'AL2.20Or.12Z
c2_
GUIDE TO RANGE PLANT COMMUNITY
TYPES AND CARRYING CAPACITY
FOR THE DRY AND CENTRAL MIXEDWOOD
SUBREGIONS IN ALBERTA
Ahem
SUSTAINABLE RESOURCE
DEVELOPMENT
Public Lands
& Forests
GUIDE TO RANGE PLANT COMMUNITY TYPES AND CARRYING CAPACITY
FOR THE DRY AND CENTRAL MIXEDWOOD SUBREGIONS IN ALBERTA
6th approximation
(Please note this edition is a revision of the 5th approximation of the Range Plant
Community Types and Carrying Capacity for the Dry and Central Mixedwood Pub. No.
T/074)
Prepared by
Michael G. Willoughby,
Colin Stone,
Carcey Hincz,
Darlene Moisey,
Gerry Ehlert,
Donna Lawrence
Edmonton
2006
ALBERTA SUSTAINABLE
RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
Public Lands and Forests Division
FORWARD
In January, 1999 the Rangeland Health Assessment Project was initiated. Its purpose was to
coordinate the development of rangeland health assessment methods and ecological site
descriptions for both forested and grassland dominated rangelands in the province and transfer
the new technology (awareness, information and tools) to livestock producers, staff and other
stakeholders. This document “Range plant communities and carrying capacity for the Dry and
Central Mixedwood subregions of Alberta, Sixth Approximation” is an effort to organize
existing range plant community information for the Boreal Mixedwood subregions into an
ecological framework, with the ultimate goal of developing ecological site descriptions as
outlined in the Alberta Rangeland Health Task Group, Terms of Reference (1999). This guide
encompasses the work of Karen Sundquist (who worked on previous approximations) and Dave
Downing who developed the classification for the deciduous communities in the Eastern
ecodistricts of the Dry Mixedwood (Downing and Karpuk 1992) and developed a forage gap
analysis for the Mixedwood subregions (Downing 2000). It also tries to incorporate the work
done by Beckingham and Archibald (1996) on the forested ecosites of the Boreal Mixedwood
and work done by Thompson and Hansen (2004) on the lotic and lentic communities of the
Mixedwood subregions. As we collect new research information, the sixth approximation will
evolve into a range ecological site field guide. The sixth approximation has updated successional
sequences of tame pastures in both the Dry and Central areas of the Mixedwood region. This
approximation has new information about 4 cutblock community types in the Central
Mixedwood area [see section CME p.232].
One major outcome of the project will be to produce ecological base information which will be
used to develop management tools for northern livestock producers, resource managers and other
stakeholders of Alberta’s Boreal forest. This new knowledge will aide in the sustainable grazing
of forested plant communities, and maintain the good health and proper functioning of these
ecosystems.
m
ISBN No. 0-7785-4538-5 (Printed Edition)
ISBN No. 0-7785-4539-3 (On-line Edition)
Pub No. T/103
For copies of this report contact:
Michael Willoughby
Public Lands and Forests Division(PLFD)
9920 108 st, 9th Floor
Edmonton, Alta.
T5K2M4
(403) 422-4598
mike.willoughby@.gov.ab.ca
Darlene Moisey
PLFD
St. Paul, Alta.
(780) 645-6308
darlene.moisey@.gov.ab.ca
Donna Lawrence
PLFD
Barrhead, Alta.
(780) 374-8231
donna.lawrence@.gov.ab.ca
Colin Stone
PLFD
Peace River, Alta.
(780) 624-6116
colin.stone@.gov.ab.ca
Carcey Flincz
PLFD
Grande Prairie, Alta.
(780)538-8026
carcey.hincz@.gov.ab.ca
iv
Table of Contents
ABSTRACT xii
INTRODUCTION 1
CLIMATE AND MODAL PLANT COMMUNITIES 1
Dry Mixedwood subregion J_
Central Mixedwood subregion 2
APPROACH AND METHODS OF CLASSIFICATION 3
Approach: Ecological classification hierarchy and terminology 3
Methods: Plant community classification 3
RANGE MANAGEMENT CONCEPTS AND METHODS 6
Ecologically sustainable stocking rates 6
Rangeland Health 7
HOW TO USE THE GUIDE 8
Organization of the guide 8
Identifying plant community types 9
Method 1. Use dichotomous key within dominant cover categories 9
Method 2. Use edatope and indicator species JJ_
DRY MIXEDWOOD SUBREGION 13
Ecological Site “aa” fact sheet 21
Ecological Site Phase “aal" fact sheet 22
Ecological Site “bb” fact sheet 23
Ecological Site Phase “bbl" fact sheet 24
Ecological Site Phase “bb2" fact sheet 25
Ecological Site Phase “d4" fact sheet 26
Ecological Site Phase “dla" fact sheet 27
Ecological Site Phase “dlb" fact sheet 28
Ecological Site “dd” fact sheet 29
Ecological Site Phase “ddl" fact sheet 30
Ecological Site Phase “e4" fact sheet 3J_
Ecological Site Phase “f4" fact sheet 32
Ecological Site Phase “f5" fact sheet 33
Ecological Site Phase “g2" fact sheet 34
Ecological Site Phase “j3" fact sheet 35
Ecological Site Phase “k2a" fact sheet 36
Ecological Site Phase “k3a" fact sheet 37
GRASSLAND AND SHRUBLAND COMMUNITY TYPES 38
Key to Grass and Shrublands 45
DMA1. Sedge meadows 47
DMA la. Bulrush-Cattail 48
DMA2. Marsh reed grass meadow 49
DMA3. Plains wormwood/Sedge 50
DMA4. Purple oat grass-Sedge-Califomia oat grass 51_
v
DMA4a. Veiny meadow rue/Slender wheat grass-Fringed brome 52
DMA5. Western porcupine grass-Sedge/Fringed sage 53
DMA6. Northern wheat gras s-Junegras s/Fringed sage 54
DMA7. Saskatoon-Snowberry/Hairy wild rye 55
DMA8. Rose-Snowberry/Smooth brome 56
DMA9. Kentucky bluegrass/Dandelion 57
DMA10. Willow/Sedge 58
DMA 10a. Willow/Marsh reed grass 59
DMA1 1 . Willow/Marsh reed grass-Kentucky bluegrass 60
DMA 12. Willow/Horsetail/Marsh reed grass 61
DMA13. River alder/Horsetail 62
DMA14. Willow/Kentucky bluegrass/Dandelion 63
DMA15. Sandbar willow- Yellow willow 64
DMA16: Bebb willow/Marsh reed grass 65
DMA17: Red osier dogwood/Marsh reed grass 66
DMA18: Silverberry/Smooth brome 67
DMA19: Bog willow 68
DMA20. Swamp horsetail 69
DMA21. Tall manna grass 70
DMA22. Common reed grass 71
DMA23. Reed canary grass 72
DMA24. Two stamened sedge 73
DMA25. Rush meadow 74
DMA26. Creeping spike rush 75
DMA27. Three square rush 76
DMA28. Prairie bulrush 77
DMA29. Nuttall’s saltgrass 78
DMA30. Foxtail barley 79
TAME FORAGE COMMUNITIES 80
Key to Tame Grass Plant Communities - Dry Mixedwood Subregion 84
DMB12. Brome-Timothy 85
DMB13. Creeping red fescue- Brome-Timothy 86
DMB14. Creeping red fescue-Kentucky bluegrass/Dandelion 87
DMB15. Strawberry-Dandelion- Weeds 88
DMB16. Reed canary grass-Meadow 89
DMB17. Brome-Creeping red fescue-Kentucky bluegrass/Dandelion 90
DMB18. Foxtail barley/Weeds 91.
DMB19. Wheat grass-Creeping red fescue-Timothy 92
DMB20. Rose/Creeping red fescue-Sedge 93
DMB2 1 . Aw/Rose/Strawberry 94
DMB22. Rose/Dandelion 95
DMB23. Aw-Pb/Rose/Hairy wild rye 96
DMB24. Willow/Timothy 97
vi
DECIDUOUS FOREST COMMUNITY TYPES 98
Key to Deciduous Community Types - Dry Mixedwood 103
DMC1. Aw/Dwarf bilberry/Bearberry/Mountain ricegrass 104
DMCla. Aw/Blueberry 105
DMC2. Aw/Rose/Tall forb 106
DMC3. Aw/Rose/Low forb 107
DMC3a. Aw-Pb/Dandelion/Kentucky bluegrass 108
DMC4. Aw-Pb/Hazelnut 109
DMC5. Aw/Buffaloberry 1 10
DMC6. Aw/Alder Ill
DMC7. Aw/Saskatoon JT2
DMC8. Pb- Aw/Red osier dogwood 1 13
DMC8a. Pb-AwAVillow U4
DMC9. Pb -Aw/Horsetail H5
DMC10. Deciduous cutblocks and unseeded clearings U_6
DMC 1 1 . Pb/Honeysuckle U7
DMC12. Pb/River alder 118
DMC 13. Pb-Aw/Silverberry 1 19
DMC 14. Pb/Snowberry 120
DMC15.Pb/Reed grass 121
DMC 16. Bw/Labrador tea 122
DMC 17. Bw/Raspberry 123
DMC 18. Pb-Bw/Kentucky bluegrass 124
DMC 19. Pb/Smooth brome 125
CONIFEROUS AND MIXEDWOOD FORESTS 127
Key to Conifer and Mixedwood* Types - Dry Mixedwood 130
DMD1. Pj/Alder 131
DMD2. Pj-Aw/Bearberry 132
DMD2a. Aw-Sw/Bearberry 133
DMD3. Sw/Buffaloberry/Bearberry 134
DMD4. Sw/Beaked hazelnut/Moss 135
DMD5. Aw-Sw/Rose/Marsh reed grass 136
DMD6. Aw-Pb-Sw/Willow/Wild sarsaparilla 137
DMD7. Sw-Pb-Aw/Rose/Twinflower 138
DMD8. Sb/Willow/Moss 139
DMD9. Sb-Lt/Labrador tea/Moss 140
DMD10. Sw- Aw/Low bush Cranberry 141
DMD1 1. Sw/Moss 142
DMD12. Sw-Bw/Raspberry 143
DMD13. Sw-Pb/Red osier dogwood 144
DMD14. Sw/Horsetail 145
CENTRAL MIXEDWOOD SUBREGION 146
GRASSLAND AND SHRUBLAND COMMUNITY TYPES 153
vii
Key to Central Mixedwood Grass and Shrublands 157
CMA1. Sedge meadows 158
CMA2. Marsh reed grass meadow 159
CMA3. Cow parsnip/Kentucky bluegrass-Marsh reed grass 160
CMA4. Snowberry/Kentucky bluegrass 161
CMA5. Plains wormwood/Sheep fescue-Sedge 162
CMA6. Plains wormwood/Kentucky bluegrass-Sedge 163
CMA7. Willow/Sedge 164
CMA8. Willow/Sedge-Kentucky bluegrass 165
CMA9. Willow/Marsh reed grass 166
CM A 10. Willow-River alder/Marsh reed grass 167
CMA1 1. Willow/Fireweed 168
CMA12. Willow- Spruce/Kentucky bluegrass 169
CMA13. Yellow willow 170
CMA14. Scouler willow-Red osier dogwood 171
CMA15: Bebb willow/Marsh reed grass 172
CMA16. Swamp horsetail 173
CMA17. Tall manna grass 174
CMA18. Short sedge 175
CMA19. Snowberry/Horsetail/Marsh Reed Grass 176
TAME FORAGE COMMUNITIES 177
Key to Tame Grass Plant Communities J_8J_
CMB5. Creeping red fescue-Rough hairgrass 182
CMB8. Brome/Timothy 183
CMB9. Creeping Red Fescue-Kentucky Bluegrass-Timothy 184
CMB10. Creeping Red Fescue-Kentucky Bluegrass/Dandelion 185
CMB 1 1 . Clover/Dandelion 186
CMB12. Willow/Creeping red fescue/Kentucky Bluegrass 187
CMB 13. Marsh Reed Grass/Strawberry 188
DECIDUOUS FOREST COMMUNITIES 190
Key to Deciduous Community Types 194
CMC1. Pb/Alder-Rose 196
CMC2. Pb-Aw/River alder 197
CMC3. Aw-Pb/Beaked hazelnut-Rose 198
CMC3a. Pb-Aw/Honeysuckle 199
CMC4. Bw/Willow 200
CMC5. Aw/Blueberry 20!
CMC6. Aw/Rose/Twinflower 202
CMC7. Aw/Rose/Low forb 203
CMC 8. Aw/Rose/Tall forb 204
CMC8a. Aw/Buffaloberry-Rose 205
CMC9. Pb-Aw/Rose-Saskatoon 206
CMC 10. Aw-Pb/Rose/Strawberry 207
viii
CMC1 1. Aw/Rose/Clover 208
CMC12. Aw/Alder 209
CMC 13. Aw/Willow 210
CMC 14. Aw-Pb/Red osier dogwood-Rose 211
CMC 15. Aw/Horsetail-Cow parsnip 212
CMC 16. Aspen/ Smooth brome 213
CMC 17. Aspen/Thimbleberry 214
CONIFEROUS AND MIXEDWOOD FOREST COMMUNITIES 215
Key to Conifer and Mixedwood Types 219
CMD1. Pj/Alder 220
CMD2. Pj/Bearberry 221
CMD3. Aw-Pj/Bearberry/Lichen 222
CMD4. Balsam fir-Sw/Moss 223
CMD5. Sw/Moss 224
CMD6. Sw/Creeping red fescue 225
CMD7. Aw-Sw/Rose/Low forb 226
CMD8. Aw-Sw/Labrador tea/Moss 227
CMD9. Sb/Labrador tea/Moss 228
CMD10. Sb/Bog birch 229
CMD 1 1 . Sw/Beaked hazelnut/Moss 230
CMD12. Sw/Horsetail 231
FOREST CUTBLOCK COMMUNITIES 232
Key to Forest Cutblock Types 235
CME1. Aspen/Rose/Marsh Reedgrass/Fireweed 236
CME2. Clover/Rose/Marsh Reedgrass 237
CME3. Beaked Hazelnut/Aspen/Wild Sarsaparilla 238
CME4. Green Alder-Honeysuckle/ Aspen-Balsam Poplar 239
LITERATURE CITED 240
List of Figures
Figure 1. Ecological Classification System for Alberta 4
Figure 2. Ecosite phases of the Boreal Mixedwood Natural Region 5
Figure 3A. Selected plant species occurrences relative to moisture and nutrient regimes J_8
Figure 3B. Selected plant species occurrences relative to moisture and nutrient regimes 19
Figure 4. Edatopic grid for the Dry Mixedwood subregion 20
Figure 5. Overview of native grass and shrubland complex in the Dry Mixedwood subregion.
40
Figure 6. Successional sequences of tame pasture communities on 3 moisture regimes in the Dry
Mixedwood subregion 82
Figure 7. Overview of deciduous communities in the Dry Mixedwood subregion 100
Figure 8. Ecology of the native grass and shrublands of the Central Mixedwood subregion. . . 154
Figure 9. Successional sequences of tame pasture communities on 3 moisture regimes in the
Central Mixedwood subregion 179
IX
Figure 10. Sequence of Aspen/Rose dominated community types of the Central Mixedwood
subregion
191
List of Tables
Table 1. Ecological sites, ecological site phases, forested, and range plant community types for
the Dry Mixedwood subregion (adapted from Beckingham and Archibald 1996) 14
Table 2. Production values and recommended ecologically sustainable stocking rates for grass
and shrubland communities, and ecological site phases described in the Dry Mixedwood
subregion 44
Table 3. Production and Stocking rate of Tame forage communities in the Dry Mixedwood
subregion 83
Table 4. Production values and recommended ecologically sustainable stocking rates for the
deciduous communities and ecological site phases described in the Dry Mixedwood
subregion 101
Table 5. Production (kg/ha) and grazing capacity (ha/AUM) for ecological site phase, conifer
and mixedwood communities of the Dry Mixedwood subregion 128
Table 6. Ecological sites, ecological site phases and forested and reference range plant
communities for the Central Mixedwood subregion (adapted from Beckingham and
Archibald 1996) 148
Table 7. Native grass and shrubland community types of the Central Mixedwood subregion.
156
Table 8. Tame forage communities of the Central Mixedwood subregion 180
Table 9. Deciduous community types described in the Central Mixedwood subregion 192
Table 10. Conifer and mixedwood communities of the Central Mixedwood subregion 217
Table 1 1 . Forest cutblock community types described in the Central Mixedwood subregion
234
List of Maps
Map 1 . Location of Dry and Central Mixedwood Subregions in Alberta 2
List of Photos
Photo 1 . The Western porcupine grass-Sedge/Fringed sage community is found throughout the
Dry Mixedwood subregion on the south-facing slopes of the Smoky, Wapiti and Peace
Rivers. This community provides early spring forage for both wildlife and cattle 38
Photo 2. This picture represents the transition from sedge-marsh reed grass meadows to willow
sedge dominated community types in the Dry Mixedwood subregion. These community
types provide a large amount of forage, but the moist conditions limit their use by
livestock 38
x
Photo 3. Typical Range improvement clearing in the Dry Mixedwood subregion 80
Photo 4. Aw/Rose/Tall forb community type in the Dry Mixedwood subregion 98
Photo 5. Aw/Hazelnut community is very common in the eastern ecodistricts of the Dry
Mixedwood subregion 98
Photo 6. Pj/Bearberry community type in the Dry Mixedwood subregion 126
Photo 7. This picture represents the Plains wormwood/Sheep fescue-Sedge community type.
This community type is common on dry sandy hills throughout the Central Mixedwood
subregion 153
Photo 8. This range improvement clearing exhibits signs of heavy grazing pressure and is slowly
being invaded by tall buttercup J/77
Photo 9. Aw/Rose/Clover community type represents a Central Mixedwood deciduous
community that has been moderately to heavily grazed for a number of years 189
Photo 10. The Balsam fir- White spruce/Moss community type is the climatic climax community
for the Central Mixedwood subregion 215
Photo 11. The Aspen/Rose/Marsh Reedgrass/Fireweed (CME1) community type develops after
clear-cut logging of the modal Aspen/Rose/Tall Forb (CMC8) community 232
xi
ABSTRACT
The Dry and Central Mixedwood subregions cover nearly 40% of the province and are
dominated by aspen, jack pine on coarse textured soils and black spruce, willows and sedges in
the poorly drained areas. The vegetative communities in these subregions are important because
they provide summer range for livestock, prime habitat for many species of wildlife, productive
watersheds, recreational areas and timber harvesting. Despite the importance of these vegetation
types there is little information on their ecology. The lack of information makes it very difficult
to develop sustainable management prescriptions for multiple use. As a result guides like this
and “Ecosites of Northern Alberta” (Beckingham and Archibald 1996) are being developed to
provide a framework that will easily group the vegetative community types. It is hoped these
classification systems can be used by field staff to assess the ecology of the sites and develop
management prescriptions on lands within each region.
This guide represents the analysis of 949 grass, shrubland, conifer and deciduous plots
described in the Dry and Central Mixedwood subregions. These types are split into:
Dry Mixedwood subregion
A. Native grasslands and shrubland 33 types
B. Tame forage communities 13 types
C. Deciduous community types 22 types
D. Mixedwood and Conifer community types 15 types
Central Mixedwood subregion
A. Native grassland and shrubland 19 types
B. Tame forage communities 7 types
C. Deciduous community types 19 types
D. Mixedwood and Conifer community types 12 types
E. Forest Cutblock community types 4 types
Xll
INTRODUCTION
The province of Alberta is covered by a broad spectrum of vegetation regions from prairie
in the South, to alpine vegetation in the mountains and dense forests in the Central and Northern
parts of the province. These broad vegetation regions have been classified into 6 regions and 20
subregions (Dept, of Environmental Protection 1994). Within each subregion, there are groups
of plant communities which exist under similar, localized, environmental conditions and can be
further influenced by human impacts. Sustainable management of these subregions requires an
understanding of the ecology of the site as well as the ability to recognize the vegetative
communities that have similar productivity and response to disturbance.
Vegetative communities in the province of Alberta are highly regarded by most resource
managers for their ability to provide a wide variety of benefits. They are a classic example of
multiple use land, providing summer range for livestock, prime habitat for many species of
wildlife, productive watersheds and recreational areas. Despite the importance of these
vegetation types there is little information on their ecology. The lack of information makes it
very difficult to development sustainable management prescriptions for multiple use.
The purpose of this guide was to develop a framework that would easily group the plant
community types utilized by livestock in the Dry and Central Mixedwood subregions of the
province and provide ecologically sustainable stocking rate information. Plant communities are
grouped into a hierarchal system based on ecology. These groupings include successional
communities which occur under natural succession or disturbance such as fire, timber or grazing
operations. All of the known relationships among communities are described within this guide in
table format and/or schematically. Additionally, each known plant community is described in
detail.
It is hoped this classification system can be used by field staff to assess the ecology and
sustainable stocking rate of sites in order to develop management prescriptions on lands within
each subregion. This guide supplements the work done by Beckingham and Archibald (1996) on
the forested community types in the Boreal Mixedwood of northern Alberta. Their guide is a
good description of the forested community types found within the subregions, but it does not
include forage production values or grazing management information. It also does not provide a
description of the native grassland and shrubland communities which are utilized extensively by
livestock in these subregions.
CLIMATE AND MODAL PLANT COMMUNITIES
Dry Mixedwood subregion
The Dry Mixedwood (DM) subregion represents a transition between the Central and
Peace River Parklands and the Central Mixedwood subregions. This subregion occurs in three
areas of the province (Map 1). One section is located between the Central Parkland and the
Central Mixedwood subregions in the southern portion of the boreal forest and includes the
Onion Lake, Athabasca, Westlock plains and Whitefish and Frog Uplands ecodistricts (Strong
1
and Thompson 1995). A second area is located immediately east of Edmonton in the Cooking
Lake upland ecodistrict. The third and largest area parallels the Peace River in northwestern
Alberta from Grande Prairie to Fort Vermillion and includes the Debolt, Dunvegan, Falher,
Smoky, Grimshaw, Manning, High Level and Boyer plains ecodistricts.
Mean summer temperature is 13.8°C and winter temperatures average -10.5 °C, which is
somewhat warmer than the Central Mixedwood subregion and somewhat cooler than the
Parkland subregion. Mean annual precipitation is 380 mm, which is drier than the Central
Mixedwood, but wetter than the Parkland subregion.
The modal plant community in this subregion is dominated by aspen, with a variable
understory dominated by rose, pea-vine, beaked hazelnut, saskatoon and marsh reed grass. Jack
pine stands are found on well drained, coarse-textured parent materials and poorly drained sites
are dominated by black spruce, willows and sedge species.
Map 1 . Location of Dry and
Central Mixedwood Subregions in
Alberta.
Central Mixedwood subregion
The Central Mixedwood (CM) subregion is the largest in the province covering over
210,000 km2 or nearly 32% of the province (Strong and Leggat 1992)( Map 1). Mean annual
summer temperature is 13.5 °C and winter temperature averages -13 °C. Annual precipitation
averages 397 mm which is wetter than the Dry Mixedwood.
The modal plant communities are vegetated by aspen and balsam poplar with understories
composed of a variety of herbs and deciduous shrubs. White spruce and balsam fir are the
climatic climax species but are not well represented because of the frequent occurrence of fire.
On dry, well drained, coarse-textured soils jack pine dominates and the poorly drained sites are
dominated by black spruce, willows and sedge species. These communities are very similar to
the Dry Mixedwood subregion, but drier conditions of the Dry Mixedwood favours formation of
a number of native grassland communities which are not found in the Central Mixedwood.
2
APPROACH AND METHODS OF CLASSIFICATION
Approach: Ecological classification hierarchy and terminology
The system of classification in this guide was initially based on the community type
approach of Mueggler (1988). Mueggler’s system was chosen over the habitat type approach
(Daubenmire 1952) or ecosystem association approach (Corns and Annas 1986) because it could
classify plant communities irregardless of their successional status. However, as the philosophy
of rangeland health and proper functioning condition of a site evolved, it became apparent
(through data analysis) that there was a need to also organize the various plant communities
based on their response to disturbance (i.e. disturbance vs. natural succession) within an area
under similar environmental influences.
It was determined that the ecosystem classification system developed by Corns and Annas
(1986) and Beckingham et al. (1996) could accommodate this additional requirement. Thus, the
new system developed for rangelands is a combination of Mueggler (1988) and Beckingham et
al. (1996). Consequently, this guide adopts a similar ecological unit classification hierarchy
(ecosite, ecosite phase, plant community). In an effort to first, link the hierarchical system with
the historic rangeland system, and second, to create a provincially standardized rangeland
approach, slightly different classification terminology was developed. The new terms ecological
site and ecological site phase (replacing Beckingham et al.’s [1996] ecosite and ecosite phase
terms respectively), provide subtle distinction to recognize the blending of the old systems and
still be recognizable to readers familiar with the original terminology. See Figure 1 for a flow
chart of the classification and general presentation of information. See Figure 2 for a
representation of the ecosite phases in the Boreal Mixedwood Region.
Methods: Plant community classification
Sampling for this guide occurred within the Dry and Central Mixedwood subregions.
This guide outlines the classification of 685 plots described in the Dry Mixedwood and 210 plots
described in the Central Mixedwood subregions. The procedure for inventory of plots followed
the Range Survey Manual (1992) and uses the MF5 form. A plot consisted ofalOmxlOm
macroplot and ten randomly selected 1 m x 1 m microplots to record the canopy cover of shrubs
and ten nested 20 cm x 50 cm microplots to record the canopy cover of forbs and grass. For a
description of the methodology for riparian plots done in the Mixedwood subregions see
(Thompson and Hansen 2004). The data for each site was analysed using the multivariate
analysis techniques of classification and ordination. Classification is the assignment of samples
to classes or groups based on the similarity of species. A polythetic agglomerative approach was
used to group the samples. This technique assigns each sample to a cluster which has a single
measure. It then agglomerates these clusters into a hierarchy of larger and larger clusters until
finally a single cluster contains all the samples (Gauch 1982). Cluster analysis was performed in
SAS and Euclidean distance was used as the Cluster Distance Measure and Ward’s method was
used in the Group Linkage Method. The groupings generated in cluster analysis were overlain on
the site ordination to determine final groupings.
3
Figure 1. Ecological Classification System for Alberta
bl bluebeiTy Pj- Aw | d2 lowbush cranberry Aw-$w| el dogwood Pb-Aw | f3 horsetail Sw | k2 shrubby rich fem | fl marsh
Source: Figure 12 Schematic cross section of the Boreal Mixedwood
represented by common ecosite phases and soil types. (Beckingham and Archibald 1996)
Figure 2. Ecosite phases of the Boreal Mixedwood Natural Region.
5
Ordination was used to find relationships among species, communities and environmental
variables. Ordination reduces the dimensionality of the data to 1-3 most important axes to which
environmental gradients can be assigned. The ordination technique used in the analysis of the
data was DECORANA (Detrended Correspondence Analysis). DECORANA detrends and
rescales the axes thereby reducing the arching and compression of axes problems associated with
other ordination techniques (Reciprocal averaging, Principle Components Analysis). Once final
groupings were determined on the ordination specific environmental variables can be assigned to
the variation outlined on the ordination axes.
Plant community type summaries were generated in SAS, by averaging plant species
composition, range in composition, and percent constancy of occurrence, among vegetation
inventory plots which were part of a community type. Environmental data was subsequently
sorted into the same plant community groupings to create the plant community descriptions
outlined in this guide. The number of sample plots on which the description was based is also
provided (e.g. n=16).
RANGE MANAGEMENT CONCEPTS AND METHODS
Ecologically sustainable stocking rates
Ecologically sustainable stocking rates (ESSR) values are suggested for each plant
community. These values reflect the maximum number of livestock (i.e animal unit month
[AUM] per area [e.g. ac]) that can be supported by the plant community given inherent
biophysical constraints and the ecological goal of sustainable health and proper functioning of
the plant community. When the ESSR is multiplied by the area of a plant community polygon
the result is termed ecologically sustainable carrying capacity (ESCC), and is expressed as
AUMs. Often the ESCC must be adjusted for management factors (e.g. reduced livestock
distribution), management goals (e.g. multiple use and values, etc.), drought conditions, and
other natural phenomena impacting the site (e.g. forage quality, fire, pests, etc.). This
adjusted/reduced value is the ecologically sustainable grazing capacity (ESGC). The ESGC
values are not provided in the plant community guide because the necessary adjustments are
determined by the rangeland resource manager.
Suggested ESSR values were determined from a combination of clipping studies, long-
term rangeland reference area data, estimated production, and historical grazing experience. In
order to sustain ecological health and function of the plant community, the ESSR was based on
the allocation of up to 25 % of total production for forested plant community types, and up to 50
% of total production for grass and shrub land types within the Dry and Central Mixedwood
subregions, and the forage requirements one animal unit (i.e. 455 kg of dry matter per month).
The stocking rate ranges provided, are based on total forage production tempered by the forage
value of the contributing plant species and the ecological status of the plant community. For
example a plant community with high total production but that is mostly composed of
unpalatable or unreachable material will have a high end range value based on less than 25% of
total production. If this same plant community is of low ecological status, a further reduction is
made to the range and the recommended stocking rate to allow for health recovery. The
unallocated biomass production (carry over), is needed for the maintenance of ecological
6
functions (e.g. nutrient cycling, viable diverse plant communities, hydrological function, and soil
protection, etc.) and plant community services (forage production, habitat maintenance, etc.).
The allocation of biomass production in this manner is well established, and supported, by the
scientific community and the percent allocation varies with Natural Subregion (Holechek et al.
1995).
Rangeland Health
Range health is determined by comparing the functioning of ecological processes on an
area (e.g. plant community polygon) of rangeland to a standard (i.e. RPC) described within an
ecological site description. An ecological site is similar to the concept of range site, but a
broader list of characteristics are described. An ecological site is defined by the Task Group on
Unity and Concepts (1995) as, “a distinctive kind of land with specific physical characteristics
that differs from other kinds of land in its ability to produce a distinctive kind and amount of
vegetation This guide can be used to determine the appropriate reference range plant
community, within an ecological site, for a rangeland health assessment.
Rangeland health assessments are utilized to make a rapid determination of the ecological
health of rangeland. We use range health terminology (healthy, healthy with problems, or
unhealthy), to rank the ability of rangeland to perform certain ecological functions. These
functions include: net primary production, maintenance of soil/site stability, capture and
beneficial release of water, nutrient and energy cycling and plant species functional diversity.
For a detailed description on how to assess rangeland health for various plant communities please
refer to “ Rangeland Health Assessment for Grassland, Forest and Tame Pasture ” (Adams et al.
2003).
A ecological status score [i.e. the integrity of the plant community composition compared
to the reference plant community] has been added to each community type description. These
values are based on what is currently known about how a reference plant community (RPC)
responds to various kinds and levels of disturbance or successional processes. The values
indicate how a particular plant community fits in the state and transition model relative to the
RPC. If an experienced observer wishes to estimate the health of a plant community without
competing a health form, (e.g. a small riparian area), these values can be used as a guide.
Occasionally there are 2 options provided for the ecological status score. This was done for two
reasons: 1) to express the range of divergence from the RPC possible for a particular plant
community; or 2) to allow for different health forms to be used in communities with variable
shrub or tree cover (e.g. on sites with high woody cover and/or an obvious LFH layer use the
forest rangeland health form and the corresponding ecological status score; on sites dominated by
herbaceous cover and/or an obvious herbaceous litter layer use the native grassland form). [Note:
For riparian plant communities the riparian health assessment form should be used.]
Range management objectives tend to favour the later stages of plant succession (late-
seral to potential natural community (PNC) or good to excellent range condition) (Adams et al.
2003). Late serai plant communities tend to be superior in the efficient capture of solar energy,
in cycling of organic matter and nutrients, in retaining moisture, in supporting wildlife habitat
values and in providing the highest potential productivity for the site. In contrast, early serai
stages represent plant communities with diminished ecological processes, which are less stable
7
and more vulnerable to erosion and invasion by weeds and non-native species. They also have
diminished resource values for livestock forage production, wildlife habitat and watershed
protection (Adams et al. 2003). Healthy rangelands perform important ecological functions and
provide a broader suite of goods and services. In most cases these late serai plant communities
are used as the RPC, but sometimes management goals influence the choice of RPC (e.g. a cut
block to be maintained as untimbered rangeland).
HOW TO USE THE GUIDE
Organization of the guide
This guide is an expansion of the Ecosites of Northern Alberta guide (Beckingham and
Archibald 1996). It contains new information and it is recommended that the reader has access
to relevant information from both guides. The community types in this guide are closely related
to the ecosites and ecosite phases outlined in Ecosites of Northern Alberta (Beckingham and
Archibald 1996), and are similarly arranged (e.g. Table 1). Table 1 and Table 6 are a
reproduction of Figure 1 1 in Ecosites of Northern Alberta with community types in this guide
further separated into reference range plant communities, successional communities and
harvesting and fire communities. The “Successional community types” or “Harvesting and Fire
succession” categories outline the successional sequence the community types undergo with
heavy grazing pressure, harvesting or fire disturbance.
The majority of ecological site and ecological site phase summary tables as well as the
plant community descriptions are recorded in Ecosites of Northern Alberta (Beckingham and
Archibald 1996). Any new ecological sites and ecological site phases reported in the fourth
approximation are also included in this guide and are summarized before the community type
descriptions. The bulk of this guide is community descriptions which include information on the
dominant plant species, canopy cover, environmental conditions, response to grazing, forage
production and suggested ESSRs. When available, we have included plant community
successional information to help us determine rangeland health and the successional relationships
on an ecological site.
Generally, in both guides, ecological units within a subregion are classified by their position
on the edatopic grid [a specific combination of soil moisture and soil nutrient regime] (Figures 3
and 6).
The information in this guide is presented and named by:
1 . Subregion/Ecological area
a. Dry Mixedwood [DM]
b. Central Mixedwood [CM]
2. Dominant cover type
a. Native grasslands and Shrublands [A]
b. Tame forage communities [B]
c. Deciduous forest [C]
d. Mixedwood and Conifer forest [D]
e. Forest Cutblock communities [E]
8
NOTE: Each dominant cover type may overlay several ecological sites and ecological site
phases. For example DMA community types occur in 8 ecological sites [aa, bb, c, d, dd, f, k,
and 1].
3. Community types are presented and named by:
a. Subregion/Ecological area and dominant cover type [e.g. DMA].
b. Position on the edatopic grid. Generally, communities are named/numbered from low
moisture /nutrient status to high moisture/nutrient status. For example, DMA3 is a
Plains wormwood/Sedge community on the“aa” xeric/poor ecological site, while
DMA7 is a Saskatoon-snowberry/hairy wild rye community type on the “d” mesic
medium ecological site.
NOTE: As additional information is collected and new ecological units are identified and
described, an attempt is made to fit them into the pre-existing ones. At times the usual
conventions of naming and organization have to be compromised to accommodate the new
units. Sometimes it was necessary to add an additional letter to an existing name to wedge
the new unit into the appropriate place within the pre-existing ones. For example, the extra
letter in the new ecological site “dd” and the pre-existing ecological site “d”.
Identifying plant community types
There are two methods to identify plant community types in this guide. The first method
uses a key within the dominant cover categories of native grass and shrubland, tame forage,
deciduous, or mixedwood and conifer. The second method involves using soil moisture and
nutrient information and indicator species to identify plant community types.
Method 1. Use dichotomous key within dominant cover categories
Step 1. Pick the appropriate subregion [DRY MIXEDWOOD or CENTRAL
MIXEDWOOD].
Step 2. Pick the appropriate category the community type is in within each subregion.
A. The area does not have an overstory tree canopy and has not been cleared
and broken, the community will fall under the NATIVE GRASSLANDS
and SHRUBLANDS category.
B. The area has been cleared of trees, broken, and seeded down to tame forage
species such as timothy or creeping red fescue, the community will be in the
TAME GRASS category.
C. The DECIDUOUS category includes all plant communities that are
dominated, [i.e. >70% of the overstory], by deciduous tree species.
Deciduous cutblocks are included here.
D. Communities which have begun to undergo succession from deciduous to
conifer overstory may fall into the MIXEDWOOD category. The following
is a general rule of thumb. The site is a mixedwood community if the
conifer and the deciduous overstories each range between 30 -70% of the
total overstory cover. For example a deciduous cover of 40% and a conifer
cover of 60% is a mixedwood community. If in doubt, determine if the
9
understory is responding more to a deciduous or coniferous influence [e.g.
loss of production due to conifer shading]. Communities dominated [i.e.
>70% of the overstory] by a conifers are classified in the CONIFER
category.
Step 3. Turn to the appropriate section [e.g. DMA] and work through the key provided to
determine the choose the closest matching community type for the site you are
evaluating. At times, the community in question does not seem to match any of
the known / reported types. When this happens, consider the following
information in the detailed community type descriptions.
1 . In the general description text.
a. The number of plots utilized to describe the community [n=number of
plots]. The greater the number of plots [i.e. information available], the
greater the level of confidence in the clarity and accuracy of the
description including the suggested ESSR.
b. Information about where the community is found on the landscape,
response to disturbance, and natural succession. Use this information
together with your field experience to determine the likely hood of a
similar situation occurring on the site in question.
2. Under Plant Composition heading.
a. The range of a plant species canopy cover. For example, a species with
a range of 0-25% may not always be visible on the site, having 0%
canopy cover or it may have up to 25% cover.
b. The consistency value. This indicates the percentage of the plots that
the species was actually present. So if n=16 and consistency was 75%,
then the species occurred in 12 of the plots and not in 4 of them.
c. Note that tree species in the shrub LAYER are listed in the shrub
section.
3. Try to use the other method to see if you can determine the plant
community.
Step 4. This step is necessary only if you are completing a rangeland health assessment.
In order to determine the health status of the site in question, you must decide the
appropriate reference range plant community [RPC] to compare it to. Depending
on the type of disturbance [grazing, timber operations, etc.] successional
pathways may differ. The RPC would usually be the plant community that is at
the start of the pathway. Management goals can influence the choice of RPC.
For example, if an aspen-rose community on a “d” ecological site [e.g. DMC2]
had undergone timber harvest, had not been seeded with tame forage species and
the goal was to maintain it as a native community with out a mature aspen
canopy, the appropriate RPC would be DMC10. Alternatively, if the site was to
be cultivated, seeded and managed as a tame pasture, the appropriate RPC might
be DMB12.
10
Method 2. Use edatope and indicator species
[see appendix for indicator species list and page 18-19 for plant edatopes.]
Step 1. Pick the appropriate subregion [DRY MIXEDWOOD or CENTRAL
MIXEDWOOD]. [e.g. DM]
Step 2. Determine the appropriate ecological site based on position on the edatopic grid
for the subregion. First decide soil moisture status, then soil nutrient status of the
site in question. Use any available soils information to assist [e.g. AGRASID, or
PLC]. [e.g. DM - mesic/medium is the “d” low-bush cranberry ecological site or
DM-d]
Step 3. Look up the possible ecological site phases within the selected ecological site on
Table 1 or 6. [e.g. DM-d has “dl” low-bush cranberry aspen; “d2” low-bush
cranberry aspen spruce; “d3”low-bush cranberry white spruce; and “d4”
shrubland.]
Step 4. Select the appropriate ecological site phase by first determining the dominant
overstory [i.e the highest layer of vegetation which can be either a tree, shrub, or
grass species], [e.g. For a site dominated by aspen (i.e. DM-dl), the appropriate
ecological site phase is “dl” low-bush cranberry aspen.]
Step 5. Select the appropriate community type. Within the selected ecological site
phase, use indicator understory species to choose the closest matching
community type. This information is shown in table 1 or 6 as part of the
community type name [e.g. DMC7 aspen/saskatoon]. It is also detailed in the
specific community type descriptions [i.e. species with the highest average
canopy cover and consistency]. At times, the community in question does not
seem to match any of the known / reported types. When this happens, consider
the following information in the detailed community type descriptions.
1 . In the general description text.
a. The number of plots utilized to describe the community [n=number of
plots]. The greater the number of plots [i.e. information available], the
greater the level of confidence in the clarity and accuracy of the
description including the suggested ESSR.
b. Information about where the community is found on the landscape,
response to disturbance, and natural succession. Use this information
together with your field experience to determine the likely hood of a
similar situation occurring on the site in question.
2. Under Plant Composition heading.
a. The range of a plant species canopy cover. For example, a species with
a range of 0-25% may not always be visible on the site, having 0%
canopy cover or it may have up to 25% cover.
b. The consistency value. This indicates the percentage of the plots that
the species was actually present. So if n=16 and consistency was 75%,
then the species occurred in 12 of the plots and not in 4 of them.
c. Note that tree species in the shrub LAYER are listed in the shrub
section.
11
3. Try to use the other method to see if you can determine the plant
community.
Step 6. This step is the same as step 4 in method 1 and is necessary only if you are
completing a rangeland health assessment. In order to determine the health status
of the site in question, you must decide the appropriate reference range plant
community [RPC] to compare it to. Depending on the type of disturbance
[grazing, timber operations, etc.] successional pathways may differ. The RPC
would usually be the plant community that is at the start of the pathway.
Management goals can influence the choice of RPC. For example, if an aspen-
rose community on a “d” ecological site [e.g. DMC2] had undergone timber
harvest, had not been seeded with tame forage species and the goal was to
maintain it as a native community with out a mature aspen canopy, the
appropriate RPC would be DMC10. Alternatively, if the site was to be
cultivated, seeded and managed as a tame pasture, the appropriate RPC might be
DMB12.
12
DRY MIXEDWOOD SUBREGION
13
Wet
'J
<=>
3
4
5
A
l
6
V
vl
j
J
a>
\
3
9
horsetails
Poor < > Rich
tamarack
Poor i > Rich
white spruce
~= green alder
Figure 3 A. Selected plant species occurrences relative to moisture and nutrient regimes.
18
1- reindeer lichen
2- cloudberry
9
bue
bear
berry &
Derry
bog cranberry
(Vaccvit)
snowberry & Canada
buffalo-berry
low bush
cranberry
dewberry
Poor
Rich
A B C D E
bracted honeysuckle
dogwood & ferns
Figure 3B. Selected plant species occurrences relative to moisture and nutrient regimes.
19
<u
E
*5jo
£
©
£
Nutrient Regime
Very Very
poor Poor Med. Rich rich
A B C D E
Xeric 2
Subxeric 3
Submesic 4
Mesic 5
Subhygric 6
Hygric 7
Subhydric 8
Hydric 9
aa
1
a
/ |
bb
\
(
aT. x'
•* i
dd
1
t
c
i
d
-
V
V
f
e
A
i
9
\ \
h
1
]
/
/
j
: /
k
"1,
1
V
J)
Figure 4. Edatopic grid for the Dry Mixedwood
subregion
Ecological sites of the Dry Mixedwood subregion:
f
aa grassland (xeric/poor)
a lichen (subxeric/poor)
g
h
bb grassland (subxeric/medium)
i
b blueberry (submesic/medium)
c Labrador tea-mesic (mesic/poor)
j
k
d low-bush cranberry (mesic/medium)
dd grassland (mesic/rich)
e dogwood (subhygric/rich)
1
horsetail (hygric/rich)
Labrador tea-subhygric (subhygric/poor)
Labrador tea/horsetail (hygric/medium)
bog (subhygric/very poor)
poor fen (subhydric/medium)
rich fen (subhydric/rich)
marsh (hydric/rich)
20
Ecological Site “aa” fact sheet
aa grass/shrubland (n=2)
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
This ecosite is associated with small grassy openings within
Jack pine and aspen forests. This site has dry conditions,
with rapidly drained, nutrient poor soils. The parent
materials are generally coarse textured eolian, glacialfluvial
or fluvial eolian in origin. The high insolation and dry site
conditions favour the growth of grassland species. These
include Northern ricegrass, slender wheat grass, Sedge,
bearberry and plains wormwood In the moister sites (lower
slope positions) aspen and shrubs ( saskatoon, rose) are
quite common.
SUCCESSIONAL RELATIONSHIPS
Due to the nature of the site grasslands often remain the
climax vegetation on these sites. In the moister lower slope
positions shrubs often dominate the site with succession to
aspen and spruce. On the drier hilltops and midslopes
grasslands dominated by plains wormwood and northern
ricegrass usually represent the climax vegetation. Heavy
grazing pressure on the grasslands can often lead to a
degraded site that is dominated by kentucky bluegrass on
the moister sites.
INDICATOR SPECIES
Saskatoon
Rose
Snowberry
Beaked hazelnut
Plains wormwood
Bearberry
Strawberry
Sheep fescue
Northern ricegrass
Slender wheat grass
Hairy wild rye
xeric/poor
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Moisture regime: xeric, subxeric, submesic
Nutrient regime: poor, medium
Topographic position: crest, upper, mid to lower slope
Slope: (0-2%) (5-10%)
Aspect: south, southwest, west
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
Organic thickness: (0-2)
Humus form: mor
Surface texture: SL,L
Effective texture: SL, S
Depth to Mottles/GIey: none
Drainage: rapid, well
Parent material: E, GF,FE,F
Soil subgroup: O.EB, E.DYB O.R, E.EB
ECOLOGICAL SITE PHASES
aal Plains wormwood (2)
21
Ecological Site Phase “aal" fact sheet
aal Plains wormwood (n=2)
CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Forb
[ 8 ] Scouring rush
[ 12 ] Plains wormwood*
[ 1 ] Lowgoldenrod
[ 1 ] American vetch
[ 1 ] Yellow beardstongue
[ 10 ] Common yarrow
Moisture regime: xeric, subxeric
Nutrient regime: poor,
Topographic position: crest, upper slope, midslope
Slope: 5-10%, 10-20%
Aspect: westerly, southerly
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
Grasses
[18] Sedge species*
[ 2 ] Sheep fescue*
[ 2 ] Creeping red fescue
[ 5 ] Kentucky bluegrass
Organic thickness: (0-2)
Humus form: mor
Surface texture: S, SL
Effective texture: S
Depth to Mottles/Gley: none
Drainage: rapid, well
Parent material: E, GF, FE
Soil subgroup: O.R, O.EB, E.EB
RANGE PLANT COMMUNITY TYPES
DMA3. Plains wormwood/Sedge
22
Ecological Site “bb” fact sheet
bb grassland (n=20)
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
This ecosite is associated with the south and west facing
slopes along the Peace, Smoky and Wapiti rivers in the Dry
Mixedwood subregion of Northwestern Alberta. This site
has dry conditions, with rapidly drained, nutrient rich soils.
The parent materials are generally glacio lacustrine,
morainal, colluvial and fluvial in origin. The high
insolation and dry site conditions favour the growth of
grassland species. These include Western porcupine grass,
Northern wheat grass, Junegrass, Sedge and Fringed sage.
In the moister draws aspen and shrubs (snowberry,
saskatoon, chokecherry) are quite common.
SUCCESSIONAL RELATIONSHIPS
Due to the nature of the site grasslands often remain the
climax vegetation on these sites. In the moister draws and
lower slope positions aspen and spruce can succeed onto
these grasslands. Frequent fire will often control the
succession to trees in the moist areas. Heavy grazing
pressure on the grasslands can often lead to a degraded site
that is dominated by fringed sage, upland sedges and
junegrass.
