Print Report

M073 Vancouverian Lowland Marsh, Wet Meadow & Shrubland Macrogroup

Type Concept Sentence: This macrogroup includes freshwater shrublands, meadows, marshes and mudflat wetlands, with mostly mineral soils that are that are poorly to well-drained and seasonally wet to saturated, occurring at low elevations from the Pacific coast and inland to interior wetlands of shallow lakebeds, rivershores of the Columbia River and the Rocky Mountains.

Common (Translated Scientific) Name: Vancouverian Lowland Marsh, Wet Meadow & Shrubland Macrogroup

Colloquial Name: Vancouverian Lowland Marsh, Wet Meadow & Shrubland

Hierarchy Level:  Macrogroup

Type Concept: This macrogroup includes freshwater shrublands, meadows, marshes and mudflat wetlands. Stands include riparian shrublands, herbaceous meadows, emergent marshes and sparse mudflats dominated by low forbs. Dominant shrubs include Acer glabrum, Alnus incana ssp. tenuifolia, Alnus viridis ssp. crispa, Alnus viridis ssp. sinuata, Artemisia cana, Cornus sericea, Crataegus douglasii, Crataegus rivularis, Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda, Malus fusca, Philadelphus lewisii, Prunus virginiana, Rhus trilobata, Rosa nutkana, Rosa woodsii, Rubus spectabilis, many Salix spp., Shepherdia argentea, Spiraea douglasii, and Symphoricarpos spp. Herbaceous species are quite varied and include graminoids Calamagrostis canadensis, Carex aquatilis var. dives, Carex flava, Carex lyngbyei, Carex mackenziei, Carex obnupta, Carex pellita, Carex praegracilis, Carex utriculata, Cyperus spp., Deschampsia beringensis, Deschampsia cespitosa, Eleocharis obtusa, Eleocharis palustris, Elymus trachycaulus, Eragrostis hypnoides, Glyceria striata, Juncus arcticus ssp. littoralis, Juncus lesueurii, Juncus nevadensis, Leymus cinereus, Leymus mollis, Muhlenbergia filiformis, Muhlenbergia richardsonis, Pascopyrum smithii, Paspalum distichum, Phalaris spp., Poa cusickii, Poa secunda, Schoenoplectus americanus, Schoenoplectus pungens, Typha domingensis, and Typha latifolia; forbs Achillea millefolium var. borealis, Angelica lucida, Argentina anserina, Argentina egedii, Bidens spp., Castilleja spp., Cicuta spp., Crassula aquatica, Euthamia occidentalis, Galium triflorum, Gnaphalium palustre, Heracleum maximum, Hydrocotyle umbellata, Iris missouriensis, Lathyrus japonicus var. maritimus, Lilaeopsis occidentalis, Limosella aquatica, Ludwigia palustris, Lupinus nootkatensis, Lysichiton americanus, Maianthemum stellatum, Mimulus spp., Parnassia palustris, and Rorippa curvisiliqua; ferns and fern allies Athyrium filix-femina, Equisetum arvense, Equisetum fluviatile, Equisetum variegatum, and Gymnocarpium dryopteris; and mosses Sphagnum spp. These species are associated with wetlands that occur on poorly drained or well-drained seasonally wet to saturated soils that may dry out completely during the growing season, and are mostly on mineral or shallow (<30 cm) organic or muck soils over mineral substrates. This type ranges from southern Alaska to northern New Mexico, and includes only freshwater, non-saline wetlands that occur in lowland elevations, from sea level to about 1830 m (6000 feet) (generally below the transition from montane forests to lowland grasslands and shrublands).

Diagnostic Characteristics: This macrogroup includes a broad range of species associated with freshwater shrublands, meadows, marshes and mudflat wetlands. Stands include riparian shrublands, herbaceous meadows, emergent marshes and sparse mudflats dominated by low forbs. See the floristics section for details.

