Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Ecological site RX143X00Y301
Loamy Till Swamp
Last updated: 5/20/2025
Accessed: 09/23/2026
-
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.LRU notes
LRU concepts have not been developed for MLRA 143. Ecological site groups (ESGs) have been developed for MLRA 143 based on similarities in disturbance response - that is, ecological sites with similar state-and-transition models and similar management considerations are grouped into 9 ESGs. The Loamy Till Swamp site belongs to the wooded wetlands group (ESG 3). Wooded wetlands are poorly- and very poorly-drained soils (with associated somewhat poorly-drained soils) that have sufficient oxygen and nutrients available in the soil to support >40% persistent forest canopy. Wooded wetlands differ from the open wetlands group, which are too wet and/or nutrient poor to support forest stands. Open wetlands are dominated by herbs and shrubs, with only stunted trees or sparse tree canopies (<40% canopy cover).
The wooded wetlands group is particularly susceptible to changes in hydrology that raise or lower the water table and available oxygen and nutrients in the plant rooting zone.Classification relationships
This site occurs in Ecological Site Group 3 (Wooded 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 relatively flat to gentle slopes (0-8%) or on toeslopes, where groundwater saturates the soil for much of the growing season and sometimes emerges at the surface. Small seepage rivulets are often evident. Soils formed in lodgment till and are poorly- to very poorly-drained. Soil textures are loamy with a mucky peat surface (less than 16 inches [40 centimeters]), and a densely compacted horizon within ~35 inches (<100 centimeters) of the soil surface. The water table is usually within 12 inches (30 centimeters) of the soil surface in spring, and lowers somewhat in late summer and fall. This site often has pit and mound topography, with ponding and thick organic matter accumulation in the pits, and drier soil conditions with thinner organic matter on the mounds where most trees are rooted.
The reference state is characterized by abundant northern white cedar. Altered hydrology is the primary driver of state change on this site, with beaver activity and man-made structures that impede drainage (such as roads, dams, etc.) often resulting in ponded or marshland states. This site is also logged in the winter when the ground is frozen, and occasionally used for wet pasture.Associated sites
RX143X00Y503 Loamy Flat
The Loamy Flat site has poorly-drained soils throughout, while the Loamy Till Swamp typically has both poorly- and very-poorly drained soils. Loamy Flats support red (and black) spruce, while Loamy Till Swamp is typically too wet for red spruce (though it often has black spruce present).
RX143X00Y502 Loamy Till Toeslope
The Loamy Till Toeslope site often occurs upslope of the Loamy Till Swamp, where soils are somewhat poorly- and poorly-drained, rather than poorly- and very poorly-drained. The Loamy Till Toeslope supports hardwood-dominant forests rather than cedar-dominanted forests.
RX143X00Y302 Mucky Swamp
The Mucky Peat Swamp often occurs downslope of the Loamy Till Swamp as all soils become very poorly drained and soil surface organic layer increases to greater than 16 inches.
Similar sites
RX143X00Y303 Acidic Swamp
The Acidic Swamp site has a similar complex of poorly- and very poorly-drained soils, but tends to be wetter, more acidic, and usually has coarser soil textures and weak or non-existent dense compacted layer compared to the Loamy Till Swamp site. The Acidic Swamp is dominated by black spruce rather than northern white cedar.
RX143X00Y302 Mucky Swamp
Both the Mucky Peat Swamp and the Loamy Till Swamp are dominated by northern white cedar, but the Mucky Peat Swamp is wetter, has a thicker organic soil surface layer, and typically has a more open canopy, allowing more light to reach the forest floor. As a result, the understory is often more productive in the Mucky Peat Swamp.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree (1) Thuja occidentalis
(2) Picea rubensShrub (1) Viburnum
(2) LoniceraHerbaceous (1) Cornus canadensis
(2) Hylocomium splendensLegacy ID
F143XY301ME
Physiographic features
This site typically occurs at the base of large watersheds on relatively flat, wet, till landforms. The water table is usually within 12 inches (30 centimeters) of the soil surface most of the year, but may drop to lower levels from June through September. Slopes are typically less than 3 percent, but may be as high as 8 percent if soils remain sufficiently wet.
Under reference conditions this site is characterized by pit- and mound- topography resulting from tree blowdowns. Tipped up tree roots excavate a small pit and deposit the excavated soil next to the pit as the exposed roots decay.
