5$i

POPULATION STATUS AND ECOLOGY OF TREMBLING ASPEN

AND BLACK COTTONWOOD COMMUNITIES ON THE

BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION

Prepared for:

The Blackfeet Nation- Fish and Wildlife Department

and United States Fish and Wildlife Service

Prepared by:

Stephen V. Cooper, Vegetation Ecologist

Bonnie L. Heidel,' Botanist

Montana Natural Heritage Program of the Natural Resource Information Systems

1515 East 6th Avenue
Helena, MT 59620-1800

© 1997 Montana Natural Heritage Program

Challenge Cost-Share Agreement No. 14-48-0006-96-3034

Montana State Library

3 0864 1006 3967 6

© 1997 Montana Natural Heritage Program
This document should be cited as follows:

Cooper, S. V. and B. L. Heidel. 1997. Population status and ecology of trembling
aspen and black cottonwood communities on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation.
Montana Natural Heritage Program, Helena, MT. 35 pp. plus appendices.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A combined botanical/ecological survey was conducted of the Blackfeet Indian
Reservation's aspen parklands, targeting specifically moist to wet habitats thereof.
Ecological and botanical data were entered into standard data bases, ECODATA for
community attributes and BCD for botanical features, and analyzed by various
multivariate techniques. The results should contribute to effective land management by
providing for identification of unique habitats, especially those with wetland attributes,
and placing information gathered into a statewide and national perspective.

Three plant associations, Populus tremuloides / Osmorhiza occidentalis, P. tremuloides
/Cornus stolonifera, and P. tremuloides / Calamagrostis canadensis, are identified,
described, rated for rarity and a vegetative key has been constructed for their field
identification. One association, P. tremuloides / O. occidentalis, has exemplary
representations on reservation lands and is highly likely to be relatively rare across the
whole of its distribution; this report contains the most complete ecological description of
this type and qualifies its uniqueness.

Structural and population analysis of these moist to wet aspen stands indicate most of
them will continue to be dominated by P. tremuloides and Populus trichocarpa. These
two species are replacing themselves but in certain situations the shade-tolerant Picea
spp. and Abies lasiocarpa are entering stands and population trends indicate they will
eventually become canopy dominants. Factors favoring the establishment of conifers in
aspen stands were not explicitly identified, but cattle use is thought to play a part.
Disease, decay and animal impacts to these stands are also described.

These vegetation types constitute a significant source of biodiversity. Though no TES
plant species were located in any of the stands sampled, the within plot plant diversity
was quite high (>30 species/plot) and the 167 plant species found in these three plant
associations is a remarkably high figure for forested environments. For very similar
communities and habitats it has been documented that they constitute crucial habitat for
neotropical migrant bird species as well as other avians. These moister aspen types
also provide an abundant grizzly bear (Ursus horribilis) herbaceous food source in the
spring.

L_

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This project was facilitated by the coordination efforts of Ira Newbreast, Blackfeet
Nation-Department of Fish and Wildlife and Mitch King, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Cedron Jones, Montana Natural Heritage Program (MTNHP), digitized sampling
locations, placed them in a GIS environment and generated appropriate map products.
Scott Lee Chadde (MTNHP) provided guidance on data base structure and statistical
procedures. Several Blackfeet Nation wetlands specialists made site visits and assisted
in field work, including Mary Clare Weatherwax, Brian Fitzpatrick, and Joseph Butterfly.
A challenge cost-share agreement between the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the
Montana Natural Heritage Program, augmented by a generous monetary contribution
from The Nature Conservancy, funded this project. Blackfeet Nation personnel
provided direction and coordination for the project and most especially permission to
access their lands.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
I. INTRODUCTION 1

II. STUDY AREA 3

III. METHODS 5

Data Collection 5

Data Analysis 8

IV. RESULTS and DISCUSSION 11

Community Ecology and Classification 11

Wetlands Determinations 24

Stand Structure and Successional Status 28

Disease, Defect, and Pests 35

Animal Impacts 37

Rare Plant Species/Floristics 39

V. CONCLUSIONS 40

VI. LITERATURE CITED 42

FIGURES

Figure 1. Trembling aspen ecology: ECODATA sampling plot locations on the

Blackfeet Indian Reservation 6

Figure 2. Two-dimensional ordination of 37 samples of trembling aspen-black

cottonwood forests of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation 12

Figure 3. Key to lifeform groups and selected deciduous forest types of the

Blackfeet Indian Reservation 15

Figure 4. Plot of near maximum tree age and tree height (feet) versus tree

diameter (inches) at breast height 29

Figure 5. Frequency distributions by species for the largest size class

represented within each stand, a) for Populus tremuloides, b) for

Populus trichocarpa 31

m

TABLES

Table 1 . Montana Plant Species of Special Concern documented to occur in or

adjoining aspen habitat 8

Table 2. Wetland determination results; matrix of sample plots by jurisdictional wetland
parameters and community type 25

APPENDICES

Appendix A. Trembling aspen-black cottonwood communities: Cover synthesis, or
"Stand" Table.

Appendix B. Trembling aspen-black cottonwood communities: Constancy-Cover
Table (constancy, average abundance, and range of cover values).

Appendix C. Scatterplots of stem density by 2 inch size classes without regard to
species.

Appendix D. Trembling aspen-black cottonwood tree populations by site and species
diameter classes.

Appendix E. Trembling aspen-black cottonwood basal area by site, species, and
sampling technique.

Appendix F. Vascular plant species occurring in trembling aspen-black
cottonwood stands.

Appendix G. Application of comprehensive onsite determination method to selected
trembling aspen-black cottonwood stands.

Appendix H. Montana Natural Heritage Program Community Survey Form.

Appendix I. Montana Natural Heritage Program Ocular Plant Species Data Form.

Appendix J. Annotated photographs documenting examples of the Populus tremuloides
I Cornus stolonifera, P. tremuloides / Calalmagrostis canadensis and
P. tremuloides / Osmorhiza occidentalis plant associations

IV

POPULATION STATUS AND ECOLOGY OF

TREMBLING APEN AND BLACK COTTONWOOD COMMUNITIES

ON THE BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION

I. INTRODUCTION

Trembling aspen stands on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation (BIR) are among the most
extensive, intact, and well-developed in the Northern Rocky Mountains, spanning a
continuous gradient of terrestrial-to-wetland conditions in combination with black
cottonwood. These stands are pivotal in evaluating the overall status and
characteristics of aspen in the Northern Rockies, and their closely-associated wildlife
resources.

Staff members of the Montana Natural Heritage Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, and the Fish and Wildlife Department of the Blackfeet Indian Nation, convened
in late winter of 1996 to discuss research and inventory opportunities and priorities on
the Blackfeet Indian Reservation (BIR). It was concurred that the wet communities
dominated by trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides) and black cottonwood (Populus
trichocarpa) are the most vulnerable and least well-documented, as well as having
exceptionally high wildlife values. This in turn made them a priority for baseline
characterization and management analysis covering wetland delimitation, successional
status and condition.

Other studies have documented that the high wildlife values of aspen stands in general,
and the wet aspen-cottonwood stands in particular, include disproportionately high
Neotropical migrant breeding bird use compared to these stand's areal extent on the
landscape, critical spring-early summer foraging grounds for grizzly bear, a buffered
travel corridor and cover for big game between the extremes of the plains and the
montane forests, and a structural landscape component that enhances overall wildlife
diversity. Preliminary evidence has also been compiled that their uniqueness is also
reflected in a diverse flora that includes rare plant species.

The seminal work on aspen types of BIR lands was conducted by Lynch (1955), but
keys were not developed for the classification, leaving questions of delineation and
distinction unresolved among the mesic-wet types. Among the documented plant
community types was the trembling aspen - black cottonwood/ western sweet-cicely
type (Populus tremuloides-Populus trichocarpa/Osmorhiza occidentalis) that is not
known in other states and barely documented in Canada. It is identified as a plant
community type which may be imperiled throughout its range (Grossman et al. 1994). It
is treated as a wetland type by the Montana Riparian Association (Hansen et al. 1995),
with meager information for differentiating it from terrestrial types.

1

This study was set up to document the population status and ecology of trembling
aspen and black cottonwood communities on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation as a
baseline reference and management tool. Specifically, it addresses community
classification, wetland delimitation, successional status, vigor and mortality conditions ,
and rare plant species.

II. STUDY AREA

The aspen parkland of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation (BIR) consists of a distinct zone
of parkland-fescue grassland mosaic between the eastern front of the Lewis Range of
the Rocky Mountain Cordillera and the Great Plains. The parkland lies principally within
the western edge of the BIR but on south slopes of narrow mountain valleys it advances
into the eastern edge of adjacent Glacier National Park and on north-facing valley
slopes it extends into the plains. This zone characterized by the prevalence of aspen
usually does not much exceed 1, 000 vertical feet, from 4,500 to 5,750 feet; exceptional
stands can be found above and below these limits due to compensating factors (such
as moist conditions associated with steep north-facing slopes of ridge systems set in a
plains environment).

Its distribution largely corresponds with surficial geology, namely ground moraines
deposited by Pleistocene Epoch, Wisconsin Stage glaciers (see maps in Lynch 1955).
The St. Mary Glacier was fed by tributary glaciers from drainages in which now flow
Divide, Red Eagle, Swiftcurrent, Boulder, and Kennedy Creeks and extended down the
St. Mary Valley for some 36 miles. Marking the eastern extremity of the parkland are
the lateral moraines on the western slopes of Saint Mary Ridge and which course up
the St. Mary Valley to then extend northeastward, passing around the eastern end of
Duck and Goose Lake.

Outwash fans consisting of cobbles and other coarse material formed at the Kennedy,
Swiftcurrent, Wild and Divide Creeks. The bottom of the valley north of Lower Saint
Mary Lake is filled with coarse material similar to that in the outwash fans. Where soils
are well-developed or depth to water table is shallow these coarse materials support
trembling aspen, but where a thin soil mantle prevails these coarse materials support
Fescue (fescue)- and Agropyron (wheatgrass)-dominated grasslands.

From Hudson Bay Divide south, aspen parkland covers Wisconsin-age drift in the valley
of Cutbank Creek to a short distance west of the Park boundary. South of Two
Medicine Valley the parkland grades into a mixture of communities dominated by
aspen, conifers, and herbaceous species. These vegetation types occupy ground
moraines deposited by the Two Medicine Glacier, which was fed by glaciers originating
in the Two Medicine Valley, Marias Pass, and in the valleys stretching south to Heart
Butte.

The parkland, especially the moister sites, occupies primarily troughs and depressions
in the ground moraine complex on the lower slopes of the valleys mentioned above and
similar habitats at the head of the extensive Milk River drainage system. Argillites and
limestones are the primary rock types contributing to the glacial till, whereas the
bedrock appears to be Cretaceous sandstone.

At the drier, plains portion of its distribution the aspen parkland rather abruptly gives
way to rough fescue (Festuca scabrella)- and Idaho fescue (F. idahoensis)-dom'mated
grasslands of lower elevation, drier sites having thinner soils. Within predominantly
forested landscape aspen stands also have relatively narrow transitions to conifer
dominated stands. The conifer dominants range from Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga
menziesii) and lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta), typical of younger stands and drier
environments, to subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa), Engelmann spruce (Picea
engelmannii) and hybrid swarms of Engelmann with white spruce (P. glauca) that
characterize older stands and more mesic environments.

Potentially at least, two orders, nine Subgroups, and thirteen series are represented in
our sampling, however, almost all of the soil mapping units that include aspen-black
cottonwood are complexes and associations (e.g. Nettleton-Mikesell clay loams); thus it
is not possible to distinguish even Orders at the plot level without fully describing a
profile. The 37 sample plots occurred over 16 different soil mapping units, including
one unit that was mapped as unequivocal wetland, Fresh Water Swamp.

A synopsis of the soils (their taxonomy) on which we found aspen parkland well
developed is as follows:

Order level

Subgroup level

Series

Alfisols

Typic Cryoboralf

Loberg, Mikesell, Sw

Mollisols

Pachic Cryoboroll

Adel, Gallatin,

Typic Cryoboroll

Babb

Argic Pachic Cryoboroll

Bumette

Typic Cryaquolls

Gapo

Boralfic Cryoboroll

Mord

Argiaquix Xeric Argialboll

Nettleton

Calcic Cryoboroll

Hanson, Raynesford

Typic Calciaquolls

Bear Lake

Fresh Water Swamp

III. METHODS

Data Collection

From previous field trips to forested lands of the BIR we were well acquainted with the
distribution of trembling aspen and black cottonwood stands with respect to landscape
position. Scanning orthophoto quads enabled us to identify areas with relatively
extensive mature stands in relatively mesic landscape positions (more mesic than the
average trembling aspen stand which generally occupies upland and hillslope
positions). At areas of extensive trembling aspen we walked the landscape, focusing
our search on positions known, or hypothesized, to be associated with a higher than
average soil moisture regime. We sought homogeneity of vegetation composition and
structure (across a given position) in selecting a representative plot within the stand. In
general we attempted to sample stands that appeared to have a plant composition that
indicated higher than average moisture regime. Sampling was spread along the whole
of the Reservation's parkland (Figure 1) however, certain areas of extensive parkland,
such as the vicinity of Kiowa, were more intensively sampled.

All sample plots were circular (37.2 ft radius), 1/10 acre in area. Information regarding
location, abiotic site variables and plant composition (canopy coverage) was collected
on the Natural Heritage Program Community Survey Form (Appendices G & H). The
Community Survey Form is a derivation of the General Plot Data and the Ocular Plant
Species Data Forms employed by the USDA Forest Service (Northern Region) as a
portion of their ECODATA (USDA 1996) community sampling package. We chose this
approach because it provides a state-of-the-art relational data base structure for
storage, retrieval, and export to analysis programs and is compatible with methods used
by various government agencies collaborating with The Nature Conservancy.

The same size plot was also employed to determine diameter class distribution. Tree
size and diameter classes employed were those defined by the U. S. Forest Services'
Northern Region: seedlings (>6 in., < 4.5 ft. or < 1 in. d.b.h.), saplings (> 4.5 ft. or > 1 in
. and < 5 in. d.b.h.), pole (> 5 in. to < 9.0 in d.b.h.), mature (> 9 in. and < 14 in. d.b.h.),
large mature (> 14 in. d.b.h.). Initially all stems greater than 1 in. d.b.h. were counted
by 1 inch diameter classes up to 6 in. in diameter and by 2 inch classes for trees with a
greater than 6 in. diameter at breast height; later in the study we changed to tallying by

1 inch classes across all stem sizes, realizing this finer resolution did not slow the
process and afforded a fine-scale documentation of size class distributions. The
coverage of all vascular undergrowth species was tallied by the following canopy cover
classes (percent values, see Daubenmire 1959): 0; T = >0, <1; P = *1, <5; 1 = ;>5,<15;

2 = ;>15, <25; 3 = >25, <35; 4 = ^35, <45; 5 = ^45, <55; 6 = ^55, <65; 7 = ^65, <75; 8 =
^75, <85; 9 = >85, <95; F = ;>95. Photographs to document the general aspect of
stand structure and undergrowth composition were taken for all sites. An examination
of the stand was conducted for any indicators of hydrological status (e.g. wrack lines,

Trembling aspen ecology: ECODATA sampling plot locations
on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation

Reservation Area
Glacier National Park
National Forest Area

-32#^3 £

Montana Natural Heritage Program, March 1 7, 1 997

sediment deposits) as outlined by the "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation
Manual" (Environmental Laboratory 1987).

To gain insight as to the time of last major stand disturbance and general age class
distribution information we attempted to core at least one healthy appearing (no conks,
cankers or obvious signs of root rot) individual from the largest size class represented
in the plot; if coring five or six trees on the plot did not result in countable cores we
generally discontinued coring. Sometimes coring was continued when healthy
specimens, of the same size class as those within the plot, were found outside the plot.

Soil pits were excavated only deep enough to yield information about the degree and
extent of soil saturation; generally this was not deeper than 50 cm. (20 inches). The
features consistently noted were those pertinent to soil water regime: Distance to and
height above water bodies, depth to free water or saturation, whether mottling and
gleying were present, the depth at which these phenomena occurred and their strength
of expression and depth of calcium carbonate accumulation. Other features were noted
as appropriate to the determination of whether soils were hydric or not. Usually these
features related to soil texture, shape and strength of peds, and distinctness of horizon
boundaries. Soil samples were collected from the following depths (in cm) 0-10, 10-20,
and when warranted, 20-30. These samples were air dried and stored for later
determination of soil color (hue and chroma), pH and conductivity. Soil series was
determined from published soil maps (USDA Soil Conservation Service and USDI
Bureau of Indian Affairs 1980) and compared against data collected in the field.

Field notes were taken on types and degrees of diseases and defects present on trees
with primary guidance to field identification offered by Hiratsuka et al. (1995), Hagle et
al. (1990) and Hinds (1985). Certain of the readily identifiable trunk rots, especially the
presence of conks of Phellinus tremulae (syn. Fomes igniarius var. populinus, white
trunk rot or white heart rot) and cankers, were systematically noted when tallying trees
by size class.

Sensitive plant surveys were conducted on slightly fewer than half the plots inventoried,
when a botanist familiar with all search images for sensitive, threatened, and
endangered species accompanied the field staff. The process of sensitive species
surveys can be summarized as follows; 1) Check for sensitive plant records in and
around the project area, 2) Set species search targets and time frames for fieldwork, 3)
Survey appropriate habitat at the crucial times of the growing season, 4) Collect
information on any sensitive plant populations, also documenting them in photographs
and specimens. The Biological Conservation Database (BCD) was searched for all
records of special status features, including sensitive species; none of the these
species are known to be associated with trembling aspen parkland or black cottonwood
stands in Glacier County, although elsewhere Montana Plant Species of Species of
Concern have been documented in or adjoining trembling aspen (Table 1). Many of

7

Table 1 . Montana Plant Species of Special Concern potentially occurring in or adjoining
aspen habitat.

SPECIES COMMON NAME
(SCIENTIFIC NAME)

COUNTIES OF DISTRIBUTION

Round-leaved orchis
(Amerorchis rotundifolia)

Flathead, Glacier, Lewis and Clark, Lincoln,
Pondera, Power, Teton

Short-styled columbine
(Aquilegia brevistyla)

Judith Basin, Sweetgrass

Sitka columbine
(Aquilegia formosa)

Beaverhead

Craw's sedge
(Carex crawei)

Cascade, Pondera, Power, Prairie, Teton

Yellow lady's-slipper
(Cypripedium parviflorum)

Flathead, Gallatin, Granite, Judith Basin,
Lake, Lewis & Clark, Lincoln, Missoula,
Park, Stillwater, Sweetgrass, Tton

Buckler fern
(Dryopteris cristatd)

Flathead, Lake, Missoula, Ravalli

Giant helleborine
(Epipactis giganted)

Carbon, Cascade, Flathead, Granite, Lake,
Madison, Power, Teton

Northern rattlesnake-plantain
(Goodyera repens)

Fergus, Flathead, Judith Basin, Meagher,
Wheatland

Green gentian
{Halenia deflexd)

Flathead, Lincoln

Heart-leaved buttercup
(Ranunculus cardiophyllus)

Glacier, Sweetgrass, Toole

Northern buttercup
(Ranunculus pedatifidus)

Flathead, Glacier, Granite, Liberty, Toole

Desert groundsel
(Senecio ereophilus)

Hill, Park

these species are boreal at their southern limits and the majority are also wetland
species.

Throughout this report the scientific plant names are consistent with the older taxonomic
treatment of Hitchcock and Cronquist (1984) to facilitate comparison and use with
conventional range management, wildlife and forestry references. The scientific and
common names of all species found in sampled plots and a rudimentary attempt to
synonomize them with the most recent treatments are presented, alphabetized by
scientific name within lifeform, in Appendix F.

Data Analysis

Analysis included a combination of ordination, to describe general patterns of
communities in relation to environmental gradients, and classification, to ascertain and
describe community types. Ordination was performed using detrended
correspondence analysis (DECORANA, Hill 1979b); the input data being comprised of
species cover (the midpoint values of cover classes) by stand. This is an indirect
ordination method in that analysis is performed on the species data alone first and then
environmental interpretation is made by superimposing environmental data on the
ordination plots and examining the overlay for patterns and correlations. All default
options were employed when running the ordination algorithm. Because only the moist
to wet end of the moisture gradient for a single formation was the object of study, beta
diversity was relatively low and there was no need to stratify the data set based on say,
dominant lifeform in the undergrowth layer.

We also applied canonical correspondence analysis (CCA) using the computer program
CANOCO (ter Braak 1988). CCA differs from the classical indirect ordination approach
because it incorporates the correlation and regression between vegetation data and
environmental factors within the ordination itself and thus constitutes a direct ordination.
The input data consists of a data matrix of species by quadrats (stands) and a second
matrix of environmental variables by quadrats (stands). The resulting ordination
diagram thus expresses both the patterns of variation in floristic (or stand) composition
and the principal relationships between species (or stands) and each of the
environmental variables. We restricted our analysis to environmental variables that
best capture wetland status, soil mottling and gleying; other important wetland variables
expressing hydrologic status, e.g. depth to water table or saturation, registered too
many zero observations for their use as statistical predictors.

Objective classification of vegetation was accomplished using two-way indicator species
analysis (TWINSPAN, Hill 1979a); No data transformations were employed and all
default options in the TWINSPAN algorithm were used, except that pseudospecies cut
levels were set at 0, 5 and 20 percent cover. Insights into species occurrence and
probable assemblages suggested by TWINSPAN were combined with field insights

accumulated by the investigator and the plots were then subjectively grouped using
STRATA (USDA Forest Service). Existing classifications of vegetation types,
particularly of Montana wetland types (Hansen et al. 1995), dictated more the units we
recognized than any single source of information. We attempted to make our
interpretations fit existing modes of interpretation, in so far as the data would allow.

Analysis of stand structure consisted of plotting frequencies of live and dead stems by
size classes to determine visually what might be occurring with tree populations.
Patterns of ingrowth and mortality were compared with cases of typical patterns of
forest reproduction and senescence (Oliver and Larson 1996) to determine the probable
future course of BIR trembling aspen-black cottonwood parkland.

The "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual" (Environmental Laboratory
1987) is currently the document used to assess whether a putative wetland in fact
meets wetland criteria. Information collected regarding hydrology, soils and vegetation
was tabularized and weighed to determine whether the plot (and not necessarily the
whole stand) met wetland criteria.

10

IV. RESULTS and DISCUSSION
Community Ecology and Classification

We present only the CCA ordination results (biplot) in Figure 2 as one result of data
exploration, ascertaining the degree to which the only consistently measurable
environmental variables were associated with stand (plot) position in vegetation and
environmental space. The resulting ordination (biplot) is a product of the variability of
the environmental data, the nominal variables gleying and mottling [positive
associations GY, MY; negative associations (GN, MN), the ordinal variables chroma
and value and the variability of the plot composition data (species coverages). The
ordination diagram (Figure 2) expresses not only the patterns of variation in floristic
composition but also demonstrates the principal relationships between stands of
vegetation (plots) and each of the environmental variables. The arrows point in the
direction of maximum change in these environmental variables across the diagram and
their length is proportional to the magnitude of change in that direction.

Thus the plots of the upper left quadrant are positively associated with gleying (GY
arrow) and mottling (MY arrow). Note that the plots of this quadrant are all underlined
which indicates that they unequivocally satisfy the criteria for "jurisdictional wetland"

(see page under Wetland Determinations section for explanation of "jurisdictional

wetlands"). The arrows for low chroma and low value are weaker and indicate a few
true wetlands plots (that have weak indications of mottling and gleying) that possess
very dark (low value rating, high organic matter content) and grey soils (low chroma,
lacking color). Soils of these plots (numbers 42, 48, 39) were judged to be incipiently
gleyed; they were not actually gleyed or mottled due to their developing on a coarse-
textured substrate (sands and sandy loams) wherein gleying seldom develops due to
adequate aeration (oxygen supply).

