National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

Natural Resource Program Center

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument, Minnesota

Natural Resource Report NPS/GLKN/NRR—2010/200
ON THE COVER

The Grand Portage crossing the Beaver Meadow, Grand Portage National Monument.

Photograph by: Kevin Hop
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument, Minnesota

Natural Resource Report NPS/GLKN/NRR—2010/200

Kevin Hop, Sara Lubinski, and Jennifer Dieck

U.S. Geological Survey, Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center

2630 Fanta Reed Road

La Crosse, Wisconsin 54603

Shannon Menard, Ph.D. and Jim Drake

NatureServe

P.O. Box 9354

St. Paul, Minnesota 55109

Don Faber-Langendoen

NatureServe

3467 Amber Road

Syracuse, New York 13215

May 2010

U.S. Department of the Interior

National Park Service

Natural Resource Program Center

Fort Collins, Colorado
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Preface ii

The National Park Service, Natural Resource Program Center publishes a range of reports that 

address natural resource topics of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National 

Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and 

environmental constituencies, and the public. 

The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate high-priority, current natural resource 

management information with managerial application. The series targets a general, diverse 

audience, and may contain NPS policy considerations or address sensitive issues of management 

applicability.

All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the 

information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended 

audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. This report received formal peer 

review by subject-matter experts whose background and expertise put them on par technically 

and scientifically with the authors of the information. The peer review was conducted using the 

Fundamental Science Practices of the U.S. Geological Survey.

Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report do not 

necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. Department of the 

Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or 

recommendation for use by the U.S. Government. 

This report is available from the Natural Resource Publications Management website 

(http://www.nature.nps.gov/publications/NRPM/).

Please cite this publication as:

Hop, K., S. Menard, J. Drake, S. Lubinski, D. Faber-Langendoen, and J. Dieck. 2010. National 

Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program: Grand Portage National Monument, Minnesota. 

Natural Resource Report NPS/GLKN/NRR—2010/200. National Park Service, Fort Collins, 

Colorado.

NPS 398/102527, May 2010
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Preface iii

Contents

Figures............................................................................................................................................. v

Tables............................................................................................................................................. vi

Executive Summary...................................................................................................................... vii

Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................... ix

Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 1

Grand Portage National Monument Vegetation Mapping Project.............................................. 1

The National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program......................................................... 2

Natural Resource Inventory and Monitoring Program................................................................ 2

Vegetation Inventory Program Standards................................................................................... 2

The National Vegetation Classification Standard ................................................................... 3

Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata.................................................................. 4

Grand Portage National Monument ............................................................................................ 4

Location and Brief History...................................................................................................... 4

Landscape Setting.................................................................................................................... 5

Project Overview ............................................................................................................................ 7

General Process........................................................................................................................... 7

Scoping Meeting ......................................................................................................................... 7

Project Boundary Extent ............................................................................................................. 8

Aerial Photography ..................................................................................................................... 9

Minimum Mapping Units.......................................................................................................... 10

Classification Organization....................................................................................................... 10

Vegetation Classification.............................................................................................................. 13

Methods..................................................................................................................................... 13

Preliminary Classification ..................................................................................................... 13

Data Collection Preparation................................................................................................... 13

Field Sampling....................................................................................................................... 14

Data Analyses and Results........................................................................................................ 16

Discussion ................................................................................................................................. 19

Lakeshore Unit ...................................................................................................................... 19

Portage Corridor .................................................................................................................... 20

Fort Charlotte Unit................................................................................................................. 21

Vegetation Mapping...................................................................................................................... 23

Methods..................................................................................................................................... 23

Preliminary Map Classification............................................................................................. 23

Field Reconnaissance ............................................................................................................ 23

Map Classification................................................................................................................. 24

Photointerpretation ................................................................................................................ 26

Digital Map Automation and Database Development........................................................... 27

Results....................................................................................................................................... 28

Map Classes........................................................................................................................... 28

Map Classes in the NVCS ..................................................................................................... 28

Map Classes Not in the NVCS .............................................................................................. 29
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Preface iv

Map Classification Link to Types in the NVCS .................................................................... 29

Map Classification Descriptions ............................................................................................ 34

Summary Report of the Map Layer ....................................................................................... 34

Brief Analysis and Discussion .................................................................................................. 38

Map Layer Presentation ......................................................................................................... 38

Accuracy Assessment ................................................................................................................... 41

Methods ..................................................................................................................................... 41

Purpose .................................................................................................................................. 41

Sampling Design.................................................................................................................... 41

Field Data Collection ............................................................................................................. 42

Data Analyses ........................................................................................................................ 42

Results ....................................................................................................................................... 44

References ..................................................................................................................................... 47

List of Appendices

Appendix A: Plot Sampling Form 

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types 

Appendix C: Field Key to Vegetation Types 

Appendix D: List of Plant Species

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes 

Appendix F: Accuracy Assessment Form 

Appendix G: Accuracy Assessment Contingency Table 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Preface v

Figures

Figure 1. Grand Portage National Monument, Minnesota (courtesy nps.gov).............................. 5

Figure 2. Stockade and Great Hall at the Grand Portage National Monument.............................. 5

Figure 3. Monument at the Site of Fort Charlotte at the Grand Portage National Monument. ..... 5

Figure 4. Aspen-birch-spruce-fir forest, which is the matrix forest of the Grand Portage National 

Monument....................................................................................................................................... 6

Figure 5. Relic eastern white pine along the shores of the Pigeon River at the Grand Portage 

National Monument. ....................................................................................................................... 6

Figure 6. Northern white-cedar forest near the Site of Fort Charlotte at the Grand Portage 

National Monument. ....................................................................................................................... 6

Figure 7. Basalt outcrops on Mount Rose, overlooking Lake Superior at the Grand Portage 

National Monument. ....................................................................................................................... 6

Figure 8. Participants of the scoping meeting viewing, firsthand, vegetation types at the Grand 

Portage National Monument........................................................................................................... 8

Figure 9. Project boundary for the Grand Portage National Monument vegetation mapping 

project. ............................................................................................................................................ 8

Figure 10. Centers of color-infrared aerial photographs (1:12,000-scale) obtained in October 

2006 for the Grand Portage National Monument vegetation mapping project............................. 10

Figure 11. Example of a vegetation plot for the Grand Portage National Monument vegetation 

mapping project. ........................................................................................................................... 15

Figure 12. Locations of the 23 vegetation plots sampled for the Grand Portage National 

Monument vegetation mapping project. ....................................................................................... 16

Figure 13. General vegetation groups as defined by cluster and ordination analyses for the 

vegetation classification of the Grand Portage National Monument............................................ 17

Figure 14. Shrub wetland of Grand Portage Creek with black hawthorn, gray alder, and willows.

....................................................................................................................................................... 19

Figure 15. A typical spruce-fir-aspen-paper birch mesic boreal forest in the Grand Portage 

National Monument. ..................................................................................................................... 20

Figure 16. Sedge-dominated beaver meadow complex, known as the Beaver Meadow, at the 

Grand Portage National Monument.............................................................................................. 21

Figure 17. Narrow band of arrowhead vegetation along the water margins of the Pigeon River at 

the Grand Portage National Monument. ....................................................................................... 22

Figure 18. Field reconnaissance to promote correct assignment during photointerpretative 

mapping of the Grand Portage National Monument..................................................................... 24

Figure 19. Vegetation of the Grand Portage National Monument, presented at the natural/seminatural group and the cultural class levels of the National Vegetation Classification Standard 

(Version 2). ................................................................................................................................... 40

Figure 20. Locations of accuracy assessment sites used to validate the vegetation map layer for 

the Grand Portage National Monument. ....................................................................................... 43
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Preface vi

Tables

Table 1. Timeline of the vegetation mapping initiative for the Great Lakes Network. ................. 1

Table 2. Hierarchy for natural/semi-natural vegetation (with examples) in the National 

Vegetation Classification Standard (Version 2). ............................................................................ 3

Table 3. Hierarchy for cultural vegetation (with examples) in the National Vegetation 

Classification Standard. .................................................................................................................. 4

Table 4. Aerial photography sets for the Grand Portage National Monument vegetation mapping 

project. ............................................................................................................................................ 9

Table 5. Plot sizes used for vegetation plot sampling for the Grand Portage National Monument 

vegetation mapping project........................................................................................................... 14

Table 6. Cover classes and vegetation strata used during vegetation plot sampling for the Grand 

Portage National Monument vegetation mapping project. ........................................................... 15

Table 7. List of vegetation communities of Grand Portage National Monument, with number of 

field observations.......................................................................................................................... 18

Table 8. Physiognomic modifiers assigned to polygons during photointerpretation for the Grand 

Portage National Monument vegetation mapping project. ........................................................... 26

Table 9. White pine density and stratum modifiers assigned to polygons during 

photointerpretation for the Grand Portage National Monument vegetation mapping project. ..... 26

Table 10. Map-class distribution within the National Vegetation Classification Standard for the 

Grand Portage National Monument vegetation mapping project. ................................................ 28

Table 11. Map classification with crosswalk to the National Vegetation Classification Standard 

(Version 2) for the Grand Portage National Monument vegetation mapping project. ................. 30

Table 12. Frequencies and areas of map classes (organized via the National Vegetation 

Classification Standard) represented in the vegetation map layer for the Grand Portage National 

Monument vegetation mapping project. ....................................................................................... 35

Table 13. Frequencies and areas of map classes (compiled at the group level in the National 

Vegetation Classification Standard) represented in the vegetation map layer for the Grand 

Portage National Monument vegetation mapping project. ........................................................... 37
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Preface vii

Executive Summary

The National Park Service (NPS) Vegetation Inventory Program (VIP) is an effort to classify, 

describe, and map existing vegetation of national park units for the NPS Natural Resource 

Inventory and Monitoring Program. The NPS VIP is managed by the NPS Biological Resources 

Management Division and provides baseline vegetation information to the NPS Natural 

Resource Inventory and Monitoring Program. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Vegetation 

Characterization Program lends a cooperative role in the NPS VIP. Scientists at the USGS Upper 

Midwest Environmental Sciences Center, NatureServe, and NPS Grand Portage National 

Monument have completed vegetation classification and mapping of the Grand Portage National 

Monument (GRPO).

Photointerpreters, ecologists, and botanists collaborated to identify and describe vegetation types 

within the National Vegetation Classification Standard (NVCS) and to determine how best to 

map them by using aerial photographs. The team collected 23 vegetation sampling plots within 

the GRPO project extent. Furthermore, data from 147 accuracy assessment (AA) sites were 

collected (of which all were used to test accuracy of the vegetation map layer). These data sets 

led to the identification of 20 vegetation associations in the NVCS at the GRPO. Additional 

vegetation types are recognized at the group level in the NVCS.

A total of 35 map classes were developed to map the vegetation and general land cover of GRPO

and environs, including the following: 31 map classes representing natural/semi-natural 

vegetation types at various levels in the NVCS, one map class representing cultural vegetation 

(e.g., developed) in the NVCS, and three map classes representing non-vegetated units (e.g., 

open water bodies). Features were interpreted by using high-quality stereoscopes over light 

tables and 1:12,000-scale, color-infrared aerial photographs dated October 2006 (during fall leaf

change). Polygon units were mapped to a 0.25-ha minimum mapping unit. An ancillary set of 

1:8,000-scale, true-color aerial photos dated May 2003 (during leaf-off conditions) covering the 

entire GRPO lands were used for additional reference during mapping. The interpreted data were 

digitally and spatially referenced, making the spatial database layers usable in a geographic 

information system.

A geodatabase containing various feature class layers and tables show the locations of vegetation 

types and general land cover (vegetation map), vegetation plot samples, AA sites, project 

boundary extent, and aerial photographic centers. The feature class layer for the GRPO 

vegetation map provides 423 polygons of detailed attribute data covering 291.8 ha, with an 

average polygon size of 0.7 ha. Of the area mapped, 413 polygons (97.6%) represent 

natural/semi-natural types in the NVCS, encompassing 279.2 ha (690 acres; 95.7%) of the total 

map extent.

Summary reports generated from the vegetation map layer indicate that forest types dominate the 

vegetation landscape (types from the NVCS), populating 93.7% of the polygons and covering 

96.5% of the area, and are largely dominated by Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest and Aspen - Birch / 

Boreal Conifer Forest associations. Although not common throughout the GRPO, the Whitecedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest association was mapped more frequently on the westward

end. The White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest association was mapped intermittently 

throughout the GRPO. Some associations were mapped only to the Lake Superior area around 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Preface viii

the village of Grand Portage, including Jack Pine / Balsam Fir Forest, Boreal Pine Rocky 

Woodland, and Boreal Hazelnut - Serviceberry Rocky Shrubland. Several other ruderal 

vegetation types growing in response to the human history of this area were also mapped. An 

herbaceous wetland association—Water Horsetail - Spikerush Marsh—was mapped only to the 

Pigeon River at the opposite end of the GRPO. 

A thematic AA study was conducted of map classes representing floristic types within the

NVCS. Results present an overall accuracy of 91.8% (Kappa index of 90.7%) based on data from 

147 AA sites. Most individual map-class themes exceed the NPS VIP standard of 80%, with a 

90% confidence interval.

The GRPO vegetation mapping project delivers many geospatial and vegetation data products in 

hardcopy and digital formats. These products consist of an in-depth project report discussing 

methods and results, which include descriptions and a dichotomous key to vegetation types, map 

classification and map class descriptions, and a contingency table showing AA results. They also 

include ground photos of vegetation types; a database of vegetation plots and AA sites; field data 

sheets; aerial photographic prints and images; hardcopy maps; and a geodatabase of vegetation 

types (map layer), fieldwork locations (vegetation plots and AA sites), aerial photographic 

indexes, and a project boundary. All geospatial products are projected in Universal Transverse 

Mercator, Zone 16, using the North American Datum of 1983. More NPS VIP information and 

products of completed park mapping projects are on the Internet at 

<http://biology.usgs.gov/npsveg/>.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Preface ix

Acknowledgments

The success of this complex project was dependent on the collaborative efforts of several 

individuals from various organizations. The dedicated folks who worked on this project 

collectively have a wide array of skills and expertise, essential in moving the National Park 

Service (NPS) Grand Portage National Monument (GRPO) vegetation mapping project to its 

completion. We wish to acknowledge those individuals who have been essential in making this 

project a success.

We respectfully thank the NPS Vegetation Inventory Program (VIP) and the U.S. Geological 

Survey (USGS) Vegetation Characterization Program (VCP) staff for entrusting this project to 

us, including Karl Brown (NPS VIP Coordinator) for funding the GRPO vegetation mapping 

project, Mike Mulligan (USGS VCP Coordinator) for providing additional funding support for 

the vegetation mapping effort, and Chris Lea and Tammy Cook (NPS VIP) for giving us 

guidance when we needed it.

We also thank Bill Route and Ulf Gafvert of the NPS Great Lakes Network for supporting and 

coordinating a cluster approach to classify and map the remaining six national park units within 

the network. Further thanks are given to Ulf for managing the acquisition of fall, color-infrared 

aerial photography for the project.

Thanks are also in order to the NPS GRPO staff—particularly Brandon Seitz and David 

Cooper—for hosting this project with meetings and subsequent field efforts. The staff provided 

the project with valuable local knowledge of the GRPO landscape, as well as insight into local 

management and research needs. We also appreciate the use of a set of spring, leaf-off, true-color 

aerial photographs belonging to GRPO; these greatly assisted us in our mapping.

We also acknowledge and thank those who put forth their effort in classification and data 

collection, which formed the basis of so much of this project. We give thanks to Chel Anderson

of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources who provided us a state perspective on plant 

communities, consulted with us during our mapping field reconnaissance, and provided us some 

plant identification from our various fieldwork efforts. We also recognize our lead ecologist, 

Janet Marr, and her loyal field assistant, Matt Smith, for vegetation-plot data collection. 

Furthermore, we are grateful to Brandon Seitz of GRPO for co-laboring with us in data 

collection at accuracy assessment sites.

We finally thank our colleagues from within our own offices—the USGS Upper Midwest 

Environmental Sciences Center and NatureServe. Of the USGS, we acknowledge Janis Ruhser 

for orthorectification and map automation, and JC Nelson and the student geographic 

information system lab for quality control of map automation. In addition we recognize JC’s 

assistance with random site selection for AA, building the geodatabase, and writing the metadata. 

Of NatureServe, we acknowledge Mary Russo for getting classification data into and out of the 

central database with such ease and speed.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Preface x

This project required the cooperation and assistance of many individuals. Their diligence in 

working on this multifarious project is highly regarded and appreciated because their labors went 

toward so many aspects of this project—from developing the vegetation classification to creating 

the spatial geodatabase.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Introduction 1

Introduction

Grand Portage National Monument Vegetation Mapping Project

The Grand Portage National Monument (GRPO) vegetation mapping project is an initiative of 

the National Park Service (NPS) Vegetation Inventory Program (VIP), with cooperative support 

from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Vegetation Characterization Program (VCP), to 

classify and map plant communities of GRPO. The goals of the project are to adequately 

describe and map plant communities of GRPO and to provide the NPS Natural Resource 

Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) Program, resource managers, and biological researchers with 

useful baseline vegetation information.

The GRPO vegetation mapping project is also part of a cluster approach to classify and map 

plant communities of the remaining park units within the Great Lakes Network (GLKN) of the 

I&M Program. A cluster approach provided an avenue for advancing consistency of the 

vegetation classification throughout the network as well as the mapping thereof. With Voyageurs 

National Park and Isle Royale National Park already completed (mid-1990s), six GLKN park 

units needing vegetation inventory remained, including Apostle Islands National Lakeshore, 

Grand Portage National Monument, Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, Pictured Rocks National 

Lakeshore, Saint Croix National Scenic Riverway, and Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore. 

With this cluster of six park units, an approach was taken to classify and map the vegetation of 

these park units in a somewhat staggered timeline (Table 1), providing some opportunity to share 

results and experiences from park units of the same regional locale.

Table 1. Timeline of the vegetation mapping initiative for the Great Lakes Network.

[AA, Accuracy Assessment; Clsf, Classification; Mtg, Meeting; Veg, Vegetation]

National Park 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Indiana Dunes 

National Lakeshore Air Photos Scope Mtg

Veg Plots

Veg Clsf

Mapping

Mapping

Field AA

AA Analysis

Wrap-up

Product

Updates

Apostle Islands 

National Lakeshore Air Photos Scope Mtg

Veg Plots Veg Plots Veg ClsfMapping

Mapping

Field AA

AA Analysis

Wrap-up Wrap-up

Pictured Rocks 

National Lakeshore Air Photos Scope Mtg

Veg Plots

Veg Clsf

Mapping

Mapping

Field AA

AA Analysis

Wrap-up Wrap-up

Grand Portage 

National Monument Air Photos Scope Mtg

Veg Plots Mapping

Field AA

AA Analysis Wrap-up

Sleeping Bear 

Dunes National 

Lakeshore

Scope Mtg

Veg Plots

Air Photos

Veg Clsf

Mapping

Mapping

Field AA AA Analysis Wrap-up

Saint Croix National 

Scenic Riverway Air Photos Scope Mtg

Veg Plots

Veg Plots

Veg Clsf

Mapping

Veg Clsf

Mapping

Mapping

Field AA

Field AA

AA Analysis

AA Analysis

Wrap-up

We officially inaugurated the GRPO vegetation mapping project May 31–June1, 2006, with a 

scoping meeting wherein partners discussed project objectives, goals, and methods. Major 

collaborators at this meeting included staff from NPS VIP, NPS GLKN, NPS GRPO, 

NatureServe, and the USGS. Common to all NPS VIP projects, the three major components of 

the GRPO vegetation mapping project are (1) vegetation classification, (2) vegetation mapping, 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program 

Grand Portage National Monument

Introduction 2 

and (3) map accuracy assessment. In this report, we discuss each of these fundamental 

components in detail.

The National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

The NPS VIP is an effort to classify, describe, and map existing vegetation of national park 

units. Managed by the NPS Biological Resources Management Division, the NPS VIP provides 

baseline vegetation information for the NPS Natural Resource I&M Program. The USGS VCP

lends a cooperative role in the NPS VIP. Vegetation layers and associated information support a 

wide variety of resource assessment, park management, and planning needs. They also provide 

structure for framing and answering critical scientific questions about vegetation communities 

and their relation to environmental processes across the landscape. 

Program scientists developed procedures for classification, mapping, and accuracy assessment 

(The Nature Conservancy [TNC] and Environmental Systems Research Institute 1994a, 1994b, 

TNC et al. 1994, NatureServe 2004). Ecology and mapping teams worked together to share 

knowledge and data and to resolve issues regarding classification and mapping procedures. The 

NPS VIP products meet Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) standards for vegetation 

classification and metadata and meet national standards for spatial accuracy and data transfer. 

Mapping standards include a minimum mapping unit (MMU) of 0.5 ha (1.2 acres) and 

classification accuracy meeting or exceeding 80% (with a 90% confidence level) for map classes 

representing plant communities. All geospatial products are projected in Universal Transverse 

Mercator (UTM) and use the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83). 

The NPS VIP provides an array of data products. Spatial products include aerial photographs; 

spatial databases of vegetation, including metadata; map classification description or key; hardcopy maps of vegetation; and accuracy assessment of the vegetation map. Vegetation products 

include vegetation classification, dichotomous field key to the vegetation classes, formal 

descriptions and ground photos of the vegetation types, and field data in database format. More 

NPS VIP information and products of completed park mapping projects are on the Internet at 

<http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/inventory/veg/> and <http://biology.usgs.gov/npsveg/>.

Natural Resource Inventory and Monitoring Program

The NPS Natural Resource I&M Program is a long-term effort to acquire information needed to 

help maintain ecosystem integrity for all NPS units with significant natural resources. One of the 

long-term goals of the I&M Program is to produce baseline inventories of basic biological and 

geophysical natural resources. The NPS VIP provides detailed vegetation maps based on aerial 

photographs and meets specified thematic accuracy standards (80%) set by the I&M Program. In 

producing vegetation maps, the NPS VIP also provides a listing of plant species derived from its 

mapping projects, contributing yet another baseline inventory product for the I&M Program. 

More information on the I&M Program is on the Internet at 

<http://science.nature.nps.gov/im/index.cfm>.

Vegetation Inventory Program Standards

The NPS VIP uses nationally defined standards, some of which are maintained by the FGDC. 

These include the following: 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Introduction 3

• National Vegetation Classification Standard (FGDC 2008),

• Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata (FGDC 1998a),

• Spatial Data Transfer Standard (FGDC 1998b),

• United States National Map Accuracy Standards (U.S. Geological Survey 1999), and

• Integrated Taxonomic Information System (U.S. Department of Agriculture).

Descriptions and links to websites for these standards can be accessed at 

<http://biology.usgs.gov/npsveg/standards.html>.

The National Vegetation Classification Standard

In 1997, the FGDC adopted the Vegetation Classification Standard: FGDC-STD-005-1997 

(FGDC 1997). Since then, the FGDC Vegetation Subcommittee has derived a major revision,

which is the National Vegetation Classification Standard (NVCS), Version 2: FGDC-STD-005-

2008 (Version 2) (FGDC 2008). This revision was an effort to foster a cohesive view between 

federal agencies in their approach to classifying vegetation, thus reducing duplicative efforts 

among multiple agencies. Version 2 replaced the original and addressed several issues known 

with the first version and includes a substantial reorganization to the classification hierarchical 

structure. The purpose of the classification standard is to promote consistent classification of 

vegetation resources across regions. The use of a national standard aids effective resource 

stewardship by augmenting compatibility and widespread use of the information throughout the 

NPS and other Federal and State agencies.

The NVCS classifies existing vegetation. In brief, the classification is separated into two 

overriding categories, including natural vegetation (including semi-natural) and cultural 

vegetation. From there, each category is further divided into three main sections, including the 

following: (1) Upper (where physiognomy plays a predominant role), (2) Middle (where both 

floristics and physiognomy play a significant role), and (3) Lower, where Floristics plays a 

predominant role. Within each section, additional levels are subset. Separate hierarchies are 

developed for cultural and natural vegetation types. Definitions to these various Levels are 

detailed within Section 2 of the NVCS (FGDC 2008). Tables 2 and 3 show hierarchical

structures for both natural and cultural vegetation.

Table 2. Hierarchy for natural/semi-natural vegetation (with examples) in the National Vegetation 

Classification Standard (Version 2).

Level Example

Upper: Physiognomy plays a predominant role.

Formation Class Forest & Woodland Class (1.)

Formation Subclass Temperate Forest (1.C.)

Formation Temperate Flooded & Swamp Forest (1.C.3.)

Middle: Both floristics and physiognomy play a significant role.

Division Northeastern & Central North American Flooded & Swamp Forest (1.C.3.a.)

Macrogroup Northern & Central Swamp Forest (MG030.)

Group Northern & Central Alkaline Conifer & Hardwood Swamp (G046.)

Lower: Floristics plays a predominant role.

Alliance Fraxinus nigra -Acer rubrum Saturated Forest (A.347)

Association Fraxinus nigra-Mixed Hardwoods-Conifers / Cornus sericea / Carex spp. Forest 

(CEGL002105)
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Introduction 4

Table 3. Hierarchy for cultural vegetation (with examples) in the National Vegetation Classification 

Standard.

Level Example

Upper: Physiognomy plays a predominant role.

Cultural Class Agricultural Vegetation

Cultural Subclass Herbaceous Agricultural Vegetation

Cultural Formation Pasture / Hay

Cultural Subformation Permanent Pasture & Hayland

Middle: Both floristics and physiognomy play a significant role.

Cultural Group [optional] Temperate and Tropical Permanent Pasture & Hayland

Cultural Subgroup Grass

Lower: Floristics plays a predominant role.

Cultural Type Co-dominance of tall fescue & perennial ryegrass

Cultural Subtype

[optional]

Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata

Metadata are data that describe the content, quality, condition, and other characteristics of other 

data. As a standard product, the NPS VIP employs FGDC-compliant metadata files for each 

spatial data set it produces. In 1998, the FGDC approved the Content Standard for Digital 

Geospatial Metadata, FGDC-STD-001-1998 (FGDC 1998a). This metadata standard uses a 

common set of terminology and definitions to document digital geospatial data. For spatial data 

sets involving biological components, the NPS VIP uses the FGDC-endorsed Biological Data 

Profile (a profile is a set of information specific to a discipline, in this instance the biological 

sciences discipline), which is a biological metadata standard developed by the National 

Biological Information Infrastructure. This is known as the Biological Data Profile of the 

Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata, FGDC-STD-001.1-1999 (FGDC 1999).

Grand Portage National Monument

Location and Brief History

The GRPO (Figure 1) is located in northeast Minnesota in Cook County and near the Canada 

border. The Grand Portage (portage trail) stretches 13.7 km (8.5 miles) between the shores of 

Lake Superior and the Pigeon River, which borders Canada. The GRPO is located in an area of 

287.3 ha (710 acres), with 91.5 m (300 feet) on each side of the majority of the portage trail. At 

each end of the portage trail are historic sites. At the village of Grand Portage, the Stockade and 

Great Hall nestles below Mount Rose on the shores of Lake Superior (Figure 2). Near the Pigeon 

River is the Site of Fort Charlotte (Figure 3). The Grand Portage bridges Lake Superior with the 

Pigeon River, which was an important fur trading venue most active during the late 18th century. 

The Grand Portage became the most direct route from the Great Lakes region to the Canadian 

interior lands, bypassing numerous waterfalls of the Pigeon River. The GRPO was authorized in 

1958 by the U.S. Congress to preserve and interpret fur trade and Ojibwe history and culture of 

the 18th century.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Introduction 5

Figure 1. Grand Portage National Monument, Minnesota (courtesy nps.gov).

Figure 2. Stockade and Great Hall at the Grand 

Portage National Monument.

Figure 3. Monument at the Site of Fort Charlotte at 

the Grand Portage National Monument.

Landscape Setting

Significant to traders and voyageurs choosing the portage route, The Grand Portage treks its way 

through the landscape by avoiding several steep hills, some over 90-m high. According to 

Marschner (1974) and his study of Government Land Office Survey records of Minnesota

(interpretation of Public Land Survey bearing tree data), the forests of the region during the late

19th century were primarily of eastern white pine (Pinus strobus), mixed with red pine (Pinus

resinosa) on the western half of the portage (toward the Pigeon River), and aspens (Populus

spp.), paper birch (Betula papyrifera), and conifers—most commonly white spruce (Picea 

glauca) and balsam fir (Abies balsamea)—on the eastern half (toward Lake Superior). Then, at 

the turn of the century, logging events, white pine blister rust, and fire suppression significantly 

reduced the pine population throughout the landscape, and a major shift toward aspen-birchspruce-fir forests flourished as the matrix forest throughout the entire area of GRPO (Figure 4),

with relic white pine stands scattered throughout the western half (Figure 5). Northern white-
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Introduction 6

cedar (Thuja plicata) is more common on the western third of GRPO than on the eastern twothirds (Figure 6). Nearer Lake Superior, the soil is thin and basalt bedrock manifests itself for 

only a brief distance inland from the lakeshore, just beyond (west of) U.S. Highway 61. Most 

known of the basalt formation at the GRPO is Mount Rose, which abruptly rises 105 m (345 

feet) above the waters of Lake Superior (Figure 7).

Figure 4. Aspen-birch-spruce-fir forest, which is the 

matrix forest of the Grand Portage National 

Monument.

Figure 5. Relic eastern white pine along the shores 

of the Pigeon River at the Grand Portage National 

Monument.

Figure 6. Northern white-cedar forest near the Site 

of Fort Charlotte at the Grand Portage National 

Monument.

Figure 7. Basalt outcrops on Mount Rose,

overlooking Lake Superior at the Grand Portage 

National Monument.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Project Overview 7

Project Overview

General Process

The three main components of the Grand Portage National Monument (GRPO) vegetation 

mapping project are as follows: (1) vegetation classification, (2) vegetation mapping, and (3) 

map accuracy assessment (AA). Our objectives were to identify and map existing vegetation 

communities of GRPO.

Color-infrared (CIR) aerial photographs of the study area were collected during fall 2006, 

providing aerial photos for fieldwork and mapping. True-color (TC) aerial photographs had also

been collected during spring 2003 (before the inception of this project). The scoping meeting for 

the GRPO vegetation mapping project was held May 30–31, 2007, at Grand Portage, Minnesota. 

At this meeting, primary partners met to discuss and plan the vegetation mapping project.

During the summer of 2007, botanists collected vegetation samples for plant community 

characterization. We entered the sampling data into the National Park Service (NPS) PLOTS 

Database (NatureServe 2005) and performed analyses, which provided detailed ecological

information to affirm plant communities at the GRPO and document them with local descriptors.

The vegetation classification was later modified with additional field reconnaissance and data

from AA sites.

Before mapping, we performed field reconnaissance during the summer of 2008 to correlate 

vegetation types to their appearances on aerial photographs. This resulted in the development of 

a map classification. An understanding of vegetation types is essential for mapping them. As 

vegetation concepts became known from either field or lab, we applied them to our 

photointerpretative mapping.

We completed a draft version of the vegetation map—a spatial database layer—for AA. During 

the summer of 2009, a field crew collected data of stratified and randomly selected sites for 

evaluating the accuracy of the vegetation map layer. Results were tabulated into a contingency 

matrix.

Ultimately, we developed a geodatabase containing four feature classes: vegetation points 

(containing vegetation sample points and AA sites), vegetation and land use polygons (showing 

locations of vegetation types and general land features), 1:12,000-scale CIR aerial photograph 

centers, and project boundary extent. Included in the geodatabase are several tables providing a 

suite of supporting information, from classification crosswalks to detailed sampling data. All 

geospatial products are projected in the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM), Zone 16, using

the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83).

Scoping Meeting

We officially launched the mapping project with a scoping meeting held at Grand Portage, 

Minnesota, on May 30–31, 2007. Various cooperators joined together to discuss the GRPO

vegetation mapping project objectives and methods, receive assignments, and view firsthand the 

landscape and vegetation at the GRPO (Figure 8). Individuals from NPS GRPO, NPS GLKN, 

USGS Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center, and NatureServe met to achieve the 

following objectives:
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Project Overview 8

• Inform the GRPO staff of the classification and mapping project,

• Learn about management and science issues and concerns at the GRPO,

• Learn about existing data,

• Explore possible cooperation with neighbors and partners,

• Develop an action plan for vegetation classification and mapping, and

• Define project boundary.

Figure 8. Participants of the scoping meeting viewing, firsthand, vegetation types at the Grand Portage 

National Monument.

Project Boundary Extent

The GRPO vegetation mapping project boundary extent consists of the entire GRPO lands, plus 

20 m into Lake Superior from the shoreline, and across the Pigeon River to its shoreline just into 

Canada (Figure 9). The total map extent is 291.8 ha, including all the GRPO lands and the small 

environs. The GRPO comprises 287.2 ha (98.5%) of the total map area, with the remaining 4.6

ha (1.5%) being environs. We produced a feature-class layer showing the extent of the project 

boundary and incorporated it into the GRPO vegetation mapping project geodatabase.

Figure 9. Project boundary for the Grand Portage National Monument vegetation mapping project.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Project Overview 9

Aerial Photography

Aerial photographs provide the baseline imagery data for mapping plant communities and other 

feature units. Vertical photographs (photographs taken with the aerial camera pointed straight 

down at the ground) collected with proper overlapping within each flight line permit an 

interpreter to study the photographs three-dimensionally with a stereoscope (Avery 1978). 

Because ecologic settings are taken into account in mapping plant communities, the ability to 

view aerial photographs in this way is fundamental.

A variety of film emulsions are available from which to choose, and Avery (1978) concludes that 

no single film emulsion serves all purposes. Our aim with collecting aerial photography for the 

GRPO vegetation mapping project was to capture peak leaf-color change, aiding mapping in 

viewing distinctions between various deciduous forest types.

A set of CIR aerial photographs was collected on October 4, 2006. This photo mission was 

funded by the NPS VIP, and supervised by GLKN staff. This set of photography covered the 

entire GRPO vegetation mapping project extent at 1:12,000-scale and was the primary imagery 

used in photointerpretative mapping.

In support of mapping from the CIR photos, we used a set of TC aerial photographs (1:8,000-

scale) that was collected May 2, 2003, providing deciduous leaf-off viewing of the entire extent. 

This photo mission was funded by GRPO and supervised by GLKN staff. Having the TC photos 

gave interpreters a definite advantage in determining evergreen tree and shrub components 

within forest communities otherwise obscured by deciduous tree canopy on the fall-season CIR

photos, thus giving credence to Avery’s statement regarding lack of a single all-purpose film 

emulsion.

To assure stereo viewing and full aerial coverage, aerial photo missions were planned with a 

60% forward-lap and 30% side-lap. Contact prints of both CIR and TC photo sets were produced 

for fieldwork use by mappers and vegetation crews. Diapositives of the CIR photo set were 

produced for photointerpretative mapping.

Table 4 gives details to the aerial photography acquired for the GRPO vegetation mapping 

project.

Table 4. Aerial photography sets for the Grand Portage National Monument vegetation mapping project.

[CIR, color-infrared; TC, true-color; GRPO, Grand Portage National Monument]

Photography 

date Film type Scale Photos Products Company

October 4, 

2006

CIR Transparency 

(Positive)

1:12,000 67* Contact Print 

Diapositive

Orthophotograph

Pinnacle Mapping Technologies, Inc.

May 2, 

2003

TC Transparency 

(Positive)

1:8,000 55* Contact Print

Orthophotograph

Great Lakes Aerial Survey, Inc.

for Ayers Associates

*The CIR and TC photography missions included an extended area surrounding GRPO. Twelve CIR aerial photographs, plus any 

necessary additional stereo pairs, and complementary TC photographs were used to map GRPO.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Project Overview 10

We produced a feature-class layer locating the centers of CIR aerial photographs (1:12,000-

scale) obtained in October 2006 (Figure 10). This feature class is incorporated into the GRPO

vegetation mapping project geodatabase. In addition, a digital orthophotographic mosaic of the 

CIR aerial photographs from October 2006 has been produced by the aerial photo contractor.

Figure 10. Centers of color-infrared aerial photographs (1:12,000-scale) obtained in October 2006 for the

Grand Portage National Monument vegetation mapping project.

Minimum Mapping Units

Because much of the GRPO boundary is narrow and linear in shape, we applied a minimum 

mapping unit (MMU) of 0.25 ha for mapping vegetation types and land features. This is half the 

size of a standard MMU in the NPS VIP. For vegetation types unique to their immediate 

surroundings (e.g., emergent wetland within an upland forest setting), we allowed for mapping 

down to half the MMU standard set for the GRPO vegetation mapping project1

Classification Organization

. In addition, we

applied a secondary MMU standard of 1.0 ha for physiognomic feature changes within a 

particular map class (e.g., open versus closed forest). We used MMU templates to help us 

determine minimum polygon size on the photographs during mapping. Because of angle 

distortions inherent to nonrectified aerial photos, and slight scale changes from high ridges to 

valley bottoms, we applied our MMU standards liberally.

Throughout this project report and the final products related to the GRPO vegetation mapping 

project (e.g., the geodatabase), we have organized the vegetation classification with the National 

Vegetation Classification Standard (NVCS), Version 2 (FGDC 2008). In the NVCS, separate 

 

1 Note that several polygons along the project boundary are smaller than the MMU standards for the GRPO vegetation mapping 

project because the vegetation map layer is clipped to the project boundary. We allowed clipped polygons as small as 0.05 ha 

along the project boundary.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Project Overview 11

categories are provided for natural and cultural vegetation. Typically, areas having 1% or more 

of their surface area covered with live vegetation are classified within the NVCS. The NVCS

excludes non-vegetated natural lands (e.g., rock) and waters (e.g., lakes, rivers). For these, we 

employed classifications as provided by the 2001 National Land Cover Database (Homer et al. 

2004).

Throughout this report, the term “vegetation type” is used to name vegetation classification units, 

in general, at any level of the hierarchy within the NVCS. For example, the Northern Hardwood 

- Hemlock - White Pine Forest Group and the Alnus incana Swamp Shrubland Association are 

both treated as vegetation types.

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Vegetation Classification 13

Vegetation Classification

Methods

Preliminary Classification

The first step in classifying the vegetation of Grand Portage National Monument (GRPO) was to 

prepare a preliminary classification report prior to the May 2007 scoping meeting. This report for 

the GRPO area was generated by reviewing all associations and alliances in the National 

Vegetation Classification Standard (NVCS) that are attributed to Minnesota or Ontario in the

Great Lakes Ecoregion (ECO48). This list was derived by The Nature Conservancy (TNC), and 

covered a much broader area than the GRPO project area, included many types that were very 

unlikely to occur there. The initial list of possible associations and alliances was reviewed by 

NatureServe and GRPO staff to remove vegetation types thought unlikely to occur at the GRPO. 

The resulting, preliminary classification report included 49 associations and served as a rough 

guide to the number and kind of vegetation types the field crew might encounter during 

vegetation plot sampling and helped us to determine how much data field crews would need to

collect to adequately survey the project area.

Data Collection Preparation

The protocols for the National Park Service (NPS) Vegetation Inventory Program (VIP) allowed

for the collection of approximately three plots per estimated vegetation type (from the

preliminary classification report), on average. The preliminary classification listed 49 possible 

associations in the project area. Several of those were similar to each other, though, and we 

expected only one or two of those to actually be present in the project area. For example, we 

suspected there would be sparsely vegetated cliffs and talus slopes in the project area. There 

were five sparsely vegetated cliff and talus slope associations listed in the preliminary 

classification. We did not know which of those would best fit the data we would gather from the 

project area, but we suspected that the data would best fit one, two, or, at most, three of those 

five. So, although we had five sparsely vegetated cliffs and talus slopes in the preliminary 

classification, we estimated that we would need only six plots to adequately characterize those 

areas. We did this kind of analysis for all associations in the preliminary classification and 

estimated there would be approximately 11 unique vegetation associations at the GRPO. Thus, 

our initial plan was to sample at least 33 plots.

Some vegetation types in the preliminary classification (e.g., wetlands Populus-dominated 

forests, rocky shrublands) were less well described or were expected to have variable 

composition from stand to stand, so we targeted 3–5 plots for them, whereas others (e.g., upland 

aspen forests, water-lily marshes) were well-described and/or compositionally simpler. For 

those, we only targeted 1–3 plots. We looked into using existing data to supplement our plots or 

reduce our data collection needs but did not find any suitable data.

The project boundary was essentially limited to the GRPO boundary. Thus, all vegetation 

sampling occurred on NPS-owned land. Our field team faced the problem of finding every 

vegetation type at the GRPO without knowing where they all were or even exactly what they all 

were. Our approach to this problem was to attempt to get the field team to all habitat types with 

the assumption this would allow the field crew to find as many different vegetation types as 

possible. The field crew had three primary resources to help with this, including the following:

(1) aerial photographs (1:12,000-scale, color infrared) of the project area, (2) local NPS staff, and 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Vegetation Classification 14

(3) the field crew’s own knowledge of the project area gained from prior experience and 

reconnaissance during this project.

Field Sampling

Field sampling methodology was adapted from program standards (NatureServe 2004). Details 

are provided therein, with a general summary here.

Plots were placed to represent the character of an entire stand of vegetation as well as possible. 

Plots were usually located at least 15 m from the boundary of another vegetation type to reduce 

the variability associated with the transition from one vegetation type to another. This was not 

always possible in the case of small or linear vegetation stands. It was sometimes difficult to 

determine what constituted the boundary of a unique vegetation type because two adjacent stands 

may be floristically very similar but are separated based on physiognomic criteria (e.g., amount 

of shrub cover, which may be determined by one or two species) in the NVCS.

Plots were square or rectangular and were either 100 or 400 m2, depending on the dominant 

physiognomy (Table 5). Boundaries of the plots were marked with flagging or with measuring 

tapes.

Table 5. Plot sizes used for vegetation plot sampling for the Grand Portage National Monument 

vegetation mapping project.

Dominant physiognomy Plot size Plot area

Forest: trees have their crowns overlapping, usually forming 60-100% cover. 20 x 20 m or 

40 x 10 m

400 m2

Woodland: open stands of trees with crowns usually not touching. Canopy tree cover 

25-60%, OR exceeds shrub, dwarf-shrub, herb, and nonvascular cover.

20 x 20 m or 

40 x 10 m

400 m2

Shrubland: shrubs greater than 0.5 m tall are dominant, usually forming more than 

25% cover OR exceeding tree, dwarf-shrub, herb, and nonvascular cover.

10 x 10 m or 

20 x 5 m

100 m2

Dwarf-shrubland (e.g., heath): Shrubs less than 0.5 m tall are dominant, usually 

forming more than 25% cover OR exceeds tree, shrub, herb, and nonvascular cover.

10 x 10 m or 

20 x 5 m

100 m2

Herbaceous (e.g., grassland, meadow, marsh): Herbs dominant, usually forming 

more than 25% cover OR exceeds tree, shrub, dwarf-shrub, and nonvascular cover.

10 x 10 m or 

20 x 5 m

100 m2

Nonvascular (e.g., fen, bog, cliff): nonvascular cover dominant, usually forming more 

than 25% cover.

10 x 10 m or 

20 x 5 m

100 m2

Sparse vegetation (e.g., blowout, beach): less than 10% total vegetation cover. 10 x 10 m or 

20 x 5 m

100 m2

Within each plot, the vegetation was visually separated into strata. The canopy cover and average 

height of each stratum was estimated. Within each stratum, all taxa within the plot area were 

identified, and the foliar cover of each taxon was estimated by using cover classes. (See Table 6

for cover classes and strata.) The diameter at breast height (DBH) of trees greater than 10 cm 

was recorded as well.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Vegetation Classification 15

Table 6. Cover classes and vegetation strata used during vegetation plot sampling for the Grand Portage 

National Monument vegetation mapping project.

