Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Ecological site RX143X00Y210
Marsh Wetland Complex
Last updated: 5/20/2025
Accessed: 09/20/2026
-
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): 143X–Northeastern Mountains
MLRA 143 is in Maine (51 percent), New York (27 percent), Vermont (13 percent), New Hampshire (7 percent), and Massachusetts (2 percent). It makes up about 34,409 square miles (89,118 square kilometers). The MLRA consists of rolling hills and mountains covered by Wisconsin till. It is in three parts separated by other MLRAs. The western part is in New York (primarily the Adirondack Mountains). The central part is mainly in the Green Mountains in Vermont and the Berkshires in Massachusetts. The eastern part is in New Hampshire and most of northern Maine. The MLRA is used mainly for forestry and recreational purposes. The western part of MLRA 143 in the Adirondack Mountains has a distinct boundary with the physiographical dissimilar Saint Lawrence-Champlain Plain. The middle part that encompasses the Green Mountains has a diffuse boundary as it blends into the northern part of the New England and Eastern New York Uplands on the foothills of the Green Mountains. The southern boundary of the easternmost part of MLRA 143 has the same diffuse boundary. The northern boundary of the MLRA is the Canadian border.
The westernmost part of this MLRA is primarily in the Adirondack province of the Appalachian Highlands. A small area in the southern end of the western part is in the Mohawk section of the Appalachian Plateaus province of the same division. The easternmost part, primarily in northern Maine, is in the New England Upland section of the New England province of the Appalachian Highlands. The southwestern half of this part is in the White Mountain section of the same province and division, and the middle part of the MLRA is in the Green Mountain section. The mountains and foothills in this MLRA are commonly rounded. They are underlain by bedrock and typically covered with thin deposits of till. The more rugged mountain areas are separated by high-gradient streams coursing through steep areas of colluvium or talus-laden valleys. Many glacially broadened valleys are filled with glacial outwash and have numerous swamps and lakes. The mountains and foothills are moderately steep to very steep, and the valleys are nearly level to sloping.
As the northernmost MLRA in the region with the coldest temperatures and shortest growing season, the Northeastern Mountains have less overall tree diversity, fewer pine and oak trees, and more abundant spruce and fir trees than neighboring MLRAs. The variability in microtopography on this site results in a patchy mosaic of plant communities. Silver maple is the most common overstory species, with diverse grasses and herbs indicating differences in soil wetness throughout the site due to slight variability in elevation above the water table. This site is subject to ice scour and flooding, but the most extensive disturbance is cultivation. These broad, flat landforms are nutrient rich with high water-holding capacity. These factors along with their adjacency to rivers made them ideal farming locations for early settlers, much of which continues today. The effects of altered flow regimes from modern dams may also be significant but require further study.Classification relationships
This site occurs in Ecological Site Group 2 (Open Wetlands) of MLRA 143 (The Northeastern Mountains), in the Northeastern Forage and Forest Region (Land Resource Region R).
The Northeastern Forage and Forest LRR includes all of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, as well as large portions of Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. Its southern boundary marks the extent of the Wisconsin ice sheet, which engulfed the entire LRR as recently as 10,000 to 15,000 years ago. Erosional and depositional processes associated with glaciation created many of the topographic patterns that distinguish MLRAs within the Northeastern region. Harder granitic and metamorphic bedrock to the north were more resistant to glacial erosion, resulting in the relatively nutrient poor mountains of MLRA 143; whereas nutrient-rich sedimentary bedrock of MLRAs 139, 140, and 146 resulted in relatively flat, fertile landscapes ideal for cultivation. Other areas were depressed below sea-level by the sheer mass of the glacier, resulting in pockets of marine sediments which distinguish MLRAs 142, 144A, 144B, and 145.
Precipitation is sufficient to support productive forestland throughout the Northeastern region. Still, a latitudinal temperature gradient from mesic to frigid soil temperatures results in a general transition from central hardwoods and pine in the southern MLRAs to northern hardwoods and spruce-fir forests farther north (no true boreal forests exist in the region). Elevations are generally low throughout the Northeastern region, with the exception of MLRA 143 which has many high mountain ecosystems with cryic temperature regimes and alpine vegetation above the tree line.Ecological site concept
This site occurs on flat slopes (0-2%) at footslopes and toeslopes where large amounts of water accumulates for much of the growing season. When endo- and epi-saturation are exhausted, this site will reflect standing water conditions. Well-decomposed organic deposits (mucks) are dominant in the upper 40 inches (100 centimeters) of the soil profile and are very deep, underlain by mineral textures, and very poorly drained.
The reference vegetation of this site is composed of variable natural communities of graminoids, forbs, and shrubs that grow along slight changes in soil wetness. These communities are permanently saturated and seasonally inundated, often limiting woody vegetation to a few scattered, stunted individuals. Changes in community structure and composition are based on changes in immediate and long-term shifts in hydrology and nutrient dynamics. This is often seen through the construction or removal of beaver dams or man-made water control structures which change the depth to water table and alter the dynamics that drive species composition, structure, and soil development. Further study is required of this site in regards to the influence of hydrology on changes in soil and plant dynamics.Associated sites
RX143X00Y302 Mucky Swamp
The Mucky Swamp sites will reflect similar soil characteristic but will occur in slightly higher landscape positions that will allow for the establishment and dominance of tree species.
Similar sites
RX143X00Y220 Semi-Acidic Peat Wetland Complex
The Semi-Acidic Peat Wetland Complex sites are characterized by poorly-decomposed peat rather than highly decomposed muck. The soil oxygen and nutrient levels are lower than in the Marsh Wetland Complex, resulting in greater sphagnum moss, heath shrubs, black spruce, and other common bog vegetation.
RX143X00Y230 Acidic Peat Wetland Complex
The Acidic Peat Wetland Complex sites are characterized by poorly-decomposed peat rather than highly decomposed muck. The soil oxygen and nutrient levels are much lower than in the Marsh Wetland Complex, and soil pH is less than 4.5, resulting in greater sphagnum moss, pitcher plants, and other species indicative of acid bogs.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree Not specified
Shrub (1) Alnus incana
Herbaceous (1) Carex
(2) CalamagrostisLegacy ID
F143XY210ME
Physiographic features
This ecological site and its associated plant communities occur in freshwater marshes on footslopes and toeslopes of mountains, where large amounts of water pass through, creating hydric conditions and supporting organic matter accumulation. Slope shape will often range from concave to linear, depending on localized landform, all sites reflecting a seasonal high-water table of 0 to 6 inches (0 to 15 centimeters).
