Ecological site F043AY525WA

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.

MLRA notes

Major Land Resource Area (MLRA): 043A–Northern Rocky Mountains

Major land resource area (MLRA): 043A-Northern Rocky Mountains

Description of MLRAs can be found in: 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.

Available electronically at: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ref/?cid=nrcs142p2_053624#handbook

LRU notes

Most commonly found in LRU 43A04 (Selkirk Mountains). Climate parameters were obtained from PRISM and other models for the area. Landscape descriptors are derived from USGS DEM products and their derivatives.

Classification relationships

Relationship to Other Established Classifications:

United States National Vegetation Classification (2008), A3612 Western Hemlock – Western Redcedar Cool-Mesic Central Rocky Mountain Forest & Woodland Alliance.

Washington Natural Heritage Program. Ecosystems of Washington State, A Guide to Identification, Rocchio and Crawford, 2015 - Northern Rocky Mt. Mesic Montane Mixed Conifer Forest (Cedar-Hemlock)

Description of Ecoregions of the United States, USFS PN # 1391, 1995 - M333 Northern Rocky Mt. Forest-Steppe-Coniferous Forest-Alpine Meadow Province
Level III and IV Ecoregions of WA, US EPA, June 2010 – 15y Selkirk Mountains, 15w Western Selkirk Maritime Forest.
This ecological site includes the following USDA Forest Service Plant Associations Western Hemlock Series: TSHE/CLUN, TSHE/ASCA. (Williams et. al. 1995)

Ecological site concept

This ecological site among the most productive in terms of forest production and biodiversity. It can occur all on aspects in this mountainous area. It extends to the drier western portion of MLRA 43A where it would be found on north aspects or moist drainages and toe slopes. Soils are loamy with <7 inches of volcanic ash mantling the surface, water tables at >30 inches deep, and moderate to high available water holding capacity.

Table 1. Dominant plant species

Tree	(1) Tsuga heterophylla (2) Thuja plicata
Shrub	(1) Coptis occidentalis (2) Linnaea borealis ssp. longiflora
Herbaceous	(1) Clintonia uniflora (2) Goodyera oblongifolia

Download full description

Physiographic features

Physiographic Features
Landscapes: Mountains, Foothills, Valleys
Landform: sideslopes, foot slopes, toe slopes

Elevation (m): Total range = 395 to 1780 m
(1,295 to 5,840 feet)
Central tendency = 780 to 1180m
(2,560 to 3,870 feet)

Slope (percent): Total range = 0 to 80 percent
Central tendency = 12 to 40 percent

Water Table Depth (cm):
84 to >200 cm
(33 to >80 inches)

Flooding:
Frequency: None
Duration: None

Ponding:
Frequency: None
Duration: None

Aspect:
130-280-50
Central tendency: 150-280-345

Table 2. Representative physiographic features

Landforms	(1) Mountains > Mountain slope (2) Foothills > Hillslope
Flooding frequency	None
Ponding frequency	None
Elevation	2,560 – 3,870 ft
Slope	12 – 40%
Water table depth	Not specified
Aspect	W, NW, SE, S, SW

Table 3. Representative physiographic features (actual ranges)

Flooding frequency	None
Ponding frequency	None
Elevation	1,295 – 5,840 ft
Slope	80%
Water table depth	33 in

Climatic features

Climatic Features
Frost-free period (days): Total range = 80 to 140 days
Central tendency = 100 to 120 days

Mean annual precipitation (cm): Total range = 500 to 1540 mm
(20 to 60 inches)
Central tendency = 675 to 1020 mm
(27 to 40 inches)

MAAT (C): Total range = 2.8 to 9.1
(37 to 48 F)
Central tendency = 5.2 to 9.1
(41 to 48 F)

Climate Stations:

WA: NORTHPORT
ID: BONNERS FERRY 1 SW, BONNERS FERRY BRG, BONNERS FERRY

Soil features

Representative Soil Features

This ecological subsite is associated with several soil series (e.g. Crash, Elmira variant, Frycanyon, Jeru, Keeler, Klootch, Kruse variant, Leadpoint, Myrtlecreek, Ojibway, Priestlake, Rubson, Tamarack, Waits, Zioncreek). The soils are Dystroxerepts, Dystrudepts, Eutrudepts, Haploxerepts, Hapludalfs, Paleboralfs, Udifluvents, Xerochrepts, Xeropsamments. These soils have developed in mixed Mazama tephra deposits over till, glaciolacustrine material, outwash and residuum and colluvium from various rock types. The soils are mostly very deep and have adequate available water capacity to a depth of 1 m. The soils are mostly well-drained.