INDICATOR SPECIES
Western porcupine grass Green needlegrass
Northern wheat grass Saskatoon
Junegrass Snowberry
Upland sedge
Fringed sage
subxeric/medium
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Moisture regime: subxeric, submesic
Nutrient regime: poor, medium, rich
Topographic position: crest, upper slope, midslope
Slope: 27%, 45%, 90%
Aspect: south, southwest, west
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
Organic thickness: (0-2)
Humus form: mull
Surface texture: L,CL
Effective texture: C, SCL
Depth to Mottles/Gley: none
Drainage: rapid, well
Parent material: GF, M, C, F
Soil subgroup: O.BL, R.BL, O.MB,
S.GL,CA.DB,O.B,O.EB
ECOLOGICAL SITE PHASES
bbl Western porcupine grass (7)
bb2 Northern wheat grass (13)
23
Ecological Site Phase “bbl" fact sheet
bbl Western porcupine grass (n=7)
CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Shrub
[ 8 ] Fringed sage*
[ 1 ] Saskatoon
[ 2 ] Snowberry
Moisture regime: subxeric, submesic
Nutrient regime: medium, rich
Topographic position: crest, upper slope, midslope
Slope: 25-35%, 35-72%
Aspect: westerly, southerly
Forb
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
[ 1 ] Little leaved everlasting
[ 1 ] White camas
[ 1 ] Loose flowered milkvetch
[ 2 ] Prairie crocus
[ 1 ] Wild blue flax
Grasses
[ 15 ] Western porcupine grass*
[ 15 ] Sedge species*
[ 5 ] Green needle grass*
[ 6 ] Junegrass*
[ 1 ] Western wheat grass
[ 1 ] Kentucky bluegrass
[ 2 ] Northern wheat grass
Organic thickness: (0-2)
Humus form: mull
Surface texture: L,CL
Effective texture: C, SCL
Depth to Mottles/Gley: none
Drainage: rapid, well
Parent material: GF, M, C, F
Soil subgroup: O.BL, R.BL, O.MB, S.GL, CA.DB,O.B,
O.EB
RANGE PLANT COMMUNITY TYPES
DMA5. Western porcupine grass-Sedge/Fringed sage
24
Ecological Site Phase “bb2" fact sheet
bb2 Northern wheat grass (n= 13)
CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES
Shrub
[ 6 ] Fringed sage*
[ 6 ] Saskatoon
[ 3 ] Snowberry
[ 3 ] Rose
Forb
[ 1 ] Little leaved everlasting
[ 1 ] Lindley’s aster
[ 1 ] Showy locoweed
[ 1 ] Cut leaved anemone
[ 1 ] Wild blue flax
[ 2 ] Dandelion
Grasses
[ 3] Sedge species*
[ 2 ] Green needle grass*
[ 5 ] Junegrass*
[ 3 ] Western wheat grass
[ 1 ] Richardson’s needlegrass
[ 10 ] Northern wheat grass*
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Moisture regime: xeric, subxeric
Nutrient regime: poor, medium
Topographic position: crest, upper slope, midslope
Slope: 10-90%
Aspect: westerly, southerly
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
Organic thickness: (0-2)
Humus form: mull
Surface texture: L,CL
Effective texture: C, SCL
Depth to Mottles/Gley: none
Drainage: rapid, well
Parent material: GF, M, C, F
Soil subgroup: O.R, O.MB, O.EB, O.B, SZ.GL
RANGE PLANT COMMUNITY TYPES
DMA6. Northern wheat grass-Junegrass/Fringed sage
25
Ecological Site Phase “d4" fact sheet
d4 Saskatoon-Snowberry (n=l 1)
CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES
Tree
[ 4 ] Aspen
Shrub
[ 2 ] Beaked hazelnut
[17] Saskatoon*
[ 15 ] Snowberry*
[ 23 ] Rose*
Forb
[ 3 ] Northern bedstraw
[ 1 ] Strawberry
[2] Yellow pea vine
[ 2 ] Lindley’s aster
[ 2 ] American vetch
[ 1 ] Bearberry
[ 2 ] Common yarrow
Grasses
[ 4 ] Sedge species*
[ 1 ] Northern ricegrass
[ 3 ] Smooth brome
[ 2 ] Slender wheat grass*
[ 1 ] Kentucky bluegrass
[ 2 ] Hairy wild rye
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Moisture regime: submesic, mesic
Nutrient regime: medium
Topographic position: lower slope, midslope
Slope: 0-72%
Aspect: westerly, southerly
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
Organic thickness: (0-2)
Humus form: mor
Surface texture: L, SL
Effective texture: S, SL
Depth to Mottles/Gley: none
Drainage: rapid, well
Parent material: GF, M, C, F, GL
Soil subgroup: O.R, O.MB, O.EB, DG.SO, BR.GL
RANGE PLANT COMMUNITY TYPES
DMA7. Saskatoon-Snowberry/Hairy wild rye
DMA8. Saskatoon/Sweet clover/Smooth brome
26
Ecological Site Phase “dla" fact sheet
dla Grazed Aw (n=66)
CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES
Tree
[ 48 ] Aspen*
[ 1 ] Balsam poplar
Shrub
[ 6 ] Raspberry
[ 1 ] Low bush cranberry
[ 4 ] Snowberry
[ 14 ] Rose*
Forb
[ 2 ] Northern bedstraw
[ 4 ] Strawberry*
[4] Yellow pea vine
[ 4 ] Bunchberry*
[ 3 ] Lindley’s aster
[ 3 ] Wild lily-of-the-valley*
[ 3 ] Dewberry
[ 4 ] Wintergreen*
[ 1 ] Dandelion*
[ 1 ] Clover species*
Grasses
[ 2 ] Marsh reed grass
[ 3 ] Hairy wild rye
[ 1] Purple oat grass*
[ 2 ] Slender wheat grass*
[ 1 ] Kentucky bluegrass
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Moisture regime:, mesic
Nutrient regime: medium
Topographic position: mid, lower slope, level
Slope: 0-5%
Aspect: variable
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
Organic thickness: (6-15), (0-5)
Humus form: mor, raw moder
Surface texture: SiL, SL, S, L
Effective texture: C, SiC, CL, SCL, SiCL
Depth to Mottles/Gley: none, (0-25)
Drainage: well, mod. well, imperfect
Parent material: GF, M, GL
Soil subgroup: O.GL, GR.GL, GL.GL
RANGE PLANT COMMUNITY TYPES
DMC3. Aw/Rose/Low forb
DMC3a. Aw-Pb/Dandelion/Kentucky bluegrass
27
Ecological Site Phase “dlb" fact sheet
dlb Harvested Aw (n=4)
CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES
Tree
[ 20 ] Aspen
[ 1 ] Balsam poplar
Shrub
[ 5 ] Raspberry
[ 2 ] Saskatoon
[ 3 ] Snowberry
[ 19 ] Rose
[ 2 ] Low bush cranberry
Forb
[ 4 ] Northern bedstraw
[21] Strawberry
[ 1 ] Yellow peavine
[ 4 ] Lindley’s aster
[ 1 ] American vetch
[ 4 ] Fireweed
[ 1 ] Bunchberry
Grasses
[17] Marsh reed grass
[ 2 ] Northern ricegrass
[ 1 ] Hairy wild rye
[ 1 ] Slender wheat grass
[ 2 ] Timothy
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Moisture regime:, mesic
Nutrient regime: medium
Topographic position: mid, lower slope, level
Slope: 0-5%
Aspect: variable
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
Organic thickness: (6-15), (0-5)
Humus form: mor, raw moder
Surface texture: SiL, SL, S, L
Effective texture: C, SiC, CL, SCL, SiCL
Depth to Mottles/Gley: none, (0-25)
Drainage: well, mod. well, imperfect
Parent material: GF, M, GL
Soil subgroup: O.GL, GR.GL, GL.GL
RANGE PLANT COMMUNITY TYPES
DMC10. Deciduous cutblocks
28
Ecological Site “dd” fact sheet
dd grassland (n=6)
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
This ecosite is associated with the remnant prairies located
throughout the Peace River district of Alberta. This site is
associated with the dark colored solonetzic and chemomzic
soils of the region. The parent materials are generally fine
textured, slightly saline, fluvial, lacustrine or lacustrine-
till in origin. The hard impermeable B horizon and slightly
saline conditions tend to favour the growth of grassland
species. These include Western porcupine grass, slender
wheat grass, sedge, California oat grass and fringed sage
Trees appear to be gradually moving into the old prairie
remnants where the unfavorable characteristics of the
solonetzic soils have been improved from many of the
agricultural practices in the area.
SUCCESSIONAL RELATIONSHIPS
Due to the nature of the site grasslands often remain the
climax vegetation on these sites. However, industrial
activities have greatly modified the original vegetation
cover. Heavy grazing pressure on the remnant grasslands
can often lead to a degraded site that is dominated by
purple oat grass, sedge, Kentucky bluegrass, dandelion and
smooth brome.
INDICATOR SPECIES
Saskatoon
California oat grass
Rose
Sedge species
Snowberry
Kentucky bluegrass
Strawberry
Slender wheat grass
Veiny meadow rue
Western porcupine grass
Dandelion
Purple oat grass
Common yarrow
mesic/rich
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Moisture regime: mesic, submesic
Nutrient regime: medium, rich
Topographic position: level, lower slope
Slope: (0-5%)
Aspect: south, southwest, west
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
Organic thickness: (0-5)
Humus form: mull
Surface texture: L, SiCL
Effective texture: C, CL
Depth to Mottles/Gley: none
Drainage: well, mod. well
Parent material: L
Soil subgroup: DB.SO, BL.SO, DB.SS, BL.SS, O.DB,
R.DB
ECOLOGICAL SITE PHASES
ddl California oat grass-slender wheat grass
29
Ecological Site Phase “ddl" fact sheet
ddl California oat grass-slender wheat
grass (n=6)
CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES
Shrub
[ 1 ] Saskatoon
[ 8 ] Snowberry*
[ 4 ] Rose
Forb
[ 2 ] Northern bedstraw
[ 9 ] Strawberry
[ 5 ] Common yarrow
[ 1 ] Three flowered avens
[ 5 ] Dandelion
[ 10 ] Veiny meadow rue*
[ 4 ] American vetch
Grasses
[ 6 ] California oat grass*
[ 7 ] Western porcupine grass*
[ 9 ] Sedge species*
[ 14 ] Slender wheat grass*
[ 8 ] Kentucky bluegrass
[ 3 ] Junegrass
[ 17 ] Purple oat grass*
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Moisture regime: mesic, submesic
Nutrient regime: medium, rich
Topographic position: level, lower slope
Slope: (0-5%)
Aspect: south, southwest, west
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
Organic thickness: (0-5)
Humus form: mull
Surface texture: L, SiCL
Effective texture: C, CL
Depth to Mottles/Gley: none
Drainage: well, mod. well
Parent material: L
Soil subgroup: DB.SO, BL.SO, DB.SS, BL.SS
RANGE PLANT COMMUNITY TYPES
DMA4. Purple oat grass-Califomia oat grass-Sedge
DMA4a. Veiny meadow rue/Slender wheat grass-Fringed
brome
30
Ecological Site Phase “e4" fact sheet
e4 dogwood shrubland (n= 10)
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES
Trees
[ 1 ] Balsam poplar
Shrub
[ 25 ] Red osier dogwood
[ 5 ] Snowberry*
[ 9 ] Rose
[ 32 ] Silverberry
Forb
[ 2 ] Horsetail
[ 3 ] Strawberry
[ 1 ] Common yarrow
[ 3 ] Veiny meadow rue*
[ 2 ] American vetch
Grasses
[ 3 ] Smooth brome
[ 3 ] Marsh reed grass
[ 1 ] Sedge species*
[ 2 ] Kentucky bluegrass
Moisture regime: mesic, subhygric
Nutrient regime: rich
Topographic position: level, lower slope
Slope: (0-5%)
Aspect: variable
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
Organic thickness: (6-15)
Humus form: mor
Surface texture: SiL, Si, SiC, CL
Effective texture: SiC, C,
Depth to Mottles/Gley: (0-25)
Drainage: imperfect, poor, mod. well, well
Parent material: F, GL, M
Soil subgroup: O.LG, O.G, CU.R, GLCU.R
RANGE PLANT COMMUNITY TYPES
DMA17. Red osier dogwood/Marsh reed grass
DMA18. Silverberry/Smooth brome
31
Ecological Site Phase “f4" fact sheet
f4 horsetail/ Willow (n=39)
CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES
Shrub
[ 65 ] Willow*
[ 1 ] Bracted honeysuckle
[ 10 ] Rose
Forb
[18] Horsetail*
[ 9 ] Arrow leaved coltsfoot
[ 8 ] Lindley’s aster
[ 8 ] Bishop’s cap
[ 5 ] Strawberry
[ 4 ] Veiny meadow rue
[ 4 ] Dewberry
[ 2 ] Fire weed
Grasses
[ 23 ] Marsh reed grass*
[ 1 ] Hair-like sedge
[ 2 ] Slender wheat grass
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Moisture regime: subhygric, hygric, mesic
Nutrient regime: rich, medium
Topographic position: level, lower slope, toe
Slope: level (2-5%)
Aspect: level, northerly
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
Organic thickness: (6-15)
Humus form: mor
Surface texture: SiL, Si, SiC, CL
Effective texture: SiC, C,
Depth to Mottles/Gley: (0-25)
Drainage: imperfect, poor, mod. well, well
Parent material: F, GL, M
Soil subgroup: O.LG, O.G, CU.R, GLCU.R
RANGE PLANT COMMUNITY TYPES
DMA12. Willow/Horsetail/Marsh reed grass
DMA15. Sandbar willow
DMA16. Bebb willow/Marsh reed grass
32
Ecological Site Phase “f5" fact sheet
f5 horsetail/ Bw (n=6)
CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Tree
[ 25 ] Paper birch*
[5] Larch
[ 3 ] White spruce
Shrub
[ 8 ] Bracted honeysuckle
[ 45 ] River alder*
[3] Willow
Forb
[ 27 ] Horsetail*
[ 6 ] Dewberry
[ 5 ] Bishop’s cap
[ 3 ] Twinflower
[ 2 ] Sweet scented bedstraw
[ 1 ] Purple-stemmed aster
[ 1 ] American vetch
Grasses
Moisture regime: subhygric, hygric, mesic
Nutrient regime: rich, medium
Topographic position: level, lower slope, toe
Slope: level (2-5%)
Aspect: level, northerly
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
Organic thickness: (6-15)
Humus form: mor
Surface texture: SiL, Si, SiC, CL
Effective texture: SiC, C,
Depth to Mottles/Gley: (0-25)
Drainage: imperfect, poor, mod. well, well
Parent material: F, GL, M
Soil subgroup: O.LG, O.G, CU.R, GLCU.R
RANGE PLANT COMMUNITY TYPES
[ 9 ] Marsh reed grass* DMA13. River alder/Horsetail
[ 2 ] Sedge species
33
Ecological Site Phase “g2” fact sheet
g2 saline (n=ll)
CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Shrub
[ 1 ] Sandbar willow
Forb
[ 1 ] Sea side arrowgrass
[ 1 ] Sea side buttercup
[ 1 ] Horsetail
Grasses
[12] Rush species
[ 20 ] Three square rush
[ 30 ] Prairie bulrush
[ 30 ] Nuttall’s saltgrass
[ 25 ] Foxtail barley
Moisture regime: subhydric, hygric, hydric
Nutrient regime: medium, poor
Topographic position: level, lower slope, toe
Slope: level (2-5%)
Aspect: level, northerly
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
Organic thickness: >80
Humus form:
Surface texture: fibric, mesic
Effective texture: fibric, mesic, humic
Depth to Mottles/GIey: (0-25)
Drainage: imperfect, poor, very poor
Parent material: O, M
Soil subgroup: TY.M, R.G, TY.F, THU.M, R.HG, ME.OC
RANGE PLANT COMMUNITY TYPES
DMA25. Rush meadow
DMA27. Three square rush
DMA28. Prairie bulrush
DMA29. Nuttall’s saltgrass
DMA30. Foxtail barley
34
Ecological Site Phase “j3" fact sheet
j3 grassland poor fen (n=5)
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES
Shrub
[ 6 ] Bog willow
[ 1 ] Bog birch
Forb
[ 7 ] Buckbean
[ 5 ] Marsh cinquefoil
[ 3 ] Marsh marigold
Grasses
Moisture regime: subhydric, hygric, hydric
Nutrient regime: medium, poor
Topographic position: level, lower slope, toe
Slope: level (2-5%)
Aspect: level, northerly
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
Organic thickness: >80
Humus form:
Surface texture: fibric, mesic
Effective texture: fibric, mesic, humic
Depth to Mottles/Gley: (0-25)
Drainage: imperfect, poor, very poor
Parent material: O, M
Soil subgroup: TY.M, R.G, TY.F, THU.M, R.HG, ME.OC
[ 82 ] Two stamened sedge
[ 1 ] Water sedge RANGE PLANT COMMUNITY TYPES
DMA24. Two stamened sedge
35
Ecological Site Phase “k2a" fact sheet
k2a grazed Willow (n=13)
CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Tree
[ 1 ] Balsam poplar
Moisture regime: hydric, subhydric, hygric
Nutrient regime: rich, medium, very rich
Topographic position: level, depression
Shrub
Slope: level, (2-5%)
Aspect: level
[ 1 ] Rose
[ 14 ] Willow*
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
Forb
Organic thickness: >80, (6-15)
Humus form: peatymor
[ 22 ] Dandelion*
[ 1 ] Clover*
[2] Mint
[ 1 ] Plantain
Surface texture: fibric, C, mesic, SiL, humic
Effective texture: mesic, C, hC, fibric, SiC, humic
Depth to Mottles/Gley: (0-25)
Drainage: very poor, poor
Parent material: 0, GL, L
Grasses
Soil subgroup: R.G, R.HG, TY.F, O.F
[16] Kentucky bluegrass*
[ 12 ] Marsh reed grass
[ 1 ] Foxtail barley
[ 1 ] Sedge species
RANGE PLANT COMMUNITY TYPES
DMA11. Willow/Marsh reed grass-Kentucky bluegrass
DMA14. Willow/Kentucky bluegrass/Dandelion
36
Ecological Site Phase “k3a" fact sheet
k3a grazed meadow (n=2)
CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES
SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Forb
[ 60 ] Dandelion*
[ 14 ] Strawberry*
[12] Yellow peavine
[11] Common yarrow
[ 7 ] Horsetail
[ 3 ] Smooth aster
[ 3 ] American vetch
Grasses
[ 18 ] Kentucky bluegrass*
[ 16 ] Rough hairgrass
[ 5 ] Slender wheat grass
[ 4 ] Fringed brome
[ 2 ] Sedge species
Moisture regime: hydric, subhydric, hygric
Nutrient regime: rich, medium, very rich
Topographic position: level, depression
Slope: level, (2-5%)
Aspect: level
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
Organic thickness: >80, (6-15)
Humus form: peatymor
Surface texture: fibric, C, mesic, SiL, humic
Effective texture: mesic, C, hC, fibric, SiC, humic
Depth to Mottles/Gley: (0-25)
Drainage: very poor, poor
Parent material: O, GL, L
Soil subgroup: R.G, R.HG, TY.F, O.F
RANGE PLANT COMMUNITY TYPES
DMA9. Kentucky bluegrass-Rough hairgrass
37
DRY MIXEDWOOD SUBREGION
GRASSLAND AND SHRUBLAND COMMUNITY TYPES
Photo 1. The Western porcupine grass-Sedge/Fringed sage community is found throughout the
Dry Mixedwood subregion on the south-facing slopes of the Smoky, Wapiti and Peace Rivers.
This community provides early spring forage for both wildlife and cattle.
Photo 2. This picture represents the transition from sedge-marsh reed grass meadows to willow
sedge dominated community types in the Dry Mixedwood subregion. These community types
provide a large amount of forage, but the moist conditions limit their use by livestock.
38
NATIVE GRASS AND SHRUBLAND COMMUNITIES
The Dry Mixedwood subregion represents the transition between the Boreal forest and
Parkland subregions. Aspen Parkland-like vegetation can develop where site conditions or
drought conditions occur in combination with the driest climatic conditions (Strong 1992). The
Grande Prairie area is an example where a number of these conditions occur. It is within this
area that a number of native upland grassland community types have been described. On steep,
south-facing slopes of the Smoky, Wapiti and Peace Rivers with subxeric moisture regimes and
medium nutrient regimes the Western porcupine grass-Sedge/Fringed sage and Northern wheat
grass/Fringed sage community types are common (Figure 1). The Purple oat grass-Sedge-
Califomia oat grass community type is found on more upland sites with mesic moisture and
medium nutrient regimes. Wilkinson and Johnston (1983) felt these grasslands to be the climax
community type on Solonetzic soils. Indeed, Adams (1981) found the Western porcupine grass-
Sedge dominated community on the Peace River slopes to be associated with Dark Gray Solods
and Solonetzic Gray Luvisols. These grasslands provide important forage locally for both
wildlife and domestic livestock. The grasslands of the south-facing river slopes are important
spring forage sources because of early spring green-up.
On coarse textured, sandy soil, with submesic moisture and poor nutrient regimes which
lack tree cover are found the Plains wormwood/Sedge and Saskatoon/Bearberry/Northem
ricegrass community types. These community types are usually found in association with Jack
pine dominated community types.
Wet freshwater (subhydric/rich) sites are associated with sedge, bulrush, cattail, creeping
spike rush, swamp horsetail, common reed grass, tall manna grass and marsh reed grass
dominated meadows. Sedge, bulrush, cattail, creeping spike rush, common reed grass, tall
manna grass and swamp horsetail species are usually associated with the areas of free standing
water and reed grass species tend to dominate the drier edges. Flat leaved willow and basket
willow will invade into these meadows to form the Willow/Sedge and Willow/Marsh reed grass
community types. Rich, subhygric upland sites with better drainage are often dominated by
Scouler’s willow, Bebb’s willow or red osier dogwood. These sites will often become dominated
by trees in the absence of disturbance.
Boggy and acidic sites are often dominated by two stamened sedge and bog willow and will
undergo succession to black spruce and larch in the absence of disturbance. A number of saline
and alkaline sites were described in the Dry Mixedwood subregion. These sites are dominated by
rush species, prairie bulrush, Nuttall’s salt meadow grass, foxtail barley or three square rush.
These saline communities are more common in the eastern part of the subregion.
39
South River Slopes
Western porcupine grass-Sedge/
Figure 5. Overview of native grass and shrubland complex in the Dry Mixedwood subregion.
40
Table 2. Production values and recommended ecologically sustainable stocking rates for grass and shrubland communities, and
ecological site phases described in the Dry Mixedwood subregion.*
Ecological site Community Community type Productivity (kg/ha) Stocking rate
number ha/AUM (AUM/ac)
Grass Forb Shrub Total Range Recommended
—
— s
•—
>
PO
<n
<N
0
O
d
d
d
o>
<n
■n
in
<N
«n
0
O
<0
cn
O
0
Tt-
1—1
r— '
<N
<N
Vh
<N
r--
CO
©
d
d
ro
<N
<n
0
d
d
d
s — h
1
00
in
<N
1/3
O
<n
d
*“•
<N
IT)
(N
m
Ov
ro
O
O
<N
°o
co
OO
vo
Os
O
vo
IT)
"ifr
00
<N
O
Q>
VO
*0
’ 1
1
' '
' — (
86
UO
ov
0
co
1
10
^r
co
ov
<N
UO
00
00
1
<N
1
r— H
<N
OV
0
OO
OO
0
1
VO
OV
VO
co
c<3
&
<D
.g
S'
O
J-h
o
Oh
e
QO
a>
£
3
CO
CO
aS
kb
Hi
.S 3
CL
n
|-c
B ts
CD <D
to w>
<D T3
> GO
C/3
1/3
aS
H
bO
<D c3
bp a>
£
5 3
bn C
- <D
.£3
ts
O
<N
,0
X)
$9 a)
a S'
t
jg <l>
1
s £
■fi CO
Th CO
O 2
£ Sb
03 <D
O 00
•a j
CO
as 0)
O M
'5b
no
oS
O
‘5b
0
CO
aS
i-j
VO
3 H
<
0 &
0
Oh
<
8 a
0 (U
O +5
*o
0
O
H-J
S
W CO
Q
W *S
Q
w
CO
Q
•C |
a> 3
« a
c« £
-D
CD
1
O
C3
00
o
2 g.
OS 5-i
co 03
os *r|
on £
CD
<U
a
9 2
po
a>
CQ
aS a)
O CO
aS
^3
Oh
r-
<
00
It
<
a>
O <u
0
s
CO
Q
Q
pj M
Q
i|
<D
bO
T3
<D $
c3
8 &
oS
H c3
5b O
ta .2
0 B
- c£
-3 o3
cu CJ
B-g
Table 2. Production values and recommended ecologically sustainable stocking rates for grass and shrubland communities, and
ecological site phases described in the Dry Mixedwood subregion.*
Ecological site Community Community type Productivity (kg/ha) Stocking rate
number ha/AUM (AUM/ac)
Grass Forb Shrub Total Range Recommended
0)
a
2
43
\ 73
<U <D
2 §>
1 ^
TJ m
cb oo
<L> cS
£ kb
.5 <D
<L> 42
> £
73
§
73
O
O
I)
O
73
<D
O Cfl
'§>-3
4^ &
O D
o
w •
61 D
42
42 42
3 .2
c3
t3
O
o
g)
*§
.S 1
8 fe
•g "8
ee) 2
S3 Q
23 23
23 23
go
g® JS
3
O
1
O
3
<D
in
c3
'$
O
u
O
JO
m
5§
43
o
42
m
feb
42
8
is
GO
<L>
PQ
»o
c3 o>
O m
<N
IT)
VO
cd <d
O M
ro
cS
O
'5b j3
1
'5b 3
‘5b
£ ft
<
<
<
© cl
<
o
8 £
%
s
£
8 £
£
o
o
W 7n
Q
Q
Q
W 7n
Q
W
23
CN
6fl
DMA 25 Rush - - - 1200 - 40.47 (o.oi)
DMA 27 Three square rush - - - 1200 - 40.47 (o.oi)
DMA 28 Prairie Rush - 1200 - 40.47 (o.oi)
Table 2. Production values and recommended ecologically sustainable stocking rates for grass and shrubland communities, and
ecological site phases described in the Dry Mixedwood subregion.*
Ecological site Community Community type Productivity (kg/ha) Stocking rate
number ha/AUM (AUM/ac)
Grass Forb Shrub Total Range Recommended
6b
£
o
73
<D
6
I'
c3
d d
Os O
<N CO
O
o
P<
<N
cd o>
O oo
It
O
O
W CZ5
on Q
O
o
Ph
'O
a
cci
so
co
d a)
O on
It
8 £
— V
on
in
<o
it
m
oo
oo
m
to
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
'O
in
in
Tt
>
°0
00
00
o
cn
<n
d
N-
d
d
d
•d
d
d
o'
o'
oo
SO
m
1—1
1
d
d
d
o
o
CN
o
CN
o
d
d^
o
1
^t
in
r-
q
rn
d
d
d
d
d
■'t
r-
^t
cn
©
t"
4t
CN
q
o
"t
d
it
CN
o
^t
CN
«o
On
O
Oo
f-
O
04
VO
°o
VO
o
oo
OO
Os
P*
<N
i— i
p-
p-
p-
CO
Os
r-
' — i
"-H 1
<N
<N
<N
<N
co
1
-
uo
40
1
470
75
621
1250
73
uo
o
CO
CO
<N
VO
o
t>
i
vo
CO
oo
l-H
VO
CO
cn
1
V3
C/5
P
8
<D
bQ
a
6b
PS
6b
"8 1
8 fib
43 4J
a
o
a
,<u
d-(
'P
<u
C/3
*p
,<L>
d-l
43
Q
(D
<L>
<L>
Vh
43
£
O
>n d3
di 0)
O T3
a §
43
o
•c
£
0)
•c
bO
on
on a
'P
o
a
<u
<u
c3
'$
P 3
8 o
"o
75
B
43
S >v
^ ~on
a
<D
d
C/3
O
4b
C/3
O
O
<D
1
£ S
o B
a: a
1 g>
33 D
1
6b
a
<i>
W)
£
2
i
;r? <l>
&
& 1
CO
<u
on
cS <U
P
*P <D
ccj <u
p-
O on
o
O
O on
t-H
O Vi
<N
<
It
i— H
<
<
•5b ^
o Ph
H
<
It
<
O
O -M
s
O 0)
O 4-5
O d
O +3
Q
W '55
Q
Q
W *S
Q
Q
w *s
Q
■o S
£•!
-2 73
<*> s
-a
-a
CO
p-
Table 2. Production values and recommended ecologically sustainable stocking rates for grass and shrubland communities, and
ecological site phases described in the Dry Mixedwood subregion.*
Ecological site Community Community type Productivity (kg/ha) Stocking rate
number ha/AUM (AUM/ac)
Grass Forb Shrub Total Range Recommended
—S
—s
~V
•~V
o
"o'
»o
O
o
<=>
IT)
o
o'
d
d
d
d
d
d
7-1.
o
V
tv.
t"
tv
tv
’"i
°o
oo
>
«o
>
°0
>
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
"3-
>
m-
<N
o
l
in
rn
d
d
^r
ro
1
l
1
1
1
d
d
00
IT)
r*1
o
O
05
O
o>
o>
05
m
vo
VO
O
o>
O
o>
05
05
<N
05
o
<N
CO
05
o
05
05
<N
<N
f'n
m
<N
(N
<N
’"-i
03
kb
OJ
o
aJ
kb
D
JO
JJ* .2
a is
B 'O
ss a
aj
^ Q
o
o
o
<N
1/3
43
S3
05
05
oo
03
kb
S3
2
ai
O
2
o
a
kb
c3
T3
a>
<u
5-h
kb
£
a>
44
03
43
H
S3
S3
W)
Oh
«— i
o
a
o
S3
1
s
s
o
T3
<D
<L>
'Bn
<u
<D
3-i
GO
H
O
o
’B
o
a>
05
13
o
<D
03
aJ
o
'5b
o
aj
43
Oh
Os
'5b
o
5
Oh
<
<N
<N
<
o
o
W
0)
Q
’o
o
W
<D
+->
03
Q
i
s
Q
m vo
<N <N
O Q
y
’C
-a
tj)
S3
o
o
<D
W)
2
o
Uh
Key to Grass and Shrublands
1 . Shrub dominated site, by willow, bog birch, silverberry, river alder or dogwood
Grass or grass-likes dominated (<20% cover from shrubs) or if shrub-dominated by upland species
like hazelnut, saskatoon, or rose
2. Red osier dogwood or river alder dominated sites
Willow or silverberry dominated community types, sedge, marsh reed grass, horsetail
dominate the herbaceous layer
3. Red osier dogwood dominated community Red osier dogwood/Marsh reed grass (DMA17)
River alder dominated community River alder/Horsetail (DMA13)
4. Heavily grazed community types dominated by grazing resistant species in the herbaceous
layer Willow/Kentucky bluegrass/Dandelion (DMA14)
Lightly or moderately grazed sites with the herbaceous layer dominated by native species
5. Horsetail dominates the herbaceous layer Willow/Horsetail/Marsh reed grass (DMA12)
Sedges or marsh reed grass dominate the herbaceous layer
6. Wetland sedge species dominate the herbaceous layer Willow/Sedge (DMA10)
Upland sites dominated by willow or silverberry or boggy sites and riparian areas dominated by yellow
willow, sandbar willow or bog willow
7. Sites dominated by marsh reed grass in the herbaceous layer
Willow or silverberry dominated uplands, willow dominated riparian areas, or boggy areas
8. Marsh reed grass dominates the herbaceous layer Willow/Marsh reed grass (DMAlOa)
Kentucky bluegrass dominant or co-dominant in the herbaceous layer
Willow/Marsh reed grass-Kentucky bluegrass (DMA11)
9. Riparian areas dominated by sandbar and yellow willow Sandbar-Yellow willow (DMA15)
Upland sites dominated by Bebb willow, silverberry or boggy sites dominated by bog willow
10. Boggy sites dominated by Bog willow Bog willow (DMA19)
Upland sites dominated by Bebb willow or silverberry
11. Bebb willow dominated Bebb willow/Marsh reed grass (DMA16)
Silverberry dominated Silverberry/Smooth brome (DMA18)
12. Lowland sites, includes saline sites
Upland sites or south facing slopes
13. Sites dominated by invasive species Kentucky bluegrass/Dandelion (DMA9)
Sites dominated by native species
14. Saline sites dominated by salt tolerant species (e.g. three square rush, foxtail barley,
Nuttall’s salt meadow grass, baltic rush)
Non-saline sites dominated by other wetland species (e.g. cattails, sedges, reed grasses)
15. Salt tolerant bulrush {Scirpus species) dominated sites
Nuttall’s salt meadow grass, foxtail barley, or rush dominated
16. Prairie bulrush dominated Prairie bulrush (DMA28)
Three square rush dominated Three square rush (DMA27)
17. Nuttall’s salt meadow grass dominated NuttalPs salt meadow grass (DMA29)
Foxtail barley or baltic rush dominated
18. Site dominated by foxtail barley Foxtail barley (DMA30)
Baltic rush dominated meadow Rush meadow (DMA25)
19. Wet sites, dominated by sedge and marsh, narrow or northern reed grass
Very wet sites with standing water; cattails, bulrush, swamp horsetail, tall manna grass,
common reed grass, reed canary grass, or creeping spike rush present
20. Drier sites dominated by marsh reed grass Marsh reed grass meadow (DMA2)
Wet sites dominated by wetland sedge species
. 2
12
. 3
. 4
. 5
. 6
. 7
. 8
. 9
10
11
13
27
14
15
19
16
17
18
20
22
21
45
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
Boggy sites; poor to medium nutrient levels; dominated by two stamened
sedge Two stamened sedge (DMA24)
Fresh water sites; rich in nutrients; dominated by beaked, water, or awned sedge...
Sedge meadows (DMA1)
Common great bulrush or cattail dominated sites Bulrush-Cattail (DMAla)
Drier sites, edge communities near free standing water
Common reed grass or reed canary grass dominated
Tall manna grass, Creeping spike rush or swamp horsetail dominated
Common reed grass (Phragmites) dominated Common reed grass (DMA22)
Reed canary grass dominated Reed canary grass (DMA23)
Swamp horsetail dominated Swamp horsetail (DMA20)
Tall manna grass or creeping spike rush dominated
Tall manna grass dominated Tall manna grass (DMA21)
Creeping spike rush dominated Creeping spike rush (DMA26)
South facing (river) slopes
Open meadows and grasslands, or upland shrublands situated among forested stands
Moderate slopes; the dominate grass is western porcupine grass
Western porcupine grass-Sedge/Fringed sage (DMA5)
Very steep slopes or grazing modified communities; western porcupine grass is absent/replaced
by northern wheat grass Northern wheat grass-Junegrass/Fringed sage (DMA6)
Mesic sites with medium to rich nutrient soils; white spruce may be present
Upland sandy sites with poorer nutrient status; grasslands interspersed among
jack pine or aspen
Mesic medium sites dominated by purple oat grass, sedge, and California oat grass
Purple oat grass-Sedge-California oat grass (DMA4)
Richer sites, veiny meadow rue, slender wheat grass, and fringed brome dominate
Veiny meadow rue/Slender wheat grass-Fringed brome (DMA4a)
Very dry south facing hilltops dominated by Plains wormwood and upland sedge species,
generally lacking shrub cover Plains wormwood/Sedge (DMA3)
Moister sites dominated by other species
Sites dominated by native herbaceous species and saskatoon and/or snowberry
Saskatoon-Snowberry/Hairy wild rye (DMA7)
Sites dominated by grazing resistant or invasive herbaceous species
Rose-Snowberry/Smooth brome (DMA8)
23
24
25
26
28
29
. . . . 30
. . . . 31
32
46
DMA1. Sedge meadows
(Carex aquatilis, C. rostrata, C. atherodes)
n=41 This wetland community type is found near fresh water and can be dominated by water sedge, beaked sedge
or awned sedge. The sedge meadow is a poorly drained community. As one moves to the drier edges marsh reed
grass becomes predominant. Willows will invade into both the sedge and marsh reed grass dominated meadows.
The sedge meadow community is very productive, but the high water table, particularly in the spring when the sedge
species are most palatable, restricts livestock movement. One study done in the Yukon found that crude protein
on these meadows declined from a high of 10% in May to less than 5% in September (Bailey et al. 1992).
Beaked sedge found in abundance in this community is usually associated with nitrogen rich conditions
and moving water (Brierly et al. 1985). Water sedge is often found in abundance in this community type and is
associated with calcium rich stagnant water (MacKinnon et al. 1992).
Plant Composition canopy cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean range const.
Shrubs
Willow spp.
(Salix spp.)
2
0-30
44
Forbs
Marsh willowherb
(Epilobium palustris)
1
0-3
2
Dock
(Rumex acetosa)
1
0-2
12
Skull cap
(Scutellaria galericulata)
1
0-1
44
Mint
(Mentha arvensis )
1
0-4
22
Grasses
Beaked sedge
(Carex rostrata)
23
0-85
56
Awned sedge
(Carex atherodes )
35
0-97
65
Water sedge
(Carex aquatilis)
21
0-90
51
Marsh reed grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis )
3
0-11
17
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhydric-Hygric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
Rich
Elevation: 586(579-600) m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Poorly to very poorly
Ecological status score: 24
HEALTH FORM: RIPARIAN
FORAGE PRODUCTION (KG/HA)
Grass
3673(1054-5028)
Forb
73(0-80)
Shrub
40(0-120)
Total
3746(1254-5028)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.54 ha/AUM (2.02-0.31)
0.75 AUM/ac (0.2-1. 3)
47
DMAla. Bulrush-Cattail
(Scirpus acutus-Typha latifolia)
n=18 This wetland community type is associated with standing water. This community is an emergent
community found in standing water of ponds and sloughs. As one moves away from the water to the drier edges
the sedge meadow communities are found. On the drier edges the marsh reed grass community is found and willow
are associated in the transition from the slough margin and the forest.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean range const.
Forbs
Arum-leaved arrow head
(Sagittaria cuneata)
Narrow leaved burreed
1
0-3
17
(Sparganium eurycarpium) 9
Bulb bearing water hemlock
0-80
1 1
( Cicuta bulbifera)
Grasses
Common great bulrush
1
0-3
11
( Scripus validus)
Great bulrush
6
0-60
11
(Scirpus acutus)
Cattail
29
0-90
44
( Typha latifolia)
Creeping spike rush
27
0-97
50
( Eleocharis palustris )
Spangletop
3
0-4
22
(Scholochloa festucacae)
5
0-97
5
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhydric-Hygric
Nutrient Regime (mean
Rich
Elevation:
606 m
Soil Drainage (mean):
very poorly
Ecological status score: 24
HEALTH form: RIPARIAN
FORAGE PRODUCTION (KG/HA)
Grass 4300
Total 4300
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally Non Use
40.47 ha/AUM
0.01 AUM/ac
48
DMA2. Marsh reed grass meadow
(Calamagrostis canadensis, C. inexpans a, C. stricta)
n=12 This community is found on the edges of sedge meadows and moist draws where the water table is lower
and can be dominated by either species of reed grass. The lower water table makes this community accessible for
most of the grazing season. Willow will invade onto these sites to form the Willow/Marsh reed grass community
type. Increased grazing pressure on these sites will cause marsh reed grass to decline and their will be an invasion
of Kentucky bluegrass and dandelion. These sites are highly productive.
Environmental Variables
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Moisture Regime (mean):
Mean range const. Subhygric-Hygric
Shrubs
Willow spp.
(Salix spp.)
Forbs
Mint
(Mentha arvense)
Stinging nettle
(Urtica dioica)
1 0-10 50
2 0-20 40
3 0-10 33
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 42
Baltic rush
(Juncus balticus) 1
Northern reed grass
(Calamagrostis inexpansa) 10
Water sedge
(Carex aquatilis ) 1
NARROW REED GRASS
(Calamagrostis stricta) 1 5
0-97 67
0-10 25
0-90 17
0-3 33
0-70 25
Nutrient Regime (mean):
Rich
Elevation:
603(600-606)m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Poorly
Ecological Status Score: 24
Health Form: Riparian
FORAGE PRODUCTION^ KG/HA)
Grass 1427(1254-1600)
Forb 812(450-1174)
Total 2237(2050-2424)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.4 ha/AUM (0.81-0.34)
1.0 AUM/ac (0.5-1. 2)
49
DMA3. Plains wormwood/Sedge
(Artemisia campestris/Carex spp.)
n=2 This community type is found on coarse textured, sandy soils. It is generally found on hilltops and south-
facing slopes in openings among Jack pine on the uplands and black spruce in the lowlands. This community type
was also described on similar site conditions in the Central Mixedwood subregion. This community has low forage
production and fragile nature.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Forbs
Scouring rush
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Equisetum hyemale)
Plains wormwood
8
0-16
50
(Artemisia campestris)
LOW GOLDENROD
12
8-15
100
(Solidago missouriensis)
American vetch
1
0-2
50
(Vicia americana)
Yellow beardstongue
1
0-2
50
( Penstemon confertus)
Grasses
Kentucky bluegrass
1
0-1
50
(Poa pratensis)
Creeping red fescue
5
0-9
50
(Festuca rubra)
Sedge
2
0-4
50
( Carex spp)
Sheep fescue
18
1-34
100
(. Festuca saximontana)
2
1-3
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
XERIC-SUBXERIC
Nutrient Regime (mean):
SUBMESOTROPHIC
Elevation:
467(325-606) m
Soil Drainage:
Rapidly To Well
Slope(Range): 16(10-22)
Aspect: South to westerly
Ecological Status Score: 24-16
FORAGE PRODUCTION (kg/haI
Grass 652
Forb 525
Shrub 86
Total 1263
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally Non Use
4.05 ha/AUM (40.47-4.05)
0.1 AUM/ac (0.01-0.1)
50
DMA4. Purple oat grass-Sedge-California oat grass
(Schizachne purpurascens-Carex spp.-Danthonia calif ornica)
n=4 This community appears to be characteristic of dry grassy meadows on dark coloured Solonetzic soils
and gentle to level areas throughout the Dry Mixedwood subregion. Wilkinson and Johnson (1982), found there
was a close correlation between large tracts of prairie vegetation and the distribution of solonetzic soils in the
Peace River district of Alberta. They specifically described Western porcupine grass-Sedge/Fringed sage
community on steep south -facing slopes and a Sedge-California oat grass-W estern porcupine grass on more gentle
slopes. They felt the solonetzic soils supported grasslands and not forests because of their unfavourable ratios
of Ca and Na, hard, columnar B-horizon, and relatively impermeable clay pan close to the surface. This
community type appears to more similar to their Sedge-California oat grass-W estern porcupine grass community
type. It is likely the heavy grazing pressure of the described sites favours the growth of purple oat grass over
Western porcupine grass on these sites. Many of the sites described were old homestead sites.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean range const.
Shrubs
Prickly rose
(Rosa acicularis)
3
0-10
20
Snowberry
( Symphoricarpos
occidentals)
12
0-36
75
Saskatoon
( Amelanchier alnifolia)
1
0-3
50
Forbs
Strawberry
(Fragaria virginiana)
14
1-29
100
Meadow rue
(Thalictrum venulosum)
4
1-8
IOODandelion
(Taraxacum officinale)
8
0-20
100
Yarrow
(Achllea millefolium)
6
0-12
75
American vetch
(Vida americana)
5
0-9
75
Grasses
Purple oat grass
(Schizachne purpurascens)
25
12-34
100
Slender wheat grass
(Agropyron trachycaulum)
12
6-18
100
Kentucky bluegrass
(Poa pratensis)
12
1-40
100
Prairie sedge
(Carex prairea)
9
0-15
75
Junegrass
(Koeleria macrantha)
4
0-6
75
California oat grass
( Danthonia californica) 9 0-28 50
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean): Mesic
Nutrient Regime (mean): medium
Elevation: 576-606(584) m
Soil Drainage (mean): Well
Slope % (Range): 2(0-5)
Aspect: South to west
ecological status score: 16
FORAGE PRODUCTION (KG/HA)
Grass 1463 (626-2578)
Forb 818(500-1 192)
Shrub 227(0-606)
Total 2508(1600-3316)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.4 ha/AUM (0.58-0.31)
1.0 AUM/ac (0.7-1. 3)
51
DMA4a. Veiny meadow rue/Slender wheat grass-Fringed brome
(Thalictrum venulosum/Agropyron trachycaulum-Bromus ciliatus)
n=2 This community appears to be characteristic of dry grassy meadows on dark colored Chernozemic soils
and gentle to level areas throughout the Dry Mixedwood subregion. This community type is likely associated with
the large tracts of prairie vegetation described by Wilkinson and Johnson (1982) in the Peace River district of
Alberta. They specifically described Western porcupine grass-Sedge/Fringed sage community on steep south -
facing slopes and a Sedge-California oat grass-Western porcupine grass on more gentle slopes. They felt these
grasslands were associated with the distribution of solonetzic soils in the Peace River area. This community type
appears to be richer than the Sedge-California oat grass-Western porcupine grass community described by
Wilkinson and Johnson. The soils on this community are described as Chernozemic and the parent material is
fluvial in origin. These sites are very productive.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean range const.
Trees
White spruce
(Picea glauca)
1
0-1
50
Forbs
Strawberry
(Fragaria virginiana)
1
0-1
50
Meadow rue
(Thalictrum venulosum)
23
15-30
100
Fireweed
(Epilobium angustifolum)
2
1-2
100
Yarrow
(Achllea millefolium)
1
0-2
50
Tall lungwort
( Mertensia paniculata)
9
2-15
100
Grasses
Fringed brome
(Bromus cilatus)
15
10-20
100
Slender wheat grass
(Agropyron trachycaulum)
18
15-20
100
White scaled sedge
( Carex xerantica )
10
9-10
100
Marsh reed grass
( Calamagrostis canadensis)
1
0-2
50
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean): Mesic
Nutrient Regime (mean): medium-rich
Elevation: 472-587(530) m
Soil Drainage (mean): Moderately well
Slope: Level
Ecological Status Score: 24
FORAGE PRODUCTION (KG/HA)
Total 2500 *estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.4 ha/AUM (0.58-0.31)
1.0 AUM/ac (0.7-1. 3)
52
DMA5. Western porcupine grass-Sedge/Fringed sage
(Stipa curtiseta-Carex spp. /Artemisia frigida)
n=7 This community type is found on steep, south-facing slopes along the banks of the Peace, Smoky and W apiti
rivers throughout the Dry Mixedwood subregion. Wilkinson and Johnson (1982), found there was a close
correlation between large tracts of prairie vegetation and the distribution of solonetzic soils in the Peace River
district of Alberta. They specifically described Western porcupine grass-Sedge/Fringed sage community on steep
south -facing slopes and a Sedge-California oat grass-Western porcupine grass on more gentle slopes. They felt
the solonetzic soils supported grasslands and not forests because of their unfavourable ratios of Ca and Na, hard,
columnar B-horizon, and relatively impermeable clay pan close to the surface. Adams (1981), found this
community type as being a major source of spring forage for livestock in the Peace River area. He found that with
increased grazing pressure sedge, Junegrass, northern and western wheat grass would increase as western
porcupine grass declines. Often this community type is on steep slopes and is difficult for domestic livestock to
access.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean range const.
Shrubs
Fringed sage
(Artemisia frigida)
8
0-30
86
SASKATOON
(Amelanchier alnifolia)
1
0-2
71
Snowberry
(Symphoricarpos
occidentalis )
2
0-8
57
Forbs
Little leaved everlasting
(Antennaria parviflora)
1
0-3
43
Bastard’s toadflax
(Commandra umbellata)
1
0-2
71
Prairie crocus
(Anemone patens)
2
0-12
43
Prickly pear cactus
(Opuntia fragilis)
1
0-2
29
Grasses
Western porcupine grass
(Stipa curtiseta )
15
5-46
100
Blunt sedge
(Carex obtusata)
15
0-33
75
Green needlegrass
(Stipa viridula)
5
0-17
43
Junegrass
(Koeleria macrantha)
6
0-12
86
Western wheat grass
(Agropyron smithii)
1
0-5
43
Kentucky bluegrass
(Poa pratensis) 1
Northern wheat grass
0-8
14
(Agropyron dasystachyum) 2
0-6
29
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean): subxeric-submesic
Nutrient Regime (mean): poor-medium
Elevation: 442-606(503) m
Soil Drainage (mean): Very rapidly
Slope: 35-82(59)%
Aspect: South and west
ECOLOGICAL STATUS SCORE: 24
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA)
Grass
989(700-945)
Forb
254(0-531)
shrub
5(0-20)
Total
1055(752-1476)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
1 .01 ha/AUM (1.35-0.58)
0.4 AUM/ac (0.3-0.7)
53
DMA6. Northern wheat grass-Junegrass/Fringed sage
(Agropyron dasystachyum-Koeleria macrantha/ Artemisia frigida)
n=13 This community type is found on steep, south-facing slopes along the banks of the Peace, Smoky and
Wapiti rivers throughout the Dry Mixedwood subregion. Adams (1981), felt this community type would form
when the Western porcupine grass community was heavily to moderately grazed, but a number of plots were
described in an area that had little grazing pressure. This community was located on a much steeper slope (76%
vs 35%) than the previously described Western porcupine grass community type. It is likely that the drier site
conditions and shallower and poorer nutrient soils favour the growth of northern wheat grass over Western
porcupine grass. This community type is located on steep slopes that can be difficult for livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean range const.
Shrubs
Fringed sage
(. Artemisia frigida)
6
0-20
80
Saskatoon
( Amelanchier alnifolia)
6
0-15
95
Rose
( Rosa acicularis)
3
0-15
62
Snowberry
{Symphoricarpos
occidentalis )
3
0-10
69
Forbs
Wild blue flax
(Linum lewesii)
1
0-4
23
Lindley’s aster
(. Aster ciliolatus)
1
0-3
46
Showy locoweed
( Oxytropis splendens )
1
0-2
39
Dandelion
( Taraxacum offincinale)
1
0-2
62
Grasses
Northern wheat grass
(Agropyron dasystachyum )
10
0-17
75
SEDGE SPP.
{Care x spp.)
