. Extensive areas of sandy glacial outwash and eolian deposits also occur. Some glacial lake sediments have been deposited above glacial moraines. These deposits are thickest in the valleys and thinnest on the ridges and highlands. During the later stages of the Wisconsin glacial period, seawater entered the Champlain Valley and deposited marine sediments that were later covered by freshwater sediments. The marine deposits are unique to the area.
This area supports hardwoods. The beech-birch-sugar maple forest type is the dominant climax forest type on uplands. Associated with this type are basswood, American elm, maple species, white ash, black cherry, and white pine. The aspen-birch type, earlier in succession, is economically important. Such species as eastern hemlock, red maple, American elm, and spruce are on wet soils.
Some of the major wildlife species in this area are white-tailed deer, red fox, raccoon, beaver, woodchuck, muskrat, cottontail, ruffed grouse, and woodcock.Classification relationships
NRCS:
Land Resource Region: R - Northeastern Forage and Forest Region
MLRA: 142X–St. Lawrence-Champlain Plain
LRU: B - Mesic Mean Annual Soil TemperatureEcological site concept
Landform/Landscape Position:
The site occurs on hills, knolls, ridges, benches, and till plains. Slopes range from 0 to 50 percent.
Soils:
The site consists of moderately deep to very deep, moderately well drained and somewhat poorly drained soils that formed in glacial till derived mostly from a combination sandstone, shale, siltstone, and limestone. Correlated soils are Angola, Aurora, Busti, Chautauqua, Conesus, Danley, Darien, Fremont, Greene, Hornell, Hornellsville, Kanona, Opark, Ravenna, Remsen, and Towerville.
Vegetation
The reference community coincides with both PA Natural Heritage Program's Red oak - mixed hardwood forest and Mixed mesophytic forest.Associated sites
F140XY030NY Well Drained Dense Till
Similar sites
F140XY029NY Rich Shallow Till Upland
F140XY007NY Frigid Moist Dense Till
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree (1) Quercus rubra
(2) Acer saccharumShrub (1) Lindera benzoin
Herbaceous (1) Symplocarpus foetidus
(2) CarexPhysiographic features
The site occurs on hills, benches, and till plains. Slopes range from 0 to 50 percent.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Landforms (1) Drumlin field > Till plain
(2) Till plain > Hill
(3) Upland > Bench
(4) Ridge
(5) Drumlinoid ridge
(6) Hillslope
Runoff class Medium to very high Flooding frequency None Ponding frequency None Elevation 328 – 2460 ft Slope 0 – 35 % Water table depth 6 – 27 in Aspect Aspect is not a significant factor Table 3. Representative physiographic features (actual ranges)
Runoff class Not specified Flooding frequency Not specified Ponding frequency Not specified Elevation 0 ft Slope 0 – 50 % Water table depth 0 in Climatic features
The Koppen-Geiger climate classification of the area in which this MLRA occurs is
Dfb, Warm-summer humid continental. Mean annual precipitation is 43 inches and evenly distributed throughout the year. Rainfall occurs as high-intensity, convective thunderstorms in the summer. However, snow comprises most of the precipitation in this area. Average frost-free and freeze-free days are 122 and 153, respectively, with the coldest temperatures and the shortest frost-free periods occurring in the high-elevation areas in the eastern part of the MLRA.Table 4 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (characteristic range) 110-130 days Freeze-free period (characteristic range) 140-170 days Precipitation total (characteristic range) 40-50 in Frost-free period (actual range) 100-140 days Freeze-free period (actual range) 140-170 days Precipitation total (actual range) 40-50 in Frost-free period (average) 120 days Freeze-free period (average) 150 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) BINGHAMTON [USW00004725], Johnson City, NY
-
(2) STROUDSBURG [USC00368596], East Stroudsburg, PA
-
(3) TOWANDA 1 S [USC00368905], Towanda, PA
-
(4) MONTROSE [USC00365915], Montrose, PA
-
(5) CORNING [USC00301787], Corning, NY
-
(6) ROCK HILL 3 SW [USC00307210], Rock Hill, NY
-
(7) CANTON [USC00361212], Canton, PA
">Influencing water features
NONE
Wetland description
NONE
Soil features
The site consists of moderately deep to very deep, moderately well drained and somewhat poorly drained soils that formed in glacial till derived mostly from a combination sandstone, shale, siltstone, and limestone. Correlated soils are Angola, Aurora, Busti, Canfield, Chautauqua, Conesus, Danley, Darien, Derb, Fremont, Greene, Hornell, Hornellsville, Kanona, Opark, Ravenna, Remsen, Schuyler, and Towerville.
Table 5. Representative soil features
Parent material (1) Till – limestone, sandstone, and shale
(2) Till – siltstone
Surface texture (1) Loam
(2) Silt loam
(3) Silty clay loam
(4) Channery silt loam
(5) Gravelly silt loam
(6) Very stony loam
Family particle size (1) Coarse-loamy
(2) Fine-loamy
(3) Fine
(4) Fine-silty
(5) Loamy-skeletal
Drainage class Somewhat poorly drained to moderately well drained Permeability class Very slow to slow Depth to restrictive layer 23 – 72 in Surface fragment cover <=3" Not specified Surface fragment cover >3" 3 % Available water capacity
(Depth not specified)2 – 7 in Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(Depth not specified)3.5 – 8.4 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(Depth not specified)5 – 40 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(Depth not specified)0 – 85 % Ecological dynamics
The reference community coincides with both PA Natural Heritage Program's Red oak - mixed hardwood forest and Mixed mesophytic forest.