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Hillslope profile (1) Footslope
(2) Toeslope
Slope shape across (1) Linear
(2) Concave
Slope shape up-down (1) Concave
(2) Linear
Landforms (1) Marsh
(2) Depression
(3) Swamp
Runoff class Negligible to very high Flooding frequency None Ponding duration Long (7 to 30 days) to very long (more than 30 days) Ponding frequency Occasional to frequent Elevation 10 – 2800 ft Slope 0 – 2 % Ponding depth 2 – 6 in Water table depth 0 – 6 in Aspect Aspect is not a significant factor Climatic features
As the northernmost MLRA in the region, this site experiences frigid and snowy winters, warm rainy summers, and a relatively short five to six month growing season. Precipitation is considerably constant from month to month; however, areas of higher elevations may receive up to double the annual precipitation of the lower elevations and have a three to four month growing season with extremely cold winters.
Table 3 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (characteristic range) 80-90 days Freeze-free period (characteristic range) 120-130 days Precipitation total (characteristic range) 40-40 in Frost-free period (actual range) 80-90 days Freeze-free period (actual range) 120-130 days Precipitation total (actual range) 40-40 in Frost-free period (average) 90 days Freeze-free period (average) 130 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) EUSTIS [USC00172700], Eustis, ME
-
(2) COLEBROOK 3SW [USC00271647], Canaan, NH
-
(3) NORTH STRATFORD [USC00276234], Guildhall, NH
-
(4) ISLAND POND [USC00434120], Island Pond, VT
">Influencing water features
Water will pond on the surface of these sites each year for significant periods of time, typically starting at the beginning of the growing season and can last throughout the summer. Presence or absence of dams can significantly shift the hydrology and vegetation of these sites, causing water to stand for longer or shorter durations. On representative soils, ponding duration will be long to very long and a frequency of occasional to frequent, with depths ranging up to 61 inches (155 centimeters). When standing water is not present, these sites will typically remain saturated throughout much of the year.
Wetland description
Classification System: Cowardin<br />
System: Palustrine<br />
Subsystem: NA<br />
Class: Emergent Wetlands / Shrub-Scrub WetlandsSoil features
Soils are dominantly very poorly drained mucky organic soils over glacial till. Typical soils will be very deep with at least 16 inches (40 centimeters), but often greater than 40 inches (100 centimeters) of mucky organic deposits, often underlain by mineral soils with textures ranging from loamy to sandy. Fluctuations in seasonal inundation allows the soils to remain sufficiently oxygenated and decompose new inputs of organic deposits to support muck rather than peat.
Representative soils include the Wonsqueak (Terric Haplosaprists), Pleasant Lake (Typic Haplosaprists) and Bucksport (Typic Haplosaprists) series.Table 4. Representative soil features
Parent material (1) Herbaceous organic material
(2) Till
Surface texture (1) Muck
Family particle size (1) Loamy
Drainage class Very poorly drained Permeability class Moderately slow to moderately rapid Soil depth 40 – 80 in Surface fragment cover <=3" Not specified Surface fragment cover >3" Not specified Available water capacity
(0-40in)9.5 – 17.4 in Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-40in)5.7 – 7.8 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(0-40in)0 – 2 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(0-40in)Not specified Table 5. Representative soil features (actual values)
Drainage class Very poorly drained to poorly drained Permeability class Very slow to rapid Soil depth 40 – 80 in Surface fragment cover <=3" 0 % Surface fragment cover >3" 0 % Available water capacity
(0-40in)0 – 18 in Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-40in)3.2 – 7.8 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(0-40in)0 – 5 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(0-40in)0 % Ecological dynamics
[Caveat: The vegetation information contained in this section and is only provisional, based on concepts, and future projects support validation through field work. *] The vegetation groupings described in this section are based on the terrestrial ecological system classification and vegetation associations developed by NatureServe (Comer et al., 2003) and localized associations provided by the New York Natural Heritage Program (Edinger et al., 2014), Maine Natural Areas Program (Gawler and Cutko, 2010), New Hampshire Natural Heritage Program (Sperduto and Nichols, 2011), and Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife (Swain, 2020).
The Marsh Wetland Complex ecological site includes many distinctive wetland communities dominated by complex community mosaics in which diverse graminoids, herbs, and shrub species grow differently along slight changes in soil wetness. These communities are permanently saturated and seasonally inundated, allowing for the development of shallow to moderately deep organic muck over mineral soils. The following State and Transition Model (STM) is broken into separate states based on the dominant functional group, which often correlates closely with associated hydrology of a site. While occurring as stand along vegetative communities, the Marsh Wetland Complex ecological site may also serve as a successional pathway for other wooded wetland ecological sites that have been subjected to changes in hydrology. Further study is required to distinguish the relationship between hydrology and vegetation.
These are open wetlands communities in which trees and shrubs are generally absent or sparse (less than 25 percent cover) due to the long duration of inundation (seasonally in spring to summer months) and the very low availability of dissolved oxygen and minerals. Vegetation under natural conditions will vary by changes in localized hydrology and can be separated by dominant functional groups reflecting those changes under natural or anthropogenically altered conditions.
These sites are highly susceptible to altered hydrology, whether of natural or anthropogenic influences. Dams or structures that alter the long-term hydrology of a site can create these marsh complexes, depending on the amount of stagnant water and time. A forested area may become non-forested with standing dead snags reflecting the past conditions when water levels were lower, shifting the understory composition to graminoid or forb dominance. These dammed areas will often be maintained by a beaver population in the area and can persist for extended periods of time. Upon abandonment or removal of a beaver population or dam, ponded areas will drain and revert to a graminoid meadow which can resist succession to a shrubland or forested community despite a proximity to active seed sources or though relict seedbeds due to waterlogged soils (Terwilliger and Pastor 1999). In areas of natural geographic depressions where beaver influence in minimal, persistence of one community may occur for decades until acted upon by a natural or anthropogenic influence.
