Print Report

A3362 Abies grandis - Pseudotsuga menziesii Central Rocky Mountain Forest & Woodland Alliance

Type Concept Sentence: This alliance occurs in the middle to northern Rocky Mountains and occasionally in the Cascade Range representing forest and woodland vegetation dominated by Abies grandis where Pseudotsuga menziesii may be an early-seral component, codominant or the sole dominant species.


Common (Translated Scientific) Name: Grand Fir - Douglas-fir Central Rocky Mountain Forest & Woodland Alliance

Colloquial Name: Central Rocky Mountain Grand Fir - Douglas-fir Forest & Woodland

Hierarchy Level:  Alliance

Type Concept: This alliance occurs in the middle to northern Rocky Mountains and occasionally in the Cascade Range in a variety of topographic positions. These are highly variable montane coniferous forests that lie between drier Pseudotsuga menziesii - Pinus ponderosa and more moist Tsuga heterophylla or Thuja plicata forests on the moisture scale, and are warmer than forests dominated by Abies lasiocarpa. Stands are dominated by Abies grandis where Pseudotsuga menziesii may be an early-seral component, codominant or the sole dominant species. Several other conifers may be present in the canopy, typically as seral species, including Larix occidentalis, Pinus contorta, or Pinus monticola. Picea engelmannii and Taxus brevifolia become increasingly common towards the eastern edge of the range, and Tsuga heterophylla and Thuja plicata may be associates at moister sites. The shrub and herbaceous components of these forests are highly variable across the range of the alliance and are very species-diverse due to the moderate climate regime. Cold-deciduous or ericaceous shrubs can be abundant in some stands. Shrubs can include Acer glabrum, Linnaea borealis, Menziesia ferruginea, Physocarpus malvaceus, Spiraea betulifolia, Symphoricarpos occidentalis, and Vaccinium membranaceum. Herbaceous layers may be graminoid- or forb-dominated and may include Asarum caudatum, Bromus vulgaris, Calamagrostis rubescens, Carex geyeri, Clintonia uniflora, Coptis occidentalis, Cornus canadensis, Linnaea borealis, and Trautvetteria caroliniensis. Elevations range from 460-1950 m. Topographic positions include montane slopes, alluvial benches and terraces, ridgetops, flats, protected coves, ravines, and valley bottoms. All aspects are represented and slopes can be flat to steep. Parent materials are highly variable, but volcanic ash is often present in the soil profile. Soils are derived from basalt colluvium and alluvium, volcanic ash, granitics, shale, sandstone, meta-sediments, gneiss, quartzite, limestone, and loess or loess-ash over colluvium or alluvium.

Diagnostic Characteristics: Tall-statured forests and woodlands of the Cascades and northern Rocky Mountains dominated by the needle-leaved evergreen trees Abies grandis and/or Pseudotsuga menziesii. Environmentally, communities of this alliance represent mesic vegetation between the drier and moist forest vegetation of the region. Understories may be herb- or shrub-dominated.

Rationale for Nominal Species or Physiognomic Features: No Data Available

Classification Comments: This is the combination of old alliances Abies grandis Forest Alliance (A.153) and Pseudotsuga menziesii Forest Alliance (A.157). It was suggested during peer review that ~Abies grandis / Calamagrostis rubescens Woodland (CEGL000916)$$ and ~Abies grandis / Carex geyeri Woodland (CEGL000917)$$ be placed in another group as they are much colder and drier than other associations in this group.

Similar NVC Types: No Data Available
note: No Data Available

Physiognomy and Structure: Associations in this alliance are characterized by a closed tree canopy of tall coniferous trees which can attain 50 m in height. Canopy cover ranges from 60-100%. A subcanopy is often present, composed of broad-leaved cold-deciduous shrubs or shade-tolerant small trees. Herbaceous cover is highly variable, ranging from 0-60% cover depending on location, precipitation, fire history, and stand age. Generally the abundance of subcanopy and herbaceous cover decreases with increasing stand age and as available light decreases.