More than forty years have passed since Lynch (1955) conducted his study of trembling
aspen "groveland" ecology. His study recognized three trembling aspen- or black
cottonwood-dominated plant associations, Populus tremuloides/Symphoricarpos albus,
Populus/Aster foliaceus, and Populus / Osmorhiza occidentalis. We have found the
latter two of these associations, named only as Populus because they contained both
P. tremuloides and P. trichocarpa, to be undifferentiate and propose merging them.
We have documented two additional mesic to wetland associations, P. tremuloides /
Calamagrostis canadensis and P. tremuloides/ Cornus stolonifera as defined elsewhere
by Hansen et al. (1995). We also observed three other trembling aspen-dominated
forest associations in uplands, P. tremuloides / Calamagrostis rubescens, P.
tremuloides / Carex geyeri (Mueggler 1988) and P. tremuloides/Symphoricarpos albus
(Cooper and Pfister 1981).

11

+ 1.0

AXIS 2

MY

-1.0

+ 1.0

AXIS 1 Chroma, low

42

Value, low

-1.0

Figure 2. Sample plot/environment CCA biplot ordination of 37 of trembling aspen-black cottonwood-dominated forests of the Blackfeet
Indian Reservation. The numbers represent the last two digits of ECODATA plot numbers; those underlined represent plots that
unequivocally qualify as jurisdictional wetlands. Arrows representing each environmental variable (GY = Increasing Gleying, GN =
Decreasing Gleying, MY = Increasing Mottling, MN = Decreasing Mottling) point in the direction of maximum change in that variable
across the diagram; the arrow's length is proportional to proportional to the magnitude of change in that direction.

12

Lynch did not provide a key for plant association identification. Had he attempted to do
so, he well may have experienced the difficulty we encountered in trying to separate his
types on the landscape. We often encountered stands of pure P. tremuloides with
Symphoricarpos albus dominant in the undergrowth, but mesic- to wet-site indicators
(e. g. Angelica arguta, Geum macrophyllum, Viola canadensis, and Calamagrostis
canadensis) also present and occasionally abundant. Is this a P. tremuloides/S. albus
or a P. tremuloides/O. occidentalis plant association? Lynch did not employ the
indicator concept, that the coverage or mere presence of certain plants is indicative of
certain site conditions. Building upon Lynch's work and operating from a much
expanded data base of vegetation stands and soils information we are proposing a
revision of aspen and black cottonwood synecology for this area. For instance, Lynch
did not note finding Angelica arguta, Festuca subulata or Schizachne purpurascens, all
of which are important components of many stands we sampled; his sampling intensity
or time of sampling was such that these species went unrepresented in the data base.
He listed 36 species occurring in the P. tremuloides/Osmorhiza occidentalis p. a.,
whereas we have documented, based on 18 more plots than Lynch sampled, an
additional 1 1 1 species for roughly the same portion of the environmental gradient. Our
revision is in the best tradition of "successive approximation" (Poore 1962) that holds
ecological conceptions regarding an area can be fine-tuned with additional sampling
and analysis as an incremental approach to the most appropriate description or model.

We chose to focus on the wetter end of the moisture gradient represented by the
Populus/O. occidentalis, Populus/A. foliaceus plant associations because these
appeared to be problem areas for type recognition. Lynch recognized the importance of
these two plant associations being capable of supporting both P. trichocarpa and P.
tremuloides. He differentiated these two community types based on species dominance
in the undergrowth layer, with the stands having greater importance (a higher "index
value"1) for a suite of species defining a particular plant association and distinguishing it
from other stand groupings with other suites of species having high index values .

Our analysis indicates that whatever composition might be considered typical for the
Populus/Aster foliaceus p. a. is not borne out in the ordinations (Figure 2); there is no
cluster of stands within the ordination that would be defined by the A. foliaceus union of
species as described by Lynch (1955). Lynch characterizes the landforms or positions
occupied by both Popu/us-dominated plant associations as having considerable
overlap, including inter-morainal troughs and depressions in glacial drift. Because no
indicator species or suite of species or environmental parameters could be identified as
unique to this type it was merged with what Lynch termed Populus / Osmorhiza
occidentalis and Cooper and Pfister (1981) described as Populus tremuloides-Populus
trichocarpa / O. occidentalis. Populus trichocarpa is recognized in the latter association
as an important and distinctive component. In this report we have equated it to the
name P. tremuloides/Osmorhiza occidentalis following Hansen et al (1995), who
dropped the dual tree designation in their statewide monograph of wetland community

13

types. We have also accepted the lead of Hansen et al. (1995) in placing P.
tremuloides before P. trichocarpa in the key to plant communities. However, judging by
our data and that of others, we perceive that P. trichocarpa is more strongly associated
with hydric conditions than is P. tremuloides and therefore should come first in the key.
Hansen et al [1995] have generally constructed their keys on the premise that the
wettest types are identified first; perhaps they recognized the fact that P. tremuloides is
more widespread than P. trichocarpa in giving it priority.

1 Index value is a weighted measure of frequency and vitality, the % of plots in which
species is flowering.

14

What follows is a key to the moist to wet trembling aspen- and black cottonwood-
dominated communities of the BIR. Immediately following the key are the
descriptions of the moist to wet site plant associations. The written descriptions
attempt to characterize the environmental setting, overall composition and
structure of the plant associations however, the composition of individual plots
can be found in Appendix A, (stand table), the overall average composition for
the plant association in Appendix B, (constancy-coverage table), and
photographs of representative stands in Appendix J. These appendices employ
six letter acronyms, the first three letters of the genus followed by the first three
of the specific epithet, as shorthand for the scientific name.

Figure 3. KEY TO LIFEFORM GROUPS AND SELECTED DECIDUOUS FOREST
TYPES OF THE BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION

[Plant associations described in this document are in bold; their order of presentation in
the text follows the order in which they occur in the key. Other wetland/riparian
associations are found in Hansen et al 1995, or as noted]

1. Tree canopy cover, single species or combined cover, at least 25% 2

1 . Tree canopy cover, single species or combined cover, less than 25%

Non-forested types, not treated in this document

2. Coniferous trees present and reproducing successfully (10 or more trees per

acre or canopy cover of seedlings/sapling >5%)

Coniferous Forest Types (see Hansen et al. 1995 or Pfister et al. 1977)

2. Coniferous trees absent, or if present, then not reproducing successfully or

restricted to microsites . 3

3. Populus tremuloides (trembling aspen) present and reproducing successfully .... 4

3. Populus tremuloides absent or, if present, not reproducing successfully 8

4. Cornus stolonifera (red-osier dogwood) or wet site Salix spp. (willows, not

including S. scouleriana) having at least 5% canopy cover, individually

or in combination

Populus tremuloides/Cornus stolonifera plant association

4. Cornus stolonifera and wet site Salix spp., individually or in combination, having

less than 5% canopy cover 5

5. Calamagrostis canadensis (bluejoint reedgrass), C. stricta (narrow-spiked

reedgrass), Alopecurus alpinus (alpine foxtail) or A. pratensis (meadow foxtail)

either singly or their combined canopy cover at least 5%

Populus tremuloides/Calamagrostis canadensis Plant Association

15

5. Calamagrostis canadensis, C. stricta, Alopecurus alpinus, or A. pratensis either

singly or their combined cover less than 5% 6

Figure 3. Continued.

6. Osmorhiza occidentalis (western sweet-cicely), Angelica arguta (sharptooth

angelica), Viola canadensis (Canada violet), Heracleum lanatum (cow-parsnip),
Veratrum viride (green false hellebore), Actaea rubra (baneberry), Galium
triflorum (sweetscented bedstraw) individually, or in any combination, having at

least 5% canopy cover

Populus tremuloides/Osmorhiza occidentalis Plant Association

6. Site lacking at 5% canopy cover, either singly or in any combination, of the following

species, Osmoshiza occidentalis, Angelica arguta, Viola canadensis, Heracleum
lanatum, Veratrum viride, Actaea rubra, Galium triflorum 7

7. Poa pratensis (Kentucky bluegrass), Phleum pratense (common timothy), or

Agrostis stolonifera (redtop), their individual or combined canopy coverages at
least 5% Populus tremuloides /Poa pratensis community type

7. Not as above Populus tremuloides-dom'mated community types *

8. Populus trichocarpa (black cottonwood), P. angustifolia (narrowleaf cottonwood),

or P. deltoides (Great Plains cottonwood) with a greater canopy cover than
other individual tree species 9

8. Populus trichocarpa, P. angustifolia, and P. deltoides having less canopy cover

than other individual tree species . (see Hansen et al. 1995 for further coverage)

9. Populus trichocarpa with greater canopy cover than either P. angustifolia

or P. deltoides Populus trichocarpa-dom'maied community types*

9. P. angustifolia or P. deltoides with greater canopy cover than P. trichocarpa

(see Hansen et al. 1995)

*Other P. tremuloides- and P. trichocarpa-dommated plant communities (e.g. P. tremuloides/
Symphoricarpos albus) do occur on the BIR and their description can be found in Hansen et al. 1995 or
Cooper and Pfister 1 981 .

16

Populus tremuloides / Cornus stolonifera Plant Association

(POPTRE/CORSTO; trembling aspen/red osier dogwood; 3 plots;
WHTF1 designation POPTRE / Cornus sericea)

Environment: This is the wettest of deciduous forest types we inventoried on the BIR
and is the wettest vegetation type, when present, in local landscapes. It was seldom
found in patches greater than an acre, though in its stringer form along steams and
other water bodies its collective area is clearly greater. Small patches are also located
in inter-morainal troughs. Very small fragments were found on mid-, lower-slope, and
toe-slope positions; there was no obvious explanation for the high cover of C.
stolonifera at these positions except to invoke a subsurface source of water due to the
complexity of water channeling in slump surfaces. Soils show strong gleying and
mottling (except for the sideslope oddities). Adjacent communities were Salix-
dominated on wetter positions and Populus tremuloides / Calamagrostis canadensis or
P. tremuloides / Osmorhiza occidentalis on drier, or at least slightly upslope positions.

Vegetation: It is important to note that our key to this community type differs, at least in
defining species, from that described by Hansen et al. (1995). We recognize only
Cornus stolonifera (FACW, see Appendix F) with at least 5% canopy cover as a
significant indicator of wetland conditions, but two of the other shrub species (Prunus
virginiana, Amelanchier alnifolia) listed in the key of Hansen et al. (1995) are not
associated with wetlands, but rather uplands (Appendix F). For instance, accepting A.
alnifolia as an indicator would broaden the concept of this type to include relatively dry
upslope conditions. C. stolonifera cover varies widely and it appeared the higher
coverages are associated with wetter conditions. More appropriate alternative
indicators for this type are the various wetland Salix spp., e.g. S. boothii, S. bebbiana,
S. geyeriana, which occur with coverages up to 10% and are definitely associated with
wetland conditions.

The overstory is usually dominated by varying proportions of P. trichocarpa and P.
tremuloides, but at least one stand was sampled, and others noted, having P.
tremuloides as the monospecific dominant. P. trichocarpa has a higher cover in
POPTRE/CORSTO than in the other moist types, indicating that these sites are in fact
wetter. [It should be noted here that we have followed the lead of Hansen et al. (1995)
in constructing our key so that P. tremuloides comes off before P. trichocarpa. But we
feel this prioritization is inappropriate because of the two species, P. trichocarpa is more
strongly associated with wetland conditions (see Appendix F) however, we have bowed
to priority and followed Hansen's lead, not wanting to create competing classifications.
Where drainages flow out onto the plains there are pure P. trichocarpa stands,
however, these were not sampled, being beyond the parkland environment. For the
mixed species stands there is no clear indication in size class structure of eventual

1 Western Heritage Task Force of The Nature Conservancy

17

domination by either species. In sampled stands Picea spp. and Abies lasiocarpa
evidenced only very scattered seedlings and saplings, their cover not amounting to
more than 5%. However, during reconnaissance we noted several stands at the prairie-
forest juncture having at least 50% cover of coniferous species, predominantly Picea
spp and low vigor Abies lasiocarpa, indicating that at least some of these sites may be
climax in shade-tolerant conifers and constitute the Picea / Cornus stolonifera habitat
type.

The graminoid component is invariably dominated by Elymus glaucous (blue wildrye)
and Festuca subulata (bearded fescue) with Bromus ciliata (fringed brome), Alopecurus
(foxtail) spp. and Calamagrostis canadensis (bluejoint reedgrass) occurring sporadically
with high coverages (Appendix A). It should be noted that E. glaucous is the most
ubiquitous graminoid of trembling aspen stands across the Intermountain West and
Northern Rocky Mountains; often it has the highest cover of any graminoid present.
Aggressive, weedy grasses apparently do very poorly here despite the fact that
opportunities abound for animals, both domestic and natives, to introduce these
species. There are a number of forbs with 100% constancy including Thalictrum
occidentale, O. occidentalis, Viola canadensis, Sanicula marilandica, and Geranium
richardsonii. A considerable variety of wetland herbs are present with varying
constancy and cover; surprisingly Angelica arguta exhibited low constancy but very high
coverage for those stands in which it occurred. The only forbs present associated with
livestock use or disturbance are Prunella vulgaris and Urtica dioica.

Other Studies: As we have defined this plant association there are no other
comparable regional types described. If one accepts A. alnifolia as an alternative
indicator of the type as do Hansen et al. (1995), then there are vast extents of the
Northern Rocky Mountains and Intermountain West dominated by various permutations
of P. tremuloides / C. stolonifera (see Mueggler 1988). Of these combinations, the P.
tremuloides / A. alnifolia/TaW Forb c.t. described by Mueggler (1988) is compositionally
most similar to POPTRE/CORSTO, but it is far from being a wetland c.t. as described
here. Both Bird (1961) and Moss (1955) indicate that Populus trichocarpa, Cornus
stolonifera and Viburnum opulus are commonly associated with moist to wet aspen of
southwestern Alberta but neither author provides plant association level descriptions.
Almost certainly this plant association is present in southern Alberta, but given the
intensive grazing pressure, seeding to introduced pasture grasses and habitat
fragmentation associated with oil field development that has transpired in this region
almost certainly stand condition has been negatively impacted.

Natural Heritage Program Rank: G3/S3 (Unchanged from Bourgeron & Engelking
1994)

18

Populus tremuloides/Calamagrostis canadensis Plant Association

(POPTRE/CALCAN; trembling aspen/bluejoint reedgrass; 11 plots)

Environment: POPTRE/CALCAN is a minor type on the BIR and would appear to be
associated with landscape positions as wet as those for POPTRE/CORSTO, but only
infrequently were the two community types noted to occur in a mosaic pattern on the
same landscape. Though Hansen et al. (1995) note both types to be well aerated, we
speculate that the POPTRE /CALCAN p. a. is less so, occupying finer, more poorly-
drained soils. The largest extents of the type were found bordering herbaceous- or
Sa//x-dominated wetlands; other positions included inter-morainal troughs, alluvial
benches and even toeslopes speculated to receive appreciable subsurface flow. Soils
were predominantly loams, silt loams and silty clay loams, usually gleyed (or mottled) to
within 1 5 to 20 cm of the surface.

Vegetation: The usual condition is a closed canopy overstory dominated by P.
tremuloides, with P. trichocarpa being a considerable component on three fourths of the
stands; in only two stands did P. trichocarpa exceed P. tremuloides in importance
(canopy cover and basal area). Lynch (1955) also noted that P. trichocarpa was not
present in all moist-site stands, observing that there was no apparent difference in site
parameters and attributing the difference to local stochastisity in seed distribution at the
time of establishment. In stands where both species are well represented there is no
consistent indication one or the other gaining dominance. P. trichocarpa attains larger
stem diameters but ultimate heights for both species asymptotically approach about 60
ft. P. trichocarpa also seems to be more infested with heart-rot fungal pathogens.

Shrubs are generally poorly represented in the undergrowth, with the exception of
Symphoricarpos albus and Rosa woodsii, the average covers of which are 8 and 4 %,
respectively. Shrubs with wetland indicator value include Salix boothii, S. bebbiana, S.
geyeriana, Ribes americanum, R. setosum and Cornus stolonifera, but the coverages
are low (<5%) and constancy does not exceed 36% for any one of these species.

The predominant aspect of these stands is that of graminoid dominance with the
wetland indicators Calamagrostis canadensis, C. stricta, Alopecurus alpinus and A.
pratensis contributing more than half the cover and Elymus glaucous, Festuca subulata,
and Phleum pratense contributing most of the rest. Other wetland graminoids sampled
only in this type include Glyceria striata, Carex microptera, C. hoodii, C. brevior, and C.
rostrata (syn. C. utriculata). This type differs from POPTRE/CORSTO by having
disturbance increasers, Poa pratensis, Poa palustris, and Phleum pratense as a
significant undergrowth component in some cattle-influenced stands. Some stands had
an appreciable forb component with Angelica arguta, Arnica chamissonis, Epilobium
ciliatum, Geum macrophyllum, Senecio foetidus, Aster laevis, Geranium richardsonii,
Pedicularis bracteosa, Smilacina stelllata, Lathyrus ochroleucus, Galium boreale, G.
triflorum and Fragaria virginiana having their highest constancy within this plant

19

association; constancy for the listed species ranged from 36 to 100%. The first five
listed forbs are rated by US Fish and Wildlife Service as FACW1 or wetter.

Other Studies: Other than the description in Hansen et al. (1995) the
POPTRE/CALCAN plant association has not been described elsewhere within the
region (Northern Rocky Mountains), but it has been described for both Colorado's Front
Range (Mutel 1973) and the mountains of the state's south-central area (Powell 1988).
Judged on a regional basis it appears to be an incidental type; even two of the six
stands attributed by Hansen et al. (1995) to the type have 20% cover of Alnus incana
making the stands members of POPTRE/CORSTO, rather than POPTRE/CALCAN, in
their taxonomy.

Natural Heritage Program Rank: G3/S3 (POPTRE7CALCAN is a relatively
uncommon association but threats to it are minimal, at least to the Montana examples,
even from overgrazing by ungulates. We have noted few weed problems with the
exception of Urtica dioica. Poa pratensis can also form aggressive clones on these
moist to wet sites. )

1 FACW is wetland indicator status designation assigned by US Fish & Wildlife Service
indicating a facultative wetland species that usually occurs in a wetland, i.e. with an
estimated probability of 67-99%, but is occasionally found in non-wetlands

20

Populus tremuloides/Osmorhiza occidentalis Plant Association

(POPTRE/OSMOCC; trembling aspen/western sweet-cicely; 23 plots)

Environment: POPTRE/OSMOCC is the driest community type of the aspen
parkland's mesic to hydric associations. It most usually grades to POPTRE/
Symphoricarpos albus of drier exposures and to POPTRE/CALCAN, POPTRE/
CORSTO, or Sa//x-dominated wetlands of moister sites. This plant association
occupies a wider range of landscape positions and soils (or positions on soil catena)
than either of the associations described previously. The driest positions occupied were
sideslopes, from midslope to just below the shoulder break.; these sites are seldom
found to have wetland soils. Ostensibly they do not possess wetland hydrology by
virtue of their position, but the possibility of subirrigation is present in landscapes
possessing slumps and clay lenses (such as the Kiowa area). The moistest positions
were stream terraces where POPTRE/OSMOCC exists in complex mosaics with the two
wetter trembling aspen types.

All the soils were silt loams or sandy loams and more than 80% of them had negligible
rock in the upper 20 to 30 cm of the profile, where 80% of the root mass is
concentrated. Several profiles were notably rocky to just below a 3-5 cm thick organic
horizon, but these rocky substrates did not condition a distinct vegetation. As observed
in the "Jurisdictional Wetlands" section these sites are overwhelming not jurisdictional
wetlands, but the rank vegetation often gives an impression to the contrary.

One of the study's goals was to identify easily inventoried features such as wetland
indicator plants (or their quantitative representation), perhaps in conjunction with
landscape position, that would unequivocally identify wetland sites within this single
broadly-defined plant association. Such a suite of species/landscape positions would
provide for convenient inventory of wetland (jurisdictional) sites. Unfortunately no such
suite of species or site features was identified.

Vegetation: The closed-canopy overstory is usually dominated by P. tremuloides with
variable amounts of P. trichocarpa; in only five stands did P. trichocarpa have higher
coverage than P. tremuloides, whereas in six stands it was completely lacking. Thus
the constancy for P. trichocarpa is about the same in this association as the others, but
its cover agerages at least 20 % less. It is in this somewhat drier type that Picea is
incrementally more successful, but still coverages did not exceed 13 %. In the course
of tree coring we gained the impression more sound trees were found in this type than
the others.

That this type is transitional to the distinctly upland type POPTRE/SYMALB is seen in
the shrub composition where the cover or constancy, or both, is high for a number of
upland shrubs, including Symphoricarpos albus, Rubus parviflorus, Rosa woodsii,
Amelanchier alnifolia, and Salix scouleriana. A number of upland shrubs occur only in

21

this of the three mesic to wet plant associations, including, but not confined to, Berberis
repens, Juniperus communis, Potentilla fruticosa, Spiraea betulifolia, Sorbus scopulina,
and Shepherdia canadensis.

This association is similar to POPTRE/CALCAN and POPTRE/CORSTO In
composition by dominant graminoids (excepting wetland indicators), including Elymus
glaucous, Bromus ciliatus and Festuca subulata. However, there are a number of
upland graminoids recorded only for POPTRE/OSMOCC, including Calamagrostis
rubescens, Stipa occidentalis, Melica subulata, Bromus pumpellianus and Dactylis
glomerata. Species richness of the forb layer is high (73 species). Those species
having their highest coverages or constancy in this type are Veratrum viride, Senecio
pseudaureus, Actaea rubra, Aster engelmannii, Castilleja miniata, Disporum hookeri,
Erythronium grandiflorum, Hackelia floribunda, Osmorhiza occidentalis, Smilacina
racemosa, and Viola canadensis; only the first two named species are typical of
wetlands (FACW or wetter, Appendix F). Two other wetland species, Angelica arguta
(90 % constancy, 5 % c.c.) and Geum macrophyllum (72 % constancy, 3 % c.c.) are
important across most of the stands of this type. As discussed In more detail in the
"Jurisdictional Wetlands" section, despite the dominance of wetland vegetation as
determined by the Corps of Engineers method, soils and hydrology more often than not
fail to corroborate that these sites are in fact wetlands.

Other Studies: Lynch (1955) was the first to describe the POPTRE/OSMOCC plant
association (as Populus spp. /Osmorhiza occidentalis). Cooper and Pfister (1981)
slightly augmented the description (calling the type POPTRE-POPTRI/OSMOCC) and
provided an initial dichotomous key to forested plant associations, including deciduous-
dominated, on the BIR. Hansen et al. (1995) have devised a comprehensive
classification for all of Montana's wetland types, of which POPTRE/OSMOCC was
considered one; their description was based on 15 plots distributed across western
Montana, but centered on the East Front of the Rocky Mountains.

In both site parameters and composition POPTRE/OSMOCC also bears a strong
resemblance to the most commonly encountered trembling aspen type in the
Intermountain Region, POPTRE/Tall Forb (Mueggler 1988). Of the nine forb species
Mueggler included in the Tall Forb Group (also referred to as guild or union) five (Aster
engelmannii, Hackelia floribunda, Heracleum lanatum, Senecio serra, and Osmorhiza
occidentalisa) also occur regularly in POPTRE/OSMOCC. Mueggler (1988) considers
10% canopy cover of any one of the Tall Forb Guild species or combination of these
species to be sufficient for recognition of the community type. As in
POPTRE/OSMOCC the most important graminoid in POPTRE/Tall Forb is Elymus
glaucous, followed by Bromus ciliatus and Poa pratensis. Mueggler speculated that
many of the communities sampled in this tall forb type constitute a near-climax
condition; in other words, the majority of these stands are self-perpetuating as those of
the BIR are hypothesized to be. The Intermountain Region tall forb type differs from

22

POPTRE/OSMOCC in lacking both POPTRI as a co-dominant and any wetland
indicator species with a value of FACW or greater. These two types may simply
represent regional expressions of a common type or at least define overlapping portions
of the environmental gradient with POPTRE/OSMOCC, as defined, extending to wetter
conditions on the soil moisture catena.

