High precipitation mountain slopes

Description

The dynamics described below are general to the level that the site concept has been developed for provisional ecological site concept identification and further investigation purposes only. It is meant to give a general overview of the ecological dynamics of the system and should not be viewed as a model for a specific ecological site level management. It is supported by the current available literature that was reviewed for a general understanding of the system and basic understanding of the abiotic and biotic drivers. Further investigations and soil-site data collection and analysis should be conducted before specific land management can be applied at the ecological site specific scale. This STM only serves to explain the general ecology and dynamics. No alternative states were found during the literature review, however that does not mean they do not exist and more time should be spent determining whether or not this model captures all the dynamics of this system, especially once more is known about the soil-site characteristics of this LRU and ecological site concept.

Reference State (State 1) – The reference state for this provisional ecological site concept is dominated by Pseudotsuga menzeisii (Douglas-fir), with a significant component of Notholithocarpus densiflorus (tanoak) and Sequoia sempervirens (coast redwood) may still be present in the canopy, in lower amounts. On the drier end near the transition between MLRA 4B and MLRA 5, Arbutus menziesii (Pacific madrone) or Chrysolepis chrysophylla (giant chinquapin) can be found in the mix with tanoak in the subcanopy, however this is a small area and a transitional area and not representative of the bulk of this large-scale, provisional ecological site concept. The ecological dynamics represented in the reference state are driven primarily by periodic fires that create the complex dynamics and plant expressions reflected by the community phases described. Depending on the intensity, severity, timing, and weather conditions associated with each fire and which community phase is impacted by the fire, this ecological site will respond to varying degrees. At this very general scale, this reference state only really captures the generalities related to the functional groups that are most dominant and does not capture the more specific dynamics and patterns that would be found at the more detailed and refined ecological site scale that focuses on specific abiotic factors that drive some of these various complex plant expressions. More data and refinement is needed to capture the information needed in order to make specific land management decisions at the ecological site-component scale.

Submodel