Rationale for Nominal Species or Physiognomic Features: No Data Available

Classification Comments: Is the floristic variability here greater than it is for peatlands or forested wetlands? For peatlands the macrogroups are more finely divided among floristic regions (North Pacific, Vancouverian) and the forested are split biogeographically at the division level! However, here all western shrublands, wet meadows and marshes are only split out at the group level. Are there data justifying that the floristics of this macrogroup (M073) are much more homogenous than those of other wetland types? If they show as much variability as those other groups, then some consistency is needed in how the macrogroups are defined: Vancouverian, Rocky Mountain, Intermountain Basin. Or, to keep logic consistency, those other macrogroup should be lumped (i.e., M063 and M064 = Western North American Bog & Fen (J. Rocchio pers. comm. 2014). Should swamp versus riparian be more consistently applied within the groups of this macrogroup? Great Plains wetland. Possible split: (1) Within 2.B.6 Nb, split M073 into two macrogroups for Vancouverian/Temperate Pacific (G322+G517+G525) and Western North American Interior (G526+G531) bioregions. (2) Consider a physiognomic-based macrogroup within M073--although might that make more sense at division scale?

Similar NVC Types: No Data Available
note: No Data Available
Physiognomy and Structure: Deciduous broadleaf shrublands, short to tall (0.5-5 m) and low-statured herbaceous wetlands dominated by perennial graminoids, annual plants or emergent vegetation.

Floristics: Dominant shrubs include Acer glabrum, Alnus incana ssp. tenuifolia, Alnus viridis ssp. sinuata, Artemisia cana, Cornus sericea, Crataegus douglasii, Crataegus rivularis, Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda, Malus fusca, Philadelphus lewisii, Prunus virginiana, Rhus trilobata, Rosa nutkana, many Salix spp., Shepherdia argentea, Spiraea douglasii, and Symphoricarpos spp. Herbaceous species are quite varied and include graminoids Calamagrostis canadensis, Carex aquatilis var. dives (= Carex sitchensis), Carex flava (= Carex nevadensis), Carex lyngbyei, Carex mackenziei, Carex obnupta, Carex pellita (= Carex lanuginosa), Carex praegracilis, Carex utriculata, Cyperus spp., Deschampsia beringensis, Deschampsia cespitosa, Eleocharis obtusa, Eleocharis palustris, Elymus trachycaulus, Eragrostis hypnoides, Glyceria striata, Juncus arcticus ssp. littoralis (= Juncus balticus), Juncus lesueurii, Leymus cinereus, Leymus mollis, Muhlenbergia richardsonis, Pascopyrum smithii, Paspalum distichum, Phalaris spp., Poa cusickii, Poa secunda (= Poa nevadensis), Schoenoplectus americanus, Schoenoplectus pungens, Typha domingensis, and Typha latifolia; forbs Achillea millefolium var. borealis (= Achillea borealis), Angelica lucida, Argentina anserina (= Potentilla anserina), Argentina egedii, Bidens spp., Castilleja spp., Cicuta spp., Crassula aquatica, Euthamia occidentalis, Galium triflorum, Gnaphalium palustre, Heracleum maximum, Hydrocotyle umbellata, Iris missouriensis, Lathyrus japonicus var. maritimus, Lilaeopsis occidentalis, Limosella aquatica, Ludwigia palustris, Lupinus nootkatensis, Lysichiton americanus, Maianthemum stellatum, Mimulus spp., and Parnassia palustris; ferns and fern allies Athyrium filix-femina, Equisetum arvense, Equisetum fluviatile, Equisetum variegatum, and Gymnocarpium dryopteris; and mosses Sphagnum spp.

Dynamics:  These wetlands are subject to flooding, groundwater discharge, or surface inundation, resulting from proximity to waterbodies, including tidal pulses of freshwater, or subsurface water due to high water table. Flooding may be accompanied by burial by sand and other coarse material. A fluctuating water table may expose some areas to scour by wind. They may be heavily inundated for at least part of the growing season, impeding the establishment of tree species. Isolated wetlands in dune systems are subject to changes in the size and location of the wet swales as the sand dunes shift with active dune migration.
Environmental Description:  Environmental settings include seasonally flooded bottomlands along drainages, river floodplain depressions, glacial or other depressions, cienegas, oxbow lakes, seeps and springs, freshwater tidal-influenced shores of the Columbia River, frequently flooded gravel bars, low-lying sidebars, infilled side channels, small ponds, ditches, small interdunal depressions to extensive deflation plains behind stabilized foredunes, slow-moving streams, perennial streams in valleys and mountain foothills, and lakeshore mudflats. Elevations range from sea level to 1830 m (0-6000 feet). Soil/substrate/hydrology: Substrates are variable but are generally fine-textured, alluvial soil, coarse loam, sandy loam, sand, and silt. Hydrologic regimes vary from seasonal inundation followed by complete soil desiccation to year-round standing water. Water may be poorly oxygenated or nitrogen-rich and at or above the ground surface for most of the growing season. A consistent source of freshwater is essential to the function of these systems. Rarely, water is brackish.
Geographic Range: This macrogroup is found from the northernmost Aleutian Islands to Cook Inlet Basin and Prince William Sound, Alaska, south along the Pacific Coast to California, into the temperate western North American interior (interior British Columbia, Columbia Basin, Great Basin, Colorado Plateau, and higher intermountain basins) and in dune wetlands across the intermountain western U.S.