Figure 1. Monarda and Burnham soils, shown at the lower toeslope position in this block diagram, are typical of the Loamy Till Swamp ecological site.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Hillslope profile (1) Toeslope
(2) Footslope
Landforms (1) Upland > Hill
(2) Upland > Mountain
(3) Upland > Drumlinoid ridge
Flooding frequency None Ponding duration Long (7 to 30 days) Ponding frequency Occasional to frequent Elevation 120 – 2500 ft Slope 0 – 3 % Ponding depth 0 – 3 in Water table depth 0 – 12 in Aspect Aspect is not a significant factor Table 3. Representative physiographic features (actual ranges)
Flooding frequency None Ponding duration Brief (2 to 7 days) Ponding frequency None to frequent Elevation 120 – 2500 ft Slope 0 – 8 % Ponding depth 0 – 6 in Water table depth 0 – 31 in 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 4 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (characteristic range) 90-110 days Freeze-free period (characteristic range) 120-140 days Precipitation total (characteristic range) 40-50 in Frost-free period (actual range) 80-120 days Freeze-free period (actual range) 110-150 days Precipitation total (actual range) 40-50 in Frost-free period (average) 100 days Freeze-free period (average) 130 days Precipitation total (average) 40 in Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 2. Monthly precipitation range
Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 3. Monthly minimum temperature range
Characteristic rangeActual rangeBarLineFigure 4. Monthly maximum temperature range
BarLineFigure 5. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature
Figure 6. Annual precipitation pattern
Figure 7 Annual average temperature pattern
Climate stations used
-
(1) DANFORTH [USC00171833], Danforth, ME
-
(2) GREENVILLE MAINE FORESTRY SVC [USW00094626], Greenville, ME
-
(3) SPRINGFIELD [USC00178353], Springfield, ME
-
(4) BERLIN [USC00270690], Berlin, NH
-
(5) RANGELEY 2 NW [USC00177039], Rangeley, ME
-
(6) BRASSUA DAM [USC00170814], Rockwood, ME
-
(7) VANCEBORO NO 2 [USC00178974], Vanceboro, ME
-
(8) BARNARD [USC00170398], Brownville, ME
-
(9) INDIAN LAKE 2SW [USC00304102], Indian Lake, NY
-
(10) GRAND LAKE STREAM [USC00173261], Northern Washington Co, ME
-
(11) JACKMAN [USC00174086], Jackman, ME
-
(12) MILLINOCKET [USC00175304], Millinocket, ME
-
(13) CLAYTON LAKE [USC00171472], Northwest Aroostook, ME
">Influencing water features
This site is a forested wetland, characterized by a dense, compacted till layer in the subsoil that perches water for much of the year. Additional water enters this site as run-in from the watershed above. Ponding occurs in depressions, and the water table is within the plant rooting zone throughout the growing season. Gentle slopes allow water to slowly pass laterally through the soil before exiting downslope to even wetter, flatter sites below.
Wetland description
Classification System: Cowardin<br />
System: Palustrine<br />
Subsystem: NA<br />
Class: Forested Wetlands<br />
Subclass: Needle-leaved EvergreenSoil features
Soils are poorly- to very poorly- drained with a restrictive layer at less than 40 inches (100 centimeters) and are moderately deep. They will have a seasonal high-water table from the soil surface to 12 inches (30 centimeters) for most of the year and may have standing water up to 6 inches (15 centimeters). Available water capacity is greater than 3 inches. A thin mucky – peat surface horizon will be present, underlain by mineral textures ranging from silt loam to loam. Surface fragments will be generally absent to sparse and subsurface fragments will typically increase with depth. This site occurs on soils with wide-ranging soil pH but is most likely to occur where soil pH is greater than 5.0. The soil temperature regime is frigid, and the soil moisture regime is aquic.
Representative soils include the Sabattis (Histic Humaquepts), Pillsbury (Humic Endoaquepts), Peacham (Histic Humaquepts), Monarda (Aeric Endoaquepts), Burnham (Histic Humaquepts), and Aurelie (Aeric Endoaquepts) series. Other soils may be present that support this type of vegetation, but vegetation community dynamics can also be driven by abiotic influences (groundwater seepage, landscape position, etc.) rather than soils.
Figure 8. Image of Monarda soil, Maine
Table 5. Representative soil features
Parent material (1) Organic material
(2) Lodgment till – granite and gneiss
(3) Lodgment till – phyllite
(4) Lodgment till – mica schist
Surface texture (1) Mucky peat
(2) Muck
(3) Silt loam
(4) Fine sandy loam
(5) Loam
Family particle size (1) Loamy
(2) Coarse-loamy
Drainage class Very poorly drained to poorly drained Permeability class Very slow to slow Depth to restrictive layer 0 – 40 in Soil depth 80 in Surface fragment cover <=3" Not specified Surface fragment cover >3" 0 – 2 % Available water capacity
(0-40in)4.1 – 10.2 in Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-40in)4.8 – 7.4 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(0-40in)1 – 6 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(0-40in)0 – 3 % Table 6. Representative soil features (actual values)
Drainage class Very poorly drained to poorly drained Permeability class Very rapid to rapid Depth to restrictive layer 0 – 40 in Soil depth 80 in Surface fragment cover <=3" 0 – 9 % Surface fragment cover >3" 0 – 9 % Available water capacity
(0-40in)3 – 14 in Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-40in)3.2 – 7.8 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(0-40in)0 – 25 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(0-40in)0 – 20 % 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 reference state is a mature coniferous forest primarily dominated by northern white cedar (Thuja occidentalis) on gently sloping hillsides, or at slope bases, with significant seepage of groundwater.