Cover scales Vegetation strata

T 0–1% T1 Emergent Canopy

P >1–5% T2 Main Canopy

1 >5–15% T3 Subcanopy

2 >15–25% S1 Tall Shrubs

3 >25–35% S2 Short Shrubs

4 >35–45% S3 Dwarf-shrubs

5 >45–55% H Herbaceous (field layer, including tree seedlings)

6 >55–65% A1 Floating-leaved aquatics

7 >65–75% A2 Submerged-leaved aquatics

8 >75–85%

9 >85–95%

10 >95%

Environmental information, such as slope, aspect, soil texture, and evidence of disturbance, were 

recorded. Locational information, including spatial coordinates, was obtained by using global

positioning system (GPS), and written directions to the plot were provided. Digital photographs 

were taken of the plot to provide additional information and assist in classifying the plot. Finally, 

the field crew gave the plot a provisional classification name. Figure 11 shows an example of a 

vegetation plot. For an example of a plot form, see Appendix A: Plot Sampling Form.

Figure 11. Example of a vegetation plot for the Grand Portage National Monument vegetation mapping 

project.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Vegetation Classification 16

Data Analyses and Results

Field teams collected plot information in late August and early September 2007, sampling 22 

plots. One additional plot was sampled in August 2009 during the accuracy assessment (AA) 

field effort. In total, 23 vegetation samples were collected for analysis. We did not create a 

sampling strategy before the field crew began work. With GRPO being a small-sized park unit

and linear in shape, the field crew could view the majority of GRPO simply by traversing the 

length of it via the portage trail.

Plots were placed as the field crew encountered undersampled vegetation types along the length 

of GRPO (Figure 12). All field data were entered into the NPS PLOTS Database Version 2.0, a 

Microsoft Access database designed for the NPS VIP (NatureServe 2005). The plot data were 

then analyzed by using ordination (non-metric multidimensional scaling or NMS) and clustering 

techniques (Flexible Beta) with PC-Ord 5.0 (McCune and Mefford 1999).

Figure 12. Locations of the 23 vegetation plots sampled for the Grand Portage National Monument 

vegetation mapping project.

The limited number of plots collected at the GRPO presented some difficulties for our standard 

methods of analyses and classification. Our quantitative analytical strategy was to do iterative 

runs of the ordination and clustering analyses, removing groups of plots that were identified as 

most different from the rest in each run. We performed these standard analyses, and the initial 

groups reflected the distinction between wetlands and uplands (Figure 13). Subsequent groups 

were based on presence of significant woody canopy (forests, woodlands, and shrublands) versus 

herbaceous communities.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Vegetation Classification 17

Figure 13. General vegetation groups as defined by cluster and ordination analyses for the vegetation 

classification of the Grand Portage National Monument.

The small number of vegetation plots limited the effectiveness of mere quantitative analyses, 

however, so we relied more heavily on qualitative classification methods. Our qualitative 

comparison of GRPO plots with existing vegetation associations in the NVCS was greatly aided 

by other NPS VIP classification and mapping projects at two nearby and ecologically similar 

park units. Both Voyageurs National Park and Isle Royale National Park have had vegetationplot data collected and analyzed for VIP projects within the past 10 years. These two park units

have a great deal of overlap in vegetation types with GRPO. This allowed us to compare the 

GRPO plot data with vegetation summaries derived from hundreds of plots within those two 

larger park units. After the plots were classified, we had some plots assigned to associations in 

the NVCS with somewhat limited confidence. Data collected from the AA field effort was used 

to solidify some of these less certain assignments. In addition, we received guidance in 

classification matters from a local regional ecologist with the Minnesota Department of Natural 

Resources.

Through the analyses of our summer 2007 sampling plots, we identified 15 plant communities 

(associations in the NVCS). During our summer 2008 field reconnaissance for the mapping 

effort and during our summer 2009 AA in the field, we discovered five additional plant

communities that had not been characterized by the original plot data. Most of these 

communities were fairly well described from a regional perspective, so assigning them to 

vegetation associations was fairly straightforward, even without full vegetation plots. One 

community (discovered during the AA field effort) was not as well known—a sparsely vegetated 

talus of the northern toeslope of Mount Rose. Thus, a vegetation plot sample was collected of the 

site.

Three of the five plant communities were added from mapping field reconnaissance and 

consisted of two permanently flooded aquatic associations and one sparsely vegetated lakeshore 

association. The other two plant communities discovered during AA consisted of a well 

described (although unique to GRPO) jack pine-aspen forest and the sparsely vegetated talus, for 

which an additional vegetation plot was sampled.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Vegetation Classification 18

In all, a total of 20 natural/semi-natural plant associations in the NVCS were identified for 

GRPO. Table 7 lists these associations and includes the number of times each was sampled with 

a vegetation plot or an AA site. It is worth noting there were over six times as many AA sites 

sampled as vegetation plots (147 versus 23), so most of the field observations were from AA 

sites. Data from AA sites provide information on distribution and dominant species, but they do 

not provide the detail of a full vegetation plot.

Table 7. List of vegetation communities of Grand Portage National Monument, with number of field 

observations.

[NVCS, National Vegetation Classification Standard; CEGL, Community Element Global]

Group Association Name NVCS Code Observations

Forest and Woodland

Northern Hardwood - Hemlock - White Pine Forest Group

White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest CEGL002449 15

White Pine - Red Pine - Jack Pine - Oak Forest & Woodland Group

White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest CEGL002445 14

Northern & Central Alkaline Conifer & Hardwood Swamp Group

Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp CEGL002105 8

Aspen - Balsam Poplar Lowland Forest CEGL005036 10

Northern & Central Shrub Swamp Group

Gray Alder Swamp CEGL002381 16

Jack Pine - Black Spruce Forest Group

Jack Pine - Aspen / Bush-honeysuckle Forest CEGL002518 1

Jack Pine / Balsam Fir Forest CEGL002437 6

Jack Pine - Northern Pin Oak Rocky Woodland Group

Boreal Pine Rocky Woodland CEGL002483 4

White Spruce - Balsam Fir Forest Group

Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest CEGL002475 36

Spruce - Fir / Mountain Maple Forest CEGL002446 11

Aspen - Birch / Boreal Conifer Forest CEGL002466 27

Shrubland and Grassland

Eastern North American Boreal Shrubland Group

Boreal Hazelnut - Serviceberry Rocky Shrubland CEGL005197 5

Eastern North American Freshwater Marsh Group

Water Horsetail - Spikerush Marsh CEGL005258 3

Eastern North American Wet Meadow Group

Bluejoint Wet Meadow CEGL005174 4

Northern Sedge Wet Meadow CEGL002257 5

Aquatic Vegetation

Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation Group [Placeholder]

Northern Water-lily Aquatic Wetland CEGL002562 0

Midwest Pondweed Submerged Aquatic Wetland CEGL002282 0

Nonvascular and Sparse Vascular Rock Vegetation

Great Lakes Cliff & Shore Group [Placeholder]

Great Lakes Basalt - Diabase Cobble - Gravel Shore CEGL005250 1

Northern Non-Carbonate Dry Talus Vegetation CEGL005247 2

Northern Non-Carbonate Moist Talus Vegetation CEGL002409 1
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Vegetation Classification 19

For types above the association level (e.g., group) in the NVCS, we relied on general 

observations via field and aerial photo study to determine classification placement. These types 

characterize anthropogenic or natural disturbance regimes (e.g., ruderal herbaceous field, 

dynamic beaver meadow).

All associations within the NVCS that we identified at the GRPO are described in Appendix B: 

Descriptions of Vegetation Types. A key to vegetation types is provided in Appendix C: Field 

Key to Vegetation Types, which can be used in concert with the vegetation descriptions. A 

listing of plant species identified from the vegetation plot samples and AA sites are provided in 

Appendix D: List of Plant Species.

Discussion

The following are general observations regarding the vegetation of GRPO. We provide these 

general descriptions of vegetation at three locations at the GRPO, including the Lakeshore Unit, 

the Portage Corridor, and the Fort Charlotte Unit.

Lakeshore Unit

The vegetation in and around the Lakeshore Unit is distinctive because of the Lake Superior 

shoreline and hills. Along the shore is found Great Lakes cobble beach. As the Grand Portage 

creek reaches Lake Superior, it widens and is terraced by speckled alder (Alnus incana), black 

hawthorn (Crataegus douglasii), and willow (Salix spp.) thickets (Figure 14). The Mount Rose 

Trail, which ascends 100 m, includes not only spectacular views of Lake Superior, but also 

forests consisting of white spruce (Picea glauca), balsam fir (Abies balsamea), quaking aspen 

(Populus tremuloides), paper birch (Betula papyrifera), and jack pine (Pinus banksiana). Steep 

areas contain open talus slopes, both mesic and dry, depending on aspect, whereas somewhat 

more level, dry midslopes contain rocky shrublands and woodlands.

Figure 14. Shrub wetland of Grand Portage Creek with black hawthorn, gray alder, and willows.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Vegetation Classification 20

Portage Corridor

The Grand Portage makes its way through a gap in the hills north and west of Lake Superior. The 

gap was formed by more rapid weathering along bedrock that was shattered through movement 

along a crack named by geologists as the Grand Portage-Poplar Creek fault. The glaciallyscoured, moderately level portage corridor contains rather shallow soils over bedrock. It courses 

through a matrix of mesic boreal forests dominated by quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), 

white spruce (Picea glauca), balsam fir (Abies balsamea), and paper birch (Betula papyrifera)

(Figure 15). Less common are stands of northern white cedar (Thuja occidentalis), although they

are more frequent to the western third of the portage corridor. Somewhat shallower mesic soils 

contain stands of eastern white pine (Pinus strobus), with occasional red pine (Pinus resinosa).

Occurrences of jack pine (Pinus banksiana) are rare along the portage corridor. Together, the 

mesic forests contain understory shrubs of mountain maple (Acer spicatum), bush honeysuckle 

(Diervilla lonicera), alders (Alnus incana, Alnus viridis), and beaked hazel (Corylus cornuta).

Common herbs include large-leaved aster (Eurybia macrophylla), wild sarsaparilla (Aralia 

nudicaulis), and bluebead (Clintonia borealis). Also, all the mesic forests show persistent effects 

of logging, lacking the typical range in tree sizes and ages for these forests, but natural processes, 

such as wind storms and fires, can restore these over time.

Figure 15. A typical spruce-fir-aspen-paper birch mesic boreal forest in the Grand Portage National 

Monument.

Lower flat, poorly drained areas contain lowland hardwood wet swamp forests and are

dominated by balsam poplar (Populus balsamifera), black ash (Fraxinus nigra), quaking aspen 

(Populus tremuloides), and scattered conifers of northern white cedar (Thuja occidentalis), 

balsam fir (Abies balsamea), and, rarely, black spruce (Picea mariana). The common shrub in 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Vegetation Classification 21

the understory is gray alder (Alnus incana). Depending on beaver activity within some of the 

small streams, open wet meadows and marshes may form. The larger, more prominent wet 

meadow is the extensive beaver meadow located midway between old U.S. Highway 61 and the 

Site of Fort Charlotte (Figure 16). Hairy sedge (Carex lacustris) dominates this herbaceous wet 

meadow along with other common species including harlequin blueflag (Iris versicolor), 

bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis), woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus), upright sedge (Carex 

stricta), and cattail (Typha spp.).

Figure 16. Sedge-dominated beaver meadow complex, known as the Beaver Meadow, at the Grand 

Portage National Monument.

Fort Charlotte Unit

The vegetation of GRPO changes once again along the Pigeon River near the Site of Fort 

Charlotte. This river is bordered by floodplain forests dominated by black ash (Fraxinus nigra),

like the wet swamp forests more interior, but are here joined by green ash (Fraxinus 

pennsylvanica) and American elm (Ulmus americana), along with other boreal conifers and 

hardwoods. A thin band of herbaceous emergents, consisting mostly of sessilefruit arrowhead

(Sagittaria rigida) and/or water horsetail (Equisetum fluviatile), with some single-vein sweetflag 

(Acorus calamus), dominate the water margins of the Pigeon River (Figure 17). In addition, the 

rocky landscape surrounding the campsite location contains a striking dry-mesic white pine-red 

pine (Pinus strobus-Pinus resinosa) forest with a very open understory dominated by rocky 

outcrops and blueberries (Vaccinium angustifolium, V. myrtilloides).
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Vegetation Classification 22

Figure 17. Narrow band of arrowhead vegetation along the water margins of the Pigeon River at the 

Grand Portage National Monument.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Vegetation Mapping 23

Vegetation Mapping

Methods

Mapping vegetation of Grand Portage National Monument (GRPO) involved four primary steps, 

including the following: (1) field reconnaissance, (2) map classification, (3) photointerpretation, 

and (4) digital map automation and database development. Although these steps occurred 

sequentially, they overlap to some degree.

Preliminary Map Classification

Prior to field reconnaissance, it is advantageous for photointerpreters to become familiar with 

any known vegetation types to be mapped. Having a map classification in hand with initial 

mapping conventions, as preliminary as they might be, promotes continuity from the classifier to 

the mapper at the onset of the vegetation mapping process. As well, this preliminary step puts in 

the hands of the photointerpreters the foundations of a working map classification (one that will 

undoubtedly go through many updates and revisions throughout the vegetation mapping 

process).

The vegetation classification for GRPO had been developed via analyses of the vegetation 

sampling data collected the prior year. Thus, we met as classifiers and mappers in Redwing, 

Minnesota, during May 2008 to discuss the vegetation classification and how vegetation types 

might best be represented in a workable map classification. Pertinent details about the vegetation 

types that might aid in making interpretive decisions were assembled into mapping conventions.

Field Reconnaissance

In preparation to map vegetation types, photointerpreters (with aerial photographs in hand)

invested several days in the field investigating ground conditions. This process is necessary, as 

Hershey and Befort (1995) explain, because color-infrared (CIR) photography is not consistent

enough between photo sets to allow a species or type to be described precisely. Film batch, 

printing process, sun angle, light intensity, shadow, and exposure can all affect the appearance of 

the contents of the photos. Hence, even as experienced photointerpreters, we engaged in formal 

ground verification of the aerial photographs. Ultimately, field reconnaissance helped us 

correlate photo signatures of the vegetation (appearances of vegetation on the aerial photographs) 

to vegetation on the ground. Field reconnaissance also allowed photointerpreters to become more 

familiar with the local ecology of plant communities, important when applying ecologic concepts 

to mapping.

Although the majority of field reconnaissance for mapping was conducted during the 2008 field 

season, a preliminary field visit to GRPO occurred during the 2007 field season to assist the

vegetation sampling crew in locating some vegetation types. This effort was coupled with some 

mapping reconnaissance as a vanguard to the 2008 effort.

Much of the field reconnaissance effort was accomplished by using a team of mappers and 

ecologists to ensure correct assessment of vegetation types in the field and, subsequently, to 

promote correct assignment during photointerpretative mapping (Figure 18). We became familiar 

with the vegetation and local ecology as we discussed the structural, floristic, and habitat 

characteristics of the vegetation encountered in the field and compared them to their appearance 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Vegetation Mapping 24

on the photos. Through this process, we built an understanding of how to map the vegetation 

types and established a working map classification with mapping protocols.

Figure 18. Field reconnaissance to promote correct assignment during photointerpretative mapping of the 

Grand Portage National Monument.

We took the photo contact prints into the field, recording notes onto photo jackets. These field 

notes included map-class assignment, if known, as well as noting significant species to promote 

proper perspective of species composition for photointerpretation (e.g., heterogeneous versus

monotypic forest stand). In essence, we built a photo signature and environmental model to base 

our decisions on during photointerpretative mapping. In addition, estimated tree heights were 

occasionally recorded to give a perspective for applying the physiognomic height modifier 

during mapping.

Map Classification

The map classification and protocols are based on existing classification systems. A map class

represents a definable feature (e.g., a vegetation type) that can be distinguished on an aerial 

photograph and/or by use of an environmental model. We linked map classes representing

natural/semi-natural plant communities to association in the National Vegetation Classification 

Standard (NVCS) as identified by NatureServe. Some vegetation types could not be assigned to 

an association because of disturbance (e.g., human or beaver). For those map classes, we 

assigned the appropriate type further up the hierarchy (e.g., group) within the NVCS. Cultural 

vegetation (e.g., roads, building grounds) are linked to the upper echelon of the NVCS and then 

further described with special modifiers by using the classification from the National Land Cover 

Database (NLCD) 2001 (Homer et al. 2004)2

For those map classes representing associations in the NVCS, we used the synonym names as

established in the classification database of NatureServe (e.g., Aspen - Birch / Boreal Conifer 

. For non-vegetated features (e.g., open water 

bodies), we derived map classes corresponding closely with the classification from NLCD 2001.

 2 The NLCD 2001 is a land cover database produced by the Multi-Resolution Land Characterization 2001 Consortium.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Vegetation Mapping 25

Forest). For map classes with phases, we used the synonym names, followed by, and in 

parenthesis, the phase name we derived, such as White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest 

(conifer - hardwood phase). We developed map-class phases when a variation of the plant 

community was recognizable on the aerial photographs and had importance for either 

management or ecologic interests. For map classes representing types above the floristic level in 

the NVCS and for non-vegetated features, we derived generic names.

We continually updated the map classification throughout the mapping effort. During the field 

reconnaissance, new information would be revealed, prompting us to modify map classes and 

their definitions. We also made revisions as the vegetation classification developed to 

completeness, as concepts were better understood. Furthermore, as aerial photos were 

interpreted, new issues arose, which forced us to redefine, expand, or polish map-class 

definitions. Even from the accuracy assessment, it was discovered that certain map classes 

originally thought to describe separate vegetation types were actually mere mapping phases of 

the same vegetation type. Throughout the project, we adjusted the map classification as needed 

to best reflect the vegetation classification we knew at the time.

We derived a map-class code for each map class merely for ease of assigning information to map 

polygons and as a short-hand language amongst team members. For each polygon, a mapattribute code is assigned, which is a code constructed of three sections, including the following: 

(1) a single map-class code, (2) a set of physiognomic modifier codes, and (3) a set of parkspecial, eastern white pine density and stratum codes3

A map-class code is made up of three alpha characters and represents an independent map class. 

Each vegetation map-class code begins with the first alpha representing the major physiognomic 

characteristic of the vegetation type, as follows:

. A hyphen separates each section of the 

three-code systems (e.g., [map class code]-[set of physiognomic modifier codes]-[set of white 

pine density and stratum codes]).

• F = Forest,

• W = Woodland,

• S = Shrubland,

• H = Herbaceous Vegetation, and

• V = Sparse Vegetation.

For developed cultural vegetation and non-vegetated features, map class codes begin with an N. 

The subsequent two alpha characters for each map class loosely represent the map-class name 

(e.g., AS for alder swamp, WM for wet meadow, DV for developed).

The physiognomic modifier codes are strings of alpha and numeric characters and, when 

applicable, follow the map-class codes. These physiognomic modifiers provide additional 

information describing the physiognomic characteristics of the vegetation within each mapped 

polygon. Table 8 lists the physiognomic modifiers we used for mapping GRPO. Table 9 lists the 

white pine density and stratum modifiers.

 3 The eastern white pine density and stratum modifiers were added to support a white pine-regeneration strategy at the GRPO.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Vegetation Mapping 26

Table 8. Physiognomic modifiers assigned to polygons during photointerpretation for the Grand Portage 

National Monument vegetation mapping project.

Category Modifier Meaning

Coverage density

(Applied to all vegetation map 

classes)

1

2

3

Closed Canopy/Continuous (60–100% cover)

Open Canopy/Discontinuous (25–60% cover)

Dispersed-Sparse Canopy (10–25% cover)

Coverage pattern

(Applied to all vegetation map 

classes)

A

B

C

D

Evenly Dispersed

Clumped/Bunched

Gradational/Transitional

Regularly Alternating

Height

(Applied to woody terrestrial 

vegetation map classes only)

2

3

4

15–30 m

5–15 m

0.5–5 m

Table 9. White pine density and stratum modifiers assigned to polygons during photointerpretation for the 

Grand Portage National Monument vegetation mapping project.

Category Modifier Meaning

White Pine Density

(Applied to map classes when any 

amount of white pine present)

S

M

D

Sparse (1–0% relative density)

Moderate (10–25% relative density)

Dense (25–100% relative density)

White Pine Stratum

(Applied to map classes when any 

amount of white pine present)

1

2

3

Only Mature

Both Mature & Mid-successional

Only Mid-successional

An example of a map-attribute code is “FCM-1A3-M2.” This code describes given map 

polygons as the conifer - hardwood phase (FCM) of the White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic 

Forest map class, which represents the Thuja occidentalis / Abies balsamea - Acer spicatum

Forest Association (CEGL002449) in the NVCS. This code also indicates that the vegetation has

a coverage density of 60–100%, a coverage pattern that is evenly distributed, and an average tree 

height of 5–15 m (16–50 ft) throughout the mapped polygon. Furthermore, the relative density of 

the white pine to other trees is 10–25%, with both mature and mid-successional white pine

present. Presenting this series of map classification and physiognomic information can greatly 

enhance the interpretation of the map layer for managers and researchers, particularly when 

introducing other geospatial data sets.

Photointerpretation

Preparation of the aerial photographs for interpretation generally followed procedures of Owens 

and Hop (1995). We placed clear acetate overlays on each aerial photograph diapositive used for 

mapping. Using the diapositive photos for photointerpretative mapping provided us with the

highest resolution possible. The diapositive photos are also dimensionally stable and virtually not 

affected by temperature and humidity changes. The paper contact prints are less desirable 

because they are grainier, and the paper base can expand and contract slightly with changes in 

temperature and humidity.

We registered the mapping overlays to the CIR aerial photos (1:12,000-scale) from October 2006

by using the fiducials (standard reference points) and photo-identification information. The CIR 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Vegetation Mapping 27

aerial photos were viewed for interpretation by using Richards MIM light tables and Bausch & 

Lomb Zoom 240 stereoscopes with variable zoom capabilities. Features within the entire project 

extent were mapped to a minimum mapping unit (MMU) of 0.25 ha between map classes and a 

MMU of 1.0 ha between physiognomic modifiers within a map-class unit. Exceptions for 

mapping below the MMU (to half of the MMU) were allowed for map-class units with 

vegetation unique to the immediate surroundings (e.g., herbaceous wetland within an upland 

forest)

4

We paired each diapositive photo with the adjacent photo (stereo pair) so we could view the

images three-dimensionally. Features were delineated and scribed to their corresponding mapattribute codes onto the acetate overlays by using Rapidograph ink pens (4x0-size, 0.18 mm) and 

Rapidraw black India ink (3084; waterproof, fast drying for film). Standard photo signature 

characteristics were applied during the photointerpretation, including texture, color, pattern, and 

position in the landscape to guide placement of polygons. In addition to photo signature 

characteristics, understanding the environmental distribution of the vegetation types helped us 

not only identify types, but also to properly place polygon boundaries. For each polygon, the 

appropriate map-class code and physiognomic modifier codes (collectively, the map-attribute 

code) were applied to each map polygon unit.

. Interpreted data—map polygons and attributes—were applied to photo overlays 

covering the CIR photos. True-color aerial photos (1:8,000-scale) from May 2003 were viewed 

digitally on computer and/or using a Topcon (MS-3) mirror stereoscope with 3x binocular 

stereoscopes to aid the interpretation of the CIR photos.

Digital Map Automation and Database Development

We converted the photointerpreted data into a format usable in a geographic information system 

(GIS) by employing three fundamental processes: (1) orthorectify, (2) digitize, and (3) develop 

the geodatabase. All digital map automation was projected in Universal Transverse Mercator 

(UTM) projection, Zone 16, using the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83).

Orthorectify: We orthorectified the interpreted overlays by using OrthoMapper, a softcopy 

photogrammetric software for GIS. One function of OrthoMapper is to create orthorectified 

imagery from scanned and unrectified imagery (Image Processing Software, Inc. 2002). The

software features a method of visual orientation involving a point-and-click operation that uses

existing orthorectified horizontal and vertical base maps. Of primary importance to us, 

OrthoMapper also has the capability to orthorectify the photointerpreted overlays of each 

photograph based on the reference information provided.

Digitize: To produce a polygon vector layer for use in ArcGIS (Environmental Systems Research 

Institute [ESRI], Redlands, California), we converted each raster-based image mosaic of 

orthorectified overlays containing the photointerpreted data into a grid format by using ArcGIS. 

In ArcGIS, we used the ArcScan extension to trace the raster data and produce ESRI shapefiles. 

We digitally assigned map-attribute codes (both map-class codes and physiognomic modifier 

codes) to the polygons and checked the digital data against the photointerpreted overlays for line 

and attribute consistency. Ultimately, we merged the individual layers into a seamless layer.

Geodatabase: At this stage, the map layer has only map-attribute code assigned to each polygon. 

To assign meaningful information to each polygon (e.g., map-class names, physiognomic 

 4 It should also be noted that we allowed polygons as low as 0.05 ha once clipped by the project boundary.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Vegetation Mapping 28

definitions, link to NVCS types), we produced a feature-class table, along with other supportive 

tables, and subsequently related them together via an ArcGIS Geodatabase. This geodatabase 

also links the map to other feature-class layers produced from this project, including vegetation 

sample plots, accuracy assessment (AA) sites, aerial photo locations, and the project boundary 

extent. A geodatabase provides access to a variety of interlocking data sets, is expandable, and 

equips resource managers and researchers with a powerful GIS tool.

Results

Map Classes

We developed 35 map classes (including map-class phases) to map GRPO. Of these 35 map 

classes, 31 represent natural/semi-natural vegetation types within the NVCS, one represents a 

cultural vegetation type (developed) within the NVCS, and three represent non-vegetated units 

(open water). Table 10 provides a breakdown of these map classes in regards to the finer levels 

of the NVCS: floristic (association), group, and macrogroup. The one unit not included in the 

NVCS is listed as well. Explanations to each are provided after the table.

Table 10. Map-class distribution within the National Vegetation Classification Standard for the Grand 

Portage National Monument vegetation mapping project.

[NVCS, National Vegetation Classification Standard; NLCD, National Land Cover Database]

NVCS Classes Map Class Floristic Group Macrogroup

FOREST & WOODLAND 19 11 9 5

SHRUBLAND & GRASSLAND 7 4 4 3

AQUATIC VEGETATION 2 2 1 1

NONVASCULAR & SPARSE VASCULAR 

ROCK VEGETATION 3 3 1 1

DEVELOPED VEGETATION CULTURAL 1 n/a n/a n/a

NVCS Total 32 20 15 10

Non-NVCS Units (NLCD 2001) Map Class

Open Water 3

Non-NVCS Total 3

Map Class Grand Total 35

Map Classes in the NVCS

Thirty-one map classes represent natural/semi-natural types in the NVCS and one represents a 

cultural type in the NVCS (developed area, which is modified into further detail using NLCD 

2001 classes). Five map classes rest at the group level in the NVCS. Twenty-six map classes 

represent 20 association types in the NVCS, of which 10 of these classes are phases to four

association types. The following is a breakdown of map classes and their relation to the NVCS, 

organized by NVCS class.

Forest & Woodland: Nineteen map classes represent 13 natural/semi-natural vegetation types.

Two map classes rest at two group types, one being a ruderal forest group and the other being a 

plantation group. Seventeen map classes represent 11 association types; 10 of these map classes 

are phases within four of the associations.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Vegetation Mapping 29

Shrubland & Grassland: Seven map classes represent six natural/semi-natural vegetation types. 

Three map classes rest at two group types, two being ruderal and one being wet meadow. The 

remaining four map classes represent four associations.

Aquatic Vegetation: Two map classes represent two natural/semi-natural vegetation types, both 

being associations within the same group.

Nonvascular & Sparse Vascular Rock Vegetation: Three map classes represent three 

natural/semi-natural vegetation types, all three being associations within the same group.

Developed Vegetation Cultural: One map class—developed areas—represents a cultural 

vegetation type at the formation level. It was modified further by using the classification in the 

NLCD 2001.

Map Classes Not in the NVCS

Three map classes represent non-vegetation features not described in the NVCS. This unit

correlates to the NLCD 2001 classification. We have categorized these map classes into the 

following group: Non-vegetated Water.

Map Classification Link to Types in the NVCS

Table 11 lists the map classes (map-class phases included) as they relate to the NVCS. It is 

organized first by class, then division, macrogroup, group, and finally floristic association. Map 

classes rest in the finest level of the NVCS possible.
Vegetation Mapping 30

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory ProgramGrand Portage National Monument

Table 11. Map classification with crosswalk to the National Vegetation Classification Standard (Version 2) for the Grand Portage National Monument

vegetation mapping project.

[NVCS, National Vegetation Classification Standard; NLCD, National Land Cover Database]

Map-class Code Map-class Name

1. FOREST & WOODLAND CLASS

1.C.2.a. Eastern North American Cool Temperate Forest Division

MG014. Northern Hardwood & Conifer Forest Macrogroup

G163. Northern Hardwood - Hemlock - White Pine Forest Group

Thuja occidentalis / Abies balsamea - Acer spicatum Forest Association (CEGL002449)

FCC White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest (conifer phase)

FCM White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest (conifer - hardwood phase)

G025. White Pine - Red Pine - Jack Pine - Oak Forest & Woodland Group

Pinus strobus / Acer spicatum - Corylus cornuta Forest Association (CEGL002445)

FWM White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (conifer mesic phase)

FWA White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (conifer - hardwood mesic phase)

FWD White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (dry-mesic phase)

MG013. Eastern North American Ruderal Forest & Plantation Macrogroup

G030. Northern & Central Hardwood & Conifer Ruderal Forest Group

FMX Conifer - Hardwood Ruderal Forest

G032. Northern & Central Conifer & Hardwood Plantation Group

FPE Conifer Plantation

1.C.3.a. Northeastern & Central North American Flooded & Swamp Forest Division

MG030. Northern & Central Swamp Forest Macrogroup

G046. Northern & Central Alkaline Conifer & Hardwood Swamp Group

Fraxinus nigra - Mixed Hardwoods - Conifers / Cornus sericea / Carex spp. Forest Association (CEGL002105)

FBA Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp (black ash phase)

FGA Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp (green ash - elm phase)

Populus tremuloides - Populus balsamifera - Mixed Hardwoods Lowland Forest Association (CEGL005036)

FAP Aspen - Balsam Poplar Lowland Forest
Vegetation Mapping 31

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory ProgramGrand Portage National Monument

Map-class Code Map-class Name

MG160. Northern & Central Tall Shrub Wetland Macrogroup

G167. Northern & Central Shrub Swamp Group

Alnus incana Swamp Shrubland Association (CEGL002381)

SAS Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (classic alder phase)

SAH Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (hawthorn mix phase)

SAW Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (willow mix phase)

1.D.1.a. North American Lowland Boreal Forest Division

MG037. Eastern & Central North American Boreal Conifer & Hardwood Forest Macrogroup

G047. Jack Pine - Black Spruce Forest Group

Pinus banksiana - Populus tremuloides / Diervilla lonicera Forest Association (CEGL002518)

FJM Jack Pine - Aspen / Bush-honeysuckle Forest

Pinus banksiana / Abies balsamea Forest Association (CEGL002437)

FJF Jack Pine / Balsam Fir Forest

G347. Jack Pine - Northern Pin Oak Rocky Woodland Group

Pinus banksiana - (Picea mariana, Pinus strobus) / Vaccinium spp. Rocky Woodland Association (CEGL002483)

WPR Boreal Pine Rocky Woodland

G048. White Spruce - Balsam Fir Forest Group

Picea glauca - Abies balsamea - Populus tremuloides / Mixed Herbs Forest Association (CEGL002475)

FCP Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest

Picea glauca - Abies balsamea / Acer spicatum / Rubus pubescens Forest Association (CEGL002446)

FSF Spruce - Fir / Mountain Maple Forest

Populus tremuloides - Betula papyrifera / (Abies balsamea, Picea glauca) Forest Association (CEGL002466)

FAC Aspen - Birch / Boreal Conifer Forest

2. SHRUBLAND & GRASSLAND CLASS

2.C.1.c. Eastern North American Grassland, Meadow & Shrubland Division

MG123. Eastern Ruderal Shrubland & Grassland Macrogroup

G059. Eastern Ruderal Shrubland & Grassland Group [Placeholder]

SDX Deciduous Ruderal Shrubland

HMX Ruderal Grassland
Vegetation Mapping 32

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory ProgramGrand Portage National Monument

Map-class Code Map-class Name

2.C.2.a. North American Boreal Grassland, Meadow & Shrubland Division

MG069. North American Boreal Shrubland & Grassland Macrogroup

G339. Eastern North American Boreal Shrubland & Grassland Group

Corylus cornuta - Amelanchier spp. - Prunus virginiana Rocky Shrubland Association (CEGL005197)

SHS Boreal Hazelnut - Serviceberry Rocky Shrubland

2.C.5.a. Eastern North America Freshwater Wet Meadow, Riparian & Marsh Division

MG069. Eastern & North-Central North American Marsh & Wet Meadow Macrogroup

G125. Eastern North American Freshwater Marsh Group

Equisetum fluviatile - (Eleocharis palustris) Herbaceous Vegetation Association (CEGL005258)

HHS Water Horsetail - Spikerush Marsh

G112. Eastern North American Wet Meadow Group

HWM Wet Meadow Mixed Herbaceous

Calamagrostis canadensis - Eupatorium maculatum Herbaceous Vegetation Association (CEGL005174)

HCC Bluejoint Wet Meadow

Carex (rostrata, utriculata) - Carex lacustris - (Carex vesicaria) Herbaceous Vegetation Association (CEGL002257)

HSG Northern Sedge Wet Meadow

5. AQUATIC VEGETATION CLASS

5.B.1.a. North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation Division

MG108. Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation Macrogroup

G114. Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation Group [Placeholder]

Nymphaea odorata - Nuphar (microphylla, variegata) Herbaceous Vegetation Association (CEGL002562)

HFA Northern Water-lily Aquatic Wetland

Potamogeton spp. - Ceratophyllum spp. Midwest Herbaceous Vegetation Association (CEGL002282)

HSV Midwest Pondweed Submerged Aquatic Wetland
Vegetation Mapping 33

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory ProgramGrand Portage National Monument

Map-class Code Map-class Name

6. NONVASCULAR & SPARSE VASCULAR ROCK VEGETATION CLASS

6.B.2.a. Eastern North American Temperate Cliff, Scree & Rock Vegetation Division

MG111. Eastern North American Cliff & Rock Vegetation Macrogroup

G341. Great Lakes Cliff & Shore Group [Placeholder]

Basalt - Diabase Cobble - Gravel Great Lakes Shore Sparse Vegetation Association (CEGL005250)

VCB Great Lakes Basalt - Diabase Cobble - Gravel Shore

Basalt - Diabase Northern Open Talus Sparse Vegetation Association (CEGL005247)

VDT Northern Non-Carbonate Dry Talus Vegetation

Granite - Metamorphic Talus Northern Sparse Vegetation Association (CEGL002409)

VMT Northern Non-Carbonate Moist Talus Vegetation

8. DEVELOPED VEGETATION CULTURAL CLASS

Herbaceous & Woody Developed Vegetation Cultural Subclass (L2)

Other Developed Urban / Built Up Vegetation Formation (L3)

Developed Area (NLCD 2001; 21-24)

NDV Developed Area

NON-NVCS UNITS

Non-Vegetated Water & Land

Non-Vegetated Water

Open Water (NLCD 2001; 11)

NSR Stream & River

NWP Open Water Pond

NWL Open Water Lake
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Vegetation Mapping 34

Map Classification Descriptions

We provide descriptions of map classes (and their phases) representing those vegetation types in 

the NVCS, as well as of non-vegetated units. These descriptions are provided in Appendix E: 

Descriptions of Map Classes. These descriptions point out the link between map classes and the 

types/units they represent. In addition, a succinct explanation is given of how map classes were 

employed during the AA analysis. Representative ground photos are provided as well. 

Summary Report of the Map Layer 

Table 12 provides a summary report of the spatial-data layer (map) of GRPO and summarizes

frequency, area, and average polygon size for each map class (including phases). Table 13

provides a compilation of the map classes to the group level in the NVCS. The summary reports 

organize the map classes by hierarchy in the NVCS and represent all lands within the established 

project boundary extent, including the environs.

Following the tables are some general observations and inferences we made from a quick study 

of the summary reports. Although many more inferences can be made, these are provided as an 

example of how one might begin to analyze the map layer and garner information from it.
Vegetation Mapping 35

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory ProgramGrand Portage National Monument

Table 12. Frequencies and areas of map classes (organized via the National Vegetation Classification Standard) represented in the vegetation map layer 

for the Grand Portage National Monument vegetation mapping project.

[Freq, Frequency; Ha, Hectare; Ave, Average; NVCS, National Vegetation Classification Standard]

Map Code Map-class Name Freq Area (Ha) Ave (Ha) Area (Ac) Ave (Ac)

FOREST & WOODLAND CLASS

Northern Hardwood - Hemlock - White Pine Forest Group

FCC White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest (conifer phase) 13 4.7 0.4 11.7 0.9

FCM White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest (conifer - hardwood phase) 19 14.7 0.8 36.3 1.9

White Pine - Red Pine - Jack Pine - Oak Forest & Woodland Group

FWM White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (conifer mesic phase) 6 2.7 0.4 6.6 1.1

FWA White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (conifer - hardwood mesic phase) 19 12.5 0.7 30.8 1.6

FWD White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (dry-mesic phase) 1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3

Northern & Central Hardwood & Conifer Ruderal Forest Group

FMX Conifer - Hardwood Ruderal Forest 1 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.4

Northern & Central Conifer & Hardwood Plantation Group

FPE Conifer Plantation 4 1.0 0.3 2.5 0.6

Northern & Central Alkaline Conifer & Hardwood Swamp Group

FBA Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp (black ash phase) 16 4.6 0.3 11.4 0.7

FGA Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp (green ash - elm phase) 1 0.3 0.3 0.8 0.8

FAP Aspen - Balsam Poplar Lowland Forest 40 18.3 0.5 45.1 1.1

Northern & Central Shrub Swamp Group

SAS Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (classic alder phase) 17 5.3 0.3 13.2 0.8

SAH Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (hawthorn mix phase) 2 1.1 0.6 2.8 1.4

SAW Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (willow mix phase) 1 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.5

Jack Pine - Black Spruce Forest Group

FJM Jack Pine - Aspen / Bush-honeysuckle Forest 1 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.7

FJF Jack Pine / Balsam Fir Forest 2 1.8 0.9 4.5 2.3

Jack Pine - Northern Pin Oak Rocky Woodland Group

WPR Boreal Pine Rocky Woodland 3 0.9 0.3 2.3 0.8

White Spruce - Balsam Fir Forest Group

FCP Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest 97 76.7 0.8 189.6 2.0

FSF Spruce - Fir / Mountain Maple Forest 38 17.0 0.4 42.1 1.1

FAC Aspen - Birch / Boreal Conifer Forest 106 106.8 1.0 263.8 2.5
Vegetation Mapping 36

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory ProgramGrand Portage National Monument

Map Code Map-class Name Freq Area (Ha) Ave (Ha) Area (Ac) Ave (Ac)

SHRUBLAND & GRASSLAND CLASS

Eastern Ruderal Shrubland & Grassland Group

SDX Deciduous Ruderal Shrubland 2 0.4 0.2 1.0 0.5

HMX Ruderal Grassland 2 1.9 1.0 4.7 2.3

Eastern North American Boreal Shrubland & Grassland Group

SHS Boreal Hazelnut - Serviceberry Rocky Shrubland 3 0.7 0.2 1.7 0.6

Eastern North American Freshwater Marsh Group

HHS Water Horsetail - Spikerush Marsh 3 1.0 0.3 2.4 0.8

Eastern North American Wet Meadow Group

HWM Wet Meadow Mixed Herbaceous 1 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.7

HCC Bluejoint Wet Meadow 3 0.6 0.2 1.6 0.5

HSG Northern Sedge Wet Meadow 5 2.9 0.6 7.2 1.4

AQUATIC VEGETATION CLASS

Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation Group

HFA Northern Water-lily Aquatic Wetland 2 0.5 0.3 1.3 0.6

HSV Midwest Pondweed Submerged Aquatic Wetland 2 0.5 0.3 1.2 0.6

NONVASCULAR & SPARSE VASCULAR ROCK VEGETATION CLASS

Great Lakes Cliff & Shore Group

VCB Great Lakes Basalt - Diabase Cobble - Gravel Shore 1 0.4 0.4 0.9 0.9

VDT Northern Non-Carbonate Dry Talus Vegetation 1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3

VMT Northern Non-Carbonate Moist Talus Vegetation 1 0.6 0.6 1.4 1.4

DEVELOPED VEGETATION CULTURAL CLASS

Developed Area

NDV Developed Area 7 7.4 1.1 18.3 2.6

NON-NVCS UNITS

Open Water

NSR Stream & River 1 2.8 2.8 6.9 6.9

NWP Open Water Pond 1 0.5 0.5 1.1 1.1

NWL Open Water Lake 1 2.0 2.0 4.8 4.8
Vegetation Mapping 37

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory ProgramGrand Portage National Monument

Table 13. Frequencies and areas of map classes (compiled at the group level in the National Vegetation Classification Standard) represented in the 

vegetation map layer for the Grand Portage National Monument vegetation mapping project.

[Freq, Frequency; Ha, Hectare; Ave, Average; NVCS, National Vegetation Classification Standard]

Map Code Map-class Name Freq Area (Ha) Ave (Ha) Area (Ac) Ave (Ac)

FOREST & WOODLAND CLASS 387 269.4 0.7 665.7 1.7

Northern Hardwood - Hemlock - White Pine Forest Group 32 19.4 0.6 48.0 1.5

White Pine - Red Pine - Jack Pine - Oak Forest & Woodland Group 26 15.3 0.6 37.8 1.5

Northern & Central Hardwood & Conifer Ruderal Forest Group 1 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.4

Northern & Central Conifer & Hardwood Plantation Group 4 1.0 0.3 2.5 0.6

Northern & Central Alkaline Conifer & Hardwood Swamp Group 57 23.2 0.4 57.4 1.0

Northern & Central Shrub Swamp Group 20 6.7 0.3 16.5 0.8

Jack Pine - Black Spruce Forest Group 3 2.1 0.7 5.2 1.7

Jack Pine - Northern Pin Oak Rocky Woodland Group 3 0.9 0.3 2.3 0.8

White Spruce - Balsam Fir Forest Group 241 200.5 0.8 495.6 2.1

SHRUBLAND & GRASSLAND CLASS 19 7.8 0.4 19.2 1.0

Eastern Ruderal Shrubland & Grassland Group 4 2.3 0.6 5.7 1.4

Eastern North American Boreal Shrubland & Grassland Group 3 0.7 0.2 1.7 0.6

Eastern North American Freshwater Marsh Group 3 1.0 0.3 2.4 0.8

Eastern North American Wet Meadow Group 9 3.8 0.4 9.5 1.1

AQUATIC VEGETATION CLASS 4 1.0 0.3 2.5 0.6

Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation Group 4 1.0 0.3 2.5 0.6

NONVASCULAR & SPARSE VASCULAR ROCK VEGETATION CLASS 3 1.1 0.4 2.6 0.9

Great Lakes Cliff & Shore Group 3 1.1 0.4 2.6 0.9

NVCS Subtotal 413 279.2 0.7 690.0 1.7

DEVELOPED VEGETATION CULTURAL CLASS

Developed Area 7 7.4 1.1 18.3 2.6

NVCS Cultural Subtotal 7 7.4 1.1 18.3 2.6

NON-NVCS UNITS

Open Water 3 5.2 1.7 12.8 4.3

Non-NVCS Subtotal 3 5.2 1.7 12.8 4.3

Grand Total 423 291.8 0.7 721.1 1.7
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Vegetation Mapping 38

Brief Analysis and Discussion

Collectively, the GRPO spatial database layer is composed of 423 polygons covering 291.8 ha, 

with an average polygon size of 0.7 ha. Map classes representing natural/semi-natural types in 

the NVCS apply to 413 polygons (97.6% of all polygons, with an average polygon size of 0.7 ha)

and cover 279.2 ha (95.7% of the entire area). The Forest & Woodland Class in the NVCS 

applies to the majority of polygons and area covered by types in the NVCS, with 387 polygons 

(93.7% of natural/semi-natural polygons, with an average polygon size of 0.7 ha) and covering 

269.4 ha (96.5% of area covered by the NVCS). 