Nations: CA,MX?,US

States/Provinces:  AB, AK, AZ, BC, CA, CO, ID, MT, NM, NV, OR, TX, UT, WA, WY


Confidence Level: Moderate

Confidence Level Comments: No Data Available
Grank: GNR

Greasons: No Data Available
Type Name Database Code Classification Code
Class 2 Shrub & Herb Vegetation Class C02 2
Subclass 2.C Shrub & Herb Wetland Subclass S44 2.C
Formation 2.C.4 Temperate to Polar Freshwater Marsh, Wet Meadow & Shrubland Formation F013 2.C.4
Division 2.C.4.Nb Western North American Temperate Freshwater Marsh, Wet Meadow & Shrubland Division D031 2.C.4.Nb
Macrogroup 2.C.4.Nb.4 Vancouverian Lowland Marsh, Wet Meadow & Shrubland Macrogroup M073 2.C.4.Nb.4
Group 2.C.4.Nb.4.a Blunt Spikerush - Teal Lovegrass - Marsh Seedbox Temperate Pacific Freshwater Wet Mudflat Group G525 2.C.4.Nb.4.a
Group 2.C.4.Nb.4.b Bering''s Tufted Hairgrass - Pacific Silverweed - Slough Sedge Vancouverian Freshwater Coastal Marsh & Wet Meadow Group G517 2.C.4.Nb.4.b
Group 2.C.4.Nb.4.c Alder species - Willow species - Meadowsweet species Wet Shrubland Group G322 2.C.4.Nb.4.c
Concept Lineage: No Data Available

Predecessors: No Data Available

Obsolete Names: No Data Available

Obsolete Parents: No Data Available
Synonomy: < Wetlands (217) (Shiflet 1994)
Concept Author(s): Faber-Langendoen et al. (2014)

Author of Description: G. Kittel, K. Boggs, C. Chappell, P. Comer, M.S. Reid, M.E. Hall, J. Christy