Logging is historically the greatest source of disturbance. These stands are relative free of serious insect injury as well as being resistant to decay, making them high in value for wood products that comes in contact with water and soil, such as fence posts, shingles, and paneling. This wood has historically been popular for log cabins because of good insulating qualities. Due to the wet nature of these soils, this site is particularly vulnerable to lasting disturbance when logging practices during the growing season churn and rut the surface soils. For this reason, this site is typically harvested when the ground is frozen. Harvests have often targeted spruce removal, though northern white cedar is also often taken from these areas. Selective harvests do not generally convert the site to a different state but do result in a temporary increase in understory shrubs and herbs. Clearcutting and shelterwood strips are currently recommended for harvesting mature stands of northern white cedar and reproducing new ones (Carey 1993). Difficulty has been identified in regenerating these species after harvesting due to its forage value to white tailed deer. Northern white cedar are slow growing species, and the seedlings (less than 7 ft tall) are often damaged by heavy browsing.
Natural disturbances will include wind, ice, and snow damage that create natural canopy gaps from individual or group tree fall, leading to greater sunlight exposure and temporary increase in shrub and forb cover. In areas of intense groundwater seepage, highly diverse areas of forbs and grasses can persist for extended periods of time, particularly in areas where emerging groundwater creates a saturated and unstable rooting substrate that does not support tall trees. Herbivory on seedlings and pole trees may cause extensive damage in times where low forage is available elsewhere, and high browse lines are often seen on larger northern white cedar trees.
Altered hydrology, in the form of ponding or draining, can greatly alter the ecological functioning of this site. While these trees can tolerate high seasonal high-water tables, higher than normal water levels will reduce growth and eventually kill trees. This is often seen through beaver damming and road construction and may transition the reference forested condition through a variety of communities including open marsh grasses and emergent vegetation. Removal of dams and man-made structures that restores hydrologic function leads to natural succession by emergent wetland plants, herbaceous plants, shrubs, and eventually cedar re-establishment. Draining and ditching along with tree cover removal can convert the site to hayfield and pasture with varying degrees of ponding, depending on the extent of hydrological alteration.
While cedar is generally considered as shade tolerant, it is not as tolerant as balsam fir, sugar maple, red maple, and black ash. Seedlings are often intermediate in shade tolerance and can survive severe suppression for several years but will die if not eventually released in the canopy. Successional replacement is often seen on a tree-by-tree basis, where cedar saplings in the understory are released when a mature cedar dies, but major disturbances may accelerate the replacement of cedar with more shade tolerant species.
Fire is typically not a dominant risk in these communities due to their inherent wetness, but they are highly susceptible due to their thin bark, shallow roots, and high oil content (Carey 1993, Curtis 1946). Cedar regeneration may become better established by seed on recently burned sites if a seed source is nearby and the exposed soil remains moist.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 - Cedar seedbank exhausted, hardwood dominance and persistance T1B - Variable increase in soil wetness (natural or anthropogenic) T1C - Anthropogenic drainage, land clearing, cultivation of pasture grasses and / or legumes T2A - Selective harvest of hardwoods, cedar regeneration promotion T2B - Variable increase in soil wetness (natural or anthropogenic) T3A - Decrease in soil wetness (natural or anthropogenic) T3B - Intense increase in soil wetness (natural or anthropogenic) T4A - Long-term agricultural abandonment T5A - Decrease in soil wetness (natural or anthropogenic) State 1 submodel, plant communities
1.1A - Seep, patch cut, clearcut, or blowdown that increases soil wetness and light availability 1.1B - Shelterwood strip cuts, selective harvesting 1.2A - Time (typically less than 50 years), tree regeneration and establishment 1.3A - Seep, patch cut, clearcut, or blowdown that increases soil wetness and light availability 1.3B - Time (typically greater than 50 but less than 100 years), thinning (natural or anthropogenic) 1.4A - Time (often greater than 100 years), thinning (natural or anthropogenic) 1.4B - Seep, patch cut, clearcut, or blowdown that increases soil wetness and light availability 1.4C - Shelterwood strip cuts State 2 submodel, plant communities
State 3 submodel, plant communities
3.1A - Time, natural successional allowing for the establishment and dominance (greater than 50 percent cover) of shrubs State 4 submodel, plant communities
4.1A - Reduced or eliminated grassland management operations that allows for succession of predominantly invasive or incursive shrubs and trees 4.2A - Removal of undesirable species via management practices (mechanical, chemical, biological), regular maintenance and management of grassland operations State 5 submodel, plant communities
5.1A - Increase in long-term hydrology 5.2A - Decrease in long-term hydrology State 1
Cedar Seepage SwampsThese are softwood dominated forests most often comprised of mature northern white cedar (Thuja occidentalis) found on shallow organic over dense till soils. The canopy is often a pure stand of cedar (up to 95 percent abundance) and can be somewhat open but is more often closed. Minor inclusions of hardwoods may be present. Tall shrubs are generally absent, low shrubs and forbs are often sparse to locally abundant (greater than 30 percent cover). Bryophytes are the dominant groundcover, covering both hummocks and hollows. Changes in light availability and soil wetness are the dominant drivers for these communities, with logging being the main factor attributable to this.
