Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Ecological site F149BY010MA
Moist Till Uplands
Last updated: 9/17/2024
Accessed: 08/20/2026
-
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): 149B–Long Island-Cape Cod Coastal Lowland
149B—Long Island-Cape Cod Coastal Lowland
This area is in the Embayed Section of the Coastal Plain Province of the Atlantic Plain. It is part of the partially submerged coastal plain of New England. It is mostly an area of nearly level to rolling plains, but it has some steeper hills (glacial moraines). Ridges border the lower plains. The Peconic and Carmans Rivers are on the eastern end of Long Island. The parts of this area in Massachusetts and Rhode Island have no major rivers. This entire area is made up of deep, unconsolidated glacial outwash deposits of sand and gravel. A thin mantle of glacial till covers most of the surface. Some moraines form ridges and higher hills in this area of generally low relief. Sand dunes and tidal marshes are extensive along the coastline.Classification relationships
USDA-NRCS (USDA, 2006):
Land Resource Region (LRR): S—Northern Atlantic Slope Diversified Farming Region
Major Land Resource Area (MLRA): 149B—Long Island-Cape Cod Coastal Lowland
USDA-FS (Cleland et al., 2007):
Province: 221 Eastern Broadleaf Forest Province
Section: 221A Lower New England
Subsection: 221Ab Cape Cod Coastal Lowland and Islands
Subsection: 221An Long Island Coastal Lowland and MoraineEcological site concept
The site consists of very deep, moderately well drained soils formed in loamy glacial till on uplands. They are nearly level to gently sloping soils on broad hill tops and toeslopes on moraines. Slope ranges from 0 to 8 percent. Representative soil is Moshup.
The reference plant community is considered to be a wetland transition community. Common trees include black oak, red oak, white oak, tulip tree, American beech, hickories, and red maple. Pitch pine is subdominant. Common shrubs spicebush and highbush blueberry. Post settlement clearing of forests and an increase in fire has led to a dominance of pitch pine over oaks on terminal moraines within Cape Cod (Parshall et al. 2003). In the absence of severe or frequent fire, oaks replaces pitch pine while other hardwoods such as beech and hickories become a larger component of the forests on more mesic sites (Parshall et al. 2003).Associated sites
F149BY011MA Well Drained Till Uplands
Well-drained Till Uplands
Similar sites
F149BY006NY Well Drained Outwash
Well-drained Outwash
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree (1) Quercus velutina
(2) Pinus rigidaShrub (1) Lindera benzoin
Herbaceous Not specified
Physiographic features
The site occurs on broad hill tops and toeslopes on moraines and is not subject to flooding/ponding.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Landforms (1) Upland > Moraine
(2) Hill
Runoff class Medium to high Flooding frequency None Ponding frequency None Elevation 0 – 262 ft Slope 0 – 15 % Water table depth 24 in Aspect Aspect is not a significant factor Climatic features
Coastal regions' climate generally considered maritime, experiences a more moderate climate than inland, i.e., cooler summers and warmer winters and delayed onset of spring. However, coastal regions do experience the brunt of extreme weather such as nor'easters and tropical storms, e.g., hurricanes.
Table 3 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (characteristic range) 160-160 days Freeze-free period (characteristic range) 200-210 days Precipitation total (characteristic range) 50-50 in Frost-free period (actual range) 160-160 days Freeze-free period (actual range) 200-210 days Precipitation total (actual range) 40-50 in Frost-free period (average) 160 days Freeze-free period (average) 200 days Precipitation total (average) 50 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) HYANNIS [USC00193821], Hyannis, MA
-
(2) EAST WAREHAM [USC00192451], East Wareham, MA
">Influencing water features
N/A
Wetland description
N/A
Soil features
The site consists of very deep, moderately well drained soils formed in loamy glacial till and marine deposits. Representative soil is Moshup.
Table 4. Representative soil features
Parent material (1) Till
(2) Marine deposits
Surface texture (1) Loam
Family particle size (1) Fine-loamy
(2) Coarse-loamy
Drainage class Moderately well drained Depth to restrictive layer 72 in Soil depth 72 in Surface fragment cover <=3" Not specified Surface fragment cover >3" 0 – 2 % Available water capacity
(Depth not specified)6 in Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(Depth not specified)3.5 – 5.5 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(Depth not specified)5 – 20 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(Depth not specified)0 – 5 % Ecological dynamics
[Caveat: The vegetation information contained in this section and is only provisional, based on concepts, not yet validated with field work.*]
The vegetation groupings described in this section are based on the terrestrial ecological system classification and vegetation associations developed by NatureServe (Comer 2003). Terrestrial ecological systems are specifically defined as a group of plant community types (associations) that tend to co-occur within landscapes with similar ecological processes, substrates, and/or environmental gradients. They are intended to provide a classification unit that is readily mappable, often from terrain and remote imagery, and readily identifiable by conservation and resource managers in the field. A given system will typically manifest itself in a landscape at intermediate geographic scales of tens-to-thousands of hectares and will persist for 50 or more years. A vegetation association is a plant community that is much more specific to a given soil, geology, landform, climate, hydrology, and disturbance history. It is the basic unit for vegetation classification and recognized by the US National Vegetation Classification (US FDGC 2008; USNVC 2017). Each association will be named by the diagnostic and often dominant species that occupy the different height strata (tree, shrub, and herb). Within the NatureServe Explorer database, ecological systems are numbered by a community Ecological System Code (CES) and individual vegetation associations are assigned an identification number called a Community Element Global Code (CEGL).