3
0-7
63
Richardson needlegrass
{Stipa richardsonii)
1
0-4
15
JUNEGRASS
( Koeleria macrantha)
5
0-20
77
Slender wheat grass
{Agropyron trachycaulum)
3
0-30
46
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean): xeric-subxeric
Nutrient Regime (mean): poor
Elevation: 345-606 m
Soil Drainage (mean): Very rapidly
Slope: 68(10-90%)
Aspect: South and west
Ecological Status Score: 24-16
FORAGE PRODUCTION (KG/HA)
Grass
600(500-798
Forb
183(50-400)
Shrub
309(220-450)
Total
1146(1000-1350)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
1 .35 ha/AUM (2.02-1.01)
0.3 AUM/ac (0.2-0.4)
54
DMA7. Saskatoon-Snowberry /Hairy wild rye
(Amelanchier alnifolia -Symphoricarpos occidentalis/Elymus innovatus)
n=9 This community represents small shrubby openings within aspen forests on southwest facing slopes and
level areas. These sites have well developed Luvisolic soils with colluvial, glacialfluvial and glacial lacustrine
parent materials. It is likely these shrubby openings are drier than the surrounding forest, which favours the growth
of shrubs over trees. Forage productivity on these sites is only moderate averaging only 677 kg/ha. These sites are
also heavily utilized by wildlife. As a result caution should be used when managing these sites for domestic
livestock grazing in order to prevent over-utilization.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Shrubs
Blueberry
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Vaccinium myrtilloides)
Chokecherry
1
0-5
22
( Prunus virginiana )
Snowberry
{Symphoricarpos
12
0-45
78
occidentalis)
Saskatoon
10
1-30
100
{Amelanchier alnifolia )
Prickly rose
15
6-65
100
{Rosa acicularis)
Forbs
Bearberry
13
5-27
100
(Arctostaphylos uva-ursi)
Strawberry
5
0-36
22
(Fragaria virginiana)
Yellow pea vine
1
0-7
67
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
Lindley’s aster
1
0-2
78
(Aster ciliolatus)
Grasses
Northern ricegrass
2
0-5
67
{Oryzopsis pungens )
Slender wheat grass
2
0-12
22
{Agropyron trachycaulum
Blunt sedge
) 3
0-5
56
{Carex obtusata)
Hairy wild rye
1
0-9
22
{Elymus innovatus)
Kentucky bluegrass
2
0-10
78
{Poa pratensis)
1
0-7
11
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
Mesic-submesic
Nutrient Regime (mean):
poor
Elevation:
343-606(460) m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Very rapidly to well
Slope (Range):
17(0-72)
Aspect:
VARIABLE
ECOLOGICAL STATUS SCORE: 24
Forage Production(kg/ha)
Grass
344(124-564)
Forb
189(82-296)
Shrub
144(104-184)
Total
677(524-830)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.02 ha/AUM (4.05-1.35)
0.2 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.3)
55
DMA8. Rose-Snowberry/Smooth brome
(Rosa acicularis-Symphoricarpos occidentalis/Bromus inermis)
n-2 This community type appears to represent the Saskatoon-Snowberry /Hairy wild rye community type which
has undergone disturbance by livestock. Sweet clover and smooth brome are both invasive species often originating
from roadsides or settlements. Sweet clover is well adapted to growing on roadsides and in waste places. Sweet
clover and brome can be very productive but must be used before they become over mature.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean
RANGE
const. Moisture Regime (mean):
SUBMESIC-MESIC
Trees
Aspen
Nutrient Regime (mean):
(Populus tremuloides)
5
4-5
100
POOR-MEDIUM
Shrubs
Elevation:
Snowberry
(Symphoricarpos
455 M
occidentalis)
20
14-25
1 00 Soil Drainage (mean):
Prickly rose
(Rosa acicularis)
37
11-62
100
well To Moderately Well
Saskatoon
Slope (Range):
( Amelanchier alnifolia)
7
1-13
100
4(3-5)
Forbs
Aspect:
Strawberry
(Fragaria virginiana)
1
1-2
100
Southerly
Cream colored vetchling(peavine)
Ecological Status Score: 8
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
2
1-3
100
Northern bedstraw
(Galium boreale)
5
1-8
FORAGE PRODUCTIONf KG/HA)
Sweet clover
( Meliolatus officinalis )
8
0-16
50
Total 1500*Estimate
Grasses
Smooth brome
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
(Bromus inermis)
7
0-13
50
4.05 ha/AUM (8.09-2.02)
Ross’s sedge
(Carex rossii)
6
4-7
100
0.1 AUM/ac (0.05-0.2)
Timothy
(Phleum pratense )
Kentucky bluegrass
5
0-6
50
(Poa pratensis )
1
0-1
50
56
DMA9. Kentucky bluegrass/Dandelion
{Poa pratensis/T araxacum officinale)
n=2 This community type represents a Marsh reed grass meadow that has undergone heavy prolonged grazing
pressure and is now dominated by Kentucky bluegrass, rough hairgrass and dandelion. This community is a fairly
productive community type and the species are generally palatable to livestock when grazed in the vegetative state,
but the extremely heavy grazing pressure which is needed to displace the native grass species indicates that there
are livestock distribution problems that should be addressed.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Forbs
American vetch
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
( Vicia americana)
Dandelion
3
3-4
100
(Taraxacum officinale)
Yellow pea vine
30
0-60
50
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
Wild Strawberry
6
0-12
50
(Fragaria virginiana)
Yarrow
7
0-14
50
(Achillea millefolium)
Horsetail
6
0-11
50
( Equisetum arvense )
Grasses
Kentucky bluegrass
4
0-7
50
(Poa pratensis)
Rough Hairgrass
58
18-97
100
(Agrostis scabra)
Slender wheat grass
8
0-15
50
(Agropyron trachycaulum)
Fringed brome
3
0-5
50
( Bromus ciliatus )
2
0-4
50
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
Hygric-Subhygric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
rich
Elevation:
697 m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Imperfectly
Ecological Status Score: 0 or modified
FORAGE PRODUCTION KG/HA)
Grass 1382
Forb 1682
Total 3064
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.81 ha/AUM (1.35-0.4)
0.5 AUM/ac (0.3-1. 0)
57
DMA10. Willow/Sedge
(Salix spp./Carex spp.)
n=27 This community type is found along the edges of sedge meadows and in moist depressions. Generally flat
leaved willow and basket willow become established at the edges of the sedge meadows due to the shorter duration
of standing water. Increased flooding and prolonged water logging may result in the disappearance of willow and
a transition to a water sedge meadow.
These sites are fairly productive but difficult to graze due to the moist ground conditions and heavy shrub
cover which reduces access and mobility within the area.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean
Shrubs
Bebb willow
(Salix bebbiana) 5
Flat leaved willow
( Salix planifolia) 1 1
Basket willow
(Salix petiolaris) 7
Forbs
Mint
(Mentha arvensis) 1
Skullcap
(Scutellaria galericulata) 1
Strawberry
(Fragaria virginiana) 2
Dandelion
( Taraxacum officinale) 3
Arrowed leaved coltsfoot
(Petasites sagittatus) 2
Grasses
Awned sedge
(Carex atherodes) 12
Marsh reed grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 2
Beaked sedge
(Carex rostrata) 11
Water sedge
(Carex aquatilis ) 9
RANGE const.
0-65 47
0-90 52
0-60 37
0-5 44
0-10 52
0-18 29
0-22 30
0-30 41
0-70 59
0- 11 48
1- 42 70
0-80 63
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhydric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
rich
Elevation:
576-606(588) m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Poorly
Ecological Status Score: 24
Health Form: riparian
FORAGE PRODUCTIONf KG/HA)
Grass 673(344-1002)
Forb 470(52-888)
Shrub 11(0-22)
Total 1169(448-1890)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.81 ha/AUM (40.47-0.4)
0.5 AUM/ac (0.01-1.0)
58
DMAlOa. Willow/Marsh reed grass
(Salix spp./Calamagrostis canadensis)
n=18 This community type is found along the edges of sedge and marsh reed grass meadows and in moist
depressions. Predominantly flat leaved willow becomes established at the edges of these meadows due to the
shorter duration of standing water. Increased flooding and prolonged water logging may result in the disappearance
of willow and a transition to a marsh reed grass and water sedge meadow. These sites are fairly productive but
difficult to graze due to the moist ground conditions and heavy shrub cover which reduces access and mobility
within the area.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Shrubs
Bebb willow
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Salix bebbiana)
Flat leaved willow
3
0-20
44
(Salix planifolia)
Basket willow
26
0-70
75
(Salix petiolaris )
Forbs
Skullcap
3
0-20
38
(Scutellaria galericulata)
Marsh hemp nettle
1
0-10
38
(Stachys palustris)
Strawberry
2
0-10
38
(Fragaria virginiana)
Stinging nettle
7
0-80
31
(Urtica dioica)
Horsetail
1
0-5
56
( Equisetum arvense )
1
0-10
43
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhydric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
rich
Elevation:
606 m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Poorly
Ecological Status Score: 24
Health Form: riparian
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA)
Grass 1325(900-1750)
Forb 75(50-200)
Total 1400(950-1850)
Grasses
AWNED SEDGE
(Carex atherodes)
Marsh reed grass
2
0-20
44
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.81 ha/AUM (40.47-0.4)
(Calamagrostis canadensis)
Beaked sedge
22
0-70
94
0.5 AUM/ac (0.01-1.0)
( Ca rex rostra ta )
Fowlbluegrass
2
0-10
38
(Poa palustris )
2
0-10
38
59
DMA11. Willow/Marsh reed grass-Kentucky bluegrass
(Salix spp./Calamagrostis canadensis-Poa pratensis)
n=6 This community type is very similar to the W illow/ Marsh reed grass community type, but has been heavily
grazed favouring the growth of Kentucky bluegrass and dandelion. Continued heavy grazing pressure will
eventually lead to a understory community that is similar to the Willow/ Kentucky bluegrass/dandelion dominated
community type.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean range const.
Shrubs
Willow spp.
(Salix spp.)
17
10-35
100
Snowberry
(Symphoricarpos
occidentalis )
1
0-1
17
Forbs
Mint
(Mentha arvensis)
2
0-6
83
Dandelion
(Taraxacum offincinale)
15
1-41
100
Bushy cinquefoil
(Potentilla paradoxa)
1
0-2
67
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis)
15
3-42
100
Kentucky bluegrass
(Poa pratensis)
17
4-32
100
Baltic rush
(Juncus balticus)
2
0-9
17
Foxtail barley
(Hordeum jubatum)
1
0-3
83
Moisture Regime (mean):
subhygric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
rich
Elevation:
600-606 m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Imperfectly
Ecological Status Score: 16-8
Health Form: riparian
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Grass 1861(1800-1922)
Forb 621(176-2450)
Shrub 5(0-28)
Total 2487(1800-4250)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
1.01 ha/AUM (2.02-0.5)
0.4 AUM/ac (0.2-0.8)
60
DMA12. Willow/Horsetail/Marsh reed grass
(Salix spp./Equisetum arvensis/Calamagrostis canadensis)
n=12 This community type appears to be transitional between the horsetail (hygric/rich) and shrubby rich fen
(subhydric/rich) ecosites described by Beckingham and Archibald (1996). It has plant species characteristic of
both ecosites. This community type is also similar to the Willow-Alder/Fern community described on moist,
nutrient rich seepage areas in the Lower Foothills subregion (Lane et al. 2000). This community type is very
productive, but the high shrub cover and slope conditions make it difficult to graze. Horsetail the principal forage
species is generally unpalatable to domestic livestock and can be poisonous to livestock in large amounts (Lodge
et al. 1968).
Plant Composition canopy cover(%) Environmental Variables
Shrubs
Scouler’s willow
( Salix scouleriana)
Willow spp.
(Salix spp.)
Bracted honeysuckle
(Lonicera involcrata )
Red osier dogwood
( Cornus stolonifera )
Mean range const.
53 0-90 92
5 0-65 8
2 0-10 67
5 0-30 83
Moisture Regime (mean):
subhygric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
Permesotrophic
Elevation:
667 m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Moderately well
Forbs
Stinging nettle
(Urtica dioica) 9 0-60
Common horsetail
(Equisetum arvensis) 15 1-60
Large Leaved yellow avens
(Geum macrophyllum) 1 0-3
Dewberry
(Rubus pubescens) 2 0-10
58
100
58
67
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 22 0-97 75
Ecological Status Score: 24
health Form: Riparian
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA)
Grass 580
forb 1272
Total 1852
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.02 ha/AUM (40.47-1.35)
0.2 AUM/ac (0.01-0.3)
61
DMA13. River alder/Horsetail
(Alnus tenuifolia/Equisetum arvensis)
n=6 This community represents lowland sites surrounding open water or nutrient rich river flood plains This
community is part of the red osier dogwood ecological site. Succession in the absence of disturbance will likely
be to balsam poplar and eventually white spruce. The high shrub cover limits access to livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Environmental Variables
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Moisture Regime (mean):
Trees
Paper birch
(Betula papyrifera )
Larch
4
0-25
33
Hygric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
rich
( Larix laricina)
1
0-5
17
Elevation:
Shrubs
606 m
Willow spp.
(Salix spp.)
River alder
2
1-3
100
Soil Drainage (mean):
Imperfectly
{Alnus tenuifolia)
Bracted honeysuckle
43
10-90
100
Ecological Status Score: 24
( Lonicera involcrata)
Red osier dogwood
2
0-7
33
Health Form: riparian
{Cornus stolonifera)
1
0-3
50
Forage production(kg/ha)
Forbs
Dewberry
(Rubus pubescens)
8
0-30
67
Grass 102
Bishop’s cap
Forb 330
(Mitella nuda)
2
0-5
50
Shrub 104
HORSETAIL
Total 536
(Equisetum arvensis)
6
0-27
67
(Galeopsis tetrahit) 9 0-50 33
Grasses
SEDGE
(Carexspp.) 2 0-3 50
Marsh reed grass
{Calamagrostis canadensis) 5 0-10 83
Nodding wood reed
( Cinna latifolia ) 3 0-20 33
Smooth brome
(Bromus inermis) 8 0-50 17
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
8.09 ha/AUM (40.47-8.09)
0.05 AUM/ac (0.01-0.05)
62
DMA14. Willow/Kentucky bluegrass/Dandelion
(Salix spp./Poa pratensis/Taraxacum officinale)
n=7 This community type is very similar to the Willow/ Marsh reed grass community type, but has been
heavily grazed favouring the growth of Kentucky bluegrass and dandelion. Continued heavy grazing pressure
eventually leads to a understory community that is dominated by Kentucky bluegrass and dandelion.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Shrubs
Willow spp.
(Salix spp.)
8
0-20
85
SCOULER’S WILLOW
(Salix scouleriana )
9
0-50
29
Flat leaved willow
(Salix planifolia )
11
0-40
29
Forbs
Mint
(Mentha arvensis)
2
0-10
57
Dandelion
(Taraxacum officinale )
32
0-80
71
Plantain
(Plantago major)
1
0-5
21
Strawberry
(Fragaria virginiana)
2
0-10
57
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis)
5
0-10
86
Kentucky bluegrass
(Poa pratensis)
10
0-40
43
Fowl bluegrass
(Poa palustris)
4
0-10
71
Smooth brome
(Bromus inermis )
4
0-30
14
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
subhygric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
rich
Elevation:
600-606 m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Imperfectly
Ecological Status Score: 8
Health Form: riparian
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA)
Grass 1100(700-1500)
Forb 1250(750-1750
Total 2350(2250-2450)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
1 .35 ha/AUM (40.47-0.67)
0.3 AUM/ac (0.01-0.6)
63
DMA15. Sandbar willow-Yellow willow
(Salix exigua-Salix lutea)
n=14 This community type occurs on moist alluvial deposits which are adjacent to streams and rivers. This
community can persist for some time if the site is subject to frequent flooding. However in the absence of
disturbance it will eventually undergo succession to a spruce dominated community type. Thompson and Hansen
(2002) described this community in the grassland natural region of Southern Alberta. They found that this
community type disappeared as one moved north into the Parkland and it was replaced by basket willow and flat
leaved willow dominated community types. T ypically there is little understory vegetation found in this community
type and it should be rated as non-use for livestock.
Plant composition CANOPY COVER (%)
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
Balsam poplar
( Populus balsamifera )
1
0-3
42
SHRUBS
Sandbar WILLOW
(Salix exigua)
Yellow willow
32
0-60
86
(Salix lutea)
Shining willow
11
0-40
86
(Salix lucida)
2
0-30
29
FORBS
Horsetail
(Equisetum arvense)
SlLVERWEED
12
0-90
64
(Potentilla anserina)
Plantain
2
0-10
43
(Plantago major)
2
0-20
29
Grasses
Small fruited bulrush
(Scirpus microcarpus)
Kentucky bluegrass
2
0-10
43
(Poa pratensis)
Smooth brome
2
0-3
50
(Bromus inermis)
9
0-90
57
Environmental Variables
Moisture regime: hygric
Nutrient regime: rich
Elevation: 600 m
Soil drainage: imperfectly
Ecological Status Score: 24
Health Form: RIPARIAN
FORAGE PRODUCTIONf KG/HA)
TOTAL 1 000*ESTIMATE
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally Non Use
40.47 ha/AUM
0.01 AUM/ac
64
DMA16: Bebb willow/Marsh reed grass
(Salix bebbiana/Calamagrostis canadensis)
n=13 This community type is found along the drier edges of marsh reed grass meadows and in moist depressions
and represents the transition between the flat leaved willow and basket willow dominated shrublands and the upland
forest. Bebb willow is an upland species that prefers well drained sites. This species of willow is often found in the
understory of aspen and balsam poplar dominated community types. Increased flooding and prolonged water logging
may result in the disappearance of Bebb willow and favour the growth of flat leaved willow. In contrast the
continued drying of the site will favour the growth of balsam poplar. These sites are fairly productive but difficult
to graze due to the moist ground conditions and heavy shrub cover which reduces access and mobility within the
area.
Plant composition canopy cover r%)
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
Balsam poplar
(Populus balsamifera )
2
0-10
23
SHRUBS
Bebb willow
(Salix bebbiana)
Snowberry
23
1-90
100
(Symphoricarpos
occidentalis)
Raspberry
1
0-10
31
(Rubus idaeus )
Rose
2
0-10
46
( Rosa acicularis)
10
0-80
54
FORBS
Horsetail
(Equisetum arvense)
Dandelion
4
0-20
69
(Taraxacum officinale)
Strawberry
1
0-3
46
( Fragaria virginiana)
Canada goldenrod
3
0-30
62
(Solidago canadensis)
2
0-20
39
GRASSES
KENTUCKY BLUE GRASS
(Poa pratensis)
Smooth brome
2
0-10
31
(Bromus inermis)
SEDGE
1
0-10
23
(Carex spp.)
Marsh reed grass
10
1-40
100
(Calamagrostis
canadensis)
12
0-60
62
Environmental variables
MOISTURE REGIME: SUBHYGRIC-HYGRIC
NUTRIENT REGIME: RICH
ELEVATION(mean): 600 M
SOIL DRAINAGE: MOD. WELL
Ecological Status Score: 24
Health Form: riparian
Forage Production (kg/ha)
TOTAL 1 500*ESTIMATE
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.81 ha/AUM (40.47-0.4)
0.5 AUM/ac (0.01-1.0)
65
DMA17: Red osier dogwood/Marsh reed grass
(Cornus stolonifera/Calamagrostis canadensis)
n=8 This community type was described on alluvial terraces, streambanks, abandoned channels on river
floodplains and moist areas around springs and seeps. This community is much richer and has higher moisture levels
than the adjacent upland aspen dominated forest, but it is much drier than the willow dominated shrublands in lower
slope positions. In the absence of disturbance this community type will likely succeed to a balsam poplar and
eventually white spruce dominated community type.
Livestock generally do not prefer this community type because of the dense nature of the understory, but
heavy grazing pressure can reduce the understory cover and allow Kentucky bluegrass, timothy and smooth brome
to invade.
Plant composition CANOPY COVER (%) Environmental variables
Mean range const.
Trees
Balsam poplar
( Populus balsamifera ) 1 0-3 50
Shrubs
Red osier dogwood
(Cornus stolonifera)
Rose
(Rosa acicularis)
Snowberry
(Symphoricarpos
occidentalis)
Raspberry
(Rubus idaeus)
FORBS
Veiny meadow rue
(Thalictrum venulosum)
Horsetail
(Equisetum arvense)
AMERICAN VETCH
( Vicia americana)
50 20-90 100
3 0-10 75
5 0-20 50
5 0-30 50
6 0-30 63
4 0-20 50
3 0-20 63
GRASSES
Marsh reed grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 7 0-20 88
FOWL BLUEGRASS
(Poa palustris) 1 0-3 75
MOISTURE REGIME: Subhygric
NUTRIENT REGIME: Rich
ELEVATION(mean): 600 M
SOIL DRAINAGE: Mod. Well
ECOLOGICAL STATUS SCORE: 24
Health Form: Riparian
Forage Production (Kg/ha)
TOTAL 1500*Estimated
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.81 ha/AUM (2.02-0.4)
0.5 AUM/ac (0.2-1. 0)
66
DMA18: Silverberry/Smooth brome
(Elaeagnus commutata/Bromus inermis)
11=2 This community type has similar moisture and nutrient conditions to the previously described red osier
dogwood dominated community type. Silverberry prefers moist, well drained seepage areas where overland flow
provides additional moisture. This species can be found adjacent to streams and rivers, or seepage areas and snow
accumulation areas adjacent to aspen stands. Thompson and Hansen (2002) found that these silverberry shrublands
are often associated with disturbance in the grassland natural region of southern Alberta. Indeed, smooth brome is
dominate in the understory of this community and it has likey invaded off the road allowance adjacent to this site.
This community type is very productive because of the favourable moisture conditions, but as succession occurs to
an aspen forest many of the palatable grass and forbs are often lost. This community will likely succeed to an
Pb/Snowberry/Smooth brome dominated community type.
Plant Composition canopy cover (%>
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
Balsam poplar
{Populus balsamifera )
2
0-3
50
SHRUBS
Prairie rose
(Rosa arkansana)
Snowberry
15
10-20
100
(Symphoricarpos
occidentalis)
Silverberry
5
1-10
100
{Elaeagnus commutata)
65
50-80
100
FORBS
Stinging nettle
(Urtica dioica)
Strawberry
2
1-3
100
(Fragaria virginiana)
5
0-10
50
YARROW
{Achillea millefolium )
2
0-3
50
GRASSES
KENTUCKY BLUE GRASS
(Poa pratensis)
Smooth brome
5
0-10
50
(Bromus inermis)
Quackgrass
12
3-20
100
(Agropyron repens.)
2
1-3
100
Environmental variables
MOISTURE REGIME: SUBHYGRIC-MESIC
NUTRIENT REGIME: RICH
ELEVATION(MEAN): 600 M
SOIL DRAINAGE: WELL
ECOLOGICAL STATUS SCORE: 8-0
Forage Production (kg/ha)
TOTAL 1500*Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
1 .35 ha/AUM (2.02-0.67)
0.3 AUM/ac (0.2-0.6)
67
DMA19: Bog willow
(Salix pedicellaris)
n— 4 This community type was described on floating fens in the northern part of the Dry Mixedwood subregion near
Gunn and Tulliby lake. Bog willow tends to prefer growing in swamps and fens throughout the Boreal forest of
Northern Alberta (Johnson et al. 1995). The slight acidity on these sites limits productivity and these site are
difficult to graze due to the moist ground conditions and heavy shrub cover which reduces access and mobility within
the area.
Plant Composition canopy cover (%>
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
Paper birch
( Betula papyrifera )
1
0-1
50
SHRUBS
Bog willow
(Salix pedicellaris)
70
50-90
100
FORBS
Marsh cinquefoil
(Potentilla palustre)
Skullcap
9
1-20
100
(Scutellaria galericulata)
1
0-3
50
GRASSES
Two stamened sedge
(Carex diandra)
Water sedge
8
0-20
75
( Carex aquatilis )
Narrow reed grass
15
0-40
75
( Calamagrostis stricta)
13
0-50
50
Environmental Variables
MOISTURE REGIME: SUBHYDRIC
NUTRIENT REGIME: MEDIUM
ELEVATION(mean): 600M
SOIL DRAINAGE: IMPERFECTLY
ECOLOGICAL STATUS SCORE: 24
HEALTH FORM: RIPARIAN
Forage Production (kg/ha)
TOTAL 1500*ESTIMATE
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally Non Use
40.47 ha/AUM
0.01 AUM/ac
68
DMA20. Swamp horsetail
(Equisetum fluviatile)
n=3 This wetland community type is found near fresh water and is often associated with shallow water around
lake shores or saturated wet spots in old river channels and sloughs. This community is often only found in small
isolated spots or in narrow bands around the edge of lakes. As these areas dry, swamp horsetail is often replaced by
sedge species. Swamp horsetail is generally unpalatable to livestock and the areas it grows in are often to wet for
livestock to access.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Forbs
Swamp horsetail
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhydric-Hygric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
rich
(Equisetum fluviatile)
Marsh willow herb
77
50-90
100
Elevation:
586(579-600) m
(Epilobium leptophyllum)
Skull cap
13
0-40
33
Soil Drainage (mean):
(Scutellaria galericulata)
Small bedstraw
3
0-10
33
Poorly to very poorly
(Galium trifidum)
Grasses
Beaked sedge
7
0-20
33
ecological status score: 24
health form: riparian
FORAGE PRODUCTION (KG/HA)
(Car ex ro strata)
Water sedge
3
0-10
33
Total 2000*Estimate
(Carex aquatilis )
Cattail
8
0-20
66
(Typha latifolia)
1
0-1
33
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally Non Use
40.47 ha/AUM
0.01 AUM/ac
69
DMA21. Tall manna grass
(Glyceria grandis)
n=3 This wetland community type is associated with the edge of the standing water of ponds, sloughs and slow
meandering streams. As one moves away from the water to the drier edges the sedge meadow communities are
found. This community is often only found in small isolated spots or in narrow bands around the edge of lakes.
As these areas dry, tall manna grass is often replaced by sedge species. Tall manna grass is palatable to livestock,
however, the areas it grows in are often to wet for livestock to access.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Environmental Variables
Mean range const.
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhydric-Hygric
Forbs
Swamp horsetail
(Equisetum fluviatile) 3 0-10 33
Marsh willowherb
(Epilobium leptophyllum) 1 0-3 33
Small bedstraw
{Galium trifidum ) 1 0-3 33
Nutrient Regime (mean
Permesotrophic
Elevation:
606 m
Soil Drainage (mean):
VERY POORLY
Grasses
Tall manna grass
{Glyceria grandis)
Awned sedge
{Carex atherodes )
Cattail
{Typha latifolia)
92 80-97 100
3 3-4 100
1 0-1 66
ecological status score: 24
health form: riparian
FORAGE PRODUCTION (KG/HA)
Grass 2000
Total 2000*estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.54 ha/AUM
0.75 AUM/ac
70
DMA22. Common reed grass
(Phmgmites australis)
n=3 This community is found on the edges of shallow lakes and sloughs where the water table is near the surface
for most of the growing season. Common reed grass is common throughout the Boreal forest and this species is very
important in binding the soil on river banks. The high sugar content of this plant makes it very palatable to livestock,
but the moist ground conditions limits livestock use of these areas.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhydric
Shrubs
Willow spp.
Nutrient Regime (mean):
(Salix spp.)
2
0-5
33
Permesotrophic
Forbs
Elevation:
Mint
603(600-606)m
(Mentha arvense)
Skullcap
1
0-1
66
Soil Drainage (mean):
(Scutellaria galericulata)
1
0-1
66
Poorly
Grasses
ecological status score: 24
Marsh reed grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis)
Common reed grass
1
0-3
33
health form: riparian
( Phragmites australis)
Awned sedge
58
13-80
100
FORAGE PRODUCTION^ KG/HA)
(Carex atherodes )
2
0-5
66
Creeping spike rush
( Eleocharis palustris )
3
0-10
33
Total 2000*Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally Non Use
40.47 ha/AUM
0.01 AUM/ac
71
DMA23. Reed canary grass
(Phalaris arundinacea.)
n=l This community type is found along the edges of lakes, rivers, streams and pond margins. The European
variety of this species has been widely distributed as a forage and often escapes from pastures and invades into the
riparian and wetland areas, displacing more desirable species (Thompson and Hansen 2002). Once this species has
invaded riparian areas it often forms monospecific stands because of its heavy sod forming habit (Thompson and
Hansen 2002). Reed canary grass is moderately palatable to livestock and when it is grazed heavily the site often
becomes invaded by thistle, dandelion and Kentucky bluegrass.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Forbs
Canada thistle
Mean
range const.
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhydric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
(Cirsium arvense)
water smartweed
20
100
Permesotrophic
(Polygonum amphibium)
Sow thistle
10
100
Elevation:
600 m
(Sonchus spp.)
Marsh hedge-nettle
3
100
Soil Drainage:
(Stachys palustris)
Grasses
Redtop
3
100
Poorly
ecological status score: 24
(Agrostis stolonifera)
Reed canary grass
10
100
HEALTH form: RIPARIAN
(Phalaris arundinacea)
Slender wheat grass
50
100
FORAGE PRODUCTION Ikg/ha)
(Agropyron trachycaulum)
1
100
Total 2000*estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.81 ha/AUM
0.5 AUM/ac
72
DMA24. Two stamened sedge
(Car ex diandra)
n=5 This community type was described in boggy areas adjacent to black spruce and larch dominated community
types. Two stamened sedge tends to be found in the wetter areas where there is a floating mat of peat. As these areas
dry out two stamened sedge will be replaced by willow, black spruce and larch species. Two stamened sedge is
generally unpalatable to livestock and the areas it grows in are often too wet for livestock to access.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean range const. Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhydric
Shrubs
Bog willow
(Salix pedicellaris)
6
0-30
40
Nutrient Regime (mean):
Mesotrophic
Bog birch
( Betula glandulosa)
1
0-3
40
Elevation:
Forbs
Buck-bean
(Menyanthes trifoliata)
7
0-20
60
576-606(584) m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Well
Marsh cinquefoil
(Potentilla palustris)
5
0-10
60
Ecological Status Score: 24
Marsh marigold
(Caltha palustris)
3
0-10
40
Health Form: Riparian
Grasses
Two stamened sedge
(Carex diandra)
82
60-90
100
FORAGE PRODUCTION (KG/HA)
Water sedge
(Carex aquatilis)
1
0-3
40
Total 1500*estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally Non Use
40.47 ha/AUM
0.01 AUM/ac
73
DMA25. Rush meadow
(Juncus balticus, J. nodosus)
n=2 This community type was described on slightly saline sandy lakeshores. As the lake recedes rush species
will invade into the sand of the lakeshore. Bailey et al. (1992) described rush dominated meadows in a saline
sequence in the Yukon and Thompson and Hansen (2002) felt that rush dominated meadows were indicative of heavy
grazing pressure in Southern Alberta. Rush species are generally unpalatable to livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Moisture Regime (mean):
Trees
Subhygric
Balsam poplar
(Populus balsamifera)
1
0-1
50
Nutrient Regime (mean):
SUBMESOTROPHIC
Forbs
Prickly sow thistle
(Sonchus asper)
2
0-3
50
Elevation:
600 m
Grasses
Baltic rush
Soil Drainage (mean):
Moderately well
(Juncus balticus)
Knotted rush
40
1-80
100
ECOLOGICAL STATUS SCORE: 24
(Juncus nodosus)
40
0-80
50
HEALTH FORM: RIPARIAN
FORAGE PRODUCTION (KG/HA)
Total 1200*estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally Non Use
40.47 ha/AUM
0.01 AUM/ac
74
DMA26. Creeping spike rush
(Eleocharis palustris)
n=2 Thompson and Hansen (2002) described this type on somewhat alkaline sites in narrow bands along
streams, rivers, lake margins and reservoirs. These sites are subject to yearly flooding. Typically these sites are
almost pure stands of creeping spike rush. Creeping spike rush is generally unpalatable to livestock and the wet
conditions limit livestock use.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean range const.
Forbs
Marsh ragwort
(Senecio congestus) 2 1 -3
Seaside buttercup
{Ranunculus cymbalaria ) 10 0-20
Marsh willow herb
{Epilobium palustre) 5 0-10
Common burreed
{Sparganium eurycarpum ) 5 0-10
100
50
50
50
Grasses
Creeping spike rush
{Eleocharis palustris)
Common bulrush
{Scirpus acutus )
Foxtail barley
{Hordeum jubatum)
60 50-70 100
5 0-10 50
2 0-3 50
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhydric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
Permesotrophic
Elevation:
600 m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Poorly
Ecological Status Score: 24
Health Form: Riparian
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Total 1200*Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally Non Use
40.47 ha/AUM
0.01 AUM/ac
75
DMA27. Three square rush
(Scirpus pungens)
n=3 This community is an edge community forming dense stands along the edges of smaller streams, marshes
and ponds. Three square rush is also tolerant of alkaline (pH 8.5) and saline soils (Thompson and Hansen 2002) and
can be found adjacent to saline areas in conjunction with prairie bulrush in the southern part of the region. The
palatability of this species is low to moderate. Consequently, three square rush communities are seldom grazed by
livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean range const.
Shrubs
Sandbar willow
(Salix exigua)
1
0-1
33
Forbs
Slender arrow-grass
(Triglochin palustris)
4
0-10
66
Seaside buttercup
(. Ranunculus cymbalaria )
2
0-3
66
Horsetail
( Equisetum arvense)
3
0-10
33
Grasses
Three square rush
(Scirpus pungens)
60
50-70
100
Foxtail barley
(Hordeum jubatum)
4
0-10
66
Nuttall’s saltgrass
(Puccinellia nuttalliana)
2
0-3
66
Rough hairgrass
( Agrostis scabra)
2
0-3
66
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
SUBMESOTROPHIC
Elevation:
606 m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Poorly
Ecological Status Score: 24
Health Form: Riparian
FORAGE PRODUCTION (KG/HA)
Total 1200*estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally Non Use
40.47 ha/AUM
0.01 AUM/ac
76
DMA28. Prairie bulrush
(Scirpus paludosus)
n=2 This community type is often associated with alkaline and saline areas in semi-permanently flooded shallow
edges of marshes and ponds (Thompson and Hansen 2002). Three square rush is often associated with the drier
edges of this community type. The palatability of this species is low to moderate. Consequently, prairie bulrush
communities are seldom grazed by livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean range const.
Grasses
Prairie bulrush
(Scirpus paludosus) 98 - 100
Foxtail barley
(Hordeum jubatum) 1 - 100
Nutt all’s saltgrass
(Puccinellia nuttalliana) 1 - 100
Soil Drainage (mean):
Poorly
Ecological Status Score: 24
Health Form: Riparian
Forage production(kg/ha)
Total 1200*Estimate
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
SUBMESOTROPHIC
Elevation:
600 m
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally Non Use
40.47 ha/AUM
0.01 AUM/ac
77
DMA29. Nuttall’s saltgrass
(Puccinellia nuttalliana)
n=2 This community is characteristic of saline and alkaline alluvial deposits adjacent to ponds, lake margins
or seepage areas. This community type is fairly productive and heavy grazing will often lead to a community type
dominated by foxtail barley.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Grasses
Nuttall’s saltgrass
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Puccinellia nuttalliana)
Prairie bulrush
97
97-98
100
(Scirpus paludosus)
Foxtail barley
2
0-3
50
(Hordeum jubatum )
1
0-1
50
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
SUBMESOTROPHIC
Elevation:
600 m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Moderately Well
Ecological Status Score: 24
Health Form: Riparian
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Total 1500*Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
4.05 ha/AUM
0.10 AUM/ac
78
DMA30. Foxtail barley
( Hordeum jubatum)
n=2 This community represents a disturbance community. It can result from heavy grazing of tame pastures
or native meadows in slightly saline areas. This community can also form on the edges of receding lake shores. As
the lake drys foxtail barley will invade onto the drier edges. Foxtail barley is generally unpalatable to livestock and
the seeds can get stuck in the animals mouth causing sores. Despite the high productivity of these sites they are often
never used by livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean range const.
Forbs
Seaside buttercup
{Ranunculus cymbalaria )
2
0-3
50
Dandelion
(Taraxacum officinale)
1
0-1
50
Sea side arrow-grass
(Triglochin maritima)
1
0-1
50
Grasses
Foxtail barley
(Hordeum jubatum)
80
80-81
100
Nuttall’s saltgrass
(Puccinellia nuttalliana)
1
1-2
100
Creeping spike rush
(Eleocharis palustris)
5
0-10
50
Three square rush
{Scirpus pungens )
2
0-3
50
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
SUBMESOTROPHIC
Elevation:
600m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Imperfectly
Ecological Status Score: 8
Health Form: Riparian
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA)
Total 1500*estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally Non Use
40.47 ha/AUM
0.01 AUM/ac
79
DRY MIXEDWOOD SUBREGION
TAME FORAGE COMMUNITIES
Photo 3. Typical Range improvement clearing in the Dry Mixedwood subregion.
80
TAME FORAGE COMMUNITIES
(Cleared areas that have been broken and seeded to tame forage)
Throughout the Dry mixedwood subregion there are sites that have been deforested, broken,
and seeded to tame forage. Usually these areas are mesic and moderately well to well drained
with good nutrient levels. Because most of these tame forage stands are established on similar
sites, the most influential factors affecting plant species composition are stand establishment and
grazing regime.
Stand establishment is important because it determines what the initial plant species
composition is going to be. Seed bed preparation and the type of seed sown are the two most
important factors influencing stand establishment. Seed bed preparation is important because it
helps to determine how well the sown seed germinates and establishes. If the seed bed is not well
prepared, the tame forage species may have reduced seedling vigour and/or density allowing
native or weedy species to become a dominant component of the plant community.
After the stand is established, the grazing regime applied to the stand will influence the plant
species composition. Generally, a light to moderate level of grazing allows the stand to maintain
itself while sustained heavy grazing causes the stand to degrade. Damage to a stand due to
overgrazing occurs more readily while the stand is establishing than it does when the stand is
established. This is because the forage plants in an establishing stand have not had time to
develop energy reserves or substantial root systems and are therefore more susceptible to grazing
induced stress.
Figure 6 is a successional diagram for tame pastures in the Dry Mixedwood subregion. Tame
pasture communities are organized horizontally by moisture gradient [e.g. dry (submesic) to moist
(subhygric)] and vertically by successional factors like the grazing disturbance gradient [e.g.
moderate or very heavily grazed] or stand establishment. A light to moderate grazing regime will
normally maintain a forage stand similar to what was seeded on the site. These stands are
generally the most productive and provide the best grazing opportunities for livestock. In figure
6, these plant communities are indicated by the bolded boxes and represent various seed mixes
sown on submesic to subhygric sites (not just those species in the plant community name) They
are considered to be in the healthy category for range health.
The plant communities represented by the boxes above the bolded boxes may be the result of
a number of different factors. For example, when the site is under-grazed, the stand becomes
dominated by species that are the most competitive in the absence of grazing disturbance. In this
case, trees and shrubs growth is unchecked and they can out-compete seeded plants for light and
other resources. Poor forage establishment is another factor that can result in stands that are
dominated by native or weedy species. Although shrubs and trees can occur on all tame pasture
community types, the extent to which invasion occurs is influenced by site preparation, forage
establishment, moisture conditions, age of stand and grazing history.
Plant community changes which occur under heavy grazing are dependent on the grazing
history (level of use, season of use and duration of the grazing regime). Overgrazed community
types [plant communities at bottom of Figure 6] develop over a long period of repeated
overgrazing. If weedy species such as tall buttercup or Canada thistle, become established on
overgrazed sites, they can quickly become a dominant species.
81
Figure 6. Successional sequences of tame pasture communities on 3 moisture regimes in the Dry
Mixedwood subregion.
SUBMESIC
SITES
MESIC SITES
SUBHYGRIC
SITES
SUCCESSIONAL
CHANGES
SUCCESSION
FACTORS
tree species become
dominant
Aw-Pb / Rose / H.
wild rye
DMB23
Aw / Rose /
Strawberry DMB21
♦
some woody
regrowth and native
herbaceous species
Rose / Dandelion /
H. wild rye
DMB22
Rose / C. red
fescue- Sedge
DMB20 ~ j
Willow / Timothy
DMB24
♦
reversion to native
plants
poor stand
establishment or
under-grazing
dominated by the
tall, productive
species originally
seeded [i.e. desirable
species]
Wheat grass /
Creeping red fescrn
DMB19
Brome / Timothy
DMB12
R. canary grass-
Meadow foxtail-
Timothy-Brome
DMB16
light to '
moderately
grazed
moderately to
heavily grazed
decline in desirable
species with some
grazing induced
species present
Brome - Timothy -
C. red fescue
DMB13 1
Brome -C. red
fescue- K. bluegrass /
Dandelion
DMB17
*
dominated by
grazing induced
species with some
weedy species
C. red fescue -
K. bluegrass /
Dandelion
DMB14
heavily grazed
■
♦
dominated by
grazing induced
and/or weedy
species
Strawberry-
Dandelion/Weeds
DMB15
Strawberry-
Dandelion/W eeds
DMB15
Foxtail barley/Weeds
DMB18
very heavily
grazed
82
a
0
'5b
1
Cfl
T3
O
o
4
<D
X
Q
J§
I ^
Ph ^
« O
•S w
a>
w
e
«
CSJ
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
oo
(N
<N
© °®
o
<N
in
<N
©
ci|
©
• o
©
©
©
©
1 1
, 1 1
i — i
i — i
i — i
i — i
^H
<N
<N
<p+ ' *
r->
(N
i— H
fN
in
©
©
X m
o
©
00
©
©
<N
<N
° ©
©
<N
©
<N
0.3]
0.31
in’
1 1
©
p1
(o’
©
0.8]
0.3]
in’
1.2]
0.3]
in1
©
i
i
i
p
t-H
i
■
’ 1
i
i
-H
r— H
©
o
CO
©
CO
H— 1
i
©
OO
i— i
CO
©
o
©|
©
©
]
©
©
i i
w’
L— J
in
CO
1 — 1
1 1
i i
t-H
I— H
_
^|-
*— 1
<— 1
o
in
i — i
»n
©
•n
©
m
©
©
i
©
»n
©
•n
©
(N
©
CO
©
CO
oo
©
in
i
in
rj-
OO
»n
in
CO
H"
i
in
i
in
i
tJ-
i
in
in
©
©
\1
CO
©
in
©
CO
©
©
©
'd-
©
©
©
©
a-
©
©
©
©
©
in
©
©
©
©
©
oo
<N
(N
©
©
vo
©
©
©
©
©
©
oo
r— H
in
©
©
©
in
in
in
ro
(N
<N
1
<N
(N
<N
<N
<N
a>
s g
JS 5-1
^ TJ <d
1 «
T3
<L>
g> £
& K
<D ^
0 1
<Z>
(/3
S)
eb
J§
2
1
<3
QQ
aS
V)
f§
£
I
£
<
o
s s
S .2
pfi -a
s «
“ S
<L>
a
o
!-h
PQ
<L>
^ 8
4 <2
o Td
a a
a &
g g „
PQ U U c/2
pj
&
<d
4 -8
a o
2 ^
5 ^
* §
<D ;£h
R o
g 2
2 a
'O Q
g 4
» I
C2 ^
■a o>
Oh >
<D £
o 5
0)
b0
T3
1)
GO
i>
a
o
W3
2 b
T3 §
2 ^
<3
D
!-h
u
'dS
V2
o
o4
bX)
a
.2 .2
*<« "O
0> <u
S 2
<N CO ^ m O — i
(N <N
PQ PQ
PQ PQ PQ PQ
Q Q Q Q
Q Q
<N
© ©
bD
So
J3
£
5
C/2
S3 ^
& 2
a
S' g
G &
S £
" I
« a
Oh 00
*o
<u
Vh
u
I
«5
CC
o3
t/3
T3
<L>
C« u
cd _, D
IM ^ 4
a <d o
r- <D
3 4 a
U S £ £
g S 3 o
21 gg
PQ eg p_ ^
oo Tj-
— 1 <N
PQ PQ
2 2
O Q
co
OO
Key to Tame Grass Plant Communities - Dry Mixedwood Subregion
1. Tame forage stand dominated by tall productive species, grazing has not caused an
increase of grazing resistant or weedy species 2
Tame forage stand modified by overgrazing with grazing resistant species at least
co-dominant in the plant community; or the site has aspen or shrub invasion 4
2. Subhygric sites dominated by productive, moisture loving tame forage species seeded
on the site [e.g. reed canary grass, meadow foxtail or timothy]
Reed Canary Grass-Meadow Foxtail-Smooth brome-Timothy (DMB16)
Mesic or submesic sites dominated by productive tame forage species suited to normal
or dry moisture conditions [e.g. smooth brome, meadow brome, timothy, wheat grass, etc.] 3
3. Submesic sites with wheat grass and creeping red fescue
Crested wheat grass-Creeping Red Fescue (DMB19)
Mesic sites dominated by other tall, productive tame forage species [e.g. smooth brome, meadow
brome, timothy, etc.] Brome / Timothy (DMB12)
4. Tame pasture invaded by aspen, balsam poplar or shrub species 9
Species composition modified by moderate to heavy grazing 5
5. Pasture moderately to heavily grazed; tall, productive and grazing resistant species
co-dominate the site Creeping Red Fescue - Brome-Timothy (DMB13)
Pasture heavily to very heavily grazed; grazing resistant and/or weedy species dominate the site . . 6
6. Pasture heavily grazed; grazing resistant forage species dominate the site; dandelion,
strawberry are common 7
Pasture very heavily grazed; weedy invaders dominate the site 8
7. Subhygric sites; dominated by grazing resistant species
Brome-Creeping Red Fescue- Kentucky Bluegrass-Dandelion (DMB17)
Mesic sites; dominated by grazing resistant species
Creeping Red Fescue-Kentucky Bluegrass-Clover / Dandelion (DMB14)
8. Mesic or submesic sites dominated by strawberry, dandelion, Canada thistle and other
weedy species Strawberry / Dandelion / Weeds (DMB15)
Subhygric sites dominated by foxtail barley, Canada thistle or other weedy spp
Foxtail barley / Weeds (DMB18)
9. Old tame pastures with Aspen and Balsam Poplar invasion 10
Newer tame pastures with shrub invasion, little tree growth 11
10. Mesic sites with strawberry Aw/Rose/Strawberry (DMB21)
Submesic sites with hairy wild rye Aw-Pb/Rose/Hairy wild rye (DMB23)
1 1 . Submesic sites dominated by hairy wild rye and rose
Rose/Dandelion/Hairy wild rye (DMB22)
Mesic to subhygric sites 12
12. Mesic sites with marsh reed grass and sedge
Rose/Creeping red fescue-Sedge (DMB20)
Subhygric sites with willow invading Willow/Timothy (DMB24)
84
DMB12. Brome-Timothy
(Bromus inermis, B. biebersteinii-Phleum pratense)
n=9 This community type represents healthy condition tame pasture on mesic sites that were seeded with a
timothy, smooth brome, meadow brome, creeping red fescue, alfalfa, clover mixture. Timothy establishes
much quicker than creeping red fescue or smooth brome on pastures that have been recently seeded. Eventually
creeping red fescue and smooth brome will outcompete timothy and this community will likely become
dominated by creeping red fescue and smooth brome. Heavy to moderate grazing pressure will cause the tall
growing grass species (Brome, timothy) to decline and allows low growing Kentucky bluegrass and dandelion
to increase to form communities DMB 13 and DMB14. Continued heavy grazing pressure will eventually lead
to a community dominated by dandelion and weeds (DMB 15). Light or no grazing or poor seed establishment
will allow native trees, shrubs, forbs and grass to invade onto these sites to form communities DMB20 and 21.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Shrubs
Prickly Rose
(Rosa acicularis)
1
0-4
22
Forbs
Clover
(Trifolium spp.)
Dandelion
4
0-30
44
(Taraxacum officinale)
Wild Strawberry
10
0-45
67
(Fragaria virginiana)
15
0-47
78
Grasses
Creeping Red Fescue
(Festuca rubra)
Timothy
7
0-35
78
(Phleum pratense)
Kentucky Bluegrass
8
0-60
46
(Poa pratensis)
Smooth brome
1
0-3
33
( Bromus inermis)
Meadow brome
49
25-77
100
( Bromus biebersteinii)
10
0-56
44
Moisture Regime (mean):
Mesic-Subhygric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
MEDIUM-RICH
Elevation:
457-606 (587)m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Well to moderately well
Desirable species shift score: 8
Forage production (kg/ha)
Total 3884
Ecological sustainable stocking rate
0.4 ha/AUM (0.4-0.31)
1.0 AUM/ac (1 .0-1 .3)
85
DMB13. Creeping red fescue- Brome-Timothy
(Festuca-rubra-Bromus spp.-Phleum pratense)
n=12 This community type develops on mesic sites that were seeded to a mixture of brome, timothy or
other productive species with some grazing resistant species like creeping red fescue, A history of moderate
to heavy grazing pressure results in a decline in the proportions of tall, productive species and an increase in
the grazing resistant species. Heavy continuous grazing will allow Kentucky bluegrass and dandelion to
invade into the stand to form a Kentucky bluegrass or Quackgrass/Dandelion dominated community type.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
Aspen
(Populus tremuloides )
2
0-10
33
Shrubs
Rose
(Rosa acicularis )
2
0-5
75
Forbs
Clover
(Trifolium spp.)
Dandelion
19
0-72
83
(Taraxacum officinale)
Strawberry
10
0-31
83
(Fragaria virginiana)
8
0-35
50
Grasses
Creeping Red Fescue
(Festuca rubra)
Timothy
41
9-78
100
(Phleum pratense)
Kentucky Bluegrass
9
0-25
83
(Poa pratensis)
Smooth brome
5
0-23
67
(Bromus inermis )
15
0-75
50
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
Mesic
Nutrient Regime (mean):
medium
Elevation:
609m
Soil Drainage (mean):
well
DESIRABLE SPECIES SHIFT SCORE: 4
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Total 2120
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.51 ha/AUM (0.58-0.4)
0.8 AUM/ac (0.7-1. 0)
86
—
DMB14. Creeping red fescue-Kentucky bluegrass/Dandelion
(Festuca rubra-Poa pratensis/ Taraxacum officinale)
n=31 This community is representative of heavily grazed mesic sites and is dominated by grazing resistant
species like Kentucky bluegrass, creeping red fescue or quackgrass. Heavy grazing tends to favour the growth
of these low-growing or rhizomatuous species and that of weedy or disturbance induced species such as
dandelion. These sites have poor health ratings and lower production than community types dominated by
species like timothy and brome.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Shrubs
Raspberry.
( Rubus idaeus.)
1
0-30
25
Forbs
Clover
(Trifolium spp.)
Dandelion
13
0-45
100
(Taraxacum officinale)
Strawberry
21
0-42
91
(Fragaria virginiana)
2
0-4
72
Grasses
Creeping Red Fescue
(Festuca rubra)
Timothy
15
0-75
40
(Phleum pratense)
Smooth brome
3
0-13
53
(Bromus inermis)
Kentucky bluegrass
2
0-3
25
( Poa pratensis )
Quackgrass
15
0-36
78
( Agropyron repens)
5
0-45
20
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
Mesic
Nutrient Regime (mean):
Medium
Elevation:
576-701(658)m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Well
desirable species shift score: 0
FORAGE PRODUCTION (KG/HA)
Total 2120
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.67 ha/AUM (1.35-0.4)
0.6 AUM/ac (0.3-1. 0)
87
—
DMB 1 5. Str awberry-Dandelion- W eeds
(Fragaria virginiana-Taraxacum officinale- Cirsium arvensis)
n=6 This community represents extremely heavily grazed mesic pasture sites. Generally, all that is left
growing on these areas is dandelion. There also tends to be a lot of bare soil, which provides a place for
noxious weeds (Canada thistle) to become established.
Environmental Variables
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Moisture Regime (mean):
Mean range const. Mesic
Forbs
Strawberry
(Fragaria virginiana)
2
0-8
50
Clover
(Trifolium spp.)