Community 1.1
Late Successional Seepage Cedar ForestMature northern white cedar is dominant in the closed canopy (greater than 60 percent to over 90 percent canopy cover) and will often create a dark, cool forest floor. A patchy shrub layer is often present with a highly diverse herbaceous layer (greater than 50 percent cover) over a nearly continuous cover of bryoids. Hummocks and hollows are common microtopographic features of this site, indicating years of tip ups due to the highly saturated and shallow root restriction. Other species such as red spruce, yellow birch, red maple, black ash, and balsam fir may be present in small amounts but not dominant.
Within the Northeast US, this community type correlates to Maine’s “Evergreen Seepage Forest” concept (Gawler and Cutko 2010), New Hampshire’s “Northern White Cedar Seepage Forest” concept (Sperduto and Nichols 2012), New York’s “Northern White Cedar Swamp” concept (Edinger et al. 2014), and Vermont’s “Northern White Cedar Sloping Seepage Forest” concept (Thompson, Sorenson, and Zaino 2019). This correlates with NatureServes ‘Thuja occidentalis – (Picea rubens)/ Tiarella cordifolia Swamp Forest ' Association (CEGL006175) and LandFires’ ‘Acadian – Appalachian Conifer Seepage Forest’ concept (CES201.576).Dominant plant species
-
arborvitae (Thuja occidentalis), tree
-
balsam fir (Abies balsamea), tree
-
red maple (Acer rubrum), tree
-
black ash (Fraxinus nigra), tree
-
yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis), tree
-
American fly honeysuckle (Lonicera canadensis), shrub
-
swamp fly honeysuckle (Lonicera oblongifolia), shrub
-
withe-rod (Viburnum nudum var. cassinoides), shrub
-
mountain maple (Acer spicatum), shrub
-
sedge (Carex), grass
-
naked miterwort (Mitella nuda), other herbaceous
-
bluntleaved orchid (Platanthera obtusata), other herbaceous
-
sidebells wintergreen (Orthilia secunda), other herbaceous
-
robin runaway (Dalibarda repens), other herbaceous
-
bunchberry dogwood (Cornus canadensis), other herbaceous
-
bluebead (Clintonia borealis), other herbaceous
-
creeping snowberry (Gaultheria hispidula), other herbaceous
-
threeleaf goldthread (Coptis trifolia), other herbaceous
-
mountain woodsorrel (Oxalis montana), other herbaceous
-
twinflower (Linnaea borealis), other herbaceous
-
heartleaf foamflower (Tiarella cordifolia), other herbaceous
-
western oakfern (Gymnocarpium dryopteris), other herbaceous
-
splendid feather moss (Hylocomium splendens), other herbaceous
-
delicate thuidium moss (Thuidium delicatulum), other herbaceous
-
rough goose neck moss (Rhytidiadelphus triquetrus), other herbaceous
-
(Bazzania trilobata), other herbaceous
-
sphagnum (Sphagnum), other herbaceous
Community 1.2
Temporary Herbaceous / Open SeepsThese are open canopy gaps, which can either be a transitional phase or persistent phase depending on subsurface groundwater flow. These will consist primarily of diverse grasses and forbs, with sparse to absent trees and shrubs due high soil saturation and shallow root restrictions. These may be narrow to open patches, with occasional trees being present but will typically tip up at young ages due to the unstable grounds if present as a persistent seep. If a transitional temporary herbaceous phase, seedlings may be present in small amounts. Bryophytes are often abundant in these areas.
Dominant plant species
-
eastern rough sedge (Carex scabrata), grass
-
melic mannagrass (Glyceria melicaria), grass
-
golden saxifrage (Chrysosplenium), other herbaceous
-
eastern swamp saxifrage (Saxifraga pensylvanica), other herbaceous
-
American marshpennywort (Hydrocotyle americana), other herbaceous
-
jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), other herbaceous
-
sensitive fern (Onoclea sensibilis), other herbaceous
-
false hellebore (Veratrum nigrum), other herbaceous
-
drooping woodreed (Cinna latifolia), other herbaceous
-
brachythecium moss (Brachythecium rivulare), other herbaceous
-
undulate atrichum moss (Atrichum undulatum), other herbaceous
-
rhizomnium moss (Rhizomnium punctatum), other herbaceous
Community 1.3
Early Seral ForestSeedling and sapling regeneration of cedar and balsam fir is abundant and may be intermixed with other hardwood species such as gray and yellow birch, red maple, and black ash. Faster growing trees such as balsam fir may temporarily outcompete other species, especially cedar, which is considered a slow growing tree. While this community may not consist of trees in a similar size class, these communities will typically be in a single age class. Species will typically be less than 50 years old and will range up to 15 feet (5 meters) in height.
