Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Ecological site F236XY176AK
Boreal Woodland Loamy Flood Plains
Last updated: 2/13/2024
Accessed: 09/18/2026
-
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): 236X–Bristol Bay-Northern Alaska Peninsula Lowlands
The Bristol Bay-Northern Alaska Peninsula Lowland Major Land Resource Area (MLRA 236) is located in Western Alaska. This MLRA covers approximately 19,500 square miles and is defined by an expanse of nearly level to rolling lowlands, uplands and low to moderate hills bordered by long, mountain footslopes. Major rivers include the Egegik, Mulchatna, Naknek, Nushagak, and Wood River. MLRA 236 is in the zone of discontinuous permafrost. It is primarily in areas with finer textured soils on terraces, rolling uplands and footslopes. This MLRA was glaciated during the early to middle Pleistocene. Moraine and glaciofluvial deposits cover around sixty percent of the MLRA. Alluvium and coastal deposits make up a large portion of the remaining area (Kautz et al., 2012; USDA, 2006).
Climate patterns across this MLRA shift as one moves away from the coast. A maritime climate is prominent along the coast, while continental weather, commonly associated with Interior Alaska, is more influential inland. Across the MLRA, summers are general short and warm while winters are long and cold. Mean annual precipitation is 13 to 50 inches, with increased precipitation at higher elevations and areas away from the coast. Mean annual temperatures is between 30 and 36 degrees F (USDA, 2006).
The Bristol Bay-Northern Alaska Peninsula MLRA is principally undeveloped wilderness. Federally managed land includes parts of the Katmai and Aniakchak National Parks, and the Alaska Peninsula, Becharof, Togiak and Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuges. The MLRA is sparsely populated. Principal communities include Dillingham, Naknek, and King Salmon. Commercial fishing in Bristol Bay and the Bering Sea comprises a major part of economic activity in the MLRA. Other land uses include subsistence activities (fishing, hunting, and gathering) and sport hunting and fishing (USDA, 2006).Ecological site concept
This ecological site is on flood plain talfs of smaller tributary creeks. Site elevation is between 30 and 980 feet above sea level. Slopes are nearly level (0 – 3 percent). Soil hydrology, flooding, and a fire regime shape the vegetation on this site. A shallow water table and aquic soil conditions below 17 inches limit the number of white spruce on this site and create a woodland canopy rather than a forest. Wet soil is also reflected in the facultative to facultative wet wetland species found in the understory.
Local site factors including soil and site hydrology and flooding and fire disturbances support five communities in the reference stateThe reference state supports five communities. The reference plant community is characterized as a coniferous woodland (Viereck et al., 1992). It is composed of a white spruce canopy with an open understory of facultative to obligate wetland shrub, forb, and graminoid species. The relatively small size of this site along smaller tributaries make it susceptible to surrounding fires. Fires are more likely to occur in drier areas of this site where standing and dead trees and shrubs provide the most fuel. Post-fire vegetation is comprised of fast growing herbaceous species and extant shrubs.Associated sites
R236XY144AK Subarctic Scrub Peat Terraces
R236XY144AK describes shrubland terraces in valleys. These terraces are supported on wet soils found alongside and at slightly higher elevations within a valley than the forested flood plains described by F236XY176AK.
F236XY139AK Boreal Woodland Loamy Rises
F236XY139AK describes a boreal woodland on plains. These landforms slope down and abut the flood plains described by this site.
R236XY173AK Subarctic Riparian Complex Loamy Flood Plains
R236XY173AK describes a rangeland on narrow valley flood plains. Occasional, long flooding events prevent a forest from developing on this site.