Introduction and persistence of exotic and non-native grasses and grass-like plants are common throughout much of New England, and can form dense mats that exclude native plants, alter ecosystems functions, and provide little to no value as wildlife food or cover (Destefano 2013). Native grass-like monocultures, such as cattail marshes, are in part the result of past hydrologic manipulation and increased fertility associated with agricultural runoff, which can reduce the diversity of other wetland types and wildlife species that rely on them. Areas that have been chemically or mechanically disturbed by human activity may allow for the establishment of monocultures of reed marshes (Phalaris & Phragmites spp.) in which few or no other vascular plants can survive, displacing native vegetation over time.
While fire is not commonly known as a driver in New England, especially in wetland communities, replacement severity fires (causing >75% kill or top kill of the upper canopy layer) for northeastern shrub and herbaceous wetlands may occur at intervals of approximately 780 years or during periods of extreme drought (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Missoula Fire Sciences Laboratory 2012). Removal of organic matter from fire may prevent seed germination and act as a driver to lower the soil surface, causing localized increases in hydrology and shifting vegetative communities.
While drainage of this site has yet to be observed, some sedge and wet meadows have been used for hay fields and kept in an early successional stage by periodic mowing when fields are dry (Thompson and Sorenson 2019). This hay is often coarse and unpalatable to cows and is used as bedding. These sites are unsuited for agriculture.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
T1A - Decreases in local long-term hydroperiods, allowing for the establishment and dominance (>50% cover) of shrubs. T1B - Increases in local long-term hydroperiods, creating deeper longer inundation periods and allowing for the establishment and dominance of freshwater emergent species and other deep-water associates OR permanent inundation. T1C - Introduction of non-native or exotic species to the system. Establishment and dominance of species (>50% cover) overwhelms native vegetation composition and structure, creating a mixed stand to monoculture. T2A - Removal of shrubs (mechanical, biological, or chemical), Increase in local long-term hydroperiods, allowing for the establishment and dominance (>50% cover) of graminoids. T2B - Increases in local long-term hydroperiods, creating deeper longer inundation periods and allowing for the establishment and dominance of freshwater emergent species and other deep-water associates OR permanent inundation. T2C - Introduction of non-native or exotic species to the system. Establishment and dominance of species (>50% cover) overwhelms native vegetation composition and structure, creating a mixed stand to monoculture. T3A - Decreases in local long-term hydroperiods, creating shallower and more temporary inundation periods, allowing for the establishment and dominance (>50% cover) of graminoids. T3B - Introduction of non-native or exotic species to the system. Establishment and dominance of species (>50% cover) overwhelms native vegetation composition and structure, creating a mixed stand to monoculture. R4A - Removal of non-native species using manual, chemical, and / or biological methods. Reintroduction of native species dependent on duration or inundation and readily available seedbank. R4B - Removal of non-native species using manual, chemical, and / or biological methods. Reintroduction of native species dependent on duration or inundation and readily available seedbank. R4C - Removal of non-native species using manual, chemical, and / or biological methods. Reintroduction of native species dependent on duration or inundation and readily available seedbank. State 1 submodel, plant communities
State 2 submodel, plant communities
State 3 submodel, plant communities
State 4 submodel, plant communities
Marsh Wetland Complex provisional STM Key
I. Graminoids are dominant as a monotypic stand or in mixed stands, but will be greater than 50 percent total cover. Forbs and shrubs may be present in low amounts to locally abundant, but will be less than 50 percent total cover.A. Sedges (Carex spp.) are dominant and are composed of greater than 50 percent total cover. Minor inclusions of grasses, forbs, and shrubs may be present but total less than 50 percent cover.B. Grasses (Calamagrostis canadensis) and sedges (Carex spp.) are dominant, with grasses occupying more than 50 percent total cover and sedges with minor dominance. Forbs and shrubs may be present in small amounts.C. Graminoids (Phalaris arundinacea) are dominant, forming monocultures (often greater than 50 percent total cover) but may be mixed with other species (Calamagrostis canadensis). Forbs and shrubs may be present in small amounts.D. Graminoids (Scirpus spp.) are dominant, forming single species monocultures (often greater than 50 percent total cover) or multiple species of Scirpus. Forbs and shrubs may be present in small amounts.E. Graminoids (Calamagrostis canadensis, Phalaris arundinacea, Scirpus spp.) and sedges (Carex spp.) are found in mixed stands where no one species takes dominance. Shrubs can range up to 50 percent total canopy cover and herbaceous species cover will range greatly.II. Shrubs are dominant and will be greater than 50 percent total cover. Forbs and graminoids may be present in low amounts to locally abundant depending on canopy openings, but will be less than 50 percent total cover. Trees may be scattered and sparse.A. Shrubs (Alnus spp.) are dominant and are composed of greater than 50 percent total cover. The herbaceous and ground layer are highly variable depending on the presence or absence of canopy openings.III. Non-persistent freshwater emergent species are dominant and will be greater than 50 percent total cover. These communities may be mixed with various grasses, forbs, or shrubs of different states and phases; but will often be dense monotypic stands. In areas of prolonged hydroperiods, open water and submerged vegetation may be present.A. Cattails (Typha spp.) are dominant and will typically make up more than 50 percent total cover. These sites will typically have extended hydroperiods to permanent inundation in shallow to moderately deep standing water.B. Non-persistent freshwater emergent species (Pontederia cordata, Sagittaria latifolia, Eleocharis palustris, Nymphaea odorata, etc.) are dominant and typically occur in permanently inundated conditions with moderately deep standing water.C. Bulrush (Schoenplectus spp.) is dominant and typically occurs in permanently inundated conditions with deep standing water.D. Open water (permanent inundation) that does not support vegetation.IV. Non-native, exotic, noxious, invasive species are dominant and will be greater than 50 percent total cover. These communities may be mixed with various grasses, forbs, or shrubs of different states and phases; but will often be dense monotypic stands.A. Graminoids (Phragmites australis ssp. australis) are dominant and typically occur in semi-permanent inundated marshes, ditches, impoundments, etc. that have been disturbed by human activity.B. Floating herbaceous species (Trapa natans) are dominant and typically occur in permanently inundated marshes, ditches, impoundments, etc. that have been disturbed by human activity.State 1
Sedge and Wet Meadows
Figure 7. Typical Sedge/Wet Meadow of the Marsh Wetland Complex site. Diverse graminoids are dominant, shrubs are low and sparse individuals, and trees are absent. Photo taken April 2025, West Danville, VT.