Community 1.4
Mixed Cedar – Hardwood Mid-Succession ForestThis successional phase consists of a mixed canopy of northern white cedar trees 50 to 100 years old or older and mature early to mid-successional species such as yellow birch, grey birch, paper birch, balsam fir, and red maple. Hardwoods and balsam fir will begin to die out in this state but still may be canopy dominants before reverting to a mature cedar forest.
In community variants where this occurs on more sloped areas, yellow birch can persist as a canopy dominant and be mixed with the cedar canopy. Groundwater seeps can be seen or head moving just below the soil surface. Herbaceous plants more common in upland habitats may be common and bryophyte cover may be low.Dominant plant species
-
arborvitae (Thuja occidentalis), tree
-
paper birch (Betula papyrifera), tree
-
yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis), tree
-
balsam fir (Abies balsamea), tree
-
red maple (Acer rubrum), tree
Pathway 1.1A
Community 1.1 to 1.2This may occur in areas where subsurface water flow is increased due to changes in hydrologic input or upslope soil damage. Increased seepage may weaken rooting stability and support graminoid and forbs rather than mature trees. Natural blowdowns from windstorms, ice or snow damage may also reflect a similar transition, opening the canopy and allowing for the temporary dominance of grasses and forbs. Harvesting methods such as patch cuts or clearcuts for pulpwood and lumber may also result in this community’s temporary dominance by increasing soil wetness and light availability. Harvesting during winter months is recommended to prevent extensive rutting and hydrologic instability that may lead to issues such as erosion, loss of moisture retention, and changes in groundwater flow.
Pathway 1.1B
Community 1.1 to 1.3This transition can occur through shelterwood strip cuts or selective harvesting, in which the mature northern white cedar canopy is cleared, allowing for new seedlings to grow under the shelter of the remaining trees before harvesting the remaining trees. This is often done in cedar forests since there has often been difficulty in regenerating cedar stands due to heavy browse by deer. This may have minimal impact on the overall canopy composition while promoting the growth of saplings. Harvesting during winter months is recommended and will differ from clearcutting methods through the limited disturbance to the local hydrology.
Pathway 1.2A
Community 1.2 to 1.3This transition can occur if the basic requirements for tree regeneration are met, primarily an adequate seed supply, proper seedbed, and light, temperature, and moisture conditions are conductive for seed germination and survival. This transition will often occur in less than but no greater than 50 years post canopy disturbance. Planting of northern white cedar can help accelerate the restoration of the natural vegetation of the swamp.
Pathway 1.3A
Community 1.3 to 1.2This may occur in areas where subsurface water flow is increased due to changes in hydrologic input or upslope soil damage. Increased seepage may weaken rooting stability and support graminoid and forbs rather than mature trees. Natural blowdowns from windstorms, ice or snow damage may also reflect a similar transition, opening the canopy and allowing for the temporary dominance of grasses and forbs. Harvesting methods such as patch cuts or clearcuts for pulpwood may also result in this community’s temporary dominance by increasing soil wetness and light availability. Harvesting during winter months is recommended to prevent extensive rutting and hydrologic instability that may lead to issues such as erosion, loss of moisture retention, and changes in groundwater flow.
Pathway 1.3B
Community 1.3 to 1.4This transition will occur over time, typically greater than 50 years but less than 100 years into a stand’s lifecycle. The early successional stand will thin in density either naturally (treefall, disease, etc.) or via human interference (forest stand improvement [FSI]). Tree height will surpass an average of 15 feet and greater than 1.6 inches diameter at breast height (DBH) along with more spaced trees with intermediate understory regeneration and development. Thinning through FSI methods can allow for the regeneration of understory vegetation, including saplings, while encouraging the growth the desired species. FSI during winter months is recommended and will differ from clearcutting or selecting harvesting methods through the limited disturbance to the local hydrology.
Pathway 1.4A
Community 1.4 to 1.1This transition will over time, often greater than 100 years, in which the main stand remains relatively undisturbed. This will allow the cedar stand to mature is size and height classes, creating a more uneven aged stand with a well-developed overstory and a dark, cool understory that limits regeneration. This transition may be assisted with forest stand improvement practices. Northern white cedar will become the canopy dominant, and the understory will reflect more variation in microtopography (hummocks and hollows) due to natural disturbance tip ups.
Pathway 1.4B
Community 1.4 to 1.2This may occur in areas where subsurface water flow is increased due to changes in hydrologic input or upslope soil damage. Increased seepage may weaken rooting stability and support graminoid and forbs rather than mature trees. Natural blowdowns from windstorms, ice or snow damage may also reflect a similar transition, opening the canopy and allowing for the temporary dominance of grasses and forbs. Harvesting methods such as patch cuts or clearcuts for pulpwood and lumber may also result in this community’s temporary dominance by increasing soil wetness and light availability. Harvesting during winter months is recommended to prevent extensive rutting and hydrologic instability that may lead to issues such as erosion, loss of moisture retention, and changes in groundwater flow.