Similar sites
F236XY139AK Boreal Woodland Loamy Rises
F236XY139AK describes a boreal woodland on plains. The forested reference plant communities on these sites are similar. However, site and soil differences result in different understory communities and different disturbance regimes.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
Tree (1) Picea glauca
Shrub (1) Salix pulchra
(2) Rubus arcticusHerbaceous (1) Calamagrostis canadensis
(2) Equisetum arvensePhysiographic features
This site is on linear to convex flood plain talfs of tributaries. Elevation ranges from 30 to 980 feet above sea level. Slopes are nearly level (0 – 3 percent). This site is found at all aspects. Flooding is an occasional and brief event. A water table is present between 10 and 20 inches throughout the year.
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
Geomorphic position, flats (1) Talf
Slope shape across (1) Linear
Slope shape up-down (1) Linear
(2) Convex
Landforms (1) Valley > Flood plain
Runoff class Negligible to low Flooding duration Brief (2 to 7 days) Flooding frequency Occasional Ponding frequency None Elevation 30 – 980 ft Slope 0 – 3 % Water table depth 10 – 20 in Aspect W, NW, N, NE, E, SE, S, SW Table 3. Representative physiographic features (actual ranges)
Runoff class Negligible to low Flooding duration Brief (2 to 7 days) Flooding frequency Occasional Ponding frequency None Elevation 20 – 980 ft Slope 0 – 3 % Water table depth 4 – 71 in Climatic features
The climate of this site reflects that of the MLRA, which is described as maritime polar (EPA, 2013). Temperatures are moderated by the nearby Bristol Bay and norther Pacific bodies of water. Annual precipitation ranges from 21 – 34 inches with approximately 40 percent occurring during the June-September growing season (PRISM, 2018).
Table 4 Representative climatic features
Frost-free period (characteristic range) 80-100 days Freeze-free period (characteristic range) 70-90 days Precipitation total (characteristic range) 20-30 in Frost-free period (actual range) 80-100 days Freeze-free period (actual range) 70-90 days Precipitation total (actual range) 20-40 in Frost-free period (average) 90 days Freeze-free period (average) 80 days Precipitation total (average) 30 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
">Influencing water features
This site is on flood plains. It experiences occasional, brief flooding during periods of large snow melt and high precipitation. Vegetation is a mix of facultative to facultative wet wetland species.
Soil features
Soils are young and weakly developed Inceptisols (Soil Survey Staff, 2013). Soils are very deep and somewhat poorly drained. They support a cryic temperature regime and an aquic moisture regime. Parent material is alluvium.
Soil hydrology shapes vegetation on this site. A shallow water table is present throughout the year. Aquic soil conditions begin at 17 inches and continue through the soil profile. Wet soil conditions likely limit the number of white spruce on this site and create a woodland canopy rather than a forest. Wet soil is also reflected in the facultative to facultative wet wetland species found in the understory.
Correlated soil components in MLRA 236: Keefer; Fluvaquentic Cryaquepts, forest; D36-Boreal woodland loamy flood plainsTable 5. Representative soil features
Parent material (1) Alluvium
Surface texture (1) Silt loam
Drainage class Somewhat poorly drained Permeability class Moderate Soil depth 60 – 0 in Surface fragment cover <=3" Not specified Surface fragment cover >3" Not specified Available water capacity
(0-10in)1.5 – 2.6 in Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-10in)4.2 – 5.5 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(Depth not specified)Not specified Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(Depth not specified)Not specified Table 6. Representative soil features (actual values)
Drainage class Somewhat poorly drained to moderately well drained Permeability class Moderate Soil depth 60 – 0 in Surface fragment cover <=3" 0 % Surface fragment cover >3" 0 % Available water capacity
(0-10in)1.5 – 3.1 in Soil reaction (1:1 water)
(0-10in)4.2 – 6 Subsurface fragment volume <=3"
(Depth not specified)0 % Subsurface fragment volume >3"
(Depth not specified)0 % Ecological dynamics
This site is on flood plain talfs of smaller streams. This stie is common along upstream tributaries of the larger Nushagak and Mulchatna Rivers. Local site factors including soil and site hydrology and flooding and fire disturbances support five communities in the reference state. The reference plant community is a white spruce woodland with an understory of predominantly facultative to obligate wetland species.