Natural Heritage Program Rank: G3/S3 (This is a common type within the trembling
aspen parklands on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation and extending into the Canadian
parklands [though possibly in a somewhat impacted condition with composition altered
by the incursion of weedy and non-native species]. Continued threats to the
association come from grazing (alteration of composition) and fragmentation through
land development and oil exploration and development.)

23

Wetlands Determinations

We were requested by several BIR resource staff members to make some general
observations that might bear on the wetland status of BIR deciduous forests. It
appeared that National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps possibly overlooked their
presence in the landscape. Determination of jurisdictional wetlands involves the
evaluation of three parameters, soils, vegetation and hydrology; we applied the Corps
of Engineers 1987 Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) methodology to determine
wetland status.

Table 2 and Appendix G (more detailed than Table 2) represent the data transcription of
wetland species from raw data forms to synopsis form, treating wetland vegetation by
the categories obligate, facultative wet and merely facultative (see Appendix F for full
species name, common and scientific, and an explanation of wetland indicator
categories), whether soils are hydric or not, and whether or not hydrology is indicative of
wetland functions. It should be appreciated that a one-time site visit, especially at the
end of summer, is usually insufficient to effectively evaluate some parameters,
particularly hydrological ones. Whether the hydrology is that of a wetland is often
arrived at through circular reasoning or surrogate variables and not by direct
observation of hydrological conditions at the site at a critical time in the cycle. Of the 37
stands inventoried 46% met wetland criteria, though some were borderline cases
generally due to uncertainties about either soils or hydrology; some borderline cases
were encountered when the wetland vegetation indicators present just met the 50%
cutoff mark.

There are some clear trends present in percentages of wetlands present when sites are
stratified by vegetation type. Sites typified as POPTRE/CORSTO possessed
unequivocal indications of wetland soils, with mottling and gleying always present. The
wetland vegetative indicators averaged 68 % (range 60 to 72 %) of the dominant
species, of which on average 26 % (range 14-43 %) were FACW class or greater. The
landscape settings were primarily adjacent to stream courses and could be inferred to
meet hydrological criteria with overbank flow (evidence in wrack lines and silt deposits)
and saturated soils for a prolonged period during spring runoff.

Within the POPTRE/CALCAN plant association 27% of the sites are unequivocal
wetlands, 64 % equivocal wetands (91 % wetlands of some status) and 9% non-
wetlands. Of the dominant species, wetland indicators comprise from 36 to 100 % and
average 68 %; the percentage of species FACW or greater ranges from 18 to 57 and
averages 42. Only two stands (18%) within this grouping did not meet the vegetation
criteria of more than 50 % of the dominants being wetland species; one of these sites
was clearly not wetland but the other lacked only the vegetation criteria, though in terms
of indicator species (and not their cover weighted %) a wetland condition clearly

24

Table 2. Wetland determination results; matrix of sample plots by Jurisdictional Wetland parameters and community type

Vegetation (% by Class) Hydrophytic Hydric WetlandJurisdictional

Total Percent Vegetation Soils HydrologyWetland

Plot Number Community Type OBL FACW FAC/FAC+ Wetland Species Y, N, ?

Y, N, ? Y, N, ? Y, N, ?: why

96SC0017*

POPTRE/CORSTO

0

20

40

60

Y

Y

Y

Y: no question

96SC0018

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

12

50

62

Y

?

Y

Y:

96SC0019

POPTRE/CORSTO

0

14

57

71

Y

Y

Y

Y: unequivocal

96SC0020

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

14

57

71

Y

N

N

N:

96SC0021

POPTRE/CALCAN

0

50

20

70

Y

Y

Y

Y: unequivocal

96SC0022

POPTRE/CORSTO

0

43

29

72

Y

Y

Y

Y: unequivocal

96SC0023

POPTRI/CALCAN

0

50

20

70

Y

Y

Y

Y: unequivocal

96SC0024

POPTRE/CALCAN

0

36

27

63

Y

Y

Y?

Y: questionable

96SC0025

POPTRE/CALCAN

0

29

36

72

Y

Y?

Y?

Y: questionable

96SC0026

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

25

50

75

Y

N

N

N:

96SC0027

POPTRE/OSMOCC

10

20

40

70

Y

Y

Y

Y: unequivocal

96SC0028

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

0

50

50

Y/N

N

N

N:

96SC0029

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

0

57

57

Y/N

N

N

N:

96SC0030

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

11

33

44

N

N

N

N:

96SC0031

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

28

28

57

Y

Y

Y?

Y: (equivocal)

96SC0032

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

20

50

70

Y

N

N

N:

96SC0033

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

25

37

62

Y

N

N

N:

96SC0034

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

12

25

37

N

N

N

N:

25

Table 2(Continued). Matrix of sample plots by Jurisdictional Wetland parameters and community type

Vegetation (% by Class) Hydrophytic Hydric WetlandJurisdictional

Total Percent Vegetation Soils HydrologyWetland

Plot Number Community Type OBL FACW FAC/FAC+ Wetland Species Y,N, ?

Y,N, ? Y,N, ? Y,N, ?:why

96SC0035

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

0

40

40

N

N

N

N:

96SC0036

POPTRE/CALCAN

0

33

33

67

Y

?

Y

Y: equivocal

96SC0037

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

12

50

62

Y

Y

Y?

Y: equivocal

96SC0038

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

0

60

60

Y

N

N

N:

96SC0039

POPTRE/CALCAN

0

57

29

86

Y

?

Y

Y: equivocal

96SC0040

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

0

42

42

N

N

N

N:

96SC0041

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

12

37

50

Y/N

N

N

N:

96SC0042

POPTRE/CALCAN

0

50

50

100

Y

Y

Y

Y: unequivocal

96SC0043

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

14

43

57

Y

Y

N

N: borderline

96SC0044

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

12

25

37

N

Y?

Y?

N:

96SC0045

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

33

11

44

N

Y?

Y?

N:

96SC0046

POPTRE/CALCAN

0

36

9

45

N

Y?

Y

Y: equivocal

96SC0047

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

20

20

40

N

N

N

N:

96SC0048

POPTRE/CALCAN

0

57

29

86

Y

Y

Y

Y:

96SC0049

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

12

50

62

Y

N

N

N:

96SC0050

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

20

40

60

Y

Y

Y

Y;

96SC005 1

POPTRE/CALCAN

0

42

8

50

Y/N

Y

?

Y: equivocal

96SC0052

POPTRE/CALCAN

0

18

18

36

N

N

N

N:

96SC0053

POPTRE/OSMOCC

0

0

50

50

N

N

N

N:

26

obtained. This association represents the strongest expression of wetland plant
species, though a small percentage of sites were in fact not jurisdictional wetlands.
Some of these sites possessed soils with stronger gleying and mottling and with these
conditions occurring closer to the soil surface than was expressed in the
POPTRE/CORSTO association. It is quite possible that POPTRE/CALCAN spans, in
terms of duration of soil saturation (and associated anoxic conditions), a broader
environmental range than does the POPTRE/CORSTO association; clearly this type is
found in a greater variety of landscape positions than is POPTRE/CORSTO, ranging
from streamside stringers of alluvial terraces to subirrigated toeslopes to glacial
depressions.

POPTRE/OSMOCC is cited as a major wetland vegetation type by Hanson et al. (1995),
but our sampling of this type indicates that only 22% of the sites were wetlands, some
equivocally so; only 3 sites (13 %) were unequivocal wetlands. If vegetation (wetland
indicator species) alone is the criterion, then 65 % of the sites qualify as wetlands. This
vegetation type had the lowest percentage of wetland indicator species, averaging 55 %
of dominant species and ranging from 36 to 75 %. It also had, by far, the lowest
average percent composition (13%) of indicators that were at least FACW and 5 sites
had no FACW species at all. This vegetation type occupies the widest range of
environments, from hill sideslopes to toeslopes to alluvial bottoms. The hillslope
positions obviously are not expected candidates for possessing wetland hydrology,
unless subirrigation could be inferred from the presence of restrictive layers (e.g. clay
lenses) causing near-surface flow. Only one hillslope site had evidence (mottling) of
seasonally high water and no obvious soil feature (in a 1.1m deep soil pit) could account
for water perching at this position.

Implications of this inventory's results regarding NWI mapping and the extent of
jurisdictional wetlands on BIR lands are several. In a quick scan of NWI maps we noted
that none of the first 12 sites we had sampled and identified as wetlands were included
as palustrine forested wetlands in the NWI mapping. We suggest that, based on
community type present and landscape position alone, wetlands maps could be
corrected to reflect the much greater contribution of forested wetlands on the BIR; this
approach would obviate the excavation of soil pits and hypothesizing about hydrologic
regime. It is with a relatively high degree of certainty (85 % plus) that the presence of
POPTRE/CORSTO and POPTRE/CALCAN associations indicate wetlands and
polygons in which these plant communities occur can be so labeled. The
POPTRE/OSMOCC association presents no unequivocal answer that a wetland is
present but at least it indicates areas where soil pits should be excavated and the
hydrologic regime investigated.

27

Stand Structure and Successional Status

Figure 4 shows the results of tree coring to establish the age of stand dominants.
Populus tremuloides and P. trichocarpa were not distinguished on this plot due to strong
similarities in their height and diameter growth patterns (Moss 1932) and the fact that
only two P trichocarpa were successfully bored and counted (with great difficulty).
About three quarters of the stands were successfully cored for at least one tree age. To
the extent that coring attempted on 5 to 7 dominant trees resulted in failure to extract a
readable core, then approximately one quarter of the stands had significant heart rot or
other wood defects. Even coring at breast height, as Lynch (1955) cited doing to avoid
basal heart rot, was not successful. Coring of P. trichocarpa usually resulted in being
squirted with a stream of watery fluid in which were borne the core fragments when the
extractor was withdrawn.

Populus tremuloides under current climatic conditions in the Intermountain West is
known to reproduce via adventitious shoots from roots (sucker shoots) only (exceptions
to this reproductive mode are so unusual as to be documented in notes to various
botanical journals). Conventional wisdom holds that aspen groves throughout this
region have been in place for possibly thousands of years, establishing sometime in late
Pleistocene times, or sometime thereafter, when pluvial climates were still in force.
Thus ages from trees of the largest size class may represent time since last disturbance
or they may simply represent the oldest tree still standing (see discussion of reverse J-
shaped curve of size class structure); they do not represent time since stand
establishment.

Populus trichocarpa also is also known as a colonizer of disturbed surfaces, usually
associated with riparian environments, preferentially establishing as seedlings on fresh
alluvium, on point bars or other recently deposited surfaces. Though this species is
most commonly found on the BIR in riparian environments, it has a notable presence in
the aspen parkland and this is a distinctly uncommon habitat for its occurrence, a
pattern generally not found elsewhere in its distribution. It is also capable of
reproducing via root sprouting within established stands, though not so prolifically as P.
tremuloides.

Figure 4 indicates that tree height is moderately correlated with diameter breast height.
Tree height, for both P. tremuloides and P. trichocarpa, even for the largest diameter
size classes in the 18 to 24 inch range never exceeded 60 feet. Size classes greater
than 18 inches are not shown on Figure 4 because readable cores could never be
extracted from specimens this large, almost invariably P. trichocarpa. In Lynch's study
(1955) of BIR parklands for the P. tremuloides/ Osmorhiza occidentalis plant association
the average height of P. trichocarpa was 56 feet and P. tremuloides 45 feet. From
Figure 4 it can be inferred, at least for P. tremuloides, that there has been little height
growth on a per stand basis in the intervening 45 years between Lynch's study and
ours. In fact, average stand height may have decreased due to wind damage. West of
Glacier National Park at the same latitude and elevation as the BIR parklands aspen of

28

Figure 4. Plots of near maximum tree age and height (feet) versus tree diameter at breast height.

Plots of Tree Height and Age versus Diameter Breast Height

n

0)

><

o
8)

<

c

0!

C

o
E
5
"O
II

o

E
>.

CO

d>
M

'5
x

6 8 10 12

Diameter Breast Height (inches)

29

70 to 80 feet tall are common. We cite wind as the primary factor influencing tree height
because further north (central Alberta) Moss (1932) found on the better sites dominant
trees at only 50 years (index age) to be 50 to 60 feet tall, heights never attained at this
age by BIR aspen (or black cottonwood). Though Chinook winds blow along the whole
of the eastern front of the Rocky Mountain the greatest frequency and strength is
registered from Browning to just north of Lethbridge, Alberta (Yoshino 1975); the
dessicating and trimming effects of these winds may account for the relatively short
stature of BIR aspen stands.

Lynch (1955) cited the mean dbh for dominants of the P. tremuloides/Osmorhiza
occidentalis plant association to be 7.7 and 12.8 inches for P. tremuloides and P.
trichocarpa respectively. From the P. tremuloides histogram (Figure 5a) it is clear that
this species has matured considerably and of the three stands with the largest size
class represented of 7 inches or less, two have P. tremuloides as the tree species
growing into a P. trichocarpa-dom'mated stand. This leaves but one P. tremuloides-
dominated stand wherein its largest size class is the same or smaller than the average
size dominant reported by Lynch (1955). In the intervening 45 years from Lynch's study
to ours it is well within the bounds of extrapolation to project these dominant trees
putting on from 2 to 8 inches of diameter growth. From this pattern we can infer there
has been little stand structure disturbance overall in the parkland since Lynch's 1952
study (reported in 1955), assuming that neither Lynch nor ourselves have biased
sampling by selecting stands with regard to stem size criteria and that both our samples
reflect the parkland structure as it then and now exists.

Lynch's average age of dominant P. tremuloides in the POPTRE/Os/77or/7/'za
occidentalis plant association was 78 years in 1 952 ; it is tempting to extrapolate and
say that the average age of today's dominants should be 122, plus or minus a few
years, but such extrapolation is not justified. It is this oldest/largest class of trees that
yielded few readable cores due to heart rot and other maladies and that would have
experienced the greatest mortality in the intervening years. We often had to core
smaller and ostensibly younger trees to obtain a countable core, hoping it would at least
give us a minimum age since disturbance or stand "age". Moss (1932) states that
"rarely" do P. trichocarpa and P. tremuloides exceed 135 and 120 years, respectively;
these ages come from trees growing in more favorable environments (inferred from
greater tree heights).

The histogram (Figure 5b) showing largest size classes of P. trichocarpa present in a
stand is bimodal and indicates through the presence of several small size classes that
there are some stands with ingrowth of this species into P. fremu/o/o'es-dominated
stands. Lynch (1955) gives no indication of the distribution of maximum dbh size
classes, only the average of 12.8 inches; we must infer that the stands with 15, 17, 21,
and 23 inch classes present represent those with the expected subsequent diameter
increase since Lynch's (1955) study.

30

Figure 5. Frequency distributions by species for the largest size class represented within each
stand, a) for Populus tremuloides, b) for Populus trichocarpa.

Frequency distribution; largest Populus tremuloides size class
represented for each stand

Average dbh of the largest size classes present in Lynch's stands (1955)

7 9 11 13 15 17

Midpoint of size class (inches)

19 21

23

Frequency distribution; largest Populus trichocarpa size class
represented for each stand

Average dbh of the largest size classes present in Lynch's stands (1955)

co m

Midpoint of size class (inches)

Appendices C, D, and E display the results of the tree species population inventory
(tallied by 1 inch size classes In the field) converted to 2 inch classes for ease of
presentation and interpretation. The scatterplots (Appendix C) of stem/acre against dbh
size classes (2 inch increments) are most easily examined for repeating patterns of
reproduction and stand structure; Appendices D and E simply present the same data as
Appendix C, but with more detail such as stem number or basal area by species and
diameter class.

The most common pattern of size class structure, a negative exponential, or, as referred
to colloquially in the literature reverse J-shaped curve (Oliver & Larson 1992), is
exemplified by stands 24, 28, 30, 35, 36, 39, 50 and others (Appendix C), though not
with so classical a curve form. Within this group of stands are represented all three
plant associations and the full range of the wetland gradient. For this set of stands stem
numbers per acre are high in the smaller diameter classes and decline precipitously with
increasing size classes. Note that the smallest size class spans a range of only 1 inch
(breast height diameters >1 and <2 inches) and therefore potentially encompasses
many fewer stems than the size classes spanning 2 inches. The narrow span of this
class centered on 1.5 inch midpoint accounts for several of the graphs not peaking in
the smallest size class as would be expected for this type of distribution. It is these
stands with the reversed J-shape frequency-by-size-class structure that often have the
largest size classes represented, but with very few stems per acre.

Of all the stands sampled these most closely approximate what may be termed "old
growth" or "mature" structure, though stem ages did not exceed 122 years (certainly not
old when compared to age potentials of conifers native to BIR lands). This size class
structure pattern is also known as "stable" because of an somewhat constant
recruitment of stems into the smallest (youngest) classes and a consistent rate of
mortality by class. This structure is that expected from self-replacing stands; it is the
structure exhibited by mixed-species or monospecific dominant old-growth stands of
shade-tolerant conifers. However, the case with Populus tremuloides and P.
trichocarpa is quite different from that of climax conifers because both species are
notably shade-intolerant and short lived. Virtually all the stems (the individual trees,
known technically as ramets) originating in an aspen stand represent the production of
one genetic entity and constitute a clone. Black cottonwood is not as strongly clonal in
nature. As mortality claims the older (larger) stems in a stand apical dominance is
weakened and the root systems send up suckers; in general, the greater the motality
and lessening of apical dominance, the greater the suckering response.

The other textbook structural pattern evident in our data is the even-sized (even-aged)
development exemplified by stands 17, 20, 29, 33, 34, 40, 50 and others (Appendix C).
All three plant associations and the full spectrum of wetland conditions are represented
in this group of stands. Stem density peaks in one or two size classes; increment coring
shows that stems from these highest density size classes (or even three classes) are
essentially even-aged, being within 1-12 years of one another; stand ages of the above-
cited six stands were respectively, 62, 122, 69, 42, 54, and 96 (no age stand 20) based

32

on the largest size class with near peak population size. With the exception of stands
29 and 51 (122 and 106 yrs.) these are among the youngest stands In our sample.
Mortality has not yet begun to thin out the older age classes (see Appendix A, dead
stem density); most mortality is in younger suppressed size classes, which are
themselves not very densely populated due to apical dominance of the mature stems.
Comparing the oldest stands, 29 (122 yrs) and 51 (106 yrs.), that still exhibit the pulse of
post-disturbance reproduction it appears that the greater stem density of stand 29 is
responsible for the continued suppression of root sprouting. In contrast stand 51 shows
low density in the large classes (half that of stand 29) and moderate mortality across all
size classes that possibly accounts for the spurt in suckering.

This successional development in aspen is analogous to classic cases, such as post
burn succession with lodgepole pine giving rise to even-aged, sometimes "doghair"
dense, stands. The only troubling aspect to the aspen scenario on the BIR is the
general lack of evidence for fire, both in the soil (charcoal) and above ground (stumps
and downed boles). We speculate that in these moist environments decay of these
nutrient-rich softwoods is accelerated relative to what would be expected with conifers,
leaving little or no evidence after 50 or more years since the disturbance. Another
possibility is that certain of these stands were harvested for firewood; leaving no
evidence in the soil or above ground (save for stumps which decay quickly due to their
continued connection to the moist soil column).

There are other patterns exhibited in the size class data, such as rather flat curves
where numbers drop only slowly with increasing size (age) classes, exemplified by
stands 26, 37, 42, and 43 among others. Other stands, such as 19, show spikes in
particular size classes for no obvious reasons. One can speculate that some past event
may have weakened apical dominance, for example several consecutive years
infestation by the western tent caterpillar (Malacosoma californicum), allowing a cohort
of suckers to become established. Sampling error is another possibility for injecting
spikes and valleys in the data; 1/10 acre plots are perhaps undersized for sampling
population structure when stem numbers are low or when formerly relatively
homogeneous stands begin to fragment with patches of mortality.

An occasional cone bearing Engelmann spruce {Picea engelmannii) or hybrid with white
spruce ( P. glauca) was found in these stands but, despite the considerable seed rain,
spruce seedling density was generally in the range of only 1-50 per acre. The per stand
basal area contribution of spruce was much less than 1 percent. The establishment of
Abies lasiocarpa (subalpine fir) and Pseudotsuga menziesii (Douglas-fir) is occurring at
even slower rates than for spruce. At these rates of establishment it would take many
hundreds to thousands of years without disturbance for succession to result in spruce or
mixed conifer stands.

Most of these moist to wet aspen- and black cottonwood-dominated stands should be
viewed as self-replacing. In the wetter of the three plant associations,
POPTR/CORSTO and POPTRE/CALCAN, P. trichocarpa has higher canopy cover in

the stands in which it is present than it does in the drier POPTRE/OSMOCC plant
association. Of the stands wherein both species are present in the seedling to sapling
size classes (up to 5 inches dbh) 22% of the stands show P. trichocarpa to have higher
stem counts, indicating it could possibly be the canopy dominant at a future date.
However, scanning the mortality plots (Appendix C) it is obvious that mortality can take
out whole size classes, rendering moot speculations about eventual dominance in these
mixed species stands. For almost 90% of the stands sampled P. tremuloides appears to
be the species most successfully replacing itself, regardless of plant association
involved.

It should be added parenthetically that in the course of conducting 1997 field
investigations relating to grassland ecology that we encountered several mature, moist
to wet, aspen-dominated stands on the eastern fringe of the aspen parkland sites
wherein Picea and Abies lasiocarpa were clearly establishing successfully and
population structure indicated their eventual site dominance. Thus it appears that with
or without periodic disturbance, aspen and non-riparian black cottonwood groves will
continue to flourish, but that certain of these trembling aspen-black cottonwood groves
will succeed to conifer dominance. At this time we have not identified those predictors
that would distinguish climax aspen habitats from those successional to conifers.

One of the more puzzling aspects of the aspen parkland, at least concerning mesic
sites, is why rock content is so uniformly low (<5 %), often completely lacking, in the
upper portions (upper 20-30 cm) of soil profiles. For mesic sites, virtually all parkland
soils (which we textured only by feel) were silt loams to loams, at least in the upper 30
cm of the profile. Some of these rock-free soils may be attributed to resorted glacial
deposits which have been deposited along old glacial drainage courses or in lakes or
depressions near the retreating ice. However, many of the upslope soils are virtually
rock-free as well. We hypothesize that the lack of rock in these profiles (rock is present
in conifer-dominated stands and drier aspen stands) is attributable to the upper profile
being composed largely of aeolian materials, including volcanic ash. Both Mt. Mazama
and Glacier Peak volcanic events are post-Pleistocene and could have contributed ash.
Another, much greater source of aeolian material is the glacial drift surfaces that would
have been newly created the north and west. In the pluvial climates of post-Pleistocene
(post-Glacial) times aspen and black cottonwood, with their cottony, wind disseminated
seeds that require prolonged moisture, could have been among the early colonizers of
freshly created substrates. These groves would likely have been the tallest and
densest vegetation in the landscape; their canopies would have served to create eddy
currents and resulted in airborne particles coming out of suspension. The Canadian
literature also contains speculations that these sites were first stabilized by grasslands
and evolved to aspen forest.

34

Disease, Defect, Pests

Preliminary data on forest disease and defect was collected following the guide of
Hiratsuka et al. (1995) and descriptions of Hinds (1985). No trees were sectioned or
their bases excavated to make more definitive identification of agents responsible for
heart rots, cankers or insect damage. In the narrative that follows we describe various
fungal and bacterial conditions as though they occurred one to a tree but in reality there
is generally a complex of infestations associated with a tree; in many cases these
infestations have been shown to follow a somewhat predictable successional sequence
(Hinds 1985).