Pathway 1.4C
Community 1.4 to 1.3This transition can occur through shelterwood strip cuts, in which the mature northern white cedar canopy is cleared, allowing for new seedlings to grow under the shelter of the remaining trees before harvesting the remaining trees. This is often done in cedar forests since there has often been difficulty in regenerating cedar stands due to heavy browse by deer.
State 2
Hardwood Seepage SwampsThese are hardwood dominated seepage swamps most often comprised of red maple (Acer rubrum), black, white, or green ash (Fraxinus nigra, F. americana, F. pennsylvania, respectfully), and yellow birch (Betula alleghenies) are found on shallow to absent organic soil over dense till. The canopy will be mostly hardwoods with softwoods, often northern white cedar (Thuja occidentalis), hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), or red spruce (Picea rubra); present but making up less than 25 percent of the canopy. The canopy will often be closed (greater than 60 percent canopy cover) with both the tall and shrub layer being generally sparse. Sapling regeneration can be common. The herbaceous layer is generally complex due to the variable canopy but consists of forbs and primarily herbaceous litter.
Community 2.1
Mid Successional Seepage Hardwood ForestAsh and / or yellow birch are dominant in the canopy, with red maple present but not always dominant. Softwoods such as northern white cedar, hemlock, red spruce, white pine, and balsam fir may be present but make up less than 25 percent of the total canopy. The canopy will often be closed (35 to 85 percent cover of each species) and will often create a dark, cool forest floor during the summer months. A patchy shrub layer is often present with a highly diverse herbaceous layer reflecting both upland and wetland species. The groundcover will typically consist of herbaceous litter. Bryoids are sparse to abundant and will be locally dependent on subsurface seepage and cover by herbaceous litter.
Within the Northeast US, this community type correlates to Maine’s “Hardwood Seepage Forest” and “Black Ash Swamp” concept (Gawler and Cutko 2010), New Hampshire’s “Northern Hardwood – Black Ash – Conifer Swamp” concept (Sperduto and Nichols 2012), and New York’s “Red Maple – Hardwood Swamp” concept (Edinger et al. 2014). This correlates with NatureServes ‘Betula alleghaniensis - Acer rubrum - (Tsuga canadensis, Abies balsamea) / Osmunda cinnamomea Swamp Forest' Association (CEGL006380).Dominant plant species
-
black ash (Fraxinus nigra), tree
-
white ash (Fraxinus americana), tree
-
green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), tree
-
yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis), tree
-
red maple (Acer rubrum), tree
-
arborvitae (Thuja occidentalis), tree
-
balsam fir (Abies balsamea), tree
-
red spruce (Picea rubens), tree
-
upright sedge (Carex stricta), grass
-
prickly bog sedge (Carex atlantica), grass
-
silvery sedge (Carex canescens), grass
-
longhair sedge (Carex comosa), grass
-
broom sedge (Carex scoparia), grass
-
fox sedge (Carex vulpinoidea), grass
-
rattlesnake mannagrass (Glyceria canadensis), grass
-
common rush (Juncus effusus), grass
-
rice cutgrass (Leersia oryzoides), grass
-
woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus), grass
-
sensitive fern (Onoclea sensibilis), other herbaceous
-
royal fern (Osmunda regalis), other herbaceous
-
eastern marsh fern (Thelypteris palustris), other herbaceous
-
jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), other herbaceous
-
purple avens (Geum rivale), other herbaceous
-
Schweinitz's ragwort (Packera schweinitziana), other herbaceous
-
heartleaf foamflower (Tiarella cordifolia), other herbaceous
-
small enchanter's nightshade (Circaea alpina), other herbaceous
-
white turtlehead (Chelone glabra), other herbaceous
-
splendid feather moss (Hylocomium splendens), other herbaceous
-
delicate thuidium moss (Thuidium delicatulum), other herbaceous
-
(Bazzania trilobata), other herbaceous
-
sphagnum (Sphagnum), other herbaceous
State 3
Beaver Meadows / Transitional MarshesThese are graminoid and shrub dominated wetlands that are typical successional communities after an alteration to the surrounding landscape increases the local hydroperiods. This is most often the result of beaver damming but can be the result of anthropogenic influences such as building of roads and man-made dams as well. This state may persist indefinitely or may be seen as a transitional community and will depend on the surrounding hydrologic regime. It can be identified by the presence of the root restrictive layer and shallow organic soils compared to other sites which may have deeper organic soils. Standing dead snags may or may not be present depending on time since hydrological change.
Dominant plant species
-
alder (Alnus), shrub
-
sedge (Carex), grass
-
reedgrass (Calamagrostis), grass
-
bulrush (Scirpus), grass
Community 3.1
Sedges and Wet Herbaceous MeadowsThese 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. Changes in dominant species will often be dependent on slight differences in the hydroperiod and the presence or absence of a viable seedbank.