Flooding is a major disturbance on this site. Spatial and temporal patterns in soil and site hydrology shape three communities. Areas with increased flooding energy and higher throughflow are most likely to support the early flood phase (community 1.3). These areas are too wet to support white spruce. An intermediate flood phase(community 1.2) is also present.
Hydrological changes caused by a change in throughflow or in the movement of a channel can shift one community to the other. A raised water table, caused by increased precipitation or more run off due to a watershed fire, can kill trees and shrubs and shift the community to a herbaceous meadow. Likewise, a decreased water table allows less hydrophytic and slower growing species to colonize.
Fire occurs on this site. Fire is hypothesized to be an infrequent occurrence on active flood plains. However, the small size of this site along smaller tributaries make them susceptible to surrounding fires. Fires are more likely to occur in drier areas of this site where standing and dead trees and shrubs provide the most fuel.
Willows are moderately browsed by moose, particularly in the reference plant community. This does not appear to affect the ecological processes of the site.
The information in this Ecological Dynamics section, including the state-and-transition model (STM), was developed based on current field data, professional experience, and a review of the scientific literature. As a result, all possible scenarios or plant species may not be included. Key indicator plant species, disturbances, and ecological processes are described to inform land management decisions.State and transition model
More interactive model formats are also available. View Interactive Models
Click on state and transition labels to scroll to the respective textEcosystem states
State 1 submodel, plant communities
Communities 1 and 5 (additional pathways)
1.1A - Increased hydrologic pressures 1.1B - Fire 1.2A - Decreased hydrologic pressure 1.2B - Increased hydrologic pressure 1.3A - Decreased hydrologic pressure 1.4A - Fire recovery. 1.5A - Fire recovery. State 1
Reference StateThe reference state supports five community phases, which are distinguished by the developed structure and dominance of the vegetation and by their ecological function and stability. The reference community phase is woodland. The presence of each community is dictated temporally by flooding or fire.
This report provides baseline inventory data on the vegetation. Future data collection is needed to provide further information about existing plant communities and the disturbance regimes that result in transitions from one community to another. Common and scientific names are from the USDA PLANTS database. Community phases are characterized by the Alaska Vegetation Classification System (Viereck et al., 1992).Community 1.1
White spruce/tealeaf willow-arctic raspberry/bluejoint
Figure 7. Typical area of community 1.1.
Figure 8. Frequency and canopy cover of plants in community 1.1.
The reference plant community is needleleaf woodland (Viereck et al., 1992) that has a mix of shrubs, graminoids, and forbs throughout. This community consists of medium (15 to 40 feet tall) and tall (more than 40 feet tall) white spruce (Picea glauca) and an understory of tealeaf willow (Salix pulchra), Barclay’s willow (Salix barclayi), arctic raspberry (Rubus arcticus), bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis), field horsetail (Equisetum arvense), and Canadian burnet (Sanguisorba canadensis). Other species may include lingonberry (Vaccinium vitis-idaea), sweetgale (Myrica gale), sedges (Carex spp.), fireweed (Chamerion angustifolium), and arctic starflower (Trientalis europaea). Some paper birch (Betula papyrifera) may be present. Shrub species, ranging from dwarf (less than 8 inches tall) to tall (more than 10 feet tall), commonly are present. Mosses are common in the ground cover, and a low density of lichens typically are present. The ground cover also may include herbaceous litter, woody litter, and water. Some areas are bare soil.
Dominant plant species
-
white spruce (Picea glauca), tree
-
arctic raspberry (Rubus arcticus), shrub
-
tealeaf willow (Salix pulchra), shrub
-
Barclay's willow (Salix barclayi), shrub
-
bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis), grass
-
field horsetail (Equisetum arvense), other herbaceous
-
Canadian burnet (Sanguisorba canadensis), other herbaceous
-
fireweed (Chamerion angustifolium), other herbaceous
Community 1.2
Tealeaf willow-arctic raspberry/bluejoint/purple marshlocks
Figure 9. Typical area of community 1.2.