Though not explicitly tallied, it is safe to say virtually all cored trees showed some
degree of discoloration and softening of interior wood, which can be interpreted as
resulting from some form of fungal (or possibly bacterial) infestation. Only two
specimens of P. trichocarpa were successfully cored and even these had some punky
wood. By far the most common bole defect encountered in P. trichocarpa we would
describe as "wetwood" analogous to this condition as described for P. tremuloides
(Hinds 1985); this malady was noted very infrequently in P. tremuloides cores.
Wetwood is caused primarily by invasion of sapwood by bacteria, presumably from
initial root infections. In specimens we cored, copious bleeding of a watery sap followed
core extraction; we presume that water pools in lumina created from the mass
destruction of xylem cells. Other disease symptoms associated with wetwood include
branch dieback, crown wilting and premature death.

Phellinus tremulae, the predominant trunk rot or white heart rot fungus of Populus spp.
in North America, is probably the easiest of the wood decay agents to identify with its
distinctive 7-20 cm wide conk having a purplish-brown undersurface. If its presence is
accounted for only by conks, then this pathogen occurred in about 32% of the stands,
usually on larger (>9" dbh) P. tremuloides and infested from 10 to 100% of this species
within a given stand. Because sporophores form on only a small fraction of the trees
infected (Lynch 1955) it is difficult to gauge the incidence of infestation. In Ontario, 28
to 70% of the trees in 60 to 70 years old stands were infected (Hinds 1985). Its
presence renders age coring virtually impossible as the decay column continues for
most of the main stem's length; usually the wood is so soft it cannot even be used for
pulping. Conks of the P. tremulae type were not noted on P. trichocarpa.

Only one instance of Armillaria "root rot" was found as indicated by honey colored
mushrooms and rhizomorphs in the soil and rotted wood at the base of the tree. The
mushrooms are produced only in late summer and early fall; the black stringy
rhizomorphs (black-string root rot) are always present but for proper identification
require excavation in the vicinity of the tree base; basal excavation was beyond the
scope of our work and thus this pathogen could have had a much greater presence than
we recorded. This pathogen produces rot in roots and tree butts and could explain part
of the lack of success in basal tree coring.

35

Trunk canker is the most obvious disease problem of aspen in the West (Hinds 1985).
We noted trunk canker symptoms (lesions, formation of callus tissue, dead bark
sloughing, often in long stringy strips, blackened and sooty bark, concentric stem
girdling) on many dead and dying P. tremuloides and P. trichocarpa trees of all size
classes, but particularly on smaller to mid-size dbh classes. We made no attempt to
identify the fungal species causing these symptoms. This broad group of fungal
diseases is cited as the major cause of aspen mortality but we had no way of knowing
which among the wide range of fungal diseases present in the sampled stands,
including heart rots, root rots, was actually responsible for the deaths of individual
trees.

The canopy of one stand was noted to be producing an extremely fine exudate
dispersed into the air and deposited on the undergrowth and aspen seedlings. Neither
the exact source or causative agent of the aerosol, nor consequences to the stand
could be determined.

At the time of sampling none of the sampled stands were infested by western tent
caterpillar (Malacosoma californicum) and this insect pest was not noted in general
reconnaissance. Severe outbreaks have been noted on the BIR with multiple year
defoliation, but it is our impression these infestations have not resulted in wholesale
mortality.

36

Animal Impacts

At grove margins some stems has been gnawed by either porcupine (Erethizon
epixanthum) or snowshoe rabbits (Lepus americanus). The aspen groves of the BIR
are obviously not under native ungulate pressure, most especially not from elk (Cervus
canadensis), of the type that has resulted in the wholesale loss of aspen stands in
western Wyoming and Yellowstone National Park (Krebill 1972, Kay and Wagner 1994).
Even with the extensive Yellowstone fires of 1988 aspen stands have not been able to
establish suckers greater than 2 meter in height and are still a target for browsing elk.
The situation appears to be quite different on the BIR with the only positive evidence of
animal induced mortality to aspen being from beaver (Castor canadensis) gnawing and
felling trees.

The abrasion of antler felt was the elk (Cervus canadensis) damage most frequently
observed. This activity left almost all trees of particular stands with wounds to trunks
and branches. We also observed wounding to the main stem from gnawing and in
several cases mortality resulted from stem girdling. With the exception of girdling, this
wounding apparently does not immediately result in loss of stand vigor or health.
However, wounding of any kind, from any source, that breaches the bark potentially
constitutes an entry point for disease vectors, most especially a whole host of
pathogenic fungi. Stands with elk damage had no obviously greater incidence of heart
rot or cankers.

It would appear that the very scattered seedlings of Abies lasiocarpa (subalpine fir)
present in these aspen stands are browsed (portion above snowpack) by some agent,
most likely moose (Alces alces). The consequence for aspen stands is that this
browsing retards the rate, apparently quite slow anyway, at which stands succeed to
conifer dominance.

Cattle pressure on stands of these moist environments in late summer can be
appreciable; they seek and find both thermal cover and forage. Their impacts
constitute the single greatest threat to maintenance of this vegetation type for its
biodiversity value, that of a relatively unaltered state. A synopsis of field notes indicates
that by mid-August most stands have been entered and trampled. It appears certain
that localized areas, including but not restricted to e.g. South Fork of Milk River mostly
east of Hw. 89 and lower elevations in the vicinity of Kiowa, have experienced
continuous and heavy grazing, which results in yearly forage removal of 80% plus of the
standing crop in forb-dominated undergrowth conditions.

We speculate that this intense grazing pressure is responsible for the highly, altered
composition of the aspen parkland in certain localities, even of these moist to wet
stands. In the most highly affected areas we noted the rhizomatous, non-native grasses
Poa pratensis (Kentucky bluegrass) and Phleum pratense (timothy) to have become
undergrowth dominants, to the near exclusion of all but relatively unpalatable vegetation
such as Symphoricarpos albus (common snowberry), Ribes setosum (Missouri

37

gooseberry), Achillea millefolium (common yarrow), Geranium richardsonii
(Richardson's geranium), Geranium viscossisimum (sticky geranium), Ranunculus
uncinatus (little buttercup). In small disturbed areas dense patches of weeds such as
Urtica dioica (stinging nettle) and Cirsium arvense (Canada thistle) have developed.

Field notes taken in the summer of 1996 confirmed previous impressions that several
forbs are grazed preferentially by cattle, these being Angelica arguta (sharptooth
angelica), Osmorhiza occidentalis (western sweetcicely), Heracleum lanatum (cow
parsnip) and Veratrum viride (green false hellebore). Based on their position in the
landscape we have reason to believe that the areas referred to in the paragraph above
would have supported extensive populations of the above-named species, whereas
portions of these areas are now converted to a less desirable status. Though
coincidental, it is none the less significant that all these heavily-grazed species
constitute grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) forage as well, their importance varying by season.
There is clear overlap in the diets of cattle and grizzly bears and management strategies
should address these conflicting needs.

Lynch (1955) speculated that the high sheep numbers that apparently were present in
earlier times were responsible for aspen never getting beyond the root sprout stage in
aspen openings and at the edge of groves and thus prevented parkland expansion.
Though purely speculative, it is quite conceivable that intensive sheep grazing in
previous times could be responsible for missing age (size) classes in some stands. We
found no sheep pellets in our stands or in the vicinity and noted no evidence for their
browsing on aspen sprouts and thus presume sheep numbers have been reduced; we
took no data that bear on parkland expansion, or lack therof.

38

Rare Plant Species/Floristics

We did not find threatened, endangered, or sensitive plant species in trembling aspen
habitat, but do not rule out the possibility. The fieldwork focus on sampling
homogeneous stands may overlook the microhabitat features that rare species occupy,
inset within the stands and the overall landscape.

Eight tree species, 29 shrub species, 28 graminoids and 82 forbs, ferns, and fern allies
combine for a total of 147 vascular plant species found on the sample plots (complete
list Appendix F), which is fewer than the number of species than can be expected for
the aspen parkland as a whole (considering that the more xeric portions of the moisture
gradient were not sampled). Species richness averaged 38 species per plot, which is
quite high for forest vegetation east of the Continental Divide in Montana. Coniferous
forest types in this same landscape average between 15-27 species per plot. Within
drier aspen types, generally fewer than 24 species are recorded per plot. In terms of
preserving the diversity of forested habitats, the moist to wet segment of the BIR
parkland is a highly significant component of the Rocky Mountain Front.

39

V. CONCLUSIONS

In the course of a partial summer's field sampling we acquired a data base sufficient to
permit refining of the deciduous dominated forest portions of three previous community
classifications (Lynch 1955, Cooper and Pfister 1981, Hansen et al. 1995); our
classification circumscribes three most mesic to wet community types of the BIR,
Populus tremuloides / Corn us stolon if era, P. tremuloides / Calamagrostis canadensis
and P. tremuloides / Osmorhiza occidentalis. The BIR wetlands and moist uplands
dominated by trembling aspen and black cottonwood communities are uncommon
regarding their composition and possibly unique because of the generally high quality of
their occurrences. Plant associations characteristic of the wettest sites, P. tremuloides /
Cornus stolonifera and P. tremuloides / Calamagrostis canadensis, are rated by the
Heritage Program as S3 and G3 regarding their rarity, with threats to their long-term
existence factored in as well.

The POPTRE/OSMOCC association, rated G2/S2, is ostensibly the most
geographically restricted and exceptional of the three community types and also under
the greatest threat. Regarding composition and condition we have not established
unequivocally that POPTRE/OSMOCC is unique (this would require sampling in the
Canadian portion of the parkland) and in fact this community type bears a strong floristic
and structural resemblance to and occupies similar habitats, soils, and positions in the
landscape as does the P. tremuloides I tall forb community type of the Intermountain
Region defined by Mueggler (1988). There is approximately a 250-300 mile gap
between the northernmost example of P. tremuloides I tall forb in the Middle Rocky
Mountains and the southernmost occurrence of P. tremuloides / Osmorhiza occidentalis
in the Northern Rocky Mountains. There is a steep floristic dine over this considerable
geographic expanse. Despite the more than superficial ecological resemblance of the
two communities we believe they are sufficiently different, especially in regard to
geographic setting and floristic composition, to regard them as unique types.

Cattle, through excessive grazing, trampling, and weed introduction, have negatively
impacted some POPTRE/OSMOCC sites and constitute the greatest ongoing threat to
this community, but overall these moister sites are in good condition. We suggest that
establishing cattle exclosures, appropriately placed and sized so a to capture a range of
aspen-black cottonwood habitat conditions, would be effective in estimating both the
impact of cattle through vegetation trends and the overlap between cattle and ungulate
or grizzly bear use.

All three community types are climax associations to a degree that appears inversely
related to increasing dryness on the moisture gradient. We noted in passing that the
drier upland aspen-dominated communities had much more evidence of the incursion of
conifers, mostly Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii). These aspen and black
cottonwood stands are self-perpetuating, their tree populations apparently being long-
term stable. This is not a unique condition for aspen but is definitely the exception to
most successional scenarios in this vegetation type. Fungal and bacterial diseases and

40

insect pathogens are ubiquitous and limit tree longevity and stand productivity (the tree
portion thereof) but the suckering ability of both Populus spp. provides a relatively
constant source of recruitment to the canopy layer.

An examination of reports and classifications from adjacent areas, which have been
less intensively sampled and with somewhat different techniques, indicates that the
aspen parkland of the BIR has a relatively severe climate as reflected by the short,
wind-trimmed trees and that the undergrowth is especially forb-rich. Species richness
averaged 38 species per plot, which is high for forested types. Coniferous community
types in this same landscape average between 15 and 27 species per plot. In terms of
preserving the diversity of forested habitats alone, this BIR parkland should be a strong
focus of efforts.

Additionally, much of the aspen lowland is both subirrigated and in position to receive
overland flow and could constitute an appreciable area of palustrine, broad-leaved
deciduous, forested wetland in the Cowardin et al. (1977) classification and a
"jurisdictional wetland" in the scheme of the "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineartion
Manual" (Environmental Laboratory 1987). We have documented that two plant
associations, P. tremuloides/Cornus stolonifera and P. tremuloides/Calamagrostis
canadensis, are almost invariably associated with wetland conditions. The third
association, P. tremuloides/ Osmorhiza occidentalis, occurs as a jurisdictional wetland
in about 20 % of the cases. The fact that these plant associations are so predictably
associated with jurisdictional wetlands makes them valuable surrogates for mapping
wetlands without having to resort to excavating soil pits or hypothesizing about
hydrologic regimes. Values typically associated with such wetlands include flood
mitigation (floodwater storage), water quality improvement (capture of nutrients and
erosion from uplands), storm abatement and aquifer recharge, aesthetics, and perhaps
most importantly critical wildlife habitat.

This moist to wet habitat is potentially critical to avian productivity (Tewksbury 1997). It
also contains an abundance of grizzly bear foods (herbs), such as sharptooth angelica
(Angelica arguta), western sweet-cicely (Osmorhiza occidentalis), cow-parsnip
(Heracleum lanatum), glacier lily (Erythronium grandiflorum), field horsetail (Equisetum
arvense). In light of the demise of many stands of whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) in
adjacent Glacier National Park, these aspen parklands may sustain more pressure from
the grizzly bear population, though aspen parkland stands generally serve as spring-
early summer forage sites and not fall sites, as do the whitebark pine stands. Other
wildlife species frequent these habitats but determination of intensity and types of use
were beyond this study's scope.

41

VI. LITERATURE CITED

Bird, R. D. 1961. Ecology of the aspen parkland of western Canada. Contribution No.
27, Research Station, Canada Department of Agriculture. Winnipeg. Manitoba,
Canada. 155 pp.

Daubenmire, R. 1959. Canopy coverage method of vegetation analysis. Northwest
Science 33: 43-64.

Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual.
Technical Report Y-87-1 . U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, MS. 100 pp.

Hagle, S. K., S. Tunnock, K. E. Gibson and C. J. Gilligan. 1990. Field guide to

diseases and insect pests of Idaho and Montana forests. Publication No. R1-89-
54. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, State and Private Forestry,
Northern Region, Missoula, MT. 123 pp.

Hansen, P. L, R. D. Pfister, K. Boggs, B. J. Cook, J. Joy, and D. K. Hinckley. 1995.
Classification and management of Montana's riparian and wetland sites.
Miscellaneous Publication No. 54, Montana Forest and Conservation Experiment
Station, School of Forestry, University of Montana, Missoula, MT. 646 pp.

Hill, M. O. 1979a. DECORANA-A FORTRAN Program fordetrended correspondence
analysis and reciprocal averaging. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.

Hill, M. O. 1979b. TwINSPAN - A FORTRAN program for arranging multivariate data in
a ordered two-way table by classification of the individuals and attributes. Ithaca,
NY. Cornell University.

Hinds, T. E. 1985. Diseases. In Aspen: Ecology and Management in the western
United States. Eds. N.V. DeByle and R. P. Winokur. U. S. Forest Service,
General Technical Report RM-119, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range
Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO. pg. 87-106.

Hiratsuka, Y., T Stokes, P. Chakravarty, and D. J. Morgan. 1995. A field guide to

classify and measure aspen decay and stain. Special Report 4, Canadian Forest
Service Northwest Region, Northern Forestry Centre, Edmonton, Alberta,
Canada. 27 pp.

Hitchcock, C. L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of
Washington Press, Seattle. 730 pp.

42

Kay, C. E. and F. H. Wagner. 1994. Historical condition of woody vegetation on

Yellowstone's Northern Range: A critical evaluation of the "natural regulation"
pardigm. Ed. D. G. Despain. In Plants and their environments: Proceedings of
the first biennial scientific conference on the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem.
Technical Report NPS/NRYELL/NRTR-93/XX. 15

Lynch, D. 1955. Ecology of the aspen groveland in Glacier County, Montana.
Ecological Monographs 25 (4): 321-344.

Moss, E. H. 1955. The vegetation of Alberta IV. The poplar association and related
vegetation of central Alberta. Journal of Ecology 20: 380-41 5.

Mueggler, W. F. 1988. Aspen community types of the Intermountain Region. U. S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service General Technical Report INT-250.
Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, UT. 135 pp.

Mutel, C. F. 1973. An ecological study of the plant communities of certain montane
meadows in the Front Range of Colorado. Unpublished Thesis, University of
Colorado, Boulder. 77 pp.

Oliver, C. D. and B. C. Larson. 1996. Forest stand dynamics. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
520 pp.

Pfister, R. D., B. L. Kovalchik, S. F. Arno, and R. C. Presby. 1977. Forest habitat types
of Montana. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service General Technical
Report INT-34. Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden,
UT. 175 pp.

Powell, D. C. 1988. Aspen community types of the Pike and San Isabel National
Forests in south-central Colorado. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Report R2-ECOL-88-01. 254 pp.

Reed, P. B. Jr. 1988a. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: North

Plains (Region 4). U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88 (26.4). U.
S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Research and Development,
Washington, DC. 64 pp.

Reed, P. B. Jr. 1988b. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: Norhtwest
(Region 9). U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88 (26.9). U. S.
Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Research and Development,
Washington, DC. 89 pp.

Tewksbury, J. 1997. Riparian forests and avian productivity. Report prepared for U. S.
Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Missoula, MT. 61 pp.

43

USDA Soil Conservation Service and USDI Bureau of Indian Affairs. 1980. Soil Survey
of Glacier County Area and Part of Pondera County, Montana. Bozeman, MT. 161 pp
plus maps and plates.

44

APPENDIX A. BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD COMMUNITIES

* Cover Synthesis (Stand) Table *

Community * 1 * 1* 1* 2 * 2 * 2* 2* 2* 2* 2* 2* 2* 2* 2* 3*

Site * 1* 2* 3* 4* 5* 6* 7 * 8* 9* 10* 11* 12* 13* 14* 15*

Trees

ABILAS 1 1 1 1 1

PICEAX — — — — 10 — — 3 — — — 1 — i

PICENG 1 1 i

PINCON 10

POPTRE 70 25 30 90 70 83 50 70 85 70 60 60 40 40 80

POPTRI — 70 70 -~ — 13 30 20 40 40 50 50 60

PSEMEN -

Shrubs

AMEALN 1 3 113 4 3 4 2 3 — 1

BERREP ' ;

BETOCC 3 3

CORSTO 60 20 5 3 i

CRADOU

JUNCOM ■ . 1

LONINV 12

LONUTA 1

POTFRU

PRUVIR 3 1

RHAALN '

RHAPOR

1

RIBAME 1 1 3

RIBLAC 1

RIBSET 3 3 1 3 3

ROSACI .

3 10

10

ROSWOO 3 32 10 13332 327 —

RUBIDA 3 x

RUBPAR 1

SALBEB 3 3 4 10 1

SALBOO 2 2

SALGEY

SALIXX 1 3 1

SALLUT

SALSCO 2

SALTWE -

SHECAN

SORSCO

SPIBET 3

SYMALB 10 7 13 — — 10 10 2 4 7 — 3 3 28 63

3

2

1

APPENDIX A. BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD COMMUNITIES

* Cover Synthesis (Stand) Table *

Community * 1* 1* 1* 2 * 2 * 2* 2* 2* 2* 2* 2* 2* 2* 2* 3*

Site * 1* 2* 3* 4* 5* 6* 7* 8* 9 * 10* 11* 12* 13* 14* 15*
********"********************************************^^

Graminoids :

AGROST 1

AGRREP 1 .

AGRSCA 1 1 1 1 ,

ALOALP — 1 — 20 — — — 28 1 — — 20 — 20

ALOPRA 1 — — — 20 3 17 — — 1 1 — ___ ___ X

BROCIL 1 3 1 1 1113

BROINE — »- 5

BROPUM

CALCAN — 10 — — — 20 — — 60 20 10

CALRUB

CALSTR — 67 70 1 3

CARBRE 1

CAREXX 1 — -

CARGEY

CARHOO 1 : 1 1

CARMIC 1

CARRAY 1

17 40

CARROS ,

CINLAT

DACGLO

DESCES

ELYGLA 3 10 30 3 3 10 3 40 20 20 23 3 33 3 27

FESSUB — 1 10 — — 20 — — 27 1 2 13 3 3

GLYSTR 1

JUNBAL

MELSUB

PHLPRA 1 1 — 20 10 10 30 20 — 3 1 10 13 4

POAINT 1

POAPAL 20

POAPRA — — — 3 1 — 10 10 — — 3

SCHPUR
STIOCC

Forbs :

ACHMIL

ACTRUB

ALLCER

ALLIUM 1

ALLSCH

10

1

ANGARG 40 1 17 23 5 15 23 33 7 3 20

ARAB1S 1 .

ARAGLA

ARAHIR

APPENDIX A. BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD COMMUNITIES

* Cover Synthesis (Stand) Table *
**************************************************** *****************************.****************************,, i******^*,**

Community * 1* 1* 1* 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2* 2* 2* 2* 2* 2* 2* 3*

Site * 1* 2* 3* 4* 5* 6* 7* 8* 9* 10* 11* 12* 13* 14* 15*

******************************************** ********************************************************* ^^^^^^^^^^^^

Forbs Continued:

ARCMIN

ARELAT

ARNCHA — - --- -— 1 1 4 1 1 — - 1 1 3 ___ 3

ASTCON 1

ASTENG 1 1 i 2

ASTFOL --- 10 1 — — — — -— i 13 ___ ___ ± ±

ASTLAE — — — 2 3 — 3 13 — — 3 2 3 10 3

CAMQUA 1 4 2 2 1

CAMROT 1 1 1 1

CASLUT 1

CASMIN 1

CASRHE 1 -

CASTIL 1 i

CERAST - —

CIRARV 1

CIRHOO

CIRSCA

CIRSIU x

CIRVUL

DESPIN

DISHOO 4

DISTRA 1

EPIANG 1 ' 1 !

EPICIL — — — 1 1 1 — 1 — _ — _ !