[*Caveat] The information presented is representative of very complex vegetation communities. Key indicator plants and ecological processes are described to help inform land management decisions. Plant communities will differ across the MLRA because of the naturally occurring variability in weather, soils, and geography. The reference plant community is not necessarily the management goal. The drafts of species lists are merely representative and are not botanical descriptions of all species occurring, or potentially occurring, on this site. They are not intended to cover every situation or the full range of conditions, species, and responses for the site.
This ecological site, set in moderately-well-drained moist till, is characterized by somewhat mesic plant communities with coastal affinities from Long Island, New York, north to Cape Cod, Massachusetts. These plant communities coincide with Northern Atlantic Coastal Plain Dry Oak-Hardwood Forest system(CES203.475). The prevailing ecological processes are related to coastal influences, such as a coastal climate and storms, and if within close proximity to the coast, maritime effects of wind exposure, salt spray, and sand movement. Oaks (Quercus) typically predominate in the forest canopy, including black oak (Q. velutina), red oak (Q. rubra), white oak (Q. alba), scarlet oak (Q. coccinea), and chesnut oak (Q. montana) or sometimes pines (Pinus) such as white pine (Pinus strobus) or pitch pine (Pinus rigida) or admixtures thereof. Oaks were found to be dominant on terminal moraines within Cape Cod while pines dominated sandy outwash sites (Parshall et al. 2003). American holly (Ilex opaca) or inkberry (Ilex glabra) can be present. Threats include road vehicles, and may include invasive plants such as, but not limited to, black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia), tree-of-heaven (Ailanthus altissima), autumn olive (Elaeagnus umbellata), white poplar (Populus alba), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), Honeysuckles, (Lonicera spp.), oriental bittersweet (Celatrus orbiculatus), japanese knotweed (Polygonum cuspidatum) wineberry (Rubus phoenicolasius), Asiatic tearthumb (Polygonum perfoliatum). (Source: NatureServe 2018 [accessed 2019], USNVC 2017 [accessed 2019]).State and transition model
Custom diagramStandard diagram
More interactive model formats are also available. View Interactive Models
More interactive model formats are also available. View Interactive Models
Click on state and transition labels to scroll to the respective textState 1 submodel, plant communities
State 2 submodel, plant communities
State 3 submodel, plant communities
State 1
Reference State (Moist Till )The predominant plant communities of the Moist Till ecological site Reference State (miniamally-managed) include:
• North Atlantic Coastal Oak / Holly Forest, (Black Oak / American Holly Forest), [Quercus velutina / Ilex opaca Forest] - CEGL006378
• Coastal White Pine - White Oak Forest, (Eastern White Pine - White Oak / Inkberry Forest), [Pinus strobus - Quercus alba / Ilex glabra Forest], - CEGL006382
• Northeastern Dry Oak - Hickory Forest, Oak (White Oak, Northern Red Oak, Black Oak) - Hickory species / Mapleleaf Viburnum Forest), [Quercus (alba, rubra, velutina) - Carya spp. / Viburnum acerifolium Forest], - CEGL006336
(Source: NatureServe 2018 [accessed 2019], USNVC 2017 [accessed 2019]).Community 1.1
Black Oak / American Holly ForestNorth Atlantic Coastal Oak / Holly Forest, (Black Oak / American Holly Forest), [Quercus velutina / Ilex opaca Forest] - CEGL006378
This forest occurs on mesic, moderately well-drained silts and sandy loams in low areas on the landscape that are sheltered from direct maritime influences. Canopy dominants include Oaks (Quercus) predominately black oak (Q. velutina) and white oak (Q. alba),as well as American beech (Fagus grandifolia), red maple (Acer rubrum), and blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica). American holly (Ilex opaca) is abundant in the subcanopy. Other associated species of lessor cover include Canada serviceberry (Amelanchier canadensis), and sassafras (Sassafras albidum). Shrubs are common and include highbush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum), American witchhazel (Hamamelis virginiana), smooth arrowood (Viburnum recognitum) [= V. dentatum var. lucidum], and mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia). Vines are common but not usually abundant, and include such species as poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), roundleaf greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia), cat greenbrier (Smilax glauca), and grapes (Vitis spp.). Characteristic herbs include starflower (Trientalis borealis), Swan’s sedge (Carex swanii), and New York fern (Thelypteris noveboracensis). (Source: NatureServe 2018 [accessed 2019], USNVC 2017 [accessed 2019]).