These are graminoid dominant wetlands comprised most often of sedges and grasses in a monotypic or mixed stand of often greater than 50 percent cover. Forbs will often be present in lower amounts and locally abundant but not dominant. Trees, shrubs, and other woody species will often be sparse to absent, occurring as stunted individuals found on microhighs created from past tip ups. The ground cover typically consists of herbaceous litter mixed with bryophytes, which is usually sparse but may occasionally reach over 50 percent cover. The vegetation is often firmly rooted in the substrate and will not form floating mats when inundated unlike similar Sphagnum bog sites. Standing water may be present ranging from only the beginning, or throughout much of the growing season, depending on the site and the years precipitation, with the soil remaining saturated even when water levels drop. Changes in community phases will often be dependent on slight changes in hydroperiod and the presence or absence of a viable seedbank. Further study is needed to assess the potential drivers between community phases and will be left blank until it can be assessed. The absence of community pathway arrows does not indicate these communities can transition to one another and will only exist as standalone stable communities but rather is left blank until data becomes available explaining such a transition.
These community types correlate with LandFire’s CES201.582 “Laurentian-Acadian Wet Meadow-Shrub Swamp” classifications.Dominant plant species
-
upright sedge (Carex stricta), grass
-
blister sedge (Carex vesicaria), grass
-
Northwest Territory sedge (Carex utriculata), grass
-
bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis), grass
-
reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), grass
-
woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus), grass
-
panicled bulrush (Scirpus microcarpus), grass
-
green bulrush (Scirpus atrovirens), grass
-
three-way sedge (Dulichium arundinaceum), grass
-
swamp milkweed (Asclepias incarnata), other herbaceous
-
eastern marsh fern (Thelypteris palustris), other herbaceous
-
marsh bellflower (Campanula aparinoides), other herbaceous
-
harlequin blueflag (Iris versicolor), other herbaceous
-
purple marshlocks (Comarum palustre), other herbaceous
-
spotted joe pye weed (Eutrochium maculatum), other herbaceous
Community 1.1
Sedge (Carex spp.) Dominated Wet MeadowThese are sedge dominated meadows in which the genus Carex is the primary species. Herbaceous species, particularly upright sedge (Carex stricta) in its tussock form, are dominant. Shrubs will typically be sparse but may have up to 25 percent cover. Trees are absent. Bryophyte cover is usually sparse but may reach over 50 percent cover. The tussock growth form in these sedge meadows form the characteristic high raised mounds unique to this site. While one species of sedge is often dominant, other sedges may be dominant at other sites or mix to create a heterogeneous stand of sedges, mixed with lower number of grasses and forbs. This will often grade into mixed grasses and sedge wet meadows (Phase 1.2) but is distinctive by its dominance of sedges (>50%) and minor grass dominance (
Forest understory. In addition to the various graminoids listed, less dominant forbs and shrubs may be present. Shrub species may include grey alder (Alnus incana), sweetgale (Myrica gale), winterberry (Ilex verticillata), leatherleaf (Chamaedaphne calyculata), and white meadowsweet (Spiraea alba). Additional forbs include swamp milkweed (Asclepias incarnata), marsh fern (Thelypteris palustris), spotted joe-pye weed (Eutrochium maculatum), marsh bellflower (Campanula aparinoides), royal fern (Osmunda regalis), marsh cinquefoil (Comarum palustre), swamp candles (Lysimachia terrestris), American angelica (Angelica atropurpurea), common boneset (Eupatorium perfoliatum), American bugelweed (Lycopus americanus), swamp smartweed (Polygonum hydropiperoides), bluntleaf bedstraw (Galium obtusum), arrow-leaved tearthumb (Polygonum sagittatum), and stiff marsh bedstraw (Galium tinctorium), to name a few.
Dominant plant species
-
upright sedge (Carex stricta), grass
-
blister sedge (Carex vesicaria), grass
-
Northwest Territory sedge (Carex utriculata), grass
-
prickly bog sedge (Carex atlantica), grass
-
silvery sedge (Carex canescens), grass
-
longhair sedge (Carex comosa), grass
-
northern long sedge (Carex folliculata), grass
-
broom sedge (Carex scoparia), grass
-
awlfruit sedge (Carex stipata), grass
-
fox sedge (Carex vulpinoidea), grass
-
bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis), grass
-
common rush (Juncus effusus), grass
-
rattlesnake mannagrass (Glyceria canadensis), grass
-
three-way sedge (Dulichium arundinaceum), grass
-
rice cutgrass (Leersia oryzoides), grass
-
woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus), grass
-
Magellan's sphagnum (Sphagnum magellanicum), other herbaceous
-
Girgensohn's sphagnum (Sphagnum girgensohnii), other herbaceous
-
prairie sphagnum (Sphagnum palustre), other herbaceous
-
drepanocladus moss (Drepanocladus aduncus), other herbaceous
Community 1.2
Bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis) - Sedge (Carex spp.) Wet MeadowThese are mixed grasses and sedge meadows in which the genus Calamagrostis and Carex are the dominant species. Graminoid cover is typically dense and can form hummocky microtopography and is dominated by bluejoint grass (Calamagrostis canadensis) in pure stands or mixed with sedges (Carex spp.). This will often grade into sedge dominated wet meadows (Phase 1.1) but is distinctive by its dominance of grasses (>50%) and minor sedge dominance (
Forest understory. In addition to the various graminoids listed, less dominant forbs and shrubs may be present. Shrub species may include possumhaw viburnum (Viburnum nudum), arrowwood viburnum (Viburnum dentatum), white meadowsweet (Spiraea alba), silky dogwood (Cornus amomum), grey alder (Alnus incana), or smooth alder (Alnus serrulate). Additional forbs include marsh bellflower (Campanula aparinoides), bog willowherb (Epilobium leptophyllum), spotted joe-pye weed (Eutrochium maculatum (= Eupatorium maculatum)), common boneset (Eupatorium perfoliatum), northern blue flag iris (Iris versicolor), water smartweed (Polygonum amphibium), and marsh cinquefoil (Comarum palustre (= Potentilla palustris)), to name a few.