Parent Materials:

Kind: till, outwash, alluvium, colluvium, residuum, volcanic ash
Origin: granite, gneiss, schist, shale

Surface Texture:
(1) Ashy Silt Loam
(2) Ashy Sandy Loam
(3) Ashy Loam

Fragment content of surface (hard fragments): 0 to 23 percent (median = 5%)

Subsurface Texture Group: Loamy
Fragment content of subsurface (25 to 100cm): 0 to 67 percent (median = 10%)
Most components lack surface fragments
Drainage Class: Well drained
Saturated Hydraulic conductivity: Moderately High to Very High (median = Moderately High)
Soil Depth: 66 to >200 cm
Calcium Carbonate Equivalent (percent): 0
Soil Reaction (1:1 Water): 5.0 to 8.2
Available Water Capacity (total in 100cm): 5.20-20.00cm (median = 14.01cm)

Table 4. Representative soil features

Parent material	(1) Volcanic ash (2) Till (3) Outwash (4) Residuum – granite and gneiss (5) Colluvium – granite and gneiss (6) Residuum – metasedimentary rock (7) Colluvium – metasedimentary rock
Surface texture	(1) Ashy silt loam (2) Ashy loam (3) Ashy sandy loam
Drainage class	Well drained
Permeability class	Moderately rapid to rapid
Depth to restrictive layer	Not specified
Available water capacity (0-40in)	5.5 in
Calcium carbonate equivalent (0-60in)	Not specified
Soil reaction (1:1 water) (0-60in)	Not specified
Subsurface fragment volume <=3" (10-40in)	10%

Table 5. Representative soil features (actual values)

Drainage class	Well drained
Permeability class	Slow to very rapid
Depth to restrictive layer	26 in
Available water capacity (0-40in)	2 – 7.9 in
Calcium carbonate equivalent (0-60in)	Not specified
Soil reaction (1:1 water) (0-60in)	5 – 8.2
Subsurface fragment volume <=3" (10-40in)	67%

Interpretations

Table 6. Representative site productivity

Common name	Symbol	Site index low	Site index high	CMAI low	CMAI high	Age of CMAI	Site index curve code	Site index curve basis
western white pine	PIMO3	60	93	118	180	100	–	–
grand fir	ABGR	60	98	76	149	100	–	–
western larch	LAOC	56	85	74	132	70	–	–
Rocky Mountain Douglas-fir	PSMEG	72	85	83	116	110	–	–
Rocky Mountain Douglas-fir	PSMEG	66	100	71	97	90	–	–

Supporting information

References

Zack, A. 1997. Biophysical Classification- Habitat Groups and Description of Northern Idaho and Northwestern Montana, Lower Clarkfork and Adjacent Areas..
Cooper, S.V., K.E. Neiman, R. Steele, and D.W. Roberts. 1991. Forest Habitat types of Northern Idaho, A Second Approximation.
. 2017. NRCS Soil and Site Index data for NE WA and N. Idaho.
Williams, C.K., B.F. Kelley, B.G. Smith, and T.R. Lillybridge. October, 1995. Forested Plant Associations of the Colville National Forest.
. October, 1995. Idaho Department of Lands H.T. Groupings based on Forest HTs of Northern Idaho.
Miller and Gravelle. October, 2005. Species Selection Guidelines for Planting, Natural Regeneration and Crop Tree Selection on Potlatch Land in Northern Idaho, Forestry Technical Paper TP -2003-1.
McDonald, G.L., A.E. Harvey, and J.R. Tonn. 2000. Fire, Competition, and Forest Pests: Landscape Treatment to Sustain Ecosystem Functions, The Joint Fire Science Conference and Workshop.. Pages 195–211 in Proceedings from the Joint Fire Science Conference and Workshop: crossing the millennium: integrating spatial technologies and ecological principles for a new age in fire management.
Zack, A. 1994. Early Succession in Western Hemlock Habitat Types of Northern Idaho.

Approval

Curtis Talbot, 10/14/2020

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	09/15/2022
Approved by	Curtis Talbot
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:

Download reference sheet

Search

Natural ResourcesConservation Service

Ecological site F043AY525WA

Frigid, Udic, Loamy Foothills/Mountainsides, mixed ash surface (Western Hemlock/Moist Forbes) Tsuga heterophylla / Clintonia uniflora , Tsuga heterophylla / Asarum caudatum

Last updated: 10/14/2020 Accessed: 12/22/2024