EPILOB 1 i

ERYGRA
FRAVES

10

13

1

1

FRAVIR 1 1 3 — 10 3 20 10 20 3 3 3 1 10

GALBOR 3 1 3 4 113 11

GALTET x

GALTRI 3 1 x x x

GERRIC 8 10 3 1 1 5 3 3 110 1 2 4 2 4

GERVIS 1

GEUMAC 3 — 3 13 7 4 3 1 7 — 4 2 4 4 4

HABDIL 1 i

HABSAC

HABUNA 1

HACFLO 1 1 ! -l j

HERLAN — 20 25 — 1 1 — 1 1 — i ___ 40 ___ 4

IRIMIS

LATOCH --- --- ___-_. 11 1 1 i __ _ 3 ___ J ___ 3

LOMDIS

MEDSAT

MONFIS 1

APPENDIX A. BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD COMMUNITIES

* Cover Synthesis (Stand) Table *

Community * 1* 1* l* 2 * 2 * 2 * 2 * 2* 2* 2* 2* 2* 2* 2* 3*

site * 1 * 2 * 3 * 4 * 5 * 6 * 7 * 8 * 9 * 10 * 11 * 12 * 13 * 14 * 15 *

Forbs Continued:

OSMDEP 13

1 — 1

RANUNI 1

SENSER 1

SENTRI 1

SMIRAC

SMISTE 1 3 1 2

SOLGIG 1

SONCHU

STELLA"

STELON

STEOCC

STRAMP 5

THAVEN 1

TRIREP

URTDIO 3

VALSIT

VERVIR 4

1

ZIGELE

Ferns & Fern Allies:

BOTVIR 1

EQUARV 3 3 4

EQUHYE

FERNXX

1

1

OSMOCC 1 10 50 2 — 17 — 13 1 10 20 — 20 2 17

PEDBRA --- 2 — — - 2 ' 1 1 3 2 1 1

PEDGRO 1

PERGAI 3 __"

PETSAG 2 1

PLAMAJ

POTENT 1

POTGRA 1

PRUVUL 3 11 1

PYRCHL 1 1 j

1 j 1

SANMAR 1 30 1 — — 3 13 — — 13 1 1 ___ ___ 3

SENCRA

SENFOE — — — 20 3 13 — 17 17 1 " 1 1 "1 1

SENHYD 3

SENPSE — 10 3 1 — 10 — — ,10 40 23 "_3 — — 1

TAROFF 3 — — 1 1 1 — 1 ___ ___ j , 3

THAOCC 8 20 4 1 1 1 3 3 2 — 1 1 2

1

VICAME 1 1 — !—!-___ 3 "1 I __'_ __l

VIOCAN 3 1 10 — 1 3 — 1 — 1 7 40 1 3

APPENDIX A. BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD COMMUNITIES

* Cover Synthesis (Stand) Table *

Community * 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3*

Site * 16 * 17 * 18 * 19 * 20 * 21 * 22 * 23 * 24 * 25 * 26 * 27 * 28 * 29 * 30 *

i..»*****.t...t*ii4.tHU**»**H»*Hi**HH.**4**t*.*tii44iH*«***HHn**HHt***H.4***4HlHH*tt»***H4i»Ht.*»*t**t^

Trees:

ABILAS 3 1 1 1

PICEAX 1 1 1 1 -'— — 1 3 2

PICENG 3 13

PINCON
PINFLE

1

CORSTO

CRADOU 3 Z

JUNCOM 1

LONINV j

LONUTA

POTFRU 1

PRUVIR 1

RHAALN — - '

RHAPUR 1 1

RIBAME

RIBLAC

RIBSET 3 '

ROSACI 1 1

ROSWOO 3 13 1 — 10 — — 13 13 — 20 10 — 3

RUBIDA 1

RUBPAR 40 27

SALBEB

SALBOO 2 1

SALGEY 2

SALIXX - — 17 3 3 4

SALLUT 1 3

SALSCO 3 3 7 2

SALTWE ,

SHECAN 3 1 x 1

SORSCO 1

SPIBET 7 13 ,

SYMALB 40 — 30 60 50 30 2 30 30 50 50 60 3 17

38

POPTRE 90 80 83 83 83 80 55 73 80 50 83 90 50 50

POPTRI — — — 1 1 1 1 2 10 10 20 23 30 20 30

PSEMEN 3

Shrubs :

AMEALN 2 3 3 13 2 — - 1 3 23 1 1 — - 1

BERREP — — — — 3 1 1 1 4 4 ___ 1

BETOCC -— 2 1 1

1
30

APPENDIX A. BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD COMMUNITIES

* Cover Synthesis (Stand) Table *

Community * 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3*

Site * 16 * 17 * 18 * 19 * 20 * 21 * 22 * 23 * 24 * 25 * 26 * 27 * 28 * 29 * 30 *
******************************************************** ^^

Graminoids :

AGROST

AGRREP ]_ .

AGRSCA

ALOALP 13

ALOPRA 1

BROCIL 1 3 3 2 2 1 1 — 1 3 x 1 ! 20 ___

BROINE 1

BROPUM 1

CALCAN 1 -_ 3 3 3 2

CALRUB 1 3 1 23

POAPAL

1

CALSTR
CARBRE

CAREXX 1 1 1

CARGEY 1

CARHOO

CARMIC -L

CARRAY

CARROS

CINLAT x

DACGLO 1

DESCES 1

ELYGLA 7 20 4 30 10 20 40 3 17 20 10 7 27 10 3

FESSUB 2 — — 3 10 3 — — 13 2 3 13 1 1

GLYSTR

JONBAL

MELSUB 13

PHLPRA 1 15 1 10 10 — 10 3 3 — '-— — --- 3

POAINT 1

1

POAPRA --- 20 — 10 10 1 — 3 — — ! 10

SCHPUR 1 — — 1 1 1 ___ 17 3 1 3

STIOCC

Forbs :

ACHMIL —-111 --- 1 1 !

ACTRUB 1 3

ALLCER 1 1

ALLIUM

ALLSCH

ANGARG 1 3 4 3 15 7 ' 15 10 1

ARABIS

ARAGLA 1

ARAHIR 1

1

APPENDIX A. BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD COMMUNITIES

Cover Synthesis (Stand) Table *

********************

Community * 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3*

Site * 16 * 17 * 18 * 19 * 20 * 21 * 22 * 23 * 24 * 25 * 26 * 27 * 28 * 29 * 30 *
*****************************************i*iiitit*ttiiitiliiitiiiiitiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii^ii^iiitiitiiitii^tii + titititiii^titii

Forbs Continued:

ARCMIN

ARELAT x

ARNCHA 1 1

ASTCON

ASTENG 1 2

ASTFOL 1 1 1 1

ASTLAE 2 1 3 2 4 1 3 1 3

DISTRA

1
1 — 4

CAMQUA 1 1

CAMROT 111

CASLOT 3

CASMIN 1

CASRHE

CASTIL - —

CERAST

CIRARV

CIRHOO

CIRSCA 1

CIRSIU

CIRVUL 1

DESPIN

DISHOO — — — 1 — 17 1 ___ ___ 1 ___ ___ 17 7 30

1

1

20

EPIANG 7 1

EPICIL ,

EPILOB

ERYGRA 20 30 — - 10 20 10

FRAVES x

FRAVIR 10 3 17 3 1 3 3 3 1 — 2 3 10

GALBOR --- 1 1 3 1 1 x ___ x 7 ___ !

GALTET

GALTRI 1 3

GERRIC 13 343 10 41422

GERVIS 5

1

GEUMAC 1 7 1113 3 1

HABDIL

HABSAC 1

HABUNA !

HACFLO 1 1 1 1 1 1 x

HERLAN 1 1 43 23

IRIMIS 1

LATOCH 1 1 1 2 1 1

LOMDIS

MEDSAT 1

MONFIS 1 1 1

27 3 20
3

APPENDIX A. BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD COMMUNITIES

* Cover Synthesis (Stand) Table *

Community * 3 * 3 * 3 * 3 * 3 * 3 * 3 * 3 * 3 * 3 * 3 * 3 * 3 * 3 * 3 *

S^le * 16 * 17 * 18 * 19 * 20 * 21 * 22 * 23 * 24 * 25 * 26 * 27 * 28 * 29 * 30 *
Forbs Continued:

OSMDEP 3 3 — — — i ___ 3 — 3 1 1 — 1 i

OSM0CC 3 3 30 20 4 23 30 1 30 1 7 13 20 27

PEDBRA 3 — — 1 — i 3 x 1 — , t I

PEDGRO 1 x J

PERGAI ~ 4

PETSAG

PLAMAJ x

POTENT .

POTGRA x

PRUVUL

PYRCHL

RANUNI 1 1

SANMAR

SENCRA

SENFOE 1 1 i

17

SENHYD

SENPSE 1 10 10

SENSER 1

SENTRI

SMIRAC

3 3 1 — "I

-- 4 1 — x

10 4 10 20 2 1

1 1 — — 1 1 — ___ i

SMISTE 1 1 1,3 11 3 2 1 1 1 i

SOLGIG . x

SONCHU 1

STELLA

STELON

STEOCC i

STRAMP

TAROFF 7 1 1 ! x x I "I ~"~ ~~

10 10 2 4 10 10 3

THAOCC 10 1 4 7 1 20 1
THAVEN

TRIREP 1 2

URTDIO x

VALSIT 1 2

VERVIR 3 — — 4 — 13 1 "I -II III H III ~7n ~~ """

VICAME 1 x j 1 i' J J

IS --- ::: 11 -1 -1 11 _1 ::: __i j_ ~}i 11 A A A

Ferns & Fern Allies

BOTVIR

EQUARV

EQUHYE 4 4

FERNXX '

50

30

30

30

20

68

50

50

60

60

10

APPENDIX A. BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD COMMUNITIES

* Cover Synthesis (Stand) Table *

Community * 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3*

Site * 31 * 32 * 33 * 34 * 35 * 36 * 37 *

Trees:

ABILAS 111

PICEAX 1 4

PICENG 1

PINCON •

PINFLE

POPTRE 50 30 30 30 20 75

POPTRI

PSEMEN

Shrubs :
AMEALN

BERREP

BETOCC :

CORSTO 1 3 11

CRADOU

JUNCOM

LONINV

LONUTA 1

POTFRU

PRUVIR 3

RHAALN 3

RHAPUR 1

RIBAME

RIBLAC

RIBSET 3 11

ROSACI

ROSWOO 3 12 3

RUBIDA

RUBPAR 20 27 2

SALBEB 1

SALBOO 1 1

SALGEY 1

SALIXX 13 3 3

SALLUT

SALSCO - —

SALTWE 3

SHECAN

SORSCO 1

SPIBET

SYMALB 1 1 17 30 — 10 23

APPENDIX A. BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD COMMUNITIES

* Cover Synthesis (Stand) Table *

Community * 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3*

Site * 31 * 32 * 33 * 34 * 35 * 36 * 37 *

Graminoids :

AGROST

AGRREP

AGRSCA 1 1

ALOALP 1

ALOPRA 1 1

BROCIL 3 1111

BROINE

BROPUM

CALCAN 3 1 2

CALRUB 10 1

CALSTR 2 — - 17

CARBRE

CAREXX 1

CARGEY - — ■

CARHOO

CARMIC

CARRAY 1

CARROS 1

CINLAT 1

DACGLO

DESCES

ELYGLA 10 3 3 13 3 20 23

FESSUB 3 23 4 10

GLYSTR

JUNBAL 1

MELSUB

PHLPRA 1 10 3 3

POAINT

POAPAL

POAPRA 17 1

SCHPUR 3 1

S'TIOCC

Forbs :

ACHMIL 1 1

ACTRUB 1 7 2 1 10 1

ALLCER '

ALLIUM

ALLSCH

ANGARG 1 7 4 3 1

ARABIS

ARAGLA

ARAHIR 1

APPENDIX A. BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD COMMUNITIES

* Cover Synthesis (Stand) Table *

Community * 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3*

Site * 31 * 32 * 33 * 34 * 35 * 36 * 37 *

Forbs Continued:

ARCMIN 2

ARELAT

ARNCHA 1 1 1

ASTCON !

ASTENG 3 1 2

ASTFOL 1 1 10

ASTLAE 3 13

CAMQUA 1

CAMROT

CASLOT 1

CASMIN 1

CASRHE

CASTIL

CERAST 1

CIRARV

CIRHOO

CIRSCA

CIRSIU

CIRVUL

DESPIN 1 1

DISHOO 25

DISTRA 1 1

EPIANG - — 1

EPICIL 1 1

EPILOB —

ERYGRA 1

FRAVES

FRAVIR 3 10 10 1 3

GALBOR 2 — - '3 111

GALTET

GALTRI 13 --- 1 --- 10

GERRIC 3 1 17 3 10 10 1

GERVIS ___

GEUMAC 1 1 3 1 2 20 1

HABDIL

HABSAC

HABUNA

HACFLO —

HERLAN 4 60 17 1 18 10

IRIMIS

LATOCH 1 2

20

LOMDIS
MEDSAT
MONFIS

3

APPENDIX A. BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD COMMUNITIES

* Cover Synthesis (Stand) Table *
************************************** ***************************************************************************************
Community * 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3* 3*

Site * 31 * 32 * 33 * 34 * 35 * 36 * 37 *

***********************************************************

*****************************************************************v

Forbs Continued:

OSMDEP 1 - — i

OSMOCC 27 30 1 13 4 20 30

PEDBRA 1 1 2 . 3 1

PEDGRO 1

PERGAI

PETSAG

PLAMAJ

POTENT

POTGRA

PRUVUL 1 1 1

PYRCHL — 1

RANUNI

SANMAR 10

SENCRA

SENFOE 1 1 3

SENHYD

SENPSE 1 1 — - 27

SENSER 1

SENTRI 1 3

SMIRAC 1

SMISTE 3 11111

SOLGIG

SONCHU

STELLA

STELON

STEOCC

STRAMP

TAROFF 1 1 1 i

THAOCC 10 1 1 3 1 10 10

THAVEN

TRIREP 1 1

URTDIO 1 3 3

VALSIT

VERVIR 1 3 1 2

VICAME 111 111

VIOCAN 1 30 7 20 1 30 30

ZIGELE

Ferns & Fern Allies:

BOTVIR

EQUARV 1 1 1 2 12

EQUHYE

FERNXX 1

APPENDIX B. BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD COMMUNITY TYPES:

Cover Constancy Table: Constancy (Average Abundance) [Range, Minimum - Maximum!

********************** ***********

Community * POPTRE/CORSTO
# Sites * N = 3

POPTRE/CALCAN
N = 11

POPTRE/OSMOCC
N = 23

ii»*Hitti**«i***n«iiHH*(***Ht»t4iit**tttlij,llt,jllutl,M1[

********************

Trees :

ABILAS

33

PICEAX

0

PICENG

67

PINCON

0

PINFLE

0

POPTRE

100

POPTRI

67

PSEMEN

0

AMEALN

67

BERREP

0

BETOCC

67

CORSTO

100

CRADOU

0

JUNCOM

0

LONINV

33

LONUTA

0

POTFRU

0

PRUVIR

33

RHAALN

0

RHAPUR

0

RIBAME

0

RIBLAC

33

RIBSET

67

ROSACI

0

ROSWOO

100

RUB I DA

0

RUBPAR

33

SALBEB

67

SALBOO

33

SALGEY

0

SALIXX

33

SALLUT

0

SALSCO

0

SALTWE

0

SHECAN

0

SORSCO ■

0

SPIBET

0

SYMALB

100

1)

0)

1)

0)

0)

42)

70)

0)

2)
0)
3)

28)
0)
0)

12)
0)
0)
3)
0)
0)
0)

1)

3)
0)
3)
0)
1)
3)
2)
0)
1)
0)
0)
0)
0)
0)
0)
10)

1

0

1

0

0

25

70

0

1
0
3
5
0
0
12
0
0
3
0
0
0
1
3
0
2
0
1
3
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
7

1]

0]

1]

0]

0]

70]

70]

0]

3]
0]
3]

60]
0]
0]

12]
0]
0]
3]
0]
0]
0]

1]

3]

0]
3]
0]
1]
3]
2]
0]
1]
0]
0]
0]
0]
0]
0]
13]

36

( 1) [

27

( 5) [

9

( 1) [

9

(10) [

0

( 0) [

100

(65) [

73

(38) [

0

( 0) [

Shrubs:

73

( 3) [

0

( 0) [

0

( 0) [

18

( 2) [

0

( 0) [

0

( 0) [

0

( 0) [

9

( 1) [

0

( 0) [

9

( 1) [

9

( 1) [

0

( 0) [

27

( 2) [

0

( 0) [

27

( 2) [

0

( 0) [

91

( 4) [

18

( 2) [

0

( 0) [

36

( 6) [

9

( 2) [

0

( 0) [

27

2) [

0

0) [

18

2) [

9

1) [

0

0) t

0

0) [

0

0) [

73

8) [

1

1
1

10

0

40

13
0

1]
10]

1]
10]

0]
90]
60]

0]

4]
0]
0]
3]
0]
0]
0]
1]
0]

1]
1]

0]
3]
0]
3]
0]

10]
3]
0]

10]
2]
0]
3]
0]
2]
1]
0]
0]
0]

28]

30

43

13

0

4

100

74

4

70

30

13

39
4
9
4
4
4
9
4

13
4
0

17
9

65
4

26
4

17
9

35
9

22
4

17
9

17

91

1)
2)
6)
0)
1)
61)
26)
3)

4)
2)
1)
2)
3)
1)
1)
1)
1)
2)
3)
1)
1)
0)
2)
1)
7)
1)

24)
1)
1)
2)
4)
2)
3)
3)
2)
1)
6)

28)

1 -

3]

1 -

4]

1 -

13]

0 -

0]

1 -

1]

9 -

90]

1 -

68]

3 -

3]

1 - 23]

1 -
1 -
1 -
3 -
1 -
1 -
1 -
1 -
1 -
3 -
1 -
1 -

0 -

1 -
1 -

1 - 20]
1-1]

2 - 40]
1 - 1]
1 - 2]
1 " 2]
1 - 17]

4]
2]
3]
3]

1]

1]
1]
1]
3]
3]
1]
1]
0]
3]
1]

1 -

1 -

3 -

1 -

1 -

1 -

3]
7]
3)
3]
1]
13]
63]

******

******

APPENDIX B. BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD COMMUNITY TYPES:

Cover Constancy Table: Constancy (Average Abundance) [Range, Minimum - Maximum 1
********************* **************************************ti,*iit**t*t+*******i***tt + *ttttiiit+ttt^iitti:iitiiitirittl

Community * POPTRE/CORSTO * POPTRE/CALCAN * POPTRE/OSMOCC *
# Sites * n=3 * N = 11 * N = 23 *
***********************************************************************tt*i**i,i,iri,icici!itiri,:iricti!iri:iritiriiiit + iri:i!iriti!i;i!ii^

Graminoids :

AGROST

0

AGRREP

0

AGRSCA

0

ALOALP

33

ALOPRA

33

BROCIL

67

BROINE

0

BROPUM

0

CALCAN

33

CALRUB

0

CALSTR

0

CARBRE

0

CAREXX

33

CARGEY

0

CARHOO

0

CARMIC

0

CARRAY

0

CARROS

0

CINLAT

0

DACGLO

0

DESCES

0

ELYGLA

100

FESSUB

67

GLYSTR

0

JUNBAL

0

MELSUB

0

PHLPRA

67

POAINT

0

POAPAL

0

POAPRA

0

SCHPDR

0

STIOCC

0

ACHMIL

0

ACTRUB

33

ALLCER

0

ALLIUM

33

ALLSCH

0

ANGARG

33

ARAB IS

33

ARAGLA

0

ARAHIR

0

0)
0)
0)

1)
1)

2)
0)
0)
10)
0)
0)
0)

1)

0)
0)
0)
0)
0)
0)
0)
0)

14)

6)
0)
0)
0)

1)

0)
0)
0)
0)
0)

0)
8)
0)

1)

0)
40)
1)
0)
0)

0
0
0

1
1
1

0
0
10
0
0
0

1

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3

1

0
0
0

1

0
0

0
0
0

0]
0]
0]

1]
1]

3]
0]
0]
10]
0]
0]
0]

1]

0]
0]
0]
0]

0]
0]

0]
0]
30]
10]
0]
0]
0]

1]

0]

0]

0]

0].

0]

0 -

0]

1 -

1]

0 -

0]

40 -

40]

1 -

1]

0 -

0]

0 -

0]

0

( 0) [

9

( 1) [

45

( 1) [

45

(18) [

45

( 8) [

55

( 1) [

9

( 5) [

0

( 0) [

55

(28) [

0

( 0) [

36

(35) [

18

( 1) [

0

( 0) [

0

( 0) [

27

( 1) [

18

1) [

9

1) [

9

1) [

0

0) [

0

0) [

0

0) [

100

15) [

55

ID [

9

1) [

0

0) [

0

0) [

91

ID [

9

1) [

9

20) [.

64

6) [

27

2) [

0 (

0) [

Fort

s:

36 {

1) [

27 (

3) [

0 (

0) [

9 (

1) [

9 (

1) [

100 (

14) [

0 (

0) [

0 (

0) [

0 (

0) [

0

1
1
1

1
1

5

0

10

0

1
1

0
0

1
1
1

1

0
0
0
3
1
1
0
0

1
1

20
1
1
0

0]

1]
1]

28]
20]

3]
5]
0]

60]
0]

70]
1]
0]
0]

1]
1]
1]
1]

0]
0]

0]

40]

27]

1]

0]

0]

30]

1]

20]

10]

3]

0]

1]
7]
0]
1]
1]
33]
0]
0]
0]

4
4
9
9

17

78

4

4

35

26

13

0

17

4

0

4

9

4

9

4

4

100

65

0

4

4

61

4

4

48

48

4

39

57

9

0
0

91
0
4

13

1)
1)
1)
7)
1)
3)
1)
1)
2)
7)
7)
0)
1)
1)
0)
1)
1)
1)
1)
1)
1)

14)
6)
0)
1)

13)
6)
1)
1)
7)
3)
1)

1)
3)

1)
0)
0)
5)
0)
1)
1)

1 -

1]

1 -

1]

1 -

1]

1 -

13]

1 -

1]

1 -

20]

1 -

1]

1 -

1]

1 -

3]

1 -

23]

1 -

17]

0 -

0]

1 -

1]

1 -

1]

0 -

0]

1 -

1]

1 -

1]

1 -

1]

1 -

1]

1 -

1]

1 -

1]

3 -

40]

1 -

23]

0 -

0]

1 -

1]

3 -

13]

1 -

15]

1 -

1]

1 -

1]

1 -

20]

1 -

17]

1 -

1]

1 -

1]

1 -

10]

1 -

1]

0 -

0]

0 -

0]

1 -

15]

0 -

0]

1 -

1]

1 -

1]

APPENDIX B. BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD COMMUNITY TYPES:

Cover Constancy Table: Constancy (Average Abundance) [Range, Minimum - Maximuml

Community * POPTRE/CORSTO

# Sites * N = 3 *

**********************
POPTRE/CALCAN * POPTRE/OSMOCC *
N = 11 * N = 23 *
*************************.************iititit]tijtJtti)r

Forbs Continued:

ARCMIN

ARELAT

ARNCHA

ASTCON

ASTENG

ASTFOL

ASTLAE

CAMQUA

CAMROT

CASLUT

CASMIN

CASRHE

CASTIL

CERAST

CIRARV

CIRHOO

CIRSCA

CIRSIU

CIRVUL

DESPIN

DISHOO

DISTRA

EPIANG

EPICIL

EPILOB

ERYGRA

FRAVES

FRAVIR

GALBOR

GALTET

GALTRI

GERRIC

GERVIS

GEUMAC

HABDIL

HABSAC

HABUNA

HACFLO

HERLAN

IRIMIS

LATOCH

LOMDIS

MEDSAT

0

( 0)

0

! 0)

0

( 0)

33

( 1)

33

( 1)

67

( 6)

0

( 0)

33

( 1)

67

( 1)

0

( 0)

0

( 0)

0

( 0)

33

( 1)

0

( 0)

33

( 1)

0

( 0)

0

( 0)

0

0)

0

0)

0

0)

33

4)

33

1)

33

1)

0

0)

33

1)

0

0)

0

0)

67

1)

33

3)

0

0)

33

3)

100 (

7)

33 (

1)

67 (

3)

33 (

1)

0 (

0)

0 (

0)

33 (

1)

67 (

23)

0 (

0)

0 (

0)

0 (

0)

0 (

0)

[ o -

0]

0

( 0)

[ o -

0]

4

( 2)

[ 2 -

2]

[ o -

0]

0

( 0)

[ o -

0]

4

{ 1)

[ 1 -

1]

[ o -

0]

82

( 2)

[ 1 -

4]

22

( 1)

[ 1 -

1]

[ 1 -

1]

0

( 0)

[ 0 -

0]

9

( 1)

[ 1 -

1]

[ 1 -

1]

27

( 1)

t 1 -

2]

30

( 2)

[ 1 -

4]

[ 1 -

10]

36

( 4)

[ 1 -

13]

35

( 2)

[ 1 -

10]

[ o -

0]

73

( 5)

[ 2 -

13]

61

( 3)

[ 1 -

7]

[ 1 -

1]

36

( 2)

[ 1 -

4]

17

( 1)

[ 1 -

1]

[ 1 -

1]

27

( 1)

[ 1 -

1]

17

( 1)

; i -

1]

[ o -

0]

18

( 1)

[ 1 -

1]

9

( 2)

; l -

3]

[ o -

0]

9

( 1)

[ 1 -

1]

22

( 1)

: i -

1]

[ o -

0]

9

( 1)

[ 1 -

1]

0

( 0)

[ o -

0]

[ 1 -

1]

9

( 1)

[ 1 -

1]

0

< 0)

[ o -

0]

[ o -

0]

0

( 0)

[ 0 -

0]

4

( 1)

[ 1 -

1]

[ 1 -

1]

0

( 0)

[ 0 -

0]

0

( 0)

: o -

0]

: o -

0]

0

( 0)

[ o -

0]

4

( 1)

: i -

1]