Dominant plant species
-
bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis), grass
-
water sedge (Carex aquatilis), grass
-
hairy sedge (Carex lacustris), grass
-
beaked sedge (Carex rostrata), grass
-
upright sedge (Carex stricta), grass
-
woollyfruit sedge (Carex lasiocarpa), grass
-
redtop (Agrostis gigantea), grass
-
American mannagrass (Glyceria grandis), grass
-
fowl bluegrass (Poa palustris), grass
-
Canada bluegrass (Poa compressa), grass
-
woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus), grass
Community 1.3
Reed Canary Grass (Phalaris arundinacea) MarshThese are graminoid dominant stands in which the native reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) forms monocultures or is associated with other graminoids such as bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis). Forbs will often be sparse but occasional stands may have a mixture of forbs equaling the graminoid cover. Shrubs may be present in small amounts and will often be scattered. Trees are absent.
Within the Northeast US, this community type correlates to New Hampshire’s “Tall Graminoid Emergent Marsh – Reed Canary Grass Variant” concept (Sperduto and Nichols 2012) and Massachusetts “Shallow Emergent Marsh” concept (Swain 2020). This correlates with NatureServes ‘Phalaris arundinacea Eastern Ruderal Marsh' Association (CEGL006044).
Forest understory. In addition to the various graminoids listed, less dominant forbs and shrubs may be present. Shrub species may include possumhaw viburnum (Viburnum nudum), arrowwood viburnum (Viburnum dentatum), willow (Salix spp.), grey alder (Alnus incana), or smooth alder (Alnus serrulate). Additional forbs include wild mint (Mentha arvensis) and purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), to name a few.
Dominant plant species
-
reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), grass
-
bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis), grass
-
fowl bluegrass (Poa palustris), grass
-
redtop (Agrostis gigantea), grass
-
whitegrass (Leersia virginica), grass
Community 1.4
Woolgrass (Scirpus spp.) Wet MeadowThese are graminoid dominant meadows in which the genus Scirpus is the dominant species. Graminoid cover is typically dense and consist of one or more species of Scirpus. Forbs and other grasses will be present in lower amounts. Shrubs and trees are generally absent.
Within the Northeast US, this community type correlates to Maine’s “Grassy Shrub Marsh” concept (Gawler and Cutko 2010), New Hampshire’s “Tall Graminoid Emergent Marsh – Bulrush Variant” concept (Sperduto and Nichols 2012), New York’s “Shallow Emergent Marsh” concept (Edinger et al. 2014) and Massachusetts “Deep Emergent Marsh” concept (Swain 2020. This correlates with NatureServes 'Scirpus cyperinus Wet Meadow' Association (CEGL006349).Dominant plant species
-
woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus), grass
-
panicled bulrush (Scirpus microcarpus), grass
-
green bulrush (Scirpus atrovirens), grass
-
mannagrass (Glyceria), grass
-
eastern marsh fern (Thelypteris palustris), other herbaceous
Community 1.5
Bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis) – Bulrush (Scirpus spp.) – Sedge (Carex spp.) Wet MeadowThese are mixed composition wet meadows. The vegetation is dominated by graminoids or graminoids mixed with shrubs, the latter of which can range up to 50%, but will always be exceeded by graminoid cover. In many cases, shrubs are absent. The herbaceous layer is well developed and often greater than 40% cover and up to nearly 100% cover. Bryophyte cover is highly variable. This will often grade into sedge dominated (1.1) and mixed graminoid – sedge wet meadows (1.2) but is distinctive by not being almost monotypically dominated by one species of grass or sedge.
Within the Northeast US, this community type correlates to New Hampshire’s “Tall Graminoid Emergent Marsh – Bluejoint Variant” concept (Sperduto and Nichols 2012), New York’s “Shallow Emergent Marsh” concept (Edinger et al. 2014) and Vermont’s “Shallow Emergent Marsh” concept (Thompson, Sorenson, and Zaino 2019). This correlates with NatureServes 'Calamagrostis canadensis – Scirpus spp. – Dulichium arundinaceum Wet Meadow' Association (CEGL006519).
Forest understory. In addition to the various graminoids listed, less dominant forbs and shrubs may be present. Shrub species may include white meadowsweet (Spiraea alba), willow (Salix spp.), grey alder (Alnus incana), smooth alder (Alnus serrulata), buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis), leatherleaf (Chamaedaphne calyculata), sweetgale (Myrica gale), pale st. john's-wort (Hypericum ellipticum), winterberry (Ilex verticillata), and blueberry (Vaccinium spp.). Additional forbs include northern blue flag iris (Iris versicolor), (Triadenum fraseri), swamp candles (Lysimachia terrestris), sensitive fern (Onoclea sensibilis), and royal fern (Osmunda regalis), to name a few.
Dominant plant species
-
bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis), grass
-
woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus), grass
-
woodland bulrush (Scirpus expansus), grass
-
green bulrush (Scirpus atrovirens), grass
-
upright sedge (Carex stricta), grass
-
Northwest Territory sedge (Carex utriculata), grass
-
shallow sedge (Carex lurida), grass
-
false hop sedge (Carex lupuliformis), grass
-
hop sedge (Carex lupulina), grass
-
hairy sedge (Carex lacustris), grass
-
three-way sedge (Dulichium arundinaceum), grass
-
calamus (Acorus calamus), grass
-
redtop (Agrostis gigantea), grass
-
rattlesnake mannagrass (Glyceria canadensis), grass
-
American mannagrass (Glyceria grandis), grass
-
Canadian rush (Juncus canadensis), grass
-
reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), grass
-
fowl bluegrass (Poa palustris), grass
State 2
Shrub Swamps
Figure 8. Typical Alder Swamp of the Marsh Wetland Complex site. Alnus serrulata is the dominant cover. Photo taken April 2025 (before leaf out), West Danville, VT.
These are wetlands of shrub dominance, often reflecting slightly lower seasonal high-water tables or decreased long-term hydroperiods. In naturally occurring areas shrubs will tend to dominant the higher perimeter and mounds within the graminoid marsh site. These shrubs will often be tall in stature (6 to 26 feet [2 to 8 meters]) and may be moderately open to dense in canopy cover (at least 50 percent cover). Scattered trees may be present, with graminoids and forbs representing the surrounding marsh community locally abundant in canopy openings. A groundcover of mosses is typically present. In areas where shrub swamps are part of a successional pathway for a wooded wetland, the dense canopy cover may delay succession to forested conditions and perpetuate shrubland conditions.