1
0-6
50
Dandelion
(Taraxacum officinale)
44
19-75
100
Canada thistle
(Cirsium arvense )
5
0-29
33
Grasses
Timothy
(Phleum pratense)
2
0-7
67
Creeping red fescue
(Festuca rubra)
1
0-1
67
Kentucky Bluegrass
(Poa pratensis)
17
3-74
100
Nutrient Regime (mean):
Medium
Elevation:
455m
Soil Drainage (mean):
WELL
Plant composition: Tame or Modified Tame
desirable species shift score: 0
FORAGE PRODUCTION (KG/HA)
Total 1500
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.02 ha/AUM (40.47-1.35)
0.2 AUM/ac (0.01-0.3)
88
DMB16. Reed canary grass-Meadow foxtail-Smooth brome-Timothy
(Phalaris arundinacea-Alopecurus pratensis-Bromus inermis-Phleum pratense)
n=2 This community type represents seeded areas on moist (subhygric) rich sites. Reed canary grass
and meadow foxtail establish quickly in wet places that have been disturbed and will dominate very wet sites.
Care should be taken when seeding reed canary grass. It appears that the commercial cultivars can be very
invasive (Invasive plants of natural habitats 1992). In areas that have supported reed canary grass
monocultures for extended periods many have seed banks devoid of other species. Meadow foxtail also
seems particularly prone to increasing on moister grazed sites as it starts growth and heads out early.
Meadow foxtail becomes unpalatable and is avoided by livestock if it is not grazed early enough in the
spring.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Forbs
AMERICAN VETCH
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Vicia americana)
Dandelion
1
0.1
50
(Taraxacum officinale)
Strawberry
3
2-3
100
(Fragaria virginiana)
Clover
13
0-26
50
( Trifolium spp .)
Grasses
Reed canary grass
15
6-25
100
(Phalaris arundinacea)
TIMOTHY
28
0-55
50
(Phleum pratense)
Smooth brome
5
2-7
100
(Bromus inermis )
Creeping red fescue
21
0-41
50
( Festuca rubra)
Meadow foxtail
6
1-11
100
( Alopecurus pratensis)
11
0-22
50
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
rich
Elevation:
579-606m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Well
DESIRABLE SPECIES SHIFT SCORE: 8
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Total 2995
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.34 ha/AUM (0.4-0.27)
1.2 AUM/ac (1.0-1.5)
89
DMB17. Brome-Creeping red fescue-Kentucky bluegrass/Dandelion
(Bromus spp.-Festuca rubra-Poa pratensis/Taraxacum officinale)
n=3 This community represents moderately grazed subhygric sites. Heavy continuous grazing will allow
Kentucky bluegrass and dandelion to invade into the stand to form a Kentucky bluegrass or
Quackgrass/Dandelion dominated community type. Continued heavy grazing pressure may eventually lead to
site dominated by foxtail barley.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Forbs
Clover
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Trifolium spp.)
Dandelion
19
6-31
100
(Taraxacum officinale)
Horsetail
29
15-38
100
(Equisetum arvense)
Strawberry
4
2-6
100
(Fra gar ia virginiana )
Grasses
Creeping Red Fescue
2
1-2
100
(Festuca rubra)
Meadow brome
62
40-80
100
(Bromus biebersteinii)
Sedge
21
17-23
100
(Car ex spp.)
Kentucky bluegrass
16
1-45
100
(Poa pratensis )
Timothy
5
1-10
100
(Phleum pratense )
3
2-4
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
Permesotrophic
Elevation:
667m
Soil Drainage (mean):
MODERATELY WELL
DESIRABLE SPECIES SHIFT SCORE: 4
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA)
Total 2500
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.4 ha/AUM (0.51-0.34)
1.0 AUM/ac (0.8-1. 2)
90
DMB18. Foxtail barley /Weeds
(Hordeum jubatum/Cirsium arvensis)
n=l This community type develops on heavily grazed subhygric moist sites. This community was found in
depressional areas and on river flood plains. Foxtail barley is also well adapted to growing on saline soils
(Bailey et al. 1992). It is likely that the soils of this site are slightly saline. This community type would be
considered non-use because the principle forage species foxtail barley is generally unpalatable to livestock.
Foxtail barley can also cause injury to livestock. The sharp seeds and awns may work their way into tongues,
gums, eyes, noses or skins of animals.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean range const.
Forbs
Alfalfa
(Medicago falcata.)
11
100
Dandelion
(Taraxacum officinale)
1
100
Sweet clover
(Melilotus officinalis)
4
100
Clover
{Trifolium spp .)
5
100
Grasses
Foxtail barley
(Hordeum jubatum)
69
100
Smooth brome
(Bromus inermis)
1
100
Timothy
(Phleum pratense)
18
100
Fowl bluegrass
(Poa palustris)
1
100
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
Rich
Elevation:
457-606(597)m
Soil Drainage (mean): Well
Plant composition: Tame or Modified Tame
Desirable Species Shift Score: 0
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Total 1500
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.34 ha/AUM (4.05-1.35)
0.2 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.3)
91
DMB19. Wheat grass-Creeping red fescue-Timothy
(Agropyron pectiniforme-Festuca rubra-Phleum pratense)
n=l This community type occurs on cleared pastures that were seeded on submesic (dry) sites in the eastern
part of the subregion near St. Paul. These sites occur on very stoney well drained soils and it was thought
crested wheat grass would grow well in these site conditions. These pastures were seeded in the late 1980's
with a mixture of pubescent wheat grass, timothy, creeping red fescue, alfalfa, crested wheat grass and sweet
clover. Crested wheat grass and creeping red fescue were found to dominate the dry hilltops and timothy was
found on the moist lowland sites. There was little evidence of pubescent wheat grass, alfalfa or sweet clover
surviving from the original mix. These pastures often undergo succession to a shrub dominated community
(DMB1 1) and then a deciduous dominated community type (DMB9).
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean range const.
Shrubs
Prickly rose
( Rosa acicularis)
1
-
100
Forbs
Clover
(Trifolium spp.)
1
100
Dandelion
(Taraxacum offmcinale)
29
.
100
Bearberry
(Arctostaphylos uva-ursi)
1
-
100
Grasses
Creeping Red Fescue
(Festuca rubra)
7
100
Crested wheat grass
(Agropyron pectiniforme)
11
_
100
Timothy
(Phleum pratense)
5
_
100
KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS
(Poa pratensis)
3
_
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
Submesic
Nutrient Regime (mean):
Mesotrophic
Elevation:
579m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Well
DESIRABLE SPECIES SHIFT SCORE: 8
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Total 1000
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.51 ha/AUM (0.51-0.4)
0.8 AUM/ac (0. 8-1.0)
92
DMB20. Rose/Creeping red fescue-Sedge
(Rosa acicularis/Festuca rubra-Carex spp.)
n=5 As seeded pastures undergo succession back to a deciduous dominated forest they are often invaded by
rose and willow before the trees become dominant. This community represents an early successional
community of DMB21. Burning, cultivation and spraying with herbicide are all options that can be considered
in order to control shrub regrowth. On mesic sites marsh reed grass tends to be the native grass that invades. In
contrast hairy wild rye will invade on drier sites.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
Aspen
( Populus tremuloides )
6
0-15
40
Shrubs
Prickly rose
( Rosa acicularis)
12
1-25
100
Forbs
Clover
(Trifolium spp.)
7
0-14
80
Dandelion
(Taraxacum officinale)
2
1-7
100
WILD STAWBERRY
(Fragaria virginiana)
8
1-23
100
Grasses
Creeping Red Fescue
(Festuca rubra)
19
0-64
80
Timothy
(Phleum pratense)
4
0-12
60
KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS
(Poa pratensis)
2
0-7
60
Hairy wild rye
( Elymus innovatus)
1
0-3
40
Marsh reed grass
( Calamagrostis canadensis)
3
0-13
20
Sedge
(Car ex spp.)
7
0-24
80
Moisture Regime (mean):
Mesic
Nutrient Regime (mean):
Medium
Elevation:
603(600-606)m
Soil Drainage (mean): Well
Plant composition: Tame or Modified Tame
DESIRABLE SPECIES SHIFT SCORE: 0
FORAGE PRODUCTIONf KG/HA)
Total 2000
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.81 ha/AUM (1.35-0.51)
0.5 AUM/ac (0.3-0.8)
93
—
DMB21. Aw/Rose/Strawberry
(Populus tremuloides/Rosa acicularis/Fragaria virginiana)
n=5 This community type occurs in mesic cultivated pastures that are being invaded by aspen. No grazing
pressure or only light grazing pressure allows aspen to recolonize these cultivated pastures. Burning,
cultivation and spraying with herbicide are all options that can be considered in order to control aspen regrowth.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Environmental Variables
Mean range const. Moisture Regime (mean):
Trees
Aspen
{Populus tremuloides )
14
8-20
Mesic
Nutrient Regime (mean):
lOO Mesotrophic
Balsam poplar
{Populus balsamifera)
1
0-1
40 Elevation:
Shrubs
Prickly rose
{Rosa acicularis )
3
1-4
600m
Soil Drainage (mean): Well
100
Willow
{Salix bebbiana)
1
0-4
Plant composition: Tame or Modified Tame
20
Snowberry
{Symphoricarpos
occidentalis )
1
0-2
DESIRABLE SPECIES SHIFT SCORE: 0
60 FORAGE PRODUCTION^ KG/HA)
Forbs
Clover
(Trifolium spp.)
Dandelion
(Taraxacum offincinale)
2
0-5
60
Total 2060
15
0-40
80
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
WILD STAWBERRY
(Fragaria virginiana)
5
2-12
100
2.02 ha/AUM (4.05-0.51)
0.2 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.3)
Grasses
Creeping Red Fescue
(Festuca rubra)
2
0-5
40
Timothy
(Phleum pratense)
1
0-4
20
KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS
(Poa pratensis)
5
0-8
60
Hairy wild rye
{Elymus innovatus)
6
1-15
100
Marsh reed grass
{Calamagrostis canadensis )
1
0-4
40
94
DMB22. Rose/Dandelion/Hairy wild rye
(Rosa acicularis/Taraxacum officinal e/Ely mus innovatus)
n=l This community represents early invasion of shrubs onto drier (submesic) sites on pastures in the St.
Paul area of the subregion. As seeded pastures undergo succession back to a deciduous dominated forest they
are often invaded by rose and willow before the trees become dominant. This community represents an early
successional community of DMB23. Burning, cultivation and spraying with herbicide are all options that can
be considered in order to control shrub regrowth.
Plant Composition camopy cover<%) Environmental Variables
Mean
RANGE CONST.
Trees
Aspen
( Populus tremuloides)
Balsam poplar
1
100
( Populus balsamifera )
1
100
Shrubs
Prickly rose
{Rosa acicularis)
Willow
6
100
(Salix bebbiana )
SNOWBERRY
4
100
{Symphoricarpos
occidentalism
2
100
Forbs
Clover
(Trifolium spp.)
Dandelion
3
100
(Taraxacum offincinale)
22
100
WILD STAWBERRY
(Fragaria virginiana)
3
100
Grasses
Creeping Red Fescue
(Festuca rubra)
Timothy
8
100
(Phleum pratense)
1
100
KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS
(Poa pratensis)
Hairy wild rye
4
100
{Elymus innovatus)
Crested wheat grass
4
100
{Agropyron pectiniforme)
1
100
Moisture Regime (mean):
Submesic
Nutrient Regime (mean):
Medium
Elevation:
600m
Soil Drainage (mean): Well
Plant composition: Tame or Modified Tame
Desirable Species Shift Score: 0
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA)
Total 1000
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.02 ha/AUM (4.05-0.51)
0.2 AUM/ac (0. 1-0.3)
95
DMB23. Aw-Pb/Rose/Hairy wild rye
(Populus tremuloides-P. balsamifera/Rosa acicularis/Elymus innovatus)
n=l This community represents old pastures on dry sandy sites that were cleared of trees and aerial seeded
with brome, timothy, crested wheat grass and creeping red fescue in the 1 980's near St. Paul. In the absence of
disturbance these sites have been slowly encroached by trees and the understory has been invaded by hairy wild
rye. These sites are moderately productive and are easily accessible to livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean range const.
Trees
Aspen
{Populus tremuloides )
15
100
Balsam poplar
{Populus balsamifera )
35
-
100
Shrubs
Prickly rose
{Rosa acicularis )
6
100
Willow
{Salix bebbiana )
1
_
100
Snowberry
{Symphoricarpos
occidentalis)
1
-
100
Forbs
Clover
(Trifolium spp.)
1
100
Dandelion
(Taraxacum offincinale)
4
_
100
WILD STAWBERRY
(Fragaria virginiana)
1
-
100
Grasses
Creeping Red Fescue
(Festuca rubra)
9
100
SLENDER WHEAT GRASS
(Agropyron trachycaulum)
1
100
KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS
(Poa pratensis)
1
100
Hairy wild rye
{Elymus innovatus)
24
.
100
Crested wheat grass
{Agropyron pectiniforme)
1
_
100
Moisture Regime (mean):
Submesic
Nutrient Regime (mean):
Medium
Elevation:
600m
Soil Drainage (mean): Well
Plant composition: Tame or Modified Tame
Desirable Species Shift Score: 0
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Total 1000
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.02 ha/AUM (4.05-0.51)
0.2 AUM/ac (0. 1-0.3)
96
DMB24. Willow/Timothy
(Salix spp./Phleum pratense)
n~2 This community represents invasion of shrubs and trees onto tame pasture on moister sites. Willow
favours growing on these moist, richer sites and will often invade off the edges of the pasture. Burning,
cultivation and spraying with herbicide are all options that can be considered in order to control shrub regrowth.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean range const.
Shrubs
Willow
( Salix bebbiana )
19
8-30
100
Forbs
Clover
(Trifolium spp.)
3
2-3
100
Dandelion
(Taraxacum offincinale)
27
4-49
100
WILD STAWBERRY
(Fragaria virginiana)
6
0-12
100
Horsetail
(Equisetum arvense )
1
0-2
50
Grasses
Timothy
(Phleum pratense)
45
43-46
100
Sedge
(Carex spp.)
5
0-9
50
KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS
(Poa pratensis)
1
0-1
50
Smooth brome
{Bromus inermis)
2
0-3
50
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
Permesotrophic
Elevation:
600m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Well
DESIRABLE SPECIES SHIFT SCORE: 8
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Total 2500
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
1.01 ha/AUM (1.35-0.81)
0.4 AUM/ac (0.3-0.5)
97
DRY MIXEDWOOD SUBREGION
DECIDUOUS FOREST COMMUNITY TYPES
Photo 4. Aw/Rose/Tall forb community type in the Dry Mixedwood subregion
Photo 5. Aw/Hazelnut community is very common in the eastern ecodistricts of the Dry
Mixedwood subregion.
98
DECIDUOUS FOREST COMMUNITIES
All of the deciduous stands sampled in the Dry Mixedwood subregion were dominated by
aspen and balsam poplar and had a significant rose understory. In both Brierley et al. (1985) and
Beckingham's (1993) deciduous classifications in the same subregion rose was the dominant or
codominant understory shrub species in nearly every aspen-dominated community type. In
Beckingham's classification rose was present in 205 of the 209 aspen-dominated stands. Rose is
well adapted to a wide variety of site conditions with a moderate supply of nutrients. The moisture
regime can vary from submesic to subhygric and the sites can be well to imperfectly drained.
It appears the secondary forb and shrub species in association with rose characterize the
ecological conditions of aspen forest types in the Dry Mixedwood subregion. Indeed, many of the
deciduous types in Beckingham's classification were based on the secondary shrub species.
In the Dry Mixedwood 22 deciduous community types were described. The Aw/Blueberry
type is found on well-drained, sandy sites in association with jack pine stands and the Aw/Dwarf
bilberry/Bearberry/Mountain ricegrass community is found on slightly moister sites with loamy
sand textures . The Aspen/Alder type is found on moist, moderately drained sites at higher
elevations and the Aspen/Rose(Aw/Rose/Tall forb, Aw/Rose/Low forb, Aw/Rose-Hazelnut,
Aw/Buffaloberry-Rose and Aw/Saskatoon-Rose) site types are moderately well-drained, with mesic
moisture and mesotrophic nutrient regimes. Beckingham (1993), felt the Aspen/Buffaloberry type
occurred on somewhat nutrient-poor soils. The Aspen/Rose/Tall and Low forb community types
occupy similar site conditions. The difference between these two types may be related to grazing
pressure. The Aspen/Rose/Low forb type has a low total cover of forbs (48%), whereas the
Aspen/Rose/Tall forb type has a high total cover of forbs (81%). The increased grazing pressure in
the Aspen/Rose/Low forb type may have caused a reduction in forb cover. The Aspen/Hazelnut
type is found on mesic, well-drained sites and appears to be the reference deciduous type for this
subregion, particularly in the more eastern ecodistricts. The hazelnut-dominated community types
were very common within the eastern ecodistricts in the southern part of the subregion (St. Paul,
Bonnyville, Smoky Lake). The presence of hazelnut appears to be indicative of warmer sites
(Beckingham 1993) and have some fire history (Downing and Karpuk 1992).
A number of balsam poplar-dominated community types were described in the western and
eastern ecodistricts. These communities are typical of forests situated along the flood plains of
rivers and seepage areas in lower slope positions. The Balsam poplar-Aspen/Horsetail and Balsam
poplar- Aspen/Willow type are found on moist poorly drained sites adjacent to some willow
shrublands.
The position sequence of the dominant community types in the d. 1 . ecological site phase is
shown in figure 7.
99
Ecological site phase: d.1 low bush cranberry - Aw
I
sustained heavy grazing
DMC 3a
NOTE: DMC 5 may not be present in eastern areas of the Dry Mixedwood subregion.
Figure 7. Overview of deciduous communities in the Dry Mixedwood subregion.
100
Table 4. Production values and recommended ecologically sustainable stocking rates for the deciduous communities and ecological
site phases described in the Dry Mixedwood subregion.*
Ecological site Community Community type Productivity (kg/ha) Stocking rate
number ha/AUM(AUM/ac)
T3
o>
-o
v©'
—
a
•n
IT)
•n
CN
in
in
in
<N
»n
<N)
in
q'
CN
1
1 — <
d
1
1
d
1
d
d
g
d
d
d
d
d
d^
d
d
—
' — ^
rj
— ✓
n>«-'
fy-\
CN
^ — '
(N
N — -
•n
CN
S
A
q
IN.
r t
•o
q
q
q
q
q
r-
q
w
<N
CN
<N
<N
CN
CN
<N
<N
<N
CN
<n
ni
<N
CN
ZJ
as
in
<N
3T
co
nT
rn
cT
n?
<n"
m
o'
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
’-i
M
■
iH
i-H
M
M
MM
OX
d
CO
d
MM
d
d
d
d
o
d
d
— '
N ^
s
’mm'
- — ^
'm'
S3
<N
<N
»n
CN
VO
(N
(N
in
<N
CN
<N
in
O
CO
q
q
q
q
q
q
CO
q
HH
cn
mM
ni
<N
oi
CN
<N
'— 1
in
'n
in
1
in
o
m
in
in
in
in
•n
in
©
CO
q
q
q
q
q
q
03
q
nt
d
T;t
d
d
^t
'■sj-
d
d
"c3
<N
(N
vo
m
oo
oo
•n
t>
00
ov
in
r-
M
©
<N
<n
in
ov
ov
o
o
oo
m
o
H
r-
’■"i
ov
ov
oo
1
oo
ov
CN
s
9m
i n
<n
<N
^M
ov
VO
o
o
9N.
O
J3
nf
«N.
OO
M
in
Cs|
m
o
mM
CN
<N
in
in
m
OO
pO
m
Os
r-
oo
VO
Ov
o
Ov
o>
o
©
VO
v©
o
in
in
in
M
<N
m
Oo
00
CN
in
^1-
VO
m
in
m
<n
in
</)
*n
C3
ov
©
OV
o
m
in
in
•x,
VO
Jm
<n
d
VO
Ov
r-
in
in
oo
Oo
CN
o
cn
’■-1
1—1
1
f— H
(N
VO
VO
ai
CZ3
cd
CZ3
$
£
<
O
^ &
g1
3
C/3
PQ
I
&
<u
£•8
<D ^
€ s
l|M \
g-
a>
1
9m
O
C/3
€
3
3
H
1
<u
a
ts
<u
X3
O
a
o
o
|
<
•e
£
o
q
o
3
nO
<
T3
<L>
M
o
3
3
o
t/1
<D
•8
| £
rP
<D
J3
•s
O
Id
C/3
o
5
2
Vm
O
9m
<D
J2
Xfl
aj
'O
CD
N
o
1/3
O
a
$
t/3
a>
p
o
O
3
<N
9 ■£
> aJ
£ <u
< PQ
3
£
<
aS
£
<
CU
i
<
1
<
<
<
GO
<
1
£
S)
-3
OS
<
rO)
Ph
<
-3
3
’o
<u
Q
p a>
e3 a>
c3 a>
c3 ao
O c/3
aj
3 S3
<3
O on
• r"!. «3
a
o on
o
'5b 5
(
i-H
5P Ja
<N
in
VO
oo
cn
m
1— H
,2 Ph
U
u
O cl
u
V
O
u
o
U
S Ph
O
U
3 &
U
8 2
S
3
O <L>
O +3
S
S
s
%
S
o ©
s
3
O <u
O 4±3
3
W m
Q
Q
w 'S
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
W *w
Q
a
w -s
Q
_ S
« .2
*iw *0
a> <u
s s
-o
<50
o
o
CD
T3
X>
Oh
i
£
<
T3
O
0
1
o
cd aj
O CO
'§>.§
£ a
8 £
W co
CD
*S
W>
1 1
(n
CN
<N^
— \
cT
>— i
i— i
'—i
©
o'
p
p
p
o
©
p
N— -
CN
CN
NO
»/d
<N
s —
>o
•o
•o
•TN
Nn
o
p
0>
05
<05
05
O
p
<N
N-
<N
<N
N"
N-
c^T
r^T
r^T
<N^
rT
©
©
©
05
c5
05
©
,"h
©
o'
o'
p
p
P
©
' ✓
^ '
v — ^
U'S
i n
CN
*-H
<N
<N
<N
CN
cn
cn
©
O
<05
05
p
— 1
CN
,~'h’
<N
<N
<N
CN
ifS
LT)
uo
»o
•o
*o
<o
©
O
©
05
Q>
<05
05
©
N-
N"
N-
N-
N-
'■-i
IN.
05
N-
<05
05
N-
o
"-h
Oo
<05
O
*o
<o
m
<N
'**1
’"■H
<N
’-H
<N
o
ON
»-H
"*>1
'"H
r"H
,-H
CT)
05
05
'O
05
CN
05
On
05
Os
‘O
<o
o
O
<N
r*~i
NO
°o
‘O
ro
CO
IN.
>
05
Q>
05
05
'xT
Oo
>
05
°o
05
05
N"
CN
Vo
•o
<N
<>d
cn
*o
Qs
05
05
oo
CO
<N
>
Oo
05
05
oo
<n->
<N
<N
^~H
P)
tN
CO
CO
cd
CD
on
T3
O
o
Oh
i
£
<
o
TO
3
'O
Vh
.CD
JD
E*
(D
o
o
CD
B
£
<
’£
Id
CO
Vi
1
'co
O
*3
CD
o
3
>>
CD
ri
u
CD
'cd
U
CD
•e
CD
>;
m
B“
(D
f
tX)
o
-o
T3
CD
N
0
1
o
Vh
X>
rP
H— >
o
o
rP
Oh
*£
Id
£
<f
J-H
o
.>
2
<
o
S3
cd
&b
cd
CQ
£
i/i
co
Vh
O
43
1
X)
^p
J~>
^p
P5
Oh
Oh
Oh
Oh
Oh
CD
Oh
Oh
£h
Oh
cd cd
cd cd
,-H
CN
ro
N"
O CO
OO
On
O co
oo
r-H
r-H
i— H
r-H
’3) ^
r-H
i-H
’5b £
ON
U
U
u
u
U
,2 a
O
U
3 Ph
o
S
S
s
S
S
o <u
O +3
S
S
O <u
O 4-S
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
W *33
Q
Q
W
Q
OJD X
b.a
o
o
pH
03
<D
CD
CCS a>
O CO
It
O cd
o -e
w *3
-6 s
^ 3
s®
no
u
s
Q
-o
S £
<N
5)
”3
<D
CD
2
^P
Oh
Cd D
•§. S «o
£Q _s3
,2 & U
o CD ^
■«« 3
W 'co
*C
T3
S *
'S w
CD
X)
Ph
CO
ccS
CQ
to
S3
o
o
CCS CD
O CO
'§>5
,2 SO
8 2
W ’S
T3
§
CO
0)
J3
Id
>
_o
-4-J
o
■§
2
Oh
CD
s?
Vi
o
Oh
Key to Deciduous Community Types - Dry Mixedwood
1. Sites where plant community succession is in the early stages (i.e. recently reset by
logging or fire) DMC10 Deciduous cutblocks and unseeded clearings
Mid to late successional plant communities 2
2. Tree canopy dominated by Aspen 3
Tree canopy dominated by Balsam poplar and paper birch 11
3. Dry sites with sandy soil texture, blueberry and bearberry dominate understory 4
Sites with mesic or better moisture, blueberry or bearberry may be present but do not
dominate the understory 5
4. Sandy sites dominated by blueberry DMCla Aw/Blueberry
Loamy sand sites dominated by dwarf bilberry, bearberry and Mtn. ricegrass
DMC1 Aw/D.bilberry/Bearberry/Mtn. ricegrass
5. Heavily grazed sites dominated by dandelion, Kentucky bluegrass or clover
DMC3a Aw/Dandelion/Kentucky bluegrass
Moderately or lightly grazed sites dominated by shrubs 6
6. Beaked hazelnut dominates the understory DMC4 Aw-Pb/Hazelnut
Sites dominated by other shrubs 7
7. Alder dominates the understory DMC6 Aw/Alder
Sites dominated by other shrubs 8
8. Slope communities dominated by saskatoon DMC7 Aw/Saskatoon
Sites dominated by other shrubs 9
9. Buffaloberry dominates the understory DMC5 Aw/Buffaloberry
Rose and forb dominated understory 10
10. Tall forb dominated (fireweed, showy aster, peavine, wild sarsaparilla).... DMC2 Aw/Rose/Tall forb
Low forb dominated (bunchberry, twinflower, strawberry, wintergreen)...DMC3 Aw/Rose/Low forb
1 1 . Heavily grazed birch or balsam poplar dominated sites 12
Moderately or lightly grazed birch or balsam poplar dominated sites 13
12. Smooth brome dominates understory .....DMC19 Pb/Smooth brome
Kentucky bluegrass and dandelion dominated DMC18 Pb-Bw/K. bluegrass
13. Paper birch dominated 14
Balsam poplar dominated 15
14. Boggy area that has recently burned DMC16 Bw/Labrador tea
Wet sites with recent beaver activity DMC17 Bw/Raspberry
15. Very wet site, grass meadows invaded by balsam poplar DMC15 Pb/Reed grass
Upland sites dominated by shrubs or horsetail 16
16. Riverine forests dominated by dogwood in understory.... DMC8 Pb- Aw/Red osier dogwood
Sites dominated by other shrubs or horsetail in the understory 17
17. Willow dominates the understory DMC8a Pb-Aw/Willow
Sites dominated by other shrubs or horsetail in the understory 18
18. Riverine forest dominated by river alder DMC12 Pb/River alder
Sites dominated by other shrubs or horsetail in the understory 19
19. Very moist sites dominated by horsetail in the understory DMC9 Pb-Aw/Horsetail
Understory dominated by shrubs 20
20. Honeysuckle present as a co-dominant shrub on rich seepage sites.... DMC 11 Pb/Honey suckle
Snowberry or silverberry are dominant is the understory 21
21. Snowberry dominates the understory DMC14 Pb/Snowberry
Silverberry dominates the understory DMC 13 Pb-Aw/Silverberry
103
DMC1. Aw/Dwarf bilberry/Bearberry/Mountain ricegrass
(Populus tremuloides/Vaccinium caespitosum/Arctostaphylos uva-ursi/Oryzopsis
asperifolia )
n=26 This community type is found on dry, well-drained, loamy-sand sites and is part of the blueberry ecosite
outlined by Beckingham and Archibald (1996). The canopy cover of aspen is open allowing for easy access by
livestock, but the dry site conditions and poorer nutrient status limit the amount of regrowth after grazing. If this
community type is managed for one rotation a year, it can contribute significantly to the overall carrying capacity of
a lease.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
Trembling Aspen
(Populus tremuloides)
White spruce
43
20-75
100
(Picea glauca)
2
0-15
42
Shrubs
Prickly Rose
(Rosa acicularis)
SASKATOON
8
0-21
92
(Amelanchier alnifolia)
Blueberry
4
0-22
77
(Vaccinium myrtillus)
Dwarf bilberry
2
0-13
50
( Vaccinium caespitosum )
4
0-9
81
Forbs
BEARBERRY
(Arctostaphylos uva-ursi)
Twinflower
7
0-36
75
(Linnaea borealis)
Lindley's Aster
8
0-22
88
(Aster ciliolatus)
Wild lily of the valley
2
0-6
89
(Maianthemum canadense)
Yellow peavine
5
2-9
100
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
Strawberry
7
3-31
100
(Fragaria virginiana)
5
0-12
96
Grasses
Mountain Rice Grass
(Oryzopsis asperfolia)
Hairy wild rye
7
0-22
81
( Elymus innovatus)
Purple oat grass
7
0-16
96
( Schizachne purpurascens )
3
0-10
81
Northern ricegrass
{Oryzopsis pungens) 1 0-10 35
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Submesic
Nutrient Regime:
poor
Elevation:
455 m
Soil Drainage:
Well
Ecological Status Score: 18
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA)
Grass 339(166-442)
Forbs 263(64-610)
Shrubs 145(56-266)
Total 728(230-1284)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.7 ha/AUM (4.05-2.02)
0.15 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.2)
104
DMCla. Aw/Blueberry
(Populus tremuloides/Vaccinium myrtillus )
n=l This community type is found on dry, well-drained, sandy sites interspersed with stands of jack pine and
is part of the blueberry ecosite outlined by Beckingham and Archibald (1996). The canopy cover of aspen is open
allowing for easy access by livestock, but the dry site conditions and poorer nutrient status limit the amount of
regrowth after grazing. If this community type is managed for one rotation a year, it can contribute significantly
to the overall carrying capacity of a lease.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Trembling Aspen
(Populus tremuloides)
Shrubs
Prickly Rose
(Rosa acicularis)
LOW BUSH CRANBERRY
(Viburnum edule)
Blueberry
(Vaccinium myrtillus)
Grasses
Hairy wild rye
( Elymus innovatus )
Northern ricegrass
(Oryzopsis pungens )
Lichen
Reindeer lichen
( Cladina mitis )
Mean range const.
35 - 100
2 - 100
2 - 100
40 - 100
100
100
100
100
100
5 - 100
4 - 100
1 - 100
Forbs
bearberry
(Arctostaphylos uva-ursi) 20
Twinflower
(Linnaea borealis) 5
Strawberry
(Fragaria virginiana) 5
Wild lily of the valley
(Maianthemum canadense) 15
Wild Sarsaparilla
(Aralia nudicaulis) 7
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
SUBMESIC-SUBXERIC
Nutrient Regime:
Poor
Elevation:
455 M
Soil Drainage:
Well
Ecological Status Score: 18
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA)
Total 750*Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.7 ha/AUM (4.05-2.02)
0.15 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.2)
105
DMC2. Aw/Rose/Tall forb
(Populus tremuloides/Rosa acicularis/Tall forbs)
n=71 This community type is part of the low bush cranberry ecosite outlined by Beckingham and Archibald
( 1 996). This community type is also very similar to the Aspen/Rose/Low forb community type, but the cover of forbs
is much higher. This appears to be related to the grazing pressure. The higher the grazing pressure on the
Aw/Rose/T all forb community type appears to cause a reduction in the cover of tall growing forbs (wild sarsaparilla,
fireweed, peavine, showy aster) and favours the growth of low growing forbs (bunchberry, dewberry, wintergreen,
strawberry). This community type is providing a moderate amount of forage for domestic livestock.
Plant Composition canopy covERf%)
Trees
Trembling Aspen
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Populus tremuloides)
Balsam Poplar
51
15-70
100
{Populus balsamifera)
Shrubs
Hazelnut
4
0-10
58
{Corylus cornuta)
Wild Red Raspberry
2
0-12
34
{Rubus idaeus)
Bracted Honeysuckle
4
0-10
83
(Lonicera involucrata)
Prickly Rose
2
0-32
45
(Rosa acicularis)
LOW BUSH CRANBERRY
12
0-24
91
{Viburnum edule )
Forbs
Fireweed
5
0-36
76
(Epilobium angustifolium) 3 0-7
Dewberry or Running Raspberry
61
(Rubus pubescens) 4
Palmate-leaved Coltsfoot
0-7
87
(Petasites palmatus)
Wild Strawberry
2
0-10
78
(Fragaria virginiana)
Lindley's Aster
3
0-4
87
(Aster ciliolatus)
YELLOW PEAVINE
1
0-4
76
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
Wild Sarsaparilla
7
0-27
96
(Aralia nudicaulis)
1 1
0-57
79
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis )5
0-65
93
HAIRY WILD RYE
{Elymus innovatus ) 3
0-30
70
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic to Subhygric
Nutrient Regime:
MEDIUM TO RICH
Elevation:
455-606(496) m
Percent Slope Gradient:
0-25(5)
Soil Drainage:
Well to Moderately well
Ecological Status Score: 18
FORAGE PRODUCTIONf KG/HA)
Grass 169(0-444)
Forbs 507(72-988)
Shrubs 282(1 18-378)
Total 958(624-1810)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.02 ha/AUM (4.05-1.35)
0.2 AUM/ac (0. 1-0.3)
106
DMC3. Aw/Rose/Low forb
(Populus tremuloides/Rosa acicularis/Low forbs )
n=60 This community type is part of the low bush cranberry ecosite described by Beckingham and Archibald
(1996) and is very similar to the Aw/Rose/Tall forb community type previously described. The difference in the
community types appears to be related to the grazing pressure. The higher the grazing pressure on the Aw/Rose/T all
forb community type appears to cause a reduction in the cover of tall growing forbs (wild sarsaparilla, fireweed,
peavine, showy aster) and favours the growth of low growing forbs (bunchberry, dewberry, wintergreen, strawberry).
This community type is providing a moderate amount of forage for domestic livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Trembling Aspen
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Populus tremuloides)
Balsam Poplar
46
15-85
100
(Populus balsamifera)
Shrubs
Willow spp.
3
0-15
33
(Salix spp.)
Saskatoon
2
0-20
36
(Amelanchier alnifolia)
Wild Red Raspberry
1
0-11
48
(Rubus idaeus)
Snowberry
(Symphoricarpos
5
0-20
93
occidentalis)
Prickly Rose
4
0-38
85
(Rosa acicularis)
Forbs
Fireweed
13
1-55
100
(Epilobium angustifolium) 1 0-1 1
Dewberry or Running Raspberry
42
(Rubus pubescens) 3
Palmate-leaved Coltsfoot
0-30
78
(Petasites palmatus)
Wild Strawberry
1
0-30
53
(Fragaria virginiana)
Lindley's Aster
3
0-12
92
(Aster ciliolatus)
Bunchberry
2
0-12
82
(Cornus canadensis)
Wild Sarsaparilla
5
0-22
83
(Aralia nudicaulis)
Wintergreen
1
0-9
38
(Pyrola asarifolia)
3
0-20
85
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis)
Slender wheat grass
2
0-20
77
(Agropyron trachycaulum)
Hairy wild rye
2
0-40
33
(Elymus innovatus )
3
0-22
73
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic to Subhygric
Nutrient Regime:
MEDIUM TO RICH
Elevation: 455-697(524) m
Percent Slope Gradient: 0 - 5
Soil Drainage:
Well to Moderately well
Ecological Status Score: 12
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Grass 285(12-996)
Forbs 339(90-842)
Shrubs 300(0-896)
Total 937(414-2074)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.7 ha/AUM (4.05-2.02)
0.15 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.2)
107
DMC3a. Aw-Pb/Dandelion/Kentucky bluegrass
(Populus tremuloides-P. balsamifera/Taraxacum officinale/ Poa pratensis )
n=6 This community represents the Aw or Pb/Rose/Tall forb community that has received prolonged heavy
grazing. This community type often occurs in relatively small isolated patches created by intensive grazing adjacent
to water, salt or temporary holding areas. The species richness and diversity of native shrubs, forbs, and grass is
reduced and replaced by grazing resistant clover, dandelion and Kentucky bluegrass.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
Trembling Aspen
(Populus tremuloides)
Balsam Poplar
36
20-50
100
(Populus balsamifera)
32
20-40
100
Shrubs
Willow spp.
(Salix spp.)
Wild Red Raspberry
2
1-3
100
(Rubus idaeus)
Snowberry
4
0-10
80
(Symphoricarpos
occidentalis)
Prickly Rose
7
0-20
80
(Rosa acicularis)
15
3-30
100
Forbs
Clover
(Trifolium spp.)
10
0-20
80
Dewberry or Running Raspberry
(Rubus pubescens)
Dandelion
2
0-10
83
(Taraxacum officinale)
Wild Strawberry
4
1-10
100
(Fragaria virginiana)
Showy aster
3
1-3
100
(Aster conspicuus)
Bunchberry
4
3-10
100
(Cornus canadensis)
Wild Sarsaparilla
1
0-1
50
(Aralia nudicaulis)
WlNTERGREEN
1
0-1
20
(Pyrola asarifolia)
2
0-10
33
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 1
0-3
67
Kentucky bluegrass
{Poa pratensis) 4
0-10
83
Hairy wild rye
(Elymus innovatus ) 2
0-10
50
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic to Subhygric
Nutrient Regime:
Mesotrophic to Permesotrophic
Elevation:
455-697(524) M
Percent Slope Gradient:
0-5
Soil Drainage:
Well to Moderately well
Ecological Status Score: 6-0
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA)
Total 1 178*Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
4.05 ha/AUM (4.05-2.02)
0.1 AUM/ac (0. 1-0.2)
108
DMC4. Aw-Pb/Hazelnut
(Populus tremuloides-P. balsamifera/Corylus cornuta)
n=45 Beaked hazelnut is a common component of many of the deciduous stands in both the western and eastern
ecodistricts of the Dry Mixedwood subregion. The presence of hazelnut appears to be indicative of warmer sites and
have some fire history (Downing and Karpuk 1992). This community tends to occur on moderately to well drained,
fine-textured and gently sloping till deposits. The total forage productivity of this community type is only moderate,
but the majority of the production is coming from hazelnut, which is largely unpalatable to livestock at proper
stocking levels. The high cover of hazelnut also restricts access to livestock, limiting the forage availability.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Trembling Aspen
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Populus tremuloides)
Balsam Poplar
38
3-75
100
(Populus balsamifera)
Paper birch
5
0-60
38
( Betula papyrifera)
Shrubs
Hazelnut
2
0-70
4
(Corylus cornuta)
Prickly Rose
39
12-70
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Snowberry
( Symphoricarpos
9
0-25
82
occidentals, albus)
Saskatoon
4
4-10
100
( Amelanchier alnifolia)
LOW BUSH CRANBERRY
4
0-18
89
( Viburnum edule)
Forbs
Lindley’s aster
3
0-16
71
(Aster ciliolatus) 2 0-7
Dewberry or Running Raspberry
80
(Rubus pubescens)
Peavine
4
0-5
87
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
American vetch
5
1-10
100
(Vicia americana)
Bunchberry
1
0-2
67
(Cornus canadensis)
Wild Sarsaparilla
6
0-8
84
(Aralia nudicaulis)
11
0-25
93
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 4 0-10 87
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic To subhygric
Nutrient Regime:
MEDIUM TO RICH
Elevation:
455 m
Percent Slope Gradient:
0-15 %
Soil Drainage:
Well to Moderately well
Ecological Status Score: 18
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Grass 77(2-200)
Forbs 457(398-520)
Shrubs 441(348-522)
Total 995(830-1 180)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.7 ha/AUM (4.05-1.62)
0.15 AUM/ac (0.1-0.25)
109
DMC5. Aw/Buffaloberry
(Populus tremuloides/ Shepherdia canadensis)
n=5 This community type was found on mesic sites at higher elevations in the Saddle and Birch hills.
Beckingham (1993) felt the Aw/Buffaloberry type was slightly drier and had a slightly poorer nutrient regime than
the model Aw/Rose community types. This type is providing a moderate amount of forage for domestic livestock,
but the drier site conditions and poorer nutrient status will limit regrowth after grazing. Buffaloberry the
predominant shrub species in this community type, is generally unpalatable to livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Trembling Aspen
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Populus tremuloides)
Shrubs
Buffaloberry
52
30-85
100
(Shepherdia canadensis)
Wild Red Raspberry
25
11-38
100
(Rubus idaeus)
Bracted Honeysuckle
3
0-8
60
(Lonicera involucrata)
Prickly Rose
1
0-2
20
(Rosa acicularis)
Low Bush Cranberry
8
2-17
100
(Viburnum edule)
Forbs
Bunchberry
3
0-14
40
(Cornus canadensis) 8
Dewberry or Running Raspbery
0-21
80
(Rubus pubescens)
Yellow peavine
2
0-9
60
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
Twinflower
8
1-18
100
(Linnaea borealis)
3
0-8
60
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 2
Hairy wild rye
1-7
80
(Elymus innovatus) 5
1-15
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic
Nutrient Regime:
medium
Elevation:
455-758(556) m
Percent Slope Gradient:
0-15
Soil Drainage:
Well
Ecological Status Score: 18
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Grass 112
Forbs 304
Shrubs 346
Total 713
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.7 ha/AUM (4.05-2.02)
0.15 AUM/ac (0. 1-0.2)
110
DMC6. Aw/Alder
(Populus tremuloides/Alnus crispa)
n=7 This community type was described at a higher elevation (600 m) in the Dry Mixedwood subregion. Brierly
et al. (1985) and Beckingham (1993) both described aspen-alder communities at higher elevations (>600m). It
appears that the presence of alder may indicate a transition from the Dry Mixedwood into the Lower Foothills
subregion.
This community type is providing a moderate amount of forage for domestic livestock, but the high cover
of alder will limit access.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Balsam Poplar
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Populus balsamifera)
Trembling Aspen
5
1-10
100
{Populus tremuloides)
45
25-60
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic
Nutrient Regime:
medium
Shrubs
Prickly Rose
(Rosa acicularis)
Wild Red Raspberry
(Rubus idaeus)
LOW BUSH CRANBERRY
(Viburnum edule)
Green alder
(Alnus crispa)
7 5-12 100
2 0-5 67
5 2-12 100
31 18-82 100
Forbs
Cream-coloured Vetchling
(Lathyrus ochroleucus) 4
Bunchberry
(Cornus canadensis) 12
Strawberry
(Fragaria virginiana) 2
Wild Sarsaparilla
(Aralia nudicaulis) 20
0-6
0-30
1-3
5-40
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 21 0-65
Slender wheat grass
( Agropyron trachycaulum) 2 0-5
83
83
100
100
83
50
Elevation:
600 m
Percent Slope Gradient:
5 %
Soil Drainage:
WELL
Ecological Status Score: 18
FORAGE PRODUCTION^ KG/HA)
Grass
170
Forbs
356
Shrubs
556
Total
1082
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.7 ha/AUM (4.05-2.02)
0.15 AUM/ac (0. 1-0.2)
111
DMC7. Aw/Saskatoon
(Populus tremuloides/ Amelanchier alnifolia)
n=9 This community type is found on mesic, well drained south facing slopes that overlook rivers and creeks.
Generally, hazelnut, chokecherry, saskatoon and snowberry are indicative of the Dry Mixedwood subregion and are
usually found associated with each other. When saskatoon predominates it usually occurs on south and west facing
slopes. Saskatoon provides important browse for wild ungulates. Livestock also find saskatoon palatable and in
areas where there is extensive cattle grazing this species can be heavily browsed.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
Trembling Aspen
(Populus tremuloides)
Balsam poplar
55
35-70
100
(Populus balsamifera)
4
0-20
44
Shrubs
Saskatoon
(Amelanchier alnifolia)
Prickly Rose
21
15-30
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Wild Red Raspberry
12
1-31
100
(Rubus idaeus)
Snowberry
5
0-17
67
(Symphoricarpos
occidentalis)
Chokecherry
5
0-12
89
(Prunus virginiana)
7
0-30
67
Forbs
Yellow peavine
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
Strawberry
2
0-10
78
(Fragaria virginiana)
1
0-10
78
Dewberry or Running Raspberry
(Rubus pubescens)
Wild sarsaparilla
2
0-10
67
(Arailia nudicaulis)
6
0-20
89
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 3
1-10
78
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic
Nutrient Regime:
medium
Elevation:
455-630 m
Percent Slope Gradient:
4(3-5%)
Aspect:
Southerly-westerly
Soil Drainage:
well
Ecological Status Score: 18
Forage production(kg/ha)
Grass 153(42-264)
Forbs 419(250-587)
Shrubs 524(514-534)
Total 1096(826-1365)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.02 ha/AUM (4.05-1.35)
0.2 AUM/ac (0. 1-0.3)
112
DMC8. Pb-Aw/Red osier dogwood
(Populus balsamifera-P . tremuloides/Cornus stolonifera)
n=51 This community type is typical of river floodplains throughout the Dry Mixedwood subregion. This
community type tends to have a subhygric moisture and rich nutrient regime. Beckingham and Archibald ( 1 996) found
this community type on mid to lower slope topographic positions or near water courses where they recieve nutrient-rich
seepage or flood waters for a portion of the growing season. This community type is one of the most productive in
the Dry Mixedwood subregion, but the high cover of shrubs limits access to livestock.
Plant Composition canopy cover(%)
Environmental Variables
Trees
Balsam Poplar
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Moisture Regime:
Subhygric
(Populus balsamifera)
Trembling Aspen
37
0-80
84 Nutrient Regime:
rich
(Populus tremuloides)
Paper birch
20
0-60
69 1
Elevation:
455-606 m
(Betula papyrifera )
Shrubs
Red osier dogwood
4
0-50
41
Soil Drainage:
Moderately well
(Cornus stolonifera)
Wild red raspberry
23
8-70
100 ]
Ecological Status Score: 18
(Rubus idaeus)
Prickly rose
4
0-18
60
FORAGE PRODUCTIONfKG/HA)
(Rosa acicularis)
Low bush cranberry
9
0-18
78
Grass 13(0-50)
( Viburnum edule)
Forbs
Horsetail
7
0-30
78
Forbs 213(150-250)
Shrubs 713(400-900)
Tree 13(0-50)
Total 950(600-1150)
(Equisetum arvense)
WILD SARSAPARILLA
(Aralia nudicaulis)
Peavine
4
0-10
73
7
0-40
80
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
Fireweed
1
0-4
57
2.02 ha/AUM (4.05-1.35)
0.2 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.3)
(Epilobium angustifolium)
3
0-20
61
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 4 0-50 75
113
DMC8a. Pb-A\v /Willow
(Populus balsamifera-P . tremuloides/Salix spp.)
n=6 This community type is typical of aspen forests adjacent to sloughs and wet meadows. The edges of the
sedge meadows tend to be willow dominated. This community type represents the transition from the meadow
edge into the aspen and balsam poplar dominated forest. This community type is relatively moist and nutrient rich,
but the high cover of willow limits the light reaching the forest floor inhibiting the growth of understory shrub,
forbs and grass. As a result there is little forage for domestic livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
Balsam Poplar
(Populus balsamifera)
Trembling Aspen
25
0-60
83
(Populus tremuloides)
Paper birch
16
0-50
67
(Betula papyrifera )
7
0-20
50
Shrubs
willow spp.
(Salix spp.)
Wild red raspberry
27
20-35
100
(Rubus idaeus)
Prickly rose
8
0-20
83
(Rosa acicularis)
Bracted honeysuckle
3
1-10
100
( Lonicera involcrata)
2
0-3
83
Forbs
Strawberry
(Fragaria virginiana)
Lindley’s aster
3
1-5
100
(Aster ciliolatus)
Tall lungwort
1
0-5
33
(Mertensia paniculata)
Dewberry
4
1-20
100
(Rubus pubescens)
Horsetail
2
1-4
100
(Equisetum arvense)
3
0-10
83
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 5
1-20
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime:
Rich
Elevation:
455-606 m
Soil Drainage:
Moderately well
Ecological Status Score: 18
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA)
Grass 130(0-260)
Forbs 525(350-700)
Shrubs 155(50-260)
Tree 75(0-150)
Total 885(660-1110)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.7 ha/AUM (4.05-2.02)
0.15 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.2)
114
DMC9. Pb-Aw/Horsetail
(Populus balsamifera-Populus tremuloides/Equisetum arvense)
n=5 This community occupies lowland sites adjacent to black spruce and willow lowlands. It is very moist
and nutrient-rich. Horsetail types in the other subregions also tend to be moister and richer than the model
Aw/Rose types. Past overgrazing pressure appears to have been heavy at one of the sites has resulted in an
alteration of understory species composition and productivity. Overuse appears to lower species diversity and
allows horsetail to increase in cover.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Aspen
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Populus tremuloides )
Balsam poplar
25
0-85
60
(Populus balsamifera)
Shrubs
Prickly Rose
41
0-75
80
(Rosa acicularis)
Honeysuckle
3
1-10
100
( Lonicera involcrata)
Red osier dogwood
3
0-16
60
( Cornus stolonifera )
Forbs
Horsetail
3
0-8
60
(Equisetum arvense)
Bunchberry
30
5-60
100
(Cornus canadensis)
Tall lungwort
1
0-6
40
(Mertensia paniculata)
Dewberry
3
0-7
60
(Rubus pubescens)
Veiny meadow rue
1
0-5
80
( Thalictrum venulosum)
Bishop’s cap
1
0-4
20
(Mitella nuda)
Strawberry
1
0-3
40
(Fragaria virginiana)
1
0-2
60
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 2 0-5 80
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
hygric
Nutrient Regime:
Rich
Elevation:
590-667 m
Soil Drainage:
Imperfectly
Ecological Status Score: 18
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Grass 188(104-272)
Forbs 544(450-638)
Shrubs 302(0-604)
Total 1034(910-1158)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
4.05 ha/AUM (4.05-2.02)
0.1 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.2)
115
DMC10. Deciduous cutblocks and unseeded clearings
(Populus tremuloides)
n=4 This community type represents deciduous cutblocks and clearings that have not been seeded to tame forage
species. [Note: it is also the “best fit” for recently burnt areas that remain undescribed in the guide to date.] Marsh reed
grass and strawberry initially dominated these areas. As succession occurs an understory of aspen and rose
predominate. As the tree cover increases the understory species structure and diversity declines. Initially these
clearings are very productive for domestic livestock until the trees grow back and limit accessiblity. Care should be
taken when grazing these cutblocks that the trees are not damaged and there is sufficient regrowth to regenerate the
cutblock.