The Forest & Woodland Class is largely dominated by the White Spruce - Balsam Fir Forest 

Group (G048), both in polygon frequency (241 polygons, with an average polygon size of 0.8 ha,

or 62.3%) and in area (200.5 ha or 74.4%). This dominance by G048 is largely because of two 

matrix forest map classes, including the Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest (FCP, with 97 polygons 

covering 76.7 ha) and the Aspen - Birch / Boreal Conifer Forest (FAC, with 106 polygons 

covering 106.8 ha). From this quick analysis, we begin to see that GRPO is largely covered by

hardwood mesic boreal forests.

The average polygon size for all natural/semi-natural map classes in the NVCS tends to be 

smaller at the GRPO than at other national park units within the Great Lakes Network (GLKN). 

Every natural/semi-natural map class for GRPO has an average polygon size of 1.0 ha or less,

with an overall average of 0.7 ha, whereas the overall average polygon size at the Apostle Islands 

National Lakeshore (also within the GLKN) is 3.7 ha (Hop et al. 2010). The standard MMU for 

GRPO is 0.25 ha, whereas the MMU for other national park units within the GLKN is 0.5 ha.

The smaller polygon sizes at the GRPO are largely due to the narrow (<200-m wide) corridor 

surrounding The Grand Portage. This narrow corridor limits polygon sizes, as many would 

continue beyond the GRPO boundary.

Cultural types in the NVCS and non-vegetated classes make up a nominal portion of the map 

layer, consisting of only 10 polygons (2.4% of all polygons) that cover just 12.6 ha (4.3% of the 

entire area). The sole map class capturing the cultural landscape is Developed Area (NDV), 

having 7 polygons covering 7.4 ha. The non-vegetated classes capture open water bodies of the 

Pigeon River, the deeper zone of a beaver pond in the Site of Fort Charlotte area, and Lake 

Superior.

Considerably more analyses and deductions can be attained even from these simple summary 

reports. Other summary tables can be derived from the map layer of localized areas (e.g., 

comparison of east and west sections of the portage trail) by clipping the map layer to its desired 

location and running new summaries. Also, more complex summary reports can be derived 

either from the map layer alone (e.g., employing physiognomic or park-special modifiers, such 

as coverage, pattern, height, white pine density, and stratum) or from introducing other spatialdata layers (e.g., invasive species, animal distribution, historical land use). By performing 

various exercises to the vegetation map layer, one can make further deductions regarding 

vegetation and its ecology.

Map Layer Presentation

Figure 19 presents the map layer produced for the GRPO vegetation mapping project. The finest 

level of the map (the map-attribute codes consisting of map classes and physiognomic modifiers) 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Vegetation Mapping 39

is too detailed to present; therefore, the map in Figure 19 is generalized, collapsing map classes 

at the group level within the NVCS. The light gray polygon boundaries are shown within to 

illustrate the finest level of the map.
Vegetation Mapping 40

Grand National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Portage National Monument

Figure 19. Vegetation of the Grand Portage National Monument, presented at the natural/semi-natural group and the cultural class levels of the 

National Vegetation Classification Standard (Version 2).
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Accuracy Assessment 41

Accuracy Assessment

Methods

Purpose

The objective of an accuracy assessment (AA) is to measure the probability that a particular 

location has been assigned its correct vegetation class. An AA estimates thematic errors in the 

data, giving users information needed to determine data suitability for a particular application. At 

the same time, data producers are able to learn more about the nature of errors in the data. Thus, 

the two views of an AA are “producers’ accuracy,” which is the probability that an AA point has 

been mapped correctly (also referred to as an error of omission), and “users’ accuracy,” which is 

the probability that the map actually represents what was found on the ground (also referred to as 

error of commission). Both producers’ and users’ accuracies can be obtained from the same set 

of data by using different analyses. Errors occur when map classes are not the same as the classes 

observed in the field. A major assumption of AA is that the process of mapping and the process 

of the assessment (e.g., the application of the classification system) are identical, so that a “false 

error” is not detected because of procedural differences. In actuality, the process of AA is based 

on field observance and the process of mapping is based on aerial photointerpretation with 

different perspectives of scale and observation.

Sampling Design

We used a stratified, random sampling approach to select AA sites. We included all primary map 

classes representing natural/semi-natural floristic vegetation types5

To determine the number of samples needed for each map class (theme), we divided the number 

of hectares for each map class by 1.67 and then rounded up to the nearest whole number. This 

formula, per guidance from National Park Service (NPS) Vegetation Inventory Program (VIP) 

staff, apportions sites per map class at near the same ratio as the standard scenarios (TNC et al. 

1994) established for the Program; however, it improves the representation of map classes that 

are less common or rare (in area and frequency). If the resulting number was greater than 30, it 

was reduced to 30, and if less than five, it was increased to five or to the maximum number the 

map-class area could accommodate based on a minimum mapping unit (MMU)

in the National Vegetation 

Classification Standard (NVCS) as the individual themes to randomly select sites. Map-class 

phases were collapsed into the primary map class they belonged to. (Recall that a map-class 

phase is a version of a vegetation type recognizable in mapping and is important for either 

management or ecological interests.) The entire Grand Portage National Monument (GRPO) was

included in the sampling design.

6

 5 Map classes representing ruderal vegetation were classified at the group level in the NVCS and were not included in the AA 

sampling design (because of the inherent variability in vegetation), with one exception—the Wet Meadow Mixed Herbaceous

(HWM) map class (which was classified as the Eastern North American Wet Meadow Group (G112) in the NVCS).

.

6 The accuracy estimate associated with rare classes cannot be stated with the same level of confidence as with more abundant 

classes. For example, with a sample size of five, the level of error in the estimate is closer to 25% at a 90% confidence level, as 

opposed to 10% with a sample size of 27. This has implications for our ability to accept a given point estimate as meeting 

accuracy requirements. Whether or not a given accuracy estimate is accepted as one that meets accuracy requirements depends on 

the width of the confidence interval associated with the point estimate and the outcome of a hypothesis test that determines if a 

given point estimate is equivalent to or exceeds requirements.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Accuracy Assessment 42

We used the above guidelines in selecting the appropriate number of sites for each map class. 

For map classes receiving a MMU of 0.25ha, a 5-m buffer was applied interior to the polygon 

boundaries to promote global positioning system (GPS) navigation into the correct polygon. For 

map classes receiving a MMU of 0.10 ha, a 2-m buffer was applied. Random AA points 

(coordinates) were generated for each map class by using Hawth’s Tools for ArcGIS (Beyer, 

H.L. 2004). The AA points were then assigned a random number used to identify each AA site 

location.

We equipped the field team with several tools to maximize their ability to accurately locate each 

AA site. We printed hard-copy maps showing locations of the AA sites, the unlabelled polygon 

boundaries of the vegetation map, the project boundary with the color-infrared aerial 

photomosaic displayed as a background. The AA site coordinates were uploaded into Trimble 

Recon units with Pathfinder XC GPS receivers, projected in Universal Transverse Mercator 

(UTM), Zone 16, using the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83). ArcPad was used to 

display AA sites, polygon boundaries, the project boundary, and the aerial photomosaic to aid 

the field crew in correctly assessing an MMU area within the proper polygon in which an AA 

site was located.

Field Data Collection

Once the AA site was reached by using the tools described above, an area equal to MMU size 

was evaluated. Using ArcPad in the Trimble Recon GPS unit, one crew member would 

determine the MMU size within the polygon boundary, thus promoting assessment within the 

intended polygon. A field GPS coordinate was collected and recorded. Other crew members 

recorded AA data, including dominant species, environmental data, and pertinent comments. 

Then, using the field key, the appropriate vegetation type would be determined and recorded. If 

the area was not homogeneous (containing more than one vegetation type), the other appropriate 

vegetation types were also listed on the data sheet.

“Quick” assessments were performed at AA sites that were clearly typical of a particular 

vegetation type—common of matrix vegetation types where data collection becomes mere 

repetitive. For quick assessments, notation was recorded regarding the typical vegetation

characteristics of the site. This allowed for an efficient field effort because the quick assessments 

did not include specific height and scale information regarding the strata and dominant species.

For a sample data sheet, refer to Appendix F: Accuracy Assessment Form.

Data Analyses

Field data for 147 AA sites were collected and entered into the NPS PLOTS Database Version 2 

(TNC 2005b). The database was subsequently reviewed for data entry errors. The analyses of the 

map accuracy included the following steps:

• Initial comparative analysis of the field and map data,

• Review of all disagreements and correcting for false errors as necessary,

• Final comparative analysis of the field and map data,

• Individual map class analysis,

• Final output of results into a contingency matrix, and

• Final output of the analyses and results into a spatial database for use in GIS.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Accuracy Assessment 43

Initial Comparative Analysis: We completed a spatial join of the AA field-site data and the map 

polygon data. This allowed us to compare each AA field-site call (vegetation type) to the 

corresponding map-polygon call (map class representing vegetation type). We used Microsoft 

Excel 2007 (Microsoft Corporation) to compare and tabulate the field-site call to the mappolygon call. Our comparison accounted for alternate field-site calls indicated on the field data 

sheets, accepting map-polygon calls as correct when matching these alternate calls.

Review of Disagreements: All mismatches (disagreements) were subsequently reviewed for false 

errors. A false error is defined as a mismatch between the AA field-site call and the map-polygon 

call if caused by an accuracy error in the GPS field coordinates, a missing or misapplied field 

call, or a field site assessment of an area smaller than a MMU (an inclusion). This review process 

involved looking at the AA sites and their corresponding polygons by using ArcGIS (Version 

9.3, © 2008 Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands, California) to locate them and 

by then viewing them on aerial photographs with a Topcon (MS-3) mirror stereoscope with 3x 

binoculars. We also reviewed the field data sheet to gain fuller context of the ground data. From 

this process, we determined whether an initial disagreement was either a true error or indeed a 

match.

Final Comparison: We used all 147 AA field sites for the final comparative analysis of the

vegetation map layer (Figure 20).

Figure 20. Locations of accuracy assessment sites used to validate the vegetation map layer for the 

Grand Portage National Monument.

Individual Map-class Analysis: For individual map-class accuracies falling below standards of 

the NPS VIP, we compared map classes to determine which were in confusion. If a repetitive 

confusion was evident, we then determined whether to merge the map classes for accuracy 

purposes or to leave the map classes as they were, even if doing so resulted in lower accuracy. If 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Accuracy Assessment 44

confusion between map classes would occur, these determinations would be made with NPS staff 

involvement.

Final Output: The results of the final analyses were transferred into a contingency table (matrix) 

where we calculated percentages of users’ and producers’ accuracy for each map class. The 

matrix shows both the frequency of agreement and placement of disagreements.

AA Spatial Database: For use in GIS, we produced a feature-class layer of the AA site locations,

along with supporting tables, and incorporated them into the GRPO vegetation mapping project

geodatabase. The field data are also included in the PLOTS Database for this project.

Results

There were initially 16 mismatches between the AA field-site calls and the map-polygon calls. 

Results from our review of those disagreements are as follows: one was found to be an inclusion, 

one was a correctable GPS error, one was classified as a wetland type that appeared to have 

changed to annual vegetation because of an environmental event, and one was assessed from an 

adjoining polygon having the GPS coordinates displaced. Once these four mismatches were 

reconciled, the remaining 12 mismatches were identified as actual errors.

There were no major issues with confusion between individual map classes. The accuracy of 

only one map class (at the 90% confidence interval) fell below the NPS VIP accuracy standard 

(as a producers’ error) simply because it was a vegetation type discovered during the AA field 

effort, thus was deemed an error of omission (discussed further below). All other map classes, at 

the 90% confidence interval, met the accuracy standard of 80%.

The overall accuracy was 91.8% for primary map classes representing natural/semi-natural 

floristic types in the NVCS, exceeding the NPS VIP accuracy requirement of 80%. A kappa 

adjustment for chance agreements resulted in a final overall accuracy of 90.7%. The contingency 

matrix for AA is provided in Appendix G: Accuracy Assessment Contingency Table. The matrix 

shows the accuracy of each map class, along with 90% confidence intervals, with the users’ 

accuracy reflecting errors of inclusion (commission errors) and producers’ accuracy reflecting 

errors of exclusion (omission errors). The width of each confidence interval was affected by the 

sample size used to derive the point estimate. Most individual map classes met the 80% 

requirement, with many at 100% (both users’ [11 of 17 map classes] and producers’ accuracy [11 

of 18 map classes]).

The one map class not meeting the 90% confidence interval accuracy requirement was with the

producers’ accuracy (-50–50%) for the Jack Pine - Aspen / Bush-honeysuckle Forest (FJM) map 

class, which describes the Pinus banksiana - Populus tremuloides / Diervilla lonicera Forest 

Association (CEGL002518) in the NVCS. This vegetation type was discovered during the AA 

field effort, residing at that time within the conifer - hardwood mesic (FWA) phase of the White 

Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest map class, which describes a mixed conifer-hardwood 

version of the Pinus strobus / Acer spicatum - Corylus cornuta Forest Association 

(CEGL002445) in the NVCS. This particular vegetation type was not identified for GRPO at the 

time of mapping; therefore, no map class was derived for it, let alone did we attempt to map the 

vegetation type (thus, the users’ accuracy for FJM is null). Although the location of the AA site 

(GRPO.AA085) where FJM was discovered is believed to be the only location of this vegetation 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Accuracy Assessment 45

type at the GRPO, we decided to show it as an omission error in the contingency table for the 

benefit that if more of this vegetation type does exist, coverage may likely occur in polygons 

mapped as FWA. For the benefit of the map user, the appropriate map polygon has been changed 

to the FJM map class to show the location of the CEGL002518 vegetation type (the polygon is 

0.29 ha in size, just exceeding the size of a MMU). 

Of the map classes meeting the 90% confidence intervals accuracy requirement, the following 

map classes fell below the base accuracy of 80%: (1) for the Boreal Hazelnut - Serviceberry 

Rocky Shrubland (SHS) map class, which represents the Corylus cornuta - Amelanchier spp. -

Prunus virginiana Rocky Shrubland Association (CEGL005197) in the NVCS, the producers’ 

accuracy was only 75% and (2) for the Boreal Pine Rocky Woodland (WPR) map class, which 

represents the Pinus banksiana - (Picea mariana, Pinus strobus) / Vaccinium spp. Rocky 

Woodland Association (CEGL002441) in the NVCS, the users’ accuracy was only 67%. These 

two results are actually from the same AA site, as the SHS and WPR map classes were confused 

for each other in the mapping. With only three polygons mapped for each of these map classes, 

one occurrence of misclassifying to each other diminishes the accuracy for each, one with the 

producers’ and the other with the users’. Upon post-review of the polygon in confusion, it is 

evident that this area gives credence to the case where an aerial perspective and a ground 

perspective can pose different interpretations. Upon re-interpretation, the photointerpretive call 

would remain as originally interpreted, which was of coverage by WPR.

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

References 47

References

Avery, T. E. 1978. Forester’s guide to aerial photo interpretation. Agriculture Handbook 308. 

U.S. Forest Service, Washington, D.C., USA. (Revised and enlarged version of Occasional 

Paper 156, Southern Forest Experiment Station, New Orleans, January 1957.)

Beyer, H. L. 2004. Hawth's Analysis Tools for ArcGIS. Available from 

(http://www.spatialecology.com/htools.) Accessed 30 March 2010.

Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC). 1997. Vegetation classification standard, FGDCSTD-005-1997. Online. (http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/projects/FGDC-standardsprojects/vegetation/vegclass.pdf). Accessed 23 April 2010.

Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC). 1998a. Content standard for digital geospatial 

metadata, FGDC-STD-001-1998. Online. (http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/projects/FGDCstandards-projects/metadata/base-metadata/v2_0698.pdf). Accessed 23 April 2010.

Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC). 1998b. Spatial data transfer standard, FGDCSTD-002 (modified version ANSI NCITS 20:1998). Online. 

(http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/standards_publications/index_html). Accessed 23 April 

2010.

Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC). 1999. Content standard for digital geospatial 

metadata, Part 1: Biological Data Profile, FGDC-STD-001.1-1999. Online. 

(http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/projects/FGDC-standardsprojects/metadata/biometadata/biodatap.pdf). Accessed 23 April 2010.

Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC). 2008. National vegetation classification standard, 

Version 2, FGDC-STD-005-2008 (Version 2). Online. 

(http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/projects/FGDC-standardsprojects/vegetation/NVCS_V2_FINAL_2008-02.pdf). Accessed 23 April 2010.

Hershey, R. R., and W. A. Befort. 1995. Aerial photo guide to New England forest cover types. 

General Technical Report NE-195. U.S. Forest Service, Radnor, Pennsylvania, USA.

Homer, C., C. Huang, L. Yang, B. Wylie, and M. Coan. 2004. Development of a 2001 National 

Landcover Database for the United States. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote 

Sensing 70:829–840. (http://www.mrlc.gov/pdf/July_PERS.pdf). Accessed 23 April 2010.

Hop, K., S. Menard, J. Drake, S. Lubinski, and J. Dieck. 2010. National Park Service Vegetation 

Inventory Program: Apostle Islands National Lakeshore, Wisconsin. Natural Resource 

Report NPS/GLKN/NRR—2010/199. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Image Processing Software, Inc. 2002. OrthoMapper: softcopy Photogrammetric software for the 

GIS and natural resources professional. Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

References 48

Marschner, F.J. 1974. The original vegetation of Minnesota, a map compiled in 1930 by F.J. 

Marschner under the direction of M.L. Heinselman of the U.S. Forest Service. Map at

1:500,000 scale. Cartography Laboratory of the Department of Geography, University of 

Minnesota, St. Paul, USA.

McCune, B., and M.J. Mefford. 1999. PC-ORD. Multivariate analysis of ecological data, 

Version 4.0. MjM Software Design, Gleneden Beach, Oregon.

NatureServe. 2004. Field methods for vegetation mapping. Prepared for the U.S. Geological 

Survey and National Park Service. Washington, D.C., USA.

NatureServe. 2005. NPS PLOTS Database Version 2.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Owens, T., and K. D. Hop. 1995. Long Term Resource Monitoring Program standard operating 

procedures: Field station photointerpretation. Long Term Resource Monitoring Program 95-

P008-2. National Biological Service, Environmental Management Technical Center, 

Onalaska, Wisconsin, USA.

The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI). 1994a. 

NBS/NPS vegetation mapping program: Standardized national vegetation classification 

system. Prepared for the National Biological Survey and National Park Service. Washington, 

D.C., USA.

The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI). 1994b. 

NBS/NPS vegetation mapping program: Field methods for vegetation mapping. Prepared for 

the National Biological Survey and National Park Service. Washington, D.C.

The Nature Conservancy (TNC), Environmental Systems Research Institute, and National Center 

of Geographic Information and Analysis. 1994. NBS/NPS vegetation mapping program: 

accuracy assessment procedures. Prepared for the U.S. Department of the Interior, National 

Biological Survey and National Park Service. Washington, D.C.

U.S. Geological Survey. 1999. Map accuracy standards. U.S. Geological Survey. Fact sheet 171-

99. Online. (http://egsc.usgs.gov/isb/pubs/factsheets/fs17199.pdf). Accessed 23 April 2010.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix A: Plot Sampling Form A-1

Appendix A: Plot Sampling Form

Appendix A: Plot Sampling Form A-3

NATIONAL PARK VEGETATION MAPPING PROGRAM: PLOT SURVEY FORM

IDENTIFIERS/LOCATORS

Plot Code________________________________________ Polygon Code____________________________________

Provisional CommunityName________________________________________________________________________

State____ Park Name______________________________ Park Site Name___________________________________

Quad Name______________________________________ Quad Code_______________________________________

GPS file name__________________ Field UTM X__ __ __ __ __ __ m E Field UTM Y__ __ __ __ __ __ __ m N

Waypoint____________ Zone______ Datum_______________ Error +/-________ m Elevation_______________

please do not complete the following information when in the field

Corrected UTM X___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ m E Corrected UTM Y___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ m N

Survey Date_____________ Surveyors_________________________________________________________________

Directions to Plot:

Plot length____ (m) Plot width____ (m) Camera___________ Number of images____ Time of Photos________

Plot representativeness: 

Is the surrounding ~1 hectare area all the same? ___yes ___no

Please draw a map of plot here with plot shape, 

where plot photos were taken, potential community

boundary breaks, and important landmarks.

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Slope____________________________________________Aspect___________________________________________

Topographic Position

Landform

Surficial Geology

Cowardian System

___Upland

___Riverine

___Palustrine

___Lacustrine

Non-Tidal

___Permanently Flooded

___Semipermanently Flooded

___Seasonally/Temporarily Flooded

___Saturated

___Seasonally Flooded/Saturated

___Intermittently Flooded
Appendix A: Plot Sampling Form A-4

Environmental Comments: Soil Taxon/Description

Unvegetated Surface: (percent – total should equal 100%)

___Bedrock ___Litter, duff ___Wood (> 1 cm)

___Large rocks (cobbles, boulders > 10 cm)

___Small rocks (gravel, 0.2-10 cm)

___Sand (0.1-2 mm) ___Bare soil

___Other:__________________________________________

Soil Texture

___sand ___loamy sand ___sandy loam ___loam

___silt loam ___silt ___clay loam ___silty clay

___silty clay loam ___clay ___peat ___muck

Soil Drainage

___Rapidly drained ___Well drained

___Moderately well drained ___Somewhat poorly drained

___Poorly drained ___Very poorly drained

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Leaf phenology 

(of dominant stratum)

Trees and Shrubs

___Evergreen

___Cold-deciduous

___Drought-deciduous

___Mixed evergreen -

 cold-deciduous

___Mixed evergreen - 

drought-deciduous

Herbs

___Annual

___Perennial

Leaf Type

(of dominant stratum)

___Broad-leaved

___Needle-leaved

___Mixed Needleleaved - Broad-leaved

___Microphyllous

___Graminoid

___Forb

___Pteridophyte

Physiognomic class

___Forest

___Woodland

___Shrubland

___Dwarf Shrubland

___Herbaceous

___Nonvascular

___Sparsely Vegetated

Cover Scale for Strata

P 5%

01 10%

02 20%

03 30%

04 40%

05 50%

06 60%

07 70%

08 80%

09 90%

10 100%

Height Scale for 

Strata

01 <0.5 m

02 0.5-1m

03 1-2 m

04 2-5 m

05 5-10 m

06 10-15 m

07 15-20 m

08 20-35 m

09 35-50 m

10 >50 m

Strata Height Cover Diagnostic species (if known)

Class Class

T1 Emergent _______ _______ _____________________________________________________________

T2 Canopy _______ _______ _____________________________________________________________

T3 Sub-canopy _______ _______ _____________________________________________________________

S1 Tall shrub _______ _______ _____________________________________________________________

S2 Short Shrub _______ _______ _____________________________________________________________

S3 Dwarf-Shrub _______ _______ _____________________________________________________________

H Herbaceous _______ _______ _____________________________________________________________

A1 FltngLvdAquatic ______ _______ _____________________________________________________________

A2 Submerged Aquatic _____ _______ _____________________________________________________________

N Non-vascular _______ _______ _____________________________________________________________

V Vine/liana _______ _______ _____________________________________________________________

E Epiphyte _______ _______ _____________________________________________________________

please see above table for height and cover scales

Animal Use Evidence

Natural and Anthropogenic Disturbance Comments:

Overall Qualitative Assessment:
Appendix A: Plot Sampling Form A-5

Plot Code _____________________________________________________

Species/percent cover: Starting with the uppermost stratum, list all species with cover class for each species in the stratum. For 

forests and woodlands, on a separate line below each tree species, list the DBH of all trees above 10 cm diameter. Separate 

measurements with a comma. Put an asterisk next to any species that are known diagnostics for a particular community in the 

classification. Cover Cover

Stratum Species Name Class Stratum Species Name Class

Cover Scale for Species: T=<1%; P=1-5%; 01=5-15%; 02=15-25%; 03=25-35%; 04=35-45%; 05=45-55%; 06=55-65%; 

07=65-75%; 08=75-85%; 09=85-95%; 10=>95%

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types B-1

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types B-3

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

U.S. NATIONAL VEGETATION CLASSIFICATION

GRAND PORTAGE NATIONAL MONUMENT

11 November 2009

by 

NatureServe

1101 Wilson Blvd., 15th floor

Arlington, VA 22209

P.O. Box 9354

St. Paul, MN 55109

This subset of the International Ecological Classification Standard covers the associations attributed to Grand 

Portage National Monument. This classification has been developed in consultation with many individuals and 

agencies and incorporates information from a variety of publications and other classifications. Comments and 

suggestions regarding the contents of this subset should be directed to Mary J. Russo, Central Ecology Data 

Manager, Durham, NC <mary_russo@natureserve.org> and Shannon Menard, Senior Regional Ecologist, 

Minneapolis, MN <shannon_menard@natureserve.org>.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types B-4

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

Copyright © 2009 NatureServe, 1101 Wilson Blvd, 15th floor

Arlington, VA 22209, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved.

Citations:

The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference ecological system and/or 

International Vegetation Classification (IVC hierarchy) and association data:

NatureServe. 2009. International Ecological Classification Standard: Terrestrial Ecological Classifications. 

NatureServe Central Databases. Arlington, VA. U.S.A. Data current as of 11 November 2009.

Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute these data is hereby granted under the following 

conditions: 

1. The above copyright notice must appear in all documents and reports;

2. Any use must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes;

3. Some data may be altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using 

the citation above.

Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by NatureServe. Except as expressly provided above, nothing 

contained herein shall be construed as conferring any license or right under any NatureServe copyright.

Information Warranty Disclaimer: All data are provided as is without warranty as to the currentness, 

completeness, or accuracy of any specific data. The absence of data in any particular geographic area does not 

necessarily mean that species or ecological communities of concern are not present. NatureServe hereby disclaims 

all warranties and conditions with regard to these data, including but not limited to all implied warranties and 

conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement. In no event shall NatureServe 

be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, consequential damages, or for damages of any kind arising out of or in 

connection with the use of these data. Because the data in the NatureServe Central Databases are continually being 

updated, it is advisable to refresh data at least once a year after receipt.

NatureServe

1101 Wilson Blvd, 15th floor

Arlington, VA 22209

_____________________________________________________________

These data are extracted from:

NatureServe. 2009. International Ecological Classification Standard: Terrestrial Ecological Classifications. 

NatureServe Central Databases. Arlington, VA. U.S.A. Data current as of 11 November 2009.

_____________________________________________________________

This document may be generally cited as follows:

NatureServe1. 2009. U.S. National Vegetation Classification: Associations of Grand Portage National Monument. 

NatureServe Central Databases. Arlington, VA. Data current as of 11 November 2009.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types B-5

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

1 NatureServe is an international organization including NatureServe regional offices, a 

NatureServe central office, U.S. State Natural Heritage Programs, and Conservation Data 

Centres (CDC) in Canada and Latin America and the Caribbean. Ecologists from the following 

organizations have contributed the development of the ecological systems classification:

United States

Central NatureServe Office, Arlington, VA; Eastern Regional Office, Boston, MA; Midwestern Regional Office, Minneapolis, MN; Southeastern 

Regional Office, Durham, NC; Western Regional Office, Boulder, CO; Alabama Natural Heritage Program, Montgomery AL; Alaska Natural 

Heritage Program, Anchorage, AK; Arizona Heritage Data Management Center, Phoenix AZ; Arkansas Natural Heritage Commission Little 

Rock, AR; Blue Ridge Parkway, Asheville, NC; California Natural Heritage Program, Sacramento, CA; Colorado Natural Heritage Program, Fort 

Collins, CO; Connecticut Natural Diversity Database, Hartford, CT; Delaware Natural Heritage Program, Smyrna, DE; District of Columbia 

Natural Heritage Program/National Capital Region Conservation Data Center, Washington DC; Florida Natural Areas Inventory, Tallahassee, FL; 

Georgia Natural Heritage Program, Social Circle, GA; Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Gatlinburg, TN; Gulf Islands National Seashore, 

Gulf Breeze, FL; Hawaii Natural Heritage Program, Honolulu, Hawaii; Idaho Conservation Data Center, Boise, ID; Illinois Natural Heritage 

Division/Illinois Natural Heritage Database Program, Springfield, IL; Indiana Natural Heritage Data Center, Indianapolis, IN; Iowa Natural Areas 

Inventory, Des Moines, IA; Kansas Natural Heritage Inventory, Lawrence, KS; Kentucky Natural Heritage Program, Frankfort, KY; Louisiana 

Natural Heritage Program, Baton Rouge, LA; Maine Natural Areas Program, Augusta, ME; Mammoth Cave National Park, Mammoth Cave, KY; 

Maryland Wildlife & Heritage Division, Annapolis, MD; Massachusetts Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program, Westborough, MA; 

Michigan Natural Features Inventory, Lansing, MI; Minnesota Natural Heritage & Nongame Research and Minnesota County Biological Survey, 

St. Paul, MN; Mississippi Natural Heritage Program, Jackson, MI; Missouri Natural Heritage Database, Jefferson City, MO; Montana Natural 

Heritage Program, Helena, MT; National Forest in North Carolina, Asheville, NC; National Forests in Florida, Tallahassee, FL; National Park 

Service, Southeastern Regional Office, Atlanta, GA; Navajo Natural Heritage Program, Window Rock, AZ; Nebraska Natural Heritage Program, 

Lincoln, NE; Nevada Natural Heritage Program, Carson City, NV; New Hampshire Natural Heritage Inventory, Concord, NH; New Jersey 

Natural Heritage Program, Trenton, NJ; New Mexico Natural Heritage Program, Albuquerque , NM; New York Natural Heritage Program, 

Latham, NY; North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, NC; North Dakota Natural Heritage Inventory, Bismarck, ND; Ohio Natural 

Heritage Database, Columbus, OH; Oklahoma Natural Heritage Inventory, Norman, OK; Oregon Natural Heritage Program, Portland, OR; 

Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory, PA; Rhode Island Natural Heritage Program, Providence, RI; South Carolina Heritage Trust, 

Columbia, SC; South Dakota Natural Heritage Data Base, Pierre, SD; Tennessee Division of Natural Heritage, Nashville, TN; Tennessee Valley 

Authority Heritage Program, Norris, TN; Texas Conservation Data Center, San Antonio, TX; Utah Natural Heritage Program, Salt Lake City, 

UT; Vermont Nongame & Natural Heritage Program, Waterbury, VT; Virginia Division of Natural Heritage, Richmond, VA; Washington 

Natural Heritage Program, Olympia, WA; West Virginia Natural Heritage Program, Elkins, WV; Wisconsin Natural Heritage Program, Madison, 

WI; Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, Laramie, WY

Canada

Alberta Natural Heritage Information Centre, Edmonton, AB, Canada; Atlantic Canada Conservation Data Centre, Sackville, New Brunswick, 

Canada; British Columbia Conservation Data Centre, Victoria, BC, Canada; Manitoba Conservation Data Centre. Winnipeg, MB, Canada; 

Ontario Natural Heritage Information Centre, Peterborough, ON, Canada; Quebec Conservation Data Centre, Quebec, QC, Canada; 

Saskatchewan Conservation Data Centre, Regina, SK, Canada; Yukon Conservation Data Centre, Yukon, Canada

Latin American and Caribbean 

Centro de Datos para la Conservacion de Bolivia, La Paz , Bolivia; Centro de Datos para la Conservacion de Colombia, Cali,Valle, Columbia; 

Centro de Datos para la Conservacion de Ecuador, Quito, Ecuador; Centro de Datos para la Conservacion de Guatemala, Ciudad de Guatemala , 

Guatemala; Centro de Datos para la Conservacion de Panama, Querry Heights , Panama; Centro de Datos para la Conservacion de Paraguay, San 

Lorenzo , Paraguay; Centro de Datos para la Conservacion de Peru, Lima, Peru; Centro de Datos para la Conservacion de Sonora, Hermosillo, 

Sonora , Mexico; Netherlands Antilles Natural Heritage Program, Curacao , Netherlands Antilles; Puerto Rico-Departmento De Recursos 

Naturales Y Ambientales, Puerto Rico; Virgin Islands Conservation Data Center, St. Thomas, Virgin Islands.

NatureServe also has partnered with many International and United States Federal and State organizations, which have also contributed 

significantly to the development of the International Classification. Partners include the following The Nature Conservancy; Provincial Forest 

Ecosystem Classification Groups in Canada; Canadian Forest Service; Parks Canada; United States Forest Service; National GAP Analysis 

Program; United States National Park Service; United States Fish and Wildlife Service; United States Geological Survey; United States 

Department of Defense; Ecological Society of America; Environmental Protection Agency; Natural Resource Conservation Services; United 

States Department of Energy; and the Tennessee Valley Authority. Many individual state organizations and people from academic institutions 

have also contributed to the development of this classification.

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-7

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. FOREST & WOODLAND................................................................................................................................9

1.C.2. Cool Temperate Forest.............................................................................................................................................. 9

1.C.2.a. Eastern North American Cool Temperate Forest..........................................................................................................9

MG014. Northern Hardwood & Conifer Forest.........................................................................................................................9

G163. Northern Hardwood - Hemlock - White Pine Forest...................................................................................................9

White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest ...................................................................................................................9

G025. White Pine - Red Pine - Jack Pine - Oak Forest & Woodland ..................................................................................11

White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest ................................................................................................................11

1.C.3. Temperate Flooded & Swamp Forest..................................................................................................................... 13

1.C.3.a. Northeastern & Central North American Flooded & Swamp Forest ..........................................................................13

MG030. Northern & Central Swamp Forest ............................................................................................................................13

G046. Northern & Central Alkaline Conifer & Hardwood Swamp .....................................................................................13

Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp.........................................................................................................................13

Aspen - Balsam Poplar Lowland Forest.......................................................................................................................16

MG160. Northern & Central Tall Shrub Wetland....................................................................................................................18

G167. Northern & Central Shrub Swamp ............................................................................................................................18

Gray Alder Swamp.......................................................................................................................................................18

1.D.1. Lowland & Montane Boreal Forest........................................................................................................................ 20

1.D.1.a. North American Lowland Boreal Forest ....................................................................................................................20

MG037. Eastern & Central North American Boreal Conifer & Hardwood Forest ..................................................................20

G047. Jack Pine - Black Spruce Forest................................................................................................................................20

Jack Pine - Aspen / Bush-honeysuckle Forest..............................................................................................................20

Jack Pine / Balsam Fir Forest.......................................................................................................................................22

G347. Jack Pine - Northern Pin Oak Rocky Woodland .......................................................................................................23

Boreal Pine Rocky Woodland ......................................................................................................................................23

G048. White Spruce - Balsam Fir Forest .............................................................................................................................25

Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest ..........................................................................................................................................25

Spruce - Fir / Mountain Maple Forest..........................................................................................................................27

Aspen - Birch / Boreal Conifer Forest..........................................................................................................................29

2. SHRUBLAND & GRASSLAND ....................................................................................................................31

2.C.2. Boreal Grassland, Meadow & Shrubland.............................................................................................................. 31

2.C.2.a. North American Boreal Grassland, Meadow & Shrubland ........................................................................................31

MG055. North American Boreal Shrubland & Grassland .......................................................................................................31

G339. Eastern North American Boreal Shrubland & Grassland..........................................................................................31

Boreal Hazelnut - Serviceberry Rocky Shrubland .......................................................................................................31

2.C.5. Temperate & Boreal Freshwater Wet Meadow & Marsh.................................................................................... 33

2.C.5.a. Eastern North America Freshwater Wet Meadow, Riparian & Marsh .......................................................................33

MG069. Eastern & North-Central North American Marsh & Wet Meadow ...........................................................................33

G125. Eastern North American Freshwater Marsh ..............................................................................................................33

Water Horsetail - Spikerush Marsh..............................................................................................................................33

G112. Eastern North American Wet Meadow .....................................................................................................................34

Bluejoint Wet Meadow ................................................................................................................................................34

Northern Sedge Wet Meadow......................................................................................................................................36

5. AQUATIC VEGETATION ............................................................................................................................39

5.B.1. Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation............................................................................................................................... 39

5.B.1.a. North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation........................................................................................................39

MG108. Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation..........................................................................................39

G114. Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation [Placeholder]...................................................................39

Northern Water-lily Aquatic Wetland..........................................................................................................................39

Midwest Pondweed Submerged Aquatic Wetland .......................................................................................................40
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-8

6. NONVASCULAR & SPARSE VASCULAR ROCK VEGETATION .......................................................42

6.B.2. Temperate & Boreal Cliff, Scree & Rock Vegetation........................................................................................... 42

6.B.2.a. Eastern North American Temperate Cliff, Scree & Rock Vegetation ........................................................................42

MG111. Eastern North American Cliff & Rock Vegetation....................................................................................................42

G341. Great Lakes Cliff & Shore [Placeholder]..................................................................................................................42

Great Lakes Basalt - Diabase Cobble - Gravel Shore ..................................................................................................42

Northern Non-Carbonate Dry Talus Vegetation ..........................................................................................................43

Northern Non-Carbonate Moist Talus Vegetation .......................................................................................................44
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-9

1. Forest & Woodland

1.C.2. Cool Temperate Forest

1.C.2.a. Eastern North American Cool Temperate Forest

MG014. Northern Hardwood & Conifer Forest

G163. Northern Hardwood - Hemlock - White Pine Forest

White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest

Thuja occidentalis / Abies balsamea - Acer spicatum Forest

Northern White-cedar / Balsam Fir - Mountain Maple Forest

Identifier: CEGL002449

NVC CLASSIFICATION

Division Eastern North American Cool Temperate Forest (1.C.2.a)

Macrogroup Northern Hardwood & Conifer Forest (MG014)

Group Northern Hardwood - Hemlock - White Pine Forest (G163)

Association (Common name) White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest

Ecological System(s): Laurentian-Acadian Northern Hardwoods Forest (CES201.564)

ELEMENT CONCEPT

Global Summary: This sub-boreal upland white-cedar forest occurs in the northern Great Lakes region of the United States and 

Canada, and occasionally eastward into northern New England. Stands are found on gentle wet-mesic slopes to very steep welldrained slopes, or in the eastern portion of the range on moderately well-drained flats. The predominant aspect is north to northeast. 

Soils are fine to moderately coarse-textured, usually calcareous, moderately deep to deep (50-100 cm), and often contain boulders at 

the surface. The overstory is dominated by coniferous trees, with or without a substantial deciduous component. Thuja occidentalis

(northern white-cedar) is the most abundant tree and may occur in pure stands. Other canopy species include Abies balsamea (balsam 

fir), Acer rubrum (red maple), Betula papyrifera (paper birch), Picea glauca (white spruce), Picea mariana (black spruce), Populus 

tremuloides (quaking aspen), and Pinus strobus (eastern white pine). There is usually an abundant shrub/sapling layer with saplings of 

Thuja occidentalis (northern white-cedar) and Abies balsamea (balsam fir) along with Acer pensylvanicum (striped maple) and the 

shrubs Acer spicatum (mountain maple), Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), Linnaea borealis (twinflower), Lonicera canadensis

(American fly honeysuckle), Rubus pubescens (dwarf red blackberry), and Sorbus decora (northern mountain-ash). Vaccinium 

angustifolium (lowbush blueberry) and Viburnum nudum var. cassinoides (withe-rod) may be present on more acidic sites. The ground 

layer is typically diverse on mesic to wet-mesic stands and less so on drier stands. Wet-mesic stands can contain a hummock-andhollow topography, with a seasonally saturated hydrology. Typical species include Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), Eurybia 

macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Clintonia borealis (bluebead), Coptis trifolia (threeleaf goldthread), Cornus canadensis (bunchberry 

dogwood), Dryopteris carthusiana (spinulose woodfern), Galium triflorum (fragrant bedstraw), Maianthemum canadense (Canada 

mayflower), Mitella nuda (naked miterwort), Trillium undulatum (painted trillium), and Trientalis borealis (starflower). Mosses 

include Sanionia uncinata (sanionia moss), Hylocomium splendens (splendid feather moss), Plagiomnium cuspidatum (toothed 

plagiomnium moss), Pleurozium schreberi (Schreber's big red stem moss), Ptilium crista-castrensis (knights plume moss), and 

Rhytidiadelphus triquetrus (rough goose neck moss) and, in wetter phases of the type, Sphagnum (sphagnum) spp.

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Environment: This upland white-cedar forest was sampled once in the park. The site is a 

gentle south-facing slope with moderately well-drained clay soil. The surface is dominated by leaf litter (91% cover) with some wood 

(4%) and plant stems (5%). No evidence of disturbance was reported.

Global Environment: This community is found on gentle wet-mesic slopes to very steep well-drained slopes (MNNHP 1993). The 

predominant aspect is north to northeast. Soils are moderately deep to deep (50-100 cm), calcareous, coarse- to fine-textured, and 

often contain boulders at the surface (Ohmann and Ream 1971, Sims et al. 1989).

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Vegetation: The moderately dense (70% cover) tree canopy, 20-35 m tall, is dominated by 

Thuja occidentalis (northern white-cedar); small amounts of Betula papyrifera (paper birch) and Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen) 

also occur. Abies balsamea (balsam fir) forms a sparse (20%) subcanopy (10-15 m). The moderate (50%) tall-shrub layer (2-5 m) is 

dominated by Abies balsamea (balsam fir) and includes Acer spicatum (mountain maple) and Picea mariana (black spruce). The 

sparse (30%) short-shrub layer (0.5-1 m) is dominated by Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut) along with Diervilla lonicera (northern 

bush honeysuckle), Lonicera canadensis (American fly honeysuckle), Lonicera hirsuta (hairy honeysuckle), Rosa (rose) sp., Rubus

(blackberry) sp., and Vaccinium myrtilloides (velvetleaf huckleberry). The sparse (30%) herbaceous layer includes Athyrium filixfemina (common ladyfern), Carex pedunculata (longstalk sedge), Clintonia borealis (bluebead), Cornus canadensis (bunchberry 

dogwood), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Galium (bedstraw) sp., Linnaea borealis (twinflower), Mitella nuda (naked 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-10

miterwort), and others. Nonvascular species (mosses) cover 30% of the ground surface and include Hylocomium splendens (splendid 

feather moss) and Pleurozium schreberi (Schreber's big red stem moss).

Global Vegetation: The overstory is dominated by coniferous trees, with or without a substantial deciduous component. Thuja 

occidentalis (northern white-cedar) is the most abundant tree and may occur in pure stands. Usually there are other canopy species, 

especially Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Betula papyrifera (paper birch), Picea glauca (white spruce), Picea mariana (black spruce), 

Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen), and Pinus strobus (eastern white pine). There is usually an abundant shrub/sapling layer with 

saplings of Thuja occidentalis (northern white-cedar) and Abies balsamea (balsam fir) along with the shrubs Acer spicatum (mountain 

maple), Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), Linnaea borealis (twinflower), Lonicera canadensis (American fly honeysuckle), Rubus 

pubescens (dwarf red blackberry), and Sorbus decora (northern mountain-ash). The ground layer is typically diverse on mesic to wetmesic stands and less so on steep drier stands. Wet-mesic stands can contain a hummock-and-hollow topography, with a seasonally 

saturated hydrology. Typical species include Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Clintonia 

borealis (bluebead), Coptis trifolia (threeleaf goldthread), Cornus canadensis (bunchberry dogwood), Dryopteris carthusiana

(spinulose woodfern), Galium triflorum (fragrant bedstraw), Maianthemum canadense (Canada mayflower), Mitella nuda (naked 

miterwort), and Trientalis borealis (starflower). Mosses include Sanionia uncinata (sanionia moss), Hylocomium splendens (splendid 

feather moss), Plagiomnium cuspidatum (toothed plagiomnium moss), Pleurozium schreberi (Schreber's big red stem moss), Ptilium 

crista-castrensis (knights plume moss), and Rhytidiadelphus triquetrus (rough goose neck moss) and, in wetter phases of the type, 

Sphagnum (sphagnum) spp. (Ohmann and Ream 1971, Sims et al. 1989, MNNHP 1993, Chambers et al. 1997).