These community types correlate with LandFire’s CES201.582 “Laurentian-Acadian Wet Meadow-Shrub Swamp” classifications.Dominant plant species
-
gray alder (Alnus incana), shrub
-
hazel alder (Alnus serrulata), shrub
-
possumhaw (Viburnum nudum), shrub
-
willow (Salix), shrub
Community 2.1
Alder (Alnus spp.) Shrub Swamp
Figure 9. Typical Alder Swamp of the Marsh Wetland Complex site. Alnus serrulata is the dominant cover and tall (~9 feet [3 meters]). Photo taken April 2025 (before leaf out), West Danville, VT.
These are shrub dominated swamps and will often be found in a steady state or as along a successional pathway to another community type. The vegetation is dominated by tall shrubs, most often speckled alder (Alnus incana) forming dense, nearly impenetrable thickets. Where alder is not dominant, other wetland shrubs can be found. The herbaceous layer contains forms and graminoids reflective of the surrounding marsh if seen as an inclusion or the relict marsh if seen as a successional community. Then ground layer will often be highly variable depending on the presence or absence of canopy openings, with herbaceous species being denser in canopy gaps.
If seen as a transitional community along a successional path from a previously flooded beaver meadow back to a forested wetland, scattered stunted trees and saplings may be found in the alder stands.
Within the Northeast US, this community type correlates to Maine’s “Alder Thicket” concept (Gawler and Cutko 2010), New Hampshire’s “Speckled Alder Wooded Fen” concept (Sperduto and Nichols 2012), New York’s “Shrub Swamp” concept (Edinger et al. 2014) and Vermont’s “Alder Swamp” concept (Thompson, Sorenson, and Zaino 2019). This correlates with NatureServes ‘Alnus incana Shrub Swamp' Association (CEGL006839).Forest overstory.If observed as a transitional pathway to a forested wetland (R143X00Y302 - Mucky Swamp), immature trees such as red maple (Acer rubrum), black ash (Fraxinus nigra), northern white cedar (Thuja occidentalis), or black spruce (Picea mariana) may be present but not dominant (<25% canopy cover).
Forest understory. In addition to the shrub species listed, less dominant forbs and graminoids may be present. Graminoids include bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis), upright sedge (Carex stricta), prairie sedge (Carex prairea), three-seeded sedge (Carex trisperma), and dark green bulrush (Scirpus atrovirens). Additional forbs include tall flat-topped white aster (Doellingeria umbellata (= Aster umbellatus)), spotted joe-pye weed (Eutrochium maculatum (= Eupatorium maculatum)), jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), northern bugelweed (Lycopus uniflorus), sensitive fern (Onoclea sensibilis), cinnamon fern (Osmunda cinnamomea), dwarf raspberry (Rubus pubescens), marsh fern (Thelypteris palustris), and violets (Viola spp.) to name a few.
Dominant plant species
-
gray alder (Alnus incana), shrub
-
hazel alder (Alnus serrulata), shrub
-
redosier dogwood (Cornus sericea), shrub
-
American red raspberry (Rubus idaeus), shrub
-
willow (Salix), shrub
-
white meadowsweet (Spiraea alba), shrub
-
steeplebush (Spiraea tomentosa), shrub
-
viburnum (Viburnum), shrub
State 3
Freshwater Emergents and Open WaterThese are wetlands of emergent vegetation and areas of open water, often reflecting slightly higher seasonal high-water tables or increased long-term hydroperiods. Hydrologic regimes are often the longest in this state, with long-term or permanent inundation influencing the development of freshwater emergent species. Organic soils are often deepest in these states but may often include shallow organics or high organic content mineral soils. These communities will often form near monocultures and be so dense that germination of other species is limited.
These community types correlate with LandFire’s CES201.594 “Laurentian-Acadian Freshwater Marsh” classifications.Dominant plant species
-
hardstem bulrush (Schoenoplectus acutus), grass
-
softstem bulrush (Schoenoplectus tabernaemontani), grass
-
chairmaker's bulrush (Schoenoplectus americanus), grass
-
broadleaf cattail (Typha latifolia), other herbaceous
-
narrowleaf cattail (Typha angustifolia), other herbaceous
-
pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata), other herbaceous
-
bulltongue arrowhead (Sagittaria lancifolia), other herbaceous
-
green arrow arum (Peltandra virginica), other herbaceous
-
common spikerush (Eleocharis palustris), other herbaceous
Community 3.1
Cattail (Typha spp.) MarshThese are tall emergent marshes dominated by cattail (Typha spp.). Shrubs will often be scattered to absent. Trees are absent. Bryophyte cover varies depending on depth and duration of inundation.
Within the Northeast US, this community type correlates to Maine’s “Cattail Marsh” concept (Gawler and Cutko 2010), New Hampshire’s “Cattail Marsh” concept (Sperduto and Nichols 2012), New York’s “Shallow Emergent Marsh” concept (Edinger et al. 2014) and Vermont’s “Cattail Marsh” concept (Thompson, Sorenson, and Zaino 2019). This correlates with NatureServes ‘Typha (angustifolia, latifolia) – (Schoenoplectus spp.) Eastern Marsh' Association (CEGL006153).
Forest understory. Other locally abundant grasses and forbs may be present depending on the depth and duration of inundation and density of cattails. Additional graminoids may include sedges, such as water sedge (Carex aquatilis), shallow sedge (Carex lurida), woolly sedge (Carex pellita), beaked sedge (Carex rostrata), upright sedge (Carex stricta), woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus), and bulrushes, such as chairmaker's bulrush (Schoenoplectus americanus) and hard-stem bulrush (Schoenoplectus acutus), occur along with patchy grasses, such as bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis). Additional forbs may include swamp milkweed (Asclepias incarnata), water arum (Calla palustris), jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), sensitive fern (Onoclea sensibilis), broadleaf arrowhead (Sagittaria latifolia), blue skullcap (Scutellaria lateriflora), giant bur-reed (Sparganium eurycarpum), eastern skunk cabbage (Symplocarpus foetidus), marsh fern (Thelypteris palustris), and blue verbain (Verbena hastata), to name a few.