Figure 10. Frequency and canopy cover of plants in community 1.2.
The late flooding community phase is open tall scrubland that has an understory of hydrophilic forbs and dense graminoids. This community consists of medium and tall tealeaf willow and thinleaf alder (Alnus incana ssp. tenuifolia) and an understory of cloudberry (Rubus chamaemorus), dense bluejoint, purple marshlocks (Comarum palustre), and horsetails. Other species may include bog blueberry (Vaccinium uliginosum), spirea (Spiraea stevenii), dwarf birch (Betula nana), violets (Viola spp.), and tall Jacob’s ladder (Polemonium acutiflorum). Individual white spruce trees may be present. Mosses, typically including sphagnum mosses (Sphagnum spp.), are in the ground cover. Lichens typically are not in this community. The ground cover may include herbaceous litter, woody litter, and water.
Dominant plant species
-
tealeaf willow (Salix pulchra), shrub
-
cloudberry (Rubus chamaemorus), shrub
-
thinleaf alder (Alnus incana ssp. tenuifolia), shrub
-
bog blueberry (Vaccinium uliginosum), shrub
-
bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis), grass
-
purple marshlocks (Comarum palustre), other herbaceous
-
sphagnum (Sphagnum), other herbaceous
Community 1.3
Sweetgale/bluejoint/field horsetail-purple marshlocks
Figure 11. Typical area of community 1.3.
Figure 12. Frequency and canopy cover of plants in community 1.3.
The early flooding community is a mesic graminoid herbaceous meadow (Viereck et al., 1992) that has hydrophilic shrubs and forbs throughout. This community consists of dense bluejoint and hydrophilic shrubs and forbs such as sweetgale, tealeaf willow, purple marshlocks, and field horsetail. Other species may include livid sedge (Carex livida), silvery sedge (Carex canescens), woolly geranium (Geranium erianthum), and Canadian burnet. The ground cover typically includes moss, herbaceous litter, and water. Some areas are bare soil.
Dominant plant species
-
sweetgale (Myrica gale), shrub
-
tealeaf willow (Salix pulchra), shrub
-
bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis), grass
-
field horsetail (Equisetum arvense), other herbaceous
-
purple marshlocks (Comarum palustre), other herbaceous
Community 1.4
White spruce-Kenai birch/tealeaf willow-arctic raspberry/bluejoint
Figure 13. Typical area of community 1.4.
Figure 14. Frequency and canopy cover of plants in community 1.4.
This community phase is mixed woodland that has various shrubs, graminoids, and forbs in the understory. This community consists of an open canopy of white spruce and Kenai birch (Betula papyrifera var. kenaica) and an understory of tealeaf willow, arctic raspberry, bluejoint, and field horsetail. Other species in the understory may include lingonberry (Vaccinium vitis-idaea), spirea, bluegrasses (Poa spp.), woodland horsetail (Equisetum sylvaticum), fireweed, and Canadian burnet. Other tree species may include paper birch (Betula papyrifera) and Alaska birch (Betula neoalaskana). Various mosses, including sphagnum moss, Schreber’s big red stem moss (Pleurozium schreberi), and splendid feathermoss (Hylocomium splendens) typically make up a large mat. A small amount of lichens may be present. Other ground cover includes herbaceous litter and woody litter.
Dominant plant species
-
white spruce (Picea glauca), tree
-
Kenai birch (Betula papyrifera var. kenaica), tree
-
tealeaf willow (Salix pulchra), shrub
-
arctic raspberry (Rubus arcticus), shrub
-
lingonberry (Vaccinium vitis-idaea), shrub
-
bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis), grass
-
field horsetail (Equisetum arvense), other herbaceous
-
fireweed (Chamerion angustifolium), other herbaceous
Community 1.5
Shrub/graminoid/forbThis post-fire community phase was not observed in the field. Based on post-fire communities in other treed ecological sites, it is hypothesized that the post-fire community will support of a variety of fast-growing forbs and graminoids and extant shrubs that remain.