MOST ABUNDANT SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument

Stratum Lifeform Species

Tree canopy Needle-leaved tree Thuja occidentalis (northern white-cedar)

Tall shrub/sapling Needle-leaved shrub Abies balsamea (balsam fir)

Herb (field) Forb Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster)

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument: Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Acer spicatum (mountain maple), Athyrium filix-femina

(common ladyfern), Clintonia borealis (bluebead), Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), 

Hylocomium splendens (splendid feather moss), Linnaea borealis (twinflower), Pleurozium schreberi (Schreber's big red stem moss), 

Thuja occidentalis (northern white-cedar)

CONSERVATION STATUS RANK

Global Rank & Reasons: G4 (3-Oct-1996). 

CLASSIFICATION

Status: Standard

Classification Confidence: 1 - Strong

Global Comments: This type has a wet-mesic phase that can be difficult to distinguish from cedar swamps, such as Thuja 

occidentalis - (Picea mariana, Abies balsamea) / Alnus incana Forest (CEGL002456). [See also Harris et al. (1996) who consider 

W32, a white-cedar swamp, to be equivalent to V21, a white-cedar upland type, of Sims et al. (1989).] Type is equivalent in concept 

to V21 of Sims et al. (1989) and V21 Chambers et al. (1997). In Wisconsin, stands of this type are best developed near the Great 

Lakes shore, but the type concept is still not clear. Those stands may still best go with either Thuja occidentalis - Betula alleghaniensis

Forest (CEGL002450) or Thuja occidentalis - (Betula alleghaniensis, Tsuga canadensis) Forest (CEGL002595).

Global Similar Associations:

• Thuja occidentalis - (Betula alleghaniensis, Tsuga canadensis) Forest (CEGL002595)

• Thuja occidentalis - (Picea mariana, Abies balsamea) / Alnus incana Forest (CEGL002456)

• Thuja occidentalis - Betula alleghaniensis Forest (CEGL002450)--This is the mixed conifer-hardwood equivalent

Global Related Concepts:

• Boreal Forest (Chapman et al. 1989) B

• Cedar (inc. Mixedwood) / Mountain Maple Forest (V21) (Sims et al. 1989) =

• Lowland lakeshore northern white cedar forest (NAP pers. comm. 1998) ?

• White Cedar Type (Grigal and Ohmann 1975) =

• White Cedar-Trembling Aspen-White Spruce-Twinflower (V21) (Chambers et al. 1997) =

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

Global Range: This sub-boreal upland white-cedar forest type occurs in the northern Great Lakes region of the United States and 

Canada, east to upstate New York and northern New England.

Nations: CA, US

States/Provinces: MI, MN, NH:S1, NY, ON, QC?, WI

TNC Ecoregions: 35:C, 47:C, 48:C, 63:C, 64:C

USFS Ecoregions (1994/95): 212He:CCC, 212Hi:CCC, 212Hj:CCP, 212Hl:CCC, 212Ho:CCC, 212Hr:CCP, 212Hw:CCC, 

212Ia:CCC, 212Ib:CCC, 212Ja:CPP, 212Jb:CPP, 212Jc:CPP, 212Jl:CPP, 212Jn:CPP, 212Jo:CPP, 212La:CCC, 212Lb:CCC, 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-11

212Lc:CCC, 212Ld:CC?, 212Mb:CCC, 212Na:CCC, 212Nb:CCP, 212Nc:CC?, 212Oa:CCC, 212Ob:CCC, 212Pa:CCC, 222Na:CCC, 

M212Ae:CCC

Federal Lands: NPS (Apostle Islands, Grand Portage, Isle Royale, Pictured Rocks, Sleeping Bear Dunes, Voyageurs); USFS 

(Chippewa, Huron, Huron-Manistee, Manistee?, Ottawa, Superior)

Federal Lands: Information not available.

ELEMENT SOURCES

Grand Portage National Monument Plots: GRPO.4.

Grand Portage National Monument Map Code: FCC, FCM

Local Description Authors: M.J. Russo

Global Description Authors: J. Drake

References: Chambers et al. 1997, Chapman et al. 1989, Edinger et al. 2002, Grigal and Ohmann 1975, MNNHP 1993, Midwestern 

Ecology Working Group n.d., NAP pers. comm. 1998, Ohmann and Ream 1971, Sims et al. 1989, Sperduto 2000a, WNHIP unpubl. 

data

G025. White Pine - Red Pine - Jack Pine - Oak Forest & Woodland

White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest

Pinus strobus / Acer spicatum - Corylus cornuta Forest

Eastern White Pine / Mountain Maple - Beaked Hazelnut Forest

Identifier: CEGL002445

NVC CLASSIFICATION

Division Eastern North American Cool Temperate Forest (1.C.2.a)

Macrogroup Northern Hardwood & Conifer Forest (MG014)

Group White Pine - Red Pine - Jack Pine - Oak Forest & Woodland (G025)

Association (Common name) White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest

Ecological System(s): Laurentian-Acadian Northern Pine-(Oak) Forest (CES201.719)

Laurentian-Acadian Pine-Hemlock-Hardwood Forest (CES201.563)

ELEMENT CONCEPT

Global Summary: This white pine forest type is found in the northern parts of the midwestern United States and in adjacent parts of 

Canada. Stands occur on moderately deep to deep (>60 cm) sandy or gravelly loam soil. The canopy is dominated by Pinus strobus

(eastern white pine), often mixed with Pinus resinosa (red pine). The lower layer of the canopy consists mainly of Abies balsamea

(balsam fir) trees and saplings. Other trees that may be found in this layer include Acer rubrum (red maple), Betula papyrifera (paper 

birch), Betula alleghaniensis (yellow birch), Picea glauca (white spruce), and Thuja occidentalis (northern white-cedar). The tallshrub/sapling layer is moderately to well-developed and consists of Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Acer spicatum (mountain maple), 

Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), and, less frequently, Amelanchier (serviceberry) spp. The low-shrub layer is not well-developed 

and is dominated by Diervilla lonicera (northern bush honeysuckle), Linnaea borealis (twinflower), Vaccinium myrtilloides

(velvetleaf huckleberry) and Vaccinium angustifolium (lowbush blueberry). The herb stratum is often sparse. Prevalent herbs include 

Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Cornus canadensis (bunchberry dogwood), Maianthemum 

canadense (Canada mayflower), Polypodium virginianum (rock polypody), and Pteridium aquilinum (western brackenfern). Moss 

species include Dicranum polysetum (dicranum moss) and Pleurozium schreberi (Schreber's big red stem moss). The forest floor is 

generally characterized by a deep layer of pine needle litter. Diagnostic features include dominance by Pinus strobus (eastern white 

pine), a well-developed tall-shrub layer with Acer spicatum (mountain maple) and Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), and a sparse 

herb layer.

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Environment: This white pine forest was sampled once in the park. The site is a gentle, southfacing slope with moderately well-drained clay soil. The surface is dominated by leaf litter (89% cover) with some wood (7%) and 

plant stems (4%). No evidence of disturbance was reported.

Global Environment: This community is found on Precambrian Shield bedrock, overlaid with sandy loam soils that are moderately 

well-drained and deep (>60 cm). In northeastern Minnesota it occurs on northeast- and south-facing slopes, that are moderate to steep 

(slope ranges between 4-45%) (Ohmann and Ream 1971). The climate is highly variable, with temperature extremes between -46.7 

degrees C and 38.7 degrees C and 58-91 cm precipitation.

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Vegetation: The moderate (50% cover) tree canopy, 15-20 m tall, is dominated by Pinus 

strobus (eastern white pine) and includes lesser amounts of Picea glauca (white spruce) and Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen). 

Abies balsamea (balsam fir) dominates the very sparse (10%) subcanopy (10-15 m) along with some Betula papyrifera (paper birch). 

The sparse (30%) tall-shrub layer (2-5 m) includes Acer spicatum (mountain maple), Alnus incana ssp. rugosa (speckled alder), 

Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen), and Prunus virginiana (chokecherry). The very sparse 

(10%) short-shrub layer (1-2 m) is composed of Cornus sericea (red-osier dogwood), Lonicera canadensis (American fly 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-12

honeysuckle), Lonicera hirsuta (hairy honeysuckle), Rosa (rose) sp., and Rubus (blackberry) sp. The dense (80%) herbaceous layer is 

dominated by Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster) and Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla) and includes small amounts of 

Calamagrostis canadensis (bluejoint), Carex pedunculata (longstalk sedge), Cornus canadensis (bunchberry dogwood), Fragaria 

virginiana (Virginia strawberry), Lathyrus ochroleucus (cream pea), Linnaea borealis (twinflower), Lycopodium clavatum (running 

clubmoss), Mitella nuda (naked miterwort), Oryzopsis asperifolia (roughleaf ricegrass), Pteridium aquilinum (western brackenfern), 

and Trientalis borealis (starflower). Nonvascular species (mosses), including Pleurozium schreberi (Schreber's big red stem moss), 

cover 10% of the ground surface.

Global Vegetation: This community is dominated by Pinus strobus (eastern white pine). It is often distinguished by a supercanopy of 

large, old Pinus strobus (eastern white pine) and scattered Pinus resinosa (red pine). The lower layer of the canopy consists mainly of 

Abies balsamea (balsam fir) trees and saplings (Ohmann and Ream 1971). Other trees that may be found in this layer include Betula 

alleghaniensis (yellow birch), Picea glauca (white spruce), Thuja occidentalis (northern white-cedar), Acer rubrum (red maple), Acer 

spicatum (mountain maple), and other trees common to boreal forest landscapes. The tall-shrub layer is moderately to well-developed 

and consists of Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Acer spicatum (mountain maple), Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), and, less 

frequently, Amelanchier (serviceberry) spp. (Ohmann and Ream 1971, Sims et al. 1989). The low-shrub layer is not well-developed 

and dominated by Diervilla lonicera (northern bush honeysuckle), Linnaea borealis (twinflower), Vaccinium myrtilloides (velvetleaf 

huckleberry), and Vaccinium angustifolium (lowbush blueberry). The herb stratum is also not well-developed. The deep layer of 

undecomposed needles that formed the mor humus are not conducive to herb growth (Martin 1959a). Prevalent herbs include Aralia 

nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Cornus canadensis (bunchberry dogwood), Maianthemum 

canadense (Canada mayflower), Polypodium virginianum (rock polypody), and Pteridium aquilinum (western brackenfern). Moss 

species include Dicranum polysetum (dicranum moss) and Pleurozium schreberi (Schreber's big red stem moss).

MOST ABUNDANT SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument

Stratum Lifeform Species

Tree canopy Needle-leaved tree Pinus strobus (eastern white pine)

Herb (field) Forb Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf 

aster)

Global

Stratum Lifeform Species

Tree canopy Needle-leaved tree Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Pinus strobus (eastern white pine)

Tree subcanopy Needle-leaved tree Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Pinus strobus (eastern white pine)

Tall shrub/sapling Broad-leaved deciduous tree Acer spicatum (mountain maple)

Tall shrub/sapling Broad-leaved evergreen tree Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut)

Tall shrub/sapling Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Diervilla lonicera (northern bush honeysuckle)

Short shrub/sapling Dwarf-shrub Vaccinium angustifolium (lowbush blueberry), Vaccinium 

myrtilloides (velvetleaf huckleberry)

Herb (field) Forb Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster)

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument: Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Acer spicatum (mountain maple), Aralia nudicaulis (wild 

sarsaparilla), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Picea glauca (white spruce), Pinus strobus (eastern white pine), Populus 

tremuloides (quaking aspen)

Global: Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Diervilla lonicera (northern bush honeysuckle), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Pinus 

strobus (eastern white pine)

CONSERVATION STATUS RANK

Global Rank & Reasons: G3G4 (22-Jun-1998). There are fewer than 100 occurrences of this community rangewide, but Ontario 

ranks are unknown. Currently there are 45 occurrences documented from Minnesota (where it is ranked S3), Michigan (S?), and 

Wisconsin (S?); it is also reported from Ontario (S?). There are probably fewer than 10,000 acres of this community rangewide. 

Currently 2075 acres have been documented from 32 occurrences in Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Many stands are reported 

to be of post-fire origin; infrequent catastrophic fires may be important for maintenance of this community. Many, perhaps, most sites 

have been degraded by logging. Some sites may be disturbed by fire suppression, and they may be succeeding to other forest types.

CLASSIFICATION

Status: Standard

Classification Confidence: 1 - Strong

Global Comments: The type allows for Pinus strobus (eastern white pine)-dominated stands or mixed Pinus strobus (eastern white 

pine)-conifers, including Pinus resinosa (red pine). The type concept is not well-developed in Wisconsin, where it complexes with 

Pinus strobus - (Pinus resinosa) - Quercus rubra Forest (CEGL002480). The limits of the type farther eastward, where it overlaps 

with Pinus strobus - Pinus resinosa / Cornus canadensis Forest (CEGL006253), are also not clear. In some stands Juniperus 

communis (common juniper) may be present.

Global Similar Associations:
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-13

• Pinus resinosa / Vaccinium spp. Forest (CEGL002443)

• Pinus strobus - (Pinus resinosa) - Quercus rubra Forest (CEGL002480)

• Pinus strobus - Pinus resinosa / Cornus canadensis Forest (CEGL006253)--northeastern U.S. version?

• Pinus strobus - Populus tremuloides / Corylus cornuta Forest (CEGL002479)

• Pinus strobus / Vaccinium spp. Forest (CEGL002444)

Global Related Concepts:

• White Pine (Ohmann and Ream 1971) =

• White Pine Conifer (V26) (Sims et al. 1989) =

• White Pine-Red Pine-Beaked Hazel-Bracken Fern-Bush Honeysuckle (V29) (Chambers et al. 1997) =

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

Global Range: This white pine forest type is found in the northern parts of the midwestern United States and in adjacent parts of 

Canada, ranging from Minnesota and Ontario east to Wisconsin and Michigan. Its range extent is between 100,000 and 200,000 

square km.

Nations: CA, US

States/Provinces: MI?, MN:S3, ON, QC, WI

TNC Ecoregions: 47:C, 48:C, 64:C

USFS Ecoregions (1994/95): 212Ea:CCP, 212Eb:CCP, 212Ec:CCC, 212Ha:CCC, 212Ia:CCC, 212Ja:CCP, 212Jb:CCC, 212Jc:CCC, 

212Je:CCC, 212Jl:CCC, 212Jm:CCC, 212Ka:CCC, 212La:CCC, 212Lb:CCC, 212Lc:CCC, 212Ld:CC?, 212Ma:CCC, 212Mb:CCC, 

212Nb:CCC

Federal Lands: NPS (Apostle Islands, Grand Portage, Saint Croix, Voyageurs); USFS (Chequamegon-Nicolet, Chequamegon?, 

Nicolet, Superior)

Federal Lands: Information not available.

ELEMENT SOURCES

Grand Portage National Monument Plots: GRPO.3.

Grand Portage National Monument Map Code: FWM, FWA, FWD

Local Description Authors: M.J. Russo

Global Description Authors: D. Faber-Langendoen

References: Chambers et al. 1997, Frelich 1992, Grigal and Ohmann 1975, Heinselman 1973, Judziewicz and Koch 1993, MNNHP 

1993, Martin 1959a, Midwestern Ecology Working Group n.d., Ohmann and Ream 1971, Sims et al. 1989, WNHIP unpubl. data

1.C.3. Temperate Flooded & Swamp Forest

1.C.3.a. Northeastern & Central North American Flooded & Swamp Forest

MG030. Northern & Central Swamp Forest

G046. Northern & Central Alkaline Conifer & Hardwood Swamp

Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp

Fraxinus nigra - Mixed Hardwoods - Conifers / Cornus sericea / Carex spp. Forest

Black Ash - Mixed Hardwoods - Conifers / Red-osier Dogwood / Sedge species Forest

Identifier: CEGL002105

NVC CLASSIFICATION

Division Northeastern & Central North American Flooded & Swamp Forest (1.C.3.a)

Macrogroup Northern & Central Swamp Forest (MG030)

Group Northern & Central Alkaline Conifer & Hardwood Swamp (G046)

Association (Common name) Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp

Ecological System(s): Laurentian-Acadian Alkaline Conifer-Hardwood Swamp (CES201.575)

Eastern Boreal Floodplain (CES103.588)

ELEMENT CONCEPT

Global Summary: This black ash - hardwood swamp forest is found widely in the northern midwestern region of the United States 

and into the boreal region of central Canada. Sites are found on well-decomposed woody peat or fine mineral soil. The type is found 

where perched wet pockets occur on fine sandy, clay loamy to fine loamy soils in valleys with impeded drainage or near shores. 

Hydrology can vary from seasonally flooded to saturated. Conditions are often transitional to uplands. Canopy structure is variable, 

ranging from 30-90% cover. The canopy is dominated by Fraxinus nigra (black ash) (at least 50% cover), with a diverse mix of 

hardwoods and conifers in the main and subcanopies, including Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Acer rubrum (red maple), Betula 

papyrifera (paper birch), Betula alleghaniensis (yellow birch), Fraxinus pennsylvanica (green ash), Picea glauca (white spruce), 

Populus balsamifera (balsam poplar), Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen), Thuja occidentalis (northern white-cedar), Tilia 

americana (American basswood), and Ulmus americana (American elm). Shrub and sapling species include Abies balsamea (balsam 

fir), Acer spicatum (mountain maple), Cornus sericea (red-osier dogwood), Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), Lonicera canadensis
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-14

(American fly honeysuckle), Prunus virginiana (chokecherry), Ribes triste (red currant), Rubus idaeus (American red raspberry), and 

Rubus pubescens (dwarf red blackberry). Herbaceous species include Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), Eurybia macrophylla

(bigleaf aster), Athyrium filix-femina (common ladyfern), Carex gracillima (graceful sedge), Carex intumescens (greater bladder 

sedge), Cinna latifolia (drooping woodreed), Circaea alpina (small enchanter's nightshade), Clintonia borealis (bluebead), Dryopteris 

carthusiana (spinulose woodfern), Equisetum sylvaticum (woodland horsetail), Fragaria virginiana (Virginia strawberry), 

Maianthemum canadense (Canada mayflower), Mitella nuda (naked miterwort), Streptopus lanceolatus var. longipes (twistedstalk), 

Thalictrum pubescens (king-of-the-meadow), and Trientalis borealis (starflower). Mosses include Climacium dendroides (tree 

climacium moss), Plagiomnium (plagiomnium moss) spp. A floodplain variant may also occur, with more hardwood dominance, with 

wetter species present, such as Alnus incana (gray alder), Calamagrostis canadensis (bluejoint), and Caltha palustris (yellow marshmarigold). Diagnostic features include the dominance by Fraxinus nigra (black ash).

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Environment: This black ash - hardwood swamp forest was sampled at two locations in the 

park. One site is described as a moderate southwest-facing depression. Soils are somewhat poorly drained clay and clay loam. The 

surface is dominated by leaf litter (81-93% cover) with some large rocks (0-1%), wood (3-8%) and plant stems (5-10%). Evidence of 

disturbance includes trails and a boardwalk.

Global Environment: Sites are found on well-decomposed woody peat or fine mineral soil. The type is found where perched wet 

pockets occur on fine sandy, clay loamy to fine loamy soils in valleys with impeded drainage or near shores. Hydrology can vary from 

seasonally flooded to saturated. Conditions are often transitional to uplands (Sims et al. 1989, MNNHP 1993, Cleland et al. 1994, 

Chambers et al. 1997).

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Vegetation: The moderate (50-60% cover) tree canopy, 15-35 m tall, is dominated by 

Fraxinus nigra (black ash) and may include Abies balsamea (balsam fir) and Picea glauca (white spruce). The sparse (20%) 

subcanopy (10-15 m) includes Populus balsamifera (balsam poplar) and Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen). The moderately sparse 

(30-40%) tall-shrub layer (2-5 m) may include Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Alnus incana ssp. rugosa (speckled alder), Corylus 

cornuta (beaked hazelnut), Fraxinus nigra (black ash), and Ulmus americana (American elm). The sparse (30%) short-shrub layer 

(0.5-1 m) is dominated by Cornus sericea (red-osier dogwood) and may include Prunus virginiana (chokecherry), Sorbus decora

(northern mountain-ash), and Viburnum opulus var. americanum (American cranberrybush). Rubus (blackberry) sp. and Ribes

(currant) may form a sparse (30%) dwarf-shrub layer. The sparse to dense (30-80%) herbaceous layer includes Anemone canadensis

(Canadian anemone), Asarum canadense (Canadian wildginger), Athyrium filix-femina (common ladyfern), Carex gynandra (nodding 

sedge), Carex pedunculata (longstalk sedge), Equisetum arvense (field horsetail), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Glyceria 

striata (fowl mannagrass), Heracleum maximum (common cowparsnip), Matteuccia struthiopteris (ostrich fern), Mitella nuda (naked 

miterwort), Onoclea sensibilis (sensitive fern), and Thalictrum dasycarpum (purple meadowrue). Nonvascular species (mosses) cover 

5-20% of the ground surface.

Global Vegetation: Canopy structure is variable, ranging from 30-90% cover. The canopy is dominated by Fraxinus nigra (black 

ash) (at least 50% cover), with a diverse mix of hardwoods and conifers in the main and sub canopies, including Abies balsamea

(balsam fir), Acer rubrum (red maple), Betula papyrifera (paper birch), Betula alleghaniensis (yellow birch), Fraxinus pennsylvanica

(green ash), Picea glauca (white spruce), Populus balsamifera (balsam poplar), Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen), Thuja 

occidentalis (northern white-cedar), Tilia americana (American basswood), and Ulmus americana (American elm). Shrub and sapling 

species include Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Acer spicatum (mountain maple), Cornus sericea (red-osier dogwood), Corylus cornuta

(beaked hazelnut), Lonicera canadensis (American fly honeysuckle), Prunus virginiana (chokecherry), Ribes triste (red currant), 

Rubus idaeus (American red raspberry), and Rubus pubescens (dwarf red blackberry). Herbaceous species include Aralia nudicaulis

(wild sarsaparilla), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Athyrium filix-femina (common ladyfern), Carex gracillima (graceful sedge), 

Carex intumescens (greater bladder sedge), Cinna latifolia (drooping woodreed), Circaea alpina (small enchanter's nightshade), 

Clintonia borealis (bluebead), Dryopteris carthusiana (spinulose woodfern), Equisetum sylvaticum (woodland horsetail), Fragaria 

virginiana (Virginia strawberry), Maianthemum canadense (Canada mayflower), Mitella nuda (naked miterwort), Streptopus 

lanceolatus (twistedstalk), Thalictrum pubescens (king-of-the-meadow), and Trientalis borealis (starflower). Mosses include 

Climacium dendroides (tree climacium moss), Plagiomnium (plagiomnium moss) spp. (Sims et al. 1989, MNNHP 1993, Cleland et al. 

1994, Harris et al. 1996, Chambers et al. 1997). A floodplain variant may also occur, with more hardwood dominance, with wetter 

species present, such as Alnus incana (gray alder), Calamagrostis canadensis (bluejoint), and Caltha palustris (yellow marshmarigold) (Harris et al. 1996). Diagnostic features include the dominance by Fraxinus nigra (black ash).

MOST ABUNDANT SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument

Stratum Lifeform Species

Tree canopy Needle-leaved tree Abies balsamea (balsam fir)

Tree canopy Broad-leaved deciduous tree Fraxinus nigra (black ash)

Tall shrub/sapling Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Acer spicatum (mountain maple), Fraxinus nigra (black ash)

Herb (field) Forb Mitella nuda (naked miterwort)

Herb (field) Fern or fern ally Athyrium filix-femina (common ladyfern)
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-15

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument: Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Acer spicatum (mountain maple), Athyrium filix-femina

(common ladyfern), Cornus sericea (red-osier dogwood), Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), Fraxinus nigra (black ash), Heracleum 

maximum (common cowparsnip), Mitella nuda (naked miterwort), Prunus virginiana (chokecherry), Thalictrum dasycarpum (purple 

meadowrue)

CONSERVATION STATUS RANK

Global Rank & Reasons: G4 (3-Oct-1996). 

CLASSIFICATION

Status: Standard

Classification Confidence: 2 - Moderate

Global Comments: This type description is essentially boreal to sub-boreal in content, emphasizing the northern/western part of the 

range. Southern/eastern stands may differ and may warrant a separate type. For examples, see the description in Michigan provided by 

the Manistee National Forest FEC, ELTP 74 (Cleland et al. 1994), which lists Hamamelis virginiana (American witch-hazel), Salix

(willow) spp. Viburnum acerifolium (mapleleaf viburnum), and Viburnum nudum var. cassinoides (withe-rod) in the shrub layer; and 

descriptions from central Minnesota (MNNHP 1993, Wovcha et al. 1995), which include virtually no conifers, lack a number of 

boreal species, and include others, such as the shrubs Ilex verticillata (common winterberry) and Toxicodendron vernix (poisonsumac), and the herbs Arisaema triphyllum (Jack in the pulpit), Glyceria striata (fowl mannagrass), Impatiens capensis (jewelweed), 

Osmunda cinnamomea (cinnamon fern), and Onoclea sensibilis (sensitive fern). A seepage variant has also been described in 

Minnesota, containing Carex bromoides (bromelike sedge) and Symplocarpus foetidus (skunk-cabbage). This seepage variant may 

resemble the riparian variant described in northern Ontario (MNNHP 1993, Harris et al. 1996 -W34). Finally, in Wisconsin stands 

have been described with a tree layer of Fraxinus nigra (black ash), Tilia americana (American basswood), Picea glauca (white 

spruce), a ground layer dominated by Matteuccia struthiopteris (ostrich fern) and Laportea canadensis (Canadian woodnettle), and a 

diverse mix of spring ephemerals that are more typical of southern Wisconsin (E. Epstein pers. comm. 1999).

Global Similar Associations:

• Acer rubrum - Fraxinus spp. - Betula papyrifera / Cornus canadensis Forest (CEGL002071)

• Symplocarpus foetidus Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL002385)

Global Related Concepts:

• Black Ash Hardwood and Mixedwood (V2) (Sims et al. 1989) =

• Black Ash-Hardwoods-Herb Rich (V7) (Chambers et al. 1997) =

• ELTP 74 - Black ash-basswood-Viola plant association (Cleland et al. 1994) =

• Hardwood swamp: black ash (other hardwood): riparian (W34) (Harris et al. 1996) F

• Hardwood swamp: black ash (other hardwood): upland transition (W33) (Harris et al. 1996) F

• Northern Swamp (Chapman et al. 1989) B

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

Global Range: This black ash - hardwood swamp forest type is found widely in the northern midwestern region of the United States 

and into the boreal region of central Canada, ranging from northern Indiana and northern Illinois northward to Ontario and Manitoba.

Nations: CA, US

States/Provinces: IL, IN, MB:S2, MI, MN, ND:S3, ON, QC:S4?, WI:S3, WY

TNC Ecoregions: 35:C, 36:C, 46:C, 47:C, 48:C

USFS Ecoregions (1994/95): 212Ha:CCP, 212Hb:CCP, 212Hd:CCC, 212He:CCP, 212Hh:CCP, 212Hi:CCC, 212Hj:CCP, 

212Hk:CCP, 212Hl:CCP, 212Hm:CCC, 212Hn:CCP, 212Ho:CCC, 212Hp:CCP, 212Hq:CCP, 212Hr:CCP, 212Hs:CCP, 212Ht:CCP, 

212Hv:CCP, 212Hw:CCC, 212Hy:CCP, 212Ia:CCC, 212Ib:CCC, 212Ja:CCP, 212Jb:CCC, 212Jc:CCC, 212Jd:CCC, 212Je:CCP, 

212Jf:CCP, 212Jj:CCP, 212Jk:CCP, 212Jl:CCP, 212Jm:CCC, 212Jn:CCP, 212Jo:CCP, 212Jr:CCP, 212Ka:CCC, 212Kb:CCC, 

212La:CCC, 212Lb:CCC, 212Mb:CCC, 212Na:CCC, 212Nb:CCP, 212Nc:CCC, 212Oa:CCC, 222Ke:CCC, 222Kf:CCC, 

222Kg:CCC, 222Lc:CCC, 222Ld:CCC, 222Lf:CCC, 222Mc:CCC, 222Md:CCC, 222Na:CCC, 251Aa:CCC, 251Dc:CCC

Federal Lands: NPS (Apostle Islands, Grand Portage, Isle Royale, Pictured Rocks, Saint Croix, Sleeping Bear Dunes, Voyageurs); 

USFS (Chequamegon, Chequamegon-Nicolet, Chippewa, Huron-Manistee, Manistee, Nicolet, Ottawa, Superior)

Federal Lands: Information not available.

ELEMENT SOURCES

Grand Portage National Monument Plots: GRPO.6, GRPO.14.

Grand Portage National Monument Map Code: FBA, FGA

Local Description Authors: M.J. Russo

Global Description Authors: D. Faber-Langendoen

References: Chambers et al. 1997, Chapman et al. 1989, Cleland et al. 1994, Greenall 1996, Harris et al. 1996, MNNHP 1993, 

Midwestern Ecology Working Group n.d., NDNHI unpubl. data, Sims et al. 1989, WNHIP unpubl. data, Wovcha et al. 1995
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-16

Aspen - Balsam Poplar Lowland Forest

Populus tremuloides - Populus balsamifera - Mixed Hardwoods Lowland Forest

Quaking Aspen - Balsam Poplar - Mixed Hardwoods Lowland Forest

Identifier: CEGL005036

NVC CLASSIFICATION

Division Northeastern & Central North American Flooded & Swamp Forest (1.C.3.a)

Macrogroup Northern & Central Swamp Forest (MG030)

Group Northern & Central Alkaline Conifer & Hardwood Swamp (G046)

Association (Common name) Aspen - Balsam Poplar Lowland Forest

Ecological System(s): Boreal Aspen-Birch Forest (CES103.020)

Laurentian-Acadian Alkaline Conifer-Hardwood Swamp (CES201.575)

ELEMENT CONCEPT

Global Summary: This lowland aspen forest is found in the boreal/sub-boreal regions of the Great Lakes region of the United States 

and adjacent Canada. Stands are found on lower slopes and draws, occasionally under seepage conditions. Soils are deep, fresh to 

moist, poorly drained, and often fine-textured and of lacustrine origin. Stands are dominated by deciduous trees, but can contain a mix 

of evergreen species. Dominants include Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen) and Populus balsamifera (balsam poplar). Other 

associates include Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Betula papyrifera (paper birch), and Picea glauca (white spruce). The shrub and herb 

layer are often fairly rich. Typical shrubs/saplings include Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Alnus incana (gray alder), Amelanchier

(serviceberry) spp., Cornus sericea (red-osier dogwood), Cornus canadensis (bunchberry dogwood), Ribes (currant) spp., Rosa 

acicularis (prickly rose), Rubus idaeus (American red raspberry), and Rubus pubescens (dwarf red blackberry). The herb layer 

contains Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), Symphyotrichum ciliolatum (Lindley's aster), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), 

Anemone quinquefolia (nightcaps), Calamagrostis canadensis (bluejoint), Carex (sedge) spp., Clintonia borealis (bluebead), 

Dryopteris carthusiana (spinulose woodfern), Equisetum (horsetail) spp. (including Equisetum sylvaticum (woodland horsetail)), 

Galium triflorum (fragrant bedstraw), Maianthemum canadense (Canada mayflower), Mertensia paniculata (tall bluebells), Mitella 

nuda (naked miterwort), Petasites frigidus var. palmatus (arctic sweet coltsfoot), Streptopus lanceolatus var. longipes (twistedstalk), 

and Viola renifolia (white violet). Calamagrostis canadensis (bluejoint) can be abundant in the herb layer.

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Environment: This lowland aspen forest was sampled once in the park. The site is a moderate 

southwest-facing, seasonally flooded floodplain with well-drained clay loam soil. The surface is dominated by leaf litter (90% cover) 

with some large rocks (1%), wood (1%) and plant stems (8%). Evidence of disturbance includes the presence of human trash, a paved 

road and dead plants due to recent drought conditions.

Global Environment: Stands are found on lower slopes and draws, occasionally under seepage conditions. Soils are deep, fresh to 

moist, poorly drained, and often fine-textured and of lacustrine origin (Sims et al. 1989).

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Vegetation: The moderate (60% cover) tree canopy, 15-20 m tall, is codominated by Populus 

balsamifera (balsam poplar) and Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen). Small amounts of Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Betula 

papyrifera (paper birch), and Sorbus decora (northern mountain-ash) form a sparse (30%) subcanopy (10-15 m). The moderate (50%) 

tall-shrub layer (2-5 m) is dominated by Acer spicatum (mountain maple) and includes Alnus incana ssp. rugosa (speckled alder), 

Alnus viridis (green alder), and Sorbus decora (northern mountain-ash). The sparse (20%) short-shrub layer (0.5-1 m) includes Cornus 

sericea (red-osier dogwood), Diervilla lonicera (northern bush honeysuckle), Spiraea alba (white meadowsweet), Viburnum opulus 

var. americanum (American cranberrybush), and trace amounts of others. The moderate (60%) herbaceous layer is dominated by 

Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster) and includes Athyrium filix-femina (common ladyfern), Calamagrostis canadensis (bluejoint), 

Carex intumescens (greater bladder sedge), Clintonia borealis (bluebead), Dryopteris carthusiana (spinulose woodfern), Fragaria 

virginiana (Virginia strawberry), Mertensia paniculata (tall bluebells), and Symphyotrichum ciliolatum (Lindley's aster). Nonvascular 

species (mosses) cover 10% of the ground surface.

Global Vegetation: Stands are dominated by deciduous trees, but can contain a mix of evergreen species. Dominants include 

Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen) and Populus balsamifera (balsam poplar). Other associates include Abies balsamea (balsam fir), 

Betula papyrifera (paper birch), and Picea glauca (white spruce). The shrub and herb layer are often fairly rich. Typical 

shrubs/saplings include Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Alnus incana (gray alder), Amelanchier (serviceberry) spp., Cornus sericea (redosier dogwood), Cornus canadensis (bunchberry dogwood), Ribes (currant) spp., Rosa acicularis (prickly rose), Rubus idaeus

(American red raspberry), and Rubus pubescens (dwarf red blackberry). The herb layer contains Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), 

Symphyotrichum ciliolatum (Lindley's aster), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Anemone quinquefolia (nightcaps), Calamagrostis 

canadensis (bluejoint), Carex (sedge) spp., Clintonia borealis (bluebead), Dryopteris carthusiana (spinulose woodfern), Equisetum

(horsetail) spp. (including Equisetum sylvaticum (woodland horsetail)), Galium triflorum (fragrant bedstraw), Maianthemum 

canadense (Canada mayflower), Mertensia paniculata (tall bluebells), Mitella nuda (naked miterwort), Petasites frigidus var. 

palmatus (arctic sweet coltsfoot), Streptopus lanceolatus (twistedstalk), and Viola renifolia (white violet). Calamagrostis canadensis

(bluejoint) can be abundant in the herb layer (Sims et al. 1989, McCarthy et al. 1994).
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-17

MOST ABUNDANT SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument

Stratum Lifeform Species

Tree canopy Broad-leaved deciduous tree Populus balsamifera (balsam poplar), Populus tremuloides

(quaking aspen)

Tall shrub/sapling Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Acer spicatum (mountain maple)

Herb (field) Forb Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster)

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument: Acer spicatum (mountain maple), Alnus incana ssp. rugosa (speckled alder), Calamagrostis 

canadensis (bluejoint), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Populus balsamifera (balsam poplar), Populus tremuloides (quaking 

aspen)

CONSERVATION STATUS RANK

Global Rank & Reasons: G5 (3-Oct-1996). 

CLASSIFICATION

Status: Standard

Classification Confidence: 2 - Moderate

Global Comments: This type may arise from clearcut sites on moist spruce-fir or spruce-fir aspen sites. In Wisconsin, this type may 

arise from widespread logging of spruce-fir stands followed by catastrophic fires that burn the humus out of the soil and prevent 

spruce-fir regeneration (E. Epstein pers. comm. 1999). It appears that, as result of the cut, soils become very wet because the trees are 

no longer "pulling" moisture out of the soil horizons. Alnus incana (gray alder) can be common in these situations. In fact the ground 

layer of spruce-fir types such as Picea glauca - Abies balsamea / Acer spicatum / Rubus pubescens Forest (CEGL002446), at its 

moistest end, can resemble this type [see, e.g., Sims et al. (1989) V24, which can contain Alnus incana (gray alder)]. The hydrology of 

this type may be close to saturated.

Global Similar Associations:

• Picea glauca - Abies balsamea - Populus tremuloides / Mixed Herbs Forest (CEGL002475)--Although this is a spruce-fir-aspen 

type, and its moistest end, the ground layer can resemble this type.

• Picea glauca - Abies balsamea / Acer spicatum / Rubus pubescens Forest (CEGL002446)--Although this is a spruce-fir type, and its 

moistest end, the ground layer can resemble this type [see, e.g., Sims et al. (1989)].

• Populus tremuloides - Populus balsamifera / Calamagrostis canadensis Forest (CEGL002097)

• Populus tremuloides - Populus balsamifera / Rubus pubescens Forest (CEGL002511)

Global Related Concepts:

• Balsam Poplar Hardwood and Mixedwood Forest (V1) (Sims et al. 1989) =

• Northern Swamp (Chapman et al. 1989) ?

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

Global Range: This lowland aspen forest is found in the boreal/sub-boreal regions of the Great Lakes region of the United States and 

adjacent Canada., ranging from Minnesota east to Michigan and Ontario, and perhaps elsewhere in central Canada.

Nations: CA, US

States/Provinces: MI, MN, ON, QC, WI

TNC Ecoregions: 47:C, 48:C

USFS Ecoregions (1994/95): 212Hi:CCC, 212Ib:CCC, 212Ja:CPP, 212La:CCC, 212Lb:CCC

Federal Lands: NPS (Grand Portage, Isle Royale, Voyageurs); USFS (Chequamegon, Chequamegon-Nicolet, Nicolet?, Ottawa?, 

Superior?)

Federal Lands: Information not available.

ELEMENT SOURCES

Grand Portage National Monument Plots: GRPO.21.

Grand Portage National Monument Map Code: FAP

Local Description Authors: M.J. Russo

Global Description Authors: D. Faber-Langendoen

References: Chapman et al. 1989, McCarthy et al. 1994, Midwestern Ecology Working Group n.d., Sims et al. 1989, WNHIP unpubl. 

data
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-18

MG160. Northern & Central Tall Shrub Wetland

G167. Northern & Central Shrub Swamp

Gray Alder Swamp

Alnus incana Swamp Shrubland

Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland

Identifier: CEGL002381

NVC CLASSIFICATION

Division Northeastern & Central North American Flooded & Swamp Forest (1.C.3.a)

Macrogroup Northern & Central Tall Shrub Wetland (MG160)

Group Northern & Central Shrub Swamp (G167)

Association (Common name) Gray Alder Swamp

Ecological System(s): Western Great Plains Open Freshwater Depression Wetland (CES303.675)

Laurentian-Acadian Wet Meadow-Shrub Swamp (CES201.582)

High Allegheny Wetland (CES202.069)

ELEMENT CONCEPT

Global Summary: This alder swamp community is widespread in the midwestern and northeastern United States and southern 

Canada. Stands occur on shores, edges of beaver meadows in stream floodplains, swales associated with small streams in peatlands, or 

upland forests. Soils are well-decomposed peat, muck or mineral soils. The hydrology is typically seasonally flooded, with most sites 

remaining saturated. The vegetation is dominated by tall shrubs, 2-8 m in height, with a moderately open to dense shrub canopy. There 

is an understory of shorter shrubs and herbaceous species. The density of the understory varies inversely with the tall-shrub canopy. 

The overstory is usually overwhelmingly dominated by Alnus incana (gray alder), but in the more southeastern portions of this type's 

range, Alnus serrulata (hazel alder) can occur with Alnus incana (gray alder). Where alder is not as dominant, other shrubs, such as 

Cornus sericea (red-osier dogwood), Ilex verticillata (common winterberry), Rubus idaeus (American red raspberry), Salix (willow) 

spp., Spiraea alba (white meadowsweet), Spiraea tomentosa (steeplebush), and Viburnum (viburnum) spp., can be found. At the 

southern range limit of this type in West Virginia, shrub layers may by be dominated or codominated by the Central Appalachian 

endemic Ilex collina (longstalk holly). The herbaceous layer contains species such as Symphyotrichum lanceolatum var. lanceolatum

(white panicle aster), Symphyotrichum puniceum (purplestem aster), Calamagrostis canadensis (bluejoint), Caltha palustris (yellow 

marsh-marigold), Carex lacustris (hairy sedge), Carex prairea (prairie sedge), Carex trisperma (threeseeded sedge), Doellingeria 

umbellata (parasol whitetop), Eupatorium maculatum (spotted joepyeweed), Glyceria melicaria (melic mannagrass), Glyceria striata

(fowl mannagrass), Impatiens capensis (jewelweed), Lycopus uniflorus (northern bugleweed), Onoclea sensibilis (sensitive fern), 

Osmunda cinnamomea (cinnamon fern), Rubus pubescens (dwarf red blackberry), Scirpus atrovirens (green bulrush), Symplocarpus 

foetidus (skunk-cabbage), Thelypteris palustris (eastern marsh fern), Typha (cattail) spp., and Viola (violet) spp. Mosses include 

Climacium dendroides (tree climacium moss) and Sphagnum (sphagnum) spp. Where the tall-shrub canopy is open, graminoids can 

become dense. Scattered trees are found in many stands, including Acer rubrum (red maple), Fraxinus nigra (black ash), and Thuja 

occidentalis (northern white-cedar).

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Environment: This alder swamp community was sampled at three locations in the park. The 

sites are flat to gently sloping, seasonally flooded floodplains which were dry at the time of sampling. Soils range from poorly drained 

to moderately well-drained clay and clay loam. The surface is dominated by leaf litter (87-93% cover) with some large rocks (0-1%), 

wood (2-3%), bare soil (0-1%) and plant stems (5-15%). Evidence of disturbance includes animal and human paths and signs of 

beaver activity.

Global Environment: Sites are typically along streams, lakeshores, edges of beaver meadows, swales associated with small streams 

in peatlands or upland forests, or near seeps. Most have little to no slope, but some sites are on moderate slopes. Hydrologic conditions 

can range from temporarily flooded to seasonally flooded, or even saturated, but are typically seasonally flooded/saturated. The water 

ranges from non-stagnant, nutrient-rich, and often slightly calcareous (Curtis 1959) to rather stagnant and nutrient-poor where over 

acidic bedrock or till. Soils are wet, often mucks or peats (Anderson 1982, Chapman et al. 1989). In the upper Midwest, this 

community is found on Precambrian Shield bedrock that is overlaid with sandy loam soils, which are moderately well-drained and 

deep (>60 cm). In northeastern Minnesota stands can occur on northeast- and south-facing slopes that are moderate to steep, with 

slopes ranging from 4 to 45% (Ohmann and Ream 1971). The climate is highly variable, with temperature extremes between -46 and 

38 degrees C and 58-91 cm precipitation.

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Vegetation: The moderately to very dense (70-90% cover) tall-shrub layer (2-5 m tall) is 

dominated by Alnus incana ssp. rugosa (speckled alder) along with lesser amounts of state-imperiled Crataegus douglasii (black 

hawthorn), as well as Fraxinus nigra (black ash), Salix (willow) sp., and Viburnum opulus var. americanum (American 

cranberrybush). The short-shrub layer (0.5-1 m) may be absent or moderate (0-50%) and may include Alnus incana ssp. rugosa

(speckled alder), Amelanchier (serviceberry) sp., Cornus sericea (red-osier dogwood), Ribes (currant) spp., Rubus (blackberry) sp., 

and Spiraea alba (white meadowsweet). The sparse to moderately dense (30-70%) herbaceous layer may include Asarum canadense
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-19

(Canadian wildginger), Calamagrostis canadensis (bluejoint), Equisetum arvense (field horsetail), Equisetum sylvaticum (woodland 

horsetail), Eupatorium maculatum (spotted joepyeweed), Heracleum maximum (common cowparsnip), Impatiens capensis

(jewelweed), Impatiens capensis (jewelweed), Mertensia paniculata (tall bluebells), Onoclea sensibilis (sensitive fern), and 

Thalictrum dasycarpum (purple meadowrue). Nonvascular species cover 5-10% of the ground surface.