Plant Composition canopy coveri%)
Environmental Variables
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Understory Trees
Moisture Regime:
Balsam Poplar
Mesic
(Populus balsamifera)
T
0-1
25
Aspen
Nutrient Regime:
(Populus tremuloides )
19
11-28
100
Mesotrophic
Shrubs
Elevation:
Prickly Rose
(Rosa acicularis)
18
9-22
100
455-727(636) m
Low Bush Cranberry
Percent Slope Gradient:
(Viburnum edule)
2
0-4
75
Level
Snowberry or Buckbrush
(Symphoricarpos
Soil Drainage:
occidentalis)
Wild Red Raspberry
3
0-11
75
WELL
(Rubus idaeus)
5
0-16
50 Ecological Status Score: 18-0
Forbs
Wild Strawberry
FORAGE PRODUCTION^ KG/HA)
(Fragaria virginiana)
22
8-38
100
Grass 623
Palmate-leaved Coltsfoot
(Petasites palmatus)
2
0-6
25
Forbs 580
Dewberry or Running Raspberry
Shrubs 810
(Rubus pubescens)
Northern bedstraw
2
0-8
50
Total 2013
(Galium boreale)
Lindley’s aster
4
0-14
75
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
(Aster ciliolatus)
4
0-12
75
2.02 ha/AUM (4.05-1.35)
0.2 AUM/ac (0. 1-0.3)
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis)
17
0-45
75
116
DMC11. Pb/Honey suckle
(Populus balsamifera/Lonicera involcrata)
n=8 This community type occupies mid to lower slope positions which receive nutrient rich seepage from upslope.
It has similar moisture and nutrient regimes to the red osier dogwood dominated sites, but it has a very low cover of
red osier dogwood which distinguishes this community type from the red osier dogwood dominated communities. The
lack of red osier dogwood cover may be indicative of increased grazing pressure or this community may represent the
transition to the Lower Foothills subregion. Indeed Lane et al. (2000) described an Aw/Honeysuckle in the Lower
Foothills subregion and red osier dogwood was not as common in this subregion. This community type has a very
diverse shrub and forb layer, but the high cover of shrubs often restricts access to livestock, limiting forage availability.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
Balsam poplar
(Populus balsamifera)
Aspen
53
20-70
100
( Populus tremuloides )
8
0-20
75
Shrubs
LOW BUSH CRANBERRY
( Viburnum edule)
Prickly Rose
4
0-20
63
(Rosa acicularis)
Bracted honeysuckle
11
0-20
88
( Lonicera involucrata )
Raspberry
9
3-10
100
( Rubus idaeus)
11
3-40
100
Forbs
Dewberry or Running
Raspberry
(Rubus pubescens)
Bunchberry
3
0-10
88
(Cornus canadensis)
Wild Strawberry
4
0-20
88
(Fragaria virginiana)
Showy aster
3
0-10
88
(Aster conspicuus)
Tall lungwort
3
1-10
100
(Mertensia paniculata)
2
0-5
88
YELLOW PEAVINE
( Lathyrus oclnroleucus)
1
0-3
88
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 2
1-3
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime:
rich
Elevation:
590-648(630) m
Percent Slope Gradient:
0
Soil Drainage:
Moderately well
Ecological Status Score: 18
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Grass 105
forbs 450
shrubs 604
Total 1191
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
1.62 ha/AUM (4.05-1.35)
0.25 AUM/ac (0. 1-0.3)
117
DMC12. Pb/River alder
(Populus balsamifera/Alnus tenuifolia)
n=2 This community is found on lower slopes along natural drainages or areas with high water tables. River alder
persists on moist sites and is replaced by green alder on drier upper slope positions. This community is similar to the
Pb-Aw/River alder community described by Beckingham and Archibald ( 1 996) in the Boreal Mixedwood ofNorthern
Alberta and is part of the dogwood ecosite. Production of this community type is very high because of the high
moisture and nutrient conditions, however a large component of the total forage production is coming from alder which
is generally unpalatable to livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) ENVIRONMENTAL VARIABLES
Mean range const.
Trees
Balsam poplar
(Populus balsamifera)
50
50-60
100
Moisture Regime:
Subhygric
Shrubs
Prickly Rose
(Rosa acicularis)
5
1-10
100
Nutrient Regime:
rich
Elevation:
River alder
(Alnus tenuifolia)
55
50-60
100
556-646(587) m
Red osier dogwood
(Cornus stolonifera)
12
3-20
100
Percent Slope Gradient:
1-5(3)%
Forbs
Horsetail
(Equisetum arvense)
5
1-10
100
Dandelion
(Taraxacum officinale)
2
1-3
100
Star flowered Solomon seal
(Smilacina stellata) 1
1-2
100
Soil Drainage:
Moderately well
Ecological Status Score: 18
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 1
0-1
50
Hairy wild rye
(Elymus innovatus) 1
0-1
50
Total 1 187 *Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
4.05 ha/AUM (4.05-2.02)
0.1 AUM/ac (0. 1-0.2)
118
DMC13. Pb-Aw/Silverberry
(Populus balsamifem-P. tremuloides/Elaeagnus commutata )
n=3 This community is scattered throughout the Dry Mixedwood subregion. It appears to represent the invasion
of aspen and balsam poplar onto silverberry shrublands. Silverberry thickets can occur on alluvial floodplain terraces,
in V-shaped ravines and swale-like depressions where overland flows provide additional moisture (Thompson and
Hansen 2002). The open nature and high productivity on these silverberry dominated communities make them
attractive to livestock grazing. The understory of these communities are often dominated by Kentucky bluegrass,
smooth brome and dandelion. Thompson and Hansen (2002) felt that silverberry dominated communities represented
a grazing disclimax of red osier dogwood communities in Southern Alberta.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
Trembling Aspen
(Populus tremuloides)
Balsam poplar
17
0-50
33
{Populus balsamifera)
31
3-50
100
Shrubs
Prickly Rose
(Rosa acicularis)
Yellow willow
11
3-20
100
(Salix lutea)
Silverberry
4
1-10
100
{Elaeagnus commutata)
23
20-30
100
Forbs
dandelion
(Taraxacum officinale)
Showy aster
2
1-3
100
(Aster conspicuus)
Horsetail
1
1-3
100
(Equisetum arvense)
Strawberry
4
0-10
66
(Fragaria virginiana)
Yellow pea vine
4
0-10
66
(Lathyrus ochroleucus )
1
1-2
100
Grasses
Kentucky bluegrass
(Poa pratensis)
Smooth brome
5
1-10
100
(Bromus inermis)
4
0-10
66
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime:
rich
Elevation:
570-690(630) m
Soil Drainage:
Moderately well
Ecological Status Score: 12
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Total 1 100 *Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.02 ha/AUM (4.05-1.01)
0.2 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.4)
119
DMC14. Pb/Snowberry
(Populus balsamifera/Symphoricarpos occidentalis)
n=3 This community type occupies small seepage areas on slopes above creeks and rivers in the Dry Mixedwood
subregion. Snowberry prefers well drained habitats and has been found to quite common on forested slopes and river
flood plains throughout the Boreal forest (Lane et al. 2000). The presence of balsam poplar indicates that the moisture
content is sufficient to support its growth in this community. This community type is usually found in only small
isolated spots.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
Trembling Aspen
{Populus tremuloides)
5
0-11
66
Balsam poplar
(Populus balsamifera)
36
3-80
100
Shrubs
Prickly Rose
{Rosa acicularis)
17
10-20
100
Snowberry
(Symphoricarpos
occidentalis)
22
6-20
100
Red osier dogwood
{Cornus stolonifera)
5
1-10
100
Forbs
Bunchberry
(Cornus canadensis)
3
0-6
66
Strawberry
(Fragaria virginiana)
2
1-3
100
Northern bedstraw
(Galium boreale) 1
1-2
100
Dandelion
{Taraxacum officinale)
2
0-3
66
Yellow peavine
{Lathyrus ochroleucus )
6
3-15
100
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis)
1
0-1
66
Kentucky bluegrass
(Poa pratensis)
3
0-10
33
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime:
rich
Elevation:
556-709(624) m
Soil Drainage:
Moderately well
Ecological Status Score: 12
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Total 1204 *Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.02 ha/AUM (4.05-1.35)
0.2 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.3)
120
DMC15. Pb/Reed grass
(Populus balsamifera/Calamagrostis stricta)
n=2 This community type is not common in the Dry Mixedwood subregion. It appears to represent the invasion
of balsam poplar onto reed grass and reed canary grass dominated meadows. As sloughs and small lakes dry up the
edge communities become drier which favours the growth of trees and shrubs. If drying continues this community
will likely succeed to a Pb/Red osier dogwood dominated community type. However, if flooding increases balsam
poplar will likely decline. This community type is very productive for domestic livestock and the open nature of the
understory also allows for good access.
Plant Composition Canopy Cqver(%)
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
Balsam poplar
( Populus balsamifera)
40
20-60
100
Shrubs
Red osier dogwood
(Cornus stolonifera)
2
1-3
100
Forbs
Thistle
(Cirsium arvense)
Horsetail
3
3-4
100
(Equisetum arvense)
Sow THISTLE
3
3-4
100
(Sonchus arvensis)
Dandelion
7
3-10
100
{Taraxacum officinale)
2
0-3
50
Grasses
Narrow Reed Grass
(Calamagrostis stricta)
Reed canary grass
10
0-20
50
(Phalaris arundinacea)
Water sedge
5
0-10
50
{Carex aquatilis )
5
0-10
50
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
SUBHYGRIC TO SUBHYDRIC
Nutrient Regime:
rich
Elevation:
556-693(617) m
Soil Drainage:
Moderately well to imperfectly
Ecological Status Score: 12
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Total 2150 *Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.81 ha/AUM (0.81-0.4)
0.5 AUM/ac (0.5-1. 0)
121
DMC16. Bw/Labrador tea
(Betula papyrifera/Ledum groenlandicum)
n=l This community type represents a treed poor fen ecosite that was recently burned in Elk Island National
Park. The poor fen ecosite is intermediate in nutrient regime between the bog and the rich fen ecosites (Beckingham
and Archibald 1 996). The presence of Labrador tea and short sedge is indicative of the acidic soil conditions. Treed
poor fens are often dominated by black spruce in the Boreal Mixedwood (Beckingham and Archibald 1 996), however
the frequent fire regime in the park has burned the black spruce canopy and the site has become dominated by paper
birch a early successional species in these boggy areas. These boggy community types are often too wet for domestic
livestock and the species growing in them are often unpalatable.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
RANGE CONST.
Trees
Paper birch
(Betula papyrifera)
Aspen
40
100
( Populus tremuloides )
1
100
Shrubs
Labrador tea
(Ledum groenlandicum)
Currant
40
100
(Ribes triste)
Raspberry
30
100
(Rubus idaeus)
Blueberry
3
100
( Vaccinium myrtilloides )
20
100
Forbs
Fireweed
(Epilobium angustifolium)
Skull cap
1
100
(Scutellaria galericulata)
1
100
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 3
100
Short sedge
(Carex curta)
3
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
subhydric
Nutrient Regime:
poor
Elevation:
625 m
Soil Drainage:
poorly
Ecological Status Score: 18
Health Form: riparian
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA)
Total 750 *Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
40.47 ha/AUM
0.01 AUM/ac)
122
DMC17. Bw/Raspberry
(Betula papyrifera/Rubus idaeus)
n=2 This community type was described adjacent to old beaver dams. Cutting of the adjacent tree canopy and
the increased moisture around the dam favours the growth of paper birch and raspberry. Both species are early
successional and will rapidly dominate a site after disturbance. As the site drys and undergoes succession it will
likely succeed to willow and eventually balsam poplar and white spruce. This community occupies small areas
adjacent to the ponds and sloughs and is generally too wet for livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
Paper birch
(Betula papyrifera)
85
80-90
100
Aspen
( Populus tremuloides )
1
0-1
50
Shrubs
Rose
(Rosa acicularis)
1
0-1
50
SCOULER’S WILLOW
(Salix scouleriana)
5
0-10
50
Raspberry
( Rubus ideaus)
10
10-11
100
Forbs
Fireweed
(Epilobium angustifolium)
1
0-1
50
Bunchberry
(Cornus cornuta)
2
0-3
50
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis)
15
1-30
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
subhydric
Nutrient Regime:
rich
Elevation:
625 m
Soil Drainage:
poorly
ecological status score: 18
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA)
Total 1000 *estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
40.47 ha/AUM
0.01 AUM/ac
123
DMC18. Pb-Bw/Kentucky blue grass
(Populus balsamifera-Betula papyrifera/Poa pratensis )
n=5 This community represents a Pb or Bw/Red osier dogwood community that has recieved prolonged heavy
grazing. This community type often occurs in relatively small isolated patches created by intensive grazing adjacent
to water, salt or temporary holding areas. The species richness and diversity of native shrubs, forbs, and grass is
reduced and replaced by grazing resistant species like clover, dandelion and Kentucky bluegrass.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Trembling Aspen
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Populus tremuloides)
Balsam Poplar
4
0-10
80
(Populus balsamifera)
Paper birch
54
30-80
100
(Betula papyrifera )
Shrubs
Willow spp.
8
0-40
60
(Salix spp.)
Wild Red Raspberry
3
3-4
100
(Rubus idaeus)
Snowberry
(Symphoricarpos
4
0-10
80
occidentalis)
Prickly Rose
3
1-10
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Forbs
Fireweed
6
3-10
100
(Epilobium angustifolium) 1 0-1
Dewberry or Running Raspberry
60
(Rubus pubescens)
Clover
4
0-20
80
(Trifolium spp.)
Wild Strawberry
2
0-10
60
(Fragaria virginiana)
Showy Aster
3
1-3
100
(Aster conspicuus)
Horsetail
2
1-3
100
(Equisetum arvense)
Dandelion
2
1-3
100
(Taraxacum officinale)
4
1-10
100
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 1
0-3
80
Kentucky bluegrass
( Poa pratensis) 9
1-20
100
QUACKGRASS
( Agropyron repens ) 1
0-3
60
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime:
rich
Elevation:
455-697(524) m
Percent Slope Gradient:
0-5
Soil Drainage:
Moderately well
Ecological Status Score: 6-0
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Total 1 150 *Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
4.05 ha/AUM (4.05-2.02)
0.1 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.2)
124
DMC19. Pb/Smooth brome
(Populus balsamifera/Bromus inermis )
n=2 This community type is similar to the previously described red osier dogwood and balsam poplar dominated
community types, but has a high cover of smooth brome in the understory. Smooth brome is an introduced grass that
can increase with increased grazing pressure, but invade into ungrazed areas. The invasion of non-native invaders
onto the site makes this community moderately productive for domestic livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Balsam Poplar
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Populus balsamifera)
Shrubs
Willow spp.
70
60-80
100
(Salix spp.)
Wild Red Raspberry
67
3-10
100
(Rubus idaeus)
Snowberry
(Symphoricarpos
10
0-20
50
occidentalis)
Red osier dogwood
7
3-10
100
(Cornus stolonifera)
Forbs
Clover
10
1-20
100
(Trifolium spp.)
HORSETAIL
1
0-1
50
(Equisetum arvense)
Dandelion
5
1-10
100
(Taraxacum officinale) 2
Star flowered solomon seal
1-3
100
(Smilacina stellata)
Showy aster
7
3-10
100
(Aster conspicuus)
Richardson geranium
2
1-3
100
(Geranium richardsonii)
Hemp-nettle
10
0-20
50
(Galeopsis tetrahit)
Grasses
Smooth brome
5
0-10
50
(Bromus inermis)
Kentucky bluegrass
10
1-20
100
( Poa pratensis)
Quackgrass
5
0-10
50
( Agropyron repens)
2
0-3
50
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
SUBHYGRIC
Nutrient Regime:
rich
Elevation:
455-697(524) m
Percent Slope Gradient:
0-5
Soil Drainage:
Well to Moderately well
Ecological Status Score: 6-0
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA)
Total 1250 *Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
4.05 ha/AUM (4.05-2.02)
0.1 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.2)
125
DRY MIXEDWOOD SUBREGION
CONIFEROUS AND MIXEDWOOD FOREST
COMMUNITIES
Photo 6. Pj/Bearberry community type in the Dry Mixedwood subregion
126
CONIFEROUS AND MIXEDWOOD FORESTS
Communities which have begun to undergo succession from deciduous to conifer overstory
may fall into the MIXEDWOOD category. The following is a general rule of thumb. The site is a
mixedwood community if the conifer and the deciduous overstories each range between 30 -70% of
the total overstory cover. For example a deciduous cover of 40% and a conifer cover of 60% is a
mixedwood community. If in doubt, determine if the understory is responding more to a deciduous
or coniferous influence [e.g. loss of production due to conifer shading]. Communities dominated
[i.e. >70% of the overstory] by a conifers are classified in the CONIFER category .
The mixedwood and coniferous community types described in this guide represent seven
ecological sites (ecosites) as described by Beckingham and Archibald (1996). On sites with
subxeric moisture and poor nutrient regimes, coarse textured, sandy soils open stands of jack pine
generally dominate (Pj/Alder, Pj/Bearberry). These community types commonly have a carpet of
lichens covering the forest floor and a thin organic layer typically less than 5 cm thick (Beckingham
and Archibald 1996).
On slightly moister sites with submesic moisture and medium nutrient regimes aspen grows
in conjunction with jack pine to form the Pj-Aw/Bearberry community type. On slightly moister
sites Aw-Sw/Bearberry and Sw/Buffaloberry/Bearberry communities are found. The soils of these
community types continue to be coarse-textured but the moisture and nutrient conditions are more
favourable to the growth of aspen and spruce.
The mesic/medium sites are generally dominated by white spruce (Sw/Moss) and
mixedwood communities of aspen and spruce (Aw-Sw/Rose/Marsh reed grass, Aw-Pb-
Sw/Willow/Wild sarsparilla, Sw-Pb-Aw/Rose/Twinflower, Sw-Aw/Low bush cranberry). These
communities represent the reference ecological site for the Boreal Mixedwood subregion
(Beckingham and Archibald 1996). Generally, these sites have moderately fine to fine-textured till
or glaciolacustrine parent materials. Pioneer deciduous species (aspen, balsam poplar and birch)
are replaced with white spruce and balsam fir as these sites develop successionally. With
succession shade tolerant plants take over the herbaceous layer as conifers dominate the canopy.
These shade tolerant species are unproductive and often unpalatable for domestic livestock. Forage
productivity declines from 2.3 ha/AUM in a deciduous community to 2. 3-8. 6 ha/AUM in a
mixedwood community to less than 10 ha/AUM in a conifer community.
Black spruce and larch communities generally dominate on wetter sites with subhygric to
subhydric moisture regimes and poor to medium nutrient regimes to form the Sb/Willow/Moss and
Sb-Lt/Labrador tea/Moss community types. Larch is more tolerant of excessive moisture and is
indicative of an enriched nutrient status, while black spruce is typical in areas of stagnating ground
water with poor nutrient status (Hay et al. 1985). Generally, these community types are considered
non-use for domestic livestock. In contrast on the richer sites red osier dogwood and horsetail
dominate the understory to form the Sw/Horsetail and Sw-Pb/Red osier dogwood dominated
communities.
Beckingham and Archibald (1996), provide a good description on how the conifer and
mixedwood community types are arranged in the landscape.
127
d
a
£>
’ll -3
to
o
o
'5b
a>
Vh
X
d
03
T3
O
0
1
a>
x
2 S
*3 b
H Q
- «
s
§ s
s §
O S3
U
a
U
"o’
««
cd
a3 a)
O oo
'§>.3
-2 Oh
O
o
w i
a>
l|
'O
o
d
o
o\
o
°o
d
>
03
O)
•o
0>
*o
03
03
— s
,■ — s
'■'H
o
--*
«— i
C3
o
d
d
d
d
d
'•w
' —
r~
■o
m
o
C\
^r
o
©
©>
d
d
d
d
d
d
>
>
IT)
rN
<=>
d
cl
d
<N
d
d
i
i
•~'i
o
"-<
o
•
d
d
d
o
ON
o
<N
<N
©
O
oo
<N
<N
d
O
i
©
CO
d
d
d
>■
d
>
d
CN
03
O
d
*o
•n
OO
T— H
d
*-h
f— H
1
OO
o
0>
03
"St
d
0>
Cd
00
d
•n
<N
oo
d
o>
03
CO
CO
•o
•n
<N
on
<N
<N
oo
oo
03
03
X
30
05
d
d
d*
b
£
op
>
05
a
ob
£
S'
<D
h
d
<c
03
d
d
4i
1
00
43
S3
d
S'
(0
2a
43
c»
S-H
§
o
O
43
S’
d
PQ
43
c-j
52
>*
X
a
o3
05
d
t
S3
£
00
b
S'
d
43
a3
Vh
d
X
d
05
d
43
£
5-h
d
X
Oh
03
cc3
Vh
O
43
B
43
0
1
03
d
,0
O
'd
<o
d
pa
03
d
rO
d
j3
3
3
PQ
1
£
o
op
<
a
kb
PQ
i
£
o
d
<N
£
£
CO
CO
00
T3
<
OO
'd
oo
T3
3 a>
13
d
13
o
13 <u
O 03
o
03
o
C/3
(N
Q 03
'Sbj§
CO
‘5b
cc$
in
0-3
ob
o3
'5b jS
o a
Q
Oh
Q
5
o
Oh
5
O Oh
8 £
s
3
o
d
s
o
o
d
S
8
W 'w
Q
W
’03
Q
Q
W
"w
o
W '3
"d
s
a
*«3
-3
a
a*
a
T3
oo
<N
u ^
WO 2
S3
3 i
w 3
2 ^
c/5 w
3
*3
-*■*
5/3
3
C/5
43
'©JO
g,
£
>
a>
§
£
3
£>
1 "
2
S S
2 s
o ®
U
gg
e *
o
W
—v
•"H
— s
©
o
Cs
co
©
q
•o
q
q
©
d
d
o
d
d
d
s —
^ '
r-
c-
On
l\
t-s
r~
q
>
*°1
q
©
Nh
q
q
©
d
d
*n
d
oo
d
d
d
"tf-
>
-3-
>
^t-
— \
©
o
O
q
<N
o
q
q
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
•4
'
_
©
o
©
q
©
C3
o
q
d
d
d
d
d
d
r-
r-
tv
t"-
t~-~
t's
q
'St-
q
©
■^f
d
d
d
d
<N
d
d
d
'si-
'sl-
>
^r
^t
•^i-
t"
r-
r-
o
t\
C-"
-3-
M-
q
°o
q
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
,^-
>
-3-
m-
-+
NO
NO
03
NO
03
03
O
(N
O
ro
'"h
r-
<N
NO
O
CO
<N
<N
<N
•^t
NO
•o
r_ 1
r-
74
108
100
56
250
250
50
242
<N
<N
03
o
03
<o
(—^3
89
m
03
o
*P
03
w
<■■♦•
1—1
1
'■'■H
N
f~N
NO
03
o
03
03
o
t — )
r—H
(N
<N
<d
50
£
T3
50
O
o
S3
2
O
o
50
50
s
3
O
1
Jp
2
9
'5
CO
o
£
00
4D
Ph
%
bo
o
T3
Sh
.2
"c/3
<D
+->
Vh
O
M
^4H
50
50
o
T3
<D
■a
<u
PQ
>
00
Ph
£
<
1
x>
Ph
1
£
OO
Sw/Moss
T3
O
O
i>
o
T3
<N
a>
Aw-Pb-Sw/V
sarsaparilla
0
T3
q
PLh
1
00
f2 horsetail S
Sw/Horsetail
il treed bog
'S
5h
•s
3
-O
00
Vh
O
o
Ph
T3
<u
s
0
1
00
q <u
73
<u
c3
0)
q a>
"=t
o
O 5/3
'5b j3
NO
ro
o
’5b
CO
Cj
f~l
^r
O
'5b
50
C5J
r-j
On
O 50
'5b £
oo
Q
Q
Q
° H
Q
s
o
Qh
5
o
Qh
fl
2 Ph
Q
S
S
O <u
O -+3
s
s
2
o
2
2
o
2
S
8 2
S
Q
Q
Q
W ‘5
Q
Q
W
*co
Q
W
"S3
Q
W 'S
Q
73
•c
*c
&H
o
*2 -
WD
d3
-o
o
-3 S
>>
a
^ 3
subh
rich
hygr
rich
4=
X>
3
Cfl
£
a>
P
2 g
4>
•— S
c?
23
o
o
<u
cjj
C3j
J-t
o
PU|
ON
<N
Key to Conifer and Mixedwood* Types - Dry Mixedwood
1. Wet, boggy sites dominated by black spruce
Moist, mesic or dry sandy sites dominated by white spruce, aspen, balsam poplar
or jack pine
2. Richer nutrient sites with willow and sedge
dominating understory Sb/Willow/Moss (DMD8)
Poorer sites with Labrador tea and larch present Sb-Lt/Labrador Tea/Moss (DMD9)
3. Dry, sandy sites dominated by jack pine
Mesic or subhygric sites dominated by spruce, aspen, balsam poplar
4. Bearberry dominates, alder low in cover or absent Pj-Aw/Bearberry (DMD2)
Alder dominates understory Pj/Alder (DMD1)
5. White spruce dominated (i.e. >70% spruce overstory cover, or deciduous species absent or
their cover is < 30%) or the understory is strongly influenced by conifer shading
Mixedwood types, dominated by a mixture of deciduous and conifer trees; and a
structurally diverse understory present
6. Poorer nutrient sites, buffaloberry, bearberry dominate understory
Sw/Buffaloberry/Bearberry (DMD3)
Mesic sites; hazelnut, moss, low bush cranberry or raspberry predominant or present
7. Hazelnut dominates the understory Sw/Hazelnut/Moss (DMD4)
Mesic sites with low bush cranberry, moss or raspberry
8. Moss dominates understory, little shrub cover Sw/Moss (DMD11)
Raspberry or low bush cranberry predominant or present in the understory
9. Raspberry dominates understory; recently disturbed sites Sw-Bw/Raspberry (DMD12)
Low bush cranberry predominant or present in the understory
Sw-Aw/Low bush cranberry (DMD10)
10. Dry and mesic sites dominated by aspen and spruce
Balsam poplar present, moister, richer sites
11. Typical mesic site, with rose and marsh reed grass
Aw-Sw/Rose/Marsh Reed grass (DMD5)
Drier sites dominated by bearberry Aw-Sw/Bearberry (DMD2a)
12. Twinflower dominates understory, poorer nutrient sites
Sw-Pb-Aw/Rose/Twinflower (DMD7)
Willow, wild sarsaparilla, red osier dogwood or horsetail dominate understory
13. Willow dominated understory Aw-Pb-Sw/Willow/Wild sarsaparilla(DMD6)
Red osier dogwood or horsetail dominates understory
14. Red osier dogwood dominates understory Sw-Pb/Red osier dogwood (DMD13)
Horsetail dominates understory Sw/Horsetail (DMD14)
. . 2
3
4
5
. . 6
. 10
. . 7
. . 8
. . 9
11
12
13
14
Communities which have begun to undergo succession from a deciduous to a conifer overstory may
fall into the MIXEDWOOD category. The following is a general rule of thumb. The site is a
mixedwood community if the conifer and the deciduous overstories each range between 30 -70% of
the total overstory cover. For example a deciduous cover of 40% and a conifer cover of 60% is a
mixedwood community. If in doubt, try to determine if the understory is responding more to a
deciduous or coniferous influence [e.g. loss of production due to conifer shading].
130
—
DMD1. Pj/Alder
(Pinus banksiana/ Alnus crispa)
n=2 This community type is found on dry, rapidly drained, sandy soils with a poor nutrient status. Consequently,
production is quite low. Cattle will utilize these areas due to the easy access, however overutilization will quickly deplete
the area of forage.
Percent Composition canopy cover(%) ENVIRONMENTAL VARIABLES
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
Jack Pine
(Pinus banksiana)
43
35-50
100
Shrubs
GREEN ALDER
(Alnus crispa)
Prickly rose
33
30-35
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Saskatoon
9
7-10
100
(Amelanchier alnifolia)
5
1-8
100
Forbs
Twin-flower
(Linnaea borealis)
Bearberry
6
0-12
50
(Arctostaphylos uva-ursi)
Yellow peavine
9
0-18
50
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
Strawberry
4
0-8
50
Fragaria virginiana )
2
1-2
100
Grasses
Sedges
(Carex spp.)
Hairy Wild Rye
6
1-11
100
(Elymus innovatus)
Northern ricegrass
3
1-4
100
(Oryzopsis pungens)
6
1-10
100
Moisture Regime:
SUBXERIC
Nutrient Regime
Poor
Elevation:
606 m
Soil Drainage:
Rapidly
Percent Slope Gradient:
2 - 8%
ECOLOGICAL STATUS score: 18
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
GRASS
160
FORBS
175
SHRUBS
191
TOTAL
526
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47-40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01-0.01)
131
DMD2. Pj-Aw/Bearberry
(Pinus banksiana/Arctostaphylos uva-ursi)
n=4 This community represents a jack pine forest with a secondary canopy of aspen. It is very similar to the Pj/Alder
community type, but it is found on slightly moister soils with better nutrient regimes. These conditions favour the
growth of aspen. Like the previous community, cattle will utilize these areas due to the easy access, however over-
utilization will quickly deplete the forage supply.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Environmental Variables
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
Jack Pine
(Pinus banksiana)
Aspen
45
30-45
100
( Populus tremuloides )
13
10-20
100
Shrubs
Saskatoon
(Amelanchier alnifolia)
Prickly rose
9
1-15
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Blueberry
6
4-8
100
(Vaccinium myrtilloid.es)
7
0-2
75
Forbs
Bearberry
(Arctostaphylos uva-ursi)
Northern bedstraw
15
7-64
100
(Galium boreale)
2
1-3
100
Wild lily-of-the-valley
(Maianthemum canadense)2
Cream-coloured Vetchling
1-5
100
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
7
3-7
100
Grasses
Hairy Wild Rye
(Elymus innovatus)
10
2-16
100
Mosses
Moss spp.
2
0-7
25
Moisture Regime:
Submesic
Nutrient Regime:
poor
Elevation:
606 m
Soil Drainage:
Rapidly
Percent Slope Gradient:
0-5
ECOLOGICAL STATUS SCORE: 18
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
GRASS 141
FORBS 325
SHRUBS 110
TOTAL 577
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
8.09 ha/AUM (8.09-4.05)
0.05 AUM/ac (0.05-0.1)
132
DMD2a. Aw-Sw/Bearberry
(Populus tremuloides-Picea glauca/Arctostaphylos uva-ursi)
n=l This community type was found on a small, sandy hillcrest with a high water table. It is similar to the
Sw/Buffaloberry/Bearberry (DMD3) community type, but this community is successionally younger. The majority of
productivity is from bearberry which is unpalatable to livestock.
Plant Composition canopy cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
White spruce
(Picea glauca)
15
100
Aspen
( Populus tremuloides )
15
-
100
Shrubs
Saskatoon
(Amelanchier alnifolia)
1
100
Prickly rose
(Rosa acicularis)
2
.
100
Blueberry
(Vaccinium myrtilloides)
2
-
100
Forbs
BEARBERRY
(Arctostaphylos uva-ursi)
37
100
STRAWBERRY
(Fragaria virginiana)
1
.
100
Yellow peavine
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
4
100
WlLD-LILY-OF-THE VALLEY
(Maianthemum canadense )
3
-
100
Grasses
HAIRY WILD RYE
(Elymus innovatus)
3
100
Northern ricegrass
(Oryzopsis pungens)
1
.
100
Moisture Regime:
Submesic
Nutrient Regime:
poor
Elevation:
606 m
Soil Drainage:
Well
Percent Slope Gradient:
0-4
ECOLOGICAL STATUS score: 18
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA)
Total 650*estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
8.09 ha/AUM (40.47-8.09)
0.05 AUM/ac (0.01-0.05)
133
DMD3. Sw/Buffaloberry/Bearberry
(Picea glauca/ Shepherdia canadensis/Arctostaphylos uva-ursi)
n=l This community type represents a very open spruce forest. It was found on a small, sandy hillcrest with a high
water table. The site may have a high pH and be somewhat nutrient poor as indicated by the abundance of buffaloberry
(Beckingham 1993). The majority of productivity is from buffaloberry which is unpalatable to livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean range const.
Trees
White spruce
{Picea glauca)
10
-
100
Shrubs
Buffaloberry
(Shepherdia canadensis)
48
100
Prickly rose
(Rosa acicularis)
12
_
100
Blueberry
(Vaccinium myrtilloides)
7
.
100
Snowberry
(Symphoricarpos
occidentalis)
5
-
100
Forbs
BEARBERRY
(Arctostaphylos uva-ursi)
19
100
Twinflower
(Linnaea borealis)
12
100
Yellow peavine
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
8
.
100
TOADFLAX
{Comandra umbellata )
2
-
100
Grasses
Mountain ricegrass
{Oryzopsis asperifolia)
8
100
Northern ricegrass
(Oryzopsis pungens)
6
100
Sedge
(Carex spp.)
5
.
100
Moisture Regime:
Submesic
Nutrient Regime:
poor
Elevation:
606 m
Soil Drainage:
Well
Percent Slope Gradient:
0-4
ECOLOGICAL STATUS SCORE: 18
FORAGE PRODUCTIONf KG/HA)
GRASS 18
FORBS 238
SHRUBS 848
Total 1104
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47-8.09)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01-0.05)
134
DMD4. Sw/Beaked hazelnut/Moss
(Picea glauca/Corylus cornuta/ Moss)
n=l This is a mature white spruce forest which represents the climax or near climax vegetation for the area. The
northerly aspect of this community type has probably protected the site from past disturbance by fires and allowed the
community to undergo succession. The high canopy of spruce limits the light reaching the forest floor, limiting the
growth of grasses and forbs. As a result, the forage productivity of this community type is very low.
Environmental Variables
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Moisture Regime:
Trees
White Spruce
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Mesic
Nutrient Regime:
(Picea glauca)
Paper birch
60
-
100
medium
(Betula papyrifera)
Shrubs
HAZELNUT
5
100
Elevation:
606 m
Soil Drainage:
(Corylus cornuta)
BOG CRANBERRY
12
-
100
well
(Vaccinium vitis-idaea)
Prickly rose
6
-
100
Percent Slope Gradient:
5%
(Rosa acicularis)
Forbs
Bearberry
6
100
Aspect:
Northerly
( Arctostapylos uva-ursi)
Twinflower
2
-
100
ECOLOGICAL STATUS SCORE: 18
(Linnaea borealis)
Bastard toadflax
8
-
100
FORAGE PRODUCTIONf KG/HA)
(Geocaulon lividum)
Strawberry
2
"
100
GRASS 0
FORBS 132
( Fragaria virginiana)
Mosses
2
100
SHRUBS 74
Total 206
Moss spp.
73
-
100
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47-40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01-0.01)
135
DMD5. Aw-Sw/Rose/Marsh reed grass
(Populus tremuloides-Picea glauca/Rosa acicularis/Calamagrostis canadensis)
n=2 This community represents a highly productive aspen community that is succeeding to white spruce. The
presence of tall forbs wild sarsaparilla and fireweed indicate a high nutrient regime and a light grazing regime. At
present this community type has a good level of forage for domestic livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
White Spruce
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Picea glauca)
Populus tremuloides
55
50-60
100
(Populus tremuloides)
Shrubs
Prickly rose
53
35-70
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Wild red raspberry
13
3-23
100
(Rubus idaeus)
Bristly black currant
8
0-15
50
(Ribes lacustre)
Low bush cranberry
5
0-10
50
( Viburnum edule)
Forbs
Bunchberry
8
6-10
100
(Cornus canadensis)
Field Horsetail
4
0-8
50
(Equisetum arvense)
Tall lungwort
2
0-3
50
(Mertensia paniculata)
Wild sarsaparilla
4
1-7
100
( Aralia nudicaulis)
DEWBERRY
4
3-4
100
(Rubus pubscens)
Fireweed
3
0-5
50
(Epilobium angustifolium)
2
1-3
100
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 17 3-30 100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
MESIC-SUBHYGRIC
Nutrient Regime:
MEDIUM TO RICH
Elevation:
455-600(527) m
Soil Drainage:
Well to Moderately well
ecological status score: 18
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA)
grass 468
forbs 534
shrubs 440
Total 1442
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
4.05 ha/AUM (4.05-2.02)
0.1 AUM/ac (0. 1-0.2)
136
—
DMD6. Aw-Pb-Sw/Willow/Wild sarsaparilla
(Populus tremuloides-Populus balsamifera-Picea glauca/Salix spp./Aralia nudicaulis)
n=l This community type has similar moisture and nutrient conditions to the Aw-Pb and Pb/Red osier dogwood-
Rose community types, but this community is successionally more advanced. The abundance of tall shrubs limits the
amount of light reaching the forest floor, which limits forage production.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Aspen
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Populus tremuloides)
White Spruce
35
-
100
(Picea glauca)
Paper birch
15
-
100
( Betula papyrifera )
Balsam poplar
10
-
100
{Populus balsamifera)
Shrubs
Green alder
25
100
(Alnus crisp a)
Willow
45
-
100
(Salix spp.)
Low BUSH CRANBERRY
25
-
100
(Viburnum edule)
Prickly Rose
10
-
100
(Rosa acicu laris)
Forbs
Wild sarsaparilla
10
100
(Aralia nudicaulis)
Bishop’s cap
13
-
100
(Mitella nuda)
Canada violet
11
-
100
(Viola canadensis)
Lady fern
1 1
-
100
(Athyrium filix-femina)
Dewberry
5
-
100
(Rubus pubescens)
4
-
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime:
rich
Elevation:
606 m
Soil Drainage:
Moderately well
Percent Slope Gradient:
20%
Aspect:
East
ecological status score: 18
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA)
grass 20
FORBS 400
SHRUBS 56
Total 476
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47-40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01-0.01)
137
DMD7. Sw-Pb-Aw/Rose/Twinflower
(Picea glauca-Populus balsamifera-Populus tremuloides/ Rosa acicularis/ Linnaea borealis)
n= 1 This community is similar to the previous described Aw-Pb-Sw/W illow/W ild sarsaparilla community type but
is found on slightly drier sites with a poorer nutrient regime. Succession of this community type will likely be to a
White spruce /Moss dominated community type. The thick overstory limits the growth of shrubs, forbs and grass.
Consequently, there is little forage for domestic livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
RANGE const.
Trees
White Spruce
(Picea glauca)
Trembling Aspen
35
100
(Populus tremuloides)
Balsam Poplar
20
100
(Populus balsamifera)
30
100
Shrubs
Snowberry
(Symphoricarpos
occidentalis)
Prickly Rose
13
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Bracted honeysuckle
18
100
(Lonicera involcrata)
Buffalo-berry
5
100
(Shepherdia canadensis)
1
100
Forbs
Twin-flower
(Linnaea borealis)
Bunchberry
22
100
(Cornus canadensis)
Wintergreen
8
100
(Pyrola asarifolia)
Dewberry
6
100
{Rubus pubscens)
Bishop’s cap
6
100
(Mitella nuda)
3
100
Mosses
Moss SPP.
71
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic to Subhygric
Nutrient Regime:
medium
Elevation:
606 m
Soil Drainage:
Well to Moderately well
ecological status score: 18
FORAGE PRODUCTIONf KG/HA)
GRASS
16
FORBS
112
SHRUBS
108
Total
236
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47-40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01-0.01)
138
DMD8. Sb/Willow/Moss
(Picea mariana/Salix spp./Moss)
n=2 This community type is part of the poor fen ecosite (Beckingham and Archibald 1996) because it has an
intermediate nutrient regime between the bog and rich fen ecosites. Drainage on this community type is poor to very
poor, but has some movement of water through the site. This community type has a well developed shrub layer and
the grass layer consists mainly of marsh reed grass and sedge species. The productivity of this type is moderate, but the
high water table limits access to domestic livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean range const.
Trees
Black Spruce
(Picea mariana) 15 14-16 100
Shrubs
WILLOW SPP.
(Salix spp.)
35
20-50
100
Bog Birch
(Betula glandulosa)
17
8-25
100
Forbs
Stemless raspberry
(Rubus arctica)
4
2-5
100
Horsetail
(Equisetum arvense)
18
15-20
100
Bishop’s cap
(Mitella nuda)
6
1-10
100
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis)
10
9-11
100
Hair-like sedge
(Carex capillaris)
8
5-10
100
Mosses
Moss spp.
99
99-100
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Subhydric
Nutrient Regime:
medium
Elevation:
606-697(657) m
Soil Drainage:
poorly
ECOLOGICAL STATUS score: 18
HEALTH form: RIPARIAN
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA)
GRASS 401
FORBS 89
SHRUBS 242
Total 732
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47-40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01-0.01)
139
DMD9. Sb-Lt/Labrador tea/Moss
(Picea mariana-Larix laricina/Ledum groenlandicum/Moss)
n=3 This community type is very similar to the previously described community type, but the nutrient status is
poorer. This community type appears to be related to the bog ecosite described by Beckingham and Archibald (1996).
The bog ecosite commonly has organic soils consisting of slowly decomposing peat moss. This community type is has
poor productivity and accessibility.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
Larch
(Larix laricina)
Black Spruce
10
1-15
100
{Picea mariana)
30
10-60
100
Shrubs
WILLOW SPP.
(Salix spp.)
Labrador tea
21
8-35
100
(Ledum groenlandicum)
Bog birch
23
10-35
100
{Betula glandulosa )
24
0-39
100
Forbs
Dwarf bramble
(Rubus pedatus)
Horsetail
8
0-25
66
(Equisetum arvense)
Dwarf scouring rush
21
0-45
66
(Equisetum scirpoides)
8
0-25
33
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
{Calamagrostis canadensis)
Golden sedge
3
1-4
100
(Carex aurea)
Beaked sedge
5
0-15
33
{Carex rostrata )
Fowl bluegrass
4
0-7
66
{Poa palustris )
1
0-2
33
Mosses
Moss spp.
95
10-60
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Subhydric
Nutrient Regime:
very POOR
Elevation:
576-606 m
Soil Drainage:
poor
ecological status score: 18
HEALTH form: RIPARIAN
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
GRASS 10
FORBS 40
SHRUBS 50
Total 100
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47-40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01-0.01)
140
DMD10. Sw-Aw/Low bush Cranberry
(Picea glauca-Populus tremuloides /Viburnum edule)
n=5 This community is similar to community DMD5 Aw-Sw, but is successional more advanced. As succession
continues in the absence of disturbance on these sites there will be a corresponding drop in forage production. A spruce
dominated forest generally produces about 1/3 of an undisturbed deciduous dominated community type.
Plant Composition canopy cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
White Spruce
(Picea glauca)
28
20-40
100
POPULUS TREMULOIDES
(Populus tremuloides)
14
1-30
100
Shrubs
Prickly rose
(Rosa acicularis)
4
3-10
100
Wild red raspberry
(Rubus idaeus)
5
0-10
80
Red osier dogwood
(Cornus stolonifera)
9
0-30
80
Low BUSH CRANBERRY
( Viburnum edule)
8
1-10
100
Forbs
Bunchberry
(Cornus canadensis)
3
0-10
80
Field Horsetail
(Equisetum arvense)
1
0-3
60
Tall lungwort
(Mertensia paniculata)
1
1-3
100
Wild sarsaparilla
(Aralia nudicaulis)
11
0-30
80
DEWBERRY
(Rubus pubscens)
2
1-3
100
Fireweed
(Epilobium angustifolium)
2
0-3
80
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis)
3
0-10
80
Moisture Regime:
MESIC-SUBHYGRIC
Nutrient Regime:
MEDIUM TO RICH
Elevation:
455-600(527) m
Soil Drainage:
Well to Moderately well
ECOLOGICAL STATUS SCORE: 18
FORAGE PRODUCTIONf KG/HA)
Total 1 150*Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
4.05 ha/AUM (4.05-2.02)
0.1 AUM/ac (0. 1-0.2)
141
DMD11. Sw/Moss
(Picea glauca/Moss spp.)
n=l This community is similar to community DMD 1 0 Sw-Aw, but is successional more advanced. As succession
continues in the absence of disturbance on these sites there will be a corresponding drop in forage production. A spruce
dominated forest generally produces about 1/3 of an undisturbed deciduous and mixed wood dominated community
types.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
White Spruce
(Picea glauca)
60
-
100
Shrubs
Prickly rose
(Rosa acicularis)
Bracted honeysuckle
1
-
100
(Lonicera involcrata)
Red osier dogwood
3
-
100
(Cornus stolonifera)
Low BUSH CRANBERRY
3
-
100
( Viburnum edule )
1
-
100
Forbs
Bunchberry
(Cornus canadensis)
Field Horsetail
1
-
100
(Equisetum arvense)
Twinflower
3
-
100
(Linnaea borealis)
10
-
100
DEWBERRY
(Rubus pubscens)
1
-
100
Grasses
Purple oat grass
(Schizachne purpurascens)
3
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
MESIC-SUBHYGRIC
Nutrient Regime:
MEDIUM TO RICH
Elevation:
600 m
Soil Drainage:
Well to Moderately well
ecological status score: 18
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Total 210*Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47-40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01-0.01)
142
DMD12. Sw-Bw/Raspberry
(Picea glauca-Betula papyrifera/Rubus ideaus)
n=l This community type was described near Astotin Lake in Elk Island National Park. It represents a site that has
had historic beaver activity and since has undergone succession to a spruce dominated community. Cutting of the
adjacent tree canopy and the increased moisture around the dam favours the growth of paper birch and raspberry. Both
species are early successional and will rapidly dominate a site after disturbance. This community occupies small areas
adjacent to the ponds and sloughs and therefore will contribute little to the overall carrying capacity of a lease.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
RANGE const.
Trees
White Spruce
(Picea glauca)
Paper birch
50
100
{Betula papyrifera)
20
100
Shrubs
Prickly rose
(Rosa acicularis)
Bracted honeysuckle
3
100
(Lonicera involucrata)
Raspberry
3
100
(Rubus idaeus)
LOW BUSH CRANBERRY
40
100
( Viburnum edule)
3
100
Forbs
Wild sarsaparilla
(Aralia nudicaulis )
Hemp nettle
10
100
(Galeopsis tetrahit)
Fireweed
10
100
(Epilobium angustifolium)
Showy aster
3
100
(Aster conspicuus)
1
100
Grasses
Quackgrass
(Agropyron repens)
Smooth brome
3
100
(Bromus inermis)
3
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
MESIC-SUBHYGRIC
Nutrient Regime:
medium
Elevation:
600 m
Soil Drainage:
Well to Moderately well
ECOLOGICAL STATUS SCORE: 18
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
Total 850*Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47-40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01-0.01)
143
DMD13. Sw-Pb/Red osier dogwood
(Picea glauca-Populus balsamifera/Cornus stolonifera)
n=6 This community is similar to community DMC8 Pb-Aw/Red osier dogwood, but is successional more advanced.
As succession continues in the absence of disturbance on these sites there will be a corresponding drop in forage
production. A spruce dominated forest generally produces about 1 /3 of an undisturbed deciduous dominated community
type.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
White Spruce
(Picea glauca)
23
1-40
100
Balsam poplar
( Populus balsamifera )
30
20-60
100
Shrubs
Prickly rose
(Rosa acicularis)
7
3-20
100
Red osier dogwood
(Cornus stolonifera)
14
3-20
100
River alder
(Alnus tenuifolia)
11
3-30
100
Low bush cranberry
( Viburnum edule )
2
0-10
67
Forbs
Wild sarsaparilla
(Aralia nudicaulis )
2
0-10
67
Horsetail
(Equisetum arvense)
3
1-10
100
Star flowered solomon seal
(Smilacina stellata) 1
1-3
100
Bunchberry
(Cornus canadensis)
8
0-30
83
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis)
2
0-3
67
Kentucky bluegrass
(Poa pratensis )
3
0-10
83
Redtop
(Agrostis stolonifera)
6
0-20
83
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime:
rich
Elevation:
600 m
Soil Drainage:
Well to Moderately well
ecological status score: 18-12
FORAGE PRODUCTIONf KG/HA)
Total 620*Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
8.09 ha/AUM (8.09-2.02)
0.05AUM/ac (0.05-0.02)
144
DMD14. Sw/Horsetail
(Picea glauca/Equisetum arvense)
n=5 This community type is wet and nutrient rich. These sites are commonly found on fluvial or glaciolacustrine
parent materials where flooding or seepage enhances the substrate nutrient supply. With high water tables, wet soil
conditions organic matter tends to accumulate which favours the growth of horsetails. Generally horsetails are
unpalatable to livestock and the wet ground conditions limit access.
Plant Composition canopy cover(%) Environmental Variables
Trees
White Spruce
(Picea glauca)
Balsam poplar
( Populus balsamifera )
Paper birch
( Betula papyrifera )
Shrubs
Prickly rose
(Rosa acicularis)
Red osier dogwood
(Cornus stolonifera)
Bracted honeysuckle
(Lonicera involucrata)
Low BUSH CRANBERRY
( Viburnum edule)
Forbs
Dewberry
(Rubus pubescens)
Horsetail
(Equisetum arvense)
Bishop’s cap
(Mitella nuda)
Bunchberry
(Cornus canadensis)
Mean range const.