Acknowledgements: No Data Available

Version Date: 03-29-17
  • Baker, W. L. 1988. Size-class structure of contiguous riparian woodlands along a Rocky Mountain river. Physical Geography 9(1):1-14.
  • Baker, W. L. 1989a. Macro- and micro-scale influences on riparian vegetation in western Colorado. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 79(1):65-78.
  • Baker, W. L. 1989b. Classification of the riparian vegetation of the montane and subalpine zones in western Colorado. Great Basin Naturalist 49(2):214-228.
  • Baker, W. L. 1990. Climatic and hydrologic effects on the regeneration of Populus angustifolia James along the Animas River, Colorado. Journal of Biogeography 17:59-73.
  • Banner, A., J. Pojar, and R. Trowbridge. 1986. Representative wetland types of the northern part of the Pacific Oceanic Wetland Region. Internal report FF85008-PR. British Columbia Ministry of Forests Research Program. 45 pp.
  • Banner, A., W. MacKenzie, S. Haeussler, S. Thomson, J. Pojar, and R. Trowbridge. 1993. A field guide to site identification and interpretation for the Prince Rupert Forest Region. Ministry of Forests Research Program. Victoria, BC. Parts 1 and 2. Land Management Handbook Number 26.
  • Barbour, M. G., and J. Major, editors. 1988. Terrestrial vegetation of California: New expanded edition. California Native Plant Society, Special Publication 9, Sacramento. 1030 pp.
  • Barbour, M. G., and W. D. Billings, editors. 1988. North American terrestrial vegetation. Cambridge University Press, New York. 434 pp.
  • Bezanson, D. 2000. Natural vegetation types of Texas and their representation in conservation areas. M.A. thesis, University of Texas, Austin. [http://tconr.home.texas.net/Vegetation/]
  • Boggs, K. 2000. Classification of community types, successional sequences and landscapes of the Copper River Delta, Alaska. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-469. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR. March 2000. 244 pp.
  • Boggs, K. 2002. Terrestrial ecological systems for the Cook Inlet, Bristol Bay, and Alaska Peninsula ecoregions. The Nature Conservancy, Anchorage, AK.
  • Boggs, K., S. C. Klein, L. Flagstad, T. Boucher, J. Grunblatt, and B. Koltun. 2008b. Landcover classes, ecosystems and plant associations of Kenai Fjords National Park. Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/KEFJ/NRTR-2008/136. National Park Service, Fort Collins, CO.
  • Bowers, J. E. 1982. The plant ecology of inland dunes in western North America. Journal of Arid Environments 5:199-220.
  • Bowers, J. E. 1984. Plant geography of southwestern sand dunes. Desert Plants 6(1):31-42, 51-54.
  • Bowers, J. E. 1986. Seasons of the wind: A naturalist''s look at the plant life of southwestern sand dunes. Northland Press, Flagstaff, AZ. 156 pp.
  • Brand, C. A., and J. Sanderson. 2002. Characterization of water resources at The Nature Conservancy''s Medano-Zapata Ranch in the San Luis Valley, CO. Unpublished report prepared for The Nature Conservancy of Colorado.
  • Brown, D. E., editor. 1982a. Biotic communities of the American Southwest-United States and Mexico. Desert Plants Special Issue 4(1-4):1-342.
  • Carr, W. R. 1991. Status report on Cyperus onerosus. Report prepared for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Albuquerque, NM.
  • Carr, W. R. 2004. An annotated list of the G3/T3 and rarer plant taxa of Texas. Texas Conservation Data Center, The Nature Conservancy of Texas, Austin.
  • Carsey, K., G. Kittel, K. Decker, D. J. Cooper, and D. Culver. 2003a. Field guide to the wetland and riparian plant associations of Colorado. Colorado Natural Heritage Program, Fort Collins, CO.
  • Chappell, C., and J. Christy. 2004. Willamette Valley-Puget Trough-Georgia Basin Ecoregion Terrestrial Ecological System EO Specs and EO Rank Specs. Appendix 11 in: J. Floberg, M. Goering, G. Wilhere, C. MacDonald, C. Chappell, C. Rumsey, Z. Ferdana, A. Holt, P. Skidmore, T. Horsman, E. Alverson, C. Tanner, M. Bryer, P. Lachetti, A. Harcombe, B. McDonald, T. Cook, M. Summers, and D. Rolph. Willamette Valley-Puget Trough-Georgia Basin Ecoregional Assessment, Volume One: Report prepared by The Nature Conservancy with support from The Nature Conservancy of Canada, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Natural Resources (Natural Heritage and Nearshore Habitat programs), Oregon State Natural Heritage Information Center and the British Columbia Conservation Data Centre.
  • Christy, J. A. 2004. Native freshwater wetland plant associations of northwestern Oregon. Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center, Oregon State University, Portland, OR.