Global Vegetation: The vegetation is dominated by tall shrubs, 2-8 m in height, with a moderately open to dense shrub canopy. 

There is an understory of shorter shrubs and herbaceous species. The density of the understory varies inversely with the tall-shrub 

canopy. The overstory is usually overwhelmingly dominated by Alnus incana (gray alder), but in the more southeastern portions of 

this type's range, Alnus serrulata (hazel alder) can occur with Alnus incana (gray alder). Where alder is not as dominant, other shrubs, 

such as Cornus sericea (red-osier dogwood), Ilex verticillata (common winterberry), Rubus idaeus (American red raspberry), Salix

(willow) spp., Spiraea alba (white meadowsweet), Spiraea tomentosa (steeplebush), and Viburnum (viburnum) spp., can be found. 

The herbaceous layer contains species such as Symphyotrichum lanceolatum var. lanceolatum (white panicle aster), Symphyotrichum 

puniceum (purplestem aster), Calamagrostis canadensis (bluejoint), Caltha palustris (yellow marsh-marigold), Carex lacustris (hairy 

sedge), Carex prairea (prairie sedge), Carex trisperma (threeseeded sedge), Doellingeria umbellata (parasol whitetop), Eupatorium 

maculatum (spotted joepyeweed), Impatiens capensis (jewelweed), Lycopus uniflorus (northern bugleweed), Onoclea sensibilis

(sensitive fern), Osmunda cinnamomea (cinnamon fern), Rubus pubescens (dwarf red blackberry), Scirpus atrovirens (green bulrush), 

Symplocarpus foetidus (skunk-cabbage), Thelypteris palustris (eastern marsh fern), Typha (cattail) spp., and Viola (violet) spp. Mosses 

include Climacium dendroides (tree climacium moss) and Sphagnum (sphagnum) spp. Where the tall-shrub canopy is open, the 

graminoids can become dense. Scattered trees are found in many stands, including Acer rubrum (red maple), Fraxinus nigra (black 

ash), and Thuja occidentalis (northern white-cedar) (Curtis 1959, Anderson 1982, MNNHP 1993, Harris et al. 1996, Sperduto 2000b, 

Thompson and Sorenson 2000, Gawler 2002). Where stands border on saturated conditions with peaty soils, peatland species such as 

Chamaedaphne calyculata (leatherleaf), Rhododendron canadense (rhodora), and Sphagnum (sphagnum) spp. may be present.

MOST ABUNDANT SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument

Stratum Lifeform Species

Shrub/sapling (tall & short) Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Alnus incana ssp. rugosa (speckled alder)

Short shrub/sapling Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Spiraea alba (white meadowsweet)

Herb (field) Forb Heracleum maximum (common cowparsnip), Impatiens capensis

(jewelweed)

Global

Stratum Lifeform Species

Tall shrub/sapling Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Alnus incana (gray alder)

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument: Alnus incana ssp. rugosa (speckled alder), Asarum canadense (Canadian wildginger), Carex 

lacustris (hairy sedge), Cornus sericea (red-osier dogwood), Equisetum arvense (field horsetail), Heracleum maximum (common 

cowparsnip), Impatiens capensis (jewelweed), Onoclea sensibilis (sensitive fern), Spiraea alba (white meadowsweet), Thalictrum 

dasycarpum (purple meadowrue)

Global: Alnus incana (gray alder)

OTHER NOTEWORTHY SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument: Vulnerable: Crataegus douglasii (black hawthorn, state-imperiled, G5)

Global: Vulnerable: Ilex collina (longstalk holly, vulnerable, G3)

CONSERVATION STATUS RANK

Global Rank & Reasons: G5 (23-Jun-2006). This association is widely distributed and considered secure in many states.

CLASSIFICATION

Status: Standard

Classification Confidence: 2 - Moderate

Global Comments: Type has a very broad distribution, and there may be a need to separate a northern (more boreal) type from a 

southern (more temperate) type, or perhaps an enriched versus lower-nutrient type, based on floristic differences. Hydrology may be 

quite variable, ranging from temporarily flooded to semipermanently flooded. In Ohio, this association sometimes merges with Alnus 

serrulata (hazel alder) stands in Alnus serrulata Swamp Shrubland (CEGL005082); that association is distinguished by somewhat 

more southern associates, including Rhododendron viscosum (swamp azalea), Lindera benzoin (northern spicebush), Peltandra 

virginica (green arrow-arum), etc.. With increasing tree canopy cover, this association can be similar to Larix laricina (tamarack) 

forest types, Thuja occidentalis (northern white-cedar) saturated forest types, and Fraxinus nigra - Acer rubrum saturated forest types.

Global Similar Associations:

• Alnus incana - Cornus (amomum, sericea) / Clematis virginiana Shrubland (CEGL006062)

• Alnus incana ssp. rugosa - Nemopanthus mucronatus / Sphagnum spp. Shrubland (CEGL006158)

• Alnus serrulata Swamp Shrubland (CEGL005082)

Global Related Concepts:

• Alnus incana - Sambucus canadensis shrub community (Darlington 1943) F
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-20

• Alnus incana - Viburnum cassinoides shrub community (Darlington 1943) F

• Alnus incana ssp. rugosa tall shrub thicket (Fortney et al. 2005) =

• Alnus incana ssp. rugosa shrubland (Byers et al. 2007) =

• Alnus rugosa shrub (Walbridge and Lang 1982) =

• Alnus rugosa tall shrub community (Walbridge 1982) =

• Alnus rugosa tall shrub community (Robinette 1966) =

• Alnus rugosa thicket community (Fortney 1975) =

• Alder Shrub Swamp (Anderson and Schwegman 1991) =

• Alder Thicket (Curtis 1959) =

• Thicket Swamp: Speckled Alder / Bluejoint Grass type , W35 (Harris et al. 1996) =

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

Global Range: This alder swamp shrubland is widespread in the midwestern and northeastern United States and southern Canada, 

ranging from Maine west to Manitoba, south to Iowa, and east to New York and perhaps northern New Jersey.

Nations: CA, US

States/Provinces: IA:S3?, IL, IN?, MA, MB?, ME, MI:S5, MN:S5, ND:S2?, NH:S3S4, NJ?:S2S4, NY, OH, ON, PA, QC:S4S5, VT, 

WI:S4, WV:S3, WY

TNC Ecoregions: 34:C, 35:C, 46:C, 47:C, 48:C, 60:C, 61:C, 62:C, 63:C, 64:C

USFS Ecoregions (1994/95): 212Cb:CCC, 212Da:CCC, 212Db:CCC, 212Dc:CCC, 212Fc:CCC, 212Ha:CCP, 212Hb:CCP, 

212He:CCP, 212Hh:CCP, 212Hi:CCC, 212Hj:CCP, 212Hk:CCP, 212Hl:CCC, 212Hm:CCP, 212Hn:CCP, 212Ho:CCC, 212Hp:CCP, 

212Hq:CCC, 212Hr:CCP, 212Hs:CCP, 212Ht:CCC, 212Hv:CCP, 212Hw:CCC, 212Hy:CCP, 212Ia:CCC, 212Ib:CCC, 212Ja:CCP, 

212Jb:CCP, 212Jc:CCP, 212Je:CCP, 212Jf:CCC, 212Jj:CCP, 212Jk:CCP, 212Jl:CCP, 212Jm:CCP, 212Jn:CCP, 212Jo:CCP, 

212Jr:CCC, 212Ka:CCP, 212Kb:CCC, 212La:CCC, 212Lb:CCC, 212Mb:CPP, 212Na:CCC, 212Nb:CCP, 212Nc:CCC, 221Ae:CCC, 

221Ak:CCP, 221Al:CCP, 221Bc:CCC, 222Je:CCC, 222Lb:CCC, 222Lc:CCC, 222Mc:CCC, 222Md:CCC, 222Na:CCC, 251Aa:CCC, 

251Ab:CCC, M212Aa:CCC, M212Ac:CCC, M212Ae:CCC, M212Af:CCC, M212B:CC, M212C:CC, M212D:CP

Federal Lands: NPS (Acadia, Apostle Islands, Grand Portage, Isle Royale, Pictured Rocks, Saint Croix, Saratoga, Sleeping Bear 

Dunes, Upper Delaware, Voyageurs); USFS (Chequamegon, Chequamegon-Nicolet, Chippewa, Huron, Huron-Manistee, Manistee, 

Nicolet, Ottawa, Superior); USFWS (Aroostook, Assabet River, Carlton Pond, Moosehorn?, Nulhegan Basin)

Federal Lands: Information not available.

ELEMENT SOURCES

Grand Portage National Monument Plots: GRPO.9, GRPO.12, GRPO.15.

Grand Portage National Monument Map Code: SAS, SAH, SAW

Local Description Authors: M.J. Russo

Global Description Authors: D. Faber-Langendoen, mod. S.C. Gawler

References: Anderson 1982, Anderson and Schwegman 1991, Breden et al. 2001, Byers et al. 2007, Chapman et al. 1989, Curtis 

1959, Darlington 1943, DeMeo et al. 1998, Fortney 1975, Fortney et al. 2005, Gawler 2002, Greenall 1996, Harris et al. 1996, INAI 

unpubl. data, MNNHP 1993, Midwestern Ecology Working Group n.d., NDNHI unpubl. data, NRCS 2004, Ohmann and Ream 1971, 

Rentch unpubl. data 2003, Robinette 1966, Sperduto 2000b, Swain and Kearsley 2001, Thompson and Sorenson 2000, WNHIP 

unpubl. data, Walbridge 1982, Walbridge and Lang 1982

1.D.1. Lowland & Montane Boreal Forest

1.D.1.a. North American Lowland Boreal Forest

MG037. Eastern & Central North American Boreal Conifer & Hardwood Forest

G047. Jack Pine - Black Spruce Forest

Jack Pine - Aspen / Bush-honeysuckle Forest

Pinus banksiana - Populus tremuloides / Diervilla lonicera Forest

Jack Pine - Quaking Aspen / Northern Bush-honeysuckle Forest

Identifier: CEGL002518

NVC CLASSIFICATION

Division North American Lowland Boreal Forest (1.D.1.a)

Macrogroup Eastern & Central North American Boreal Conifer & Hardwood Forest (MG037)

Group Jack Pine - Black Spruce Forest (G047)

Association (Common name) Jack Pine - Aspen / Bush-honeysuckle Forest

Ecological System(s): Boreal Jack Pine-Black Spruce Forest (CES103.022)

ELEMENT CONCEPT

Global Summary: This jack pine - aspen forest is found in the northern parts of the midwestern United States and into central 

Canada. Stands occur on generally level sandy outwash plains or moderately sloping moraines. The soils are fresh to dry, deep, sandy 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-21

loams, loams, and fine sands. In Manitoba, the soils tend to be somewhat more moist and fine. The canopy layer is a mix of coniferous 

and deciduous trees, with the conifers tending to be more abundant in the north. The canopy is typically dominated by Pinus 

banksiana (jack pine) and Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen) with lesser amounts of Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Betula papyrifera

(paper birch), Picea glauca (white spruce), and Picea mariana (black spruce). Tree density and crown spacing may be moderately 

dense to dense, but sufficient light penetrates to permit the growth of a vigorous shrub layer. Most shrubs are less than 1 m tall. The 

most common among these are Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), Diervilla lonicera (northern bush honeysuckle), Linnaea borealis

(twinflower), Rosa acicularis (prickly rose), Rubus pubescens (dwarf red blackberry), and Vaccinium (blueberry) spp. The herbaceous 

layer is also typically quite rich with species such as Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Cornus 

canadensis (bunchberry dogwood), Clintonia borealis (bluebead), Streptopus lanceolatus var. longipes (twistedstalk), Trientalis 

borealis (starflower), and Viola (violet) spp.

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Global Environment: This community is found on generally level sandy outwash plains or moderately sloping moraines (Sims et al. 

1989, MNNHP 1993). The soils are fresh to dry, deep, sandy loams, loams, and fine sands (Sims et al. 1989). In Manitoba, the soils 

tend to be somewhat more moist and fine (Zoladeski et al. 1995).

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Global Vegetation: The canopy layer is a mix of coniferous and deciduous trees, with the conifers tending to be more abundant in 

the north (Sims et al. 1989, Zoladeski et al. 1995). The canopy is typically dominated by Pinus banksiana (jack pine) and Populus 

tremuloides (quaking aspen) with lesser amounts of Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Betula papyrifera (paper birch), Picea glauca (white 

spruce), and Picea mariana (black spruce). Tree density and crown spacing may be moderately dense to dense, but sufficient light 

penetrates to permit the growth of a vigorous shrub layer. Most shrubs are less than 1 m tall. The most common among these are 

Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), Diervilla lonicera (northern bush honeysuckle), Linnaea borealis (twinflower), Rosa acicularis

(prickly rose), Rubus pubescens (dwarf red blackberry), and Vaccinium (blueberry) spp. The herbaceous layer is also typically quite 

rich with species such as Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Cornus canadensis (bunchberry 

dogwood), Clintonia borealis (bluebead), Streptopus lanceolatus (twistedstalk), Trientalis borealis (starflower), and Viola (violet) 

spp.

OTHER NOTEWORTHY SPECIES

Global: Vulnerable: Cypripedium arietinum (ram's head lady's slipper, G3)

CONSERVATION STATUS RANK

Global Rank & Reasons: G4G5 (1-Oct-1996). 

CLASSIFICATION

Status: Standard

Classification Confidence: 3 - Weak

Global Comments: In Voyageurs National Park, this type is on thin soil, rocky substrate, but on the scale of 1-10 hectares, it tends to 

be a mosaic of pure Pinus banksiana (jack pine) and pure Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen) stands. Type needs rangewide review.

Global Similar Associations:

• Pinus banksiana - (Picea mariana, Pinus strobus) / Vaccinium spp. Rocky Woodland (CEGL002483)

• Pinus banksiana / (Quercus rubra, Quercus ellipsoidalis) Forest (CEGL002440)

Global Related Concepts:

• Jack Pine Mixedwood / Shrub Rich (V15) (Zoladeski et al. 1995) =

• Jack Pine Mixedwood / Shrub Rich (V17) (Sims et al. 1989) =

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

Global Range: This jack pine - aspen forest community type is found in the northern parts of the midwestern United States and into 

central Canada, ranging from northeastern Minnesota to Manitoba and Ontario.

Nations: CA, US

States/Provinces: MB?, MI, MN, ON, QC, WI

TNC Ecoregions: 47:C, 48:C

USFS Ecoregions (1994/95): 212Hi:CCC, 212Ia:CCC, 212La:CCC

Federal Lands: NPS (Apostle Islands, Grand Portage, Pictured Rocks, Voyageurs); USFS (Superior?)

Federal Lands: Information not available.

ELEMENT SOURCES

Grand Portage National Monument Map Code: FJM

Local Description Authors: 

Global Description Authors: J. Drake

References: Greenall 1996, Kost et al. 2007, MNNHP 1993, Midwestern Ecology Working Group n.d., Sims et al. 1989, Zoladeski et 

al. 1995
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-22

Jack Pine / Balsam Fir Forest

Pinus banksiana / Abies balsamea Forest

Jack Pine / Balsam Fir Forest

Identifier: CEGL002437

NVC CLASSIFICATION

Division North American Lowland Boreal Forest (1.D.1.a)

Macrogroup Eastern & Central North American Boreal Conifer & Hardwood Forest (MG037)

Group Jack Pine - Black Spruce Forest (G047)

Association (Common name) Jack Pine / Balsam Fir Forest

Ecological System(s): Boreal Jack Pine-Black Spruce Forest (CES103.022)

ELEMENT CONCEPT

Global Summary: This jack pine / fir forest is found in the northern parts of the midwestern United States and in central Canada. 

Stands occur on moderately deep (50-100 cm), usually sandy soils. The sites are often on north- to northeast-facing slopes. The tree 

layer of this community is dominated by Pinus banksiana (jack pine), often to the exclusion of other species. Abies balsamea (balsam 

fir), Betula papyrifera (paper birch), Picea mariana (black spruce), and Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen) dominate the sapling 

and seedling layers and sometimes occur in the canopy. There is a well-developed shrub layer containing species such as Acer 

spicatum (mountain maple), Amelanchier alnifolia (Saskatoon serviceberry), Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), Lonicera canadensis

(American fly honeysuckle), and Vaccinium (blueberry) spp. The herbaceous layer is dominated by dry-mesic forest species, including 

Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Clintonia borealis (bluebead), Coptis trifolia (threeleaf 

goldthread), and Galium boreale (northern bedstraw). Mosses and lichens are common on the forest floor.

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Environment: This jack pine / balsam fir forest was sampled at one location near Mount Rose. 

The site is a somewhat steep, south-facing slope with rapidly drained loamy sand soil. The surface is dominated by leaf litter (88% 

cover) with some large rocks (1%), wood (2%) and plant stems (9%). Evidence of disturbance includes many standing dead jack pine, 

many broken off at the top.

Global Environment: This community is found on moderately deep (50-100 cm), usually sandy soils (Grigal and Ohmann 1975). 

The sites are often on north- to northeast-facing slopes.

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Vegetation: The moderate (60% cover) tree canopy, 15-20 m tall, is dominated by Pinus 

banksiana (jack pine) and includes lesser amounts of Abies balsamea (balsam fir) and Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen). The 

sparse (10%) subcanopy (10-15 m) and sparse (20%) tall-shrub layer (2-5 m) includes Abies balsamea (balsam fir). The sparse (20%) 

short-shrub layer (0.5-1 m) is dominated by Diervilla lonicera (northern bush honeysuckle) and includes Amelanchier (serviceberry) 

sp., Lonicera canadensis (American fly honeysuckle), Rosa (rose) sp., Sorbus decora (northern mountain-ash), and Vaccinium 

myrtilloides (velvetleaf huckleberry). Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (kinnikinnick) forms a very sparse (5%) dwarf-shrub layer. The 

moderate (60%) herbaceous layer is dominated by Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster) and Linnaea borealis (twinflower) and 

includes lesser amounts of Fragaria virginiana (Virginia strawberry), Maianthemum canadense (Canada mayflower), and Oryzopsis 

asperifolia (roughleaf ricegrass). Nonvascular species (mosses) cover 70% of the ground surface and include Dicranum (dicranum 

moss) sp. and Pleurozium schreberi (Schreber's big red stem moss).

Global Vegetation: The tree layer of this community is dominated by Pinus banksiana (jack pine), often to the exclusion of other 

species. Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Betula papyrifera (paper birch), Picea mariana (black spruce), and Populus tremuloides

(quaking aspen) dominate the sapling and seedling layers and sometimes occur in the canopy. There is a well-developed shrub layer 

containing species such as Acer spicatum (mountain maple), Amelanchier alnifolia (Saskatoon serviceberry), Corylus cornuta (beaked 

hazelnut), Lonicera canadensis (American fly honeysuckle), and Vaccinium (blueberry) spp. The herbaceous layer is dominated by 

dry-mesic forest species including Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Clintonia borealis

(bluebead), Coptis trifolia (threeleaf goldthread), and Galium boreale (northern bedstraw). Mosses and lichens are common on the 

forest floor (Grigal and Ohmann 1975, Sims et al. 1989).

MOST ABUNDANT SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument

Stratum Lifeform Species

Tree canopy Needle-leaved tree Pinus banksiana (jack pine)

Herb (field) Forb Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster)

Nonvascular Moss Pleurozium schreberi (Schreber's big red stem moss)

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument: Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Diervilla lonicera (northern bush honeysuckle), Eurybia 

macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Linnaea borealis (twinflower), Pinus banksiana (jack pine), Pleurozium schreberi (Schreber's big red 

stem moss), Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen)
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-23

OTHER NOTEWORTHY SPECIES

Global: Vulnerable: Cypripedium arietinum (ram's head lady's slipper, G3)

CONSERVATION STATUS RANK

Global Rank & Reasons: G5 (3-Oct-1996). 

CLASSIFICATION

Status: Standard

Classification Confidence: 2 - Moderate

Global Comments: This type represents a relatively more moist jack pine type in areas of the Canadian Shield, whereas Pinus 

banksiana / (Quercus rubra, Quercus ellipsoidalis) Forest (CEGL002440) is the drier type.

Global Similar Associations:

• Pinus banksiana / (Quercus rubra, Quercus ellipsoidalis) Forest (CEGL002440)

Global Related Concepts:

• Jack Pine (Fir) (Ohmann and Ream 1971) =

• Jack Pine / Low Shrub (V28) (Sims et al. 1989) B

• Jack Pine-Fir (Grigal and Ohmann 1975) =

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

Global Range: This jack pine / fir forest type is found in the northern parts of the midwestern United States and in central Canada, 

ranging from northeastern Minnesota to northwestern Ontario and probably elsewhere.

Nations: CA, US

States/Provinces: MI, MN:S4, ON, QC

TNC Ecoregions: 47:C, 48:C, 64:C

USFS Ecoregions (1994/95): 212Ea:CCC, 212Hi:CCC, 212La:CCC, 212Lb:CCC, 212Nc:C??

Federal Lands: NPS (Grand Portage, Pictured Rocks, Voyageurs); USFS (Superior)

Federal Lands: Information not available.

ELEMENT SOURCES

Grand Portage National Monument Plots: GRPO.17.

Grand Portage National Monument Map Code: FJF

Local Description Authors: M.J. Russo

Global Description Authors: J. Drake

References: Farrand and Bell 1982, Grigal and Ohmann 1975, MNNHP 1993, Midwestern Ecology Working Group n.d., Ohmann 

and Ream 1971, Sims et al. 1989

G347. Jack Pine - Northern Pin Oak Rocky Woodland

Boreal Pine Rocky Woodland

Pinus banksiana - (Picea mariana, Pinus strobus) / Vaccinium spp. Rocky Woodland

Jack Pine - (Black Spruce, Eastern White Pine) / Blueberry species Rocky Woodland

Identifier: CEGL002483

NVC CLASSIFICATION

Division North American Lowland Boreal Forest (1.D.1.a)

Macrogroup Eastern & Central North American Boreal Conifer & Hardwood Forest (MG037)

Group Jack Pine - Northern Pin Oak Rocky Woodland (G347)

Association (Common name) Boreal Pine Rocky Woodland

Ecological System(s): Laurentian Acidic Rocky Outcrop (CES201.019)

ELEMENT CONCEPT

Global Summary: This jack pine - black spruce rocky woodland is found in central Canada and adjacent boreal forests of the Great 

Lakes in the United States. Stands typically occur on shallow, sandy or rocky sites. Soils vary from talus slopes and bare bedrock to 

deep mineral soils of coarse to fine sand. The tree canopy is open, with scattered Pinus banksiana (jack pine) and Picea mariana

(black spruce). The understory is quite open, with scattered clumps of shrubby Picea mariana (black spruce). The dwarf-shrub layer 

contains Vaccinium angustifolium (lowbush blueberry) and Vaccinium myrtilloides (velvetleaf huckleberry). The herbaceous layer is 

sparse, containing Cornus canadensis (bunchberry dogwood), Maianthemum canadense (Canada mayflower), and Melampyrum 

lineare (narrowleaf cowwheat). The moss layer contains Dicranum polysetum (dicranum moss) and Pleurozium schreberi (Schreber's 

big red stem moss). Lichens include Cladina rangiferina (greygreen reindeer lichen), Cladina mitis (reindeer lichen), and Cladina 

stellaris (star reindeer lichen).

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Environment: This jack pine - black spruce woodland was sampled at one location in the 

park. The site is a somewhat steep, southwest-facing rocky ridge with well-drained sandy loam soil. The surface is dominated by plant 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-24

stems (88% cover) with some exposed bedrock (5%), large rocks (8%), small rocks (2%), leaf litter (10%), wood (1%) and bare soil 

(1%). Evidence of disturbance includes the presence of exotic plants.

Global Environment: Stands typically occur on shallow, sandy or rocky sites. Soils vary from talus slopes and bare bedrock to deep 

mineral soils of coarse to fine sand (Sims et al. 1989, McCarthy et al. 1994).

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Vegetation: The sparse (30% cover) tree canopy, 15-20 m tall, is dominated by Pinus 

banksiana (jack pine) and Pinus strobus (eastern white pine). The sparse (30%) subcanopy (5-10 m) includes Abies balsamea (balsam 

fir), Betula papyrifera (paper birch), Picea glauca (white spruce), Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen), and Thuja occidentalis

(northern white-cedar). The sparse (20%) tall-shrub layer (2-5 m) is comprised of sapling trees from the upper layers. The sparse 

(20%) short-shrub layer (0.5-1 m) includes Alnus viridis (green alder), Amelanchier (serviceberry) sp., Diervilla lonicera (northern 

bush honeysuckle), Prunus pensylvanica (pin cherry), Rosa (rose) sp., Sorbus decora (northern mountain-ash), and Vaccinium 

myrtilloides (velvetleaf huckleberry). Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (kinnikinnick), Juniperus communis (common juniper), and Juniperus 

horizontalis (creeping juniper) (state-vulnerable) form a moderately dense (60%) dwarf-shrub layer. The sparse (30%) herbaceous 

layer includes Antennaria neglecta (field pussytoes), Apocynum androsaemifolium (spreading dogbane), Danthonia spicata (poverty 

oatgrass), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Oryzopsis asperifolia (roughleaf ricegrass), and Sibbaldiopsis tridentata (shrubby 

fivefingers). Nonvascular species, including Cladina (reindeer lichen) sp., Dicranum (dicranum moss) sp., and Pleurozium schreberi

(Schreber's big red stem moss), cover 70% of the ground surface.

Global Vegetation: The tree canopy is open, with scattered Pinus banksiana (jack pine) and Picea mariana (black spruce). The 

understory is quite open, with scattered clumps of shrubby Picea mariana (black spruce). The dwarf-shrub layer contains Vaccinium 

angustifolium (lowbush blueberry) and Vaccinium myrtilloides (velvetleaf huckleberry). The herbaceous layer is sparse, containing 

Cornus canadensis (bunchberry dogwood), Maianthemum canadense (Canada mayflower), and Melampyrum lineare (narrowleaf 

cowwheat). The moss layer contains Dicranum polysetum (dicranum moss) and Pleurozium schreberi (Schreber's big red stem moss). 

Lichens include Cladina rangiferina (greygreen reindeer lichen), Cladina mitis (reindeer lichen), and Cladina stellaris (star reindeer 

lichen) (Sims et al. 1989, McCarthy et al. 1994).

MOST ABUNDANT SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument

Stratum Lifeform Species

Tree canopy Needle-leaved tree Pinus strobus (eastern white pine)

Short shrub/sapling Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Diervilla lonicera (northern bush honeysuckle)

Herb (field) Dwarf-shrub Juniperus communis (common juniper), Juniperus horizontalis

(creeping juniper)

Herb (field) Forb Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster)

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument: Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (kinnikinnick), Danthonia spicata

(poverty oatgrass), Diervilla lonicera (northern bush honeysuckle), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Juniperus communis

(common juniper), Juniperus horizontalis (creeping juniper), Picea glauca (white spruce), Pinus banksiana (jack pine), Pinus strobus

(eastern white pine), Pleurozium schreberi (Schreber's big red stem moss)

OTHER NOTEWORTHY SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument: Vulnerable: Juniperus horizontalis (creeping juniper, state-vulnerable, G5); Exotic/Invasive: 

Poa compressa (Canada bluegrass, exotic/invasive, High/Low)

CONSERVATION STATUS RANK

Global Rank & Reasons: G4? (3-Oct-1996). 

CLASSIFICATION

Status: Standard

Classification Confidence: 2 - Moderate

Global Comments: In Michigan, this type is possible on Isle Royale and elsewhere in the Upper Peninsula, and in Minnesota this 

type is expected primarily in the Border Lakes region (212La), though it may occur elsewhere. The description in the MNNHP (1993) 

report has a richer shrub layer than is described in Ontario, and probably also includes the tall-shrub phase of Pinus banksiana - Picea 

mariana / Vaccinium spp. / Pleurozium schreberi (Schreber's big red stem moss) Forest (CEGL002448). 

In Minnesota, especially at Voyageurs National Park, this type may essentially be synonymous with Pinus banksiana / (Quercus 

rubra, Quercus ellipsoidalis) Forest (CEGL002440) in more open rocky stands, and that type could be characterized as the typical 

subassociation within this type where Picea mariana (black spruce) is minor and Quercus ellipsoidalis (northern pin oak) is more 

common. Farther north in Ontario, Picea mariana (black spruce) is more common.

Global Similar Associations:

• Pinus banksiana - Picea mariana / Vaccinium spp. / Pleurozium schreberi Forest (CEGL002448)

• Pinus banksiana - Populus tremuloides / Diervilla lonicera Forest (CEGL002518)--This type contains more deciduous trees, but 

poor sites may resemble CEGL002483.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-25

• Pinus banksiana / (Quercus rubra, Quercus ellipsoidalis) Forest (CEGL002440)

• Pinus banksiana / Vaccinium spp. / Pleurozium schreberi Forest (CEGL002441)

• Quercus ellipsoidalis - Quercus macrocarpa - (Pinus banksiana) Rocky Woodland (CEGL005246)

Global Related Concepts:

• Jack Pine - Black Spruce / Blueberry / Lichen (V30) (Sims et al. 1989) =

• Jack Pine - Black Spruce / Feathermoss (V16) (McCarthy et al. 1994) =

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

Global Range: This jack pine - black spruce rocky woodland type is found in central Canada and adjacent boreal forests of the Great 

Lakes in the United States.

Nations: CA, US

States/Provinces: MB:S4?, MI, MN, ON, QC, WI

TNC Ecoregions: 47:C, 48:C

USFS Ecoregions (1994/95): 212Hb:CPP, 212Ib:CCC, 212Ja:CPP, 212Jj:CPP, 212Jm:CPP, 212Ka:CPP, 212La:CCP, 212Lb:CCC, 

212Lc:CCC

Federal Lands: NPS (Grand Portage, Isle Royale, Voyageurs); USFS (Chequamegon, Chequamegon-Nicolet, Nicolet, Superior)

Federal Lands: Information not available.

ELEMENT SOURCES

Grand Portage National Monument Plots: GRPO.19.

Grand Portage National Monument Map Code: WPR

Local Description Authors: M.J. Russo

Global Description Authors: D. Faber-Langendoen

References: Greenall 1996, MNNHP 1993, McCarthy et al. 1994, Midwestern Ecology Working Group n.d., Sims et al. 1989

G048. White Spruce - Balsam Fir Forest

Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest

Picea glauca - Abies balsamea - Populus tremuloides / Mixed Herbs Forest

White Spruce - Balsam Fir - Quaking Aspen / Mixed Herbs Forest

Identifier: CEGL002475

NVC CLASSIFICATION

Division North American Lowland Boreal Forest (1.D.1.a)

Macrogroup Eastern & Central North American Boreal Conifer & Hardwood Forest (MG037)

Group White Spruce - Balsam Fir Forest (G048)

Association (Common name) Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest

Ecological System(s): Boreal White Spruce-Fir-Hardwood Forest (CES103.021)

ELEMENT CONCEPT

Global Summary: This spruce - fir - aspen forest is found in the western Great Lakes area of the United States and Canada and 

elsewhere in parts of central Canada. Stands occur on deep, well-drained to rapidly drained, moist, fine-textured mineral soils. Loams 

are the most common, but silts and clays are also possible. The overstory is a mixture of coniferous and deciduous trees. Species 

composition is varied. The most abundant tree species are Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Acer rubrum (red maple), Picea glauca (white 

spruce), Pinus strobus (eastern white pine), Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen), and Populus balsamifera (balsam poplar). The 

sapling/shrub layer is usually moderately well-developed. Acer spicatum (mountain maple), Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), Rosa 

acicularis (prickly rose), Rubus pubescens (dwarf red blackberry), and saplings of Abies balsamea (balsam fir) are the most 

commonly encountered in this stratum. Herb diversity is usually high. Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), Symphyotrichum 

ciliolatum (Lindley's aster), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Clintonia borealis (bluebead), Cornus canadensis (bunchberry 

dogwood), Galium triflorum (fragrant bedstraw), Maianthemum canadense (Canada mayflower), Mitella nuda (naked miterwort), and 

Trientalis borealis (starflower) are typical of this community. A Lake Superior clayplain variant may occur in northern Wisconsin.

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Environment: This spruce - fir - aspen forest was sampled at two locations in the park. One 

site is a flat with moderately well-drained clay soil, the other a somewhat steep, southwest-facing midslope with well-drained clay 

loam soil. The surface is dominated by leaf litter (79-87% cover) with some large rocks (0-1%), wood (3-5%) and plant stems (10-

15%). Evidence of disturbance includes past fire and the presence of trails and human trash.

Global Environment: This upland community is found on deep, well-drained to rapidly drained, moist, fine-textured mineral soils. 

Loams are the most common, but silts and clays are not rare (Sims et al. 1989, Zoladeski et al. 1995).

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Vegetation: Vegetation heights and percent cover were only recorded for one of the sampled 

plots. The moderate (60% cover) tree canopy, 20-35 m tall, is dominated by Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen) and may include 

lesser amounts of Picea glauca (white spruce). The sparse (30%) subcanopy (10-15 m) includes Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Betula 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-26

papyrifera (paper birch), and Picea glauca (white spruce). The moderate (40%) tall-shrub layer (2-5 m) and moderate (40%) shortshrub layer (0.5-1 m) are dominated by Acer spicatum (mountain maple); additional short shrubs include Alnus viridis (green alder), 

Amelanchier (serviceberry) sp., Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), Diervilla lonicera (northern bush honeysuckle), Lonicera 

canadensis (American fly honeysuckle), Prunus virginiana (chokecherry), and Rubus (blackberry) sp. The moderately dense (70%) 

herbaceous layer is dominated by Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster) and may include Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), Carex 

pedunculata (longstalk sedge), Clintonia borealis (bluebead), Maianthemum canadense (Canada mayflower), Oryzopsis asperifolia

(roughleaf ricegrass), Pteridium aquilinum (western brackenfern), and others. Nonvascular species (mosses) cover 10% of the ground 

surface.

Global Vegetation: The overstory composition is varied. The most abundant tree species typically are Abies balsamea (balsam fir), 

Acer rubrum (red maple), Picea glauca (white spruce), Pinus strobus (eastern white pine), Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen), and 

Populus balsamifera (balsam poplar). The sapling/shrub layer is usually moderately well-developed. Acer spicatum (mountain maple), 

Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), Rosa acicularis (prickly rose), Rubus pubescens (dwarf red blackberry), and saplings of Abies 

balsamea (balsam fir) are the most commonly encountered in this stratum. Herb diversity is usually high. Aralia nudicaulis (wild 

sarsaparilla), Symphyotrichum ciliolatum (Lindley's aster), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Clintonia borealis (bluebead), Cornus 

canadensis (bunchberry dogwood), Galium triflorum (fragrant bedstraw), Maianthemum canadense (Canada mayflower), Mitella 

nuda (naked miterwort), and Trientalis borealis (starflower) are typical of this community (Sims et al. 1989, MNNHP 1993). A Lake 

Superior clayplain variant may occur in northern Wisconsin. Leading canopy dominants include Picea glauca (white spruce), Pinus 

strobus (eastern white pine), and Betula papyrifera (paper birch). Common associates include Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Populus 

tremuloides (quaking aspen), Populus balsamifera (balsam poplar), Thuja occidentalis (northern white-cedar), and Acer rubrum (red 

maple). Shrubs include Cornus sericea (red-osier dogwood), Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), Diervilla lonicera (northern bush 

honeysuckle), Lonicera hirsuta (hairy honeysuckle), Rubus parviflorus (thimbleberry), Rubus pubescens (dwarf red blackberry), 

Sorbus decora (northern mountain-ash), and Viburnum opulus var. americanum (American cranberrybush). Typical herbaceous 

species include Anemone quinquefolia (nightcaps), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), 

Calamagrostis canadensis (bluejoint), Carex arctata (drooping woodland sedge), Fragaria virginiana (Virginia strawberry), Luzula 

acuminata (hairy woodrush), Maianthemum canadense (Canada mayflower), Petasites frigidus (arctic sweet coltsfoot), and Pteridium 

aquilinum (western brackenfern) (E. Epstein pers. comm. 1999).

MOST ABUNDANT SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument

Stratum Lifeform Species

Tree canopy Broad-leaved deciduous tree Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen)

Tree subcanopy Needle-leaved tree Abies balsamea (balsam fir)

Tall shrub/sapling Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Acer spicatum (mountain maple)

Short shrub/sapling Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Diervilla lonicera (northern bush honeysuckle)

Herb (field) Forb Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster)

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument: Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Acer spicatum (mountain maple), Aralia nudicaulis (wild 

sarsaparilla), Betula papyrifera (paper birch), Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), Diervilla lonicera (northern bush honeysuckle), 

Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Picea glauca (white spruce), Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen), Pteridium aquilinum

(western brackenfern)

CONSERVATION STATUS RANK

Global Rank & Reasons: G5 (3-Oct-1996). No old-growth stands are known for the Lake Superior clayplain variant.

CLASSIFICATION

Status: Standard

Classification Confidence: 2 - Moderate

Global Comments: This type overlaps in concept with Abies balsamea - Betula papyrifera / Diervilla lonicera Forest 

(CEGL002474). A red maple variant may occur in the Great Lake states (Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin). The Lake Superior 

clayplain variant should be reviewed range-wide to see if it may represent a distinct association.

Global Similar Associations:

• Abies balsamea - Betula papyrifera / Diervilla lonicera Forest (CEGL002474)

• Picea glauca - Abies balsamea / Acer spicatum / Rubus pubescens Forest (CEGL002446)

• Populus tremuloides - (Populus grandidentata) Rocky Woodland (CEGL002487)

• Populus tremuloides - Populus balsamifera - Mixed Hardwoods Lowland Forest (CEGL005036)

Global Related Concepts:

• White Spruce Mixedwood (V13) (Zoladeski et al. 1995) =

• White Spruce Mixedwood (V15) (Sims et al. 1989) =

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

Global Range: This spruce - fir - aspen forest type is found in the western Great Lakes area of the United States and Canada and 

elsewhere in parts of central Canada, ranging from northern Minnesota and Manitoba east to Michigan and possibly Quebec.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-27

Nations: CA, US

States/Provinces: MB:S4S5, MI, MN, ON, QC, WI:S2

TNC Ecoregions: 35:C, 46:C, 47:C, 48:C

USFS Ecoregions (1994/95): 212He:CC?, 212Hi:CCC, 212Hl:CCP, 212Hm:CCP, 212Hn:CCP, 212Ho:CCP, 212Hp:CCP, 

212Hq:CCP, 212Hr:CCP, 212Hs:CCP, 212Hv:CCP, 212Hw:CCP, 212Ia:CCP, 212Ib:CCC, 212Ja:CCP, 212Jb:CCP, 212Jc:CCP, 

212Jl:CCP, 212Jm:CCC, 212Jn:CCP, 212Jo:CCP, 212La:CCC, 212Lb:CCC, 212Lc:CCC, 212Mb:CCC, 212Na:CPP, 212Nb:CPP, 

212Nc:CPP, 212Ob:C??, 222Ma:CCC, 222Na:CCC

Federal Lands: NPS (Grand Portage, Isle Royale, Pictured Rocks, Saint Croix, Sleeping Bear Dunes, Voyageurs); USFS (Chippewa, 

Hiawatha, Huron, Huron-Manistee, Manistee, Ottawa, Superior)

Federal Lands: Information not available.

ELEMENT SOURCES

Grand Portage National Monument Plots: GRPO.5, GRPO.22.

Grand Portage National Monument Map Code: FCP

Local Description Authors: M.J. Russo

Global Description Authors: J. Drake

References: Epstein pers. comm., Greenall 1996, MNNHP 1993, Midwestern Ecology Working Group n.d., Sims et al. 1989, 

WNHIP unpubl. data, Zoladeski et al. 1995

Spruce - Fir / Mountain Maple Forest

Picea glauca - Abies balsamea / Acer spicatum / Rubus pubescens Forest

White Spruce - Balsam Fir / Mountain Maple / Dwarf Red Raspberry Forest

Identifier: CEGL002446

NVC CLASSIFICATION

Division North American Lowland Boreal Forest (1.D.1.a)

Macrogroup Eastern & Central North American Boreal Conifer & Hardwood Forest (MG037)

Group White Spruce - Balsam Fir Forest (G048)

Association (Common name) Spruce - Fir / Mountain Maple Forest

Ecological System(s): Boreal White Spruce-Fir-Hardwood Forest (CES103.021)

ELEMENT CONCEPT

Global Summary: This white spruce - balsam fir conifer forest is found in the southern boreal region of the Great Lakes in the 

United States and elsewhere in central Canada. Stands are found primarily on dry-mesic to mesic sites with well-drained, deep (>60 

cm), loam, sand, or silt soils. Less commonly, it may be found on wetter sites. The soils have little organic content, and the topography 

is flat to gently sloping. This community is a closed-canopy forest dominated by a combination of Picea glauca (white spruce) and 

Abies balsamea (balsam fir). Common associates include Acer rubrum (red maple), Betula papyrifera (paper birch), Picea mariana

(black spruce), Pinus banksiana (jack pine), Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen), and Populus balsamifera (balsam poplar). There is 

usually a prominent shrub/sapling layer containing Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Acer spicatum (mountain maple), Corylus cornuta

(beaked hazelnut), Diervilla lonicera (northern bush honeysuckle), Lonicera canadensis (American fly honeysuckle), Picea glauca

(white spruce), Rosa acicularis (prickly rose), Rubus pubescens (dwarf red blackberry), Sorbus americana (American mountain-ash), 

Vaccinium myrtilloides (velvetleaf huckleberry), and (eastward) Viburnum nudum var. cassinoides (withe-rod). The herbaceous layer 

is often moderately sparse, with species such as Anemone quinquefolia (nightcaps), Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), Eurybia 

macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Clintonia borealis (bluebead), Coptis trifolia (threeleaf goldthread), Cornus canadensis (bunchberry 

dogwood), Dryopteris carthusiana (spinulose woodfern), Maianthemum canadense (Canada mayflower), Mitella nuda (naked 

miterwort), and Trientalis borealis (starflower). Mosses include Dicranum polysetum (dicranum moss), Pleurozium schreberi

(Schreber's big red stem moss), Ptilium crista-castrensis (knights plume moss), and Rhytidiadelphus triquetrus (rough goose neck 

moss).

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Environment: This white spruce - balsam fir forest was sampled once in the park. The site is a 

gentle southeast-facing slope with moderately well-drained clay soil. The surface is dominated by leaf litter (75% cover) with some 

wood (20%) and plant stems (5%). Evidence of disturbance includes many downed trees, possibly due to wind damage, shallow soil 

and/or drought.

Global Environment: This community is found primarily on dry-mesic to mesic sites with well-drained, deep (>60 cm) loam, sand, 

or silt soils (Sims et al. 1989, Zoladeski et al. 1995). Less commonly, it may be found on wetter sites, that may approach seasonally 

saturated conditions (Maycock 1961). The soils have little organic content and the topography is flat to gently sloping.