44 20-60 100
3 0-10 60
9 0-40 80
3 1-10 100
3 0-10 80
1 0-3 80
1 0-3 60
1 1-3 100
32 30-40 100
1 0-3 80
3 0-10 80
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 1 0-3 60
Nodding wood reed
( Cinna latifolia ) 1 0-3 40
Moisture Regime:
hygric
Nutrient Regime:
rich
Elevation:
600 m
Soil Drainage:
poor to Moderately well
ECOLOGICAL STATUS SCORE: 18
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA)
Total 560*Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47-40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01-0.01)
145
CENTRAL MIXEDWOOD SUBREGION
146
CENTRAL MIXEDWOOD SUBREGION
This subregion is the largest in the province covering over 210,000 km2 or nearly 32% of the
province (Strong and Leggat 1992)( Map 2). Mean annual summer temperatures average 13.5 °C and
winter temperatures average -13 °C, which is somewhat colder than the adjacent Dry Mixedwood
subregion. Annual precipitation averages 397 mm of precipitation which is wetter than the Dry
Mixedwood.
The modal plant communities are vegetated by aspen and balsam poplar with understories
composed of a variety of herbs and deciduous shrubs. White spruce and balsam fir are the climatic
climax species but are not well represented because of the frequent occurrence of fire. On dry, well
drained, coarse-textured soils jack pine dominates and the poorly drained sites are dominated by
black spruce, willows and sedge species. These reference communities are very similar to the Dry
Mixedwood subregion, but the drier conditions of the Dry Mixedwood favours the formation of a
number of native grassland communities, which are not found in the Central Mixedwood. Table 6
outlines the ecological sites, ecological site phases and reference range plant community types in the
Central Mixedwood subregion. There are a number of new ecological sites (ecosites) and ecological
site phases (ecosite phases) which are not found in the guide “Ecosites of Northern Alberta”
(Beckingham and Archibald 1996) and they are outlined here. The new ecosite includes (aa)
grass/shrubland and the new ecosite phases include (aal) plains wormwood, (d4)shrubland, (e4)
shrubland, and (j3) grassland poor fen (Table 6). The “Successional communities” or “Harvesting
and Fire succession” categories (Table 1 and 6) outline the successional sequence the community
type will undergo with increased grazing pressure or with harvesting or fire disturbance. There are a
number of ecological site phase tables which summarize these successional communities. These
include (dla) grazed Aw, (die) burned Aw, (d3c) burned Sw, and (k2a) grazed willow.
The 6 1 range plant communities described in the Central Mixedwood subregion are arranged into
5 categories. These include:
Central Mixedwood subregion
CMA. Native grass and shrubland 19 types
CMB. Tame pastures 7 types
CMC. Deciduous community types 19 types
CMD. Mixedwood and Conifer community types 12 types
CME. Forest Cutblock community types 4 types
The dominant plant species, canopy cover, environmental conditions, forage production and grazing
capacity (when available) are outlined for each community type.
147
Table 6. Ecological sites, ecological site phases and forested and reference range plant communities for the Central Mixedwood subregion
(adapted from Beckingham and Archibald 1996) (see Figure 2 for a diagram outlining the Ecological sites in the landscape of the Boreal
Mixedwood subregions).
WO fl
•S 2.2
S ta |
i! a
as "
5 «3 «:
O ffl 5
Egl>g
S | 8 .8
U < (4 Pu
s £
•i § »
l |£
« g
3 ©
5 W
S &
Oh «
1 ^
< g
© £
a 1
2 o
U o*
g <u
« I
s ^
S £
U H
< -s
Df
£ I
U hJ
y sj
S 5
u u
- I
£ o
< £
VO g
s 1
U on
a> >>
wo £
s §
as g
2 £
fl O
g U
a
a
o
V
OJ
a
s*>
H
-3
3
.Si «
WO X
© pln
o a>
W w
£
on
■s i
.? 1
I jb
•3 o
3
<3
*&>
o
©
o
W
c S
§ 2
& 'S
■s s
£ 8
ON
Tj-
Harvesting
and Fire
succession
CMA12 Willow-
Spruce/
Kentucky
bluegrass
CME4
Green Alder-
Honeysuckle/
Aw-Pb
Successional
community
!>££
CMD6 Sw/Creeping
red fescue
CMA4 Snowberry/
Kentucky bluegrass
Reference Range Plant
Community
CMD7 Aw-Sw/Rose/Low forb
CMD4 Balsam fir-Sw/Moss
CMD5 Sw/Moss
CMA19 Snowberry/Horsetail/
Marsh Reedgrass
CMC 14 Aw-Pb/Red osier dogwood-
Rose
CMC1 Pb/Rose -Alder
CMC3a Aw-Pb/Honeysuckle
CMC 17 Aw/Thimbleberry
CMC2 Pb-Aw/River alder
Forested Plant Community
Type
d2.5 Aw-Sw/rose
62.6 Aw-Sw/forb
d2.8 Aw-Sw/balsam fir/feather moss
62.9 Aw-Sw/feather moss
d3 . 1 Sw/Canada buffalo-berry
63.2 Sw/green alder
d3.3 Sw/low-bush cranberry
d3 .4 Sw/balsam fir/feather moss
d3 . 5 Sw/feather moss
el.l Pb-Aw/dogwood/fem
el. 2 Pb-Aw/bracted honeysuckle/fem
e 1 .3 Pb- Aw/river alder/fem
e2.1 Pb-Sw/dogwood/fem
e2.2 Pb-Sw/bracted honeysuckle/fem
e2.3 Pb-Sw/river alder-green alder/fem
e2.4 Pb-Sw/balsam fir/fem
Ecological
site Phase
d3 low-bush
£
n
ET
<D
O
d
03
o
d4 shrubland
e 1 dogwood Pb-Aw
e2 dogwood Pb-Sw
<u
C/5
(J
S'
o
t:
’So
o
■g t
O
©
o
Sb ’■§
o g
W
•o W
u
CENTRAL MIXEDWOOD SUBREGION
GRASSLAND AND SHRUBLAND COMMUNITY TYPES
Photo 7. This picture represents the Plains wormwood/Sheep fescue-Sedge community type. This
community type is common on dry sandy hills throughout the Central Mixedwood subregion.
153
Burns
Willow/Fireweed
Willow/Spruce
Figure 8. Ecology of the native grass and shrublands of the Central
Mixedwood subregion.
154
NATIVE GRASS AND SHRUBLAND COMMUNITIES
Upland native grasslands are very rare in the Central Mixedwood subregion. The communities
that have been described occur on coarse textured, sandy soil, with xeric to subxeric moisture and
poor nutrient regimes which lack tree cover. This includes the Plains wormwood/Sheep fescue-
Sedge community type. This community type is usually found in association with jack pine
dominated community types. Heavy grazing of this community type can lead to a Kentucky
bluegrass-Sedge/Plains wormword dominated type on slightly moister sites. On level, gravelly, well-
drained sites adjacent to streams and rivers the Snowberry/Horsetail/Marsh Reedgrass community
type is common. This community is extensively grazed by livestock to form the
Snowberry/Kentucky bluegrass dominated type (Figure 3).
Wetter (subhydric/rich) sites are associated with sedge, swamp horsetail, tall manna grass and
marsh reed grass dominated meadows. Sedge and swamp horsetail species are usually associated
with the areas of free standing water, whereas, tall manna grass and marsh reed grass dominate the
better drained, drier edges. Willow will invade into these meadows to form the Willow/Sedge and
Willow/Marsh reed grass community types. Under grazing pressure these community types tended to
be invaded by dandelion, clover and Kentucky bluegrass to form the Willow/Sedge-Kentucky
bluegrass community type.
Fire is an important part of the ecology of the Central Mixedwood subregion. There are a number
of shrubland community types which have a strong fire origin. These include the Willow-River
alder/Marsh reed grass, Willow/Fire weed and Willow-Spruce/ Kentucky bluegrass dominated
community types. Other upland shrub communities which are found on nutrient rich, seepage areas
include the Scouler and Bebb willow dominated communities.
155
^ <y
wo «
2 i
« P
2 <
C/5 w
« §
-g P
*5 «
C/5
bO
2
x>
3
«j
T3
O
O
£
T3
<D
X
O)
a
£»
£
S
3
£
©
U
s
I «
§ xj
1 5
y c
©D
J3
© v
© 4=
W
in <N
CO o
d d
d O
o o
2 p
<N
•A £
o ^
— < o
© ©
in on
o o
<N <N
o o
o d
vo ^
d °°.
w o
l> w
vo »n
d d
O
<N
o
oo
<n
(N
d
d
i
o'
d
o ©
d
d
o
1
o
<N
o
i
d
i
in
d
<N
d
©
1
<N
d
(N CN
O
©
o
d
^j-
<N
O
<N
©^
d
r-
^r
d
't
o d,
't 't
d d
in
d
m
d
i
-'t
m
d
1
<N
o
r-
<N
©
cT
^r
<N <N
© p
(N
p
(N
O
oo
<N
d
d
<N
d
oi ri
<N
(N
d
't
^ d d ^
O w w o
w t" t"- w
<n ^ ^
(N 't
in »n
d d
oo oo
d d
in
t> /->
d °.
©\
W> OO
WO
<N
<
£ <!
<
s
"© ^
©
"©
o ^
s
u
W U
W U
o
o
T3
^
o
©
U
#©
04
g
L
*C
■-»»
WO
O
u
?►>
*C
*5
43
43
©
©
O
.Q
X
g
3
3
a
CA
<s>
C 3
T3
©
-O
>>
1 hydric/rich Ecological site phase 11 reed grass marsh
CMA16 Swamp horsetail 40.47(0.01) 40.47-40.47(0.01-0.01)
CMA17 Tall manna grass 0.54(0.75) 2.02-0.31 (0.2-1.3)
Key to Central Mixedwood Grass and Shrublands
1. Shrubland dominated by willow, bog birch, alder, understory spruce 2
Grass-dominated, or if shrub-dominated, upland species like snowberry 7
SHRUBLANDS
2. Sedge, marsh reed grass dominated understory, wet sites or riparian or seepage areas
dominated by yellow, Scouler or Bebb willow 3a
Communities of fire origin, willow, alder, fireweed, understory spruce dominated 5
3. Ungrazed, sedge and marsh reed grass dominated understory 4
Grazed community type with Kentucky bluegrass... Willow/Sedge-Kentucky Bluegrass (CMA8)
3a. Riparian areas dominated by yellow willow Yellow willow(CMA13)
Seepage areas dominated by Bebb or Scouler’s willow or edges of lakes and sloughs
dominated by Marsh reed grass or sedge in understory 3b
3b. Upland seepage areas dominated by Bebb or Scouler’s willow 4a
Wet lowland sites dominated by Marsh reed grass or sedge species 4
4. Wetland sedges dominate understory Willow/Sedge (CMA7)
Marsh reed grass dominates understory Willow/Marsh Reed grass (CMA9)
4a. Bebb willow dominated community Bebb willow/Marsh reed grass(CMA15)
Scouler’s willow dominated community Scouler willow-Red osier dogwood(CMA14)
5. Willow, alder dominated community Willow-Alder/Marsh Reed grass (CMA10)
Willow, fireweed and understory spruce dominated communities 6
6. Willow, fireweed dominated Willow/Fireweed (CMA11)
Willow, spruce dominated Willow-Spruce/Kentucky Bluegrass (CMA12)
GRASSLANDS
7. Lowland sites dominated by sedge, marsh reed grass, swamp horsetail
or tall manna grass 7a
Upland sites dominated by snowberry, sage, or cow parsnip 9
7a. Boggy areas dominated by short sedge Short sedge (CMA18)
Freshwater areas dominated by marsh reed grass, sedge, swamp horsetail or tall manna grass... 7b
7b. Area dominated by sedge or Marsh reed grass 8
Area dominated by tall manna grass or swamp horsetail 7c
7c. Swamp horsetail dominated site, very wet Swamp horsetail (CMA16)
Tall manna grass dominated site Tall manna grass (CMA17)
8. Wet sites dominated by wetland sedge Sedge Meadow (CMA1)
Slightly drier sites dominated by marsh reed grass Marsh Reed grass Meadow (CMA2)
9. Moist, nutrient rich seepage areas or snowberry dominated areas adjacent to rivers 10
Dry, sandy sites or south facing slopes dominated by sage or grasses and upland sedge 1 1
10. Moist nutrient rich seepage areas dominated
by cow parsnip Cow Parsnip/Kentucky Bluegrass-Marsh Reed grass (CMA3)
Well drained, gravelly sites adjacent to rivers and dominated by snowberry 12
1 1 . Dry, sandy south facing slopes dominated by plains wormwood, sheep fescue, and
sedge Plains Wormwood/Sheep Fescue-Sedge (CMA5)
Grazed, sandy grasslands dominated by Kentucky bluegrass
Plains Wormwood/Kentucky Bluegrass-Sedge (CMA6)
12. Ungrazed to moderately grazed sites dominated by snowberry and marsh reegrass
Snowberry/Horsetail/Marsh Reedgrass (CMA19)
Heavily grazed sites dominated by Kentucky bluegrass and dandelion
Snowberry/Kentucky Bluegrass (CMA4)
157
CMA1. Sedge meadows
(Carex aquatilis, C. rostrata, C. atherodes)
n=5 This wetland community type is found near fresh water. The sedge meadow is a poorly drained community.
As one moves to the drier edges marsh reed grass becomes predominant. Willows will invade into both the sedge
and marsh reed grass dominated meadows. The sedge meadow community is very productive, but the high water
table, particulary in the spring when the sedge species are most palatable, restricts livestock movement. One study
done in the Yukon found that crude protein on these meadows declined from a high of 10% in May to less than 5%
in September (Bailey et al. 1992).
Beaked sedge found in abundance in this community is usually associated with nitrogen rich conditions and
moving water (Brierly et al. 1985). Water sedge is often found in abundance in this community type and is
associated with calcium rich stagnant water (MacKinnon et al. 1992).
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Environmental Variables
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Forbs
Moisture Regime (mean):
Marsh skullcap
Subhydric-Hygric
(Scutellaria galericulata)
Nodding beggar ticks
5
0-25
20
Nutrient Regime (mean
(Bidens cernua)
3
0-13
20
Rich
Dandelion
Elevation:
(Taraxacum officinale)
1
0-3
20
150-606 (485) m
Grasses
Soil Drainage (mean):
Beaked sedge
Poorly to very poorly
( Carex rostrata)
Awned sedge
48
8-73
100
Ecological status score: 24
(Carex atherodes)
Water sedge
13
0-57
40
Health form: riparian
(Carex aquatilis)
3
0-7
100
Marsh reed grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis)
8
0-18
60
FORAGE PRODUCTIONOCG/HAl n=5
Grass 2209(1498-300)
Forb 161(0-644)
Total 2370(1498-3000)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally non-use
0.54 ha/AUM (2.02 -0.31)
0.75 AUM/ac (0.2 -1.3)
158
CMA2. Marsh reed grass meadow
(Calamagrostis canadensis)
n=6 This community is found on the edges of sedge meadows and moist draws where the water table is lower.
The lower water table makes this community accessible for most of the grazing season. W illow will invade onto these
sites to form the W illow/Marsh reed grass community type. Increased grazing pressure on these sites will cause marsh
reed grass to decline and their will be an invasion of Kentucky bluegrass and dandelion. These sites are highly
productive for domestic livestock and should be rated as primary range.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
White birch
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
{Be tula papyrifera )
Shrubs
Willow spp.
2
0-14
17
(Salix spp.)
Forbs
Nodding beggarticks
1
0-2
33
(Bidens cernua)
Leafy-bracted aster
1
0-1
17
(Aster sibricus)
Dock , sorrel
T
0-1
17
(Rumex crispus)
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
1
0-1
33
(Calamagrostis canadensis)
Beaked sedge
56
34-83
100
(Carex rostrata)
Water sedge
4
0-28
17
{Carex aquatilis)
Awned sedge
4
0-14
33
{Carex atherodes)
11
0-33
67
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
Hygric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
MEDIUM TO RICH
Elevation:
150-758 (320) m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Poorly
Ecological status score: 24
Health form: riparian
Forage Production(kg/ha) n=6
Grass
2068(1052-5110)
Forb
6(0-18)
Shrub
42(0-254)
Total
2117(1070-5110)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.4 ha/AUM (0.81 -0.34)
1 .0 AUM/ac (0.5 - 1 .2)
159
CMA3. Cow parsnip/Kentucky bluegrass-Marsh reed grass
(Heracleum lanatum/Poa pratensis-Calamagrostis canadensis)
n=l This community type is found on fine textured, silty soils adjacent to the Willow river near Wabasca . It
represents a W illow/Cow parsnip/Marsh reed grass community that has been cleared and then grazed extensively. The
heavy grazing pressure has allowed dandelion and Kentucky bluegrass to invade onto the site. The high nutrient and
moisture regime of this community type makes it extremely productive. Once cleared of shrubs it can provide a
significant amount of forage for domestic livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Environmental Variables
Shrubs
Green alder
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhygric
(Alnus crispa)
Prickly rose
1
-
100
Nutrient Regime (mean):
(Rosa acicularis)
Forbs
Cow PARSNIP
8
- 10
rich
Elevation:
(Heracleum lanatum)
Horsetail
42
-
100
606 m
Soil Drainage (mean):
(Equisetum arvense)
Dandelion
33
-
100
Moderately Well
(Taraxacum officinale)
Fireweed
27
-
100
Ecological status score: 16-8
(Epilobium angustifolium)
Creamy Peavine
19
-
100
Health form: riparian
( Lathyrus ochroleucus )
Grasses
Kentucky Bluegrass
8
100
Forage Production^ kg/ha) n=i
Grass 200
(Poa pratensis)
Marsh reed grass
15
-
100
Forb 1798
Shrub 470
(Calamagrostis canadensis)
Fringed brome
10
■
100
Total 2468
(Bromus ciliatus)
2
100
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.54 ha/AUM (0.81 -0.40)
0.75 AUM/ac (0.5 -1.0)
160
CMA4. Snowberry/Kentucky bluegrass
(Symphoricarpos occidentalis/Poa pratensis)
n=4 This snowberry dominated community type appears to be common on level, well drained, gravelly areas
along rivers throughout N orthern Alberta. In the absence of disturbance this community type appears to be dominated
by snowberry, rose, fireweed, slender wheat grass and marsh reed grass. Heavy grazing pressure causes the native
forbs and grasses to decline and allows Kentucky bluegrass, dandelion and clover to increase. Because these clearings
are some of the only natural openings throughout the Central M ixedwood they tend to be heavily utilized by livestock.
Snowberry which is unpalatable to livestock will remain even under extreme grazing pressure.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Shrubs
Prickly rose
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Rosa acicularis)
Buckbrush
(i Symphoricarpos
3
0-9
50
occidentalism
Willow
19
1-30
100
{Salix spp .)
Forbs
Strawberry
5
0-8
75
(Fragaria virginiana)
Clover
1
0-1
75
(Trifolium repens)
Dandelion
29
0-54
75
(Taraxacum officinale)
Yarrow
32
5-49
100
(Achllea millefolium)
American vetch
2
1-4
100
( Vicia americana)
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
1
0-1
50
(Calamagrostis canadensis)
Slender wheat grass
7
0-24
50
(Agropyron trachycaulum)
Kentucky bluegrass
7
3-13
100
( Poa pratensis)
Prairie sedge
38
16-73
100
{Carex prairea)
1
0-1
25
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
Mesic
Nutrient Regime (mean):
MEDIUM TO RICH
Elevation:
576-606 (586) m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Well
Ecological status score: 8 - 0
Forage Production(kg/ha) n=4
Grass
1337(800-1800)
Forb
1311(200-2390)
Shrub
141(0-424)
Total
2790(2000-3614)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.67 ha/AUM (2.02 - 0.4)
0.6 AUM/ac (0.2 - 1.0)
161
CMA5. Plains wormwood/Sheep fescue-Sedge
(Artemisia campestris/Festuca saximontana-Carex spp.)
n=3 This community type is found on coarse textured, sandy soils. It is generally found on hilltops and south-
facing slopes in openings among Jack pine on the uplands and black spruce in the lowlands. This community type
was also described on similar site conditions in the Dry Mixedwood subregion. This community would be considered
either secondary or non-use range for domestic livestock because of the low forage production and fragile nature of
the community.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean range const.
Shrubs
Moisture Regime (mean):
Saskatoon
Submesic-subxeric
( Amelanchier alnifolia)
Blueberry
3
1-3
100
Nutrient Regime (mean):
( Vaccinium myrtilloid.es)
Forbs
3
0-8
33
medium
Smooth scouring rush
Elevation:
(Equisetum laevigatum)
Plains wormwood
1
0-1
33
576-652 (61 1)m
(Artemisia campestris)
9
2-13
100
Soil Drainage (mean):
Low Goldenrod
Rapidly
(Solidago missouriensis)
Bearberry
2
1-3
66
Slope(Range):
(Arctostaphylos uva-ursi)
Grasses
5
0-8
67
22(15-30)%
Kentucky bluegrass
Aspect:
(Poa pratensis)
Northern Ricegrass
3
1-4
100
South to westerly
(Oryzopsis pungens)
Slender wheat grass
4
0-12
67
Ecological status score: 24
(Agropyron trachycaulum)
Sedge
2
1-5
100
Forage Production(kg/ha) n=3
{Car ex spp)
9
7-10
100
Grass 469(270-612)
Sheep fescue
Forb 303(200-452)
{Festuca saximontana )
8
7-10
100
Total 772(470-978)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
4.05 ha/AUM (4.05 -1.16)
0.1 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.35)
162
CMA6. Plains wormwood/Kentucky bluegrass-Sedge
(Artemisia campestris/Poa pratensis-Carex spp.)
n=l This community type is similar to the Plains wormwood/Sheep fescue-Sedge community type, but heavy grazing
pressure and a higher nutrient and moisture regime has allowed Kentucky bluegrass to invade onto the site.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean range const.
Shrubs
Saskatoon
(Amelanchier alnifolia )
2
100
Moisture Regime (mean):
Submesic
Chokecherry
( Prunus virginiana)
8
.
100
Nutrient Regime (mean):
medium
Snowberry
(Symphoricarpos
occidentalism
3
100
Elevation:
606 m
Forbs
Meadow parsnip
(Zizia aptera)
2
100
Soil Drainage (mean):
Rapidly
Plains wormwood
(Artemisia campestris)
4
.
100
Slope(Range):
LOW GOLDENROD
(Solidago missouriensis)
2
100
15%
Bearberry
(Arctostaphylos uva-ursi)
10
.
100
Aspect:
South to westerly
Grasses
Kentucky bluegrass
(Poa pratensis)
49
100
Ecological status score: 8
NORTHERN RICEGRASS
(Oryzopsis pungens)
4
_
100
Forage Production(kg/ha) n=i
Slender wheat grass
( Agropyron trachycaulum )
3
.
100
Grass 824
Forb 38
Sedge
( Carex spp)
13
.
100
Total 862
Sheep fescue
( Festuca saximontana)
1
.
100
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
8.09 ha/AUM (40.47 -2.02)
0.05 AUM/ac (0.01 - 0.2)
163
CMA7. Willow/Sedge
(Salix spp./Carex spp.)
n=7 This community type is found along the edges of sedge meadows and in moist depressions. Willow becomes
established at the edges of the sedge meadows due to the shorter duration of standing water. Increased flooding and prolonged
waterlogging may result in the disappearance of willow and a transition to a water sedge meadow.
These sites are fairly productive but difficult to graze due to the moist ground conditions and heavy shrub cover
which reduces access and mobility within the area.
Plant Composition CanopyCover(%)
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Shrubs
Willow spp.
(Salix spp.)
54
26-85
100
Forbs
Mint
(Mentha arvensis)
1
0-1
17
Green sorel
(Rumex acetosa)
1
0-1
17
Fireweed
( Epilobium angustifolium )
2
0-10
57
Horsetail
(Equisetum arvense )
9
0-60
29
Grasses
AWNED SEDGE
(Car ex atherodes)
11
0-31
43
Marsh reed grass
( Calamagrostis canadensis)\0
0-20
71
Beaked sedge
(Carex rostrata)
9
0-24
57
Water sedge
( Carex aquatilis)
21
0-64
57
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhydric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
rich
Elevation:
150-853 (343) m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Poorly
Ecological status score: 24 or 18
Health form: riparian
Forage Production kg/ha) n=i
Grass 1389(0-1734)
Forb 152(70-3518)
Shrub 71(0-364)
Total 1612(214-4826)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.81 ha/AUM (2.02 -0.40)
0.5 AUM/ac (0.2 - 1.0)
164
CMA8. Willow/Sedge-Kentucky bluegrass
(Salix spp./Carex spp.-Poa pratensis)
n=4 This community type is very similar to the Willow/Sedge community, but has been heavily grazed
favouring the growth of Kentucky bluegrass and dandelion. Continued heavy grazing pressure will eventually lead
to a community that is similar to the Kentucky bluegrass/Dandelion dominated community type.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Shrubs
Willow spp.
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Salix spp.)
Prickly rose
25
1-40
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Forbs
Strawberry
3
25
0-10
( Fragaria virginiana)
Dandelion
3
0-11
25
(Taraxacum offincinale)
Mint
5
0-19
25
(Mentha arvensis)
Clover
3
0-6
75
( Trifolium spp.) 9
Arrow leaved coltsfoot
0-44
25
( Petasites sagittatus )
Grasses
Sedge
(Carex rostrata, aquatilis
9
0-15
50
atherodes.)
Kentucky bluegrass
40
12-61
100
(Poa pratensis)
21
7-42
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
subhygric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
rich
Elevation:
576 m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Imperfectly
Ecological status score: 16 - 8 or 12 - 6
Health form: riparian
Forage Production(kg/ha) n=4
Grass 2121(1566-2478)
Forb 547(492-1204)
Total 2138(2770-2970)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
1.01 ha/AUM (2.02 -0.51)
0.4 AUM/ac (0.2 - 0.8)
165
CMA9. Willow/Marsh reed grass
(Salix spp./Calamagrostis canadensis, C. inexpansa)
n=10 The Marsh reed grass community type is found along the edges of sedge meadows and in moist depressions.
Willow will invade onto these sites to form the Willow/Marsh reed grass community type. Increased grazing
pressure on these sites will cause marsh reed grass to decline and there will be an invasion of Kentucky bluegrass and
dandelion. These sites are highly productive for domestic livestock and should be rated as primary range. Increased
flooding and prolonged waterlogging may result in the disappearance of willow and a transition to a water sedge
meadow.
These sites are fairly productive but difficult to graze due to the moist ground conditions and heavy shrub
cover which reduces access and mobility within the area.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Shrubs
Willow spp.
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Salix spp.)
Flat leaved willow
48
0-80
80
(Salix planifolia )
Bebb willow
11
0-60
20
(Salix bebbiana )
Forbs
Mint
2
0-20
10
(Mentha arvensis)
Dandelion
1
0-7
40
(Taraxacum officinale)
Grasses
Kentucky bluegrass
2
0-13
60
(Poa pratensis)
Marsh reed grass
2
0-7
40
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 26
Beaked sedge
0-47
90
(Carex rostrata)
Water sedge
4
0-22
50
(Carex aquatilis)
Northern reed grass
6
0-23
30
(Calamagrostis inexpansa )
5
0-50
10
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
rich
Elevation:
333-853 (577) m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Poorly
Ecological status score: 24 or 18
Health form: riparian
Forage Production(kg/ha) n=8
Grass 951(318-2010)
Forb 219(0-270)
Shrub 336(0-554)
Total 1353(588-2118)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.81 ha/AUM (2.02-0.40)
0.5 AUM/ac(0.2- 1.0)
166
CMA10. Willow-River alder/Marsh reed grass
(Salix spp-Alnus tenuifolia/Calamagrostis canadensis)
n=6 This community type represents a tall willow and alder dominated type that is usually represented as an
AIA aspen stand on phase III maps. It is typically found in very moist, poorly drained areas. Black spruce
communities are usually found associated with this community type on the wetter edges. The understory of this
community type is fairly open allowing for easy access by livestock. When this community is situated next to trails
or seismic lines it is moderately utilized by livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Shrubs
Moisture Regime (mean):
Flat leaved willow
SUBHYGRIC-HYGRIC
(Salix planifolia )
6
0-30
33
Willow spp.
Nutrient Regime (mean):
(Salix spp.)
32
0-65
67
RICH
River alder
(Alnus tenuifolia)
20
0-40
67 Elevation:
Green alder
576 m
(Alnus crispa)
9
0-35
33
Wild red raspberry
Soil Drainage (mean):
(Rubus idaeus)
11
0-33
50
Imperfectly
Bracted honeysuckle
(Lonicera involucrata )
4
0-13
50 Ecological status score: 24
Forbs
Strawberry
Health form: riparian
(Fragaria virginiana)
1
0-3
33
Sweet scented bedstraw
Forage Production^ kg/ha) n=4
(Galium triflorum)
3
0-11
67
Wild sarsaparilla
Grass 702(118-1102)
(Aralia nudicaulis)
4
0-13
33
Forb 184(18-470)
Dewberry
Shrub 61(0-132)
(Rubus pubscens )
3
0-11
50
Total 947(592-1296)
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
(Calamagrostis canadensis )40
14-60
100
2.02 ha/AUM (2.02- 1.01)
Beaked sedge
0.2 AUM/ac (0.2 - 0.4)
(Carex rostrata)
5
0-27
17
167
CMA11. Willow/Fireweed
(Salix spp./Epilobium angustifolium)
n=l This community type represents a 3 year old burn of a white spruce forest. Fireweed and marsh reed grass
early successional species quickly dominate the community after a fire. As this community undergoes succession
the herbaceous understory will be suppressed as a result of shading by white spruce. Eliminating the tree canopy
cover has increased the forage production of this site from 50-100 kg/ha under a spruce moss forest to over 1700
kg/ha on this community type.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean range const.
Trees
Aspen
( Populus tremuloides)
1
100
White spruce
(Picea glauca )
10
.
100
Shrubs
Willow spp.
(Salix spp.)
21
100
Forbs
Strawberry
(Fragaria virginiana)
2
100
Fireweed
(Epilobium angustifolium)
37
.
100
Yarrow
(Achillea millefolium)
2
100
Large Leaved yellow avens
(Geum macrophyllum) 2
-
100
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis)\9
100
Hair-like sedge
(Car ex capillaris)
1
_
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
SUBHYGRIC-MESIC
Nutrient Regime (mean):
medium
Elevation:
150m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Moderately well
Ecological status score: 18
Forage Production(kg/ha) n=i
Grass 190
forb 1322
Shrub 236
Total 1748
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
4.05 ha/AUM (40.47- 1.01)
0.1 AUM/ac (0.0 1-0.4)
168
CMA12. Willow-Spruce/Kentucky bluegrass
(Salix spp.-Picea glauca/Poa pratensis)
n=l This community represents an old spruce community which burned in 1968, succeeded to willow, and
is now succeeding back to white spruce. After the fire, the canopy was opened up allowing for good forage
productivity. Consequently, cattle grazing was quite heavy allowing Kentucky bluegrass and clover to establish.
Thistle is now beginning to invade and will expand to other areas if not controlled. As the spruce continues to
mature, the increasing canopy cover will cause a decline in overall production and this site will eventually become
non-use for domestic livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Larch
Mean
RANGE CONST.
( Larix laricina )
8
100
White spruce(understory)
( Picea glauca )
Shrubs
Willow spp.
3
100
( Salix spp.)
Forbs
Clover
50
100
(Trifolium sp.)
Dandelion
22
100
(Taraxacum officinale)
Marsh hedge nettle
14
100
(Stachys palustris)
Bishop’s cap
6
100
(Mitel la nuda)
Canada thistle
6
100
( Cirsium arvense)
Grasses
Kentucky bluegrass
2
100
(Poa pratensis )
77
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
rich
Elevation:
667 m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Moderately Well to Imperfectly
Ecological status score: 0 or modified
Forage Production(kg/ha) n=i
Grass 1985
Forb 540
Shrub 0
Total 2524
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47 - 4.05)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01 -0.1)
169
CMA13. Yellow willow
(Salix lutea)
n=l This community type occurs on moist alluvial deposits which are adjacent to streams and rivers. This
community can persist for some time if the site is subject to frequent flooding. However in the absence of
disturbance it will eventually undergo succession to a spruce dominated community type. Thompson and Hansen
(2002) described this community in the grassland natural region of Southern Alberta. They found that this
community type disappeared as one moved north into the Parkland and it was replaced by basket willow and flat
leaved willow dominated community types. T ypically there is little understory vegetation found in this community
type and it should be rated as non-use for livestock.
PLANT COMPOSITION CANOPY COVER (%)
Mean
Range Const.
SHRUBS
Yellow willow
(Salix lutea)
Shining willow
30
100
(Salix lucida)
River alder
10
100
(Alnus tenuifolia )
3
100
FORBS
Horsetail
(Equisetum arvense)
Veiny meadow rue
1
100
(Thalictrum venulosum)
Dandelion
1
100
(Taraxaxum officinale)
1
100
Graminoids
Marsh reed grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 10
100
Kentucky bluegrass
(Poa pratensis)
Quackgrass
1
100
(Agropyron repens)
1
100
ENVIRONMENTAL VARIABLES
Moisture Regime: Hygric
Nutrient Regime: rich
Elevation:
600 M
Soil Drainage: Imperfectly
Ecological status score: 24 or 18
Health form: riparian
Forage Production (kg/ha)
TOTAL 1000*ESTIMATE
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally non-use
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47 - 40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01 -0.01)
170
CMA14. Scouler willow-Red osier dogwood
(Salix scouleriana-Cornus stolonifera)
n=l This community type appears to be transitional between the horsetail (hygric/rich) and shrubby rich fen
(subhydric/rich) ecosites described by Beckingham and Archibald (1996). It has plant species characteristic of
both ecosites. This community type is also similar to the Willow-Alder/Fern community described on moist,
nutrient rich seepage areas in the Lower Foothills subregion (Lane et al. 2000). This community type is very
productive, but the high shrub cover and slope conditions make it difficult to graze. Consequently, this community
type should be rated as secondary or non-use range.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Shrubs
Scouler’s willow
MEAN
RANGE CONST.
(Salix scouleriana)
Bracted honeysuckle
60
100
(Lonicera involcrata )
Red osier dogwood
10
100
(Cornus stolonifera)
LOW BUSH CRANBERRY
30
100
(Viburnum edule)
Forbs
Bunchberry
20
100
(Cornus canadensis)
Common horsetail
3
100
(Equisetum arvensis)
Fireweed
1
100
(Epilobium angustifolium)
Dewberry
3
100
(Rubus pubescens)
Strawberry
3
100
(Fragaria virginiana )
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
3
100
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 10
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
SUBHYGRIC
Nutrient Regime (mean):
rich
Elevation:
667 m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Moderately well
Ecological status score: 24 or 18
Health form: riparian
Forage Production(kg/ha)
TOTAL 1 500*ESTIMATE
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally non-use
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47 - 2.02)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01 -0.2)
171
CMA15: Bebb willow/Marsh reed grass
(Salix bebbiana/Calamagrostis canadensis)
n=3 This community type is found along the drier edges of marsh reed grass meadows and in moist depressions
and represents the transition between the flat leaved willow and basket willow dominated shrublands and the upland
forest. Bebb willow is an upland species that prefers well drained sites. This species of willow is often found in the
understory of aspen and balsam poplar dominated community types. Increased flooding and prolonged water logging
may result in the disappearance of Bebb willow and favour the growth of flat leaved willow. In contrast the
continued drying of the site will favour the growth of balsam poplar. These sites are fairly productive but difficult
to graze due to the moist ground conditions and heavy shrub cover which reduces access and mobility within the
area.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
MEAN
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
Balsam poplar
( Populus balsamifera)
1
0-1
33
SHRUBS
Bebb willow
(Salix bebbiana)
Flat leaved willow
57
50-70
100
(Salix planifolia)
Red osier dogwood
1
0-3
33
( Cornus stolonifera)
Bracted honeysuckle
1
0-3
66
( Lonicera involucrata)
1
0-3
66
FORBS
Horsetail
(Equisetum arvense)
Tall lungwort
13
0-30
66
(Mertensia paniculata)
1
0-3
100
Small Enchanter’s nightshade
( Circaea alpina)
Small bedstraw
13
0-40
33
{Galium trifidum)
7
0-20
33
GRASSES
Marsh reed grass
(Calamagrostis
canadensis)
24
3-40
100
ENVIRONMENTAL VARIABLES
Moisture Regime: Subhygric-Hygric
Nutrient Regime: rich
Elevation (mean): 600 M
Soil Drainage: Mod. Well
Ecological status score: 24 or 18
Health form: riparian
Forage Production (kg/ha)
TOTAL 1500*ESTIMATE
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.81 ha/AUM (2.02 -0.40)
0.5 AUM/ac (0.2 - 1.0)
172
CMA16. Swamp horsetail
(Equisetum fluviatile)
n=l This wetland community type is found near fresh water and is often associated with shallow water around
lake shores or saturated wet spots in old river channels and sloughs. This community is often only found in small
isolated spots or in narrow bands around the edge of lakes. As these areas dry, swamp horsetail is often replaced
by sedge species. Swamp horsetail is generally unpalatable to livestock and the areas it grows in are often to wet
for livestock to access. This community type should be rated as non-use.
Environmental Variables
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Moisture Regime (mean):
MEAN
RANGE CONST.
Subhydric-Hygric
Forbs
Nutrient Regime (mean):
Swamp horsetail
rich
(Equisetum fluviatile)
97
100
Elevation:
600 m
Grasses
Soil Drainage (mean):
Beaked sedge
Poorly to very poorly
( Carex rostrata)
Tall manna grass
3
100
Ecological status score: 24
( Glyceria grandis )
Slough grass
1
100
Health form: riparian
( Beckmannia syzigachne)
1
100
Forage Production (kg/ha)
Total 2000*Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally non-use
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47 - 40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01 -0.01)
173
CMA17. Tall manna grass
(Glyceria grandis)
n=l This wetland community type is associated with the edge of the standing water of ponds, sloughs and slow
meandering streams. As one moves away from the water to the drier edges the sedge meadow communities are found.
This community is often only found in small isolated spots or in narrow bands around the edge of lakes. As these areas
dry, tall manna grass is often replaced by sedge species. Tall manna grass is palatable to livestock, however, the areas
it grows in are often to wet for livestock to access. This community type should be rated as non-use.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
MEAN RANGE CONST. MOISTURE REGIME (MEAN):
Subhydric-Hygric
Forbs
Mint
(Mentha arvensis)
20
100
Nutrient Regime (mean):
rich
Pale persicaria
(Polygonum lapthifolium)
3
.
100
Elevation:
Canada thistle
(Cirsium arvense)
1
.
100
606 m
Grasses
Tall manna grass
( Glyceria grandis)
60
100
Soil Drainage (mean):
VERY POORLY
Ecological status score: 24 or 1 8
Slough grass
(Beckmannia syzigachne )
30
_
100
Health form: riparian
Bebb’s sedge
( Carex bebbii)
10
.
100
Forage Production (kg/ha)
CREEPING spike rush
( Eleocharis palustris)
10
-
100
Grass 2000
Total 2000*estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally non-use
0.54 ha/AUM (2.02 -0.31)
0.75 AUM/ac (0.2 -1.3)
174
CMA18. Short sedge
(Car ex curta)
n=l This community type was described in boggy areas adjacent to black spruce and larch dominated
community types. Short sedge tends to be found in the wetter areas where there is a floating mat of peat. As these
areas dry out short sedge will be replaced by willow, black spruce and larch species. Short sedge is generally
unpalatable to livestock and the areas it grows in are often too wet for livestock to access. This community type
should be rated as non-use.
Environmental Variables
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Shrubs
Flat leaved willow
Mean
Range Const.
Moisture Regime (mean):
Subhydric
Nutrient Regime (mean):
(Salix planifolia)
Forbs
Water hemlock
1
100
medium
Elevation:
576-606(584) m
(Cicuta maculata)
Skull cap
1
100
Soil Drainage (mean):
Well
(Scutellaria galericulata)
Grasses
Short sedge
1
100
Ecological status score: 24
(Carex curta)
Water sedge
60
100
Health form: riparian
( Carex aquatilis)
Northern reed grass
20
100
Forage Production (kg/ha)
( Calamagrostis inexpansa) 10
100
Total 1500*estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally non-use
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47 - 40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01 -0.01)
175
CMA19. Snowberry/Horsetail/Marsh Reed Grass
(Symphoricarpos occidentalis/Equisetum arvense/Calamagrostis canadensis)
n=l This snowberry dominated community type appears to be common on level, well drained, gravelly areas
along rivers throughout Northern Alberta. In the absence of disturbance this community type is dominated by
snowberry, rose, horsetail, fireweed, slender wheatgrass and marsh reedgrass. Heavy grazing pressure causes the
native forbs and grasses to decline and allows Kentucky bluegrass, dandelion and clover to increase. Because these
clearings are some of the only natural openings throughout the Central Mixedwood they tend to be heavily utilized
by livestock. Snowberry which is unpalatable to livestock will remain even under extreme grazing pressure.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
Shrubs
Snowberry
(Symphoricarpos
Range Const.
occidentalis)
Beaked willow
13
100
(Salix bebbiana)
Prickly Rose
8
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Wild Red Raspberry
5
100
(Rubus idaeus)
Forbs
Common Horsetail
4
100
(Equisetum arvense)
Fireweed
11
100
(Epilobium angustifolium)
American Vetch
14
100
(Vicia americana)
Lindley’s Aster
1
100
(Aster ciliolatus)
Cow Parsnip
3
100
(Heracleum lanatum)
Strawberry
3
100
(Fragaria virginiana)
Grasses
Marsh Reedgrass
(Calamagrostis
1
100
canadensis)
Awned Sedge
24
100
(Car ex atherodes)
Slender Wheatgrass
3
100
( Agropyron trachycaulum) 3
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
SUBHYGRIC - HYGRIC
Nutrient Regime (mean):
rich
Elevation:
758 m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Well
Ecological status score: 24
Health form: riparian
Forage Production (kg/ha)
Total 2250* Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.5 ha/AUM (2.02 - 0.4)
0.81 AUM/ac (0.2- 1.01)
176
CENTRAL MIXEDWOOD SUBREGION
TAME FORAGE COMMUNITIES
Photo 8. This range improvement clearing exhibits signs of heavy grazing pressure and is slowly
being invaded by tall buttercup.
177
TAME FORAGE COMMUNITIES
(Cleared areas that have been broken and seeded to tame forage)
Throughout the Central Mixedwood subregion there are sites that have been deforested,
broken, and seeded to tame forage. Usually these areas are mesic and moderately well to well
drained with good nutrient levels. Because most of these tame forage stands are established on
similar sites, the most influential factors affecting plant species composition are stand
establishment and grazing regime.
Stand establishment is important because it determines what the initial plant species
composition is going to be. Seed bed preparation and the type of seed sown are the two most
important factors influencing stand establishment. Seed bed preparation is important because it
helps to determine how well the sown seed germinates and establishes. If the seed bed is not well
prepared, the tame forage species may have reduced seedling vigour and/or density allowing native
or weedy species to become a dominant component of the plant community.
After the stand is established, the grazing regime applied to the stand will influence the plant
species composition. Generally, a light to moderate level of grazing allows the stand to maintain
itself while sustained heavy grazing causes the stand to degrade. Damage to a stand due to
overgrazing occurs more readily while the stand is establishing than it does when the stand is
established. This is because the forage plants in an establishing stand have not had time to
develop energy reserves or substantial root systems and are therefore more susceptible to grazing
induced stress.
Figure 9 is a successional diagram for tame pastures in the Central Mixedwood subregion.
Tame pasture communities are organized horizontally by moisture gradient [e.g. dry (submesic) to
moist (subhygric)] and vertically by successional factors like the grazing disturbance gradient [e.g.
moderate or very heavily grazed] or stand establishment. A light to moderate grazing regime will
normally maintain a forage stand similar to what was seeded on the site. These stands are
generally the most productive and provide the best grazing opportunities for livestock. In figure 9,
these plant communities are indicated by the bolded boxes and represent various seed mixes sown
on submesic to subhygric sites (not just those species in the plant community name) They are
considered to be in the healthy category for range health.
The plant communities represented by the boxes above the bolded boxes may be the result of a
number of different factors. For example, when the site is under-grazed, the stand becomes
dominated by species that are the most competitive in the absence of grazing disturbance. In this
case, trees and shrubs growth is unchecked and they can out-compete seeded plants for light and
other resources. Poor forage establishment is another factor that can result in stands that are
dominated by native or weedy species. Although shrubs and trees can occur on all tame pasture
community types, the extent to which invasion occurs is influenced by site preparation, forage
establishment, moisture conditions, age of stand and grazing history.
Plant community changes which occur under heavy grazing are dependent on the grazing
history (level of use, season of use and duration of the grazing regime). Overgrazed community
types [plant communities at bottom of Figure 9] develop over a long period of repeated
overgrazing. If weedy species such as tall buttercup or Canada thistle, become established on
overgrazed sites, they can quickly become a dominant species.
178
Figure 9. Successional sequences of tame pasture communities on 3 moisture regimes in the
Central Mixedwood subregion.
SUBMESIC
MESIC SITES
SUBHYGRIC
SITES
SITES
SUCCESSIONAL
SUCCESSION
CHANGES
FACTORS
tree species become
dominant
♦
some woody
regrowth and native
herbaceous species
Creeping Red
Fescue (CRF)-
Hairgrass
Marsh Reedgrass/
Strawberry
CMB13
*
CMB5
reversion to native
poor stand
plants
establishment or
under-grazing
dominated by the
tall, productive
species originally
Brome / Timothy
CMB8
light to
moderately
seeded [i.e. desirable
species]
grazed
moderately to
heavily grazed
decline in desirable
species with some
grazing induced
species present
CRF-Kentucky
Bluegrass-Timothy
j CMB9
*
dominated by
grazing induced
species with some
weedy species
CRF- Kentucky
Bluegrass/
Dandelion
CMB10
Willow-CRF-
Kentucky Bluegrass
CMB12
heavily grazed
♦
dominated by
very heavily
grazing induced
Clover/Dandelion
grazed
and/or weedy
species
CMB11
179
Table 8. Tame forage communities of the Central Mixedwood subregion
Ecological Community Community type Prod. Sustainable Stocking Rate
§itg number Total ha/AUM (Aum/ac)
(kg/ha) Recommended Range
p
p
rT
©
10
rT
I— 1
1
O?
oo
UO
oT
o'
i
1
o
o
co
©
t>
©
o
o'
oo
o’
oo
uo
O
o
(N
o'
oo
IT)
©
1
i n
CO
N/A
©
o
oo
IT)
o'
1
oo
i
r-
co
00
uo
i
IT)
©
©
O
©
©
o'
ON
<N
o
I
On
oo
uo
Tf
uo
CO
o
<N
<N
<N
<N
<N
o
oo
* Estimate
Key to Tame Grass Plant Communities - Central Mixedwood Subregion
1 . Tame forage stand dominated by tall productive species or sites invaded by native plants
like marsh reedgrass 2
Tame forage stand modified by grazing or poorly established 3
2. Mesic sites dominated by brome, wheat grass, timothy or other tall productive
species Brome/Timothy (CMB8)
Invaded tame pasture dominated by marsh reedgrass and strawberry
Marsh Reedgrass/Strawberry(CMB13)
3. Heavily grazed mesic to subhygric sites 4
Submesic sites with poor establishment of seed mix, extensive bare ground and many weedy
species Creeping Red Fescue-Hairgrass (CMB5)
4. Heavily grazed creeping red fescue and/or Kentucky bluegrass dominates 5
Very heavily grazed, weedy invaders common, low-growing species (e.g. clover) dominate
Clover/Dandelion (CMB11)
5. Some tall productive species (brome, timothy) still present in the stand
Creeping Red Fescue-Kentucky Bluegrass-Timothy (CMB9)
Site dominated by grazing resistant species 6
6. Mesic site (submesic to subhygric)
Creeping Red Fescue-Kentucky Bluegrass-Dandelion (CMB10)
Subhygric site, willow present
Willow-Creeping Red Fescue-Kentucky Bluegrass (CMB12)
181
CMB5. Creeping red fescue-Rough hairgrass
(Festuca rubra-Agrostis scabra)
n=l This community type represents an area that was cleared and seeded, however due to poor soil
conditions, it established poorly. The soils on this site are sandy to a depth of about 6 inches and hairgrass is
well adapted to growing on these disturbed sites with poor nutrients. The overall cover of vegetation is sparse,
therefore grazing should only be light in order to maintain the little cover of vegetation. This site should not
have been approved for range improvement.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Forbs
Mean
RANGE CONST.
Moisture Regime (mean):
Three toothed cinquefoil
Submesic
(Potentilla tridentata)
Rough cinquefoil
3
100
Nutrient Regime (mean):
(Potentilla norvegica)
Grasses
Rough hairgrass
1
100
poor
Elevation:
579m
( Agrostis scabra)
Timothy
6
100
Soil Drainage (mean):
(Phleum pratense )
Creeping red fescue
2
100
Well
( Festuca rubra )
12
100
Plant composition:
tame
Desirable species shift score: 0
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA) n=l
Grass
832
Forbs
302
Shrubs
0
Total
11
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.67 ha/AUM (0.81 -0.58)
0.6 AUM/ac (0.5 - 0.7)
182
CMB8. Brome/Timothy
(Bromus spp. / Phleum pratense)
n=4 This community type represents healthy condition tame pasture on mesic sites that were seeded with
various mixtures of timothy, smooth brome, meadow brome, creeping red fescue, alfalfa, and/or clover. Timothy
establishes much quicker than creeping red fescue or smooth brome on pastures that have been recently seeded.