Pathway 1.1A
Community 1.1 to 1.3
White spruce/tealeaf willow-arctic raspberry/bluejoint
Sweetgale/bluejoint/field horsetail-purple marshlocksA raised water table due to increased throughflow can shift the vegetation towards a herbaceous meadow. A raised water table can be the result of increased throughflow or overflow, which can be caused by increased precipitation, increased snow melt, or increased run-off due to a fire in the watershed.
Pathway 1.1B
Community 1.1 to 1.5Fire. Fire is hypothesized to be rare. Dead white spruce trees provide fuel for fires caused by natural events, such as lightning. In areas where dead spruce trees and shrubs are abundant, the fires are hypothesized to be low-intensity due to nearby water sources and periods of flooding. Fast-growing pioneer species that have propagules spread by wind typically colonize the post-fire areas.
Pathway 1.2A
Community 1.2 to 1.1
Tealeaf willow-arctic raspberry/bluejoint/purple marshlocks
White spruce/tealeaf willow-arctic raspberry/bluejointA lowered water table allows less hydrophytic and slower growing species to colonize. The period needed currently is unknown. It likely depends on myriad factors, including the reproduction and colonization rates of white spruce and changes in throughflow and overflow patterns.
Pathway 1.2B
Community 1.2 to 1.3
Tealeaf willow-arctic raspberry/bluejoint/purple marshlocks
Sweetgale/bluejoint/field horsetail-purple marshlocksA raised water table due to increased throughflow can shift the vegetation towards a herbaceous meadow. A raised water table can be the result of increased throughflow or overflow, which can be caused by increased precipitation, increased snow melt, or increased run-off due to a fire in the watershed.
Pathway 1.3A
Community 1.3 to 1.2
Sweetgale/bluejoint/field horsetail-purple marshlocks
Tealeaf willow-arctic raspberry/bluejoint/purple marshlocksSlower growing vegetation, such as shrubs, outcompete extant forbs and graminoids for light and space and increase in richness and abundance. White spruce colonizes in drier areas. The period needed for this transition currently is unknown; however, the bluejoint grass-dominant community (phase 1.3) tends to remain for extended periods due to post-flood ponding.
Pathway 1.4A
Community 1.4 to 1.1
White spruce-Kenai birch/tealeaf willow-arctic raspberry/bluejoint
White spruce/tealeaf willow-arctic raspberry/bluejointNatural succession: Normal time and growth without disruptive fire and with return of natural flooding regime. White spruce eventually will shade out deciduous trees, which will alter the understory. The period needed for this transition currently is unknown. A return of the natural flooding regime in burned areas will aid in the transition to the reference plant community.
Pathway 1.5A
Community 1.5 to 1.4Natural succession. Over time, slower growing vegetation, such as shrubs, likely will outcompete extant forbs and graminoids for light and space and increase in richness and abundance. Deciduous and conifer trees will colonize. Community 1.5 was not recorded in the field; therefore, the period needed for this transition currently is unknown.
Additional community tables
Table 7. Community 1.1 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 8. Community 1.1 forest overstory composition
Common name Symbol Scientific name Nativity Height ft Canopy cover (%) Diameter in Basal area (square ft/acre) Treewhite spruce PIGL Picea glauca Native – 20 – 0 Table 9. Community 1.1 forest understory composition
Common name Symbol Scientific name Nativity Height (ft) Canopy cover (%) Grass/grass-like (Graminoids)bluejoint CACA4 Calamagrostis canadensis Native – 50 Forb/Herbfield horsetail EQAR Equisetum arvense Native – 15 fireweed CHAN9 Chamerion angustifolium Native – 4 Canadian burnet SACA14 Sanguisorba canadensis Native – 3 Shrub/Subshrubtealeaf willow SAPU15 Salix pulchra Native – 45 Barclay's willow SABA3 Salix barclayi Native – 10 arctic raspberry RUAR Rubus arcticus Native 0.5– 10 Table 10. Community 1.2 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 11. Community 1.3 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 12. Community 1.4 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Table 13. Community 1.5 plant community composition
Group Common name Symbol Scientific name Annual production () Foliar cover (%) Interpretations
Supporting information
Inventory data references
Modal points for Community 1.1 08SS07605 09AO11007 Modal points for Community 1.2 08AO06501 10SS08105 Modal points for Community 1.3 09AO11305 09SS12505 Modal points for Community 1.4 07SM01006 10SS11805 Modal points for Community 1.5 None
References
-
Viereck, L.A., C. T. Dyrness, A. R. Batten, and K. J. Wenzlick. 1992. The Alaska vegetation classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station General Technical Report PNW-GTR-286..