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Vegetation: The moderate (60% cover) tree canopy, 20-35 m tall, is dominated by Abies 

balsamea (balsam fir) with lesser amounts of Picea glauca (white spruce) and Betula papyrifera (paper birch). In addition, there is a 

sparse (20%) emergent tree layer (35-50 m) of Pinus strobus (eastern white pine). Acer spicatum (mountain maple) forms a sparse 

(20%) subcanopy (10-15 m) and moderate (40%) tall-shrub layer (2-5 m). Additional tall shrubs include Abies balsamea (balsam fir) 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-28

and Sorbus decora (northern mountain-ash). The moderate (50%) short-shrub layer (0.5-1 m) is dominated by Corylus cornuta

(beaked hazelnut), Lonicera canadensis (American fly honeysuckle), and Rubus (blackberry) sp. and includes small amounts of 

Amelanchier (serviceberry) sp., Cornus sericea (red-osier dogwood), Lonicera hispidula (pink honeysuckle), Prunus virginiana

(chokecherry), and Taxus canadensis (Canada yew). The moderately dense (70%) herbaceous layer is dominated by Carex 

pedunculata (longstalk sedge), Cornus canadensis (bunchberry dogwood), Equisetum sylvaticum (woodland horsetail), Eurybia 

macrophylla (bigleaf aster), and Mitella nuda (naked miterwort); additional herbs include Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), 

Clintonia borealis (bluebead), Linnaea borealis (twinflower), Lycopodium annotinum (stiff clubmoss), Symphyotrichum ciliolatum

(Lindley's aster), and others. Nonvascular species (mosses) cover 30% of the ground surface.

Global Vegetation: This community is a closed-canopy forest dominated by a combination of Picea glauca (white spruce) and Abies 

balsamea (balsam fir). Some stands have a preponderance of one of these species and the other may then be an important associate. In 

these situations it is typically Picea glauca (white spruce) that is the most abundant (Maycock and Curtis 1960, MNNHP 1993). 

Common associates include Acer rubrum (red maple), Betula papyrifera (paper birch), Picea mariana (black spruce), Pinus banksiana

(jack pine), Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen), and Populus balsamifera (balsam poplar). There is usually a prominent 

shrub/sapling layer containing Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Acer spicatum (mountain maple), Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), 

Diervilla lonicera (northern bush honeysuckle), Lonicera canadensis (American fly honeysuckle), Picea glauca (white spruce), Rosa 

acicularis (prickly rose), Rubus pubescens (dwarf red blackberry), Sorbus americana (American mountain-ash), Vaccinium 

myrtilloides (velvetleaf huckleberry), and (eastward) Viburnum nudum var. cassinoides (withe-rod). The herbaceous layer is often 

moderately sparse, with species such as Anemone quinquefolia (nightcaps), Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), Eurybia macrophylla

(bigleaf aster), Clintonia borealis (bluebead), Coptis trifolia (threeleaf goldthread), Cornus canadensis (bunchberry dogwood), 

Dryopteris carthusiana (spinulose woodfern), Maianthemum canadense (Canada mayflower), Mitella nuda (naked miterwort) and 

Trientalis borealis (starflower). Mosses include Dicranum polysetum (dicranum moss), Pleurozium schreberi (Schreber's big red stem 

moss), Ptilium crista-castrensis (knights plume moss), and Rhytidiadelphus triquetrus (rough goose neck moss) (Sims et al. 1989, 

Chambers et al. 1997).

MOST ABUNDANT SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument

Stratum Lifeform Species

Tree canopy Needle-leaved tree Abies balsamea (balsam fir)

Tall shrub/sapling Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Acer spicatum (mountain maple)

Herb (field) Forb Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster)

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument: Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Acer spicatum (mountain maple), Carex pedunculata (longstalk 

sedge), Cornus canadensis (bunchberry dogwood), Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), Equisetum sylvaticum (woodland horsetail), 

Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Lonicera canadensis (American fly honeysuckle), Mitella nuda (naked miterwort), Picea glauca

(white spruce), Pinus strobus (eastern white pine)

CONSERVATION STATUS RANK

Global Rank & Reasons: G4G5 (3-Oct-1996). 

CLASSIFICATION

Status: Standard

Classification Confidence: 1 - Strong

Global Comments: This type occurs in a variety of sites, including sites that are fairly wet, and occurs both after disturbances and as 

a late-successional type. It is difficult to separate from the mixed spruce-fir-hardwood types, Picea glauca - Abies balsamea - Populus 

tremuloides / Mixed Herbs Forest (CEGL002475), from which it may only differ in the degree of conifer dominance. Treefalls in this 

type can create a very open canopy. Inclusions of Spruce-Fir/Feathermoss, Picea glauca - Abies balsamea / Pleurozium schreberi

Forest (CEGL002509), may occur in this type in the Great Lake states. Conversely, CEGL002509 appears to be the common type in 

Manitoba, and this type is not expected (J. Greenall pers. comm. 1999). In northern Wisconsin this type has been documented only in 

ravines or on stable clay bluffs and is not known from the extensive Lake Superior clayplains [see Picea glauca - Abies balsamea -

Populus tremuloides / Mixed Herbs Forest (CEGL002475)].

Global Similar Associations:

• Abies balsamea - Betula papyrifera / Diervilla lonicera Forest (CEGL002474)

• Picea glauca - Abies balsamea - Populus tremuloides / Mixed Herbs Forest (CEGL002475)--This is the mixed hardwood-conifer 

equivalent.

• Picea glauca - Abies balsamea / Pleurozium schreberi Forest (CEGL002509)

• Pinus strobus - Populus tremuloides / Corylus cornuta Forest (CEGL002479)

• Populus tremuloides - Populus balsamifera - Mixed Hardwoods Lowland Forest (CEGL005036)

Global Related Concepts:

• Abies-Populus/Rosa/Mertensia, Corylus/Diervilla/Aster-Anemone Group (La Roi 1967) =

• Aetna Creek Stand (Maycock 1961) =

• Delaware Stand (Maycock 1961) =

• Dry-mesic Stands (Maycock and Curtis 1960) =
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-29

• White Spruce - Balsam Fir / Shrub Forest (Zoladeski et al. 1995) =

• White Spruce - Balsam Fir / Shrub Rich Forest (Sims et al. 1989) =

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

Global Range: This white spruce - balsam fir conifer forest is found in the southern boreal region of the Great Lakes of the United 

States and elsewhere in central Canada.

Nations: CA, US

States/Provinces: MB:S4, MI, MN:S3, ON, QC, WI:S2

TNC Ecoregions: 47:C, 48:C

USFS Ecoregions (1994/95): 212Ha:CCP, 212Hb:CCP, 212He:CCP, 212Hh:CCP, 212Hi:CCC, 212Hj:CCC, 212Hk:CCP, 

212Hl:CCP, 212Hm:CCP, 212Hn:CCP, 212Hr:CCP, 212Hs:CC?, 212Hv:CC?, 212Hw:CCP, 212Ib:CCC, 212Ja:CCC, 212Jb:CCP, 

212Jc:CCC, 212Jk:CCP, 212Jl:CCP, 212Jn:CCP, 212Jo:CCP, 212Jr:CCP, 212Kb:CCC, 212La:CCC, 212Lb:CCC, 212Lc:CCP, 

212Ld:CCP, 212Ma:CCC, 212Mb:CCP, 212Na:CPP, 212Nb:CPP, 212Nc:CPP, 212Oa:CCC

Federal Lands: NPS (Grand Portage, Pictured Rocks, Saint Croix, Voyageurs); USFS (Chippewa, Hiawatha, Huron, HuronManistee, Manistee, Ottawa, Superior)

Federal Lands: Information not available.

ELEMENT SOURCES

Grand Portage National Monument Plots: GRPO.11.

Grand Portage National Monument Map Code: FSF

Local Description Authors: M.J. Russo

Global Description Authors: J. Drake

References: Chambers et al. 1997, Greenall 1996, La Roi 1967, MNNHP 1993, Maycock 1961, Maycock and Curtis 1960, 

Midwestern Ecology Working Group n.d., Sims et al. 1989, WNHIP unpubl. data, Zoladeski et al. 1995

Aspen - Birch / Boreal Conifer Forest

Populus tremuloides - Betula papyrifera / (Abies balsamea, Picea glauca) Forest

Quaking Aspen - Paper Birch / (Balsam Fir, White Spruce) Forest

Identifier: CEGL002466

NVC CLASSIFICATION

Division North American Lowland Boreal Forest (1.D.1.a)

Macrogroup Eastern & Central North American Boreal Conifer & Hardwood Forest (MG037)

Group White Spruce - Balsam Fir Forest (G048)

Association (Common name) Aspen - Birch / Boreal Conifer Forest

Ecological System(s): Boreal Aspen-Birch Forest (CES103.020)

ELEMENT CONCEPT

Global Summary: This aspen - birch boreal hardwoods forest type is found in the boreal regions of the midwestern United States and 

in central Canada. Sites occupy a variety of topographic positions, including ridgetops and gentle to moderate upper, mid, and lower 

slopes. The soils are deep, well-drained to rapidly drained mineral soils (dry to mesic soils). Soil textures are usually clay loamy but 

can be silt or fine sand. This community is dominated by deciduous trees, with a moderate amount of conifers (<25%). The canopy is 

dominated by Betula papyrifera (paper birch) and Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen), and occasionally Populus grandidentata

(bigtooth aspen). Conifer associates include Abies balsamea (balsam fir) and Picea glauca (white spruce), either in the canopy or, 

more characteristically, in the subcanopy. Abies balsamea (balsam fir) and Picea glauca (white spruce) are abundant in the sapling 

layer. Common shrubs include Acer spicatum (mountain maple), Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), Diervilla lonicera (northern bush 

honeysuckle), Linnaea borealis (twinflower), Lonicera canadensis (American fly honeysuckle), Rosa acicularis (prickly rose), Rubus 

pubescens (dwarf red blackberry), Sorbus decora (northern mountain-ash), and Vaccinium myrtilloides (velvetleaf huckleberry). The 

herbaceous stratum is sometimes dominated by Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), but can include a diversity of forbs, such as 

Anemone quinquefolia (nightcaps), Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), Clintonia borealis (bluebead), Cornus canadensis

(bunchberry dogwood), Galium triflorum (fragrant bedstraw), Maianthemum canadense (Canada mayflower), Mitella nuda (naked 

miterwort), Pteridium aquilinum (western brackenfern), Streptopus lanceolatus var. longipes (twistedstalk), Trientalis borealis

(starflower), and Viola renifolia (white violet). Mosses include Plagiomnium cuspidatum (toothed plagiomnium moss), Pleurozium 

schreberi (Schreber's big red stem moss), Ptilium crista-castrensis (knights plume moss), and Rhytidiadelphus triquetrus (rough goose 

neck moss). Diagnostic features of this type are the dominance by the combination of Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen) and Betula 

papyrifera (paper birch), boreal conifer associates (but very little Picea mariana (black spruce) or Pinus banksiana (jack pine)), and 

lack of more southern hardwoods (such as Acer saccharum (sugar maple)).

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Environment: This aspen - birch forest was sampled once in the park. The site is a moderate 

north-facing upper slope with moderately well-drained clay soil. The surface is dominated by leaf litter (87% cover) with some wood 

(3%), bare soil (5%) and plant stems (5%). No evidence of disturbance was reported.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-30

Global Environment: This community is found on a variety of topographic positions. Ohmann and Ream (1971) found it on 

ridgetops, upper, mid, and lower slopes. These slopes are gentle to moderate. The soils are deep, well-drained to rapidly drained 

mineral soils (Sims et al. 1989). The soils are usually loam but can be clay (including lacustrine clays or clayier tills), silt, or sand.

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Vegetation: The moderate (50% cover) tree canopy, 20-35 m tall, is dominated by Populus 

tremuloides (quaking aspen) along with Abies balsamea (balsam fir) and Betula papyrifera (paper birch). The sparse (20%) tall-shrub 

layer (2-5 m) includes canopy species as well as Acer spicatum (mountain maple) and Fraxinus nigra (black ash). The moderate 

(30%) short-shrub layer (0.5-1 m) is dominated by Cornus sericea (red-osier dogwood) and Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut) and 

includes Alnus incana ssp. rugosa (speckled alder), Alnus viridis (green alder), Amelanchier (serviceberry) sp., Diervilla lonicera

(northern bush honeysuckle), Lonicera canadensis (American fly honeysuckle), Lonicera hirsuta (hairy honeysuckle), and Prunus 

virginiana (chokecherry). The very dense (90%) herbaceous layer is dominated by Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster) and Pteridium 

aquilinum (western brackenfern) and includes Apocynum androsaemifolium (spreading dogbane), Aralia nudicaulis (wild 

sarsaparilla), Calamagrostis canadensis (bluejoint), Fragaria virginiana (Virginia strawberry), Heracleum maximum (common 

cowparsnip), Lathyrus ochroleucus (cream pea), and Pteridium aquilinum (western brackenfern). Nonvascular species (mosses), 

including Brachythecium (brachythecium moss) sp., cover 5% of the ground surface.

Global Vegetation: This community is dominated by deciduous trees, with a moderate amount of conifers (<25%). The dominant 

tree species do not have dense leaf layers and allow a significant amount of light to pass through. This promotes the establishment of 

prominent sapling and shrub layers and a moderately dense herbaceous stratum. The canopy is dominated by Betula papyrifera (paper 

birch) and Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen), and occasionally Populus grandidentata (bigtooth aspen). Conifer associates include 

Abies balsamea (balsam fir) and Picea glauca (white spruce), either in the canopy or, more characteristically, in the subcanopy. Abies

balsamea (balsam fir) and Picea glauca (white spruce) are abundant in the sapling layer. Common shrubs include Acer spicatum

(mountain maple), Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), Diervilla lonicera (northern bush honeysuckle), Linnaea borealis (twinflower), 

Lonicera canadensis (American fly honeysuckle), Rosa acicularis (prickly rose), Rubus pubescens (dwarf red blackberry), Sorbus 

decora (northern mountain-ash), and Vaccinium myrtilloides (velvetleaf huckleberry). The herbaceous stratum is sometimes 

dominated by Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), but can include a diversity of forbs, such as Anemone quinquefolia (nightcaps), 

Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), Clintonia borealis (bluebead), Cornus canadensis (bunchberry dogwood), Galium triflorum

(fragrant bedstraw), Maianthemum canadense (Canada mayflower), Mitella nuda (naked miterwort), Pteridium aquilinum (western 

brackenfern), Streptopus lanceolatus (twistedstalk), Trientalis borealis (starflower), and Viola renifolia (white violet). Mosses include

Plagiomnium cuspidatum (toothed plagiomnium moss), Pleurozium schreberi (Schreber's big red stem moss), Ptilium cristacastrensis (knights plume moss), and Rhytidiadelphus triquetrus (rough goose neck moss) (Sims et al. 1989, Chambers et al. 1997).

MOST ABUNDANT SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument

Stratum Lifeform Species

Tree canopy Broad-leaved deciduous tree Populus tremuloides (quaking aspen)

Tall shrub/sapling Broad-leaved deciduous shrub Acer spicatum (mountain maple), Populus tremuloides (quaking 

aspen)

Short shrub/sapling Broad-leaved evergreen shrub Cornus sericea (red-osier dogwood), Corylus cornuta (beaked 

hazelnut)

Herb (field) Forb Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster)

Herb (field) Fern or fern ally Pteridium aquilinum (western brackenfern)

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument: Acer spicatum (mountain maple), Aralia nudicaulis (wild sarsaparilla), Betula papyrifera

(paper birch), Cornus sericea (red-osier dogwood), Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), Eurybia macrophylla (bigleaf aster), Populus 

tremuloides (quaking aspen), Pteridium aquilinum (western brackenfern)

CONSERVATION STATUS RANK

Global Rank & Reasons: G5 (3-Oct-1996). 

CLASSIFICATION

Status: Standard

Classification Confidence: 1 - Strong

Global Comments: Further north in Ontario, a Populus tremuloides - Betula papyrifera type, Populus (tremuloides, balsamifera) -

(Betula papyrifera) - Picea mariana / Alnus viridis Forest (CEGL002514), occurs that contains greater proportions of Picea mariana

(black spruce) and Pinus banksiana (jack pine). Acer spicatum (mountain maple) drops out of this type in the more western part of the 

type's range in Ontario and Minnesota. This type is often an early successional type following fire or logging, and occupies a wide 

variety of site types.

Global Similar Associations:

• Betula papyrifera / Diervilla lonicera - (Abies balsamea) Forest (CEGL002463)

• Populus (tremuloides, balsamifera) - (Betula papyrifera) - Picea mariana / Alnus viridis Forest (CEGL002514)

• Populus tremuloides - (Populus grandidentata) Rocky Woodland (CEGL002487)
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-31

• Populus tremuloides - Betula papyrifera - (Acer rubrum, Populus grandidentata) Forest (CEGL002467)--This type contains neither 

a northern hardwoods understory nor a boreal conifer understory.

• Populus tremuloides - Betula papyrifera / Acer saccharum - Mixed Hardwoods Forest (CEGL002468)--This type contains a mixed 

northern hardwoods understory.

Global Related Concepts:

• Aspen - Birch (Ohmann and Ream 1971) =

• Boreal Forest (Chapman et al. 1989) B

• Paper Birch - Aspen - Balsam Fir - White Spruce (Hansen et al. 1973) =

• Trembling Aspen (White Birch) - Balsam Fir / Mountain Maple (V6) (Sims et al. 1989) F

• Trembling Aspen - Balsam Fir / Balsam Fir Shrub (V7) (Sims et al. 1989) F

• Trembling Aspen-White Birch-White Spruce-Dwarf Raspberry (V22) (Chambers et al. 1997) =

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

Global Range: This aspen - birch boreal hardwoods forest type is found in the boreal regions of the midwestern United States and in 

central Canada, ranging from Minnesota and Manitoba east to Michigan, Ontario and possibly Quebec.

Nations: CA, US

States/Provinces: MB:S4S5, MI, MN:S4?, ON, QC:S4, WI:S5

TNC Ecoregions: 47:C, 48:C

USFS Ecoregions (1994/95): 212Ha:CPP, 212Hb:CPP, 212He:CPP, 212Hh:CPP, 212Hi:CPP, 212Hj:CPP, 212Hk:CPP, 212Ia:CCC, 

212Ib:CCC, 212Ja:CPP, 212Jb:CPP, 212Jc:CPP, 212Jk:CPP, 212Jl:CPP, 212Jm:CP?, 212Jn:CPP, 212Jo:CPP, 212Jr:CPP, 

212La:CCP, 212Lb:CCC, 212Lc:CCC, 212Ld:CCC, 212Mb:CPP, 212Na:CPP, 212Nb:CPP, 212Nc:CPP

Federal Lands: NPS (Apostle Islands, Grand Portage, Isle Royale, Saint Croix, Voyageurs); USFS (Chippewa, Ottawa, Superior)

Federal Lands: Information not available.

ELEMENT SOURCES

Grand Portage National Monument Plots: GRPO.1.

Grand Portage National Monument Map Code: FAC

Local Description Authors: M.J. Russo

Global Description Authors: J. Drake

References: Chambers et al. 1997, Chapman et al. 1989, Greenall 1996, Hansen et al. 1973, MNNHP 1993, Midwestern Ecology 

Working Group n.d., Ohmann and Ream 1971, Sims et al. 1989, WNHIP unpubl. data

2. Shrubland & Grassland

2.C.2. Boreal Grassland, Meadow & Shrubland

2.C.2.a. North American Boreal Grassland, Meadow & Shrubland

MG055. North American Boreal Shrubland & Grassland

G339. Eastern North American Boreal Shrubland & Grassland

Boreal Hazelnut - Serviceberry Rocky Shrubland

Corylus cornuta - Amelanchier spp. - Prunus virginiana Rocky Shrubland

Beaked Hazelnut - Serviceberry species - Chokecherry Rocky Shrubland

Identifier: CEGL005197

NVC CLASSIFICATION

Division North American Boreal Grassland, Meadow & Shrubland (2.C.2.a)

Macrogroup North American Boreal Shrubland & Grassland (MG055)

Group Eastern North American Boreal Shrubland & Grassland (G339)

Association (Common name) Boreal Hazelnut - Serviceberry Rocky Shrubland

Ecological System(s): Great Lakes Acidic Rocky Shore and Cliff (CES201.025)

Laurentian Acidic Rocky Outcrop (CES201.019)

ELEMENT CONCEPT

Global Summary: This rocky shrubland is found in the northern Great Lakes region of the United States and Canada. Stands occur 

on rocky ridges, with thin, acidic soils. The vegetation is dominated by shrubs, with a strong graminoid layer. Dominant shrubs 

include Amelanchier (serviceberry) spp., Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), and Prunus virginiana (chokecherry). Other shrubs 

include Juniperus communis (common juniper), Rosa acicularis (prickly rose), and Rhus typhina (staghorn sumac). Associated herbs 

include Danthonia spicata (poverty oatgrass), Hieracium (hawkweed) spp., and Poa compressa (Canada bluegrass).
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-32

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Environment: This serviceberry short shrubland was sampled once in the park near Mount 

Rose. The site is a steep, southeast-facing ridge with rapidly drained sandy loam soil. The surface is dominated by leaf litter (76% 

cover) with some small rocks (4%), bare soil (4%) and plant stems (20%). Evidence of disturbance includes trails, dead and brown 

vegetation due to drought conditions, and the presence of exotic plants.

Global Environment: Stands occur on rocky ridges, with thin, acidic soils (C. Reschke pers. comm. 1999).

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Vegetation: The moderately sparse (40%) short-shrub layer (0.5-1 m) is dominated by 

Amelanchier (serviceberry) sp. and includes Diervilla lonicera (northern bush honeysuckle) and Prunus pensylvanica (pin cherry). 

Arctostaphylos uva-ursi (kinnikinnick) forms a very sparse (5%) dwarf-shrub layer. The moderately sparse (40%) herbaceous layer is 

dominated by Danthonia spicata (poverty oatgrass) and includes small amounts of Antennaria neglecta (field pussytoes), Fragaria 

virginiana (Virginia strawberry), Solidago (goldenrod) sp., and several exotic species. Nonvascular species (mosses and lichens) cover 

30% of the ground surface and are dominated by Cladina (reindeer lichen) spp.

Global Vegetation: The vegetation is dominated by shrubs, with a strong graminoid layer. Dominant shrubs include Amelanchier

(serviceberry) spp., Corylus cornuta (beaked hazelnut), and Prunus virginiana (chokecherry). Other shrubs include Juniperus 

communis (common juniper), Rosa acicularis (prickly rose), and Rhus typhina (staghorn sumac). Associated herbs include Danthonia 

spicata (poverty oatgrass), Hieracium (hawkweed) spp., and Poa compressa (Canada bluegrass) (C. Reschke pers. comm. 1999).

MOST ABUNDANT SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument

Stratum Lifeform Species

Herb (field) Graminoid Danthonia spicata (poverty oatgrass)

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument: Danthonia spicata (poverty oatgrass)

OTHER NOTEWORTHY SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument: Exotic/Invasive: Leucanthemum vulgare (oxeye daisy, exotic/invasive, Medium/Low), Poa 

compressa (Canada bluegrass, exotic/invasive, High/Low)

CONSERVATION STATUS RANK

Global Rank & Reasons: GNR (3-Oct-1996). 

CLASSIFICATION

Status: Standard

Classification Confidence: 3 - Weak

Global Comments: Type concept is taken from studies on Isle Royale and needs rangewide review. The associated herbaceous type 

is Danthonia spicata - Poa compressa Granite Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL005157), which is dominated by Danthonia spicata

(poverty oatgrass) and Poa compressa (Canada bluegrass).

Global Similar Associations:

• Juniperus communis - (Quercus rubra) / Juniperus horizontalis - Arctostaphylos uva-ursi Shrubland (CEGL005065)

• Picea glauca - (Betula papyrifera) / Danthonia spicata Woodland (CEGL005196)

Global Related Concepts:

• Boreal Shrubland (Chapman et al. 1989) ?

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

Global Range: This rocky shrubland type is found in the northern Great Lakes region of the United States and Canada.

Nations: CA, US

States/Provinces: MI, MN, ON, QC

TNC Ecoregions: 48:C

USFS Ecoregions (1994/95): 212Ib:CCC, 212Lb:CCC

Federal Lands: NPS (Grand Portage, Isle Royale, Voyageurs)

Federal Lands: Information not available.

ELEMENT SOURCES

Grand Portage National Monument Plots: GRPO.16.

Grand Portage National Monument Map Code: SHS

Local Description Authors: M.J. Russo

Global Description Authors: D. Faber-Langendoen

References: Chapman et al. 1989, Midwestern Ecology Working Group n.d., Reschke pers. comm.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-33

2.C.5. Temperate & Boreal Freshwater Wet Meadow & Marsh

2.C.5.a. Eastern North America Freshwater Wet Meadow, Riparian & Marsh

MG069. Eastern & North-Central North American Marsh & Wet Meadow

G125. Eastern North American Freshwater Marsh

Water Horsetail - Spikerush Marsh

Equisetum fluviatile - (Eleocharis palustris) Herbaceous Vegetation

Water Horsetail - (Common Spikerush) Herbaceous Vegetation

Identifier: CEGL005258

NVC CLASSIFICATION

Division Eastern North America Freshwater Wet Meadow, Riparian & Marsh (2.C.5.a)

Macrogroup Eastern & North-Central North American Marsh & Wet Meadow (MG069)

Group Eastern North American Freshwater Marsh (G125)

Association (Common name) Water Horsetail - Spikerush Marsh

Ecological System(s): Laurentian-Acadian Wet Meadow-Shrub Swamp (CES201.582)

Laurentian-Acadian Freshwater Marsh (CES201.594)

ELEMENT CONCEPT

Global Summary: This low graminoid marsh community is found in the boreal regions of the Great Lakes and perhaps more widely 

in Canada. Stands occur in wave-washed shores, sandbars, and stream channels. Substrate is mineral soil (often sand), sometimes held 

together by root mats. The water regime is permanently flooded to intermittently exposed, and water depth is generally less than 1 m. 

A layer of partially decomposed stalks may be present. Emergent cover is greater than 25%, and floating-leaved and submergent cover 

is low. Emergent graminoids <1 m dominate the stands, including Equisetum fluviatile (water horsetail) and/or Eleocharis palustris

(common spikerush). Associated species of low constancy include Glyceria borealis (small floating mannagrass), Isoetes tenella

(spiny-spore quillwort), Potamogeton gramineus (variableleaf pondweed), and Utricularia macrorhiza (common bladderwort).

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Environment: This low graminoid marsh community was sampled once in the park near Fort 

Charlotte. The site is a gently sloping, permanently flooded floodplain of Pigeon River with poorly drained muck soil. The surface is 

made up of leaf litter (38% cover), large rocks (1%), wood (1%), standing water (35%), bare soil (20%) and plant stems (5%). 

Evidence of disturbance includes a nearby canoe portage.

Global Environment: Stands occur in wave-washed shores, sandbars, and stream channels. Substrate is mineral soil (often sand), 

sometimes held together by root mats. The water regime is permanently flooded to intermittently exposed, and water depth is 

generally less than 1 m (Harris et al. 1996).

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Vegetation: The moderate (50%) herbaceous layer is dominated by nearly equal amounts of 

Acorus calamus (calamus), Carex vesicaria (blister sedge), Equisetum fluviatile (water horsetail), Lysimachia terrestris (earth 

loosestrife), and Sagittaria (arrowhead) sp. Additional species include Bidens cernua (nodding beggarticks), Eleocharis (spikerush) 

sp., Lycopus uniflorus (northern bugleweed), Megalodonta beckii (Beck's watermarigold), Scirpus cyperinus (woolgrass), and

Triadenum fraseri (Fraser's marsh St. Johnswort).

Global Vegetation: Emergent cover is greater than 25%, and floating-leaved and submergent cover is low. Emergent graminoids <1 

m dominate the stands, including Equisetum fluviatile (water horsetail) and/or Eleocharis palustris (common spikerush). Associated 

species of low constancy include Glyceria borealis (small floating mannagrass), Isoetes tenella (spiny-spore quillwort), Potamogeton 

gramineus (variableleaf pondweed), and Utricularia macrorhiza (common bladderwort) (Harris et al. 1996).

MOST ABUNDANT SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument

Stratum Lifeform Species

Herb (field) Forb Acorus calamus (calamus), Lysimachia terrestris (earth 

loosestrife)

Herb (field) Graminoid Carex vesicaria (blister sedge)

Herb (field) Fern or fern ally Equisetum fluviatile (water horsetail)

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument: Acorus calamus (calamus), Carex vesicaria (blister sedge), Equisetum fluviatile (water 

horsetail), Lysimachia terrestris (earth loosestrife)

CONSERVATION STATUS RANK

Global Rank & Reasons: G4 (1-Feb-1996). 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-34

CLASSIFICATION

Status: Standard

Classification Confidence: 2 - Moderate

Global Comments: This type can occur as reed swamp communities. It can grade into bulrush-dominated communities, or occur in 

conjunction with wild rice marshes. The range limit westward for this type (CEGL005258) remains to be worked out. The Northern 

Great Lakes Emergent Marsh type, Schoenoplectus acutus - Schoenoplectus subterminalis - Eleocharis palustris - (Schoenoplectus 

americanus) Northern Great Lakes Shore Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL005274), may resemble this type to some degree.

Global Similar Associations:

• Equisetum fluviatile Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL002746)--is a western type. The range limit westward for CEGL005258 and 

eastward for CEGL001960 remains to be worked out.

• Nuphar advena - Nymphaea odorata Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL002386)

• Nymphaea tetragona - Nuphar (microphylla, variegata) Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL002563)

• Schoenoplectus acutus - Schoenoplectus subterminalis - Eleocharis palustris - (Schoenoplectus americanus) Northern Great Lakes 

Shore Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL005274)

Global Related Concepts:

• Marsh: spikerush-water horsetail: mineral substrate (W6) (Harris et al. 1996) =

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

Global Range: This low graminoid marsh community is found in the boreal regions of the Great Lakes and perhaps more widely in 

Canada.

Nations: CA, US

States/Provinces: MB:S4, MI, MN, ON, QC

TNC Ecoregions: 47:C, 48:C

USFS Ecoregions (1994/95): 212Hi:CCC, 212La:CCC, 212Lb:CCC, 212Lc:CCC

Federal Lands: NPS (Grand Portage, Isle Royale, Pictured Rocks, Voyageurs)

Federal Lands: Information not available.

ELEMENT SOURCES

Grand Portage National Monument Plots: GRPO.7.

Grand Portage National Monument Map Code: HHS

Local Description Authors: M.J. Russo

Global Description Authors: D. Faber-Langendoen

References: Harris et al. 1996, Midwestern Ecology Working Group n.d.

G112. Eastern North American Wet Meadow 

Bluejoint Wet Meadow

Calamagrostis canadensis - Eupatorium maculatum Herbaceous Vegetation

Bluejoint - Spotted Joe-pyeweed Herbaceous Vegetation

Identifier: CEGL005174

NVC CLASSIFICATION

Division Eastern North America Freshwater Wet Meadow, Riparian & Marsh (2.C.5.a)

Macrogroup Eastern & North-Central North American Marsh & Wet Meadow (MG069)

Group Eastern North American Wet Meadow (G112)

Association (Common name) Bluejoint Wet Meadow

Ecological System(s): Eastern Great Plains Wet Meadow, Prairie and Marsh (CES205.687)

Ecological System(s): Eastern Boreal Floodplain (CES103.588)

North-Central Interior Wet Meadow-Shrub Swamp (CES202.701)

Laurentian-Acadian Wet Meadow-Shrub Swamp (CES201.582)

Central Appalachian River Floodplain (CES202.608)

High Allegheny Wetland (CES202.069)

ELEMENT CONCEPT

Global Summary: This wet meadow vegetation is widespread in the northeastern and midwestern United States and central and 

eastern Canada. Stands occur on the floodplains of small streams, in poorly drained depressions, beaver meadows, levees and 

lakeshores. Soils are typically mineral soil or well-decomposed peat, with a thick root mat. Water regime varies between temporarily 

and seasonally flooded. Graminoid cover is typically dense and can form hummocky microtopography. Calamagrostis canadensis

(bluejoint) is dominant, often occurring in almost pure stands or with tall sedges, such as Carex aquatilis (water sedge), Carex 

lacustris (hairy sedge), Carex utriculata (Northwest Territory sedge), and Carex stricta (upright sedge). In fen transitions, Carex 

lasiocarpa (woollyfruit sedge) can be present. Agrostis gigantea (redtop), Glyceria grandis (American mannagrass), Poa palustris

(fowl bluegrass), Poa compressa (Canada bluegrass), Scirpus cyperinus (woolgrass), and Typha latifolia (broadleaf cattail) are 

sometimes abundant. Forbs include Campanula aparinoides (marsh bellflower), Epilobium leptophyllum (bog willowherb), 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-35

Eupatorium maculatum (spotted joepyeweed), Eupatorium perfoliatum (common boneset), Impatiens capensis (jewelweed), Iris 

versicolor (harlequin blueflag), Polygonum amphibium (water knotweed), and Comarum palustre (purple marshlocks). Scattered 

shrubs, such as Viburnum nudum (possumhaw), Viburnum dentatum (southern arrow-wood), Spiraea alba (white meadowsweet), 

Cornus amomum (silky dogwood), Alnus incana (gray alder), or Alnus serrulata (hazel alder), may be present. Phalaris arundinacea

(reed canarygrass) and/or Lythrum salicaria (purple loosestrife) may be present, especially in disturbed examples.

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Environment: This reed canarygrass herbaceous vegetation was sampled once in the park near 

Poplar Creek. The site is a flat, intermittently flooded floodplain with moderately well-drained clay soil. The surface is dominated by 

leaf litter (88% cover) with some wood (1%), standing water (5%) and plant stems (6%). Evidence of disturbance includes animal and 

human paths and signs of beaver activity.

Global Environment: Stands occur on the floodplains of small streams, in poorly drained depressions, beaver meadows, levees and 

lakeshores. Soils are typically mineral soil or well-decomposed peat or peat silt loam with a thick root mat. Water regime varies 

between temporarily and seasonally flooded.

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Vegetation: Cornus sericea (red-osier dogwood) and Spiraea alba (white meadowsweet) form 

a very sparse (10% cover) short-shrub layer (1-2 m tall) over the dominant herbaceous layer (90%). Phalaris arundinacea (reed 

canarygrass) clearly dominates; additional herbs include small amounts of Asteraceae sp., Caltha palustris (yellow marsh-marigold), 

Carex lacustris (hairy sedge), Eupatorium maculatum (spotted joepyeweed), Heracleum maximum (common cowparsnip), Lycopus 

uniflorus (northern bugleweed), and Scirpus cyperinus (woolgrass).

Global Vegetation: Graminoid cover is typically dense and can form hummocky microtopography. Calamagrostis canadensis

(bluejoint) is dominant, often occurring in almost pure stands or with tall sedges, such as Carex aquatilis (water sedge), Carex 

lacustris (hairy sedge), Carex rostrata (beaked sedge), and Carex stricta (upright sedge). In fen transitions, Carex lasiocarpa

(woollyfruit sedge) can be present. Agrostis gigantea (redtop), Glyceria grandis (American mannagrass), Poa palustris (fowl 

bluegrass), Poa compressa (Canada bluegrass), Scirpus cyperinus (woolgrass), and Typha latifolia (broadleaf cattail) are sometimes 

abundant. Forbs include Campanula aparinoides (marsh bellflower), Epilobium leptophyllum (bog willowherb), Eupatorium 

maculatum (spotted joepyeweed), Eupatorium perfoliatum (common boneset), Iris versicolor (harlequin blueflag), Polygonum 

amphibium (water knotweed), and Comarum palustre (purple marshlocks). Scattered shrubs, such as Viburnum nudum (possumhaw), 

Viburnum dentatum (southern arrow-wood), Spiraea alba (white meadowsweet), Cornus amomum (silky dogwood), Alnus incana

(gray alder), or Alnus serrulata (hazel alder), may be present. Lythrum salicaria (purple loosestrife) may be present, especially in 

disturbed examples.

MOST ABUNDANT SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument

Stratum Lifeform Species

Herb (field) Graminoid Phalaris arundinacea (reed canarygrass)

Global

Stratum Lifeform Species

Herb (field) Graminoid Calamagrostis canadensis (bluejoint)

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument: Phalaris arundinacea (reed canarygrass)

Global: Calamagrostis canadensis (bluejoint)

OTHER NOTEWORTHY SPECIES

Global: Vulnerable: Polemonium vanbruntiae (Vanbrunt's polemonium, G3G4)

CONSERVATION STATUS RANK

Global Rank & Reasons: G4G5 (31-Mar-2000). This type is widespread throughout the northeastern and upper midwestern United 

States and central/southern Canada.

CLASSIFICATION

Status: Standard

Classification Confidence: 2 - Moderate

Global Comments: This type can grade into sedge meadows. A guideline of <50% sedges may be suggested as a criterion for the 

definition of this type compared to sedge meadow types. Harris et al. (1996) suggest that the bluejoint meadow type is drier than sedge 

meadows and less peaty than shore fens.

Global Similar Associations:

• Calamagrostis canadensis - Doellingeria umbellata - Spartina pectinata Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL006427)

• Calamagrostis canadensis - Scirpus spp. - Dulichium arundinaceum Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL006519)

• Carex (rostrata, utriculata) - Carex lacustris - (Carex vesicaria) Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL002257)

• Carex stricta - Carex spp. Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL002258)--Dominance of sedges versus grasses is much higher.

• Phalaris arundinacea Eastern Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL006044)
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-36

• Phalaris arundinacea Western Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL001474)

• Phleum pratense - (Calamagrostis canadensis) Semi-natural Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL005249)

Global Related Concepts:

• Calamagrostis canadensis herbaceous community (Walbridge and Lang 1982) =

• Calamagrostis canadensis meadow (Walbridge 1982) =

• Calamagrostis canadensis wet meadow (Fortney 1975) =

• Calamagrostis canadensis wet meadow (Byers et al. 2007) =

• Canada bluejoint-tussock sedge meadow (CAP pers. comm. 1998) ?

• Meadow marsh: bluejoint grass (W13) (Harris et al. 1996) =

• Palustrine Persistent Emergent Wetland (PEM1) (Cowardin et al. 1979) ?

• SNE low-energy riverbank community (Rawinski 1984) ?

• Shallow Emergent Marsh (Thompson 1996) ?

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

Global Range: This wet meadow vegetation is widely distributed in the northeastern and midwestern United States and south-central 

and southeastern Canada. It ranges from Maine south to West Virginia and possibly Virginia and west to Minnesota.

Nations: CA, US

States/Provinces: CT, DE, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, NH, NJ, NY, ON, PA, QC:S4?, RI, VA?, VT, WI, WV:S2

TNC Ecoregions: 35:C, 45:C, 47:C, 48:C, 51:P, 59:C, 60:C, 61:C, 63:C, 64:C

USFS Ecoregions (1994/95): 212Cb:CCC, 212Fa:CCC, 212Fb:CCC, 212Fc:CCC, 212Fd:CCC, 212Ga:CCC, 212Gb:CCC, 

212Hi:CCC, 212Hj:CCC, 212Ho:CCC, 212Hs:CCC, 212Hw:CCC, 212Hx:CCC, 212Ia:CCC, 212Ib:CCC, 212La:CCP, 212Lb:CCC, 

212Na:CPP, 221Ae:CCP, 221Af:CCC, 221Ag:CCC, 221Ah:CCC, 221Ai:CCC, 221Al:CCC, 221Ba:CCP, 221Bb:CCC, 221Bc:CCP, 

221Bd:CCC, 221D:CC, 222Jg:CCC, 222Na:CCC, 251Aa:CCC, M212Bb:CCC, M212Bc:CCC, M212Bd:CCC, M212Cb:CCC, 

M212Ea:CCC, M212Eb:CCC, M221Ba:CCC, M221Bb:CCC, M221Db:C??, M221Dc:C??, M221Dd:C??

Federal Lands: NPS (Apostle Islands, Grand Portage, Isle Royale, Minute Man, Pictured Rocks, Saint Croix, Saint-Gaudens, 

Sleeping Bear Dunes, Valley Forge, Voyageurs); USFS (Monongahela); USFWS (Assabet River?, Canaan Valley, Great Meadows?)

Federal Lands: Information not available.

ELEMENT SOURCES

Grand Portage National Monument Plots: GRPO.13.

Grand Portage National Monument Map Code: HCC

Local Description Authors: M.J. Russo

Global Description Authors: S.C. Gawler

References: Breden et al. 2001, Browning 1859, Byers et al. 2007, CAP pers. comm. 1998, Cowardin et al. 1979, Eastern Ecology 

Working Group n.d., Fike 1999, Fortney 1975, Francl et al. 2004, Gawler 2002, Harris et al. 1996, Harrison 2004, NAP pers. comm. 

1998, Rawinski 1984, Swain and Kearsley 2001, Thompson 1996, Thompson and Sorenson 2000, WNHIP unpubl. data, Walbridge 

1982, Walbridge and Lang 1982

Northern Sedge Wet Meadow

Carex (rostrata, utriculata) - Carex lacustris - (Carex vesicaria) Herbaceous Vegetation

(Beaked Sedge, Northwest Territory Sedge) - Lake Sedge - (Inflated Sedge) Herbaceous Vegetation

Identifier: CEGL002257

NVC CLASSIFICATION

Division Eastern North America Freshwater Wet Meadow, Riparian & Marsh (2.C.5.a)

Macrogroup Eastern & North-Central North American Marsh & Wet Meadow (MG069)

Group Eastern North American Wet Meadow (G112)

Association (Common name) Northern Sedge Wet Meadow

Ecological System(s): Eastern Great Plains Wet Meadow, Prairie and Marsh (CES205.687)

North-Central Interior Wet Meadow-Shrub Swamp (CES202.701)

Northern Great Lakes Coastal Marsh (CES201.722)

Western Great Plains Open Freshwater Depression Wetland (CES303.675)

North-Central Interior Floodplain (CES202.694)

Laurentian-Acadian Wet Meadow-Shrub Swamp (CES201.582)

High Allegheny Wetland (CES202.069)

ELEMENT CONCEPT

Global Summary: This northern tall sedge community is found in the mixed conifer - hardwood zone of the Great Lakes region and 

north into Canada, with outliers in the Allegheny Mountains region of West Virginia and Maryland. Sites are found on floodplains, 

shallow bays of lakes and streams, beaver meadows, ditches, and occasionally in isolated basins, or on semi-floating mats. Hydrology 

is seasonally to semipermanently flooded. Substrate is mineral soil or well-decomposed peat. Tall coarse-leaved sedges dominate the 

vegetation layer, often creating a tussocky hummock microtopography. Shrubs can cover up to 25% of the area. Pools with 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-37

submergents may also be present. Dominant graminoids include a number of Carices, including Carex aquatilis (water sedge), Carex 

lacustris (hairy sedge), Carex lasiocarpa (woollyfruit sedge), Carex rostrata (beaked sedge), Carex utriculata (Northwest Territory 

sedge), Carex vesicaria (blister sedge), and locally Carex stricta (upright sedge). Other graminoids include Calamagrostis canadensis

(bluejoint), Scirpus atrovirens (green bulrush), Scirpus cyperinus (woolgrass), and in wetter areas, Eleocharis palustris (common 

spikerush) and Equisetum fluviatile (water horsetail). Forbs include Acorus calamus (calamus), Symphyotrichum lanceolatum var. 

lanceolatum (white panicle aster), Campanula aparinoides (marsh bellflower), Eupatorium maculatum (spotted joepyeweed), Iris 

virginica var. shrevei (Shreve's iris), Lycopus uniflorus (northern bugleweed), Poa palustris (fowl bluegrass), Polygonum amphibium

(water knotweed), Comarum palustre (purple marshlocks), and others. Diagnostic features include the general dominance by coarseleaved sedges, wet, somewhat peaty soil conditions, and the mix of sub-boreal herbs with more temperate herbs.

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Environment: This northern tall sedge community was sampled at two locations in the park. 

The sites are flat, seasonally flooded floodplains with poorly drained peat soil and hummock-and-hollow microtopography. The 

surface is dominated by leaf litter (55-60% cover) with some wood (0-1%), standing water (10-20%), bare soil (5-9%) and plant stems 

(15-20%). Evidence of disturbance includes animal and human paths and signs of beaver activity.