  • Comer, P., D. Faber-Langendoen, R. Evans, S. Gawler, C. Josse, G. Kittel, S. Menard, C. Nordman, M. Pyne, M. Reid, M. Russo, K. Schulz, K. Snow, J. Teague, and R. White. 2003-present. Ecological systems of the United States: A working classification of U.S. terrestrial systems. NatureServe, Arlington, VA.
  • Comer, P., P. Crist, M. Reid, J. Hak, H. Hamilton, D. Braun, G. Kittel, I. Varley, B. Unnasch, S. Auer, M. Creutzburg, D. Theobald, and L. Kutner. 2013a. Central Basin and Range rapid ecoregional assessment report. Prepared for the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 168 pp. plus appendices.
  • Cooper, D. J., and C. Severn. 1992. Wetlands of the San Luis Valley, Colorado: An ecological study and analysis of the hydrologic regime, soil chemistry, vegetation and the potential effects of a water table drawdown. Report submitted to the State of Colorado Division of Wildlife, the USDI Fish & Wildlife Service and the Rio Grande Water Conservation District.
  • Crowe, E. A., B. L. Kovalchik, and M. J. Kerr. 2004. Riparian and wetland vegetation of central and eastern Oregon. Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center, Institute for Natural Resources, Oregon State University, Portland. 473 pp. [http://oregonstate.edu/ornhic/ publications.html]
  • Crowe, E. A., and R. R. Clausnitzer. 1997. Mid-montane wetland plant associations of the Malheur, Umatilla, and Wallowa-Whitman national forests. Technical Paper R6-NR-ECOL-TP-22-97. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Portland, OR.
  • Daubenmire, R. 1952. Forest vegetation of northern Idaho and adjacent Washington, and its bearing on concepts of vegetation classification. Ecological Monographs 22(4):301-330.
  • DeLong, C. 2003. A field guide to site identification and interpretation for the southeast portion of the Prince George Forest Region. Land Manage. Handbook No. 51. Province of British Columbia, Research Branch, Ministry of Forestry, Victoria, BC. [http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/Docs/Lmh/Lmh51.htm]
  • DeLong, C., D. Tanner, and M. J. Jull. 1993. A field guide for site identification and interpretation for the southwest portion of the Prince George Forest Region. Land Management Handbook No. 24. British Columbia Ministry of Forests Research Branch, Victoria, British Columbia.
  • DeLong, C., D. Tanner, and M. J. Jull. 1994. A field guide for site identification and interpretation for the northern Rockies portion of the Prince George Forest Region. Land Management Handbook No. 29. Province of British Columbia, Research Branch, Ministry of Forests, Victoria, BC.
  • DeVelice, R. L., C. J. Hubbard, K. Boggs, S. Boudreau, M. Potkin, T. Boucher, and C. Wertheim. 1999. Plant community types of the Chugach National Forest: South-central Alaska. Technical Publication R10-TP-76. USDA Forest Service, Chugach National Forest, Alaska Region. 375 pp.
  • Dick-Peddie, W. A. 1993. New Mexico vegetation: Past, present, and future. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. 244 pp.
  • Ecosystems Working Group. 1998. Standards for broad terrestrial ecosystem classification and mapping for British Columbia. Prepared by the Ecosystems Working Group, Terrestrial Ecosystem Task Force, Resources Inventory Committee, for the Province of British Columbia. 174 pp. plus appendices. [http://srmwww.gov.bc.ca/risc/pubs/teecolo/tem/indextem.htm]
  • El-Hage, A., and D. W. Moulton. 1998. Area study: Parts of the Trans-Pecos, Texas. Evaluation of selected natural resources in parts of Loving, Pecos, Reeves, Ward, and Winkler counties, Texas. Texas Parks and Wildlife, Resource Protection Division: Water Resources Team, Austin.
  • Eyre, F. H., editor. 1980. Forest cover types of the United States and Canada. Society of American Foresters, Washington, DC. 148 pp.
  • Faber-Langendoen, D., J. Drake, S. Gawler, M. Hall, C. Josse, G. Kittel, S. Menard, C. Nordman, M. Pyne, M. Reid, L. Sneddon, K. Schulz, J. Teague, M. Russo, K. Snow, and P. Comer, editors. 2010-2019a. Divisions, Macrogroups and Groups for the Revised U.S. National Vegetation Classification. NatureServe, Arlington, VA. plus appendices. [in preparation]
  • Franklin, J. F., and C. T. Dyrness. 1973. Natural vegetation of Oregon and Washington. General Technical Report PNW-8. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Portland, OR. 417 pp.
  • Hammond, D. J. 1998. Measuring changes in aerial extent of historic wetlands at Great Sand Dunes National Monument, Colorado, 1936-1995. M.S. thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins.
