Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Ecological site F003XY706OR
High Cascades Moist
Accessed: 11/21/2024
General 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.
Figure 1. Mapped extent
Areas shown in blue indicate the maximum mapped extent of this ecological site. Other ecological sites likely occur within the highlighted areas. It is also possible for this ecological site to occur outside of highlighted areas if detailed soil survey has not been completed or recently updated.
Table 1. Dominant plant species
| Tree |
(1) Tsuga mertensiana |
|---|---|
| Shrub |
Not specified |
| Herbaceous |
(1) Luzula glabrata var. hitchcockii |
Physiographic features
Table 2. Representative physiographic features
| Landforms |
(1)
Stratovolcano
(2) Ash flow |
|---|---|
| Flooding frequency | None |
| Ponding frequency | None |
| Elevation | 1,372 – 2,286 m |
| Slope | 0 – 90% |
| Water table depth | 152 cm |
| Aspect | N |
Climatic features
Winters are long, cold, windy and snowy, due to the very high elevations. Summers are short and cool. Effective precipitation comes mostly as snow. Average annual ppt is 67 inches.
Table 3. Representative climatic features
| Frost-free period (average) | 50 days |
|---|---|
| Freeze-free period (average) | 60 days |
| Precipitation total (average) | 2,540 mm |
Figure 2. Monthly precipitation range
Figure 3. Monthly average minimum and maximum temperature
Influencing water features
Soil features
Table 4. Representative soil features
| Surface texture |
(1) Paragravelly loamy sand (2) Gravelly loamy sand (3) Ashy loamy sand |
|---|---|
| Family particle size |
(1) Sandy |
| Drainage class | Well drained to excessively drained |
| Permeability class | Rapid to very rapid |
| Soil depth | 152 cm |
| Surface fragment cover <=3" | 5 – 35% |
| Surface fragment cover >3" | 0 – 35% |
| Available water capacity (0-101.6cm) |
7.37 – 20.32 cm |
| Electrical conductivity (0-101.6cm) |
0 mmhos/cm |
| Sodium adsorption ratio (0-101.6cm) |
0 |
| Soil reaction (1:1 water) (0-101.6cm) |
5.6 – 7.3 |
| Subsurface fragment volume <=3" (Depth not specified) |
15 – 50% |
| Subsurface fragment volume >3" (Depth not specified) |
0 – 40% |
Ecological dynamics
Mountain Hemlock plant community is the historic climax plant community. The major disturbance factor is wild fire. The fire return intervals estimated to be approximately 400 or more years. These fires are generally stand replacing fires, meaning that the fires are large and intense.
Small fires can occur that burn smaller acreages. Where small fires occur a seed source is available (mountain hemlock/shasta red fir) and the resiliency of the site allows seedling re-establishment.
Another significant disturbance factor is disease. Old Mountain hemlock are susceptible to disease, with laminated root rot (Phellinus weiri) being the top infecting agent. Openings created by disease killed trees allows other tree species (Shasta red fir, Western white pine, and Lodgepole pine) to establish.
The Shasta red fir community occurs as a successional step from the Lodgepole pine towards the Mountain hemlock plant community (HCPC). The SRF community also occurs when a significant disturbance occurs in the mountain hemlock plant community that kills the hemlock and allows the fir to become dominant. Mountain hemlock and Lodgepole composition can vary greatly in the overstory.
Ground cover and specie diversity is generally low. The canopy cover is not as great as the mountain hemlock community, and different plants are found in the understory.
The lodgepole pine plant community occurs after a stand replacement fire occurs and consumes all trees. Lodgepole pine, a pioneer specie, establishes readily. If it does not, then brush/forb/grasses establish. When lodgepole establishes the amount of regeneration is generally heavy. When a dense stand matures it becomes susceptible to the mountian pine beetle. If an outbreak occurs all lodgepole are generally killed. By this time, fir and/or hemlock seedlings are established and released when the pine dies.
State and transition model
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 text
Ecosystem states
State 1 submodel, plant communities
State 2 submodel, plant communities
State 3 submodel, plant communities
State 1
Mountain Hemlock
Community 1.1
Mountain Hemlock
Mountain hemlock dominates the mature stand conditions. Other tree species that can be found are shasta red fir, Western white pine, and sub-alpine fir. The understory is quite sparse and composition is very low.
Forest overstory. The typical forest overstory composition of the historic climax plant community.
Forest understory. The typical forest understory compsition. Understory vegetation is expressed as "percent canopy" and "0" denotes less than 1% canopy.