Cross-referenced plant community concepts (typically by political state):
Coastal Forest/Woodland (Swain Swain 2016) [MA]
Coastal oak-holly forest (Edinger et al. 2014) [NY]Community 1.2
Eastern White Pine - White Oak / Inkberry ForestCoastal White Pine - White Oak Forest, (Eastern White Pine - White Oak / Inkberry Forest), [Pinus strobus - Quercus alba / Ilex glabra Forest], - CEGL006382
This forest is dominated by white pine (Pinus strobus), white oak (Quercus alba), and black oak (Quercus velutina) in the canopy with occasional pitch pine (Pinus rigida). The shrub layer is characterized by highbush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum ), blue huckleberry (Gaylussacia frondosa), and inkberry (Ilex glabra). The herb layer contains wintergreens (Pyrola spp.), Indianpipe (Monotropa uniflora), checkered rattlesnake-plantain (Goodyera tesselata), and several ferns, New York fern (Thelypteris noveboracensis). (Source: NatureServe 2018 [accessed 2019], USNVC 2017 [accessed 2019]).
Cross-referenced plant community concepts (typically by political state):
Coastal Forest/Woodland (Swain Swain 2016) [MA]
Successional southern hardwoods (Edinger et al. 2014) [NY]Pathway P1.1A
Community 1.1 to 1.2Disturbance, greater fire frequency, coastal proximity
Key drivers
-
Fire frequency
-
Vegetation development
Pathway P1.2A
Community 1.2 to 1.1Succession, reduced fire frequency
State 2
Semi-natural StateVegetation on lands somewhat conditioned by land use, e.g., managed native plant communities or invasive plant communities.
Community 2.1
Managed Forest WoodlandCommunity 2.2
Invasive Plant CommunityWhite poplar (Populus alba), winged burningbush (Euonymus alatus), Japanese knotweed (Lonicera japonica), oriental bittersweet (Celatrus orbiculatus)
Pathway P2.1A
Community 2.1 to 2.2Invasive plant establishment
Pathway P2.2A
Community 2.2 to 2.1Invasive plant management
Conservation practices
Invasive Plant Species Control State 3
Cultural StateLandscapes heavily conditioned by land use, e.g., Plantations/gardens
Community 3.1
Plantations/gardens/cultivated/pastureTransition T1A
State 1 to 2Disturbance, invasive plant establishment
Conservation practices
Forest Land Management Key drivers
-
Timber management
-
Nonnative plant species presence and/or establishment
-
Fire frequency
Transition T1B
State 1 to 3Cutting, land clearing, plant establishment
Conservation practices
Brush Management Land Clearing Restoration pathway R2A
State 2 to 1Herbaceous weed treatment, plant removal, plant establishment, successional management
Conservation practices
Brush Management Restoration and Management of Natural Ecosystems Native Plant Community Restoration and Management Forest Land Management Invasive Plant Species Control Monitoring and Evaluation Transition T2A
State 2 to 3Cutting, land clearing, plant establishment
Conservation practices
Land Clearing Invasive Plant Species Control Herbaceous Weed Control Restoration pathway R3A
State 3 to 1Herbaceous weed treatment, plant removal, plant establishment, successional management
Conservation practices
Brush Management Restoration and Management of Natural Ecosystems Native Plant Community Restoration and Management Invasive Plant Species Control Monitoring and Evaluation Herbaceous Weed Control Transition T3A
State 3 to 2Abandonment, disturbance, invasive plant establishment
Additional community tables
Table 5. Community 1.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 6. Community 1.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 7. Community 2.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 8. Community 2.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 9. Community 3.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Interpretations
Supporting information
Inventory data references
Site Development and Testing Plan Future work is needed, as described in a project plan, to validate the information presented in this provisional ecological site description. Future work includes field sampling, data collection and analysis by qualified vegetation 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.
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..
-
FGDC [Federal Geographic Data Committee]. 2008. National Vegetation Classification Standard, Version 2. Federal Geographic Data Committee, Vegetation Subcommittee, Washington DC..
-
NatureServe. 2018 (Date accessed). NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org.. http://explorer.natureserve.org.
-
Parshall, T., D.R. Foster, E. Faison, D. MacDonald, and Hansen. 2003. Long‐term history of vegetation and fire in pitch pine–oak forests on cape cod, Massachusetts.. Ecology 84:736–748.