Eventually creeping red fescue and smooth brome will outcompete timothy and this community will likely become
dominated by creeping red fescue and smooth brome. Heavy grazing pressure will cause the tall growing grass
species (brome, timothy) to decline and allows low growing Kentucky bluegrass and dandelion to increase to form
communities CMB9 and CMB 1 0. Continued heavy grazing pressure will eventually lead to a community dominated
by clover, dandelion and weeds (CMB1 1).
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Environmental Variables
Forbs
Clover
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Moisture Regime (mean):
(Mesic) to subhygric
(Trifolium spp.)
Dandelion
2
0-3
75
Nutrient Regime (mean):
(Taraxacum officinale)
Strawberry
12
0-41
50
(medium) to rich
(Fragaria virginiana)
Grasses
Smooth brome
4
0-11
50
Elevation:
576-853 (645)m
Soil Drainage (mean):
(Bromus inermis)
Fringed Brome
6
0-24
25
(Well) to moderately well
(Bromus ciliatus)
Timothy
10
0-37
50
Plant composition:
TAME
(Phleum pratense)
Kentucky Bluegrass
26
8-51
100
Desirable species shift score: 8
(Poa pratensis)
Creeping Red Fescue
11
0-27
100
Forage Production(kg/ha)
(Festuca rubra)
Sedges
1
0-3
25
Grass 1660(200-3568)
(Car ex spp.)
2
0-6
50
Forbs 758(4-1876)
Shrubs 0
Total 2419(670-5444)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.34 ha/AUM (0.4 -0.27)
1.2 AUM/ac (1.0 - 1.5)
183
CMB9. Creeping Red Fescue-Kentucky Bluegrass-Timothy
(Festuca Rubra-Poa pratensis-Phleum pratense)
n=10 This community type develops on mesic sites that were seeded to a mixture of brome, timothy or other
productive species with some grazing resistant species like creeping red fescue. Heavy grazing pressure results in a
decline in the proportions of tall, productive species and an increase in the grazing resistant species. Heavy
continuous grazing will allow Kentucky bluegrass and dandelion to invade into the stand to form a Kentucky
bluegrass or Quackgrass/Dandelion dominated community type. This community type is usually considered to be
in the ‘healthy with problems’ category.
Environmental Variables
Forbs
Clover
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Moisture Regime (mean):
(Mesic) to Subhygric
(Trifolium spp.)
Dandelion
20
1-67
100
Nutrient Regime (mean):
(medium) to rich
(Taraxacum officinale)
Strawberry
20
1-47
100
Elevation:
(Fragaria virginiana)
YARROW
5
0-16
73
576-853(624)m
(Achillea millefolium)
Grasses
Creeping Red Fescue
1
0-4
82
Soil Drainage (mean):
(Well) to Moderately well
(Festuca rubra)
Kentucky Bluegrass
21
0-73
55
Plant composition:
tame
(Poa pr a tens is)
Timothy
20
0-64
82
Desirable species shift score: 4 - 0
(Phleum pratense)
Smooth brome
( Bromus inermis) 3
14
0-17
1-25
36
100
Forage Production(kg/ha) n
Grass 1774(848-5304)
Forbs 938(68-2042)
Shrub 0
Total 2712(1214-5372)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.45 ha/AUM (0.58 -0.34)
0.9 AUM/ac (0.7 - 1.2)
184
CMB10. Creeping Red Fescue-Kentucky Bluegrass/Dandelion
((Festuca Rubra-Poa pratensis-Taraxacum officinale)
11=14 This community is representative of heavily grazed mesic sites and is dominated by grazing resistant
species like Kentucky Bluegrass, Creeping Red Fescue or Quackgrass. Heavy grazing tends to favour the growth
of these low-growing or rhizomatuous species and that of weedy or disturbance induced species such as dandelion.
These sites have poor health ratings and lower production than community types dominated by species like timothy
and brome.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean range const.
Forbs
Clover
(Trifolium spp.)
Dandelion
9
0-35
43
(Taraxacum officinale)
Canada Thistle
13
0-89
86
(Cirsium arvense)
Grasses
Kentucky Bluegrass
1
0-19
14
(Poa pratensis)
Creeping Red Fescue
40
4-81
100
(Festuca rubra)
Smooth Brome
22
0-79
50
(Bromus inermis) 1
Quackgrass
0-8
36
(Agropyron repens)
Timothy
7
0-55
14
(Phleum pratense)
1
0-3
50
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime (mean):
SUBMESIC TO SUBHYGRIC (MESIC)
Nutrient Regime (mean):
(medium) to rich
Elevation:
333-667 (574)m
Soil Drainage (mean):
Rapidly to moderately well (well)
Plant composition:
tame
Desirable species shift score: 0
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA) n=14
Grass 1883(724-4406)
Forbs 746(0-3322)
Shrubs 86(0-162)
Total 2594(988-4866)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.58 ha/AUM (1.35 -0.34)
0.7 AUM/ac (0.3 - 1.2)
185
—
CMB11. Clover/Dandelion
(Trifolium spp. /Taraxacum officinale)
n=l This community represents extremely heavily grazed mesic pasture sites. Generally, all that is left
growing on these areas is clover and dandelion. There also tends to be a lot of bare soil, which provides a place
for noxious weeds (e.g. Canada thistle) to become established. This community would be rated unhealthy.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Environmental Variables
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Forbs
Moisture Regime (mean):
Clover
mesic
(Trifolium spp.)
Dandelion
33
33
100
Nutrient Regime (mean):
(Taraxacum officinale)
Shepherd’s purse
4
4
100
medium
(Capsella bursa-pastoris)
5
5
100
Elevation:
Annual Hawksbeard
333m
(Crepis tectorum) 4
Grasses
4
100
Soil Drainage (mean):
Kentucky bluegrass
Moderately Well
(Poa pratensis)
Timothy
4
4
100
Plant composition:
(Phleum pratense)
Fowl Bluegrass
11
11
100
TAME
( Poa palustris)
Quackgrass
7
7
100
Desirable species shift score: 0
(Agropyron repens)
Creeping red fescue
4
4
100
Forage Production(kg/haU=i
( Festuca rubra)
1
1
100
Grass 1154
Forbs 1226
Shrubs 0
Total 2380
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
>0.81 ha/AUM
<0.5 AUM/ac
186
CMB12. Willow/Creeping red fescue/Kentucky Bluegrass
(Salix spp./Festuca rubra/Poa pratensis)
n=2 This community represents subhygric pastures that have been heavily grazed and is dominated by grazing
resistant species such as creeping red fescue and Kentucky bluegrass. The moisture regime has led to the
encroachment of willow species. Burning, cultivation and spraying with herbicide are all options that can be
considered in order to control shrub regrowth.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Shrubs
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Moisture Regime (mean):
Willow
(Salix spp.)
14
14
100
mesic to (Subhygric)
Prickly Rose
(Rosa acicularis)
5
3-6
100
Nutrient Regime (mean):
medium
Wild Red Raspberry
(Rubus idaeus)
Forbs
Clover
4
3-4
100
Elevation:
606-636 (62 1)m
( Trifolium spp.)
Dandelion
19
11-27
100
Soil Drainage (mean):
(moderately well) to well
(Taraxacum officinale)
Strawberry
22
14-28
100
Plant composition:
(Fragaria virginiana )
Grasses
Kentucky Bluegrass
7
2-12
100
TAME
Desirable species shift score: 0
(Poa pratensis)
Creeping Red Fescue
30
1-59
100
Forage Production(kg/ha)
(Festuca rubra)
Timothy
24
0-47
50
Grass 927(700-1154)
(Phleum pratense)
3
1-6
100
Forb 1265(1226-1304)
Shrub 50(0-100)
Total 2242(2104-2380)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.51 ha/AUM (0.45-0.58)
0.8 AUM/ac (0.7-0.9)
187
CMB13. Marsh Reed Grass/Strawberry
(Calamagrostis canadensis/Fragaria virginiana)
n-2 This community type appears to be in an early to mid-successional stage. It can occur on clear-cuts that
were harvested within the past one or two years, range improvements that had poor seed establishment, range
improvement sites that have received low grazing intensities, or on pipelines that were not seeded or had poor seed
establishment. This community type appears to be associated with a low grazing intensity and it will likely succeed
towards aspen and coniferous forest.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Shrubs
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Moisture Regime (mean):
Prickly Rose
(Rosa acicularis)
3
1-5
100
(mesic) to Subhygric
Wild Red Raspberry
(Rubus idaeus)
Forbs
Strawberry
1
1-2
100
Nutrient Regime (mean):
(medium) to Rich
Elevation:
853-914 (884)m
(Fragaria virginiana)
Clover
9
1-17
100
Soil Drainage (mean):
( Trifolium spp.)
Fireweed
6
1-10
100
moderately well to well
(Epilobium angustifolium)
Dandelion
8
0-15
50
Plant Composition:
Tame
(Taraxacum officinale)
Lindley’s Aster
22
14-28
100
Desirable species shift score: 4
( Aster ciliolatus)
Grasses
Marsh Reed grass
(Calamagrostis
1
1-2
100
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)n=2
Grass 1049(594-1504)
Forb 962(724-1200)
canadensis )
Timothy
23
18-27
100
Shrub 40(0-80)
Total 2051 (1318-2784)
(Phleum pratense)
Blunt Sedge
5
4-5
100
(Car ex obtusata)
2
1-3
100
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
0.6 ha/AUM (0.5-0.7)
0.68 AUM/ac (0.8-0.58)
188
CENTRAL MIXEDWOOD SUBREGION
DECIDUOUS FOREST COMMUNITY TYPES
Photo 9. Aw/Rose/Clover community type represents a Central Mixedwood deciduous
community that has been moderately to heavily grazed for a number of years.
189
KK
DECIDUOUS FOREST COMMUNITIES
Balsam poplar is most commonly found on moist upland and alluvial bottomland sites; its best
growth is on moist rich bottom lands with deep soil (Peterson and Peterson 1992). The nine
stands with predominant balsam poplar (Pb) cover represent four community types in the Central
Mixedwood subregion. The Pb-Aw/River alder community is found on lower slope positions and
stream channels where there is seepage throughout the growing season. The Pb/Rose-Alder, Pb-
Aw/Beaked hazelnut-Rose and Aw-Pb/Honeysuckle community types are found upslope on
slightly drier and better drained soils. These three community types integrade into the Aw/Rose
dominated community types on mesic/medium ecosites.
White birch is indicative of well-drained, sandy or silty loams (Wilkinson 1990). In Alberta
this tree is found in association with balsam poplar on moist sites adjacent to small creeks and
lowland areas. Pure stands of Alaska variety white birch are also found on dry sandy ridges with
high watertables throughout northern Alberta. Beckingham (1993), found that white birch was
well adapted to growing on a soil with a pH of less than 5.3. The White birch/Willow dominated
community type maybe indicative of sites with slightly lower pH’s.
More mesic sites tend to be dominated by aspen and rose. It is the underlying soil conditions
and site history that appear to dictate which forb and shrub species will dominate these mesic sites.
Blueberry and twinflower appear to indicate sandy soils with poorer nutrient regimes. An
abundance of tall forbs (Aw/Rose/Tall forb) appears to be indicative of higher nutrient regimes
that have not been disturbed by livestock. In contrast the low forb (Aw/Rose/Low forb) dominated
type occupies sites similar to the tall forb type, but these sites appear to have been disturbed by
livestock. Increased grazing pressure on these two community types leads to the formation of
strawberry and clover dominated community types (Pb- Aw/Rose/Strawberry, Aw/Rose/Clover).
Sites that have a more subhygric moisture regime and are moderately well-drained tend to be
dominated by willow and alder ( A w/Alder- Willow-Rose, Aw/Willow). The Aw/Rose- Saskatoon
community was described on south and west facing slopes overlooking streams and rivers. This
community is very similar to the community that was described in the Dry Mixedwood subregion.
On sites with rich nutrient regimes red osier dogwood and horsetail dominated communities are
very common. The Aw/Horsetail community is usually found on moister sites than the Aw-
Pb/Red osier dogwood-Rose community type.
190
Tall forb c.t.
(Good soils)
Low forb c.t.
^ (Poorer soils or
Figure 10. Sequence of Aspen7Rose dominated community types of the Central Mixedwood
subregion.
Figure 4 Sequence of Aspen/Rose dominated community types in the landscape of the Central Mixedwood subregion.
191
Table 9. Deciduous community types described in the Central Mixedwood subregion
IT)
CN
CO
N
r— H
CN
CN
CO
o'
o
<N
CN
C>
CN
©
O
o'
1
i
d>
o’
O
i
4>
o>
T— 1
i— 1
o
o
i— <
i— i
o
©X)
o
O
o’
o'
o’
o’
o
u
S
3
(N
<N
IT)
CN
©
in
CO
<N
CN
in
CN
©D
0H
O
SO
co
CN
P
O
O
p
o
■—
2
CJ
cn
p
p
i
m
i
in
ni
i
CN
i
^t
i
CN
i
<
in
m
in
p
p
in
*n
o
m
o
o
o
©
■^t"
'Tf
o
p
N"
o
VI
41
s
'7f'
O
N-
3
3
<
#S
'8
X
4>
VI
-3
3
3
C/5
in
»n
in
in
in
in
E
' — 1
'— 1
CN
'— 1
’ — 1
* — «
'— 1
o
’ — 1
3
o
©
©
o’
o
o’
o
o.
o
M
a
N — /
^ ^
■>— */
w
O
o
o
CN
o
in
<n
o
OS
o
C ;
O
p
p
p
CN
cn
CN
<N
of-
CN
oo
CN
3
2
X
o
O
oo
CO
OO
CO
0\
so
so
SO
-
O
<N
CO
I>
o
CO
Os
o
o
■*f
2-
H
Os
Os
r-
^f
OO
a>
4>
£
C/1
O
a.
£
◄
Sm
P4
3
Jfl
4)
C/l
1-1
B
3
a
E
o
£
to
h
to
B
4>
XI
3
3
•-
4)
X
2
s
X
T3
<U
X
3
3
2
0
PP
1
&
4)
X)
3
O
o
3
<Z)
3
4)
£
o
p
3
'$
•e
«s
o
U
0>
i)
X)
C«
3
3
4)
H
o
U rrt
c n
i
1-1
£
o
■a
H
X!
2
£
PQ
2
w
4)
4)
4)
u
4)
4)
3
i
C/3
4-1
C/l
T3
N
VI
t/1
3
£
X
o
3
O
3
o
o
2
s
Ph
P4
PQ
<
S-
©X)
C*J
£
fH
£
£
r-H
X
<
T3
<
<
<
<
<
<
-a
<
<
£
£
2
2
4>
2
4>
3
rj C«
•cv
4>
C/1
3
cd
CN
CT)
#w
VI
3
£
QJ
©Jj
»n
Of X
CO
oo
oo
o\
*©JD
X
so
r-
3
■U
E
3
® CL
u
a
u
U
u
U
5
U
O
a
u
U
s
O
S 2
S
2
4>
4>
S
S
s
S
2
4)
4>
4-*
S
u
3
w *a
u
w
u
u
CJ
u
u
u
w
VI
U
u
4*
’vi
- —
"5
‘53d
Q
I E
5 .2
2
*V1
4>
E
p
3
u
3 -O
t/) 4>
2
■5
4>
UJ
x E
"O
a
CMC10 Aw-Pb/Rose/Strawberry 721 2.70(0.15) 4.05-2.02(0.1-0.2)
Table 9. Deciduous community types described in the Central Mixedwood subregion
Ecological site Community Community type Prod. Sustainable stocking rate
number Total ha/AUM (AUM/ac)
4>
WO
a
X
$
in
d
i
oT
d
■
nT
d
d
i
in'
CM
d
in
d
•rT
<N
d
ro
d
in
O
d
d
CM
o
<N
©
d
•n
p
^t
i
•n
d
»n
o
d
d
o
d^
i
d
o
r-
<N
i
p
CM
in
O
<N
i
in
<N
SO
o
p
CM
<N
p
in
co
i
a "n
p
p
^t
p
d
p
s-\
d
p
Os
©
i
i>
m
p
oo
w
CM
OO
so
d
N
in
v
s
V
i—i
i— i
in
o
<N
r— H
CM
d
d
t— H
d
d
d
d
o
d
in
Os
<N
in
CM
p
p
r*;
p
©
p
p
p
"3-
<N
OO
CM
cm
<N
*
o
CM
T—i
o
so
i-H
in
CO
o
"XI
'xC
in
co
CO
oo
"X,
r-
in
Os
xt-
r-
<N
<u
m a
g 2
o
U #
£
<
i
-o
CLh
nS
©
o
©
ns
&
ns
<D
c/D
5
6
<D
3
o
©
<D
a
0
1
jo
a
f§
TJ
O
o
I)
o
X3
O
ns
<D
£
i
4
< C
a
a.
£
o
U
S3
fc-
o
o
a
.©
,©
S
3—
43
CM
i“H
so
{J c«
CM
c3
CO
o-
CJ
•cv *
43
in
« «
■S3
u
U
£ a
u
u
U
U
5
.2 a
O
2 a
s
s
O o
tj d
£
s
S
S
O 4>
S
O o>
W -M
u
u
w *s
u
u
u
u
u
w *s
u
W *S
a> *C
■C
#o
*c
'D
u
§!
43
s-
ns
Jo
3 H
i
CMC4 BwAVillow 756 40.47(0.01) 40.47-40.47(0.01-0.01)
Key to Deciduous Community Types - Central Mixedwood Subregion
1. Community dominated by balsam poplar or birch, richer, moister sites (aspen may
be present but is only co-dominant) 2
Community dominated by aspen 7
2. Community dominated by paper birch with willow understory Bw/Willow (CMC4)
Community dominated by Pb, Bw and Aw only minor 3
3. Understory dominated by hazelnut, mesic sites
Aw-Pb/Beaked Hazelnut-Rose (CMC3)
Community dominated by green or river alder, honeysuckle or red osier dogwood 4
4. Community understory dominated by honeysuckle Pb-Aw/Honeysuckle (CMC3a)
Community dominated by river or green alder or red osier dogwood 5
5. Community dominated by river or green alder.... 6
Community dominated by red osier dogwood, fluvial floodplains next to rivers 10
6. Community dominated by green alder, more upland sites with mesic moisture regimes...
Pb/Alder-Rose (CMC1)
Community dominated by river alder, moist seepage areas next to rivers
Pb-Aw/River Alder (CMC2)
7. Wetter, richer sites, willow, alder, thimbleberry or red osier dogwood dominate the
understory 8
Mesic sites, rose, saskatoon, buffaloberry, and blueberry dominate understory 12
8. Willow or Alder dominates the understory 9
Red osier dogwood, horsetail, cow parsnip, or thimbleberry dominate .....10
9. Willow dominates understory, alder cover very small, fire origin
Aw/Willow (CMC13)
Alder dominates understory, fire origin Aw/Alder-Willow-Rose (CMC 12)
10. Red osier dogwood is dominant shrub, rose is co-dominant, community type
found on rich fluvial floodplains adjacent to river or stream
Aw-Pb/Red Osier Dogwood-Rose (CMC14)
Nutrient rich seepage areas, understory dominated by horsetail, thimbleberry and/or
cow parsnip, moist type associated with willow lowlands 1 1
1 1. Horsetail and cow parsnip dominate Aw/Horsetail-Cow Parsnip (CMC15)
Thimbleberry dominates the understory Aw/ThimbIeberry(CMC17)
194
12. Blueberry dominates shrub layer, rose is co-dominant, dry, sandy soils
Aw/Blueberry (CMC5)
Mesic sites dominated by buffaloberry, rose, or saskatoon 13
13. Buffaloberry dominates shrub understory Aw/Buffaloberry-Rose (CMC8a)
Rose or saskatoon dominate shrub layer 14
14. Saskatoon is dominant shrub with rose, community type found on south facing
slopes above rivers and streams Aw/Rose-Saskatoon (CMC9)
Rose is dominant shrub 15
15. Community not modified appreciably by grazing (tall forb dominated - wild sarsaparilla,
showy aster, fireweed, peavine) Aw/Rose/Tall Forb (CMC8)
Community moderately to severely modified by grazing (low forb dominated) or poorer
nutrient sites which are dominated by twinflower or smooth brome 16
16. Clover common in understory Aw/Rose/Clover (CMC11)
Clover not common in understory (low forb or smooth brome dominated) 17
17. Twinflower dominates forb layer, poorer soils Aw/Rose/Twinflower (CMC6)
Other low forbs (bunchberry, wintergreen, strawberry, wild lily of the valley) or smooth
brome dominate understory 18
18. Moderately grazed, Pb in overstory Aw-Pb/Rose/Strawberry (CMC10)
Primarily aspen overstory, dominated by low forbs (strawberry, bunchberry, wintergreen,
etc.), or smooth brome, low cover of shrubs 19
19. Native understory dominated by low growing forbs Aw/Rose/Low forb (CMC7)
Smooth brome dominates the understory... Aw/Smooth brome (CMC16)
195
CMC1. Pb/Alder-Rose
(Populus balsamifera/ Alnus crispa- Rosa acicularis)
n=5 This community was found on moderately well-drained sites with subhygric moisture regimes. Beckingham
(1993), described a similar community type. He found these forests to develop on parent materials that are neutral to
alkaline, thus they tended to have a relatively high level of nutrient availability and potentially high production levels.
This commmunity is producing only a moderate forage base for domestic livestock. Green alder, which makes
up a large part of the total forage production for this vegetation type, is generally unpalatable to livestock. This
community type would be rated as secondary or non-use range.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Trembling Aspen
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Populus tremuloides)
Balsam poplar
1
0-2
40
(Populus balsamifera)
Shrubs
Prickly Rose
51
10-65
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Green alder
16
6-28
100
(Alnus crispa)
Low BUSH CRANBERRY
23
12-40
100
(Viburnum edule)
Forbs
Strawberry
7
0-16
80
(Fragaria virginiana)
Twinflower
7
1-11
100
(Linnaea borealis)
Northern bedstraw
1
0-4
60
(Galium boreale)
Tall lungwort
4
0-8
80
(Mertensia paniculata)
Creamy Peavine
4
3-7
100
( Lathyrus ochroleucus )
Wild Sarsaparilla
4
1-6
100
(Aralia nudicaulis)
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
4
0-16
40
(Calamagrostis canadensis )%
2-16
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime:
Medium
Elevation:
567 m
Soil Drainage:
Moderately Well
Ecological status score: 18
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)n=5
Grass 181(0-552)
Forbs 398(234-978)
Shrubs 165(0-250)
Total 744(474-1530)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.70 ha/AUM (4.05 -2.02)
0.15 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.2)
196
CMC2. Pb-Aw/River alder
(Populus balsamifera-Populus tremuloides/Alnus tenuifolia)
n=4 This community type is found on moist lower slope positions. A similar community type was described on
similar sites in the Lower Foothills subregion (Willoughby and Downing 1995). The high cover of alder limits the
light reaching the understory and results in low production of grass and forbs. The majority of the total forage
production comes from alder which is generally inaccessible and unpalatable to livestock. Consequently this
community type would be rated as non-use for domestic livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Trembling Aspen
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Populus tremuloides)
Balsam Poplar
23
0-35
75
(Populus balsamifera)
Shrubs
River alder
26
19-45
100
(Alnus tenuifolia)
Red osier dogwood
27
7-35
100
(Cornus stolonifera)
Bracted Honeysuckle
10
5-17
100
(Lonicera involucrata)
Prickly Rose
3
0-10
25
(Rosa acicularis)
Low bush cranberry
9
4-18
100
(Viburnum edule )
Forbs
Horsetail
4
1-10
100
(Equisetum arvense) 14
Dewberry or Running Raspberry
1-45
100
(Rubus pubescens)
Bishop’s cap
6
1-8
100
(Mitella nuda)
Strawberry
4
0-7
75
(Fragaria virginiana)
Lindley's Aster
3
2-4
75
(Aster ciliolatus)
Creamy Peavine
2
2-4
75
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
Wild Sarsaparilla
3
2-5
75
(Aralia nudicaulis)
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
2
0-7
50
(Calamagrostis canadensis)\
0-4
75
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
SUBHYGRIC TO HYGRIC
Nutrient Regime:
Rich
Elevation:
150-606 (454) M
Percent Slope Gradient:
0-2
Soil Drainage:
Moderately well
Ecological status score: 18
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA) n=4
Grass 7(2-20)
Forbs 193(62-376)
Shrubs 340(200-438)
Total 540(202-816)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally non-use
8.09 ha/AUM (40.47 -4.05)
0.05 AUM/ac (0.01 -0.1)
197
CMC3. Aw-Pb/Beaked hazelnut-Rose
(Populus tremuloides-Populus balsamifera/Corylus cornuta-Rosa acicularis)
n=4 This community type was described on south facing slopes and is very similar to the the beaked hazelnut
communities described in the Dry Mixedwood subregion. This type appears to occupy warmer and drier microsites
that resemble the Dry Mixedwood’s climate. The total production of this type is high, but the majority of production
is coming from hazelnut which is largely unpalatable to livestock at proper stocking levels. The high cover of
hazelnut also restricts access to livestock, limiting the forage availability. This community would be rated as
secondary range.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Environmental Variables
Trees
Trembling Aspen
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Populus tremuloides)
Balsam Poplar
33
25-60
100
(Populus balsamifera)
Shrubs
Hazelnut
18
0-65
75
(Corylus cornuta)
Saskatoon
22
13-32
100
(Amelanchier alnifolia)
Wild Red Raspberry
7
0-12
75
(Rubus idaeus)
Prickly Rose
3
0-11
25
(Rosa acicularis)
Forbs
Wild lily-of-the-valley
12
4-18
100
(Maianthemum canadense)!
Dewberry or Running Raspberry
1-8
100
(Rubus pubescens)
Creamy Peavine
6
0-12
75
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
Veiny meadow rue
3
1-6
100
(Thalictrum venulosum )
Wild Sarsaparilla
2
0-3
75
(Aralia nudicaulis)
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
10
0-23
75
(Calamagrostis canadensis)!
Mountain ricegrass
0-9
50
(Oryzopsis asperifolia)
Sedge
2
0-7
50
( Carex spp.)
3
0-10
50
Moisture Regime:
Mesic to Subhygric
Nutrient Regime:
Medium to Rich
Elevation:
576-686 (637) m
Percent Slope Gradient:
5-10(7.5)%
Soil Drainage:
Well to Moderately well
Ecological status score: 18
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA) n~4
Grass 143(72-370)
Forbs 329(234-310)
Shrubs 462(152-670)
Total 933(776-1054)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.70 ha/AUM (4.05- 1.62)
0.15 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.25)
198
CMC3a. Pb-Aw/Honeysuckle
(Populus balsamifera-Populus tremuloides /Lonicera involucrata)
n=5 This community type is represented by one of the Public Lands Peace River benchmark sites. It is a
relatively moist and nutrient rich site and represents the honeysuckle ecosite as described by Beckingham and
Archibald (1996). The high tree and shrub layer limit the amount of light reaching the forest floor. Consquently,
there is little growth of grasses and forbs. Shrub production is largely honeysuckle which is generally unpalatable
to domestic livestock. This community type should be rated as secondary range.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Trembling Aspen
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Populus tremuloides)
Balsam Poplar
25
0-60
80
(Populus balsamifera)
Shrubs
Honeysuckle
46
20-70
100
(Lonicera involcrata)
Red osier dogwood
3
3-31
100
(Cornus stolonifera)
Wild Red Raspberry
1
0-3
80
(Rubus idaeus)
Prickly Rose
5
0-13
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Forbs
Fireweed
12
3-20
100
(Epilobium angustifolium)
1
0-5
80
Dewberry or Running Raspberry
(Rubus pubescens) 3
Palmate leaved coltsfoot
0-10
80
(Petasites palmatus)
Tall lungwort
1
1-3
100
(Mertensia paniculata)
Wild Sarsaparilla
4
1-10
100
(Aralia nudicaulis)
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
6
0-20
80
(Calamagrostis canadensis)!
3-10
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime:
Rich
Elevation:
869 m
Soil Drainage:
Well to Moderately well
Ecological status score: 18
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)n=l
Grass
151
Forbs
288
Shrubs
517
Total
956
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.02 ha/AUM (2.70-1.62)
0.2 AUM/ac (0.15 -0.25)
199
CMC4. Bw/ Willow
(Betula papyrifera/Salix spp.)
n=l This community type was described on a very moist site that was burned or cleared and is now undergoing
succession to a paper birch dominated community type. The understory of this community type is dominated by
sphagnum moss, which is characteristic of the poor fen ecosite described by Beckingham and Archibald ( 1 996). The
site was likely dominated by black spruce and larch prior to disturbance. The poor nutrient status and very moist
conditions make this community type unsuitable for livestock grazing.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean range const.
Trees
Paper birch
(Betula papyrifera)
55
-
100
Shrubs
Willow
(Salix spp.)
50
_
100
Forbs
Small bog cranberry
(Oxycoccus microcarpus) 25
100
Swamp horsetail
(Equisetum fluviatile)
19
_
100
Marsh cinquefoil
(Potentilla palustris)
12
-
100
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
(Calamagrostis canadensis)!
100
Hair-like sedge
( Carex capillaris)
6
100
Beaked sedge
( Carex rostrata)
6
-
100
Mosses
Peat moss
( Sphagnum spp.)
93
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
SUBHYDRIC
Nutrient Regime:
Medium
Elevation:
576 m
Soil Drainage:
very POOR
Ecological status score: 18
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA) n=l
Grass 340
Forbs 342
Shrubs 74
Total 756
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally non-use
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47 - 40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01 -0.01)
200
CMC5. Aw/Blueberry
(Populus tremuloides/ Vaccinium myrtilloides)
n=5 This is a very dry, well-drained community type with sandy soil. It is found in conjunction with jack pine
stands. Productivity of shrubs is largely blueberry, which is unpalatable to livestock.
These stands tend to be relatively open allowing for easy access by livestock, but the dry site conditions and
poorer nutrient status limit the amount of regrowth after grazing. If this community type is managed for one rotation
a year, it can contribute significantly to the overall carrying capacity of a lease.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Trembling Aspen
Mean
Range
CONST.
(Populus tremuloides)
Shrubs
Willow
48
35-65
100
(Salix spp.)
Wild Red Raspberry
6
0-20
60
(Rubus idaeus)
Blueberry
1
0-5
40
( Vaccinium myrtilloides)
Prickly Rose
19
11-37
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Forbs
Bunchberry
9
1-16
100
(Cornus canadensis)
Bearberry
7
1-21
100
(Arctostaphylos uva-ursi)
Yellow pea vine
3
0-13
20
{Lathyrus ochroleucus)
Twinflower
4
1-8
100
(Linnaea borealis)
Strawberry
4
0-7
80
( Fragaria virginiana )
Grasses
Purple oat grass
3
1-5
100
(Schizachne purpurascens) 2
Hairy wild rye
0-7
60
(Elymus innovatus)
Mountain ricegrass
4
0-10
80
(Oryzopsis asperfolia)
2
0-6
80
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Submesic
Nutrient Regime:
Medium
Elevation:
600-909 (682) m
Soil Drainage:
Well
Ecological status score: 18
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA) n=5
Grass 913(98-1794)
Forbs 230(0-388)
Shrubs 205(0-452)
Total 1284(762-1794)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.70 ha/AUM (4.05 - 2.02)
0.15 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.2)
201
CMC6. Aw/Rose/Twinflower
(Populus tremuloides/ Rosa acicularis/Linnaea borealis)
n=6 This community type has been grazed moderately to heavily and is very similar to the grazed
Pb/Rose/Strawberry and Aw/Rose/Low forb community types. Grazing pressure reduces the cover of shrubs and
tall-growing forbs and allows the low-growing forbs to increase in cover. This community type occupies soils
with poor nutrient regimes. The poor nutrient status appears to favour the growth of twinflower, a species that
is well adapted to growing on poor soils (Corns and Annas 1986). This may explain why twinflower is
predominant on this community type and not on the other grazed community types.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean range const.
Trees
Balsam Poplar
(Populus balsamifera)
Trembling Aspen
3
0-15
17
(Populus tremuloides)
Shrubs
Prickly Rose
53
25-75
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Wild Red Raspberry
11
6-18
100
(Rubus idaeus)
LOW BUSH CRANBERRY
1
0-1
50
(Viburnum edule) 2
Snowberry or Buckbrush
(Symphoricarpos
0-7
83
occidentalis)
Forbs
Creamy Peavine
3
1-5
100
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
Bunchberry
3
1-7
100
( Cornus canadensis)
Twinflower
5
1-10
100
(Linnaea borealis)
Strawberry
19
11-31
100
(Fragaria virginiana)
Wintergreen
5
2-9
100
( Pyrola asarifolia)
Grasses
Mountain ricegrass
3
1-7
100
(Oryzopsis asperifolia)
Hairy wild rye
1
0-7
33
(Elym us innovatus)
Purple oat grass
3
0-5
83
(Schizachne purpurascens ) 3
Kentucky bluegrass
0-5
83
( Poa pratensis)
2
0-6
83
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
SUBMESIC TO MESIC
Nutrient Regime:
Medium
Elevation:
579-733 (634) m
Percent Slope Gradient:
2(0-5 )%
Soil Drainage:
well
Ecological status score: 12
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA) n=6
Grass 56(6-134)
Forbs 230(70-464)
Shrubs 120(16-294)
Total 406(190-692)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
8.09 ha/AUM (40.47 - 4.05)
0.05 AUM/ac (0.01-0.1)
202
CMC7. Aw/Rose/Low forb
(Populus tremuloides/Rosa acicularis/Low forb)
n=23 This type occupies mesic, well-drained sites with medium nutrient regimes. This type is similar to the
Aw/Rose/Tall forb community type, but this type appears to occupy drier sites with poorer nutrient regimes. It has
also been observed that this type can also be produced when the tall forb community is grazed for a number of years.
The increased grazing pressure may explain why the production on this type is lower than the tall forb type. Forage
production in this type is good, but the low-growing forbs are not as accessible to livestock as the tall growing forbs.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Trembling Aspen
Mean
Range
CONST.
(Populus tremuloides)
Balsam poplar
50
25-70
100
(Populus balsamifera)
White spruce
5
0-20
30
(Picea glauca )
Shrubs
Saskatoon
1
0-8
40
(Amelanchier alnifolia)
Prickly Rose
4
0-16
70
(Rosa acicularis)
Wild Red Raspberry
15
4-42
100
(Rubus idaeus)
Snowberry
(Symphoricarpos
4
0-23
70
occidentalis)
Low BUSH CRANBERRY
6
0-36
74
(Viburnum edule)
Forbs
Strawberry
2
0-9
78
(Fragaria virginiana)
Fireweed
5
1-10
100
(Epilobium angustifolium)
Creamy peavine
2
0-10
61
(Lathyrus ochroleucus) 3 0-11
Dewberry or Running Raspberry
87
(Rubus pubescens)
Lindley’s aster
3
0-10
80
(Aster ciliolatus)
Bunchberry
3
0-8
78
(Cornus canadensis)
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
6
0-18
92
(Calamagrostis canadensis)5
Hairy wild rye
0-20
87
(Elymus innovatus )
3
0-12
70
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic
Nutrient Regime:
Medium
Elevation:
579-667 (649) m
Percent Slope Gradient:
3(0-15)%
Aspect:
Variable
Soil Drainage:
well to Moderately well
Ecological status score: 12
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA) n=22
Grass 288(6-660)
Forbs 312(76-830)
Shrubs 255(38-1154)
Total 846(312-2086)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.70 ha/AUM (4.05 -2.02)
0.15 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.2)
203
CMC8. Aw/Rose/Tall forb
(Populus tremuloides/Rosa acicularis/Tall forb)
n=23 This type appears to be the modal aspen community type in the absence of disturbance on mesic, medium
to rich sites. The presence of tall forbs wild sarsaparilla, fireweed, and peavine distinguish this community from
the low forb type. It is unclear why there is a difference in the tall and low forb types. Corns and Annas (1986)
recoqnized the two types in the Lower Foothills subregion. They felt the wild sarsaparilla type was moister and had
a higher nutrient regime. It has also been observed that the low forb type can be produced when the tall forb
community is lightly to moderately grazed for a number of years (Willoughby 1996).
The forage production on this community type is good. The majority of the vegetation is palatable to
livestock. This community type would be rated as primary range for domestic livestock. W ild sarsaparilla, a major
component of this community type appears to be very sensitive to any disturbance by livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Balsam Poplar
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Populus balsamifera)
Trembling Aspen
7
0-30
44
(Populus tremuloides)
Shrubs
Red osier dogwood
54
10-75
100
(Cornus stolonifera)
Wild red raspberry
2
0-7
48
(Rubus ideaus)
Prickly rose
2
0-5
70
(Rosa acicularis)
Low BUSH CRANBERRY
15
5-33
100
( Viburnum edule)
Forbs
Wild sarsaparilla
11
0-26
87
(Aralia nudicaulis)
Creamy peavine
15
0-69
96
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
Dewberry
4
1-12
100
(Rubus pubescens)
Lindley's Aster
5
0-15
91
(Aster ciliolatus)
Fireweed
2
0-2
78
( Epilobium angustifolium )
Strawberry
5
0-19
83
( Fragaria virginianu)
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
3
0-9
87
(Calamagrostis canadensis )S
2-21
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic
Nutrient Regime:
Medium to Rich
Elevation:
576-909 (683)m
Soil Drainage:
well
Ecological status score: 18
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA) n=21
Grass 216(3-812)
Forbs 466(179-1014)
Shrubs 296(60-1058)
Total 978(459-1602)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.02 ha/AUM (4.05- 1.35)
0.2 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.3)
204
CMC8a. Aw/Buffaloberry-Rose
(Populus tremuloides/Shepherdia canadensis-Rosa acicularis)
n-2 This community type was found on a mesic site at higher elevations in the Central Mixedwood subregion
west of Beaverlodge. Beckingham ( 1 993) felt the Aw/Buffaloberry type was slightly drier and had a slightly poorer
nutrient regime than the modal Aw/Rose community types. This type is providing a moderate amount of forage
for domestic livestock, but the drier site conditions and poorer nutrient status will limit regrowth after grazing.
Buffaloberry the predominant shrub species in this community type, is generally unpalatable to livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Trembling Aspen
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Populus tremuloides)
White spruce
63
50-75
100
(Picea glauca)
Shrubs
Buffaloberry
6
0-12
50
(Shepherdia canadensis)
Prickly rose
21
15-26
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Low BUSH CRANBERRY
12
11-13
100
(Viburnum edule )
Forbs
Bunchberry
7
1-13
100
(Cornus canadensis)
Creamy peavine
4
0-8
50
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
Dewberry
2
2-2
100
(Rubus pubescens)
Fireweed
2
2-2
100
(Epilobium angustifolium )
Strawberry
3
0-6
50
( Fragaria virginiana)
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
2
1-4
100
(Calamagrostis canadensis )2
-
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic
Nutrient Regime:
Medium to Poor
Elevation:
701-800 (750)m
Soil Drainage:
well
Ecological status score: 18
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA) n=2
Grass 230(60-400)
Forbs 476(364-588)
Shrubs 365(200-531)
Total 1071(955-1188)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.70 ha/AUM (4.05 -2.02)
0.15 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.2)
205
CMC9. Pb-Aw/Rose-Saskatoon
(Populus balsamifera-Populus tremuloides/Rosa acicularis-Amelanchier alnifolia)
n=4 This community type is found on mesic, well drained south facing slopes that overlook rivers and creeks.
This community is also similar to the Aw/Saskatoon-Rose community that was described in the Dry Mixedwood
subregion. Both community types occur on south and west facing slopes. Saskatoon provides important browse
for wild ungulates. Livestock also find saskatoon palatable and in areas where there is extensive cattle grazing this
species can be heavily browsed.
ENVIRONMENTAL VARIABLES
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Trembling Aspen
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Populus tremuloides )
Balsam poplar
36
0-65
75
(Populus balsamifera )
Shrubs
Prickly Rose
14
0-45
75
(Rosa acicularis)
Saskatoon
28
24-38
100
(Amelanchier alnifolia)
Snowberry
(Symphoricarpos
25
11-45
100
occidentalis )
River alder
7
1-14
100
(Alnus tenuifolia )
Willow
4
0-15
25
(Salix spp.)
Forbs
Horsetail
4
0-15
25
(Equisetum arvense)
Bunchberry
1
0-3
50
(Cornus canadensis)
Lindley's Aster
2
0-6
25
(Aster ciliolatus)
Dewberry
7
1-8
100
(Rubus pubescens)
Creamy peavine
4
0-10
75
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
Strawberry
4
0-8
75
( Fragaria virginiana)
Grasses
Mountain ricegrass
6
1-14
100
(Oryzopsis asperifolia)
Marsh Reed Grass
3
0-9
50
(Calamagrostis canadensis)!
0-14
75
Moisture Regime:
Mesic
Nutrient Regime:
Medium
Elevation:
606 m
Soil Drainage:
Well to rapidly
Slope:
26(2-50)%
Aspect:
WESTERLY
Ecological status score: 18
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA) n=4
Grass 203(0-290)
Forbs 312(240-488)
Shrubs 218(10-227)
Total 733(250-1014)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
4.05 ha/AUM (4.05- 1.35)
0.1 AUM/ac(0.1 -0.3)
206
CMC 10. Aw-Pb/Rose/Strawberry
(Populus tremuloides-Populus balsamif era/Rosa acicularis/Fragaria virginiana)
n=2 This community type appears to have been moderately grazed in the past. As grazing pressure becomes
heavy, there is a reduction in shrub, tall forbs and native grass cover and an increase in cover of low growing
forbs(dandelion and strawberry). Continued heavy grazing pressure eventually leads to a decline in all native plants
and Kentucky bluegrass, clover and dandelion will predominate in the understory (Willoughby 1996). The forage
production on this community type is only moderate and is slightly less than other Aw and Pb dominated community
types. A period of rest would greatly benefit the production on this community type.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Balsam Poplar
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Populus balsamifera)
Trembling Aspen
28
20-35
100
( Populus tremuloides )
Shrubs
Prickly Rose
45
40-50
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Red osier dogwood
4
2-6
100
(Cornus stolonifera) 4
Snowberry or Buckbrush
(Symphoricarpos
1-6
100
occidentalis)
Forbs
Strawberry
5
2-6
100
(Fragaria virginiana)
Dandelion
10
3-16
100
(Taraxacum officinale)
Dewberry or Running
3
Raspberry
2-3
100
(Rubus pubescens)
Northern bedstraw
1
1-2
100
(Galium boreale)
LlNDLEY’S ASTER
3
2-3
100
(Aster ciliolatus)
Creamy Peavine
3
2-3
100
( Lathyrus ochroleucus )
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
3
0-5
50
( Calamagrostis canadensis)\
1-2
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic To Subhygric
Nutrient Regime:
Medium
Elevation:
576-606 (578) m
Percent Slope Gradient:
Level
Soil Drainage:
well to Moderately well
Ecological status score: 12
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA) n=2
Grass 309(0-617)
Forbs 333(142-524)
Shrubs 80(23-136)
Total 721(660-782)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.70 ha/AUM (4.05 - 2.02)
0.15 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.2)
207
CMC11. Aw/Rose/Clover
(Populus tremuloides/Rosa acicularis/Trifolium spp.)
n=3 This community type is represented by aspen stands that have recieved moderate to heavy grazing pressure
for a number of years. As a result, native forbs have declined and clover has increased in the understory. A small
portion of the original shrub and tall forb understory still remains. Although, grass production has dropped, forb
production remains high due to the dense cover of clover. This community has not been grazed as long as the
Aw/Kentucky bluegrass/Clover community type (Willoughby 1996).
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean range const.
Trees
Trembling Aspen
(Populus tremuloides)
Balsam Poplar
52
30-65
100
( Populus balsamifera)
Shrubs
Wild red raspberry
6
0-18
33
( Rubus idaeus)
Prickly Rose
3
0-4
67
(Rosa acicularis)
Forbs
Clover
19
5-38
100
(Trifolium sp.)
Dandelion
12
8-18
100
(Taraxacum officinale)
Strawberry
5
4-6
100
(Fragaria virginiana)
Horsetail
3
1-4
100
(Equisetum arvense)
Wild lily-of-the-valley
2
0-4
33
( Maianthemum canadense ) 1
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
1-2
100
(Calamagrostis canadensis)6
Kentucky bluegrass
1-8
100
(Poa pr a tens is)
Creeping red fescue
4
0-10
67
( Festuca rubra)
Hairy wild rye
2
0-4
67
( Elymus innovatus)
2
1-5
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic
Nutrient Regime:
Medium
Elevation:
606-7 16 (669) m
Soil Drainage:
well
Ecological status score: 6
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA) n=3
Grass 344(260-512)
Forbs 167(130-192)
Shrubs 205(172-226)
Total 801(606-930)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
4.05 ha/AUM (8.09 -2.70)
0.1 AUM/ac (0.05 -0.15)
208
CMC12. Aw/Alder
(Populus tremuloides/ Alnus crispa)
n-14 This community type is scattered throughout the Central Mixedwood subregion on mainly mesic to
subhygric, well-drained sites. This community is likely of fire origin. Many of the plots were described from a large
fire that burned through the area in 1968. The aspen trees are also young and very dense. The high cover of aspen,
alder, and willow limits the amount of light reaching the understory. Consequently, there is little forage available
for domestic livestock. This community type would be rated as secondary or non-use range.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Trees
Trembling Aspen
(Populus tremuloides)
Shrubs
60
30-90
100
Prickly Rose
(Rosa acicularis)
Blueberry
11
0-23
92
(Vaccinium myrtilloides)
Willow
1
0-2
31
(Salix spp.)
Green alder
12
0-43
61
(Alnus crispa )
Forbs
Bunchberry
34
13-85
100
(Cornus canadensis)
Strawberry
10
0-26
92
(Fragaria virginiana)
Twinflower
2
0-6
61
(Linnaea borealis)
Dewberry
11
0-45
85
(Rubus pubescens)
Wild lily-of-the-valley
4
0-10
85
(Maianthemum canadense) 2
0-6
77
Creamy Peavine
( Lathyrus ochroleucus)
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
2
0-9
69
(Calamagrostis canadensis)5
0-19
92
Hairy wild rye
(Elymus innovatus)
Mountain ricegrass
1
0-2
39
( Oryzopsis asperfolia)
T
0-2
15
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
MESIC TO SUBHYGRIC
Nutrient Regime:
Medium to Rich
Elevation:
333-758 (635) m
Percent Slope Gradient:
5(0-15)%
Soil Drainage:
well To Moderately well
Ecological status score: 18
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA) n=14
Grass 75(8-350)
Forbs 200(2-476)
Shrubs 225(5-660)
Total 499(100-930)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
4.05 ha/AUM (4.05 - 2.02)
0.1 AUM/ac(0.1 -0.2)
209
CMC13. Aw/Willow
(Populus tremuloides/Salix spp.)
n=7 This community type is similar to the Aw/Alder-W illow-Rose community type, but lacks the cover of alder.
Previously, this community type was split into four community types (Willoughby and Downing 1995). These
included the Aw/Willow-Rose/Twinflower, Aw/Willow-Rose/Bunchberry, Aw/Rose-Willow-Pin cherry /Fire weed
and Aw/Rose-Willow-Saskatoon. All four community types appeared to have had a fire origin, but had slightly
different moisture and nutrient regimes which affected forage productivity. Productivity varied from 1326 to 1306
kg/ha on the Aw/Willow-Rose/Bunchberry and Aw/Rose-Willow-Pin cherry/Fire weed types to 606 kg/ha on the
Aw/Willow-Rose/Twinflower type. Because the sample size was so small it was felt to be impractical to split the
four community types and they were lumped into this one type for the purpose of this guide. As this community
undergoes succession forage productivity will decline.
Plant Composition CanopyCo ver( %)
Trees
Trembling Aspen
Mean
RANGE
CONST,
(Populus tremuloides)
Shrubs
Prickly Rose
46
35-68
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Willow spp.
15
11-21
100
(Salix spp.)
LOW BUSH CRANBERRY
25
15-35
100
(Viburnum edule)
Forbs
Bunchberry
3
0-12
57
( Cornus canadensis)
Wild sarsaparilla
8
0-30
86
( Aralia nudicaulis)
Creamy Peavine
5
0-18
43
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
Dewberry
4
1-10
100
(Rubus pubescens)
Wild lily-of-the-valley
8
2-12
100
( Maianthemum canadense) 4
Fireweed
3-11
100
(Epilobium angustifolium )
Twinflower
7
0-32
86
( Linnaea borealis )
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
5
0-11
71
( Calamagrostis canadensis)9
Hairy wild rye
1-17
100
(Elymus innovatus)
3
0-10
57
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
MESIC TO SUBHYGRIC
Nutrient Regime:
Medium to Rich
Elevation:
333-901 (631) m
Soil Drainage:
Well to Moderately well
Ecological status score: 18
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA) n=6
Grass 420(2-708)
Forbs 446(262-552)
Shrubs 193(107-378)
Total 1060(606-1367)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.70 ha/AUM (4.05 - 2.02)
0.15 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.2)
210
CMC14. Aw-Pb/Red osier dogwood-Rose
(Populus tremuloides-P . balsamifera/Cornus stolonifera-Rosa acicularis)
n=ll This community is typical of river floodplains throughout the Central Mixedwood subregion. This
community has a subhygric moisture and rich nutrient regime. Beckingham and Archibald (1996) found this
community type on mid to lower slope topographic positions or near water courses where they recieve nutrient-rich
seepage or flood waters for a portion of the growing season. This community type is one of the most productive in
the Central Mixedwood, but the high cover of shrubs limits access to livestock. The high cover of tall growing
shrubs (alder, red osier dogwood) also limits the growth of low shrubs, forbs and grass the principle forage species
for domestic livestock in deciduous forests. As a result, this community should be rated as secondary or non-use
range.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Trembling Aspen
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
(Populus tremuloides)
Balsam poplar
38
0-70
90
{Populus balsamifera)
Shrubs
Prickly Rose
31
0-80
80
(Rosa acicularis)
Red osier dogwood
9
0-26
90
(Cornus stolonifera)
Low BUSH CRANBERRY
20
8-40
100
{Viburnum edule)
Forbs
Lady fern
6
0-30
80
(Athyrium filix-femina)
Wild sarsaparilla
1
0-11
10
(Aralia nudicaulis)
Dewberry
5
0-20
70
(Rubus pubescens)
Wild lily-of-the-valley
2
0-6
60
{Maianthemum canadense) 2
Creamy Peavine
0-10
60
{Lathyrus ochroleucus )
Tall lungwort
3
1-10
100
(Mertensia paniculata)
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
3
0-10
90
(Calamagrostis canadensis )8
1-20
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime:
Rich
Elevation:
600-606 (604)M
Slope percent:
2(1-3)%
Soil Drainage:
Moderately well
Ecological status score: 18
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA) n=5
Grass 6(2-22)
Forbs 212(66-372)
Shrubs 214(20-358)
Total 431(226-714)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally non-Use
4.05 ha/AUM (8.09 - 2.70)
0.1 AUM/ac (0.05 -0.15)
211
CMC 15. Aw/Horsetail-Cow parsnip
(Populus tremuloides/Equisetum arvense-Heracleum lanatum)
n= 1 This community type occupies lowland sites adjacent to black spruce and willow lowlands. It is very moist
and nutrient rich. Horsetail types in other subregions also tend to be moister and richer than the modal Aw/Rose
types. This site is very productive and produces a large amount of forage for domestic livestock. Horsetail is
generally unpalatable to livestock and can be poisonous to horses. In contrast cow parsnip is very palatable to
livestock. This community type would therefore be rated as primary or secondary range for domestic livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Trees
Trembling Aspen
Mean
RANGE const.