Dominant plant species
-
upright sedge (Carex stricta), grass
-
blister sedge (Carex vesicaria), grass
-
Northwest Territory sedge (Carex utriculata), grass
-
bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis), grass
-
rattlesnake mannagrass (Glyceria canadensis), grass
-
three-way sedge (Dulichium arundinaceum), grass
-
common rush (Juncus effusus), grass
-
rice cutgrass (Leersia oryzoides), grass
-
woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus), grass
-
swamp milkweed (Asclepias incarnata), other herbaceous
-
eastern marsh fern (Thelypteris palustris), other herbaceous
-
spotted joe pye weed (Eutrochium maculatum), other herbaceous
-
marsh bellflower (Campanula aparinoides), other herbaceous
-
royal fern (Osmunda regalis), other herbaceous
-
purple marshlocks (Comarum palustre), other herbaceous
-
thoroughwort (Eupatorium), other herbaceous
-
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 3.2
Alder and Tall ShrublandsThese 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.Dominant plant species
-
arborvitae (Thuja occidentalis), tree
-
red maple (Acer rubrum), tree
-
black ash (Fraxinus nigra), tree
-
gray alder (Alnus incana), shrub
-
hazel alder (Alnus serrulata), shrub
-
redosier dogwood (Cornus sericea), shrub
-
American red raspberry (Rubus idaeus), shrub
-
steeplebush (Spiraea tomentosa), shrub
-
willow (Salix), shrub
-
viburnum (Viburnum), shrub
-
parasol whitetop (Doellingeria umbellata), other herbaceous
-
spotted joe pye weed (Eutrochium maculatum), other herbaceous
-
jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), other herbaceous
-
northern bugleweed (Lycopus uniflorus), other herbaceous
-
sensitive fern (Onoclea sensibilis), other herbaceous
-
cinnamon fern (Osmunda cinnamomea), other herbaceous
-
eastern marsh fern (Thelypteris palustris), other herbaceous
-
violet (Viola), other herbaceous
-
sphagnum (Sphagnum), other herbaceous
-
tree climacium moss (Climacium dendroides), other herbaceous
Pathway 3.1A
Community 3.1 to 3.2This transition may occur in a beaver meadow with slight fluctuations in the hydroperiod and the establishment of tall shrubs, especially alder (Alnus spp.).
State 4
Converted Cultural StateThis state represents a once forested area now cleared for pasture. This will typically only occur on gentler slopes (
Community 4.1
Improved Pasture Grasses and LegumesThis community phase represents commonly planted forage species on pastureland and hayland. The suite of plants established on any given site may vary considerably depending upon purpose, management goals, and usage (e.g., horse vs. cattle). Most systems include a mixture of grasses and legumes that provide forage throughout the growing season. Several additional plants and/or species combinations maybe present depending on the objectives and management approaches of the land manager/owner.
Dominant plant species
-
timothy (Phleum pratense), grass
-
sweet vernalgrass (Anthoxanthum odoratum), grass
-
Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), grass
-
orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata), grass
-
smooth brome (Bromus inermis), grass
-
red fescue (Festuca rubra), grass
-
sheep fescue (Festuca ovina), grass
-
perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne), grass
-
redtop (Agrostis gigantea), grass
-
festulolium (×Festulolium), grass
-
alfalfa (Medicago sativa), other herbaceous
-
red clover (Trifolium pratense), other herbaceous
-
milkvetch (Astragalus), other herbaceous
-
bedstraw (Galium), other herbaceous
Community 4.2
Herbaceous and Shrubby “Old Field”This phase represents a more degraded phase for livestock. While some utilization of desirable pasture plants will occur, undesirable species are prolific. As undesirable pasture species grow, desirable pasture grasses and forbs will decrease in cover. Small trees representative of the reference condition (often early successional species) is often present but do not form great amounts of canopy cover.
Dominant plant species
-
alder (Alnus), shrub
-
goldenrod (Solidago), other herbaceous
-
cowparsnip (Heracleum), other herbaceous
-
yellow rattle (Rhinanthus), other herbaceous
-
buttercup (Ranunculus), other herbaceous
-
hawkweed (Hieracium), other herbaceous
-
iris (Iris), other herbaceous
-
absinthium (Artemisia absinthium), other herbaceous
Pathway 4.1A
Community 4.1 to 4.2This transition may occur through the absence or mismanagement of pasture or haylands may result with the increase in undesirable species and decrease in desirable species.
Pathway 4.2A
Community 4.2 to 4.1This transition may occur through management practices via mechanical, chemical, or biological means may be used to remove undesirable pasture or hayland species.
State 5
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.
Dominant plant species
-
cattail (Typha), other herbaceous
-
pickerelweed (Pontederia), other herbaceous
-
arrowhead (Sagittaria), other herbaceous
Community 5.1
Freshwater EmergentsThese are emergent species that dominant the shallowly ponded areas. Dominant species will vary based on the depth and duration of ponding and will often form dense monocultures so that germination of other species can be limited.