: o -

0]

0

( 0)

t o -

0]

4

1)

[ i -

1]

[ o -

0]

9

I 1)

[ 1 -

1]

0

0)

[ o -

0]

[ o -

0]

0

0)

' 0 -

0]

4

1)

1 -

1]

[ o -

0]

0

0)

0 -

0]

9

1)

1 -

1]

4 -

i]

9

10)

10 -

10]

35

12)

1 -

30]

1 -

1]

0

0)

0 -

0]

22

1)

1 -

1]

1 -

1]

18

1)

1 -

1]

17

3)

1 -

7]

0 -

0]

64

1)

1 -

2]

9

1)

1 -

1]

1 -

1]

9

1)

1 -

1]

0

0)

0 -

0]

0 -

0]

18

8)

3 -

13]

35

16)

1 -

30]

0 -

0]

9

1)

1 -

U

4

1)

1 -

1]

1 -

1]

91

8)

1 -

20]

78'

5)

1 -

17]

3 -

3]

82

2)

1 -

4]

61 (

2) 1

1 -

7]

0 -

0]

9

1)

1 -

1]

0 (

0) I

0 -

0]

3 -

3]

36

1)

1 -

1]

30 (

5) [

1 -

13]

3 -

10]

100 (

3) [

1 -

10]

87 (

4) [

1 -

17]

1 -

1)

0 (

0) I

0 -

0]

9 (

3) [

1 -

5]

3 -

3]

91 (

5) [

1 -

13]

74 (

3) [

1 -

20]

1 -

1]

9 (

1) [

1 -

1]

0 (

0) [

0 -

0]

0 -

0]

0 (

0) [

0 -

0]

4 (

1) [

1 -

1]

0 -

0]

9 (

1) [

1 -

1]

4 (

1) [

1 -

1]

1 -

1]

27 (

1) [

1 -

1]

43 (

1) [

1 -

1]

20 -

25]

55 (

8) [

1 -

40]

61 (

17) [

1 -

60]

0 -

0)

0 (

0) [

0 -

0]

4 (

1) [

1 -

1]

0 -

0]

64 (

1) [

1 -

3]

48 (

2) [

1 -

3]

0 -

0]

0 (

0) [

0 -

0]

4 (

3) [

3 -

3]

0 -

0]

0 (

0) [

0 -

0]

4 (

1) [

1 -

1]

**********

*********

APPENDIX B.BLACKFEET INDIAN RESERVATION TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD COMMUNITY TYPES'

••■••••"••••••-••^

Community * POPTRE/CORSTO * POPTRE/CALCAN * POPTRE/OSMOCC

# Sites * N=3 * N = 11 * N = 91 *

*************

MONFIS

OSMDEP

OSMOCC

PEDBRA

PEDGRO

PERGAI

PETSAG

PLAMAJ

POTENT

POTGRA

PRUVUL

PYRCHL

RANUNI

SANMAR

SENCRA

SENFOE

SENHYD

SENPSE

SEMSER

SENTRI

SMIRAC

SMISTE

SOLGIG

SONCHU

STELLA

STELON

STEOCC

STRAMP

TAROFF

THAOCC

THAVEN

TRIREP

URTDIO

VALSIT

VERVIR

VI CAME

VIOCAN

ZIGELE

BOTVIR
EQUARV
EQUHYE
FERNXX

33

33
100
33
0
0
33
0
33
0
100
33
33
100
0
0
33
67
33
33
0
67
0
0
0
0
0
33
33
100
0
0
33
0
33
67
100
0

( 0)

(

( 1)

(13)
(20)
( 2)
0
0)
( 2)
( 0)
( 1)
( 0)
( 2)
( 1)
( 1)
(11)
( 0)
( 0)
( 3)
( 7)
( 1)
( 1)
( 0)
( 2)
( 0)
( 0)
( 0)
( 0)
( 0)

Forbs Continued:

( 3)
(11)
( 0)
( 0)
( 3)
( 0)
( 4)
( 1)
( 5)
( 0)

0 ( 0)

33 ( 3)

0 ( 0)

0 ( 0)

1 -
13 -

1 -

2 -
0 -
0 -
2 -

0 -

1 -

0 -

1 -
1 -
1 -

1!
13]
50]
2]
0)
0]
2]
0]
1]
0]
3]
1]
1]

1 - 30)
0-0]

0 -
3 -
3 -

1 -
1 -

0 -

1 -
0 -
0 -
0 -
0 -
0 -
5 -

3 -

4 -
0 -
0 -

3 -

0 -

4 -

1 -
1 -

0]

3]
1C]
1]
1]
0]
3]
0]
0]
0]
0]
0]
5]
3]
20]
0]
0]
3]
0]
4]
1]
10]

0-0]

Ferns
0-0]
3 - 3]
0-0]
0-0]

0

( 0) [

18

( 1) [

73

(11) [

64

( 2) [

18

( 1) [

9

( 3) [

9

( 1) [

0

( 0) [

0

( 0) [

9

( 1) [

9

( 1) [

27

( 1) [

18

( 1) t

45

( 6) [

0

( 0) [

82

( 8) [

0

( 0) [

55

(15) [

9

( 1) [

9

( 1) t

0

( 0) [

100

( 2) [

9

( 1) [

0

( 0) [

9

1) [

9

1) [

0

0) [

0

0) [

64

1) [

91

2) [

9

1) [

18

1) [

27 (

1) I

0 (

0) [

27 (

3) (

55 (

1) [

64 (

8) [

9 (

1) [

Fern Alii

9 (

1) [

45 (

2) [

9 (

1) [

0 (

0) [

0 -

0]

17

( 1)

[ 1 -

1)

1 -

1]

48

( 2)

[ 1 -

3]

1 -

20]

100

(15)

[ 1 -

30]

1 -

3]

61

( 2)

t 1 -

3]

1 -

1]

17

( 2)

[ 1 -

4]

3 -

3]

4

( 1)

[ 1 -

1]

1 -

1]

0

( 0)

[ 0 -

0]

0 -

0]

4

( 1)

[ 1 -

1]

0 -

0]

0

( 0)

[ o -

0]

1 -

1]

4

( 1)

[ 1 -

1]

1 -

1]

22

( 1)

[ 1 -

1]

1 -

1]

9

( 1)

[ 1 -

1]

1 -

1]

17

( 1)

[ 1 -

1]

1 -

13]

26

( 6)

[ 1 -

17]

0 -

0]

4

( 1)

: i -

1]

1 -

20]

48

( 1)

: i -

4]

0 -

0]

0

( .0)

: o -

0]

1 -

40]

57

( 8)

: i -

27]

1 -

1]

9

( 1)

i -

1]

1 -

1]

13

( 2)

[ i -

3]

0 -

0]

26

( 1)

i -

1]

1 -

3]

87

( 1)

i -

3]

1 -

1]

4

( 1)

i -

1]

0 -

0]

4

( 1)

i -

1]

1 -

1]

0

( 0)

o -

0]

1 -

1]

0

( 0)

o -

0]

0 -

0]

4

( 1)

i -

1]

0 -

0]

4

( 1) I

i -

1]

1 -

3]

65

( 2) [

i -

7]

1 -

3]

91

( 6) [

i -

20]

1 -

1]

0

( 0) [

0 -

0]

1 -

1]

17

( 1) [

1 -

2]

1 -

2]

30

2) [

1 -

3]

0 -

0]

4

1) [

1 -

1]

1 -

41

52

4) [

1 -

17]

1 -

3]

57

1) [

1 -

1]

1 -

40]

91

12) [

1 -

30]

1 -

ss :

1]

0

0) [

0 -

0]

l -

1]

0

0) [

0 -

0]

l -

4]

39

2) [

1 -

4]

i -

1]

0 (

0) (

0 -

0]

0 -

0]

4 (

1) [

1 -

1]

APPENDIX C. Scatterplots of stem density by 2 inch size classes without regard to species.
(Separate plots for live and dead; plots arranged in ascending order of stand number, five stands
per scatterplot; see Appendix D for breakdown of stem density by species, size classes, and live
versus dead)

Live Stem Desity; Stands 17, 18, 19, 20, & 21

6 8 10 12

dbh (size class midpoints, inches)

14

16

18

Dead Stem Density: Stands 17, 18, 19, 20, 21

80

60 -

o

re

0)

40 -
20 .

0

4 6 8 10

dbh (size class midpoints, inches)

APPENDIX C (Continued)

Live Stem Density; Stands 23, 24, 25, 26, 27

Stand Number

6.8 10 12 14

dbh (size class midpoints, inches)

16

18

20

Live Stem Density; Stands 23, 24, 25, 26, 27

4 6 8 10

dbh (size class midpoints, inches)

12

14

-+-23
-■-24
-&— 25
-K-26

-*-27

APPENDIX C (Continued)

Live Stem Density; Stands 28, 29, 30, 31, 32

6 8 10 12 14

dbh (size class midpoints, inches)

16

18

20

o

E

Dead Stem Density; Stands 28, 29, 30, 31, 32

8 10 12

dbh (size class midpoints, inches)

APPENDIX C (Continued)
Live Stem Density; Stand 33, 34, 35, 36, 37

6 8 10 12 14

dbh (size class midpoints, inches)

16

18

20

Dead Stem Density; Stands 33, 34, 35, 36, 37

4 6 8 10 12 14

dbh (size class midpoints, inches)

16

18

APPENDIX C (Continued)

o

Live Stem Density; Stands 38, 39, 40, 41, 42

6 8 10 12 14

dbh (size class midpoints, inches)

16

18

20

Dead Stem Density; Stands 38, 39, 40, 41, 42

4 6 8 10 12 14 16

dbh (size class midpoints, inches)

APPENDIX C (Continued)

Live Stem Density; Stands 43, 44, 46, 47, 48

6 8 10 12 14 16 18

dbh (size class midpoint, inches)

20

Dead Stem Density; Stand 43, 44, 46, 47, 48

6 8 10 12 14

dbh (size class midpoints, inches)

APPENDIX C (Continued)

o

■5
15

E

&

Live Stem Density; Stands 50, 51

8 10 12

dbh (size class midpoint, inches)

50

51

14

16

o
re

E

Dead Stem Density; Stands 50, 51

6 8 10 12

dbh (size class midpoint, inches)

14

H

16

APPENDIX D (continued) TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD TREE POPULATIONS BY SITE AND SPECIES DIAMETER CLASSE

DIAMETER CLASSES BY 1 AND 2 INCH INCREMENTS (CELL VALUES, NUMBER OF TREES PER ACRE)

/ >l-2 / >2-4 / >4-6 / >6-8 / >8-10 / >10-12 / >12-14 / >14-16 / >16

>ITE

TA1

BC2

or

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

038L"

20

80

330

190

70

10

0

038D

50

170

40

0

039L

140

210

120

80

60

20

10

039D

60

40

0

0

10

0

040L

50

0

10

60

440

270

40

0

040D

10

110

120

10

0

041L

0

30

190

10

260

40

140

10

30

0

04ID

20

0

60

0

10

0

30

0

0

0

0

10

042L

0

10

50

30

50

0

10

70

50

0

10

60

10

042D

30

20

0

043L

20

100

230

30

40

0

10

0

0

0

10

043D

10

20

140

10

10

0

0

0

20

044L

280

70

510

100

0

130

0

30

0

0

0

40

0

60

0

10

0

10

044D

40

0

0

60

0

10

0

0

0

10

0

0

0

0

0

10

045L

NI4

045D

NI

046L

110

50

330

60

90

40

10

50

0

70

10

60

10

046D

110

20

70

40

0

0

10

047L

180

200

60

40

10

20

40

40

10

047D

0

20

0

10

0

10

20

0

0

10

-, live trees; D, dead trees

A = trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides)

tC = black Cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa)

)T = other species, could include Engelmann spruce x white spruce hybrids (Picea engelmannii x P. glauca), subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa), Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and lodgepole pine (Pimis contorta)

•II = not inventoried

SITE

SUE
NO

0171.'

02 1 D

022D

023D

024D

02 3D

02ol.

0261)

027D

APPENDIX D. TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD TREE POPULATIONS BY SITE AND SPECIES DIAMETER CLASSES

DIAMETER CLASSES BY 1 AND 2 INCH INCREMENTS (CELL VALUES, NUMBER TREES PER ACRE,

>4"6 £**_ >»-l° >10-I2 / >12-I4 / >I4-I6 / >|6

SO

1 30

NI

«0

160

SI)

10

OT'

20

BL-

OT

10

70

OT

0

30

TA

DC

160

60

120

10

200

90

50

0

110

0

OT

30

10

BC

50

10

OT

0

TA

BC

SO

20

30

20

' L, live trees, D, dead Irees

| I A = ucmbling aspen tfopulus iremuloides) ' BC - black Cottonwood {Popuhu Iricbocarpa)

TA

APPENDIX D (continued). TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD TREE POPULATIONS BY SITE AND SPECIES DIAMETER CLASSES

DIAMETER CLASSES BY 1 AND 2 INCH INCREMENTS (CELL VALUES, NUMBER OF TREES PER ACRE)

/

1-2

/

>2-4

/

>4-6

/

>6-8

/

>8-10

/

>

10-12

/

>

2-14

/

>14-I6

/

>

16

j

site

NO

1 TA'

1 I3C:

1 or

1 TA

BC

1 01

1 TA

BC

OT

TA

1 BC

1 OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

1 OT

TA

1 BC

1 OT

1 1 A

1 BC

1 OT

TA II BC

II','

m:

150

390

30

40

90

110

10

(1281)

10

20

0

029L

10

20

10

60

140

170

0

029D

40

0

60

80

0

10

0

030L

5U

210

50

10

10

20

10

0

0

10

U30D

30

60

50

0

10

30

10

0

10

MIL

110

90

70

110

160

30

0

(HID

80

40

70

50

0

tan.

180

60

210

40

190

30

260

10

120

D32D

50

10

40

0

20

0

0

0

(1331.

10

20

20

10

10

330

0

190

0

30

20

0

10

U33D

10

0

60

0

140

0

034L

110

120

370

130

034D

10

60

140

20

035L

190

430

70

90

70

0

035D

120

70

50

40

20

30

0361.

230

140

210

70

30

20

10

40

80

50

10

40

0

50

0

40

036D

0

0

10

30

30

20

0

10

0

30

0

30

0

10

0371.

100

70

10

120

40

30

20

70

20

60

0

10

10

0

50

0

40

0

40

037D
L, live lr

50
ees; D, de

60
ad trees

10

0

10

0

0

0

1 TA « Ireinbling aspen {Populus iremuloides)
'■ BC = black cotionwood {Poputus trichocarpa)

1 OT = other species, could include Engeiniann spruce x white spruce hybrids (Picea en&lmatmii x P. glauca), subaipine fir [Abies lasiocarpa). Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and lodeepol

N = nil! invr-nlnrn-d ° * & "

Nl * noi inventoried

e pine {Pinus coniorta)

SITE

NO

Al PENDIX D (continued) TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD TREE POPULATIONS BY SITE AND SPECIES DIAMETER CLASSES

DIAMETER CLASSES BY 1 AND 2 INCH INCREMENTS (CELL VALUES, NUMBER OF TREES PER ACRE)

— 1 ?£*- >4"6 >6"8 >8-10 >I0-12 / >12-I4 / >14-I6 / >16

0381/

0J8U

0.191.

0391)

040L

040D

0411.

04 ID

0421.

04 2D

04JL

043D

044L

04 4 D

0451

045D

04bl.

046D

0471.

047D

140

60

20

40

Nl'

110

110

180

20

Be or

10

TA

120

or

120

190

50

230

90

40

20

0

10

TA

270

BC

20

TA

60

40

OT

TA

20

10

BC

or

TA

or

60

TA

• I., \\\< Irees; D, dead uees

1 1 A = trembling aspen [Popultis tremuioitles)

■ BC - black cotloimood (Poputus Incltocarpa)

' NT :^^rM inC'UdC En8dmmm SPrUCC X Wh"C SPtUCe hybridS {P'Cm I"*"™""" * "■ *""»>■ SUb^ine * W* '"'«■ W-<ir <"»*■ — «*0 -d lodscHc pine (N. _,

01

APPENDIX D (continued). TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD TREE POPULATIONS BY SITE AND SPECIES DIAMETER CLASSES

DIAMETER CLASSES BY 1 AND 2 INCH INCREMENTS (CELL VALUES, NUMBER OF TRFES PER ACRE)
>l'2 ' >2A ' >4"6 ' >6-8 / >8-10 / >10-12 / >12-14 / >I4-I6 1

SITE

NO

IA'

BC-' OT'

TA

uc or

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT II TA 1 BC

OT

TA

BC

| OT

1 TA

| BC

| or

| TA I BC || Oi

0481

yo

150

40

150

10

30

30

20

80

30

10

30

20

0

0

0

20

04KI)

0

30

0

60

0

40

30

10

0

0

049L

Nl4

0490

Nl

0501.

30

120

100

180

10

70

160

20

0

60

0

50

50

20

30

0

0

050D

20

40

10

40

0

10

0

10

05IL

70

70

10

0

0

10

10

0

100

0

40

0

0

0

051D

0

0

0

20

0

40

20

0

50

0

40

0

0

0

052L

Nl

052D

Nl

0531.

Nl

0531)

Nl

]

I-, live trees, U, dead trees

TA = Irenibling aspen {Hoputus iremuloUes)

BC - black eollorusood {Populus trichocurpa)

N^7o?tavSemo"edCOU'd "'""* ^C[mm" *** ' ** *"" W"M* ^ ^'"B""'" X * *'""""■ "*'"** * «**■ '"^"^ ^"^^ V***** memiesii) and lodgepole pine {P,nUS con,or,a)

1

APPENDIX A.

BLACK-FEET INDIAN RESERVATION TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD

PLANT COMMUNITIES

Index for associating particular ECODATA plot numbers with their position in the

Cover Synthesis (Stand) Table

l.POPTRE/CORSTO:
1 . NHMTECBR96SC00 17 2. NHMTECBR96SC0022 3 . NHMTECBR96SC00 1 9

2. POPTRE/CALCAN:

4. NHMTECBR96SC0039 5. NHMTECBR96SC0042 6. NHMTECBR96SC0024

7.NHMTECBR96SC0051 8. NHMTECBR96SC0046 9.NHMTECBR96SC0021

10. NHMTECBR96SC0023 1 1. NHMTECBR96SC0036 12. NHMTECBR96SC0052

13. NHMTECBR96SC0025 14. NHMTECBR96SC0048

3. POPTRE/OSMOCC:
15. NHMTECBR96SC0035
18. NHMTECBR96SC0028
21. NHMTECBR96SC0029
24. NHMTECBR96SC0041
27. NHMTECBR96SC0033
30. NHMTECBR96SC0043
33. NHMTECBR96SC0047
35. NHMTECBR96SC0050

16. NHMTECBR96SC0040
19. NHMTECBR96SC0038
22. NHMTECBR96SC0053
25. NHMTECBR96SC0030
28. NHMTECBR96SC0027
3 1 . NHMTECBR96SC0044
34. NHMTECBR96SC0037
36. NHMTECBR96SC0018

17. NHMTECBR96SC0045
20. NHMTECBR96SC0034
23. NHMTECBR96SC0031
26. NHMTECBR96SC0032
29. NHMTECBR96SC0049
32. NHMTECBR96SC0026

37. NHMTECBR96SC0020

APPENDIX D (continued). TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD TREE POPULATIONS BY SITE AND SPECIES DIAMETER CLASSI

DIAMETER CLASSES BY 1 AND 2 INCH INCREMENTS (CELL VALUES, NUMBER OF TREES PER ACRE)
/ >l-2 / >2-4 / >4-6 / >6-8 / >8-10 / >10-12 / >12-14 / >14-16 / >16

SITE

NO.

TA1

BC2

or

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

. 048L

90

150

40

150

10

30

30

20

80

30

10

30

20

0

0

0

20

048D

0

30

0

60

0

40

30

10

0

0

049L

NI4

049D

NI

OSOL

30

120

100

180

10

70

160

20

0

60

0

50

50

20

30

0

0

050D

20

40

10

40

0

10

0

10

05 1L

70

70

10

0

0

10

10

0

100

0

40

0

0

0

051D

0

0

0

20

0

40

20

0

50

0

40

0

0

0

052L

NI

052D

NI

053L

NI

053D

NI

.., live trees; D, dead trees

rA = trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides)

iC = black Cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa)

OT = other species, could include Engelmann spruce x white spruce hybrids {Picea engelmannii x P. glauca), subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa), Douglas-fir (Pseudolsuga menziesii) and lodgepole pine (Pinas contorla)

MI = not inventoried

APPENDIX D (continued). TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD TREE POPULATIONS BY SITE AND SPECIES DIAMETER CLASSES

DIAMETER CLASSES BY 1 AND 2 INCH INCREMENTS (CELL VALUES, NUMBER OF TREES PER ACRE)
>l-2 / >2-4 / >4-6 / >6-8 / >8-10 / >10-12 / >12-14 / >14-16 >16

TA'

BC2

ov

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

150

390

30

40

90

110

10

10

20

0

10

20

10

60

140

170

0

40

0

60

80

0

10

0

50

210

50

10

10

20

10

0

0

10

30

60

50

0

10

30

10

0

10

110

90

70

110

160

30

0

80

40

70

50

0

180

60

210

40

190

30

260

10

120

50

10

40

0

20

0

0

0

10

20

20

10

10

330

0

190

0

30

20

0

10

10

0

60

0

140

0

110

120

370

130

10

60

140

20

190

430

70

90

70

0

120

70

50

40

20

30

230

140

210

70

30

20

10

40

80

50

10

40

0

50

0

40

0

0

10

30

30

20

0

10

0

30

0

30

0

10

100

70

10

120

40

30

20

70

20

60

0

10

10

0

50

0

40

0

40

50

60

10

0

10

0

0

0

trees; D, dead trees

rembling aspen (Populus tremuloides)

}lack cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa)

)ther species, could include Engelmann spruce x white spruce hybrids (Picea engelmannii x P. glauca), subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa), Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and lodgepole pine (Pima conlorla)

lot inventoried

APPENDIX D. TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD TREE POPULATIONS BY SITE AND SPECIES DIAMETER CLASSES

DIAMETER CLASSES BY 1 AND 2 INCH INCREMENTS (CELL VALUES, NUMBER TREES PER ACRE)

SITE /

>l-2

/

>2-4

/

>4-6

/

>6-8

/

>8-10

/

>10-12

/

>12-14

/

>

14-16

/

>16

SITE
NO.

TA1

BC2

or

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

017L"

0

10

70

160

100

0

017D

0

10

30

10

0

0

0I8L

50

100

60

30

10

50

10

018D

!0

0

0

0

10

0

019L

0

40

30

30

100

30

40

0

10

0

0

20

0

50

10

20

019D

0

30

10

20

80

0

0

0

0

0

0

10

0

0

020L

130

0

40

180

200

40

0

020D

0

0

70

0

0

0

021L

30

40

50

50

90

40

0

021D

0

0

0

20

0

0

022L

NI4

022D

NI

023L

70

20

50

20

30

10

30

40

90

90

40

40

40

20

0

0

023D

0

10

0

0

0

10

0

0

024L

420

170

0

40

50

10

024D

0

0

20

90

50

0

025L

160

40

70

100

0

50

20

40

80

30

20

0

10

0

0

0

025D

10

0

0

20

0

0

0

10

0

0

10

0

0

0

026L

80

0

80

80

20

50

10

60

50

30

20

0

0

30

0

0

0

20

026D

0

0

0

20

0

20

0

10

0

0

027L

20

70

100

90

30

60

0

120

110

10

50

0

027D

10

20

10

60

0

30

0

10

0

0

10

0

L, live trees; D, dead trees
1 TA = trembling aspen (Populus Irenmloicles) 2 BC =
' OT = oilier species, could include l-ngelmann spruce
4 NI = not inventoried

black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa)

x while spruce hybrids (Picea engelmannii x P. glauca), subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa), Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and lodgepole pine (Pinus conlorta)

APPENDIX D. TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD TREE POPULATIONS BY SITE AND SPECIES DIAMETER CLASSES

DIAMETER CLASSES BY 1 AND 2 INCH INCREMENTS (CELL VALUES, NUMBER TREES PER ACRE)

SITE

^1-2

/

^2-4

/

>4-6

/

>6-8

/

>8-l0

/

>

10-12

/

>

12-14

/

->I4-16

/

'16

SI 1 1

TA'

lit"

JOT"

TA

1 nc || or || TA || BC || OT 1 TA

I BC 1 OT || TA || BC || OT | TA

| BC

1 OT | TA

| BC 1 OT || TA | HC || 01

1 TA 1 m 1 '" 1

on •

0

10

70

160

100

0

i'rn

0

10

30

10

0

0

018L

50

100

60

30

10

50

10

018D

10

0

0

0

10

0

0]QL

0

40

30

30

100

30

40

0

10

0

0

20

0

50

10

20

nion

0

30

10

20

80

0

0

0

0

0

0

10

0

0

(i:oi_

138

0

40

180

200

40

0

omd

0

0

70

0

0

0

h:ii

30

40

50

50

90

40

0

02 1 [1

0

0

0

20

0

0

0221.