Other references
Kautz, D.R., P. Taber, and S. Nield, editors. 2012. Land Resource Regions and Major Land Resource Areas of Alaska. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA–NRCS).
PRISM Climate Group. (PRISM) Oregon State University. https://prism.oregonstate.edu. Date created October 2018. Accessed 3 Mar 2023.
Scenarios Network for Alaska and Arctic Planning (SNAP). Historical Monthly Temperature – 1km, 1901-2009. http://ckan.snap.uaf.edu/dataset/. Accessed 20 Mar 2023.
Scenarios Network for Alaska and Arctic Planning (SNAP). Historical monthly and derived precipitation products downscaled from CRU TS data via the delta methods – 2km, 1901-2009. http://ckan.snap.uaf.edu/dataset/. Accessed 20 Mar 2023.
Soil Survey Staff. 2013. Simplified Guide to Soil Taxonomy. USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service, National Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, NE.
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.
US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Level III Ecoregions of the Conterminous United States. UP ESP Office of Research and Development. Corvallis, OR. http://edg.epa.gov/. Created 16 Apr 2013. Accessed 20 Mar 2023.Contributors
Phil Barber
Michael Margo
Kendra Moseley
Sue Tester
Steph Schmit
Steff Shoemaker
Jamin JohansonApproval
Kirt Walstad, 2/13/2024
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 09/18/2026 Approved by Approval date Composition (Indicators 10 and 12) based on Annual Production Indicators
-
Number and extent of rills:
-
Presence of water flow patterns:
-
Number and height of erosional pedestals or terracettes:
-
Bare ground from Ecological Site Description or other studies (rock, litter, lichen, moss, plant canopy are not bare ground):
-
Number of gullies and erosion associated with gullies:
-
Extent of wind scoured, blowouts and/or depositional areas:
-
Amount of litter movement (describe size and distance expected to travel):
-
Soil surface (top few mm) resistance to erosion (stability values are averages - most sites will show a range of values):
-
Soil surface structure and SOM content (include type of structure and A-horizon color and thickness):
-
Effect of community phase composition (relative proportion of different functional groups) and spatial distribution on infiltration and runoff:
-
Presence and thickness of compaction layer (usually none; describe soil profile features which may be mistaken for compaction on this site):
-
Functional/Structural Groups (list in order of descending dominance by above-ground annual-production or live foliar cover using symbols: >>, >, = to indicate much greater than, greater than, and equal to):
Dominant:
Sub-dominant:
Other:
Additional:
-
Amount of plant mortality and decadence (include which functional groups are expected to show mortality or decadence):
-
Average percent litter cover (%) and depth ( in):
-
Expected annual annual-production (this is TOTAL above-ground annual-production, not just forage annual-production):
-
Potential invasive (including noxious) species (native and non-native). List species which BOTH characterize degraded states and have the potential to become a dominant or co-dominant species on the ecological site if their future establishment and growth is not actively controlled by management interventions. Species that become dominant for only one to several years (e.g., short-term response to drought or wildfire) are not invasive plants. Note that unlike other indicators, we are describing what is NOT expected in the reference state for the ecological site:
-
Perennial plant reproductive capability:
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