Global Environment: Sites are found on floodplains, shallow bays of lakes and streams, beaver meadows, ditches, and occasionally 

in isolated basins, or on semi-floating mats. Hydrology is seasonally to semipermanently flooded. Substrate is mineral soil or welldecomposed peat (Curtis 1959, Harris et al. 1996).

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Vegetation: Alnus incana ssp. rugosa (speckled alder) and Salix (willow) sp. form a very 

sparse (<5% cover) short-shrub layer (1-2 m tall) over the dominant herbaceous layer (70%). Carex lacustris (hairy sedge) dominates; 

additional herbs include Bidens cernua (nodding beggarticks), Calamagrostis canadensis (bluejoint), Caltha palustris (yellow marshmarigold), Carex stricta (upright sedge), Comarum palustre (purple marshlocks), Equisetum fluviatile (water horsetail), Glyceria 

canadensis (rattlesnake mannagrass), Iris versicolor (harlequin blueflag), Scirpus cyperinus (woolgrass), Sparganium natans (small 

bur-reed), Triadenum fraseri (Fraser's marsh St. Johnswort), Typha (cattail) sp., and Utricularia intermedia (flatleaf bladderwort). 

Nonvascular species (sphagnum and other mosses) cover 10% of the ground surface.

Global Vegetation: Tall coarse-leaved sedges dominate the vegetation layer, often creating a tussocky hummock microtopography. 

Shrubs can cover up to 25% of the area. Pools with submergents may also be present. Dominant graminoids include a number of 

Carices, including Carex aquatilis (water sedge), Carex lacustris (hairy sedge), Carex lasiocarpa (woollyfruit sedge), Carex rostrata

(beaked sedge), Carex vesicaria (blister sedge), and locally Carex stricta (upright sedge). Other graminoids include Calamagrostis 

canadensis (bluejoint), Scirpus atrovirens (green bulrush), Scirpus cyperinus (woolgrass), and in wetter areas, Eleocharis palustris

(common spikerush) and Equisetum fluviatile (water horsetail). Forbs include Acorus calamus (calamus), Symphyotrichum 

lanceolatum var. lanceolatum (white panicle aster), Campanula aparinoides (marsh bellflower), Eupatorium maculatum (spotted 

joepyeweed), Iris virginica var. shrevei (Shreve's iris), Lycopus uniflorus (northern bugleweed), Poa palustris (fowl bluegrass), 

Polygonum amphibium (water knotweed), Comarum palustre (purple marshlocks), and others (Curtis 1959, Harris et al. 1996).

MOST ABUNDANT SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument

Stratum Lifeform Species

Herb (field) Forb Iris versicolor (harlequin blueflag)

Herb (field) Graminoid Carex lacustris (hairy sedge)

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES

Grand Portage National Monument: Calla palustris (water arum), Carex lacustris (hairy sedge), Carex stricta (upright sedge), 

Comarum palustre (purple marshlocks), Iris versicolor (harlequin blueflag)

CONSERVATION STATUS RANK

Global Rank & Reasons: G4G5 (17-Jun-1999). 

CLASSIFICATION

Status: Standard

Classification Confidence: 2 - Moderate

Global Comments: Expansion of the range of this type eastward to Massachusetts and West Virginica is based on the ambiguous 

application of Carex utriculata (Northwest Territory sedge) in past studies. Taxonomy and distribution of Carex utriculata (Northwest 

Territory sedge) versus Carex rostrata (beaked sedge) needs to be resolved. In Gleason and Cronquist (1991), Carex rostrata (beaked 

sedge) is circumboreal and only occurs in northern Michigan and northern Minnesota, whereas Carex utriculata (Northwest Territory 

sedge) is boreal but extends south to Delaware, Indiana, Nebraska, New Mexico and California. (Carex vesicaria (blister sedge) has a 

similar distribution to Carex utriculata (Northwest Territory sedge).) Carex rostrata (beaked sedge) has also been reported from 

extreme northern Wisconsin, e.g., on the Apostle Islands (E. Judziewicz pers. comm. 1999). However, all of the atlases and floras in 

the Midwest (Voss 1972, Mohlenbrock and Ladd 1978, Ownbey and Morley 1991) do not make such a distinction, so the species are 

essentially treated as synonymous in this type. Curtis (1959) suggested that differential species for northern sedge meadows in 

Wisconsin may be Symphyotrichum puniceum (purplestem aster), Campanula aparinoides (marsh bellflower), Glyceria canadensis
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-38

(rattlesnake mannagrass), Scirpus atrovirens (green bulrush), and Solidago uliginosa (bog goldenrod), among others, but this list 

needs further study.

Global Similar Associations:

• Calamagrostis canadensis - Eupatorium maculatum Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL005174)--This type is more heavily grass- and 

forb-dominated, sedges <25%?

• Carex aquatilis - Carex utriculata Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL001803)

• Carex lacustris Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL002256)

• Carex stricta - Carex spp. Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL002258)

• Chamaedaphne calyculata / Carex oligosperma / Sphagnum spp. Dwarf-shrubland (CEGL005091)

• Cornus sericea - Salix (bebbiana, discolor, petiolaris) / Calamagrostis stricta Shrubland (CEGL002187)

• Eriophorum virginicum - (Carex folliculata) / Sphagnum spp. - Polytrichum spp. Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL006570)

• Myrica gale - Chamaedaphne calyculata / Carex (lasiocarpa, utriculata) - Utricularia spp. Shrub Herbaceous Vegetation 

(CEGL006302)

Global Related Concepts:

• Carex rostrata - Rubus hispidus - Pyrus melanocarpa community (Edens 1973) =

• Carex rostrata - Sphagnum spp. community (Darlington 1943) =

• Carex rostrata sedge-meadow community (Robinette 1966) =

• Carex utriculata / Sphagnum spp. fen (Byers et al. 2007) =

• Polytrichum - Carex (rostrata, stricta) hummock bog (Fortney 1975) =

• Meadow marsh: tall sedge (W12) (Harris et al. 1996) =

• Northern Sedge Meadow (Curtis 1959) =

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

Global Range: This northern tall sedge community is found in the mixed conifer - hardwood zone of the Great Lakes and 

northeastern region of the United States and north into Canada, extending from Maine to Manitoba, south to Michigan and Iowa.

Nations: CA, US

States/Provinces: IA, MB:SU, ME, MI, MN, ND:S2S3, ON, QC:S4?, SD, WI:S3, WV:S2, WY

TNC Ecoregions: 26:C, 34:C, 35:C, 46:C, 47:C, 48:C, 59:C

USFS Ecoregions (1994/95): 212Ha:CCP, 212Hb:CCP, 212He:CCP, 212Hh:CCP, 212Hi:CCC, 212Hj:CCC, 212Hk:CCP, 

212Hn:CCP, 212Ho:CCC, 212Hq:CCP, 212Hr:CCP, 212Hs:CCP, 212Ht:CCP, 212Hv:CCC, 212Hw:CCC, 212Hx:CCP, 212Hy:CCP, 

212Ia:CCC, 212Ib:CCP, 212Ja:CCP, 212Jb:CCP, 212Jc:CCP, 212Jd:CCC, 212Je:CC?, 212Jf:CCP, 212Jj:CCP, 212Jk:CCP, 

212Jl:CCP, 212Jm:CCP, 212Jn:CCP, 212Jo:CCP, 212Jr:CCP, 212Ka:CCC, 212La:CCP, 212Lb:CCC, 212Lc:CCP, 212Ld:CCP, 

212Mb:CPP, 212Na:CPP, 212Nb:CPP, 212Nc:CPP, 222Lb:CCC, 251Ab:CCC, 251B:CC, 332:?

Federal Lands: NPS (Apostle Islands, Grand Portage, Isle Royale, Pictured Rocks, Saint Croix, Sleeping Bear Dunes, Voyageurs); 

USFS (Chequamegon, Chequamegon-Nicolet, Chippewa, Hiawatha, Huron, Huron-Manistee, Manistee, Monongahela, Nicolet, 

Ottawa?, Superior?); USFWS (Canaan Valley)

Federal Lands: Information not available.

ELEMENT SOURCES

Grand Portage National Monument Plots: GRPO.8, GRPO.10.

Grand Portage National Monument Map Code: HSG

Local Description Authors: M.J. Russo

Global Description Authors: D. Faber-Langendoen, mod. E.A. Byers

References: Byers et al. 2007, Curtis 1959, Damman and French 1987, Darlington 1943, Edens 1973, Fortney 1975, Fortney and 

Rentch 2003, Francl et al. 2004, Gawler 2002, Gleason and Cronquist 1991, Greenall 1996, Harris et al. 1996, INAI unpubl. data, 

Midwestern Ecology Working Group n.d., Mohlenbrock and Ladd 1978, NDNHI unpubl. data, Ownbey and Morley 1991, Robinette 

1966, Voss 1972, WNHIP unpubl. data
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-39

5. Aquatic Vegetation

5.B.1. Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation

5.B.1.a. North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation

MG108. Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation

G114. Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation [Placeholder]

Northern Water-lily Aquatic Wetland

Nymphaea odorata - Nuphar (microphylla, variegata) Herbaceous Vegetation

American White Water-lily - (Yellow Pond-lily, Variegated Yellow Pond-lily) Herbaceous Vegetation

Identifier: CEGL002562

NVC CLASSIFICATION

Division North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation (5.B.1.a)

Macrogroup Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation (MG108)

Group Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation [Placeholder] (G114)

Association (Common name) Northern Water-lily Aquatic Wetland

Ecological System(s): Laurentian-Acadian Freshwater Marsh (CES201.594)

ELEMENT CONCEPT

Global Summary: This water-lily aquatic wetland type occurs throughout the upper midwestern region of the United States and 

adjacent Canada. Stands occur in open, slow-moving water on lakes and streams, often less than 0.5 m deep. The substrate is variable, 

from muck to sedimentary peat. Emergent vegetation cover is less than 25% and floating-leaved aquatics cover at least 25% of the 

surface. Typical dominants vary from stand to stand but include Nymphaea odorata (American white waterlily), Nuphar microphylla, 

and Nuphar variegata. Other dominants may include Brasenia schreberi (watershield) and Potamogeton amplifolius (largeleaf 

pondweed). A variety of emergent species can occur in this community.

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Global Environment: Stands occur in open, slow-moving water on lakes and streams, often less than 0.5 m deep. The substrate is 

variable, from muck to sedimentary peat (Harris et al. 1996)

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Global Vegetation: Emergent vegetation cover is less than 25% and floating-leaved aquatics cover at least 25% of the surface. 

Typical dominants vary from stand to stand but include Nymphaea odorata (American white waterlily), Nuphar microphylla, and 

Nuphar variegata. Other dominants may include Brasenia schreberi (watershield) and Potamogeton amplifolius (largeleaf pondweed). 

A variety of emergent species can occur within this type (Harris et al. 1996).

MOST ABUNDANT SPECIES

Global

Stratum Lifeform Species

Floating aquatic Aquatic herb (floating & submergent) Nuphar lutea ssp. pumila (yellow pond-lily), Nuphar lutea ssp. 

variegata (variegated yellow pond-lily), Nymphaea odorata

(American white waterlily)

CHARACTERISTIC SPECIES

Global: Nuphar lutea ssp. pumila (yellow pond-lily), Nuphar lutea ssp. variegata (variegated yellow pond-lily), Nymphaea odorata

(American white waterlily)

CONSERVATION STATUS RANK

Global Rank & Reasons: G5 (3-Oct-1996). 

CLASSIFICATION

Status: Standard

Classification Confidence: 3 - Weak

Global Comments: This type is not well-characterized across its range. Further review is needed in the United States. Depending on 

spatial scale, it conceptually overlaps both submergent and emergent aquatic types.

Global Related Concepts:

• Inland Emergent Marsh (Chapman et al. 1989) B

• Open water marsh: floating-leaved plants (W4) (Harris et al. 1996) =
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-40

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

Global Range: This water-lily aquatic wetland type occurs throughout the upper midwestern region of the United States and adjacent 

Canada.

Nations: CA, US

States/Provinces: MB:S2, MI, MN, NY, ON, QC:S5?, WI

TNC Ecoregions: 47:C, 48:C

USFS Ecoregions (1994/95): 212Hi:CCC, 212Hl:CCP, 212Hm:CCP, 212Hn:CCP, 212Ho:CCC, 212Hp:CCP, 212Hq:CCP, 

212Hr:CCP, 212Hs:CCP, 212Ht:CCP, 212Hv:CCP, 212Hw:CCC, 212Hx:CCP, 212Hy:CCP, 212Ia:CCC, 212Ib:CCP, 212Ja:CPP, 

212Jb:CPP, 212Jc:CPP, 212Jl:CPP, 212Jn:CPP, 212Jo:CPP, 212La:CPP, 212Mb:CPP, 212Na:CPP, 212Nb:CPP, 212Nc:CPP, 

221B:CC, 222Jb:CCC, 222Je:CCC, M212:C

Federal Lands: NPS (Apostle Islands, Grand Portage, Isle Royale, Pictured Rocks, Sleeping Bear Dunes, Voyageurs); USFS 

(Chippewa, Huron, Huron-Manistee, Manistee?, Ottawa, Superior?)

Federal Lands: Information not available.

ELEMENT SOURCES

Local Description Authors: 

Grand Portage National Monument Map Code: HFA

Global Description Authors: D. Faber-Langendoen

References: Chapman et al. 1989, Edinger et al. 2002, Greenall 1996, Harris et al. 1996, Midwestern Ecology Working Group n.d., 

WNHIP unpubl. data

Midwest Pondweed Submerged Aquatic Wetland

Potamogeton spp. - Ceratophyllum spp. Midwest Herbaceous Vegetation

Pondweed species - Hornwort species Midwest Herbaceous Vegetation

Identifier: CEGL002282

NVC CLASSIFICATION

Division North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation (5.B.1.a)

Macrogroup Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation (MG108)

Group Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation [Placeholder] (G114)

Association (Common name) Midwest Pondweed Submerged Aquatic Wetland

Ecological System(s): Eastern Great Plains Wet Meadow, Prairie and Marsh (CES205.687)

North-Central Interior Floodplain (CES202.694)

Laurentian-Acadian Freshwater Marsh (CES201.594)

North-Central Interior Freshwater Marsh (CES202.899)

ELEMENT CONCEPT

Global Summary: This broadly defined submerged aquatic or open marsh type is found throughout the midwestern region of the 

United States and adjacent Canada. Based on information in the northern parts of the Midwest, several vegetation subgroups can be 

recognized that may be separate associations. Subgroup A is a shallow (<50 cm), sparsely vegetated, open water marsh found on sand, 

or organic and mineral material trapped in rocky bottoms. Stands are often exposed to wave action and found in oligotrophic lakes. 

Dominant plants often have basal rosettes that are resistant to wave action. Typical species include Elatine minima (small waterwort), 

Eriocaulon aquaticum (sevenangle pipewort), Gratiola aurea (golden hedgehyssop), Isoetes tenella (spiny-spore quillwort), Isoetes 

lacustris (lake quillwort), Juncus pelocarpus (brownfruit rush), and Lobelia dortmanna (Dortmann's cardinalflower). Subgroup B is a 

shallow (<50 cm) open water marsh with emergent cover <25% and floating-leaved aquatics >25%. Substrate is a mineral soil (often 

sand), boulders, or a mixture of sedimentary peat and fine mineral soil. Stands can be exposed to waves or are in stream channels. 

Stands may often be dominated by a single species. Typical dominants include Eleocharis acicularis (needle spikerush), 

Myriophyllum (watermilfoil) spp., Potamogeton amplifolius (largeleaf pondweed), Potamogeton gramineus (variableleaf pondweed), 

Potamogeton praelongus (whitestem pondweed), Potamogeton robbinsii (Robbins' pondweed), Sparganium fluctuans (floating burreed), and Utricularia macrorhiza (common bladderwort). Subgroup C includes open water marsh with emergent cover <25% and 

floating leaved aquatics >25%. Substrate is sedimentary peat and stands are often found in sheltered bays of lakes and streams that do 

not have high wave energy. Stands may often be dominated by a single species. Typical dominants include Ceratophyllum demersum

(coon's-tail), Elodea canadensis (Canadian waterweed), Lemna (duckweed) spp., Myriophyllum sibiricum (shortspike watermilfoil), 

Myriophyllum verticillatum (whorl-leaf watermilfoil), Potamogeton natans (floating pondweed), Stuckenia pectinata (sago 

pondweed), Potamogeton richardsonii (Richardson's pondweed), Potamogeton zosteriformis (flatstem pondweed), Ranunculus 

aquatilis (whitewater crowfoot), Utricularia macrorhiza (common bladderwort), and Vallisneria americana (American eel-grass).

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Global Environment: Curtis (1959) [see also Swindale and Curtis (1957)] noted that the major environmental controls on submerged 

aquatic vegetation are water depth (as it relates to light intensity), water chemistry, water movement, and nature of the substrate. 

Various combinations of these factors can interact in a variety of ways to influence the local composition of the community. As a 

result, a single lake may contain a number of relatively homogeneous stands, each with a different species makeup, which depends on 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-41

depth, nature of adjoining shoreline, degree of protection from waves, etc. Water chemistry may be one of the few constants. 

Assessment of water conductivity and alkalinity are two measured parameters that can provide some understanding of the influence of 

water chemistry on species composition.

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Global Vegetation: Based on information in the northern parts of the Midwest, several vegetation subgroups can be recognized that 

may be separate associations. Subgroup A is a shallow (<50 cm), sparsely vegetated, open-water marsh found on sand, or organic and 

mineral material trapped in rocky bottoms. Stands are often exposed to wave action and found in oligotrophic lakes. Dominant plants 

often have basal rosettes that are resistant to wave action. Typical species include Elatine minima (small waterwort), Eriocaulon 

aquaticum (sevenangle pipewort), Gratiola aurea (golden hedgehyssop), Isoetes tenella (spiny-spore quillwort), Isoetes lacustris (lake 

quillwort), Juncus pelocarpus (brownfruit rush), and Lobelia dortmanna (Dortmann's cardinalflower) (Curtis 1959, Harris et al. 1996). 

Subgroup B is a shallow (<50 cm), open-water marsh with emergent cover <25% and floating-leaved aquatics >25%. Substrate is a 

mineral soil (often sand), boulders, or a mixture of sedimentary peat and fine mineral soil. Stands can be exposed to waves or are in 

stream channels. Stands may often be dominated by a single species. Typical dominants include Eleocharis acicularis (needle 

spikerush), Myriophyllum (watermilfoil) spp., Potamogeton amplifolius (largeleaf pondweed), Potamogeton gramineus (variableleaf 

pondweed), Potamogeton praelongus (whitestem pondweed), Potamogeton robbinsii (Robbins' pondweed), Sparganium fluctuans

(floating bur-reed), and Utricularia macrorhiza (common bladderwort). Subgroup C includes open-water marsh with emergent cover 

<25% and floating-leaved aquatics >25%. Substrate is sedimentary peat, and stands are often found in sheltered bays of lakes and 

streams that do not have high wave energy. Stands may often be dominated by a single species. Typical dominants include 

Ceratophyllum demersum (coon's-tail), Elodea canadensis (Canadian waterweed), Lemna (duckweed) spp., Myriophyllum sibiricum

(shortspike watermilfoil), Myriophyllum verticillatum (whorl-leaf watermilfoil), Potamogeton natans (floating pondweed), Stuckenia 

pectinata (sago pondweed), Potamogeton richardsonii (Richardson's pondweed), Potamogeton zosteriformis (flatstem pondweed), 

Ranunculus aquatilis (whitewater crowfoot), Utricularia macrorhiza (common bladderwort), and Vallisneria americana (American 

eel-grass) (Curtis 1959, Harris et al. 1996).

CONSERVATION STATUS RANK

Global Rank & Reasons: G5 (3-Oct-1996). 

CLASSIFICATION

Status: Standard

Classification Confidence: 3 - Weak

Global Comments: This type is based on information in the more northern parts of the range. However, it may need to be split into a 

boreal/sub-boreal type (subgroup A above) and a Midwestern type (subgroups B and C), and even within the Midwest there may be 

substantial differences between western and eastern stands (Robert Dana pers. comm. 1999). In Wisconsin, Subgroup A is considered 

distinctive, and could be ranked an S3 type. It is locally common there in deep, hard-bottomed seepage lakes of the Northern 

Highlands Pitted Outwash subsection (212Jm of Keys et al. 1995) (E. Epstein pers. comm. 1999).

Global Similar Associations:

• Stuckenia pectinata - Ruppia maritima Herbaceous Vegetation (CEGL002004)--Prairie pothole type.

Global Related Concepts:

• Open water marsh: floating-leaved plants (W4) (Harris et al. 1996) I

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

Global Range: This pondweed submerged aquatic type is found widely throughout the midwestern United States and adjacent 

Canada, ranging from Ohio and Ontario west to North Dakota and south to Iowa.

Nations: CA, US

States/Provinces: IA:SU, IL, IN, MI:S4, MN, ND, OH, ON, SD, WI, WY

TNC Ecoregions: 35:C, 36:C, 44:C, 45:C, 46:C, 47:C, 48:C, 49:C, 50:C

USFS Ecoregions (1994/95): 212Hb:CCP, 212Hi:CCC, 212Ho:CCC, 212Hs:CCC, 212Hv:CCC, 212Hw:CCC, 212Ia:CCC, 

212Ib:CCP, 212Ja:CCP, 212Jb:CCP, 212Jc:CCP, 212Je:CCP, 212Jf:CCP, 212Jj:CCP, 212Jl:CCP, 212Jm:CCC, 212Ka:CPP, 

212La:CPP, 212Mb:C??, 221Ef:CCC, 221Fc:CCC, 221He:CCC, 222Ao:CPP, 222Ch:CPP, 222Gc:CPP, 222Ha:CCC, 222Jg:CCC, 

222Jh:CCC, 222Ji:CCC, 222Jj:CCC, 222Kf:CCC, 222L:CC, 251Aa:???, 251Ba:???

Federal Lands: NPS (Apostle Islands, Effigy Mounds, Grand Portage, Indiana Dunes, Isle Royale, Pictured Rocks, Saint Croix, 

Sleeping Bear Dunes, Voyageurs); USFS (Chequamegon, Chequamegon-Nicolet, Nicolet, Shawnee, Superior?)

Federal Lands: Information not available.

ELEMENT SOURCES

Grand Portage National Monument Map Code: HSV

Local Description Authors: 

Global Description Authors: D. Faber-Langendoen

References: Chapman et al. 1989, Curtis 1959, Harris et al. 1996, INAI unpubl. data, Keys et al. 1995, Midwestern Ecology Working 

Group n.d., NDNHI unpubl. data, Swindale and Curtis 1957
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-42

6. Nonvascular & Sparse Vascular Rock Vegetation

6.B.2. Temperate & Boreal Cliff, Scree & Rock Vegetation

6.B.2.a. Eastern North American Temperate Cliff, Scree & Rock Vegetation

MG111. Eastern North American Cliff & Rock Vegetation

G341. Great Lakes Cliff & Shore [Placeholder]

Great Lakes Basalt - Diabase Cobble - Gravel Shore

Basalt - Diabase Cobble - Gravel Great Lakes Shore Sparse Vegetation

Basalt - Diabase Cobble - Gravel Great Lakes Shore Sparse Vegetation

Identifier: CEGL005250

NVC CLASSIFICATION

Division Eastern North American Temperate Cliff, Scree & Rock Vegetation (6.B.2.a)

Macrogroup Eastern North American Cliff & Rock Vegetation (MG111)

Group Great Lakes Cliff & Shore [Placeholder] (G341)

Association (Common name) Great Lakes Basalt - Diabase Cobble - Gravel Shore

Ecological System(s): Great Lakes Alkaline Rocky Shore and Cliff (CES201.995)

ELEMENT CONCEPT

Global Summary: The basalt cobble - gravel Great Lakes shore type is commonly found along the northern Great Lakes shores of 

the United States and Canada. Stands occur between volcanic bedrock exposures comprised of both basalt and Copper Harbor 

conglomerates. Size of the gravel and cobble vary from less than 2 cm to over 20 cm. Size range varies depending on the wave energy 

acting on the shoreline and the nature of the bedrock being eroded. These steep shores are typically devoid of vegetation. At Isle 

Royale National Park, this cobble - gravel lakeshore is a sparsely vegetated community on cobble or gravel beaches. This community 

occurs as a mosaic of sparse grassland with over 25% cover, and sparsely vegetated areas with less than 25% cover. The most 

abundant herbs are grasses, mostly Elymus trachycaulus (slender wheatgrass) (average 29% cover); other characteristic herbs are 

Lathyrus palustris (marsh pea) and Oenothera biennis (common evening-primrose); characteristic shrubs are Rubus idaeus (American 

red raspberry), Cornus sericea (red-osier dogwood), and Alnus viridis (green alder) (each with <5% cover). The shrub zone is 

dominated by low shrubs, which vary from 20-60% cover. The most abundant shrubs are Rosa acicularis (prickly rose), Rubus idaeus

(American red raspberry), Diervilla lonicera (northern bush honeysuckle), Physocarpus opulifolius (common ninebark), Ribes 

oxyacanthoides (Canadian gooseberry), Alnus incana (gray alder), and Sorbus decora (northern mountain-ash). There may be 

scattered trees (0-5% cover) including Picea glauca (white spruce), Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Thuja occidentalis (northern whitecedar), and Betula papyrifera (paper birch). Cover of herbs varies from 10-40%; the most common herbs are Lathyrus palustris

(marsh pea), Oenothera biennis (common evening-primrose), Cornus canadensis (bunchberry dogwood), Calamagrostis canadensis

(bluejoint), and Equisetum hyemale (scouringrush horsetail). Carex atratiformis (scrabrous black sedge), Polygonum viviparum

(alpine bistort), and Trisetum spicatum (spike trisetum) have been reported at the inner margin of the island's cobble lakeshore, near 

the tree edge. Elsewhere, in Minnesota, Lathyrus japonicus (beach pea) is characteristic.

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Global Environment: This community occupies cobble or gravel shores of Lake Superior. These shores occur in coves and gently 

curving bays between rocky points. These mostly non-vegetated shores may contain a shrub zone that occurs on the highest beach 

ridge, which is usually nearly level. There may be little or no soil; the plants are rooted in the cobble or gravel (C. Reschke pers. 

comm. 1999).

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Global Vegetation: At Isle Royale National Park, this cobble-gravel lakeshore is a sparsely vegetated community on cobble or gravel 

beaches. This community occurs as a mosaic of sparse grassland with over 25% cover, and sparsely vegetated areas with less than 

25% cover. The most abundant herbs are grasses, mostly Elymus trachycaulus (slender wheatgrass) (average 29% cover); other 

characteristic herbs are Lathyrus palustris (marsh pea) and Oenothera biennis (common evening-primrose); characteristic shrubs are 

Rubus idaeus (American red raspberry), Cornus sericea (red-osier dogwood), and Alnus viridis (green alder) (each with <5% cover). 

The shrub zone is dominated by low shrubs, which vary from 20-60% cover. The most abundant shrubs are Rosa acicularis (prickly 

rose), Rubus idaeus (American red raspberry), Diervilla lonicera (northern bush honeysuckle), Physocarpus opulifolius (common 

ninebark), Ribes oxyacanthoides (Canadian gooseberry), Alnus incana (gray alder), and Sorbus decora (northern mountain-ash). There 

may be scattered trees (0-5% cover) including Picea glauca (white spruce), Abies balsamea (balsam fir), Thuja occidentalis (northern 

white-cedar), and Betula papyrifera (paper birch). Cover of herbs varies from 10-40%; the most common herbs are Lathyrus palustris

(marsh pea), Oenothera biennis (common evening-primrose), Cornus canadensis (bunchberry dogwood), Calamagrostis canadensis

(bluejoint), and Equisetum hyemale (scouringrush horsetail) (C. Reschke pers. comm. 1999). Carex atratiformis (scrabrous black 

sedge), Polygonum viviparum (alpine bistort), and Trisetum spicatum (spike trisetum) have been reported at the inner margin of the 

island's cobble lakeshore, near the tree edge. Elsewhere, in Minnesota, Lathyrus japonicus (beach pea) is characteristic.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-43

CONSERVATION STATUS RANK

Global Rank & Reasons: G4G5 (7-Apr-2000). Type may be relatively localized, but threats are uncommon.

CLASSIFICATION

Status: Standard

Classification Confidence: 2 - Moderate

Global Comments: The alkaline cobble - gravel shorelines are split into two types, basalt /diabase (this type) and Limestone Cobble 

- Gravel Great Lakes Shore Sparse Vegetation (CEGL005169).

Global Similar Associations:

• Basalt - Conglomerate Bedrock Great Lakes Shore Sparse Vegetation (CEGL005215)

• Igneous - Metamorphic Cobble - Gravel Inland Lake Shore Sparse Vegetation (CEGL002303)

• Limestone Cobble - Gravel Great Lakes Shore Sparse Vegetation (CEGL005169)

• Non-alkaline Cobble - Gravel Great Lakes Shore Sparse Vegetation (CEGL002508)

Global Related Concepts:

• Cobble Beach (Chapman et al. 1989) B

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

Global Range: The basalt cobble-gravel Great Lakes shore type is commonly found in the northern Great Lakes region of the United 

States and Canada, ranging from Michigan to Minnesota and Ontario.

Nations: CA?, US

States/Provinces: MI, MN, ON?

TNC Ecoregions: 48:C

USFS Ecoregions (1994/95): 212Ib:CCC, 212J:CC, 212Lb:CCC

Federal Lands: NPS (Grand Portage, Isle Royale)

Federal Lands: Information not available.

ELEMENT SOURCES

Grand Portage National Monument Map Code: VCB

Local Description Authors: 

Global Description Authors: D. Faber-Langendoen

References: Chapman et al. 1989, Midwestern Ecology Working Group n.d., Reschke pers. comm.

Northern Non-Carbonate Dry Talus Vegetation

Basalt - Diabase Northern Open Talus Sparse Vegetation

Basalt - Diabase Northern Open Talus Sparse Vegetation

Identifier: CEGL005247

NVC CLASSIFICATION

Division Eastern North American Temperate Cliff, Scree & Rock Vegetation (6.B.2.a)

Macrogroup Eastern North American Cliff & Rock Vegetation (MG111)

Group Great Lakes Cliff & Shore [Placeholder] (G341)

Association (Common name) Northern Non-Carbonate Dry Talus Vegetation

Ecological System(s): Laurentian-Acadian Acidic Cliff and Talus (CES201.569)

ELEMENT CONCEPT

Global Summary: This open basalt - diabase talus type occurs in the northern parts of the midwestern United States and into Canada. 

The type is in need of further characterization.

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Environment: This sparsely vegetated community was sampled at one location in the park 

near Mount Rose. The site is a very steep, east-facing talus slope with rapidly drained soil. The surface is dominated by large rocks 

(96% cover) with some small rocks (2%), wood (1%) and plant stems (1%). These slopes are unstable and subject to rocks falling 

from cliffs located above and to downslope slippage.

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Grand Portage National Monument Vegetation: Lichens dominate this community with 80% cover. In addition, in this example, 

Betula papyrifera (paper birch) forms a very sparse (5% cover) tree canopy 5-10 m tall. Polypodium (polypody) sp. is the only 

recorded herbaceous species.

CONSERVATION STATUS RANK

Global Rank & Reasons: GNR (1-Dec-1997). 

CLASSIFICATION

Status: Standard

Classification Confidence: 2 - Moderate
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-44

Global Comments: In Wisconsin, basalt talus occurs along the St. Croix River.

Global Similar Associations:

• Betula papyrifera - Picea glauca / Acer spicatum - Alnus viridis / Polypodium virginianum Talus Shrubland [Provisional] 

(CEGL005252)

• Granite - Metamorphic Talus Northern Sparse Vegetation (CEGL002409)

• Sorbus decora - Acer spicatum / Dryopteris carthusiana Shrubland (CEGL005253)

Global Related Concepts:

• Moist Non-Acid Cliff (Chapman et al. 1989) B

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

Global Range: This open basalt/diabase talus type occurs in the northern parts of the midwestern United States and into Canada, 

ranging from Wisconsin and Ontario to possibly Minnesota and Michigan.

Nations: CA, US

States/Provinces: MI, MN, ON, WI

TNC Ecoregions: 48:C

USFS Ecoregions (1994/95): 212J:CC, 212Lb:CCC

Federal Lands: NPS (Grand Portage)

Federal Lands: Information not available.

ELEMENT SOURCES

Grand Portage National Monument Plots: GRPO.18.

Grand Portage National Monument Map Code: VDT

Local Description Authors: M.J. Russo

Global Description Authors: D. Faber-Langendoen

References: Chapman et al. 1989, Midwestern Ecology Working Group n.d., WNHIP unpubl. data

Northern Non-Carbonate Moist Talus Vegetation

Granite - Metamorphic Talus Northern Sparse Vegetation

Granite - Metamorphic Talus Northern Sparse Vegetation

Identifier: CEGL002409

NVC CLASSIFICATION

Association (Common name) Northern Non-Carbonate Moist Talus Vegetation

Ecological System(s): Laurentian-Acadian Acidic Cliff and Talus (CES201.569)

ELEMENT CONCEPT

Global Summary: This granite - metamorphic talus type is found in the northern parts of the Great Lakes region in both the United 

States and Canada. Stands occur as unconsolidated rocks at the base of steep slopes or cliffs. Soils are absent. The parent material is 

either granite or metamorphic, and rock fragments are often angular and large. The vegetation on these talus slopes varies from very 

sparse to pockets of shrubs and trees. Species composition needs to be described.

ENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION

Global Environment: Stands occur as unconsolidated rocks at the base of steep slopes or cliffs. Soils are absent. The parent material 

is either granite or metamorphic, and rock fragments are often angular and large.

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Global Vegetation: The vegetation on these talus slopes varies from very sparse to pockets of shrubs and trees. Species composition 

needs to be described.

CONSERVATION STATUS RANK

Global Rank & Reasons: G4G5 (8-Jul-1997). 

CLASSIFICATION

Status: Standard

Classification Confidence: 2 - Moderate

Global Comments: Type may need to be split into open versus wooded types. In Wisconsin, this type may possibly occur in the 

Penokee Range (granite). Stands along the St. Croix River are basalt/diabase and are treated with Basalt - Diabase Northern Open 

Talus Sparse Vegetation (CEGL005247). Devil's Lake has a quartzite, metamorphic talus which is included here for now.

Global Similar Associations:

• Basalt - Diabase Northern Open Talus Sparse Vegetation (CEGL005247)

• Betula papyrifera - Picea glauca / Acer spicatum - Alnus viridis / Polypodium virginianum Talus Shrubland [Provisional] 

(CEGL005252)

• Polypodium (virginianum, appalachianum) / Lichens Nonvascular Vegetation (CEGL006534)

• Sandstone Talus Northern Sparse Vegetation (CEGL005202)
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-45

Global Related Concepts:

• Dry Acid Cliff (Chapman et al. 1989) B

ELEMENT DISTRIBUTION

Global Range: This granite/metamorphic talus type is found in the northern parts of the Great Lakes region in both the United States 

and Canada, ranging from Minnesota and Ontario east to Wisconsin and Michigan.

Nations: CA, US

States/Provinces: MI, MN, ON:S3S4, QC, WI

TNC Ecoregions: 47:C, 48:C, 64:C

USFS Ecoregions (1994/95): 212Ja:CPP, 212Jb:CPP, 212Jf:CP?, 212Jj:CPP, 212Jn:CP?, 222:C

Federal Lands: NPS (Grand Portage); USFS (Chequamegon, Chequamegon-Nicolet, Nicolet)

Federal Lands: Information not available.

ELEMENT SOURCES

Grand Portage National Monument Map Code: VMT

Local Description Authors: 

Global Description Authors: D. Faber-Langendoen

References: Chapman et al. 1989, Midwestern Ecology Working Group n.d., WNHIP unpubl. Data

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-47

Bibliography for Grand Portage National Monument

Albert, D. A., P. J. Comer, R. A. Corner, D. Cuthrell, M. Penskar, and M. Rabe. 1995. Bedrock shoreline survey of the Niagaran 

Escarpment in Michigan's Upper Peninsula: Mackinac County to Delta County. Michigan Natural Features Inventory for Land 

and Water Management Division (grant # CD-0.02).

Anderson, D. M. 1982. Plant communities of Ohio: A preliminary classification and description. Division of Natural Areas and 

Preserves, Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Columbus, OH. 182 pp.

Anderson, R. D., and J. E. Schwegman. 1991. Twenty years of vegetational change on a Southern Illinois Barren. Natural Areas 

Journal 11(2):100-107.

Breden, T. F., Y. R. Alger, K. S. Walz, and A. G. Windisch. 2001. Classification of vegetation communities of New Jersey: Second 

iteration. Association for Biodiversity Information and New Jersey Natural Heritage Program, Office of Natural Lands 

Management, Division of Parks and Forestry, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Trenton.

Browning, M. 1859. Forty-four years of the life of a hunter; being reminiscences of Meshach Browning, a Maryland hunter, roughly 

written down by himself. Ill. E. Stabler. J. B. Lipppincott Company, Philadelphia. Reprinted in 2003 by Appalachian 

Background, Oakland. 400 pp.

Byers, E. A., J. P. Vanderhorst, and B. P. Streets. 2007. Classification and conservation assessment of high elevation wetland 

communities in the Allegheny Mountains of West Virginia. West Virginia Natural Heritage Program, West Virginia Division of 

Natural Resources, Elkins.

CAP [Central Appalachian Forest Working Group]. 1998. Central Appalachian Working group discussions. The Nature Conservancy, 

Boston, MA.

Chambers, B. A., B. J. Naylor, J. Nieppola, B. Merchant, and P. Uhlig. 1997. Field Guide to Forest Ecosystems of Central Ontario. 

Southcentral Science Section (SCSS) Field Guide FG-01, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, North Bay, Ontario, Canada. 

200 pp.

Chapman, K. A., D. A. Albert, and G. A. Reese. 1989. Draft descriptions of Michigan's natural community types. Michigan 

Department of Natural Resources, Lansing, MI. 35 pp.

Cleland, D. T., J. B. Hart, G. E. Host, K. S. Pregitzer, and C. W. Ramm. 1994. Field guide to the ecological classification and 

inventory system of the Huron-Manistee National Forest. USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station.

Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United 

States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Service Program. FWS/OBS-79/31. Washington, DC. 103 pp.

Curtis, J. T. 1959. The vegetation of Wisconsin: An ordination of plant communities. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison. 657 pp. 

[reprinted in 1987]

Damman, A. W. H., and T. W. French. 1987. The ecology of peat bogs of the glaciated northeastern United States: A community 

profile. USDI Fish & Wildlife Service Biological Report 85(7.16). 100 pp.

Darlington, H. C. 1943. Vegetation and substrate of Cranberry Glades, West Virginia. Botanical Gazette 104:371-393.

DeMeo, T., D. McCay, D. Walton, and J. Concannon. 1998. Terrestrial ecological classification of the Monogahela National Forest. 

USDA Forest Service, Elkins, WV.

Eastern Ecology Working Group of NatureServe. No date. International Ecological Classification Standard: International Vegetation 

Classification. Terrestrial Vegetation. NatureServe, Boston, MA.

Edens, D. L. 1973. The ecology and succession of Cranberry Glades, WV. Ph.D. dissertation, North Carolina State University, 

Raleigh.

Edinger, G. J., D. J. Evans, S. Gebauer, T. G. Howard, D. M. Hunt, and A. M. Olivero, editors. 2002. Ecological communities of New 

York state. Second edition. A revised and expanded edition of Carol Reschke's ecological communities of New York state. 

(Draft for review). New York Natural Heritage Program, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, 

NY.

Epstein, Eric. Personal communication. Community Ecologist, Wisconsin Natural Heritage Program, Madison, WI.

Farrand, W. R., and D. L. Bell. 1982. Quaternary geology of northern Michigan. University of Michigan, Lansing.

Fike, J. 1999. Terrestrial and palustrine plant communities of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory. Pennsylvania 

Department of Conservation and Recreation. Bureau of Forestry. Harrisburg, PA. 86 pp.

Fortney, R. H. 1975. The vegetation of Canaan Valley, West Virginia: A taxonomic and ecological study. Ph.D. dissertation, 

University of West Virginia, Morgantown.

Fortney, R. H., S. L. Stephenson, and J. S. Rentch. 2005. Rare plant communities of Canaan Valley, West Virginia, USA. 

Unpublished manuscript.

Fortney, R. H., and J. S. Rentch. 2003. Post logging era plant successional trends and geospatial vegetation patterns in Canaan Valley, 

West Virginia, 1945 to 2000. Castanea 68(4):317-334.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-48

Francl, K. E., W. M. Ford, and S. B. Castleberry. 2004. Characterization of high elevation central Appalachian wetlands. Research 

Paper NE-725. USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA. 26 pp.

Frelich, L. E. 1992. The relationship of natural disturbances to white pine stand development. Presented at the White Pine 

Symposium: History, Ecology, Policy and Management, Duluth, Minn., Sept. 16-18, 1992.

Gawler, S. C. 2002. Natural landscapes of Maine: A guide to vegetated natural communities and ecosystems. Maine Natural Areas

Program, Department of Conservation, Augusta, ME.

Gleason, H. A., and A. Cronquist. 1991. Manual of vascular plants of northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. New York

Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY. 910 pp.

Greenall, J. A. 1996. Manitoba's terrestrial plant communities. MS Report 96-02, Manitoba Conservation Data Centre, Winnipeg.

Grigal, D. F., and L. F. Ohmann. 1975. Classification, description, and dynamics of upland plant communities within a Minnesota 

wilderness area. Ecological Monographs 45:389-407.

Hansen, H. L., L. W. Krefting, and V. Kurmis. 1973. The forest of Isle Royale in relation to fire history and wildlife. University of 

Minnesota, Agricultural Experiment Station, Technical Bulletin 294, Forestry Series 13.

Harris, A. G., S. C. McMurray, P. W. C. Uhlig, J. K. Jeglum, R. F. Foster, and G. D. Racey. 1996. Field guide to the wetland 

ecosystem classification for northwestern Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Northwest Science and Technology, 

Thunder Bay, Ontario. Field guide FG-01. 74 pp. plus appendix.

Harrison, J. W., compiler. 2004. Classification of vegetation communities of Maryland: First iteration. A subset of the International 

Classification of Ecological Communities: Terrestrial Vegetation of the United States, NatureServe. Maryland Natural Heritage 

Program, Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Annapolis. 243 pp.

Heinselman, M. 1996. The Boundary Waters Wilderness Ecosystem. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN. 334 pp.

Heinselman, M. L. 1973. Fire in the virgin forests of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area, Minnesota. Journal of Quaternary Research 

3:329-382.

INAI [Iowa Natural Areas Inventory]. No date. Vegetation classification of Iowa. Iowa Natural Areas Inventory, Iowa Department of 

Natural Resources, Des Moines.

Judziewicz, E. J., and R. G. Koch. 1993. Flora and vegetation of the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore and Madeline Island, 

Ashland and Bayfield counties, Wisconsin. Michigan Botanist 32:43-189.

La Roi, G. H. 1967. Ecological studies in the boreal spruce-fir forests of the North American taiga. I. Analysis of the vascular flora. 

Ecological Monographs 37(3):229-253.

MNNHP [Minnesota Natural Heritage Program]. 1993. Minnesota's native vegetation: A key to natural communities. Version 1.5. 

Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Natural Heritage Program, St. Paul, MN. 110 pp.

Martin, N. D. 1959a. An analysis of forest succession in Algonquin Park, Ontario. Ecological Monographs 29(3):187-218.

Maycock, P. F. 1961. The spruce-fir forest of the Keweenaw Peninsula, northern Michigan. Ecology 42(2):357-365.

Maycock, P. F., and J. T. Curtis. 1960. The phytosociology of boreal conifer-hardwood forests of the Great Lakes Region. Ecological 

Monographs 30(1):1-35.

McCarthy, T. G., R. W. Arnup, J. Nieppola, B. G. Merchant, K. C. Taylor, and W. J. Parton. 1994. Field guide to forest ecosystems of 

northeastern Ontario. NEST Field Guide FG-001, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Northeast Science and Technology, 

Timmins, ON.