Nl'

o::n

Nl

o:m

70

20

50

20

30

10

30

40

90

90

40

40

40

20

0

0

02.»r>

0

10

0

0

0

10

0

0

o:4[.

■420

170

0

40

50

10

024[>

0

0

20

90

50

0

0251

160

40

70

100

0

50

20

40

80

30

20

0

10

0

0

0

112 JO

10

0

0

20

0

0

0

10

0

0

10

0

0

0

KM

80

0

80

80

20

50

10

60

50

30

20

0

0

30

0

0

0

20

o:6D

0

0

0

20

0

20

0

10

0

0

0271

20

70

100

90

30

60

0

120

110

10

50

0

0270

I live Ire

10
cs. [> de

20
ad irces

10

60

0

30

0

10

0

0

10

0

r A - trembling aspen {Populm trrmuloides) ' BC = black Cottonwood (Populus trlchocarpa)
■ IH = other species, could include tngclmann spruce x while spruce hybrids (Pkea engflmannii x P. glauca), subalpinc fir {Abies lastocarpa), Douglas-fir (Pseudolsuga wnie.ll) and lodgcpole pine IPtm* con,0r,a)
m " not inventoried '

APPENDIX D (continued). TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD TREE POPULATIONS BY SITE AND SPECIES DIAMETER CLASSES

DIAMETER CLASSES BY 1 AND 2 INCH INCREMENTS (CELL VALUES, NUMBER OF TREES PER ACRE)
>l-2 / >2-4 / >4-6 / >6-8 / >8-IO / >I0-I2 / >12-14 / >I4-I6 / -16

SHI
NO

TA1

»c:

or

TA

1 BC

OT

TA

BC

or

TA

BC

OT 1

TA

BC

OT 1

TA

BC

0T 1

TA 1

BC

OT

TA I

BC 1

or I

TA 1

BC

,„l

:si '

150

390

30

40

90

110

10

CC8D

10

20

0

o:»l

10

20

10

60

140

170

0

o:«d

40

0

60

80

0

10

0

»m

50

210

50

10

10

20

10

0

0

10

030D

30

60

50

0

10

30

10

0

10

0) 1 1

110

90

70

110

160

30

0

(I'll)

80

40

70

50

0

o:oi

180

60

210

40

190

30

260

10

120

0321)

50

10

40

0

20

0

0

0

8?M

10

20

20

10

10

330

0

190

0

30

20

0

10

ojjd

10

0

60

0

140

0

0341

1 10

120

370

130

034D

10

60

140

20

0351.

190

430

70

90

70

0

two

120

70

50

40

20

30

0361.

230

NO

210

70

30

20

10

40

80

50

10

40

0

50

0

40

MbD

0

0

10

30

30

20

0

10

0

30

0

30

0

10

0371.

100

70

10

120

40

30

20

70

20

60

0

10

10

0

50

0

40

0

4D

P37D

50

60

10

0

10

0

0

0

' L. live trees: D. dead trees

' TA = trembling aspen {Populus tremuloides)

'■ BC = Mack cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa)

' Ol " = other species, could include Hngelmann spruce x white spruce hybrids (Picea engelmarmii x P. glauca), subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa), Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menzlesii) and lodgepolc pine {Pinus coninria)

' Nl = not inventoried

APPENDIX D (continued) TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD TREE POPULATIONS BY SITE AND SPECIES DIAMETER CLASSES

DIAMETER CLASSES BY 1 AND 2 INCH INCREMENTS (CELL VALUES, NUMBER OF TREES PER ACRE)
>l-2 / >2-4 / >4-6 / >6-8 / >8-10 / > 1 0- 1 2 / > 12-14 I >14-16 / >I6

SITE

TA1

BC:

OT'

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA ,

BC

OT

TA

BC

OT

TA j

BC

OT !

TA

BC

OT

TA

BC

oi 1

»M '

:o

80

330

190

70

10

0

u.'Sl)

50

170

40

0

0391

140

210

120

80

60

20

10

'09D

60

40

0

0

10

0

mm.

50

0

10

60

440

270

40

0

O40D

10

110

120

10

0

"J 1 L

0

30

190

10

260

40

140

10

30

0

fi-t 1 D

20

0

60

0

10

0

30

0

0

0

0

10

M21

0

10

50

30

50

0

10

70

50

0

10

60

10

M2J1

3(1

20

0

i>4 1|

:o

100

230

30

40

0

10

0

0

0

10

MJD

10

20

140

10

10

0

0

0

20

044L

280

70

510

100

0

130

0

30

0

0

0

40

0

60

0

10

0

10

044 D

40

0

0

60

0

10

0

0

0

10

0

0

0

0

0

10

045L

Nl'

(M5D

Nl

0461.

110

50

330

60

90

40

10

50

0

70

10

60

10

046D

110

20

70

40

0

0

10

1)471.

180

200

60

40

10

20

40

40

10

WD

0

20

0

10

0

10

20

0

0

10

• L. live trees; D. dead trees

1 TA = trembling aspen [Populus tremuloides)
'- BC = black cortonwood {Populus trichocarpa)

* OT = other species, could include Engetmann spruce x white spruce hybrids (Picea engeimannii x P. glauca), subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa), Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and lodgepole pine (Pinus conloria)
' Nl = not inventoried

APPENDIX D (continued). TREMBLING ASPEN-BLACK COTTONWOOD TREE POPULATIONS BY SITE AND SPECIES DIAMETER CLASSES
DIAMETER CLASSES BY 1 AND 2 INCH INCREMENTS (CELL VALUES, NUMBER OF TREES PER ACRE)
>4-6 / >6-8 / >8-l0 / >10-12 / >12-I4

>1-2

/

>2-4

/

/

>14-16

>I6

SITE

NO

1 1A'

BC:

1 or

TA

1 BC

OT

1 TA

BC

OT

| TA

BC

OT

TA 1

BC 1

OT 1

TA

BC

OT 1

TA 1

BC 1

OT 1

TA 1

BC

OT 1

TA

BC

"' 1

MSI

90

150

40

150

10

30

30

20

80

30

10

30

20

0

0

(l

2'i

(USD

0

30

0

60

0

40

30

10

0

0

04mi

Nl'

O-IW

NI

050L

30

120

100

180

10

70

160

20

0

60

0

50

50

20

30

0

0

050D

:o

40

10

40

0

10

0

10

8511

70

70

10

0

0

10

10

0

100

0

40

0

0

0

n?m

0

0

0

20

0

40

20

0

50

0

40

0

0

0

ii>:i

Nl

r«D

Nl

0531

Ni

i»«.m

Nl

' [ . live trees. IX dead trees

" TA *= trembling aspen (Populus tremuhides)

: BC = black cotlomvood (Populux trichocarpa)

: O I = other species, could include l-'ngclmann spruce x white spruce, hybrids (Picea engelmannil x P. glauca), subalpinc fir (Abies lasiocarpa), Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) and lodgepolc pine (Pima contorta)

' Nl = not inventoried

SITE
NUMBER

APPENDIX E. Trembling aspen-black cottonwood basal area by site, species, and sampling technique

BASAL AREA (FT2/ACRE)

PLOT TECHNIQUE /-—PLOTLESS /

POPTRE1 POPTRI2 PICENG3 ABILAS4 PINCON5 TOTAL TOTAL

LIVE DEAD LIVE DEAD LIVE DEAD LIVE DEAD LIVE DEAD LIVE DEAD LIVE DEAD

017

86.7

6.5

86.7

6.5

57

NI

018

66.5

4.1

66.5

4.1

72

25

019

43.0

4.1

88.6

7.3

131.6

11.4

124

NI

020

171.5

9.9

171.5

9.9

156

NI

021

135.8

9.8

22.4

43.9

158.2

53.7

125

NI

022

NI

120

NI

023

115.8

0

96.6

0.1

212.4

0.1

160

NI

024

51.0

47.2

51.0

47.2

65

12

025

64.7

6.1

33.5

5.3

98.2

11.4

85

20

026

44.4

0

114.9

6.9

159.3

6.9

90

NI

027

88.3

10.6

57.1

9.6

145.4

20.2

120

NI

028

142.9

1.4

142.9

1.4

80

NI

029

120.6

19.1

0.2

0

120.8

19.1

60

12

030

45.4

43.3

1.4

0

46.8

43.3

50

25

031

133.3

25.5

31.0

0

164.3

25.5

88

04

032

160.0

5.1

8.8

0.1

168.8

5.2

122

04

033

108.6

20.6

16.3

0

0.7

0

125.6

20.6

72

08

034

85.2

27.2

85.2

27.2

50

10

035

81.0

47.9

81.0

47.9

65

20

036

75.5

4.7

157.9

46.3

233.4

51.0

140

32

'POPTRE = Populus tremuloides; 2 POPTRI = Populus trichocarpa; 3 PICENG = Picea engelmannii; 4 ABILAS = Abies lasiocarpa; i PINCON = Pinus contorta

APPENDIX E (cont). Trembling aspen-black cottonwood basal area by site, species, and sampling technique

BASAL AREA (FT7ACRE)

/. PLOT TECHNIQUE / PLOTLESS /

SITE POPTRE1 POPTPJ2 PICENG3 ABILAS4 PINCON5 TOTAL TOTAL

NUMBER LIVE DEAD LIVE DEAD LIVE DEAD LIVE DEAD LIVE DEAD LIVE DEAD LIVE DEAD

037

61.7

2.0

166.1

0.7

0.1

0

227.9

2.7

144

20

038

133.5

14.6

0.1

0

133.6

14.6

85

7.5

039

101.6

6.3

101.6

6.3

72

0

040

155.9

23.5

0.1

0

160.0

23.5

96

0

041

177.5

11.2

17.7

6.0

195.2

17.2

108

12

042

206.8

0.5

4.9

0

■ 9.9

0

221.6

0.5

104

02

043

44.6

6.2

26.1

8.4

70.7

14.6

87

06

044

15.6

0.5

136.8

22.1

152.4

22.6

72

08

045

NI

NI

NI

NI

046

116.3

13.9

3.3

0.2

121.3

14.1

80

04

047

42.6

5.3

121.7

5.8

0.3

0

164.6

11.1

102

0

048

49.0

7.7

123.2

9.8

172.2

17.5

100

10

049

NI

55

65

050

50.2

0.5

96.4

12.5

2.5

0

149.1

13.0

88

16

051

77.8

51.8

2.5

6.2

80.3

58.0

48

08

052

NI

70

40

053

NI

NI

NI

MEAN

BASAL

AREA

90.4

13.7

40.4

4.5

1.2

0

<0.01

0

0.3

0

132.3

19.6

92

14

POPTRE = P

opulus tremut

3Kfes;2POPTI

U = Populus 1

richocarpa; 3

PICENG = PU

?ea engelmam

!/;; 4 ABILAS

= Abies lasioc

arpa;* PINCON =

= Pinus contorta

Appendix F. Vascular plant species occurring in aspen and black cottonwood stands;
arranged by decreasing Iifeform size and alphabetically within lifeform and including U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service wetland indicator status by administrative region.

LIFEFORM SCIENTIFIC NAME

COMMON NAME

REGION 4

REGION 9

1 : Trees

2: Shrubs

3: Graminoids

Abies lasiocarpa

Fir, Subalpine

FACU1

FAC

Picea engelmannii

Spruce, Engelmann

FAC

Picea glauca (x engelmannii)

Spruce, White x Engelmann

FACU

Pinus contorta

Pine, Lodgepole

FAC-

FACU

Pinus flexilis

Pine, Limber

Populus balsamifera (ssp. trichocarpa)

Cottonwood, Black

FACW

FACW

Populus tremuloides

Aspen, Trembling

FAC+

FAC

Pseudotsuga menziesii

Douglas-fir

Amelanchier alnifolia

Serviceberry, Western

FACU

FACU

Betula occidentals

Birch, Water

FACW

FACW

Cornus stolonifera

Dogwood, Red-osier

FACW

FACW

Crataegus douglasii

Hawthorn, Black

FAC

NO

Frangula (Rhamnus) purshiana

Buckthorn, Cascara

Juniperus communis

Juniper, Common

Lonicera involucrata

Honeysuckle, Twin-berry

FAC

NO

Lonicera utahensis

Honeysuckle, Utah

FACU+

NO

Mahonia (Berberis) repens

Oregon-grape, Creeping

Potentilla floribunda (fruticosa)

Cinquefoil, Shrubby

FAC-

FACW

Prunus virginiana

Chokecherry, Common

FACU

FACU-

Rhamnus alnifolia

Buckthorn, Alder

FACU

NI

Ribes americanum

Currant, Black

FAC

FACW

Ribes lacustre

Currant, Swamp

FAC+

FACW

Ribes oxyacanthoides (setosum)

Gooseberry, Missouri

NT

Rosa acicularis

Rose, Prickly

FACU

FACU

Rosa woodsii

Rose, Wood's

FACU

FACU

Rubus idaeus

Raspberry, Red

FACU

FACU

Rubus parviflorus

Thimbleberry

FACU+

FACU

Salix bebbiana

Willow, Bebb

FACW

FACW

Salix boothii

Willow, Booth

FACW

Salix geyeriana

Willow, Geyer

FACW+

OBL

Salix lutea

Willow, Watson

FACW+

OBL

Salix scouleriana

Willow, Scouler

FAC

FACU

Salix tweedyi

Willow, Tweedy's

FACW+

Shepherdia canadensis

Buffaloberry, Canada

Sorbus scopulina

Mountain-ash, Cascade

NI

NI

Spiraea betulifolia

Spiraea, Shiny-leaf

Symphoricarpos albus

Snowberry, Common

FACU

FACU

Agrostis scabra

Tickle-grass

FAC

FAC

Alopecurus boreal is (alpinus)

Foxtail, Alpine

FACW

NO

Alopecurus pratensis

Foxtail, Meadow

FACW

FACW

Bromus ciliatus

Brome, Fringed

FAC+

FAC

Bromus inermis (ssp. pumpellianus

Brome, Pumpelly

LIFEFORM SCIENTIFIC NAME

COMMON NAME

REGION 4

REGION 9

4: Forbs

Calamagrostis canadensis

Reedgrass, Bluejoint

FACW+

FACW+

Calamagrostis rubescens

Pinegrass

Calamagrostis stricta

Reedgrass, Narrow-spiked

FACW

OBL

Carex brevior

Sedge, Short-beaked

OBL

FACU

Carex geyeri

Sedge, Elk

Carex hoodii

Sedge, Hood's

NI

NI

Carex microptera

Sedge, Small-wing

FAC

FAC

Carex raynoldsii

Sedge, Raynolds'

FACU

NO

Carex rostrata

Sedge, Beaked

OBL

OBL

Cinna latifolia

Woodreed, Drooping

FACW

OBL

Dactyl is glomerata

Orchard-grass

FACU

FACU

Deschampsia cespitosa

Hairgrass, Tufted

FACW

FACW

Elymus glaucus

Wildrye, Blue

FACU

FACU

Elytrigia (Agropyron) repens

Quackgrass

FACU

FAC

Festuca subulata

Fescue, Bearded

FAC

UPL

Juncus balticus

Rush, Baltic

OBL

OBL

Melica subulata

Oniongrass, Alaska

FAC

Phleum pratense

Timothy, Common

FACU

FACU

Poa interior

Bluegrass, Inland

FAC

FAC

Poa palustris

Bluegrass, Fowl

FACW

FACUW

Poa pratensis

Bluegrass, Kentucky

FACU

FACU+

Schizachne purpurascens

False Melic

UPL

FACU

Stipa occidentalis

Needlegrass, Western

Achillea millefolium

Yarrow, Common

FACU

FACU

Actaea rubra

Baneberry

Allium cernuum

Onion, Nodding

Allium schoenoprasum

Chives

FACW+

NO

Angelica arguta

Angelica, Sharptooth

FACW

Arab is glabra

Towermustard

Arabis hirsuta

Rockcress, Hairy

FACU

Arnica chamissonis

Arnica, Meadow

FACW

Aster conspicuus

Aster, Showy

Aster engelmannii

Aster, Engelmann's

Aster foliaceus

Aster, Leafy

FACW-

NO

Aster laevis

Aster, Smooth

Camassia quamash

Camas, Common

FACW

Campanula rotundifolia

Harebell

FACU

FAC

Castilleja lutescens

Stiff Yellowish Indian Paintbrush

FAC

NO

Castilleja miniata

Greater Red Indian Paintbrush

FAC

FAC

Castilleja rhexiifolia

Rhexia-leaf Indian Paintbrush

FAC

NO

Cirsium arvense

Thistle, Canada

FACU+

FACU

Cirsium hookerianum

Hooker Thistle

Cirsium scariosum

Thistle, Elk

Cirsium vulgare

Thistle, Bull

FACU

UPL

Descurainia pinnata

Tansymustard, Pinnate

Disporum hookeri

Fairy-bell, Hooker

Disporum trachycarpum

Fairy-bell, Wartberry

NI

NI

Epilobium angustifolium

Fireweed

FACU+

FAC

LIFEFORM SCIENTIFIC NAME

COMMON NAME

REGION 4

REGION 9

Epilobium ciliatum

Willow-herb, Common

FACW-

FACW

Erythronium grandiflorum

Large-flower Yellow Fawn-lily

FAC

NO

Fragaria vesca

Strawberry, Woods

Fragaria virgin iana

Strawberry, Virginia

UPL

FACU

Galeopsis tetrahit

Hemp Nettle, Common

Galium boreale

Bedstraw, Northern

FACU

FACU

Galium triflorum

Bedstraw, Sweetscented

FACU

FACU

Geranium richardsonii

Geranium, White

FACU+ .

FAC

Geranium viscosissimum

Geranium, Sticky

FACU+

FACU

Geum macrophyllum

Avens, Large-leaved

FACW+

FACW

Glyceria striata

Mannagrass, Fowl

OBL

OBL

Hackelia floribunda

Stickseed, Showy

FACU-

FACU

Heracleum lanatum

Cow-parsnip

FAC

FAC

Iris missouriensis

Iris, Rocky Mountain

FACW+

FACW+

Lathyrus ochroleucus

Peavine, Cream-flowered

Maianthemum (Smilacina) racemosum

Solomon's Seal, False

FAC-

FAC

Maianthemum (Smilacina) stellatum

Solomon's Seal, Starry

FAC-

FAC

Medicago sativa

Alfalfa

FACU

Moehringia (Arenaria) lateriflora

Sandwort, Bluntleaf

Monarda fistulosa

Horsemint

FACU

UPL

Osmorhiza depauperata

Sweet-cicely, Blunt-fruit

FAC+

Osmorhiza occidentalis

Sweet-cicely, Western

FAC

Pedicularis bracteosa

Lousewort, Bracted

Pedicularis groenlandica

Lousewort, Elephant's Head

OBL

NO

Perideridia gairdneri

Yampah, Gairdner's

FACU

FACU

Petasites sagittatus

Coltsfoot, Arrowleaf

FACW+

FACW+

Piperia (Habenaria) unalascensis

Rein-orchid, Alaska

Plantago major

Plantain, Common

FAC+

FAC

Platanthera (Habenaria) dilatata

Orchis, White

Platanthera (Habenaria) stricta (saccata)

Bog-orchid, Slender

Potentilla gracilis

Cinquefoil, Soft

FAC

FAC

Prunella vulgaris

Self-heal

FACU+

FACW

Pyrola chlorantha

Wintergreen, Green

FAC

FACU

Ranunculus uncinatus

Buttercup, Little

FAC

NO

Sanicula marilandica

Snake-root, Black

Senecio crassulus

Groundsel, Thick-leaved

FACU

OBL

Senecio hydrophiloides (foetidus)

Butterweed, Sweet-marsh

FACW-

Senecio hydrophilus

Butterweed, Alkali-marsh

OBL

OBL

Senecio pseudaureus

Groundsel, Streambank

FACW

FACW

Senecio serra

Butterweed, Tall

FAC

Senecio triangularis

Groundsel, Arrowleaf

FACW+

Solidago gigantea

Goldenrod, Late

FACW-

FACW

Stellaria longipes

Starwort, Longstalk

FACW

FACW

Stenanthium occidentale

Stenanthium, Western

STEOC

Streptopus amplexifolius

Twisted-stalk, Clasping-leaved

FAC

OBL

Thalictrum occidentale

Meadowrue, Western

FACU

NO

Thalictrum venulosum

Meadowrue, Veiny

Trifolium repens

Clover, White

FACU+

FACU

Urticadioica

Nettle, Stinging

FAC+

FACW

LIFEFORM SCIENTIFIC NAME

COMMON NAME

REGION 4

REGION 9

5: Ferns & Fem allies

Valeriana sitchensis

Valerian, Sitka

FAC

Veratrum viride

False Hellebore, Green

OBL

Vicia americana

Vetch, American

Viola canadensis

Viola, Canada

FAC

Zigadenus elegans

Death-camas, Glaucous

FAC+

allies
Botrychium virginianum

Grape-fem, Virginia

FACU

FACU

1 Wetland indicator status designations: OBL (obligate wetland species, those that almost always occur,
i.e. with problability >99%, in wetlands under natural conditions), FACW (facultative wetland species
those that usually occur in wetlands, i.e. with estimated probability of 67-99%, but is occasionally found in
non-wetlands, FAC (facultative species, those equally likely to occur in wetlands, i.e. estimated probability
34-66%, or uplands), FACU (facultative upland species, those that usually occur in non-wetlands, i.e. with
an estimated probability of 67-99%) and U (upland species, those found almost always in uplands, i.e. with
a probability of >99%). Wetland categories and their values for species are from Reed (1988a and 1988b);
for some species no information was available (blank entries in matrix cells).

Appendix G. Application of comprehensive onsite determination method* to selected trembling aspen-black cottonwood stands.

Plot Number: SC01 7

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

Plot Number: SC01 8

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

POPTRE

FAC+

T

POPTRE

FAC+

T

CORSTO

FACW

S

SYMALB

FACU

S

THAOCC

FACU

H

PRUVIR

FACU

S

GERRIC

FAC

H

VIOCAN

FAC

H

OSMDEP

FAC+

H

OSMOCC

FAC

H

HERLAN
ELYGLA
GUEMAC

FAC

FACU

FACW+

H

H

H

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBLO
FACW: 20
FAC+/FAC: 40
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 60

Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:

Hydric Soil: Y: x N:_
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: x N:_

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: x N:

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBLO
FACW: 12
FAC+/FAC: 50
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 62

Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:

Hydric Soil: Y: ? N:_
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: x N:_

Plot Number: SC019

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

POPTRE FAC+ T

POPTRI FACW T

LONINV FAC S

SYMALB FACU S

OSMOCC FAC H

HERLAN FAC H

ELYGLA FACU H

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBLO
FACW: 14
FAC+/FAC: 57
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 71

Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:

Hydric Soil: Y: x N:_
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: x N:_

Plot Number: SC020

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

POPTRE FAC+ T

SYMALB FACU S

OSMOCC FAC H

SENPSE FACW H

VIOCAN FAC H

ELYGLA FACU H

ERYGRA FAC H

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: x N:_ Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: x N:_

Percent of Dominant Spp .
That Are:

OBLO
FACW: 14
FAC+/FAC: 57
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 71

Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:

Hydric Soil: Y:_ N: x
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: ? N:_

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N: x

Plot Number: SC021

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator
Species Status

POPTRE

FAC+ T

POPTRI

FACW T

AMEALN

FACU S

SYMALB

FACU S

ROSWOO

FACU S

SALBEB

FACW S

CORSTO

FACW S

CALCAN

FACW+ H

FESSUB

FAC H

ANGARG

FACW H

Percent of Dominant Spp.