Dominant plant species
-
broadleaf cattail (Typha latifolia), grass
-
narrowleaf cattail (Typha angustifolia), grass
-
hybrid cattail (Typha ×glauca), grass
Community 3.2
Leafy Forb MarshThe vegetation of these marshes is broadly defined and can considerably vary in the dominant vegetation present from one marsh to another but is characterized by leafy forbs and freshwater emergent species. These are permanently inundated systems in all but the driest conditions, occurring in moderately deep standing water (at least 6 inches to 3 feet [0.1 to 1 meter]). Dominant vegetation will often result from competition, with clonal species becoming established and excluding most other species.
Within the Northeast US, this community type correlates to Maine’s “Pickerelweed Marsh” concept (Gawler and Cutko 2010), New Hampshire’s “Deep Emergent – Aquatic Bed / Medium Depth Emergent Marsh” concept (Sperduto and Nichols 2012), New York’s “Deep Emergent Marsh” concept (Edinger et al. 2014) and Vermont’s “Deep Broadleaf Marsh” concept (Thompson, Sorenson, and Zaino 2019). This correlates with NatureServes ‘Pontederia cordata – Peltandra virginica – Sagittaria latifolia Marsh' Association (CEGL006191).Dominant plant species
-
pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata), other herbaceous
-
broadleaf arrowhead (Sagittaria latifolia), other herbaceous
-
green arrow arum (Peltandra virginica), other herbaceous
-
bur-reed (Sparganium), other herbaceous
-
common spikerush (Eleocharis palustris), other herbaceous
-
softstem bulrush (Schoenoplectus tabernaemontani), other herbaceous
-
calamus (Acorus calamus), other herbaceous
-
yellow pond-lily (Nuphar lutea), other herbaceous
-
American white waterlily (Nymphaea odorata), other herbaceous
-
hemlock waterparsnip (Sium suave), other herbaceous
-
coon's tail (Ceratophyllum demersum), other herbaceous
-
common bladderwort (Utricularia macrorhiza), other herbaceous
Community 3.3
Bulrush (Schoenoplectus spp.) Deepwater MarshThese are freshwater marshes consisting of monotypic stands of bulrush (Schoenplectus spp.). These are permanently inundated systems in all but the driest conditions, occurring in deep water (usually 1 to 3 feet [0.4 to 1 meter]) and will often grade into open water systems in areas of deeper more exposed water bodies (lakes shores, large marsh systems) or into freshwater emergent species in more sheltered water bodies (smaller pond shores, bays). Associated forbs and graminoids will often be present in smaller amounts but not dominant.
Within the Northeast US, this community type correlates to Maine’s “Bulrush Bed” concept (Gawler and Cutko 2010), New Hampshire’s “Tall Graminoid Emergent Marsh – Bulrush Variant” concept (Sperduto and Nichols 2012), New York’s “Deep Emergent Marsh” concept (Edinger et al. 2014) and Vermont’s “Deep Bulrush Marsh” concept (Thompson, Sorenson, and Zaino 2019). This correlates with NatureServes ‘Schoenoplectus (tabernaemontani, acutus) Eastern Marsh' Association (CEGL006275).
Forest understory. Other locally abundant grasses and forbs may be present depending on the depth and duration of inundation and density of bulrushes. Additional graminoids may include sedges, such as water sedge (Carex aquatilis), woolly sedge (Carex pellita), common beaked sedge (Carex utriculata), and woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus). Additional forbs may include swamp milkweed (Asclepias incarnata), jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), broadleaf arrowhead (Sagittaria latifolia), blue skullcap (Scutellaria lateriflora), marsh fern (Thelypteris palustris), broadleaf cattail (Typha latifolia), pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata), river bulrush (Bolboschoenus fluviatilis), marsh seedbox (Ludwigia palustris), and blue verbain (Verbena hastata), to name a few. Floating-leaved and submerged plants (such as pondweeds [Potamogeton spp.], Canadian waterweed [Elodea canadensis], hornwort [Ceratophyllum spp.]) may be scattered among the emergent plants.
Dominant plant species
-
hardstem bulrush (Schoenoplectus acutus), grass
-
softstem bulrush (Schoenoplectus tabernaemontani), grass
-
chairmaker's bulrush (Schoenoplectus americanus), grass
Community 3.4
Open WaterThis phase describes the impact of increased hydroperiods the results in a permanently inundated condition in which rooted floating or emergent species cannot persist.
State 4
Non-Native or Exotic Species DominanceThese are wetlands in which non-native or exotic invasive species have been locally introduced and occur as a monoculture or as a mixed association with other native species but comprising more than 50 percent cover.
Dominant plant species
-
European common reed (Phragmites australis ssp. australis), grass
-
water chestnut (Trapa natans), other herbaceous
Community 4.1
Phragmites – Reed MarshThis wetland phase is often seen in semipermanent inundated marshes, ditches, impoundments, etc. that have been disturbed by human activity. The vegetation is variable but will often consist of phragmites invading natural or semi-natural communities. Once established, this community can exclude other species from growing.
Within the Northeast US, this community type correlates with NatureServes ‘Phragmites australis ssp. australis Eastern Ruderal Marsh' Association (CEGL004141).Dominant plant species
-
European common reed (Phragmites australis ssp. australis), grass
Community 4.2
Water Chestnut – Standing WaterThis wetland phase is often seen in more permanently inundated marshes, a result of anthropogenic or natural damming. Water chestnut is the dominant floating emergent plant in these communities, colonizing deep marshes and excluding native species.
Dominant plant species
-
water chestnut (Trapa natans), other herbaceous
Transition T1A
State 1 to 2
Sedge and Wet Meadows
Shrub SwampsThis can occur through decreases in the long-term hydroperiod, causing the seasonal high water table to lower and allow the establishment of shrub dominance. This may occur naturally through beaver dam removal or anthropogenically through landscape level drainage or anthropogenic dam removal.
Transition T1B
State 1 to 3This can occur through increases in the long-term hydroperiod, causing the seasonal high water table to increase, potentially causing permanent inundation, and allow the establishment of non-persistent freshwater emergents. This may occur naturally through beaver dam creation or anthropogenically through anthropogenic dam installation.
Transition T1C
State 1 to 4This may occur through changes in the long-term hydroperiod as well as changes in nutrient loads to the system. This is often a result of anthropogenic disturbance.