  • Hansen, P. L., S. W. Chadde, and R. D. Pfister. 1988b. Riparian dominance types of Montana. University of Montana Miscellaneous Publication 49. Montana Forest and Conservation Experiment Station, Missoula. 411 pp.
  • Hansen, P., R. Pfister, J. Joy, D. Svoboda, K. Boggs, L. Myers, S. Chadde, and J. Pierce. 1989. Classification and management of riparian sites in southwestern Montana. Unpublished draft prepared for the Montana Riparian Association, School of Forestry, University of Montana, Missoula. 292 pp.
  • Hendrickson, D. A., and W. L. Minckley. 1984. Cienegas - Vanishing climax communities of the American Southwest. Desert Plants 6(3):131-175.
  • Holland, V. L., and D. J. Keil. 1995. California vegetation. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, IA. 516 pp.
  • Jahrsdoerfer, S. E., and D. M. Leslie. 1988. Tamaulipan brushland of the lower Rio Grande Valley of south Texas: Description, human impacts, and management options. USDI Fish & Wildlife Service. Biological Report 88(36). 63 pp.
  • Johnson, C. G., and S. A. Simon. 1985. Plant associations of the Wallowa Valley Ranger District, Part II: Steppe. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Wallowa-Whitman National Forest. 258 pp.
  • Johnson, Janel. Personal communication. Ecologist/GIS Specialist, Nevada Natural Heritage Program, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Carson City.
  • Kittel, G., D. Faber-Langendoen, and P. Comer. 2012b. Camas National Wildlife Refuge: Ecological integrity assessment, watershed analysis and habitat vulnerability climate change index. Report to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under contract # F11PX04463. Prepared by NatureServe, Boulder, CO.
  • Kittel, G., E. Van Wie, M. Damm, R. Rondeau, S. Kettler, A. McMullen, and J. Sanderson. 1999b. A classification of riparian and wetland plant associations of Colorado: A user''s guide to the classification project. Colorado Natural Heritage Program, Colorado State University, Fort Collins CO. 70 pp. plus appendices.
  • Kovalchik, B. L. 1987. Riparian zone associations - Deschutes, Ochoco, Fremont, and Winema national forests. Technical Paper 279-87. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, Portland, OR. 171 pp.
  • Kovalchik, B. L. 1993. Riparian plant associations on the national forests of eastern Washington - Draft version 1. USDA Forest Service, Colville National Forest, Colville, WA. 203 pp.
  • Kunze, L. M. 1994. Preliminary classification of native, low elevation, freshwater wetland vegetation in western Washington. Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Natural Heritage Program. 120 pp.
  • Lloyd, D. A., K. Angove, G. Hope, and C. Thompson. 1990. A guide for site identification and interpretation of the Kamloops Forest Region. 2 volumes. Land Management Handbook No. 23. British Columbia Ministry of Forests, Victoria, BC. [http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/docs/lmh/lmh23.htm]
  • MacKenzie, W. H., and J. R. Moran. 2004. Wetlands of British Columbia: A guide to identification. Land Management Handbook No. 52. Research Branch, British Columbia Ministry of Forests and Lands, Victoria, BC. 287 pp.
  • MacKinnon, A., C. DeLong, and D. Meidinger. 1990. A field guide for identification and interpretation of ecosystems of the northwest portion of the Prince George Forest Region. Land Management Handbook No. 21. Province of British Columbia, Research Branch, Ministry of Forests, Victoria, BC.
  • Manning, M. E., and W. G. Padgett. 1989. Preliminary riparian community type classification for Nevada. Draft report prepared for USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Region, Ogden, UT. 134 pp.
  • Manning, M. E., and W. G. Padgett. 1995. Riparian community type classification for Humboldt and Toiyabe national forests, Nevada and eastern California. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Region. 306 pp.
  • Meidinger, D., A. McLeod, A. MacKinnon, C. DeLong, and G. Hope. 1988. A field guide for identification and interpretation of ecosystems of the Rocky Mountain Trench, Prince George Forest Region. Land Management Handbook No. 15. Province of British Columbia, Research Branch, Ministry of Forests and Lands, Victoria, BC.
  • Muldavin, E., M. P. Moreno, J. Thomson, and P. Mehlhop. 1994b. A vegetation map for White Sands National Monument. Final report prepared for White Sands National Monument: Alamogordo, NM, by New Mexico Natural Heritage Program.
  • Muldavin, E., P. Durkin, M. Bradley, M. Stuever, and P. Mehlhop. 2000a. Handbook of wetland vegetation communities of New Mexico. Volume I: Classification and community descriptions. Final report to the New Mexico Environment Department and the Environmental Protection Agency prepared by the New Mexico Natural Heritage Program, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.