Floristics: Canopies are dominated by Abies grandis and/or Pseudotsuga menziesii. Several other conifers may be present in the canopy, typically as seral species, including Larix occidentalis, Pinus contorta, or Pinus monticola. Picea engelmannii and Taxus brevifolia become increasingly common towards the eastern edge of the range, and Tsuga heterophylla and Thuja plicata may be associates at moister sites. Lillybridge et al. (1995) report that Pinus monticola was probably more important in the canopy prior to the introduction of white pine blister rust, a pathogen which has severely reduced populations of Pinus monticola. The shrub and herbaceous components of these forests are highly variable across the range of the alliance, and Cooper et al. (1987) describe these forests as being very species-diverse due to the moderate climate regime. Cold-deciduous or ericaceous shrubs can be may dominant in the understory in some stands. Shrubs can include Acer glabrum, Linnaea borealis, Menziesia ferruginea, Physocarpus malvaceus, Spiraea betulifolia, Symphoricarpos albus, Symphoricarpos occidentalis, Taxus brevifolia, Vaccinium cespitosum, and Vaccinium membranaceum. The composition of the herbaceous layer is related to local moisture conditions and the degree of canopy closure. The herbaceous layer can be sparse or, if the shrub layer is not abundant, can be relatively species-rich. Forbs and ferns commonly dominant include Calamagrostis rubescens, Carex geyeri, Clintonia uniflora, Coptis occidentalis, Cornus canadensis, Heracleum maximum, Linnaea borealis, Trautvetteria caroliniensis, and Xerophyllum tenax. Other species include Adenocaulon bicolor, Aralia nudicaulis, Arnica cordifolia, Balsamorhiza sagittata, Goodyera oblongifolia, Gymnocarpium dryopteris, Osmorhiza berteroi (= Osmorhiza chilensis), Pteridium aquilinum, Pyrola asarifolia, Thalictrum occidentale, Trientalis borealis ssp. latifolia (= Trientalis latifolia), Trillium ovatum, and Valeriana sitchensis. Graminoids that can be present include Bromus vulgaris, Carex concinnoides, Festuca idahoensis, Festuca occidentalis, Koeleria macrantha, and Melica bulbosa.

Dynamics:  Abies grandis forests include many sites dominated by Pseudotsuga menziesii and Pinus ponderosa which were formerly maintained by wildfire, and may now be dominated by Abies grandis (a fire-sensitive, shade-tolerant species) (Lillybridge et al. 1995, Chappell et al. 1997). Pre-European settlement fire regimes were typically of frequent, low-intensity surface fires, maintaining relatively open stands of a mix of fire-resistant species. With the advent of vigorous fire suppression, longer fire-return intervals are now the rule, and mixed-stature stands with Abies grandis in various size classes now provide fuel "ladders," making these forests more susceptible to high-intensity, stand-replacing fires (Cooper et al. 1987, Lillybridge et al. 1995). This alliance also includes montane forests along rivers and slopes, and in mesic "coves" which were historically protected from wildfires. They are very productive forests which have been priorities for timber production. Successional relationships in this alliance are complex. Pseudotsuga menziesii is less shade-tolerant than many northern or montane trees such as Abies concolor, Picea engelmannii, Thuja plicata, or Tsuga heterophylla, and seedlings compete poorly in deep shade. At drier locales, seedlings may be favored by moderate shading, such as by a canopy of Pinus ponderosa, which helps to minimize drought stress. In some locations, much of these forests have been logged or burned during European settlement, and present-day stands are second-growth forests dating from fire, logging, or other stand-replacing disturbances (Mauk and Henderson 1984, Chappell et al. 1997). Pseudotsuga menziesii forests were probably subject to a moderate-severity fire regime in pre-settlement times, with fire-return intervals of 30-100 years. Many of the important tree species in these forests are fire-adapted (Larix occidentalis, Pinus contorta, Pinus ponderosa, Populus tremuloides) (Pfister et al. 1977), and fire-induced reproduction of Pinus ponderosa can result in its continued codominance in Pseudotsuga menziesii forests (Steele et al. 1981). Seeds of the shrub Ceanothus velutinus can remain dormant in forest stands for 200 years (Steele et al. 1981) and germinate abundantly after fire, competitively suppressing conifer seedlings. Some stands may have higher tree-stem density than historically, due largely to fire suppression. Fire suppression has also led to the succession of Pinus ponderosa woodlands or Quercus spp. woodlands to Pseudotsuga menziesii forests.