Transition T2A
State 2 to 1
Shrub Swamps
Sedge and Wet MeadowsThis can occur through increases in the long-term hydroperiod, causing the seasonal high water table to increase, killing the existing shrubs, and allow the establishment of graminoid. This may occur naturally through beaver dam creation or anthropogenically through anthropogenic dam installation. Mechanical, biological, or chemical removal of shrubs may occur as well.
Transition T2B
State 2 to 3This can occur through increases in the long-term hydroperiod, causing the seasonal high water table to increase, killing the existing shrubs, and allow the establishment of freshwater non-persistent emergents. This may occur naturally through beaver dam creation or anthropogenically through anthropogenic dam installation.
Transition T2C
State 2 to 4This may occur through changes in the long-term hydroperiod as well as changes in nutrient loads to the system. This is often a result of anthropogenic disturbance.
Transition T3A
State 3 to 1This can occur through decreases in the long-term hydroperiod, causing the seasonal high water table to low, removing the hydroperiod needed for freshwater emergent dominance, and allow the establishment of graminoids. This may occur naturally through beaver dam removal or anthropogenically through landscape level drainage or anthropogenic dam removal. Seeding of native graminoids may be needed, depending on the duration of the sites permanent inundation (i.e. a depleted seedbank).
Transition T3B
State 3 to 4This may occur through changes in the long-term hydroperiod as well as changes in nutrient loads to the system. This is often a result of anthropogenic disturbance.
Restoration pathway R4A
State 4 to 1This may occur through the use of chemical, biological, or mechanic treatments that removes non-native and exotic species, allowing for the reestablishment of native grasses, forbs, and shrubs. Restoration may require extensive time and money, and there is no guarantee it may work. Coordination with your local NRCS office to manage noxious and exotic species is recommended.
Restoration pathway R4B
State 4 to 2This may occur through the use of chemical, biological, or mechanic treatments that removes non-native and exotic species, allowing for the reestablishment of native grasses, forbs, and shrubs. Restoration may require extensive time and money, and there is no guarantee it may work. Coordination with your local NRCS office to manage noxious and exotic species is recommended.
Restoration pathway R4C
State 4 to 3This may occur through the use of chemical, biological, or mechanic treatments that removes non-native and exotic species, allowing for the reestablishment of native grasses, forbs, and shrubs. Restoration may require extensive time and money, and there is no guarantee it may work. Coordination with your local NRCS office to manage noxious and exotic species is recommended.
Additional community tables
Table 6. Community 1.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 7. Community 1.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 8. Community 1.3 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 9. Community 1.4 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 10. Community 1.5 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 11. Community 2.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 12. Community 3.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 13. Community 3.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 14. Community 3.3 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 15. Community 3.4 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 16. Community 4.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 17. Community 4.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Interpretations
Supporting information
Inventory data references
Future work is needed, as described in a future project plan, to validate the information presented in this provisional ecological site description. Future work includes field sampling, data collection and analysis by qualified ecologists and soil scientists. As warranted, annual reviews of the project plan can be conducted by the Ecological Site Technical Team. A final field review, peer review, quality control, and quality assurance reviews of the ESD are necessary to approve a final document.
Other references
Comer, P., D. Faber-Langendoen, R. Evans, S. Grawler, C. Josse, G. Kittel, S. Menard, M. Pyne, M. Reid, K. Schultz, K. Snow, and J. Teague. 2003. Ecological Systems of the United States: A Working Classification of U.S. Terrestrial Systems. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia
Davis, R. B., & Anderson, D. S. (2001). Classification and distribution of freshwater peatlands in Maine. Northeastern Naturalist, 8(1), 1-50.
Destefano, S. (2013). Status of exotic grasses and grass‐like vegetation and potential impacts on wildlife in New England. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 37(3), 486-496.
Edinger, G. J., D. J. Evans, S. Gebauer, T. G. Howard, D. M. Hunt, and A. M. Olivero (editors). 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.
Gawler, S. and A. Cutko. 2010. Natural Landscapes of Maine: A Guide to Natural Communities and Ecosystems. Maine Natural Areas Program, Maine Department of Conservation, Augusta, Maine.
Gotelli, N. J., Mouser, P. J., Hudman, S. P., Morales, S. E., Ross, D. S., & Ellison, A. M. (2008). Geographic variation in nutrient availability, stoichiometry, and metal concentrations of plants and pore-water in ombrotrophic bogs in New England, USA. Wetlands, 28, 827-840.
Hemond, H. F. (1977). Biogeochemistry of a New England Sphagnum bog (Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology).
Johnson, C. W. (1985). Bogs of the Northeast. UPNE.
Mehner, T. (2009). Encyclopedia of inland waters. Academic Press.
NatureServe. 2021. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. https://explorer.natureserve.org/. (accessed 10 July. 2021).
Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. 2006. Land Resource Regions and Major Land Resource Areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. Agricultural Handbook 296
Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Official Soil Series Descriptions. Available online. (accessed 11 Aug. 2021).
Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Soil Climate Research Station Data. Available online. (accessed 23 June. 2021).
Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database for [MLRA 141, Maine]. Available online. (accessed 14 Oct. 2021).
Sperduto, D.D. and William F. Nichols. 2011. Natural Communities of New Hampshire. 2nd Ed. NH Natural Heritage Bureau, Concord, NH. Pub. UNH Cooperative Extension, Durham, NH.
Swain, P. C. 2020. Classification of the Natural Communities of Massachusetts. Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, Westborough, MA
Terwilliger, J., & Pastor, J. (1999). Small mammals, ectomycorrhizae, and conifer succession in beaver meadow. Oikos, 83-94.
USNVC [United States National Vegetation Classification]. 2017. United States National Vegetation Classification Database V2.01. Federal Geographic Data Committee, Vegetation Subcommittee, Washington DC. Available The U.S. National Vegetation Classification (usnvc.org) (accessed 2 July. 2021).Contributors
Jack Ferrara, Revisions 2025
Christopher Mann, Revisions 2022
Jamin Johanson, Original Author 2016Approval
Greg Schmidt, 5/20/2025
Acknowledgments
Nels Barrett, Nick Butler, and Carl Bickford provided considerable review of this ecological site concept.
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 03/24/2025 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