Table 5. Ground cover
| Tree foliar cover | 40-45% |
|---|---|
| Shrub/vine/liana foliar cover | 0% |
| Grass/grasslike foliar cover | 10-15% |
| Forb foliar cover | 0-1% |
| Non-vascular plants | 0% |
| Biological crusts | 0% |
| Litter | 35-40% |
| Surface fragments >0.25" and <=3" | 0% |
| Surface fragments >3" | 0-1% |
| Bedrock | 0% |
| Water | 0% |
| Bare ground | 3-5% |
Table 6. Soil surface cover
| Tree basal cover | 0% |
|---|---|
| Shrub/vine/liana basal cover | 0% |
| Grass/grasslike basal cover | 2-5% |
| Forb basal cover | 0-1% |
| Non-vascular plants | 0-2% |
| Biological crusts | 0% |
| Litter | 90-95% |
| Surface fragments >0.25" and <=3" | 0% |
| Surface fragments >3" | 0% |
| Bedrock | 0% |
| Water | 0% |
| Bare ground | 0-1% |
Table 7. Canopy structure (% cover)
| Height Above Ground (m) | Tree | Shrub/Vine | Grass/ Grasslike |
Forb |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| <0.15 | – | – | 12-15% | 1-4% |
| >0.15 <= 0.3 | – | – | 7-10% | – |
| >0.3 <= 0.6 | 0-1% | – | – | – |
| >0.6 <= 1.4 | 0-1% | – | – | – |
| >1.4 <= 4 | – | – | – | – |
| >4 <= 12 | 1-3% | – | – | – |
| >12 <= 24 | 50-55% | – | – | – |
| >24 <= 37 | 2-5% | – | – | – |
| >37 | – | – | – | – |
State 2
Shasta red fir
Community 2.1
Shasta red fir
Shasta red fir community is a seral community. It's the transition between the Lodgepole pine plant community and the Mountain hemlock plant community. Understory specie composition is low and canopy cover is low.
Forest overstory. The forest overstory composition for the Shasta red fir plant community.
Forest understory. The forest understory composition os the Shasta red fir plant community. Understory vegetation is expressed as "percent canopy" and "0" denotes less than 1% canopy.
Table 8. Ground cover
| Tree foliar cover | 35-40% |
|---|---|
| Shrub/vine/liana foliar cover | 0% |
| Grass/grasslike foliar cover | 10-15% |
| Forb foliar cover | 0-1% |
| Non-vascular plants | 0% |
| Biological crusts | 0% |
| Litter | 30-40% |
| Surface fragments >0.25" and <=3" | 5-8% |
| Surface fragments >3" | 2-5% |
| Bedrock | 0% |
| Water | 0% |
| Bare ground | 20-30% |
Table 9. Soil surface cover
| Tree basal cover | 0% |
|---|---|
| Shrub/vine/liana basal cover | 0% |
| Grass/grasslike basal cover | 2-5% |
| Forb basal cover | 0-1% |
| Non-vascular plants | 0% |
| Biological crusts | 0% |
| Litter | 35-45% |
| Surface fragments >0.25" and <=3" | 5-10% |
| Surface fragments >3" | 2-5% |
| Bedrock | 0% |
| Water | 0% |
| Bare ground | 30-40% |
Table 10. Canopy structure (% cover)
| Height Above Ground (m) | Tree | Shrub/Vine | Grass/ Grasslike |
Forb |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| <0.15 | – | – | 2-5% | 0-1% |
| >0.15 <= 0.3 | – | – | 5-10% | – |
| >0.3 <= 0.6 | 0-1% | – | – | – |
| >0.6 <= 1.4 | 0-1% | – | – | – |
| >1.4 <= 4 | 1-2% | – | – | – |
| >4 <= 12 | 1-2% | – | – | – |
| >12 <= 24 | 35-45% | – | – | – |
| >24 <= 37 | 5-10% | – | – | – |
| >37 | – | – | – | – |
State 3
Lodgepole pine
Community 3.1
Lodgepole pine
This plant community comes about, generally, after a stand replacement fire has occurred. Lodgepole pine is a pioneer specie and established easily. It is usually the only tree specie but others may be present in a limited amount.
Forest overstory. The typical forest overstory composition of the Lodgepole pine community.
Forest understory. The typical forest understory composition of the Lodgepole pine community. Undestory vegetation is expressed as "percent canopy" and "0" denotes less than 1% canopy.
Table 11. Ground cover
| Tree foliar cover | 20-30% |
|---|---|
| Shrub/vine/liana foliar cover | 0% |
| Grass/grasslike foliar cover | 10-15% |
| Forb foliar cover | 0-1% |
| Non-vascular plants | 0% |
| Biological crusts | 0% |
| Litter | 0% |
| Surface fragments >0.25" and <=3" | 5-8% |
| Surface fragments >3" | 1-3% |
| Bedrock | 0% |
| Water | 0% |
| Bare ground | 40-50% |
Table 12. Soil surface cover
| Tree basal cover | 0% |
|---|---|
| Shrub/vine/liana basal cover | 0% |
| Grass/grasslike basal cover | 2-5% |
| Forb basal cover | 0-1% |
| Non-vascular plants | 0% |
| Biological crusts | 0% |
| Litter | 30-40% |
| Surface fragments >0.25" and <=3" | 5-8% |
| Surface fragments >3" | 2-5% |
| Bedrock | 0% |
| Water | 0% |
| Bare ground | 20-25% |
Table 13. Canopy structure (% cover)
| Height Above Ground (m) | Tree | Shrub/Vine | Grass/ Grasslike |
Forb |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| <0.15 | – | – | 0-5% | 0-1% |
| >0.15 <= 0.3 | 0-1% | – | 5-10% | 0-5% |
| >0.3 <= 0.6 | 1-2% | – | – | – |
| >0.6 <= 1.4 | 1-2% | – | – | – |
| >1.4 <= 4 | – | – | – | – |
| >4 <= 12 | 1-5% | – | – | – |
| >12 <= 24 | 35-45% | – | – | – |
| >24 <= 37 | – | – | – | – |
| >37 | – | – | – | – |
Additional community tables
Interpretations
Supporting information
Contributors
C Ziegler
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 | |
| 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
Other
The 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.
Click on box and path labels to scroll to the respective text.