Environmental Description:  Associations within this alliance are highly variable montane coniferous forests occurring within the region of maritime influence of the Pacific Northwest and northern Rocky Mountains. The climate regime with which this alliance is associated is usually submesic with annual precipitation ranging from 50-100 cm, with a maximum in winter or late spring. Snowpacks typically accumulate each winter but melt off in early spring at lower elevation sites. Elevations reported for associations in this alliance range from 460-1920 m in the northern Rocky Mountains of Idaho and Montana, 970-1955 m in the Blue Mountains of Oregon, to as low as 760 m in the eastern Cascades. Topographic positions include montane slopes, alluvial benches and terraces, ridgetops, flats, protected coves, ravines, and valley bottoms. All aspects are represented, and slopes can be flat to steep. Parent materials are highly variable, but most studies report that volcanic ash is often present in the soil profile. Soils are derived from basalt colluvium and alluvium, volcanic ash, granitics, shale, sandstone, meta-sediments, gneiss, quartzite, limestone, and loess or loess-ash over colluvium or alluvium. Soils textures cover the range from excessively rocky and well-drained to silty loams with a clay pan in the B horizon.

Geographic Range: This alliance is distributed from the northern Rocky Mountains from eastern Washington and Oregon to Montana. Ecoregional sections include the Okanogan Highlands, Bitterroot Mountains, Idaho Batholith, and Blue Mountains.

Nations: CA,US

States/Provinces:  AB, ID, MT, OR, WA, WY




Confidence Level: Low

Confidence Level Comments: No Data Available

Grank: GNR

Greasons: No Data Available

Type Name Database Code Classification Code
Class 1 Forest & Woodland Class C01 1
Subclass 1.B Temperate & Boreal Forest & Woodland Subclass S15 1.B
Formation 1.B.2 Cool Temperate Forest & Woodland Formation F008 1.B.2
Division 1.B.2.Nb Rocky Mountain Forest & Woodland Division D194 1.B.2.Nb
Macrogroup 1.B.2.Nb.3 Western Hemlock - Grand Fir - Western Larch Mesic Lower Montane Forest Macrogroup M500 1.B.2.Nb.3
Group 1.B.2.Nb.3.a Grand Fir - Douglas-fir - Western Larch Central Rocky Mountain Forest Group G211 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Alliance A3362 Grand Fir - Douglas-fir Central Rocky Mountain Forest & Woodland Alliance A3362 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000176 Western White Pine / Bride''s Bonnet Forest CEGL000176 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000267 Grand Fir / Rocky Mountain Maple Forest CEGL000267 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000269 Grand Fir / British Columbia Wild Ginger Forest CEGL000269 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000272 Grand Fir / Bride''s Bonnet Forest CEGL000272 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000273 Grand Fir / Idaho Goldthread Forest CEGL000273 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000275 Grand Fir / Twinflower Forest CEGL000275 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000277 Grand Fir / Mallow Ninebark Forest CEGL000277 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000281 Grand Fir / Shinyleaf Meadowsweet Forest CEGL000281 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000282 Grand Fir / Common Snowberry Forest CEGL000282 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000283 Grand Fir / Pacific Yew Forest CEGL000283 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000285 Grand Fir / Carolina Tassel-rue Forest CEGL000285 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000288 Grand Fir / Dwarf Bilberry Forest CEGL000288 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000289 Grand Fir / Thinleaf Huckleberry Rocky Mountain Forest CEGL000289 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000292 Grand Fir / Grouse Whortleberry Forest CEGL000292 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000293 Grand Fir / Common Beargrass Forest CEGL000293 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000432 Douglas-fir / Bunchberry Dogwood Forest CEGL000432 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000448 Douglas-fir / Mallow Ninebark - Twinflower Forest CEGL000448 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000461 Douglas-fir / Western Snowberry Forest CEGL000461 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000464 Douglas-fir / Blueberry species Forest CEGL000464 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000465 Douglas-fir / Dwarf Bilberry Forest CEGL000465 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000466 Douglas-fir / Thinleaf Huckleberry Forest CEGL000466 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000467 Douglas-fir / Hooked-spur Violet Forest CEGL000467 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000916 Grand Fir / Pinegrass Woodland CEGL000916 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL000917 Grand Fir / Geyer''s Sedge Woodland CEGL000917 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL002601 Grand Fir / Columbia Brome Forest CEGL002601 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL005850 Douglas-fir / Bride''s Bonnet Forest CEGL005850 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL005851 Douglas-fir / Rusty Menziesia / Bride''s Bonnet Forest CEGL005851 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL005852 Douglas-fir / Thinleaf Huckleberry / Common Beargrass Forest CEGL005852 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL005853 Douglas-fir / Common Cow-parsnip Forest CEGL005853 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL005854 Douglas-fir / Bride''s Bonnet - Common Beargrass Forest CEGL005854 1.B.2.Nb.3.a
Association CEGL005904 Paper Birch - Conifer / Bride''s Bonnet Woodland CEGL005904 1.B.2.Nb.3.a