Dominant plant species
-
cattail (Typha), grass
-
reed (Phragmites), grass
-
bulrush (Scirpus), grass
-
pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata), other herbaceous
-
bulltongue arrowhead (Sagittaria lancifolia), other herbaceous
Community 5.2
Open WaterThis phase describes the impact of increased hydroperiods the results in a permanently inundated condition. Standing dead snags may be present and indicative of a once forested community.
Pathway 5.1A
Community 5.1 to 5.2This transition may occur through increases in long-term hydrology that causes standing water, kills existing vegetation, and prevents germination of new species. Ponding may be year-round. This may occur naturally (beaver dams) or anthropogenically.
Pathway 5.2A
Community 5.2 to 5.1Decrease in long-term hydrology that causes water levels to drop and freshwater emergent species to germinate in shallow ponding conditions. This may occur naturally (beaver dam removal) or anthropogenically.
Transition T1A
State 1 to 2This transition may occur through extensive selective harvesting of cedar, in which the seedbank supply is exhausted, and the conditions are unfit for regeneration. This may also occur through extensive winter browse by deer on regenerating cedar in early successional forests due to its high forage value. In any case, hardwood species will persist and outcompete northern white cedar, transitioning a community from evergreen to hardwood dominance.
Transition T1B
State 1 to 3This transition may occur through variable increases in soil wetness, often because of natural or anthropogenic influence such as beaver or man-made dams. This may also be intensified by extensive harvesting, which reduces canopy cover and water use by trees, promoting graminoids and shrubs to become dominant. In dammed areas, existing trees may be killed and standing dead snags will be remnant in the overstory.
Transition T1C
State 1 to 4The reference state transitions to the managed grassland state with the clearing of woody vegetation and the establishment of pasture grasses and legumes. Water control structures may have been used in historically transitioned sites to drain excess water from the site and make it more suitable for pasture species. Current transition from the reference state to a converted cultural state may not be suitable following local, state, and federal laws.
Transition T2A
State 2 to 1This transition may occur through selective harvesting of hardwood species and forest management to promote cedar regeneration. This may require planting of seedlings if the seedbank is exhausted and active management to ensure seedling survival. If hydrologic changes were the dominant transitional driver, restoration to the natural hydrology of the site may be needed.
Transition T2B
State 2 to 3This transition may occur through variable increases in soil wetness, often because of natural or anthropogenic influence such as beaver or man-made dams. This may also be intensified by extensive harvesting, which reduces canopy cover and water use by trees, promoting graminoids and shrubs to become dominant. In dammed areas, existing trees may be killed and standing dead snags will be remnant in the overstory.
Transition T3A
State 3 to 1This transition may occur through decreases in soil wetness, often due to the removal of beaver or man-made dams. Lower seasonal high-water tables and seasonal fluctuation can allow for regeneration and sapling establishment.
Transition T3B
State 3 to 5This transition may occur through intense increase in soil wetness, often because of natural or anthropogenic influence such as beaver or man-made dams. In dammed areas, existing trees may be killed and standing dead snags will be remnant in the overstory. Depending on the average depth of standing water, freshwater emergent vegetation may become dominant.
Transition T4A
State 4 to 1This transition may occur following long-term agricultural abandonment. Northern white cedar, white pine, gray birch, aspen, red spruce, pin cherry, and balsam fir may be post-agricultural successional species that will invade a fallow pastureland depending on the available seedbank and the duration and intensity of the disturbance.
Transition T5A
State 5 to 3This transition may occur through decreases in soil wetness, often due to the removal of beaver or man-made dams. Lower seasonal high-water tables and seasonal fluctuation can allow for regeneration and sapling establishment.
Additional community tables
Table 7. Community 1.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 8. Community 1.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 9. Community 1.3 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 10. Community 1.4 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 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 (%) Table 16. Community 5.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 17. Community 5.2 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
Carey, Jennifer H. 1993. Thuja occidentalis. In: Fire Effects Information System, [Online].
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station,
Fire Sciences Laboratory (Producer).
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
Curtis, J. D. (1946). Preliminary observations on northern white cedar in Maine. Ecology, 27(1), 23-36.
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.
Johnston, W. F. (1990). Thuja occidentalis L. Northern white-cedar. Silvics of North America, 1(10), 580-589.
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).
Sorenson, E., Popp, R., Lew-Smith, M., Engstrom, B., Lapin, M., Ferguson, M., & Waterbury, V. (2004). Hardwood swamps of Vermont: distribution, ecology, classification, and some sites of ecological significance. Nongame and Natural Heritage Program and Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department, 55.
Sorenson, E., Popp, R., Engstrom, B., Lapin, M., Farrell, D., & Waterbury, V. (2009). Softwood swamps of Vermont: Distribution, ecology, classification, and some sites of ecological significance. Nongame and Natural Heritage Program, Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department, Montpelier, Vermont.
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 03/26/2025 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