Moisture Regime:
SUBHYGRIC TO HYGRIC
(Populus tremuloides)
Shrubs
Wild red raspberry
12
100
Nutrient Regime:
Rich
(Rubus idaeus )
Forbs
Cow PARSNIP
3
100
Elevation:
758 m
(Heracleum lanatum)
Fireweed
30
100
Soil Drainage:
(Epilobium angustifolium )
Horsetail
1
100
Moderately well
(Equisetum arvense)
Tall lungwort
25
100
Ecological status score: 18
( Mertensia paniculata)
Tall larkspur
18
100
FORAGE PRODUCTION(KG/HA)
( Delphinium glaucum)
Grasses
Marsh Reed Grass
13
100
Grass 1292
Forbs 1440
Total 2732
(Calamagrostis canadensis)41
100
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.02 ha/AUM (4.05- 1.35)
0.2 AUM/ac(0.1 -0.3)
212
CMC16. Aspen/ Smooth brome
(Populus tremuloides/Bromus inermis)
n=l This community type is similar to the previously described red osier dogwood dominated community type,
but has a high cover of smooth brome in the understory. Smooth brome is an introduced grass that can increase with
increased grazing pressure, but smooth brome is also highly invasive and can invade into ungrazed areas. The
invasion of non-native invaders onto the site makes this community moderately productive for domestic livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean Range Const.
Trees
Trembling Aspen
(Populus tremuloides)
80
100
Shrubs
Prickly Rose
(Rosa acicularis)
3
100
Snowberry
(Symphoricarpos
occidentalis)
3
100
Red osier dogwood
(Cornus stolonifera)
1
_
100
Forbs
Tall lungwort
(Mertensia paniculata)
10
100
Veiny meadow rue
(Thalictrum venulosum)
3
.
100
Creamy Peavine
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
3
-
100
Grasses
Smooth brome
(Bromus inermis)
50
100
Marsh reed grass
( Calamagrostis canadensis)3
_
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic-Subhygric
Nutrient Regime:
Medium to Rich
Elevation:
600 m
Soil Drainage:
Moderately well
Ecological status score: 0 or modified
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA)
Total: 1 100*Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
4.05 ha/AUM (4.05 - 2.02)
0.1 AUM/ac(0.1 -0.2)
213
CMC 17. Aspen/Thimbleberry
(Populus tremuloides/Rubus parviflora)
n=3 This community type was described on an east facing slope overlooking the Smoky River south of Grande
Prairie. This community type is generally rare within the Central Mixedwood Subregion, and is more commonly
found within the Montane Subregion south of the Crowsnest Pass. This community type is found on nutrient rich
seepage areas. Forage production of this type can be quite high because of the favourable moisture and nutrient
conditions. However, Thimbleberry is generally unpalatable to livestock and useable forage production is quite low
due to the predominance of thimbleberry and is generally considered to be non-use for domestic livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Trembling Aspen
Mean
Range
Const.
(Populus tremuloides)
Balsam Poplar
31
23-45
100
(Populus balsamifera)
Shrubs
Thimbleberry
4
0-7
67
(Rubus parviflorus)
Prickly Rose
44
18-85
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Low Bush Cranberry
7
4-9
100
( Viburnum edule)
Forbs
Wild Sarsaparilla
4
1-7
100
(Aralia nudicaulis)
Bunchberry
4
2-5
100
(Cornus canadensis)
Creamy Peavine
6
4-6
100
( Lathyrus ochroleucus)
Lily-of-the-valley
2
1-2
100
(Maianthemum canadense) 2
Dewberry
1-2
100
(Rubus pubescens)
Grasses
Mountain Rice Grass
1
1-2
100
( Oryzopsis asperifolia)
Marsh reed grass
6
1-13
100
( Calamagrostis canadensis)5
1-6
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Subhygric
Nutrient Regime:
Rich
Elevation:
650 -698 (675) m
Soil Drainage:
Well - Moderately well
Ecological status score: 18
FORAGE PR0DUCTI0N(KG/HA) n=3
Grass 71(0-214)
Forbs 195(74-326)
Shrubs 469(204-988)
Total 735(288-1172)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.5 ha/AUM (6.7-1.62)
0.16 AUM/ac (0.06 -0.25)
214
CENTRAL MIXEDWOOD SUBREGION
CONIFEROUS AND MIXEDWOOD FOREST COMMUNITIES
Photo 10. The Balsam fir- White spruce/Moss community type is the climatic climax community
for the Central Mixedwood subregion.
215
CONIFEROUS AND MIXEDWOOD FORESTS
The mixedwood and coniferous community types described in this guide represent five
ecological sites as described by Beckingham and Archibald (1996). On sites with subxeric
moisture and poor nutrient regimes, coarse textured, sandy soils open stands of jack pine
generally dominate (Pj/Alder, Pj/Bearberry). These community types commonly have a carpet of
lichens covering the forest floor and a thin organic layer typically less than 5 cm thick
(Beckingham and Archibald 1996).
On slightly moister sites with submesic moisture and medium nutrient regimes aspen grows in
conjunction with jack pine to form the Aw-Pj/Bearberry/Lichen community type. The soils of this
community type continue to be coarse-textured but the moisture and nutrient conditions are more
favourable to the growth of aspen.
The mesic/medium sites are generally dominated by white spruce (Balsam fir-Sw/Moss,
Sw/Moss, Sw/Creeping red fescue) and mixedwood communities of aspen and spruce (Aw-
Sw/Rose/Low forb). These communities represent the reference ecosite for the Boreal
Mixedwood subregion (Beckingham and Archibald 1996). Generally, these sites have moderately
fine to fine-textured till or glaciolacustrine parent materials. Pioneer deciduous species (aspen,
balsam poplar and birch) are replaced with white spruce and balsam fir as these sites develop
successionally. With succession shade tolerant plants take over the herbaceous layer as conifers
dominate the canopy. These shade tolerant species are unproductive and often unpalatable for
domestic livestock. Forage productivity declines from 2.0 ha/AUM in a deciduous community to
4.0 - 8. 1 ha/AUM in a mixedwood community to less than 40 ha/AUM in a conifer community.
Black spruce and larch communities generally dominate on wetter sites with subhygric to
subhydric moisture regimes and poor to medium nutrient regimes to form the Sb/Bog birch and
Sb/Labrador tea/Moss community types. Larch is more tolerant of excessive moisture and is
indicative of an enriched nutrient status, while black spruce is typical in areas of stagnating
ground water with poor nutrient status (Hay et al. 1985). Generally, these community types are
considered non-use for domestic livestock.
Beckingham and Archibald (1996), provide a good description on how the conifer and
mixedwood communities are arranged in the landscape.
216
Table 10. Conifer and mixedwood communities of the Central Mixedwood subregion
4>
"3
W) 03
© P
3 <
C/5 w
■S P
§ 3
*3 2
C/5
o»
WD
S3
a
O
©
I
©
©
©
r-
©
■'tf-
o
©,
r-
©
^r
T3 C3
© +-
9m o
Cm H
PM
£
3
3
3
3
o
U
Vh
1)
T3
<
0?
a
D
0
J
■&
<u
t
<u
PQ
S?
1
C/5
i
I
9m
<3
fl
’«
CJ
43
S-H
£
£
O
a>
C/3
0
1
1
£
C/5
*►>
<S
43
a
C3
9m
(J
O
s
£
C/5
4.
a
os
cn
13
PQ
S4>
pQ
I £
© a
U a
c« ©
© ©
<N
gfi 43
CO
w> 43
r-
W> 43
u->
Q
5 CM
Q
© a
Q
© CM
s
Q
S
o a>
W 42
SB
© 4>
(J -+M
£
© a>
o 4m
§
£
o
W *3
U
W *3
U
W *3
u
O
a
o
*5jd
©
o
W
73
0>
3
o
*<»
a
3
.©
-a S
217
Ecological d3 grazed spruce
site phase
CMD6 Sw/Creeping red fescue 625 2.70(0.15) 4.05-2.02(0.1-0.2)
o
r-
■"t
o'
r»
o'
£
m
*3
a>
1/3
on
O
03
!Z3
o
Cfl
2m
a
O
79
E
"3
9-i
<u
PU
a
£
a>
-M
o
72
79
<u
<U
<Z3
*3
•M
4>
(*>
'is
t/j
9h
o
2m
O
-a
A
2m
X
9-1
•a
OC
o
X
-o
0)
9h
o
*2
9-1
X
o
o
a
T3
a>
X
O
Vh
X
W>
o
X
C3
CO
i
>
2m
-W
X
2m
o
CQ
G
£
CO
i-H
X
<
X
m
X
in
a
*oc
a>
/
«
X
CN
« «
rj C«
■9 5
oo
3 SI
rj cn
9 5
©
*5jd
©
on
«
X
o
cu
5
5 o.
O
® a
Q
a
5
©
CJ
a>
s
O ^
O -2
s
o a>
O +M
s
"©
©
©
s
W
*3
u
W '3
U
W *3
u
W
U
0>
*c
5c
>>
X
x
s 2
cn O
... a
B
st
-3
a»
s
*C
■a
x
218
Key to Conifer and Mixedwood Types - Central Mixedwood Subregion
1 . Wet, lowland sites dominated by black spruce 2
Upland mesic sites or well drained sandy sites 3
2. Bog birch, sedge dominate understory (rich fen) Sb/Bog Birch (CMD10)
Labrador tea dominates understory, larch
present (poor fen) Sb/Labrador Tea/Peat Moss (CMD9)
3. Mesic sites dominated by spruce, aspen, balsam poplar (maybe co-dominated by jack
pine) 4
Dry, sandy sites dominated by jack pine 1 1
4. Mixedwood types, mixture of conifer and deciduous trees 5
White spruce or balsam fir dominated types 8
5.
Aw-Sw mixedwood, typical mesic sites 6
Drier sites with Jack pine, Aw-Pj dominated Aw-Pj/Bearberry/Lichen (CMD3)
6. Rose, low forb, hazelnut dominated, typical mesic sites 7
Labrador tea dominated, poorer nutrient sites Aw-Sw/Labrador Tea/Moss (CMD8)
7. Rose, low forb dominated Aw-Sw/Rose/Low Forb (CMD7)
Hazelnut dominated Aw-Sw/Hazelnut (CMD11)
8. Balsam fir dominates(old growth forest) Balsam Fir-Sw/Moss (CMD4)
White spruce dominates overstory 9
9. Spruce with agronomic species in the understory Sw/Creeping Red Fescue (CMD6)
Spruce with native species in the understory 10
10. Moss dominates understory Sw/Moss (CMD5)
Horsetail dominates understory Sw/Horsetail(CMD12)
11. Jack pine overstory, bearberry or lichen dominates understory, alder low in cover or
absent Pj/Bearberry (CMD2)
Jack pine overstory, alder dominates understory Pj/Alder (CMD1)
219
—
CMD1. Pj/Alder
(Pinus banksiana/ Alnus crispa)
n=l This community type is found on dry, rapidly drained, sandy soils with a poor nutrient status. Consequently,
production is quite low. Cattle will utilize these areas due to the easy access, however overutilization will quickly
deplete the area of forage. This community type would be rated as secondary or non-use range.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Jack Pine
Mean
RANGE
Const.
(Pinus banksiana)
Shrubs
Green alder
45
100
(Alnus crispa)
Prickly rose
41
-
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Blueberry
5
-
100
(Vaccinium myrtilloid.es)
Forbs
Twin-flower
13
100
(Linnaea borealis)
Bearberry
4
-
100
(Arctostaphylos uva-ursi)
Wild sarsaparilla
T
-
100
(Aralia nudicaulis)
Wild lily-of-the-valley
3
-
100
( Maianthemum canadense) 4
Grasses
Sedges
100
(Car ex spp.)
Hairy Wild Rye
4
-
100
(Elymus innovatus)
Northern ricegrass
4
-
100
(Oryzopsis pungens)
5
-
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
SUBXERIC
Nutrient Regime
Poor
Elevation:
606 m
Soil Drainage:
Rapidly
Percent Slope Gradient:
2-8
Ecological status score: 18
Forage Production (kg/ha) n=i
GRASS 0
FORBS 40
SHRUBS 86
Total 126
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally non-use
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47 - 40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01 -0.01)
220
CMD2. Pj/Bearberry
(Pinus banksiana/Arctostaphylos uva-ursi)
n=2 This community represents a jack pine forest which is very similar to the Pj/Alder community type. Like
the previous community cattle will utilize these areas due to the easy access, however overutilization will quickly
deplete the forage supply. This community type would be rated as secondary range and should be grazed on a
single rotation per year.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean range Const.
Trees
Jack Pine
(Pinus banksiana)
Trembling Aspen
38
100
30-45
( Populus tremuloides)
Shrubs
Bog cranberry
T
0-1
50
(Vaccinium vitis-idaea)
Prickly rose
6
0-11
50
(Rosa acicularis)
Blueberry
T
0-1
50
(Vaccinium myrtilloides)
Forbs
Bearberry
2
0-3
50
(Arctostaphylos uva-ursi)
Northern bedstraw
18
16-19
100
(Galium boreale)
Wild lily-of-the-v alley
T
0-1
50
(Maianthemum canadense)
Philadelphia fleabane
1
0-1
100
(Erigeron philadelphicus)
Grasses
Hairy Wild Rye
1
0-1
50
(Elymus innovatus)
Sedge spp.
2
0-3
50
Carex spp.)
Northern ricegrass
6
0-11
100
{Oryzopsis pungens )
Mosses
2
1-2
100
Moss spp.
18
0-35
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Submesic
Nutrient Regime:
SUBMESOTROPHIC
Elevation:
576-671 (624) m
Soil Drainage:
Rapidly
Percent Slope Gradient:
10%
Ecological status score: 18
Forage Production (kg/ha) n=2
grass 25(0-50)
forbs 47(40-54)
Shrubs 41(10-72)
Total 113(100-126)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally non-use
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47 - 40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.0 1 -0.01)
221
CMD3. Aw-Pj/Bearberry/Lichen
(Populus tremuloides-Pinus banksiana/Arctostaphylos uva-ursi/Lichen)
n=2 This community type represents a aspen forest with a secondary canopy of jack pine. It is very similar to
the Pj/Bearberry community type, but it is found on slightly moister soils with better nutrients. These conditions
favour the growth of aspen. Like the previous community cattle will utilize these areas due to the easy access,
however overutilization will quickly deplete the forage supply. This community type would be rated as secondary
range and should be grazed on a single rotation per year.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean range Const.
Trees
Jack pine
Moisture Regime:
Submesic
(Pin us banksiana)
Trembling Aspen
15
10-20
100
Nutrient Regime:
SUBMESOTROPHIC
( Populus tremuloides )
Shrubs
Bog cranberry
20
15-25
100
Elevation:
576 m
(Vaccinium vitis-idaea)
Prickly rose
4
0-8
50
Soil Drainage:
(Rosa acicularis)
Blueberry
1
0-1
50
Well
(Vaccinium myrtilloides)
Forbs
BEARBERRY
8
0-15
50
Ecological status score: 18
Forage Production (kg/ha) n=2
(Arctostaphylos uva-ursi)
Twinflower
8
2-12
100
GRASS 28
(Linnaea borealis)
Wild lily-of-the-valley
T
0-1
50
FORBS 46
SHRUBS 134
(Maianthemum canadense)2
TOADFLAX
0-3
50
Total 208
( Comandra umbellata )
Grasses
Slender wheat grass
1
0-1
100
(Agropyron trachycaulum)2
Northern ricegrass
0-4
50
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
(Oryzopsis pungens)
Sedge
2
0-4
50
Generally non-use
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47 - 40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01 -0.01)
(Car ex spp.)
4
0-7
100
Lichens
49
16-81
100
222
CMD4. Balsam fir-Sw/Moss
(Abies balsamea-Picea glauca/ Moss)
n=l This is a mature balsam fir forest which represents the climax vegetation for the area. The northerly aspect
of this community type has probably protected the site from past disturbance by fires and allowed the community
to undergo succession. The high canopy of balsam fir and spruce limits the light reaching the forest floor, limiting
the growth of grasses and forbs. As a result, the forage productivity of this community type is very low. This
community would be considered non-use.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
White Spruce
Mean
range Const.
(Picea glauca)
Balsam fir
25
100
(Abies balsamea)
Shrubs
Prickly rose
40
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Forbs
Bunchberry
T
100
(Cornus canadensis)
Twinflower
10
100
(Linnaea borealis)
Woodland horsetail
4
100
(Equisetum sylvaticum)
Running clubmoss
6
100
( Lycopodium clavatum )
Mosses
Feather moss
3
100
( Pleurozium schreberi)
Stairstep moss
51
100
(Hylocomium splendens)
37
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic
Nutrient Regime:
MESOTROPHIC
Elevation:
333 m
Soil Drainage:
well
Percent Slope Gradient:
5%
Aspect:
Northerly
Ecological status score: 18
Forage Production (kg/ha) n=i
GRASS
0
FORBS
102
SHRUBS
0
Total
102
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally non-use
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47 - 40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01 -0.01)
223
CMD5. Sw/Moss
(Picea glauca/Moss)
n=7 This community is considered successionally mature. A more continuous cover of feather moss and
presence of balsam fir would bring this community type closer to the climax community described previously. The
limited light penetration in this community discourages understory development, making this a non-use area for
domestic livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean range Const.
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic
Trees
White Spruce
(Picea glauca)
Trembling Aspen
49
20-70
100
(Populus tremuloides)
Shrubs
Prickly rose
4
1-13
50
(Rosa acicularis)
Red osier dogwood
4
0-10
86
( Cornus stolonifera)
Low BUSH CRANBERRY
2
1-9
33
( Viburnum edule )
Forbs
Bunchberry
1
1-3
71
(Cornus canadensis)
Field Horsetail
7
2-14
86
(Equisetum arvense)
Twinflower
1
0-3
29
(Linnaea borealis) 7
Palmate leaved coltsfoot
0-18
71
(Petasites palmatus)
DEWBERRY
3
0-5
85
(Rubus pubescens)
Fireweed
1
0-3
57
(Epilobium angustifolium)
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
1
0-3
29
(Calamagrostis canadensis)\
Moss
Stair step moss
0-2
71
(Hylocomium splendens)
Feathermoss
13
0-49
19
( Pleurozium schreberi)
1
0-7
17
Nutrient Regime:
MESOTROPHIC
Elevation:
150-606 (415) m
Soil Drainage:
well
Percent Slope Gradient:
1%
Ecological status score: 18
Forage Production(kg/ha) n=6
GRASS 10(0-40)
FORBS 78(0-172)
SHRUBS 54(0-158)
Total 143(36-370)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally non-use
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47 - 40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01 -0.01)
224
CMD6. Sw/Creeping red fescue
(Picea glauca/Festuca rubra)
n=l This community type represents an old cultivated field which has been planted to white spruce. The canopy
of spruce is beginning to shade the understory causing a decline in productivity, however, there is still enough forage
for grazing between the spruce trees.
Environmental Variables
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean range Const. Moisture Regime:
Mesic
Trees
Trembling Aspen
(Populus tremuloides)
White Spruce
1
-
100
(Picea glauca)
Balsam poplar
35
-
100
(Populus balsamifera )
Shrubs
Snowberry
(Symphoricarpos
1
100
occidentalis)
Prickly Rose
5
-
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Forbs
Strawberry
10
100
(Fragaria virginiana)
Clover
11
-
100
(Trifolum hybridum)
Dandelion
5
-
100
(Taraxacum officinale)
Lindley’s aster
5
-
100
(Aster ciliolatus)
Grasses
Creeping red fescue
3
100
(Festuca rubra)
Hairy wild rye
29
-
100
(Elymus innovatus )
Slender wheat grass
12
-
100
(Agropyron trachycaulum) 1 1
Sedge
-
100
(Care x spp.)
3
-
100
Nutrient Regime:
MESOTROPHIC
Elevation:
606 m
Soil Drainage:
well
Ecological status score: modified
Forage Production (kg/ha) n=i
GRASS
525
FORBS
100
SHRUBS
0
Total
625
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.70 ha/AUM (4.05 -2.02)
0.15 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.2)
225
CMD7. Aw-Sw/Rose/Low forb
(Populus tremuloides-Picea glauca/ Rosa acicularis/Low forb)
n=8 This community type is dominated by aspen in the primary canopy and by spruce in the secondary canopy.
It occupies similar site conditions to the Aw/Rose/Low forb community type. As spruce succeeds into the canopy
it reduces the amount of light reaching the forest floor reducing the growth of shrubs, forbs and grass. This
community type would be rarely used by livestock and should be rated as secondary range.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
White Spruce
Mean
RANGE
Const.
(Picea glauca)
Trembling Aspen
33
9-80
100
(Populus tremuloides)
Balsam Poplar
32
20-60
100
(Populus balsamifera)
Shrubs
Snowberry
(Symphoricarpos
2
0-10
29
occidentalis)
Prickly Rose
1
0-4
29
(Rosa acicularis)
Bracted honeysuckle
12
1-19
100
(Lonicera involcrata)
Buffaloberry
3
0-15
43
(Shepherdia canadensis)
Forbs
Twinflower
3
0-7
71
(Linnaea borealis)
Bunchberry
4
0-5
86
(Cornus canadensis)
WlNTERGREEN
6
1-12
100
(Pyrola asarifolia)
Dewberry
1
0-3
52
(Rubus pubscens)
Bishop’s cap
2
0-4
71
(Mitella nuda)
Grasses
HAIRY WILD RYE
1
0-2
57
(Elymus innovatus )
Marsh reed grass
4
0-10
86
( Calamagrostis canadensis )3
Mosses
0-9
71
MOSS SPP.
4
4-7
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic
Nutrient Regime:
Mesotrophic
Elevation:
150-853 (635) m
Soil Drainage:
Well
Ecological status score: 18-12
Forage Production (kg/ha) n=8
grass 128(2-308)
FORBS 190(70-418)
shrubs 169(50-308)
Total 487(160-1034)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
4.05 ha/AUM (4.05 -2.02)
0.1 AUM/ac (0. 1 -0.2)
226
CMD8. Aw-Sw/Labrador tea/Moss
(Populus tremuloides-Picea glauca/Ledum groenlandicum/Moss)
n=l This community type has relatively poor nutrient status. Labrador tea and bog cranberry are indicative of
acidic soil surface soil conditions. Beckingham and Archibald (1996) described this ecosite with a jack pine and
black spruce dominated overstory. The moisture and nutrient conditions of this community type are probably better
than their ecosite, which allows aspen and white spruce to dominate the overstory, but the soil conditions are poorer
than the Aw-Sw/Rose/Low forb community type. This community type produces little palatable forage and therefore
would be classified as non-use.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Trembling Aspen
Mean
range Const.
(Populus tremuloides)
White spruce
55
100
(Picea glauca)
Shrubs
Labrador tea
40
100
(Ledum groenlandicum.)
Blueberry
11
100
(Vaccinium myrtilloides)
Bog cranberry
8
100
( Vaccinium vitis-idaea )
Forbs
Bunchberry
4
100
(Cornus canadensis)
Twinflower
5
100
(Linnaea borealis)
Bastard’s toadflax
5
100
(Geocaulon lividum)
Cow-wheat
3
100
( Melampyrum lineare)
Grasses
Hairy wild rye
3
100
(Elymus innovatus)
Mosses
1
100
Moss spp.
67
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Submesic- Mesic
Nutrient Regime:
Submesotrophic-Mesotrophic
Elevation:
333 m
Soil Drainage:
Moderately well
Ecological status score: 18
Forage Production (kg/ha) n=i
GRASS 0
FORBS 96
SHRUBS 96
Total 192
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally non-use
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47 - 40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01 -0.01)
227
CMD9. Sb/Labrador tea/Moss
(Picea mariana/Ledum groenlandicum/Moss)
n=8 This community type appears to be related to the bog ecosite described by Beckingham and Archibald
(1996). The bog ecosite commonly has organic soils consisting of slowly decomposing peat moss. This community
type is considered non-use for livestock, due to the lack of forage and poor accessibility.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Larch
Mean
RANGE
Const.
(Larix laricina)
Black Spruce
14
10-75
50
(Picea mariana)
Shrubs
WILLOW SPP.
31
5-65
88
(Salix spp.)
Labrador tea
5
1-20
38
(Ledum groenlandicum)
Forbs
Cloudberry
29
7-61
100
(Rubus chamaemorus)
Horsetail
8
13-35
38
(Equisetum arvense)
Dwarf scouring rush
4
7-23
25
(Equisetum scirpoides)
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
1
2-3
25
(Calamagrostis canadensis)3
Sedge
3-10
50
(Car ex aurea)
Water sedge
4
7-14
38
(Care x aquatilis
Mosses
3
6-14
25
(Sphagnum spp)
44
75-99
63
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Subhydric
Nutrient Regime:
Oligotrophic
Elevation:
579-636 (615) m
Soil Drainage:
poorly
Ecological status score: 18
Forage Production (kg/ha) n=8
grass 52(0-192)
forbs 61(0-286)
SHRUBS 91(0-200)
Total 228(30-678)
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally non-use
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47 - 40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01 -0.01)
228
CMD10. Sb/Bog birch
(Picea mariana/Betula glandulosa)
n=l This community type is part ot the poor fen ecosite (Beckingham and Archibald 1996) because it has an
intermediate nutrient regime between the bog and rich fen ecosites. Drainage on this community type is poor to very
poor, but has some movement of water through the site. This community type has a well developed shrub layer and
the grass layer consists mainly of marsh reed grass and sedge species. The productivity of this type is moderate, but
the high water table limits access to domestic livestock. This community would be rated as non-use.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean range Const.
Trees
Larch
(Larix laricina)
Black Spruce
10
100
(Picea mariana)
Shrubs
Willow spp.
5
100
(Salix spp.)
Bog birch
30
100
(Betula glandulosa)
Blueberry
24
100
( Vaccinium myrtilloides)
Forbs
Small bog cranberry
12
100
(Oxy coccus microcarpus)
Horsetail
57
100
(Equisetum arvense) 2
Three leaved Solomon’s-seal
100
(Smilicina trifolia)
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
5
100
(Calamagrostis canadensis )6
Sedge
100
(Carex aurea)
Mosses
2
100
{Sphagnum spp.)
47
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Subhydric
Nutrient Regime:
Oligotrophic
Elevation:
576 m
Soil Drainage:
poorly
Ecological status score: 18
Forage Production (kg/ha) n=i
GRASS
104
FORBS
90
SHRUBS
400
Total
594
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally non-use
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47 - 40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01 -0.01)
229
CMD11. Sw/Beaked hazelnut/Moss
(Picea glauca/Corylus cornuta/ Moss)
n=l This is a mixedwood forest which is approaching climax. The northerly aspect of this community type has
probably protected the site from past disturbance by fires and allowed the community to undergo succession. The
high canopy of spruce limits the light reaching the forest floor, limiting the growth of grasses and forbs. As a result,
the forage productivity of this community type is very low. This community would be considered non-use.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
White Spruce
Mean
RANGE CONST.
(Picea glauca)
Trembling Aspen
30
100
(Populus tremuloides)
Shrubs
Beaked Hazelnut
40
100
(Corylus cornuta)
Red osier dogwood
30
100
(Cornus stolonifera)
Prickly rose
10
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Forbs
Wild sarsaparilla
10
100
(Aralia nudicaulis)
Showy aster
20
100
(Aster conspicuus)
Twinflower
3
100
(Linnaea borealis)
Bunchberry
3
100
( Cornus canadensis)
Mosses
3
100
Moss spp.
73
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic
Nutrient Regime:
MESOTROPHIC
Elevation:
606 m
Soil Drainage:
well
Ecological status score: 18
Forage Production(kg/ha)
Total 206*Estimate
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
8.09 ha/AUM (2.70 -40.47)
0.05 AUM/ac (0.15 -0.01)
230
CMD12. Sw/Horsetail
(Picea glauca/Equisetum arvense)
n=l This community type is wet and nutrient rich. These sites are commonly found on fluvial or glaciolacustrine
parent materials where flooding or seepage enhances the substrate nutrient supply. With high water tables, wet soil
conditions organic matter tends to accumulate which favours the growth of horsetails. Generally horsetails are
unpalatable to livestock and the wet ground conditions limit access. Consequently, this community type should be rated
as non-use.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Trees
White Spruce
Mean
RANGE
CONST.
Moisture Regime:
hygric
(Picea glauca)
Balsam fir
80
“
100
Nutrient Regime:
(Abies balsamea )
Shrubs
Prickly rose
1
100
Permesotrophic
Elevation:
(Rosa acicularis)
River alder
1
-
100
600 m
(Alnus tenuifolia)
Bracted honeysuckle
3
-
100
Soil Drainage:
poor to Moderately well
(Lonicera involucrata)
Forbs
Dewberry
3
100
Ecological status score: 18
(Rubus pubescens)
Horsetail
3
-
100
Forage Production(kg/ha)
(Equisetum sylvaticum) 40
Three leaved solomons seal
-
100
Total 560*Estimate
(Smilacina trifolia)
Bunchberry
10
'
100
(Cornus canadensis)
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
3
100
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
Generally non-use
(Calamagrostis canadensis) 10
-
100
40.47 ha/AUM (40.47 - 40.47)
0.01 AUM/ac (0.01 -0.01)
231
CENTRAL MIXEDWOOD SUBREGION
FOREST CUTBLOCK COMMUNITIES
Photo 11. The Aspen/Rose/Marsh Reedgrass/Fireweed (CME1) community type develops after
clear-cut logging of the modal Aspen/Rose/Tall Forb (CMC8) community.
232
FOREST CUTBLOCK COMMUNITIES
Timber harvesting affects the understory community through removal of the tree layer
(overstory) as well as through root destruction, soil compaction, scarification, forest floor
displacement, and understory destruction. These mechanical disturbances can alter the energy
flows between soil and plants which in turn, can alter the tree regeneration, species diversity and
production. Logging (overstory removal) will often increase understory production by eliminating
competition between overstory and understory species for light and nutrients. Any increases in
production as a result of sustainable yield timber harvest are not included in the calculation of the
overall carrying capacity of the disposition because these increases are only temporary and are not
always available to livestock. To determine the rates (ha/AUM) for grazing on harvested
cutblocks the carrying capacity is based on the undisturbed (prior to harvest) mature stand. For
example, (CME1) Aspen/Rose/Marsh Reedgrass/Fireweed has an average production at 2-8 years
following harvesting of 1838 kg/ha; however to ensure sustainable timber and forage production a
conservative approach is taken by limiting the stocking rate to the pre-harvest plant community
Aspen/Rose/Tall Forb (CMC8) average production of 978 kg/ha or 2.0 ha/AUM (0.2 AUM/ac).
Although sustained timber yield cutblocks can be productive primary range for both livestock and
wildlife, careful management of these areas is required to ensure that both forest regeneration is
successful and that livestock pre-harvest stocking levels are maintained. With good range
management cutblocks can be grazed without negatively impacting regeneration however, in
extreme circumstances, both livestock and wildlife grazing can affect regeneration success. In
addition, timber harvesting has the potential to negatively impact range management success. It
has been demonstrated in the Central Mixedwood that if given an alternative, livestock will avoid
regenerating deciduous cutblocks, resulting in a net loss of available AUMs and an increase in
grazing pressure on alternative plant community types. It is strongly recommended that these
potential impacts are discussed by the stakeholders involved and a mitigative agreement reached
prior to the integrated grazing and/or harvesting activity taking place.
233
Table 11. Forest cutblock community types described in the Central Mixedwood subregion
-a CS
O +-
V ©
ft H
<3i
ft
d
u
*oc
£
"o
(j
w
-a
'djd
£
<
£
o
G
d
V
W
X
C«
.Q
■
£
o
vo
00
On
(N
co
co
<N
ov
0
00
VO
m
’ 1
1
’ 1
1—1
C/3
£
<
I
<D
N
d
X
T3
<L)
44
S)
<D
P^
■§ s
•5 3
4>
E ^
T3 E
d
C/3
◄
-a
13
C/3
O
-3
O
1
S-H
a>
-a
4>
00
C/3
d
4>
N
P4
£
<
&
W3
c3
00
O
P^
£
C
kb
<d
<9
P4
d
Vi
DC
i-H
T3
>
0
0
DC
O
T3
0
<D
<U
O
44
Oh
I
£
<
'53
I
0)
3
O
33
"d i>
75 ©
75 «
V
(J V)
•- d
ej t/3
•G d
.a 3
0/
r\
w> -G
CO
W» J3
<N
w° -a
d"
■-=*
efl
3 ft
W
DJ
3 ft
a
5 ft
2
G
0 a>
<4
§
O <u
0 £
§
0 a>
tj %
G
W ’S
0
0
W *5
0
W *£
0
234
Key to Forest Cutblock Types - Central Mixedwood Subregion
1. Mesic sites dominated by Rose, Clover, Hazelnut or Marsh Reedgrass 2
Very moist, nutrient rich sites dominated by Alder and Honeysuckle
Green Alder-Honeysuckle/ A w-Pb (CME4)
2. Rose, Fireweed, Marsh Reedgrass and/or Clover dominate the site 3
Hazelnut is dominant or co-dominant in the shrub layer
Beaked Hazelnut/ Aw/Wild Sarsaparilla (CME3)
3. Moderately grazed or ungrazed sites dominated by Rose and Marsh Reedgrass
Aw/Rose/Marsh Reedgrass/Fireweed (CME1)
Heavily grazed sites dominated by Clover and Dandelion
Clover/Rose/Marsh Reedgrass (CME2)
235
CME1. Aspen/Rose/Marsh Reedgrass/Fireweed
(Populus tremuloides/Rosa acicularis/Calamagrostis canadensis /Epilobium angustifolium)
n=4 This community type formed after clear-cut logging an Aspen/Rose dominated community type. The logging
probably occurred two to eight years ago. After logging, more light reaches the understory and grasses and forbs are
able to flourish. As the aspen reestablishes itself, it rapidly gains dominance on the site. As aspen forms and fills in an
overstory canopy, marsh reed grass will decline and rose, along with other shrubs and forbs, will become more abundant.
This community type provides fairly good grazing opportunities in its early stages, but gradually excludes grazing
livestock as the aspen saplings grow taller and form barriers to livestock movement through the area. This community
type is in good to excellent range condition.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
Trees
Trembling Aspen
RANGE
CONST.
(Populus tremuloides)
Balsam Poplar
8
4-11
100
( Populus balsamifera )
Shrubs
Prickly rose
3
0-10
25
(Rosa acicularis)
Low Bush Cranberry
7
1-11
100
(Viburnum edule)
Bracted honeysuckle
4
0-9
75
(Lonicera involucrata)
Forbs
Fireweed
2
0-7
50
(Epilobium angustifolium)
Dewberry
5
3-7
100
(Rubus pubescens)
Creamy Peavine
4
1-6
100
(Lathyrus ochroleucus)
Lindley’s aster
3
0-4
75
(Aster ciliolatus)
Wild sarsaparilla
3
0-9
75
(Aralia nudicaulis)
Wild Strawberry
1
0-1
75
(Fragaria virginiana)
Northern Bedstraw
3
1-10
100
(Galium boreale) 2
Palmate-leaved Coltsfoot
1-2
100
(Petasites palmatus)
Bunchberry
4
1-6
100
(Cornus canadensis)
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
3
100
(Calamagrostis canadensis)23
7-45
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic
Nutrient Regime:
Medium to Rich
Elevation:
758 - 914 (821) m
Soil Drainage:
Well to Moderately well
Ecological status score: 18
Forage Production(kg/ha) n=4
grass 714(150-1400)
FORBS 824(158-1408)
shrubs 300(92-698)
Total 1838
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.0 ha/AUM (4.05 -1.0)
0.2 AUM/ac (0.1 -0.4)
236
CME2. Clover/Rose/Marsh Reedgrass
(T rifolium spp./Rosa acicularis/Calamagrostis canadensis)
n=2 This community type describes the effects of moderate to heavy grazing of the CM El Aw/marsh reed
grass/rose/fireweed harvested community type. Low-growing forbs such as strawberry and clover indicate a moderate
to heavy grazing regime for at least 2 to 3 growing seasons. With continued heavy grazing, succession will alter this
community to a Kentucky bluegrass/clover-dandelion community. In order to sustain deciduous regeneration domestic
grazing must be restricted to allow aspen and balsam suckers to emerge and proliferate.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Mean
Trees
Trembling Aspen
RANGE
CONST.
(Populus tremuloides)
Shrubs
Prickly rose
5
0-10
50
(Rosa acicularis)
Willow
1
0-1
50
(Salix spp.)
Forbs
White Clover
5
0-9
50
( Trifolium repens)
Dandelion
13
2-24
100
(Taraxacum officinale)
Fireweed
10
1-19
100
(Epilobium angustifolium)
Dewberry
5
0-10
50
(Rubus pubescens)
Lindley’s aster
2
0-3
50
(Aster ciliolatus)
Strawberry
1
0-2
50
(Fragaria virginiana)
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
1
0-2
50
(Calamagrostis canadensis)?)
Kentucky Bluegrass
1-5
100
(Poa pratensis)
Creeping Red Fescue
5
0-10
50
(Festuca rubra)
Sedges
3
0-6
50
(Care x spp.)
6
1-9
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic
Nutrient Regime:
Medium
Elevation:
606 -914 (760) m
Soil Drainage:
Well Drained
Ecological status score: 6
Forage Production(kg/ha) n=2
grass 723(290-1156)
forbs 461(84-838)
shrubs 445(52-838)
Total 1629
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
8.0 ha/AUM (40.0 -4.0)
0.05 AUM/ac (0.01 -0.1)
237
CME3. Beaked Hazelnut/Aspen/Wild Sarsaparilla
(Corylus cornuta/Populus tremuloides/Aralia nudicaulis)
n=l This community type formed after clear-cutting an Aw/hazelnut/wild forest community type similar to a CMC3
or DMC4. The presence of beaked hazelnut appears to be indicative of warmer sites that may have some fire history
(Downing and Karpuk 1992). The opening of the canopy after logging seems to have allowed hazelnut to proliferate,
possibly due to the increased light penetration and thus an increase in temperature. As aspen continues to mature,
hazelnut may decline. Sites with high cover of hazelnut and/or thick aspen regeneration can have both limited access
and forage availability for domestic livestock.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%)
Trees
Trembling Aspen
Mean
RANGE const.
(Populus tremuloides)
Shrubs
28
100
Beaked Hazelnut
(Corylus cornuta)
Prickly rose
22
100
(Rosa acicularis)
Buffaloberry
24
100
(Shepherdia canadensis)
Saskatoon
11
100
(Amelanchier alnifolia)
Western Snowberry
(Symphoricarpos
8
100
occidentalis)
Forbs
Dewberry
4
100
(Rubus pubescens)
Wild sarsaparilla
5
100
(Aralia nudicaulis)
Tall Lungwort
4
100
(Mertensia paniculata)
Strawberry
1
100
(Fragaria virginiana) 6
Palmate-leaved Coltsfoot
100
(Petasites palmatus)
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
3
100
(Calamagrostis canadensis)?)
Fringed Brome
100
(Bromus ciliatus)
Hairy Wild Rye
5
100
(Elymus innovatus)
1
100
Environmental Variables
Moisture Regime:
Mesic
Nutrient Regime:
Medium
Elevation:
686 m
Soil Drainage:
Well Drained
Ecological status score: 18
Forage Production(kg/ha) n=i
GRASS 742
FORBS 190
SHRUBS 104
Total 1036
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
2.0 ha/AUM (10.1 - 1.4)
0.2 AUM/ac (0.04 - 0.3)
238
CME4. Green Alder-Honeysuckle/Aspen-Balsam Poplar
(Alnus crispa-Lonicera involucrata/Populus tremuloides-Populus balsamifera)
n=l This community type formed after clear-cut logging an Aw-Pb/green alder forest community type. This area
is effected by a high (or perched) water table as indicated by the presence of balsam saplings and green alder The high
water table in this community type may be partially caused by the clear-cutting. Clear-cutting deciduous stands causes
the water table to rise because, even though the amount of water going into the site is the same, the amount of
transpiration and water leaving the site is greatly reduced. This community type may provide good grazing opportunities
as a mature stand; however the density of green alder and balsam poplar will restrict domestic access until natural
thinning occurs in later serai stages.
Plant Composition Canopy Cover(%) Environmental Variables
Mean
RANGE CONST.
Trees
Trembling Aspen
Moisture Regime:
SUBHYGRIC
(Populus tremuloides)
Balsam Poplar
5
100
Nutrient Regime:
{Populus balsamifera )
Shrubs
Green Alder
7
100
Rich
Elevation:
{Alnus crispa)
Bracted honeysuckle
19
100
758 m
(Lonicera involucrata)
Prickly rose
11
100
Soil Drainage:
Moderately well
( Rosa acicularis)
Low Bush Cranberry
5
100
Ecological status score: 18
(Viburnum edule)
Wild Red Raspberry
5
100
Forage Production(kg/ha) n=i
(Rubus idaeus)
Western Snowberry
(Symphoricarpos
6
100
GRASS 384
FORBS 808
occidentalis)
Forbs
Cow Parsnip
2
100
SHRUBS 200
Total 1392
(Heracleum lanatum)
Common Horsetail
9
100
Ecologically sustainable stocking rate
(Equisetum arvense)
Fireweed
11
100
2.0 ha/AUM (13.5 - 1.0)
0.2 AUM/ac (0.03 - 0.4)
(Epilobium angustifolium)
Wild sarsaparilla
1
100
(Aralia nudicaulis)
Wild Vetch
2
100
(Vicia americana)
Grasses
Marsh reed grass
1
100
(Calamagrostis canadensis)39
100
239
LITERATURE CITED
Adams, B. 1981. Range ecology and the impact of livestock grazing on the Peace River Slopes,
Alberta. Public Lands Division, Grazing Land Management, Range Management Unit. Peace
River, Alta.
Adams, B.W., G. Ehlert, C. Stone, D. Lawrence, M. Alexander, M. Willoughby, C. Hincz, D.
Moisey, and A.Bogen. 2003. Rangeland Health Assessment for Grassland, Forest and Tame
Pasute. Alberta Sustainable Resource Development. Public Lands Division. Edmonton. AB.
Pub. No. 1/044. 104pp.
Alberta Rangeland Health Task Group. 1999. Terms of Reference. Alberta Agriculture Food and
Rural Development (Public Lands Division), Alberta Environment (Forest Management
Division). Edmonton, AB. 49pp.
Bailey, A.W., M.G. Willoughby, R. Johansen and S. Smith. Management of Yukon Rangelands.
Renewable Resources, Yukon Territorial Government, Whitehorse, Yukon. 55pp. ISBN-1-
55018-138-6.
Beckingham, J. 1993. Ecosystem associations of Northern Alberta. Dept, of Environmental
Protection, Alberta Forest Service, Edmonton.
Beckingham, J. and J.H. Archibald. 1996. Field guide to ecosites of Northern Alberta. Special
report 5. Canadian Forest Service. Northwest Region. Edmonton, Alta.
Brierly, D., D. Downing and D.O’Leary. 1985. An integrated resource inventory of the Keg River
study area. Vol. 1 and 1 1, Vegetation Classification, Alberta Energy and Natural Resources.
Edmonton, Alta.
Corns, I.G.W. and R.M. Annas. 1986. Field guide to forest ecosystems of West-Central Alberta.
Northern Forestry Center, Canadian Forestry Service, Edmonton, Alta. 251pp.
Daubenmire, R. 1952. Forest vegetation of Northern Idaho and adjacent Washington and its
bearing on concepts of vegetation classification. Ecol. Mongr. 22: 301-330.
Department of Environmental Protection. 1994. Natural Regions of Alberta. Alberta
Environmental Protection. Edmonton, Alta. Pub. no.: 1/53 1 . 18pp.
Downing, D. and E. Karpuk. 1992. Aspen vegetation types of the Low Boreal Mixedwood
ecoregion, East-Central Alberta. Alberta Forestry, Lands and Wildlife. Resource Information
Branch. Land Information Services. Edmonton. AB. 79pp.
240
Downing, D. 2000. Review of Forage Data Gaps: Native range community types, Central/Dry
Mixedwood Natural Subregions, Lower Foothills Subregion. Forest Range Assessment
Project. Alberta Agriculture Food and Rural Development, Public Lands Division. St.Paul.
AB. 5pp.
Gauch, H.G. 1982. Multivariate analysis in community ecology. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, 298pp.
Hay, W.K., J.M. Veltman and R.W. Haag. 1985. An integrated resource inventory of the East
Beaver Lake Assessment Area, Physical Land and Forage Classifications. Vol. 1, Alberta
Energy and Natural Resources, Resource Evaluation and Planning. Edmonton, Alta.
Holechek, J.L., R.D. Pieper and C.H.Herbel. 1995. Range management principles and practices.
2ed . Prentice-Hall Inc. Engewood Cliff. New Jersey. Chapter 8.
Invasive plants of natural habitats in Canada. 1992. Environmental Canada, Canadian Wildlife
Service. Ottawa, Canada. 111pp.
Johnson, D., L. Kershaw, A. MacKinnon and J. Pojar. 1995. Plants of the Western Boreal Forest
and Aspen Parkland. Lone Pine Publishing. Edmonton. AB. 392pp.
Lane, C.T., M.G. Willoughby and M.J. Alexander. 2000. Range plant communities and carrying
capacity for the Lower Foothills subregion. 3rd approximation. Alberta Environment. Land
and Forest Service. Edmonton. AB. Pub. No. T/532. 232pp.
Lodge, R.W., A. McLean and A. Johnston. 1968. Stock-poisoning plants of Western Canada.
Agriculture Canada. Publication# 1361. 35pp.
Mackinnon, A. J. Pojar, and R. Coupe. 1992. Plants of Northern British Columbia. Lone Pine
Publishing, Edmonton, Alta. 345pp.
Mueggler, W.F. 1988. Aspen community types of the Intermountain Region. U.S.D.A.
Intermoutain Research Station. INT-250. 133pp.
Peterson, E.B. and N. M. Peterson. 1992. Ecology, management and use of aspen and balsam
poplar in the prairie provinces. Northern Forestry Center, Canadian Forest Service. Edmonton,
AB. Special report 1. 252pp.
Range Survey Manual. 1992. Range Management Section, Alberta Forest Service. Edmonton,
Alta. 39pp.
241
Strong, W.L. and J.M. Thompson. 1995. Ecodistricts of Alberta: Summary of Biophysical
Attributes. Alberta Environmental Protection, Resource Data Division. Edmonton, Alta. Pub.
no. T/319. 91pp.
Strong, W.L. and K.R. Leggat. 1992. Ecoregions of Alberta. Alberta Forestry, Lands and Wildlife,
Resource Information Branch, Edmonton, Alta. T/245. 77pp.
Strong, W.L. 1992. Ecoregions and Ecodistricts of Alberta. Alberta, Forestry Lands and Wildlife.
Land Information Services Division. Resource Information Branch. Edmonton, Alta. Pub. no.
T/244, 77pp.
Task Group on Unity and Concept. 1995. New concepts for assessment of rangeland condition. J.
Range Manage. 38:220-225.
Thompson, W.H. and P.L. Hansen. 2002. Classification and management of riparian and wetland
sites of the Alberta Grassland Natural Region and adjacent subregions. Bitterroot Restoration
Inc. Prepared for the Alberta Riparian Habitat Management Program-Cows and Fish,
Lethbridge, Alberta. 416pp.
Wilkinson, K. 1990. Trees and shrubs of Alberta. Lone Pine Publishing. Edmonton, Alta. 191pp.
Wilkinson, K. and E.A. Johnson. 1982. Distribution of prairies and solonetzic soils in the Peace
River district, Alberta. Can. J. Bot. 61: 1851-1860.
Willoughby, M.G. and D. Downing. 1995. Deciduous plant communities and carrying capacity of
the Boreal Ecopro vince of Alberta. Alberta Environmental Protection. Edmonton, Alta. Pub.
no. T/312. 329pp.
Willoughby, M.G. 1996. The effects of grazing on deciduous plant communities in the Boreal
Ecoprovince of Alberta. Proceedings of the Fifth IntT Rangeland Congress, Salt Lake City,
Utah. Vol. 1.610-611.
242
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11