That Are:

OBL

0

FACW: 50

FAC+/FAC

,:20

Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 70

Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:_

Hydric Soil

Y:x N:

Wtlnd. Hyd

ro. Y: x N:

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: x N:

'Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands (1987)

Appendix G (Continued). Application of comprehensive onsite determination method* to selected trembling aspen-black cottonwood stands.

Plot Number: SC022

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

Plot Number: SC023

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

Plot Number: SC024

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

POPTRI

FACW

T

POPTRE

FAC

T

POPTRE

FAC

T

POPTRE

FAC

T

POPTRI

FACW

T

ROSWOO

FACU

S

CORSTO

FACW

S

AMEALN

FACU

S

SYMALB

FACU

S

SYMALB

FACU

S

ROSWOO

FACU

s

RUBIDA

FACU

S

SAN MAR

Nl

H

SYMALB

FACU

s

SALBEB

FACW

S

HERLAN

FAC

H

ANGARG

FACW

H

RIBAME

FACW

s

ANGARG

FACW

H

SENPSE

FACW

H

AMEALN

FACU

s

THAOCC

FACU

H

SENFOR

FACW-

H

FESSUB

FAC

H

CALCAN
ELYGLA

FACW
FACU

H
H

CANCAN
OSMOCC

FACW
FAC

H

H

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBL: 0
FACW: 43
FAC+/FAC: 29
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 72

Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:

HydricSoil: Y: x N:_
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: x N:_

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: x N:

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:
OBLO
FACW: 50
FAC+/FAC: 20
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 70

Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:

HydricSoil: Y: x N:_
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: x N:_

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:
OBLO
FACW: 36
FAC+/FAC: 27
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 63

Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:

Hydric Soil: Y: x N:_
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: ? N: ?

Plot Number: SC025

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator
Species Status

POPTRI FACW T

POPTRE FAC T

SYMALB FACU S

RIBAME FACW S

ELYGLA FACU H

HERLAN FAC H

VIOCAN FAC H

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: x N

_ Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: ? N:

Percent of Dominant Spp .
That Are:
OBLO
FACW: 29
FAC+/FAC: 43
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 72

Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:

HydricSoil: Y: x N:_
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: x N:_

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: x N:

Plot Number: SC026

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator
Species Status

POPTRI FACW T

POPTRE FAC T

SALTWE FACW S

RUBPAR NC S

HERLAN FAC H

OSMOCC FAC H

VIOCAN FAC H

DISHOO Nl H

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:
OBLO
FACW: 25
FAC+/FAC: 50
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 75

Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:

Hydric Soil: Y: ? N._
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: _ N: x

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N: x

* Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands (1987)

Appendix G (Continued). Application of comprehensive onsite determination method* to selected trembling aspen-black cottonwood stands.

Plot Number: SC027

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

POPTRI FACW T

POPTRE FAC T

SYMALB FACU S

SALLUT FACW S

ELYGLA FACU H

HERLAN FAC H

VERVIR FACW H

DISHOO Nl H

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBL: 10
FACW: 20
FAC+/FAC: 40
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 70

Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:

HydricSoil: Y: x N:_
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: x N:_

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: x N:

Plot Number: SC028

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

Plot Number: SC029

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

POPTRE

FAC

T

POPTRE

FAC

T

SYMALB

FACU

S

SYMALB

FACU

S

OSMOCC

FAC

H

ELYGLA

FACU

H

FRAVIR

UPL

H

HERLAN

FAC

H

-

OSMOCC

VIOCAN

THAOCC

FAC
FAC
FACU

H

H

H

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBL: 0
FACW: 0
FAC+/FAC: 50
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 50
Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N: x
Hydric Soil: Y:_ N: x
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y:_ N: x

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N: x

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBL: 0
FACW: 0
FAC+/FAC: 57
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 57

Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:

Hydric Soil: Y:_ N: x
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y:_ N: x

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N: x

Plot Number: SC030

Dominant Wetland Strat.

Plant Indicator

Species Status

POPTRE FAC T

POPTRI FACW T

SYMALB FACU S

AMEALN FACU S

SPIBET Nl S

ELYGLA FACU H

FESSUB FAC H

HERLAN FAC H

THAOCC FACU H

Percent of Dominant Spp .
That Are:

OBL: 0
FACW: 11
FAC+/FAC: 33
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 44

Hydroph. Veg. Y: N: x

Hydric Soil: Y:_ N: x
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y:_ N: x

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N: x

Plot Number: SC031

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator
Species Status

POPTRE FAC T

PICENG FAC T

ROSWOO FACU S

SYMALB FACU S

SENPSE FACW H

GERRIC FACU H

ANGARG FACW H

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBL: 0
FACW: 28
FAC+/FAC: 28
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 57

Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:

Hydric Soil: Y: x N:_
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: x N:_

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: x N:

* Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands (1987)

Appendix G (Continued). Application of comprehensive onsite determination method* to selected trembling aspen-black cottonwood stands.

Plot Number: SC032

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator
Species Status

POPTRE FAC T

POPTRI FACW T

SYMALB FACU T

ROSWOO FACU S

SALSCO FAC S

ELYGLA FACU H

OSMOCC FAC H

SENPSE FACW H

VIOCAN FAC H

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBL: 0
FACW: 20
FAC+/FAC: 50
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 70

Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:

Hydric Soil: Y:_ N: x
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y:_ N: x

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N: x

Plot Number: SC033

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator
Species Status

POPTRI FACW T

POPTRE FAC T

SYMALB FACU S

ROSWOO FACU S

CALRUB Nl H

ERYGRA FAC H

SENPSE FACW H

OSMOCC FAC H

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBL: 0
FACW: 25
FAC+/FAC: 37
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 62
Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:_
Hydric Soil: Y:_ N: x
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y:_ N: x

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N: x

Plot Number: SC034

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

POPTRE FAC T

SALSCO FAC S

SYMALB FACU S

SANMAR Nl H

PHLPRA FACU H

ELYGLA FACU H

POAPRA FACU H

ANGARG FACW H

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBL0
FACW: 12
FAC+/FAC: 25
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 37

Hydroph. Veg. Y: N: x

Hydric Soil: Y:_ N: x
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y:_ N: x

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N: x

Plot Number: SC035

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

POPTRE FAC T

SYMALB FACU S

ROSWOO FACU S

ELYGLA FACU H

OSMOCC FAC H

Percent of Dominant Spp .
That Are:

OBL: 0
FACW: 0
FAC+/FAC: 40
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 40

Hydroph. Veg. Y: N: x

Hydric Soil: Y:_ N: x
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y:_ N: x

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N: x

Plot Number: SC036

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

POPTRE FAC T

POPOTRI FACW T

ROSWOO FACU S

ELYGLA FACU H

OSMOCC FAC H

SENPSE FACW H

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBL: 0
FACW: 33
FAC+/FAC: 33
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 67
Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:_
Hydric Soil: Y: ? N:_
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: ? N:_

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: ? N:

Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands (1987)

Appendix G (Continued). Application of comprehensive onsite determination method* to selected trembling aspen-black cottonwood stands.

Plot Number: SC037

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator
Species Status

POPTRE FAC T

POPTRI FACW T

SYMALB FACU S

RUBPAR FACU S

ELYGLA FACU H

OSMOCC FAC H

VIOCAN FAC H

HERLAN FAC H

Plot Number: SC038

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBLO
FACW: 12
FAC+/FAC: 50
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 62
Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:_
Hydric Soil: Y: x N:_
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: x N:_

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: x N:

Dominant

Wetland

Strat

Plant

Indicator

Species

Status

POPTRE

FAC

T

SYMALB

FACU

S

ELYGLA

FACU

H

ERYGRA

FAC

H

OSMOCC

FAC

H

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBLO
FACW: 0
FAC+/FAC: 60
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 60
Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:_
Hydric Soil: Y:_ N: x
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y:_ N: x

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N: x

Plot Number: SC039

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

POPTRE FAC T

ROSWOO FACU S

ALOALP FACW H

CALSTR FACW H

PHLPRA FAC H

GEUMAC FACW+ H

SENFOE FACW- H

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBL: 0
FACW: 57
FAC+/FAC: 29
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 86

Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:

Hydric Soil: Y: ? N:_
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: x N:_

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: x N:

Plot Number: SC040

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

POPTRE FAC T

RUBPAR FACU S

SYMALB FACU S

ELYGLA FACU H

ERYGRA FAC H

THAOCC FACU H

VIOCAN FAC H

Percent of Dominant Spp .
That Are:

OBLO
FACW: 0
FAC+/FAC: 42
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 42

Hydroph. Veg. Y: N: x

Hydric Soil: Y:_ N: x
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y:_ N: x

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N: x

Plot Number: SC041

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

POPTRE FAC T

POPTRI FACW T

SYMALB FACU S

ROSWOO FACU S

OSMOCC FAC H

SCHPUR UPL H

ELYGLA FACU H

ERYGRA FAC H

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBLO
FACW: 12
FAC+/FAC: 37
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 50
Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N: x
Hydric Soil: Y:_ N: x
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y:_ N: x

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N: x

* Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands (1987)

Appendix G (Continued). Application of comprehensive onsite determination method* to selected trembling aspen-black cottonwood stands.

Plot Number: SC042

Dominant Wetland Strat.

Plant Indicator

Species Status

POPTRE FAC T

SALSCO FAC S

SALBOO FACW S

CALSTR FACW H

ALOPRA FAC H

ANGARG FACW H

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBLO
FACW: 50
FAC+/FAC: 50
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 100

Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:

HydricSoil: Y: x N:_
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: x N:_

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: x N:

Plot Number: SC043

Dominant Wetland Strat.

Plant Indicator

Species Status

POPTRE FAC T

POPTRI FACW T

RUBPAR FACU S

DISHOO Nl H

ACTRUB Nl H

VIOCAN FAC H

HERLAN FAC H

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBLO
FACW: 14
FAC+/FAC: 43
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 57
Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:_
HydricSoil: Y: x N:_
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: ? N:_

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: ? N:

Plot Number: SC044

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

Plot Number: SC045

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBLO
FACW: 12
FAC+/FAC: 25
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 37

Hydroph. Veg. Y: N: x

Hydric Soil: Y:_ N: x
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: ? N:_

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N: x

Percent of Dominant Spp .
That Are:

OBLO
FACW: 33
FAC+/FAC:11
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 44

Hydroph. Veg. Y: N: x

Hydric Soil: Y:_ N: x
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y:_ N: x

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N: x

Plot Number: SC046

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

POPTRI

FACW

T

POPTRE

FAC

T

POPTRE

FAC

T

POPTRE

FAC

T

ROSWOO

FACU

T

POPTRI

FACW

T

ROSWOO

FACU

S

SALBOO

FACW

S

ROSWOO

FACU

S

AMEALN

FACU

S

PHLPRA

FACU

H

AMEALN

FACU

S

ELYGLA

FACU

H

POAPRA

FACU

H

SYMALB

FACU

S

CALRUB

NIT

H

ELYGLA

FACU

H

ELYGLA

FACU

H

OSMOCC

FAC

H

ALOPRA

FACW

H

ALOPRA

FACW

H

THAOCC

FACU

H

TAROFF

FACU

H

PHLPRA

FACU

H

SENPSE

FACW

H

SENFOE

FRAVIR

ANGARG

FACW
FACU
FACW

H

H

H

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBLO
FACW: 36
FAC+/FAC: 09
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 45

Hydroph. Veg. Y: N: x

Hydric Soil: Y: x N:_
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: x N:_

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: x N:

Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands (1987)

Appendix G (Continued). Application of comprehensive onsite determination method* to selected trembling aspen-black Cottonwood stands.

Plot Number: SC047

Dominant

Wetland

Strat

Plant

Indicator

Species

Status

POPTRE

FAC

T

POPTRI

FACW

T

SYMALB

FACU

S

AMEALN

FACU

S

POAPRA

FACU

H

GERRIC

FACU+

H

PHLPRA

FACU

H

FRAVIR

FACU

H

ANGARG

FACW

H

VIOCAN

FAC

H

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBLO
FACW: 20
FAC+/FAC: 20
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 40

Hydroph. Veg. Y: N: x

Hydric Soil: Y:_ N: x
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y:_ N: x

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N: x

Plot Number: SC048

Dominant Wetland Strat.

Plant Indicator

Species Status

POPTRE FAC T

POPTRI FACW T

SALBEB FACW S

SYMALB FACU S

CALCAN FACW H

ALOALP FACW H

SYMALB FACU S

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBLO
FACW: 57
FAC+/FAC: 29
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 86

Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:

Hydric Soil: Y: x N._
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: x N:_

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: x N:

Plot Number: SC049

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

POPTRI FACW T

POPTRE FAC T

ROSWOO FACU S

SYMALB FACU S

BROCIL FAC+ H

OSMOCC FAC H

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBLO
FACW: 12
FAC+/FAC: 50
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 62
Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:_
Hydric Soil: Y:_ N: x
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y:_ N: x

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N: x

Plot Number: SC050

Dominant Wetland Strat.

Plant Indicator

Species Status

POPTRI FACW T

POPTRE FAC T

GERRIC FACU+ S

FRAVIR FACU H

SALSCO FAC S

Plot Number: SC051

Percent of Dominant Spp .
That Are:

OBLO
FACW: 20
FAC+/FAC: 40
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 60

Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N:

Hydric Soil: Y: x N:_
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: x N:_

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: x N:

Dominant Wetland Strat

Plant

ndicator

Species

Status

POPTRE

FAC

T

POPTRI

FACW

T

SALBEB

FACW

S

SYMALB

FACU

S

AMEALN

FACU

S

ROSWOC

FACU

S

PHLPRA

FACU

H

POAPAL

FACW

H

ALOALP

FACW

H

POAPR

FACU

H

SANMAR

Nl

H

ANGARG

FACW+

H

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBLO
FACW: 42
FAC+/FAC: 08
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 50
Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N: x
Hydric Soil: Y: x N:_
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: ? N:_

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: x N:

* Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands (1987)

Appendix G (Continued). Application of comprehensive onsite determination method* to selected trembling aspen-black cottonwood stands.

Plot Number: SC052

Plot Number: SC053

Dominant

Plant

Species

POPTRI

POPTRE

RIBSET

SYMALB

ROSWOO

Wetland

Indicator

Status

FACW

FAC

Nl

FACU

RACU

FACU

FAC

FACU

FACU

FACW

FAC

Strat.

T
T
S
S
S
S
S
H
H
H
H

Dominant

Plant

Species

POPTRE
RUBPAR
OSMOCC
ELYGLA

Wetland

Indicator

Status

FAC
FACU
FAC
FACU

Strat

T
S
H
H

AMEALN

SALSCO

PHLPRA

POAPRA

ALOPRA

VIOCAN

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBLO
FACW: 18.
FAC+/FAC: 18
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 36

Hydroph. Veg. Y: N: x

Hydric Soil: Y:_ N: x
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y: ? N:_

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N: x

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBLO
FACW: 0
FAC+/FAC: 50
Total % Wetlnd. Spp. 50
Hydroph. Veg. Y: x N: x
Hydric Soil: Y:_N:x
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y:_ N: x

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N: x

Plot Number:

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

Plot Number:

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator

Species Status

Plot Number:

Dominant Wetland Strat.
Plant Indicator
Species Status

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBL:

FACW:

FAC+/FAC:_

Total % Wetlnd. Spp.

Hydroph. Veg. Y:_ N:_
Hydric Soil: Y:_ N:_
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y:_ N:_

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N:

Percent of Dominant Spp .
That Are:

OBL:

FACW:

FAC+/FAC:_

Total % Wetlnd. Spp.

Hydroph. Veg. Y:_ N:_
Hydric Soil: Y:_N:_
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y:_ N:_

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N:

Percent of Dominant Spp.
That Are:

OBL:

FACW:

FAC+/FAC:

Total % Wetlnd. Spp. _
Hydroph. Veg. Y:_ N:_
Hydric Soil: Y:_ N:_
Wtlnd. Hydro. Y._ N:_

Jurisdic. Wtlnd. Y: N:

Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands (1987)

APPENDIX H.

COMMUNITY SURVEY FORM (MTNHP)
GENERAL PLOT DATA:

IDENTIFICATION AND LOCATION: manual: units: ft. m

PLOT NO. : MON.__ DAY: __ YEAR: EOCODE:

EXAMINER(S):

POT. NAT. COMM. C.T.:

SITE NAME: STATE: COUNTY:

PURP: PREC: QUAD NAME: QUAD CODE:

LEGAL: T; R; S; 1 /4S; 4/4; 4/4/4 COMM. SIZE (acres):

LATITUDE: (deg.); (min.); (sec.) LONGITUDE: (deg.) (min.); (sec.)

PLOT TYPES: PLOT SIZE: RADIUS/LN; WIDTH SURVEY:

PHOTOGRAPHY:

DIRECTIONS:

CONSERVATION RANKING:

CONDITION
VIABILITY
DEFENSIBL

COMMENT
COMMENT
COMMENT

RANK: COMMENT

MANAGEMENT:

PROTECTION:

ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES:

DL: SOIL RPT:

SOIL UNIT: SOIL TAXON:

PARENT MAT.: LANDFORM: ; PLOT POSITION: SLOPE SHAPE:

ASPECT(°): SLOPE (%): ELEVATION: EROSION POT.: EROS. TYPE:

HORIZON ANGLE: N ;E ;S _; W IFSLP: IFVAL:

SPECIAL FEATURE(S):

GROUND COVER (classes): son.+ gravel+ rock + litter + wood + moss + basal veg. + other=100%

DISTURBANCE HISTORY (type, intensity, frequency, season):

RIPARIAN FEATURES: NONE: CHANNEL WIDTH: CHANNEL ENTRENCH.:

SURFACE WATER DEPTH: HEIGHT ABOVE WATR: DIST. FROM WATR.:

WETLAND FEATURES: NONE: COWARDIN CLASSIFICATION: STANDING WATER

DEPTH (cm or in., observed): MEAN MAXIMUM AVE. ANN. HIGH WATER (observed or estimate circle)

PONDING EVIDENCE* (a aerial photo. B banded veg. C rockj w/w/o carbonate coat, D sediment deposition, L rocks w/ and w/o lichen, R herb wrick lines, S water/silt stain*)

DURATION of INUNDATION: (days, this year)

CAPILLARY FRINGE: DEPTH TO CAP. FPJNGE; THICKNESS CAP. FRINGE; DEPTH to SATURATION (fr«w.ier)

ORGANIC HORIZON THICKNESS (cm or in.): MEAN MIN. MAX.; Oa Oe Oi

SEDIMENT DEPOSITION: COVER (%), DEPTH (cm or in.)

vrxLlNJrLJrvAlj ol 1 XL JJlLoCRIi 1 10.N (landscape features, position in landscape, and position on catena, adjacent c.ts., disease, etc.):

APPENDIX I.
OCULAR PLANT SPECIES DATA:

PLOT NUMBER: NO. SPECIES: PNC:

MINIMUM COVER VALUE:

TREES: TOTAL CV.
TALL CV.
LOW CV.

MEAN HT.
MED. CV.
GRND.CV.

FORBS: TOTAL CV.
MED. CV.
GRND. CV.

SPECIES IDENTIFICATION

HT.

CCC1
_/
_/ "
_/ "
_/ "
_/ "
_/ "
_/ *
/ "

SHRUBS: TOTAL CV.
TALL CV.
LOW CV.

MEAN HT.
MED CV.
GRND.CV.

S

s
s
s
s
s
s

S 8
S 9
S10
Sll

S12

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/
/

/
/

GRAMINOIDS :

TOT. CV.
MED. CV.
GRND. CV.

MEAN HT.
LOW CV.

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G 8

G 9

G10

Gil

G12

G13

G14

G15

G16

BRYOIDS :

B 1

B 3

B 5

B 7

TOTAL CV.

/ _ [

/ _ [

/ _ [

/ [

MEAN HT.
LOW CV.

SPECIES IDENTIFICATION

F 1

F 2

F 3 ~~

F 4

F 5 "

F 6 ~

F 7

F 8

F 9

F10

Fll ~

F12 ~

F13

F14

F15

F16 "

F17

F18

F19 "

F20 '

F21

F22 ~

F23

F24 ' "

F25

F2 6

F27 "

F28 ' "

F2 9 "

F30 "

F31 " "

F32 "

F33 "

F34 '

F35 "

F36

FERNS AND ALLIED FORMS:

TOTAL CV. MEAN HT.

LOW CV. GRND CV. _

1

F
F
F
F

F

HT. CCC

MED. CV.

B 2

B A

B 6"

B 8"

COMMENTS (EODATA)

2 Tree canopy cover for mature (> 5 in. dbh) and seedlings/saplings (< 5 in. dbh.)
1 Canopy Cover Classes (Percent Values): 0; T => >0, <1; P - *1, <5; 1 = 25,<15; 2 = 215, <25; 3
4 - 235, <45; 5 - 245, <55; 6 - 255, <65; 7 = 265, <75; 8 = 275, <85; 9 = 285, <95; F = 295

225, <35;

Appendix J.

Annotated photographs documenting examples of the Populus tremuloides

/ Cornus stolonifera, P. tremuloides / Calamagrostis canadensis, and P.

tremuloides / Osmorhiza occidentalis plant associations.

Populus tremuloides / Calamagrostis canadensis plant association: A multi-aged structure is apparent with P. tremuloides
dominant in all layers; C. canadensis and Alopecurus alpinus form a tall sward mostly obscuring the dominant forbs
Angelica arguta, Senecio pseudaureus, and Geum macrophyllum.

Populus tremuloides / Calamagrostis canadensis plant association: In contrast to previous stand of this p. a., this
stand is primarily two-aged; the canopy is experiencing high mortality. Although the shrub component is significant,
three grasses dominate the undergrowth: C. canadensis, Alopecurus pratensis, and Poa pratensis.

Populus tremuloides / Cornus stolonifera plant association: Upper canopy is
dominated by P. trichocarpa with P. tremuloides ascendant in the understory;
dominating the undergrowth are C. stolonifera (shrub layer) and forbs
Angelica arguta, Heracleum lanatum and Sanicula marilandica.

Populus tremuloides / Cornus stolonifera plant association: Abundant P. tremuloides reproduction combined with
high coverage of Cornus stolonifera and Symphoricarpos albus result in a dense undergrowth.

Populus tremuloides / Osmorhiza occidentalis plant association: Tree domi-
nance shared between P. trichocarpa and P. tremuloides on this site that is
unequivocally a wetland; the undergrowth is species rich with over 40 repre-
sented, the dominants being Heracleum lanatum, Veratrum viride, and
Elymus glaucus.

%

6|

Populus tremuloides / Osmorhiza occidentalis plant association: This even-aged wetland stand is dominated by
P. tremuloides in the overs tory. The dominance of herbs Heracleum lanatum, O. occidentalis, Elymus glaucus and
others (135% combined cover) obscures the shrubs, which have a combined cover of 40%.

Populus tremuloides / Osmorhiza occidentalis plant association: This upland
site is approaching autumnal coloration in late August; the undergrowth is
dominated by the native rhizomatous grasses Elymus glaucus, Brvmus ciliatus,
and Festuca subulata, and by the forb O. occidentalis.

;

D..

k'f

■i

I