  • Muldavin, E., Y. Chauvin, and G. Harper. 2000b. The vegetation of White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico: Volume I. Handbook of vegetation communities. Final report to Environmental Directorate, White Sands Missile Range. New Mexico Natural Heritage Program, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque. 195 pp. plus appendices
  • PRBO Conservation Science. 2011. Projected effects of climate change in California: Ecoregional summaries emphasizing consequences for wildlife. Version 1.0. PRBO Conservation Science, Petaluma, CA. [http://data.prbo.org/apps/bssc/climatechange]
  • Padgett, W. G., A. P. Youngblood, and A. H. Winward. 1989. Riparian community type classification of Utah and southeastern Idaho. Research Paper R4-ECOL-89-0. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, UT.
  • Pineda, P. M. 2000. Invertebrate inventory of Indian Spring Natural Area, Saguache County, Colorado. Field Season 1999. Final report to Colorado Natural Areas Program. Denver, CO. 37 pp.
  • Pineda, P. M., R. J. Rondeau, and A. Ochs. 1999. A biological inventory and conservation recommendations for the Great Sand Dunes and San Luis Lakes, Colorado. Report prepared for The Nature Conservancy, San Luis Valley Program. Colorado Natural Heritage Program, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. 86 pp.
  • Rondeau, R. 2001. Ecological system viability specifications for Southern Rocky Mountain ecoregion. First edition. Colorado Natural Heritage Program, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. 181 pp.
  • Sawyer, J. O., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J. Evens. 2009. A manual of California vegetation. Second edition. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento CA. 1300 pp.
  • Sawyer, J. O., and T. Keeler-Wolf. 1995. A manual of California vegetation. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento. 471 pp.
  • Shephard, M. E. 1995. Plant community ecology and classification of the Yakutat Foreland, Alaska. R10-TP-56. USDA Forest Service, Alaska Region. 213 pp. plus appendices.
  • Shiflet, T. N., editor. 1994. Rangeland cover types of the United States. Society for Range Management. Denver, CO. 152 pp.
  • Sparks, l. H., R. del Moral, A. F. Watson, and A. R. Kruckeberg. 1977. The distribution of vascular plant species on Sergief Island, Southeast Alaska. Syesis 10:l-9.
  • Steen, O. A., and R. A. CoupĂ©. 1997. A field guide to forest site identification and interpretation for the Cariboo Forest Region. Land Management Handbook No. 39. Parts 1 and 2. British Columbia Ministry of Forests Research Program, Victoria, BC.
  • Stone, C. S. 1993. Vegetation of coastal marshes near Juneau, Alaska. Northwest Science 67(4):215-230.
  • Szaro, R. C. 1989. Riparian forest and scrubland community types of Arizona and New Mexico. Desert Plants Special Issue 9(3-4):70-139.
  • TPWD [Texas Parks and Wildlife Department]. 1989d. Monahans Sandhills State Park summary of representative plant communities. October 1989. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Austin.
  • Ungar, I. A. 1965. An ecological study of the vegetation of the Big Salt Marsh, Stafford County, Kansas. University of Kansas Science Bulletin 116(1):1-99.
  • Ungar, I. A. 1972. The vegetation of inland saline marshes of North America, north of Mexico. Basic Problems and Methods in Phytosociology 14:397-411.
  • Viereck, L. A., C. T. Dyrness, A. R. Batten, and K. J. Wenzlick. 1992. The Alaska vegetation classification. General Technical Report PNW-GTR286. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR. 278 pp.
  • Walford, G. M. 1996. Statewide classification of riparian and wetland dominance types and plant communities - Bighorn Basin segment. Report submitted to the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality, Land Quality Division by the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database. 185 pp.
  • Walford, G., G. Jones, W. Fertig, S. Mellman-Brown, and K. Houston. 2001. Riparian and wetland plant community types of the Shoshone National Forest. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-85. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO. 122 pp.
  • Walford, G., G. Jones, W. Fertig, and K. Houston. 1997. Riparian and wetland plant community types of the Shoshone National Forest. Unpublished report. Wyoming Natural Diversity Database for The Nature Conservancy, and the USDA Forest Service. Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, Laramie. 227 pp.