Concept Lineage: A.153, A.157

Predecessors: No Data Available

Obsolete Names: No Data Available

Obsolete Parents: No Data Available

Synonomy: No Data Available

Concept Author(s): A.W. Küchler (1964)

Author of Description: M.E. Hall

Acknowledgements: No Data Available

Version Date: 01-08-14

  • Chappell, C., R. Crawford, J. Kagan, and P. J. Doran. 1997. A vegetation, land use, and habitat classification system for the terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems of Oregon and Washington. Unpublished report prepared for Wildlife habitat and species associations within Oregon and Washington landscapes: Building a common understanding for management. Prepared by Washington and Oregon Natural Heritage Programs, Olympia, WA, and Portland, OR. 177 pp.
  • Cooper, S. V., K. E. Neiman, R. Steele, and D. W. Roberts. 1987. Forest habitat types of northern Idaho: A second approximation. General Technical Report INT-236.USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, UT. 135 pp. [reprinted in 1991]
  • Faber-Langendoen, D., J. Drake, M. Hall, G. Kittel, S. Menard, C. Nordman, M. Pyne, M. Reid, M. Russo, K. Schulz, L. Sneddon, K. Snow, and J. Teague. 2013-2019b. Screening alliances for induction into the U.S. National Vegetation Classification: Part 1 - Alliance concept review. NatureServe, Arlington, VA.
  • Küchler, A. W. 1964. Potential natural vegetation of the conterminous United States. American Geographic Society Special Publication 36. New York, NY. 116 pp.
  • Lillybridge, T. R., B. L. Kovalchik, C. K. Williams, and B. G. Smith. 1995. Field guide for forested plant associations of the Wenatchee National Forest. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-359. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR. 335 pp.
  • Mauk, R. L., and J. A. Henderson. 1984. Coniferous forest habitat types of northern Utah. General Technical Report INT-170. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, UT. 89 pp.
  • Pfister, R. D., B. L. Kovalchik, S. F. Arno, and R. C. Presby. 1977. Forest habitat types of Montana. General Technical Report INT-34. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, UT. 174 pp.
  • Steele, R., R. D. Pfister, R. A. Ryker, and J. A. Kittams. 1981. Forest habitat types of central Idaho. General Technical Report INT-114. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, UT. 138 pp.