-
USNVC [United States National Vegetation Classification]. 2017 (Date accessed). United States National Vegetation Classification Database V2.01. Federal Geographic Data Committee, Vegetation Subcomittee, Washington DC.
Other references
Cleland, D.T., J.A. Freeouf, J.E. Keys, G.J. Nowacki, C. Carpenter, and W.H. McNab. 2007. Ecological Subregions: Sections and Subsections of the Coterminous United States. USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report WO-76. Washington, DC.
Comer, P., D. Faber-Langendoen, R. Evans, S. Gawler, C. Josse, G. Kittel, S. Menard, M. Pyne, M. Reid, K. Schulz, K., Snow, and J.Teague. 2003. Ecological Systems of the United States: A Working Classification of U.S. Terrestrial Systems. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia.
Edinger, G.J., Evans, D.J., Gebauer, S., Howard, T.G., Hunt, D.M., and A.M. Olivero, A.M. (eds.). 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.
FGDC [Federal Geographic Data Committee]. 2008. National Vegetation Classification Standard, Version 2. Federal Geographic Data Committee, Vegetation Subcommittee, Washington DC.
NatureServe 2018. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org. (Accessed: January 2018).
Parshall, T., D.R. Foster, E. Faison, D. MacDonald, and B.C.S. Hansen. 2003. Long‐term history of vegetation and fire in pitch pine–oak forests on cape cod, Massachusetts. Ecology 84:736–748.
Sneddon, L. A., Zaremba, R. E., and M. Adams. 2010. Vegetation classification and mapping at Cape Cod National Seashore, Massachusetts. Natural Resources Technical Report NPS/NER/NRTR--2010/147. National Park Service, Philadelphia, PA.
Swain, P.C. 2016. Classification of the Natural Communities of Massachusetts. Version 2.0. Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program, Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife. Westborough, MA.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2006. Land Resource Regions and Major land Resource Areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296.
USNVC [United States National Vegetation Classification]. 2017. United States National Vegetation Classification Database, V2.01. Federal Geographic Data Committee, Vegetation Subcommittee, Washington DC. http://usnvc.org/explore-classification/ (Accessed: 2018)Contributors
Nels Barrett, Ph.D.
Joshua HibitApproval
Nels Barrett, 9/17/2024
Rangeland health reference sheet
Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health is a qualitative assessment protocol used to determine ecosystem condition based on benchmark characteristics described in the Reference Sheet. A suite of 17 (or more) indicators are typically considered in an assessment. The ecological site(s) representative of an assessment location must be known prior to applying the protocol and must be verified based on soils and climate. Current plant community cannot be used to identify the ecological site.
Author(s)/participant(s) Contact for lead author Date 05/23/2020 Approved by Approval date Composition (Indicators 10 and 12) based on Annual Production Indicators
-
Number and extent of rills:
-
Presence of water flow patterns:
-
Number and height of erosional pedestals or terracettes:
-
Bare ground from Ecological Site Description or other studies (rock, litter, lichen, moss, plant canopy are not bare ground):
-
Number of gullies and erosion associated with gullies:
-
Extent of wind scoured, blowouts and/or depositional areas:
-
Amount of litter movement (describe size and distance expected to travel):
-
Soil surface (top few mm) resistance to erosion (stability values are averages - most sites will show a range of values):
-
Soil surface structure and SOM content (include type of structure and A-horizon color and thickness):
-
Effect of community phase composition (relative proportion of different functional groups) and spatial distribution on infiltration and runoff:
-
Presence and thickness of compaction layer (usually none; describe soil profile features which may be mistaken for compaction on this site):
-
Functional/Structural Groups (list in order of descending dominance by above-ground annual-production or live foliar cover using symbols: >>, >, = to indicate much greater than, greater than, and equal to):
Dominant:
Sub-dominant:
Other:
Additional:
-
Amount of plant mortality and decadence (include which functional groups are expected to show mortality or decadence):
-
Average percent litter cover (%) and depth ( in):
-
Expected annual annual-production (this is TOTAL above-ground annual-production, not just forage annual-production):
-
Potential invasive (including noxious) species (native and non-native). List species which BOTH characterize degraded states and have the potential to become a dominant or co-dominant species on the ecological site if their future establishment and growth is not actively controlled by management interventions. Species that become dominant for only one to several years (e.g., short-term response to drought or wildfire) are not invasive plants. Note that unlike other indicators, we are describing what is NOT expected in the reference state for the ecological site:
-
Perennial plant reproductive capability:
Print Options
Sections
Font
AAAAOther
PrintThe Ecosystem Dynamics Interpretive Tool is an information system framework developed by the USDA-ARS Jornada Experimental Range, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service, and New Mexico State University.
Accessibility statement