Depending on site variability, common trees and shrubs include northern red oak, sugar maple, red maple, yellow birch white ash, basswood, American beech, shagbark hickory, spicebush, witch-hazel, and hop-hornbeam.
Dynamics includes conversion of site into agricultural production and invasive species establishment. Disturbances include wind, ice, insects, and land clearing or timber harvest.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
State 1 submodel, plant communities
State 2 submodel, plant communities
State 3 submodel, plant communities
State 4 submodel, plant communities
State 1
Reference - Minimally ManagedThe reference community coincides with both PA Natural Heritage Program's Red oak - mixed hardwood forest and Mixed mesophytic forest.
Dynamics includes conversion of site into agricultural production and invasive species establishment. Disturbances include wind, ice, insects, and land clearing or timber harvest.
This forest may have at one time been cleared or plowed during colonial times.
Characteristics and indicators. Soil may have evidence of an historic plow layer (Ap horizon).
Resilience management. Ensure that regenerating trees and shrubs are not heavily browsed by deer that they cannot replace overstory trees. Deer have been shown to have negative effects on forest understories (New York Natural Heritage Program, 2020). Avoid cutting old-growth forests.
Community 1.1
Mature ForestMature, late successional closed canopy forest. Depending on site variability, common trees and shrubs include northern red oak, sugar maple, red maple, yellow birch white ash, basswood, American beech, shagbark hickory, spicebush, witch-hazel, and hop-hornbeam.
Dominant plant species
-
northern red oak (Quercus rubra), tree
-
shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), tree
-
sedge (Carex), grass
Community 1.2
Young ForestOpen canopy, early successional, young forest.
Pathway P1.1
Community 1.1 to 1.2Natural disturbances - wind/ice storm, tree fall, and insect damage.
Conservation practices
Early Successional Habitat Development/Management Pathway P1.2
Community 1.2 to 1.1Time (succession).
State 2
Managed TimberThe state is characterized by active logging. Composition of forest stands will vary based on management objectives.
Community 2.1
Managed TimberDominant plant species
-
oak (Quercus), tree
-
maple (Acer), tree
-
green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), tree
-
mapleleaf viburnum (Viburnum acerifolium), shrub
-
western brackenfern (Pteridium aquilinum), other herbaceous
-
red maple (Acer rubrum), other herbaceous
-
green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), other herbaceous
State 3
Minimally Managed Forest with Invasive Species.Invasive species such as Japanese barberry, bush honeysuckle, multiflora rose, garlic mustard, and stiltgrass are common in the understory.
Community 3.1
Oak-pine forest with invasive speciesState 4
Pasture/GrasslandForest has been cleared and grasses and forbs have been introduced for livestock grazing, hay production, and/or wildlife.
Community 4.1
Introduced grasses and forbsCommunity 4.2
Woody plant encroachmentPathway P4.1
Community 4.1 to 4.2Abandonment (lack of mowing or fire suppression)
Pathway P4.2
Community 4.2 to 4.1Mowing, prescribed fire, and/or brush management.
Conservation practices
Brush Management Transition T1A
State 1 to 2Timber harvest; logging.
Transition T1B
State 1 to 3Introduction of invasive species usually after disturbance.
Transition T1C
State 1 to 4Land use conversion.
Restoration pathway R2A
State 2 to 1Time (succession). Forest stand improvement, restoration.
Transition T2A
State 2 to 3Introduction of invasive species. Lack of timber management.
Transition T2B
State 2 to 4Land use conversion
Restoration pathway R3A
State 3 to 1Brush management, invasive species management.
Transition T3A
State 3 to 2Timber management/harvest, logging.
Transition T3B
State 3 to 4Land use conversion.
Restoration pathway R4A
State 4 to 1Abandonment, Time (succession), forest restoration.
Restoration pathway R4B
State 4 to 3Abandonment, time (sucession) and introduction of invasive species.
Additional community tables
Table 6. Community 1.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 7. Community 1.1 forest overstory composition
Common name Symbol Scientific name Nativity Height ft Canopy cover (%) Diameter in Basal area (square ft/acre) Table 8. Community 1.1 forest understory composition
Common name Symbol Scientific name Nativity Height (ft) Canopy cover (%) Table 9. Community 1.2 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 2.1 forest overstory composition
Common name Symbol Scientific name Nativity Height ft Canopy cover (%) Diameter in Basal area (square ft/acre) Table 12. Community 2.1 forest understory composition
Common name Symbol Scientific name Nativity Height (ft) Canopy 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 (%) Table 15. 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
New York Natural Heritage Program. 2020. Online Conservation Guide for Appalachian oak-pine forest. Available from: https://guides.nynhp.org/appalachian-oak-pine-forest/. Accessed January 21, 2020.
Zimmerman, E., T. Davis, G. Podniesinski, M. Furedi, J. McPherson, S. Seymour, B. Eichelberger, N. Dewar, J. Wagner, and J. Fike (editors). 2012. Terrestrial and Palustrine Plant Communities of Pennsylvania, 2nd Edition. Pennsylvania Natural Heritage Program, Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.Contributors
Joshua Hibit
Approval
Greg Schmidt, 10/01/2024
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 05/20/2020 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