Midwestern Ecology Working Group of NatureServe. No date. International Ecological Classification Standard: International 

Vegetation Classification. Terrestrial Vegetation. NatureServe, Minneapolis, MN.

Mohlenbrock, R. H., and D. M. Ladd. 1978. Distribution of Illinois vascular plants. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale. 

282 pp.

NAP [Northern Appalachian-Boreal Forest Working Group]. 1998. Northern Appalachian-Boreal Working group discussions. The 

Nature Conservancy, Boston, MA.

NDNHI [North Dakota Natural Heritage Inventory]. No date. Unpublished data. Vegetation classification of North Dakota. North 

Dakota Natural Heritage Inventory, North Dakota Parks & Recreation Department, Bismarck.

NRCS [Natural Resources Conservation Service]. 2004. Soil survey of Saratoga County, New York. USDA Natural Resources 

Conservation Service. 590 pp.

Ohmann, L. F., and P. R. Ream. 1971. Wilderness ecology: Virgin plant communities of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area. Research

Paper NC-63. USDA Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul, MN. 35 pp.

Ownbey, G. B., and T. Morley. 1991. Vascular plants of Minnesota: A checklist and atlas. University of Minnesota Press, 

Minneapolis.

Rawinski, T. 1984. Natural community description abstract - southern New England calcareous seepage swamp. Unpublished report. 

The Nature Conservancy, Boston, MA. 6 pp.

Rentch, J. S. 2003. Alnus incana shrubland, unpublished plot data. West Virginia University, Morgantown.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix B: Descriptions of Vegetation Types

Printed from Biotics on: 11 Nov 2009 Subset: Grand Portage National Monument © 2009 NatureServe

B-49

Reschke, Carol. Personal communication. Ecologist, New York Natural Heritage Program. New York State Department of 

Environmental Conservation, Latham, NY.

Robinette, S. L. 1966. Major plant communities of Cranesville Swamp, West Virginia. Arboretum Newsletter 16(1): 1-7.

Sims, R. A., W. D. Towill, K. A. Baldwin, and G. M. Wickware. 1989. Field guide to the forest ecosystem classification for 

northwestern Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources.

Sperduto, D. D. 2000a. Natural communities of New Hampshire: A guide and classification. Near final unformatted draft without

pictures and illustrations; includes upland classification. New Hampshire Natural Heritage Inventory, DRED Division of Forests 

and Lands, Concord, NH. 127 pp.

Sperduto, D. D. 2000b. A classification of wetland natural communities in New Hampshire. New Hampshire Natural Heritage 

Inventory, Department of Resources and Economic Development, Division of Forests and Lands. Concord, NH. 156 pp.

Swain, P. C., and J. B. Kearsley. 2001. Classification of natural communities of Massachusetts. September 2001 draft. Natural

Heritage and Endangered Species Program, Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife. Westborough, MA.

Thompson, E. 1996. Natural communities of Vermont uplands and wetland. Nongame and Natural Heritage Program, Department of 

Fish and Wildlife in cooperation with The Nature Conservancy, Vermont chapter. 34 pp.

Thompson, E. H., and E. R. Sorenson. 2000. Wetland, woodland, wildland: A guide to the natural communities of Vermont. The 

Nature Conservancy and the Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife. University Press of New England, Hanover, NH. 456 pp.

Voss, E. G. 1972. Michigan flora: A guide to the identification and occurrence of the native and naturalized seed-plants of the state. 

Part I. Gymnosperms and Monocots. Cranbrook Institute of Science. 488 pp.

WNHIP [Wisconsin Natural Heritage Inventory Program]. No date. Vegetation classification of Wisconsin and published data. 

Wisconsin Natural Heritage Program, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison.

Walbridge, M. R. 1982. Vegetation patterning and community distribution in four high-elevation headwater wetlands in West 

Virginia. M.S. thesis, West Virginia University, Morgantown.

Walbridge, M. R., and G. E. Lang. 1982. Major plant communities and patterns of community distribution in four wetlands of the 

unglaciated Appalachian region. In: R. B. MacDonald, editor. Proceedings of the Symposium on Wetlands of the Unglaciated 

Appalachian Region. West Virginia University, Morgantown.

Wovcha, D. S., B. C. Delaney, and G. Nordquist. 1995. Minnesota's St. Croix Valley and Anoka Sandplain: A guide to native habitats. 

University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. 234 pp.

Zoladeski, C. A., G. M. Wickware, R. J. Delorme, R. A. Sims, and I. G. W. Corns. 1995. Forest ecosystem classification for 

Manitoba: Field guide. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Northwest Region, Northern Forestry Center, 

Edmonton, Alberta. Special Report 2.

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix C: Field Key to Vegetation Types C-1

Appendix C: Field Key to Vegetation Types

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix C: Field Key to Vegetation Types C-3

Explanation and Use of the Key

This is a field key to natural vegetation types of Grand Portage National Monument (GRPO). 

Forest plantations, lawns, gardens, and roadside vegetation are excluded. The vegetation types 

are based on the National Vegetation Classification Standard (NVCS) and were derived from 

field data collected during the GRPO vegetation mapping project. This key depicts vegetation 

types at the association (plant community) level, the lowest level of the NVCS, unless otherwise 

specified. For association types, the common association name is given, followed by the

Community Global Element code in parenthesis. A few associations have an additional name 

listed in brackets, which correlate to map-class phases.

For best results, assessments of vegetation types in the field should be done on an area of ~2000

m2 (i.e., 25 m radius around point) and within a single vegetation type. Given the complexity and 

variability of vegetation, no key is infallible. Appendix B: Descriptions to Vegetation Types is 

recommended to complement this key to ascertain correct assessment of types.

Key Terms

The term dominance means a species has greater than 25% cover. Strongly dominant means 

greater than 60% cover. When the term “total canopy cover” is used, it is in reference to the 

absolute canopy cover. All other cover values refer to relative canopy cover, e.g., if total cover of 

the tree canopy is 40%, than a notation of >25% cover of jack pine refers to 25% of the 40% 

total cover.

Cover: This is the percent of the ground covered by an outline of the species foliage, when 

viewed from above or below. For trees and tall shrubs, percent cover is estimated by viewing the 

outline of the canopy of each crown from below. For short shrubs, herbs, and non-vascular 

plants, percent cover is estimated by viewing the foliage from above. Cover classes are used 

(e.g., 5–15%), since an exact measure is not needed to classify the vegetation. There are some 

important breakpoints for cover that require greater care:

• >25% cover–Essentially, this translates to more than a quarter of the plot or area being 

estimated. Species are considered dominant if they exceed 25% cover. A particular 

stratum (e.g., tree canopy, tall shrub, herbaceous) is considered dominant if it exceeds 

25% cover.

• >5% cover–Five percent is the minimum value used to define “important” species in the 

stand. Thus a species may be considered important to a type if it typically exceeds 5% 

cover.

• Canopy Cover–In the key for Forests and Woodlands, the term “canopy” is used as short 

hand for both canopy and subcanopy trees, that is, the “canopy” includes percent cover of 

all trees >5 m).

Relative Cover: This is the percent cover of a particular species relative to the total cover of all 

species in that strata. For example, if species A has 25% cover, and species B has 15% cover, 

then the relative cover of species A=63%, and the relative cover of Species B=37%.

Constant species: These are species that are typically found in a stand (e.g., at least 60% of all

stands contain the species). They may or may not be dominant or important.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix C: Field Key to Vegetation Types C-4

Stratum (strata): A combination of growth forms (or life form) and height. For example the tall 

shrub stratum is comprised of shrubs (perennial, multi-stemmed woody plants) that typically 

attain >2 m in height. Strata used in this key include:

• Tree stratum–Dominated by single-stemmed woody plants that exceed 5 m in height. 

Includes all tree layers (emergent, main, and subcanopy).

• Tall shrub stratum–Dominated by multi-stemmed woody plants that exceed 2 m in 

height (e.g., have fairly sturdy stems). Includes tree saplings between 2–5 m.

• Short shrub stratum–Dominated by short (<2 m) multi-stemmed woody plants that often 

lack sturdy stems, or have many small, thin stems, or have creeping stems. Dwarf-shrubs 

are included, as are tree seedlings (tree stems <2 m).

• Herb stratum–Dominated by non-woody plants, including graminoids (e.g., grasses), 

forbs (wildflowers), and ferns.

• Non-vascular stratum–Dominated by mosses, lichen, liverworts and macro-algae.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix C: Field Key to Vegetation Types C-5

GENERAL KEY

1. FOREST & WOODLAND. Total canopy cover of trees typically >25%. This is an initial 

starting point. Also consider shrub and herb strata. If the canopy is between 10 and 25%, 

but typical forest or woodland herbs are common in those strata, and tree regeneration is 

strong, the site may still qualify as a forest or woodland. This situation may happen on 

sites where tree canopy cover has been reduced by recent disturbances such as timber 

harvesting, windstorms, or fire.

A. UPLAND FOREST & WOODLAND. Sites very rarely have standing water and/or 

peat (organic) soil. Soils are typically saturated only briefly in the spring or following 

heavy rains, though some sites may show some saturation into the growing season.

B. WETLAND FOREST & WOODLAND. Sites often have standing water and/or peat 

or muck (organic) soil. Soils are typically saturated well into or throughout the 

growing season or following heavy rains, or may flood annually by streams, rivers, or 

lakes for more than a week.

1’. SHRUBLAND, GRASSLAND, or NON-VASCULAR VEGETATION. Tree canopy 

cover typically <25%, and some combination of shrub, herb, or non-vascular vegetation 

are dominant. This is a first starting point. If canopy is between 10 and 25%, typical 

forest or woodland herbs are common, and tree regeneration is strong, the site may still 

qualify as a forest or woodland. This situation may happen on sites where tree canopy 

cover has been reduced by recent disturbances such as timber harvesting, windstorms, or 

fire.

C. UPLAND SHRUBLAND, GRASSLAND, or NON-VASCULAR VEGETATION.

Sites very rarely have standing water and/or peat (organic) soil. Soils are typically 

saturated only briefly in the spring or following heavy rains, though some sites may 

show some saturation into the growing season.

D. WETLAND SHRUBLAND, GRASSLAND, or NON-VASCULAR VEGETATION. 

Sites often have standing water and/or peat or muck (organic) soil. Soils are typically 

saturated well into or throughout the growing season or following heavy rains, or may 

flood annually by streams, rivers, or lakes for more than a week.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix C: Field Key to Vegetation Types C-6

A. UPLAND FOREST & WOODLAND

Total canopy cover of trees >25% (or if <25%, dominated by forest and woodland shrubs and 

herbs, and tree regeneration in seedling and sapling layers exceeds 25%. Canopy dominated 

by one or more of the following conifers or hardwoods: pine (Pinus spp.), spruce (Picea 

spp.), paper birch (Betula papyrifera), trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides). If dominated 

by trembling aspen, then combined percent cover of balsam poplar (Populus balsamifera), 

cedar (Thuja occidentalis), or black ash (Fraxinus nigra) in canopy is <10% cover, and alder 

is uncommon in the shrub layer.

1. Relative cover (RC) of conifers in canopy >25%. Canopy may be dominated by conifer 

trees or be a mixture of conifers and hardwoods.

2. Canopy contains >25% RC pine species (Pinus spp.), and RC of pine species 

exceeds that of spruce, fir or cedar.

3. Jack pine (Pinus banksiana) >25% RC, or, if multiple pine species are present

Pinus banksiana is the most common pine.

4. Woodland. Total tree canopy cover <60% and canopy closure prevented by 

the presence of exposed bedrock or large rocks. Lichen and grasses common. 

Known from occurrences along the trail near Highway 61.

Boreal Pine Rocky Woodland (CEGL02483, jack pine variant)

4’. Forest. Total tree canopy cover >60%. Or, if <60%, then canopy closure 

not prevented by the presence of exposed bedrock.

5. Jack Pine forms a mostly closed canopy, with some balsam fir, or 

occasionally with aspen (which may exceed 25% RC of canopy.

Groundlayer dominated by bush honeysuckle, along with occasional drymesic species (blueberries, kinnikinick) but more mesic (moist) species 

such as mountain maple or dwarf raspberry are absent. Some blueberries 

may be present. At GRPO, found only on Mount Rose.

Jack Pine / Balsam Fir Forest (CEGL002437)

5’. Jack Pine forms an open to closed canopy, often with trembling aspen 

or birch. Ground layer contains many mesic species, such as mountain 

maple or dwarf raspberry, along with bush honeysuckle, but dry-mesic 

species, such as blueberries and kinnikinick absent. Known from a single 

occurrence on the trail, west of Cowboy Road.

Jack Pine - Aspen / Bush Honeysuckle Forest (CEGL2518)

3’. Pinus strobus, sometimes in combination with Pinus resinosa, >25% RC, and 

these together exceed the cover of Pinus banksiana. Hardwoods may be absent or 

up to 75% RC.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix C: Field Key to Vegetation Types C-7

6. Woodland. Total tree canopy cover <60% and canopy closure prevented by 

the presence of exposed bedrock or large rocks. Lichen and grasses common.

Pinus strobus and Pinus resinosa common, Picea spp. uncommon. Known 

from occurrences along the trail near Highway 61.

Boreal Pine Rocky Woodland (CEGL02483, mixed pine variant)

6’. Forest. Total tree canopy cover >60%. Or, if <60%, then canopy closure 

not prevented by the presence of exposed bedrock.

7. Shrub and herb layers mostly continuous (>50% cover) and dominated 

by mesic species, such as mountain maple or dwarf raspberry. Exposed 

rocks uncommon or absent.

White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (CEGL02445)

[conifer mesic phase or conifer - hardwood mesic phase]

7.’ Shrub and herb layers often discontinuous (10–50% cover) and 

containing some dry-mesic species, such as blueberries. Exposed bedrock 

may be common. Known from a single site at Ft Charlotte.

White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (CEGL02445)

[dry-mesic phase]

2’. Canopy contains >25% RC white or black spruce (Picea glauca, Picea mariana), 

balsam fir (Abies balsamea) and/or cedar (Thuja occidentalis) species, and percent of 

these species exceeds that of pine species.

8. Picea glauca or Abies balsamea >25% RC, either as pure conifer stands or a 

mixture of those species with Populus spp. and/or Betula papyrifera, and Picea 

glauca and Abies balsamea together more abundance than cedar.

9. Canopy dominated solely by Picea glauca (P. mariana may be present). 

Sites range from moist to wet near beaver ponds, with alder and Canada 

bluejoint common, or to somewhat dry-mesic, as on Mt Rose.

Spruce - Fir / Mountain Maple Forest (CEGL02446])

9.’ Canopy a mixture of Picea glauca, Abies balsamea, and Populus spp. 

and/or Betula papyrifera, with at least 25% RC of the hardwoods. Picea 

mariana may be present.

Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest (CEGL02475)

8’. Thuja occidentalis >25% RC, either as pure conifer or or a mixture of Thuja 

occidentalis with Populus spp. and/or Betula spp, and proportion of cedar greater 

than spruce or fir.

White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest (CEGL002449)

[conifer phase or conifer - hardwood phase]
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix C: Field Key to Vegetation Types C-8

1.’ Canopy dominated by deciduous trees Populus spp. and/or Betula papyrifera. Percent 

cover of evergreen trees in canopy <25% RC. Tree and groundlayer lacks wet-mesic or 

wet species. Note, if Populus balsamifera and or Fraxinus nigra are >10% RC of tree 

layer, then consider wetland forest key.

Aspen - Birch / Boreal Conifer Forest (CEGL02466)

B. WETLAND FOREST & WOODLAND

Poorly drained soils, with canopy >25% cover. Species with >25% RC include Populus 

balsamifera, Fraxinus nigra, or Thuja occidentalis. Or, if dominated by Populus tremuloides,

then Populus balsamifera, Thuja occidentalis, or Fraxinus nigra have >10% RC in either the 

canopy or sapling layer, and alder typically common in the shrub layer.

1. Canopy dominated by deciduous species (>75% RC). Thuja occidentalis absent or, if 

present, <25% RC.

2. Canopy with >25% RC of Fraxinus nigra.

3. Canopy does not contain Fraxinus pensylvanica and/or American elm at >10% 

RC.

Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp (CEGL02105)

[black ash phase]

3.’ Canopy contains Fraxinus pensylvanica and/or American elm at >10% RC.

Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp (CEGL02105)

[green ash - elm phase]

2’. Populus tremuloides and/or P. balsamifera dominate (>25%). Alder is common in 

the shrub layer. Fraxinus nigra with less than 25% RC.

Trembling Aspen - Balsam Poplar Lowland Forest (CEGL05036)

1.’ Canopy dominated (>25% RC) by conifer species. Thuja occidentalis >25% RC and

Fraxinus nigra <25% RC. No sites larger than 0.25 ha are known to fit a white cedar wet 

or swamp forest, but small inclusions may occur near the boundary of GRPO. See also 

[CEGL02449] White Cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest, which occasionally occupies 

wettish sites.

C. UPLAND SHRUBLAND, GRASSLAND, or NON-VASCULAR VEGETATION

N.B. Some open pine woodlands with 25- 60% total tree cover may key out to this part, if 

area of assessment is very small. These should be treated with Upland Forest and Woodland.

1. Sparsely vegetated (<25% total vascular plant vegetation cover), but overhanging trees 

can shade the site.

2. Substrate cobble or talus below or associated with cliffs, not lake or river 

shorelines.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix C: Field Key to Vegetation Types C-9

3. Talus is moist, with very large boulders (>12 inches diameter) with mosses, 

ferns, and scattered herbs, shrubs, and short trees. Found on Mt Rose on northerly 

aspects.

Northern Non-Carbonate Moist Talus Vegetation (CEGL002409)

3’. Talus is dry, with smaller rocks (<12 inches), with little to no vegetation, and 

lichens common. Found on Mt Rose, on southerly aspects.

Northern Non-Carbonate Dry Talus Vegetation (CEGL005247)

2’. Cobble - gravel shore.

Great Lakes Basalt - Diabase Cobble - Gravel Shore (CEGL05250)

1.’ Shrub and herb cover >25%, and tree canopy cover <25%. Sites on thin, sometimes 

rocky, soil; if on talus slope, see 2 above.

Boreal Hazelnut - Serviceberry Rocky Shrubland (CEGL05197)

D. WETLAND SHRUBLAND, GRASSLAND, or NON-VASCULAR VEGETATION

Presence of standing water, saturated mineral soil or peat (organic) soil. Herb or shrub 

dominated.

1. Not permanently flooded. Or, if permanently flooded, then standing water ≤ 0.5 meters 

deep, and rooted aquatics <25% total cover.

2. Shrubs dominant (>25% total cover of shrubs), alder typically present.

3. Dominant shrub Alnus incana, typically >75% RC.

Speckled Alder Swamp (CEGL02381)

[classic alder phase]

3.’ Dominant shrub either Crateagus spp. or tall willows (up to 75% RC).

4. Dominated by Crataegus spp (>25% RC). Found near the Heritage Center.

Speckled Alder Swamp (CEGL02381)

[hawthorn mix phase]

4.’ Dominated by tall (>2 m) Salix spp. (>25% RC) Found near the Heritage

Center.

Speckled Alder Swamp (CEGL02381)

[willow mix phase]

2.’ Graminoid or herb strongly dominant (>60% total herb cover), and shrub total 

cover <25%.

5. Community strongly dominated by Calamagrostis Canadensis, Carex spp, or

Phalaris arundinacea.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix C: Field Key to Vegetation Types C-10

6. RC of Carex spp. <50%.

7.’ Community dominated by Calamagrostis canadensis or Phalaris 

arundinacea.

Canada Bluejoint Eastern Meadow (CEGL05174)

6.’ Carex spp. 50% RC or greater.

Northern Sedge Wet Meadow (CEGL02257)

5.’ No clear dominant emergent, graminoid or herbaceous species. Obvious 

indication of beaver or anthropogenic disturbance. Typically consists of early 

successional grass and forb beaver meadows found near Ft. Charlotte, but not 

described to the association level.

Wet Meadow Mixed Herbaceous (Map Class; Macrogroup G112)

1.’ Permanently flooded. Standing water ≥0.5 m deep (rarely less than 0.5 m) and rooted 

aquatics dominant (>25% total cover), and emergents not dominant (<25% total cover).

8. Dominated (>50% RC) by emergent aquatics.

9.’ Community strongly dominated by Equisetum fluviatile or Sparganium spp.

Water Horsetail - Spikerush Marsh (CEGL05258)

8’. Dominated (>50% RC) by rooted floating leaved aquatics (Nymphaea odorata, 

Nuphar lutea), or rooted submergent-leaved aquatics (Ceratophyllum demersum, 

Potamogeton spp., Myriophyllum spp.) vegetation.

10. Dominated (>50% RC) by rooted floating-leaved aquatics such as 

Nymphaea odorata and Nuphar lutea with little to no rooted submergentleaved aquatic vegetation (<50% RC).

Northern Water-lily Aquatic Wetland (CEGL002562)

10.’ Dominated (>50% cover) by rooted submergent-leaved vegetation 

(Ceratophyllum demersum, Potamogeton spp., Myriophyllum spp.) with little 

to no rooted floating-leaved aquatic species present.

Midwest Pondweed Submerged Aquatic Wetland (CEGL002282)

8.’’ No clear dominant emergent, graminoid or herbaceous species. Obvious 

indication of beaver or anthropogenic disturbance. Typically consists of early 

successional grass and forb beaver meadows found near Ft. Charlotte, but not 

described to the association level.

Wet Meadow Mixed Herbaceous (Map Class; Macrogroup G112)
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix D: List of Plant Species D-1

Appendix D: List of Plant Species

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix D: List of Plant Species D-3

Explanation of the Species List

Plant species were identified and documented from vegetation sample plots and accuracy 

assessment sites collected for the Grand Portage National Monument (GRPO) vegetation 

mapping project. Plant species, along with other sample data, were entered into the National Park 

Service PLOTS Database Version 2 (NatureServe 2005b) for subsequent analyses (plant 

community descriptions and map assessment). Table D-1 is an export of all plant species 

generated from the PLOTS Database for this project. This list is not intended to be 

comprehensive of every species at the GRPO. The plant species list is organized alphabetically,

first by family name and then by scientific name. Nomenclature follows the PLANTS database 

(U.S. Department of Agriculture 2004).

Table D-1. Plant species list of Grand Portage National Monument.

Scientific Name Common Name Family

Acer saccharum sugar maple Aceraceae

Acer spicatum mountain maple Aceraceae

Acorus calamus single-vein sweetflag Acoraceae

Sagittaria arrowhead Alismataceae

Sagittaria latifolia broadleaf arrowhead Alismataceae

Sagittaria rigida sessilefruit arrowhead Alismataceae

Calliergon calliergon moss Amblystegiaceae

Rhus glabra smooth sumac Anacardiaceae

Cicuta bulbifera bulblet-bearing water hemlock Apiaceae

Heracleum maximum common cowparsnip Apiaceae

Sanicula marilandica Maryland sanicle Apiaceae

Apocynum dogbane Apocynaceae

Apocynum androsaemifolium spreading dogbane Apocynaceae

Calla palustris water arum Araceae

Aralia nudicaulis wild sarsaparilla Araliaceae

Asarum canadense Canadian wildginger Aristolochiaceae

Achillea millefolium common yarrow Asteraceae

Antennaria neglecta field pussytoes Asteraceae

Aster aster Asteraceae

Bidens cernua nodding beggartick Asteraceae

Cirsium thistle Asteraceae

Cirsium muticum swamp thistle Asteraceae

Doellingeria umbellata parasol whitetop Asteraceae

Eupatorium maculatum spotted joepyeweed Asteraceae

Eurybia macrophylla bigleaf aster Asteraceae

Hieracium hawkweed Asteraceae

Lactuca biennis tall blue lettuce Asteraceae

Leucanthemum vulgare oxeye daisy Asteraceae

Megalodonta beckii Beck's watermarigold Asteraceae

Petasites frigidus arctic sweet coltsfoot Asteraceae

Petasites frigidus var. palmatus arctic sweet coltsfoot Asteraceae

Petasites sagittatus arrowleaf sweet coltsfoot Asteraceae

Prenanthes alba white rattlesnakeroot Asteraceae

Solidago goldenrod Asteraceae

Solidago canadensis Canada goldenrod Asteraceae
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix D: List of Plant Species D-4

Scientific Name Common Name Family

Solidago gigantea giant goldenrod Asteraceae

Solidago juncea early goldenrod Asteraceae

Solidago nemoralis gray goldenrod Asteraceae

Symphyotrichum ciliolatum Lindley's aster Asteraceae

Symphyotrichum cordifolium common blue wood aster Asteraceae

Symphyotrichum puniceum purplestem aster Asteraceae

Impatiens touch-me-not Balsaminaceae

Impatiens capensis jewelweed Balsaminaceae

Alnus alder Betulaceae

Alnus incana gray alder Betulaceae

Alnus incana ssp. rugosa speckled alder Betulaceae

Alnus viridis green alder Betulaceae

Betula birch Betulaceae

Betula papyrifera paper birch Betulaceae

Corylus cornuta beaked hazelnut Betulaceae

Mertensia paniculata tall bluebells Boraginaceae

Brachythecium brachythecium moss Brachytheciaceae

Diervilla lonicera northern bush honeysuckle Caprifoliaceae

Linnaea borealis twinflower Caprifoliaceae

Lonicera canadensis American fly honeysuckle Caprifoliaceae

Lonicera hirsuta hairy honeysuckle Caprifoliaceae

Lonicera hispidula pink honeysuckle Caprifoliaceae

Sambucus canadensis elderberry Caprifoliaceae

Sambucus racemosa red elderberry Caprifoliaceae

Symphoricarpos snowberry Caprifoliaceae

Viburnum opulus European cranberrybush Caprifoliaceae

Viburnum opulus var. americanum American cranberrybush Caprifoliaceae

Cladina reindeer lichen Cladoniaceae

Triadenum fraseri Fraser's marsh St. Johnswort Clusiaceae

Cornus dogwood Cornaceae

Cornus canadensis bunchberry dogwood Cornaceae

Cornus rugosa roundleaf dogwood Cornaceae

Cornus sericea redosier dogwood Cornaceae

Sedum stonecrop Crassulaceae

Juniperus communis common juniper Cupressaceae

Juniperus horizontalis creeping juniper Cupressaceae

Thuja occidentalis arborvitae Cupressaceae

Carex sedge Cyperaceae

Carex gracillima graceful sedge Cyperaceae

Carex gynandra nodding sedge Cyperaceae

Carex intumescens greater bladder sedge Cyperaceae

Carex lacustris hairy sedge Cyperaceae

Carex laxiculmis spreading sedge Cyperaceae

Carex pedunculata longstalk sedge Cyperaceae

Carex retrorsa knotsheath sedge Cyperaceae

Carex stricta upright sedge Cyperaceae

Carex vesicaria blister sedge Cyperaceae

Eleocharis spikerush Cyperaceae
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix D: List of Plant Species D-5

Scientific Name Common Name Family

Scirpus cyperinus woolgrass Cyperaceae

Pteridium aquilinum western brackenfern Dennstaedtiaceae

Dicranum dicranum moss Dicranaceae

Athyrium filix-femina common ladyfern Dryopteridaceae

Cystopteris fragilis brittle bladderfern Dryopteridaceae

Dryopteris carthusiana spinulose woodfern Dryopteridaceae

Dryopteris intermedia intermediate woodfern Dryopteridaceae

Gymnocarpium dryopteris western oakfern Dryopteridaceae

Matteuccia struthiopteris ostrich fern Dryopteridaceae

Onoclea sensibilis sensitive fern Dryopteridaceae

Woodsia ilvensis rusty woodsia Dryopteridaceae

Equisetum arvense field horsetail Equisetaceae

Equisetum fluviatile water horsetail Equisetaceae

Equisetum sylvaticum woodland horsetail Equisetaceae

Arctostaphylos uva-ursi kinnikinnick Ericaceae

Vaccinium angustifolium lowbush blueberry Ericaceae

Vaccinium myrtilloides velvetleaf huckleberry Ericaceae

Lathyrus ochroleucus cream pea Fabaceae

Lotus corniculatus birdfoot deervetch Fabaceae

Melilotus alba white sweetclover Fabaceae

Trifolium pratense red clover Fabaceae

Ribes currant Grossulariaceae

Hylocomium splendens splendid feather moss Hylocomiaceae

Pleurozium schreberi Schreber's big red stem moss Hylocomiaceae

Rhytidiadelphus triquetrus rough goose neck moss Hylocomiaceae

Iris versicolor harlequin blueflag Iridaceae

Lycopus uniflorus northern bugleweed Lamiaceae

Mentha arvensis wild mint Lamiaceae

Scutellaria lateriflora blue skullcap Lamiaceae

Stachys tenuifolia smooth hedgenettle Lamiaceae

Utricularia intermedia flatleaf bladderwort Lentibulariaceae

Utricularia macrorhiza common bladderwort Lentibulariaceae

Clintonia borealis bluebead Liliaceae

Maianthemum canadense Canada mayflower Liliaceae

Streptopus lanceolatus twistedstalk Liliaceae

Streptopus lanceolatus var. roseus twistedstalk Liliaceae

Trillium cernuum whip-poor-will flower Liliaceae

Lycopodium clubmoss Lycopodiaceae

Lycopodium annotinum stiff clubmoss Lycopodiaceae

Lycopodium clavatum running clubmoss Lycopodiaceae

Lycopodium obscurum rare clubmoss Lycopodiaceae

Fraxinus nigra black ash Oleaceae

Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Oleaceae

Chamerion angustifolium fireweed Onagraceae

Epilobium willowherb Onagraceae

Epilobium ciliatum fringed willowherb Onagraceae

Oenothera biennis common evening-primrose Onagraceae

Corallorrhiza maculata summer coralroot Orchidaceae
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix D: List of Plant Species D-6

Scientific Name Common Name Family

Osmunda claytoniana interrupted fern Osmundaceae

Abies balsamea balsam fir Pinaceae

Picea glauca white spruce Pinaceae

Picea mariana black spruce Pinaceae

Pinus banksiana jack pine Pinaceae

Pinus resinosa red pine Pinaceae

Pinus strobus eastern white pine Pinaceae

Agropyron wheatgrass Poaceae

Bromus inermis smooth brome Poaceae

Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint Poaceae

Cinna latifolia drooping woodreed Poaceae

Danthonia spicata poverty oatgrass Poaceae

Deschampsia caespitosa tufted hairgrass Poaceae

Deschampsia flexuosa wavy hairgrass Poaceae

Elymus wildrye Poaceae

Elymus canadensis Canada wildrye Poaceae

Glyceria canadensis rattlesnake mannagrass Poaceae

Glyceria striata fowl mannagrass Poaceae

Oryzopsis ricegrass Poaceae

Oryzopsis asperifolia roughleaf ricegrass Poaceae

Phalaris arundinacea reed canarygrass Poaceae

Phleum pratense timothy Poaceae

Poa compressa Canada bluegrass Poaceae

Poa pratensis Kentucky bluegrass Poaceae

Polypodium polypody Polypodiaceae

Polypodium virginianum rock polypody Polypodiaceae

Polytrichum polytrichum moss Polytrichaceae

Lysimachia yellow loosestrife Primulaceae

Lysimachia terrestris earth loosestrife Primulaceae

Trientalis borealis starflower Primulaceae

Chimaphila umbellata pipsissewa Pyrolaceae

Orthilia secunda sidebells wintergreen Pyrolaceae

Pyrola wintergreen Pyrolaceae

Pyrola americana American wintergreen Pyrolaceae

Pyrola elliptica waxflower shinleaf Pyrolaceae

Actaea baneberry Ranunculaceae

Actaea pachypoda white baneberry Ranunculaceae

Actaea rubra red baneberry Ranunculaceae

Anemone canadensis Canadian anemone Ranunculaceae

Aquilegia columbine Ranunculaceae

Caltha palustris yellow marsh marigold Ranunculaceae

Coptis trifolia threeleaf goldthread Ranunculaceae

Thalictrum meadow-rue Ranunculaceae

Thalictrum dasycarpum purple meadow-rue Ranunculaceae

Thalictrum pubescens king of the meadow Ranunculaceae

Rhamnus alnifolia alderleaf buckthorn Rhamnaceae

Amelanchier serviceberry Rosaceae

Comarum palustre purple marshlocks Rosaceae
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix D: List of Plant Species D-7

Scientific Name Common Name Family

Crataegus hawthorn Rosaceae

Crataegus douglasii black hawthorn Rosaceae

Fragaria virginiana Virginia strawberry Rosaceae

Geum avens Rosaceae

Potentilla norvegica Norwegian cinquefoil Rosaceae

Prunus pensylvanica pin cherry Rosaceae

Prunus virginiana chokecherry Rosaceae

Rosa rose Rosaceae

Rosa acicularis prickly rose Rosaceae

Rubus blackberry Rosaceae

Rubus allegheniensis Allegheny blackberry Rosaceae

Rubus idaeus American red raspberry Rosaceae

Rubus parviflorus thimbleberry Rosaceae

Rubus pubescens dwarf red blackberry Rosaceae

Sibbaldiopsis tridentata shrubby fivefingers Rosaceae

Sorbus decora northern mountain ash Rosaceae

Spiraea alba white meadowsweet Rosaceae

Galium bedstraw Rubiaceae

Populus balsamifera balsam poplar Salicaceae

Populus tremuloides quaking aspen Salicaceae

Salix willow Salicaceae

Salix bebbiana Bebb willow Salicaceae

Salix humilis prairie willow Salicaceae

Salix planifolia diamondleaf willow Salicaceae

Mitella nuda naked miterwort Saxifragaceae

Saxifraga virginiensis early saxifrage Saxifragaceae

Chelone glabra white turtlehead Scrophulariaceae

Sparganium natans small bur-reed Sparganiaceae

Sphagnum sphagnum Sphagnaceae

Taxus canadensis Canada yew Taxaceae

Phegopteris beechfern Thelypteridaceae

Typha cattail Typhaceae

Ulmus americana American elm Ulmaceae

Viola violet Violaceae

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-1

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-3

Explanation of Map-class Descriptions

This appendix to the Main Report of the Grand Portage National Monument (GRPO) vegetation 

mapping project provides descriptions to the 35 map classes we used to map GRPO for the 

National Park Service (NPS) Vegetation Inventory Program (VIP). Of these 35 map classes, 32 

represent vegetation types within the National Vegetation Classification Standard (NVCS) 

(FGDC 2008), where another three represent non-vegetated units (open water). For those map 

classes representing associations in the NVCS, we recommend using Appendix B: Descriptions 

of Vegetation Types and Appendix C: Field Key to Vegetation Types to complement these mapclass descriptions.

Each map-class description provides the formal map-class name and code we used for mapping. 

Names for map classes representing associations in the NVCS are the synonym names as 

provided by NatureServe. (For map-class phases, the phase portion of the name is not part of the 

synonym name.) For map classes representing vegetation types above the floristic level in the 

NVCS and for non-vegetated features, we derived succinct names to describe the feature.

Commencing each map-class description, we provide the official classification name and code 

that the map class represents, whether to the NVCS or, if non-vegetated, to the classification in 

the National Land Cover Database (NLCD) 2001 (Homer et al. 2004). The map class is 

described with a focus to GRPO and not necessarily to the region beyond.

Also, descriptions are from a mapping perspective more than from an ecologic perspective;

however, some ecologic concepts are inherent to the descriptions, as one would expect when 

describing the mapping of types in the NVCS. We also discuss how map classes relate to other 

map classes, because many vegetation types transition into each other. Furthermore, we discuss 

briefly the distribution of how a particular map class was mapped throughout GRPO. (Several 

local names are used; Figure E-1 is provided to show their locations at the GRPO.) We finally 

provide a brief explanation of how map classes were analyzed by the accuracy assessment.

Throughout the map-class descriptions, “RD” refers to relative density and “AA” refers to 

accuracy assessment. Also, when speaking of tree species (e.g., balsam fir, quaking aspen, 

northern white-cedar), it is assumed these are of heights >5 m unless otherwise specified (e.g., 

shrub-height trees). This includes general references to trees as conifers and hardwoods.

Along with describing the map classes via text, representative ground pictures are also provided 

to give a visual concept of what the map classes represent. It is worth noting that the 

representative pictures are a partial representation; to capture all variations within a map class 

would become daunting.

We organized map classes representing vegetation types by the hierarchy within the NVCS 

(FGDC 2008). We organized map classes representing non-vegetated features (open water) with 

the classification in the NLCD. Map classification codes, names, and their crosswalk to the 

NVCS and NLCD are listed in Table E-1. The map classification is listed alphabetically by mapclass code in Table E-2 at the end of this appendix.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-4

Minimum Mapping Units

Because much of the GRPO boundary is narrow and linear in shape, we applied a minimum 

mapping unit (MMU) of 0.25 ha for mapping vegetation types and land features. This is half the 

size of the normal standard for a MMU within the NPS VIP. For vegetation types unique to the 

immediate surroundings (e.g., emergent wetland within an upland forest setting), we allowed for 

mapping down to half the MMU standard set for the GRPO vegetation mapping project1

Page Reference to Map-classification Descriptions

. In 

addition, we applied a secondary MMU of 1.0 ha for physiognomic-feature changes within a 

particular map class (e.g., open versus closed forest). We used MMU templates to help us 

determine minimum polygon size on the photographs during mapping. Because of angle 

distortions inherent to nonrectified aerial photos, and slight scale changes from high ridges to 

valley bottoms, we applied our MMU standards liberally.

White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest (FCC and FCM) ...................................................... 11

White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest (conifer phase)–FCC ........................................... 12

White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest (conifer - hardwood phase)–FCM ....................... 13

White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (FWM, FWA, and FWD) ....................................... 14

White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (conifer mesic phase)–FWM .............................. 15

White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (conifer - hardwood phase)–FWA...................... 16

White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (dry-mesic phase)–FWD..................................... 17

Conifer - Hardwood Ruderal Forest (FMX)................................................................................. 18

Conifer Plantation (FPE)............................................................................................................... 19

Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp (FBA and FGA).............................................................. 20

Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp (black ash phase)–FBA............................................... 21

Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp (green ash - elm phase)–FGA ..................................... 22

Aspen - Balsam Poplar Lowland Forest (FAP) ............................................................................ 23

Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (SAS, SAH, and SAW) ............................................................... 24

Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (classic alder phase)–SAS........................................................ 25

Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (hawthorn mix phase)–SAH .................................................... 26

Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (willow mix phase)–SAW ....................................................... 27

Jack Pine - Aspen / Bush-honeysuckle Forest (FJM)................................................................... 28

Jack Pine / Balsam Fir Forest (FJF).............................................................................................. 29

Boreal Pine Rocky Woodland (WPR) .......................................................................................... 30

Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest (FCP)................................................................................................ 31

Spruce - Fir / Mountain Maple Forest (FSF) ................................................................................ 34

Aspen - Birch / Boreal Conifer Forest (FAC)............................................................................... 37

Deciduous Ruderal Shrubland (SDX)........................................................................................... 40

 

1

Note that several polygons along the project boundary are smaller than the MMU standards of the VIP 

because the vegetation map layer is clipped to the project boundary. We allowed clipped polygons as 

small as 0.05 ha along the project boundary.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-5

Ruderal Grassland (HMX)............................................................................................................ 41

Boreal Hazelnut - Serviceberry Rocky Shrubland (SHS)............................................................. 42

Water Horsetail - Spikerush Marsh (HHS)................................................................................... 43

Wet Meadow Mixed Herbaceous (HWM).................................................................................... 44

Bluejoint Wet Meadow (HCC)..................................................................................................... 45

Northern Sedge Wet Meadow (HSG)........................................................................................... 46

Northern Water-lily Aquatic Wetland (HFA)............................................................................... 47

Midwest Pondweed Submerged Aquatic Wetland (HSV)............................................................ 48

Great Lakes Basalt - Diabase Cobble - Gravel Shore (VCB)....................................................... 49

Northern Non-Carbonate Dry Talus Vegetation (VDT)............................................................... 50

Northern Non-Carbonate Moist Talus Vegetation (VMT)........................................................... 51

Developed Area (NDV)................................................................................................................ 52

Open Space–21 (O) ................................................................................................................... 52

Low Intensity–22 (L) ................................................................................................................ 53

Medium Intensity–23 (M)......................................................................................................... 53

High Intensity–24 (H) ............................................................................................................... 53

Stream & River (NSR).................................................................................................................. 54

Open Water Pond (NWP) ............................................................................................................. 55

Open Water Lake (NWL) ............................................................................................................. 56
Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes

E-6

Grand PortageNational Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

National Monument

Figure E-1. Local geographic names in connection to the Grand Portage National Monument vegetation mapping project.
Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes

E-7

Grand PortageNational Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

National Monument

Table E-1. Map classification with crosswalk to the National Vegetation Classification Standard (Version 2) for the Grand Portage National Monument

vegetation mapping project.

[NVCS, National Vegetation Classification Standard; NLCD, National Land Cover Database; MMU, minimum mapping unit]

Map-class Code Map-class Name

1. FOREST & WOODLAND CLASS

1.C.2.a. Eastern North American Cool Temperate Forest Division

MG014. Northern Hardwood & Conifer Forest Macrogroup

G163. Northern Hardwood - Hemlock - White Pine Forest Group

Thuja occidentalis / Abies balsamea - Acer spicatum Forest Association (CEGL002449)

FCC White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest (conifer phase)

FCM White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest (conifer - hardwood phase)

G025. White Pine - Red Pine - Jack Pine - Oak Forest & Woodland Group

Pinus strobus / Acer spicatum - Corylus cornuta Forest Association (CEGL002445)

FWM White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (conifer mesic phase)

FWA White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (conifer - hardwood mesic phase)

FWD White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (dry-mesic phase)

MG013. Eastern North American Ruderal Forest & Plantation Macrogroup

G030. Northern & Central Hardwood & Conifer Ruderal Forest Group

FMX Conifer - Hardwood Ruderal Forest

G032. Northern & Central Conifer & Hardwood Plantation Group

FPE Conifer Plantation

1.C.3.a. Northeastern & Central North American Flooded & Swamp Forest Division

MG030. Northern & Central Swamp Forest Macrogroup

G046. Northern & Central Alkaline Conifer & Hardwood Swamp Group

Fraxinus nigra - Mixed Hardwoods - Conifers / Cornus sericea / Carex spp. Forest Association (CEGL002105)

FBA Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp (black ash phase)

FGA Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp (green ash - elm phase)

Populus tremuloides - Populus balsamifera - Mixed Hardwoods Lowland Forest Association (CEGL005036)

FAP Aspen - Balsam Poplar Lowland Forest
Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-8

Grand PortageNational Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

National Monument

Map-class Code Map-class Name

MG160. Northern & Central Tall Shrub Wetland Macrogroup

G167. Northern & Central Shrub Swamp Group

Alnus incana Swamp Shrubland Association (CEGL002381)

SAS Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (classic alder phase)

SAH Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (hawthorn mix phase)

SAW Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (willow mix phase)

1.D.1.a. North American Lowland Boreal Forest Division

MG037. Eastern & Central North American Boreal Conifer & Hardwood Forest Macrogroup

G047. Jack Pine - Black Spruce Forest Group

Pinus banksiana- Populus tremuloides / Diervilla lonicera Forest Association (CEGL002518)

FJM Jack Pine - Aspen / Bush-honeysuckle Forest

Pinus banksiana / Abies balsamea Forest Association (CEGL002437)

FJF Jack Pine / Balsam Fir Forest

G347. Jack Pine - Northern Pin Oak Rocky Woodland Group

Pinus banksiana-(Picea mariana, Pinus strobus) / Vaccinium spp. Rocky Woodland Association (CEGL002483)

WPR Boreal Pine Rocky Woodland

G048. White Spruce - Balsam Fir Forest Group

Picea glauca- Abies balsamea- Populus tremuloides / Mixed Herbs Forest Association (CEGL002475)

FCP Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest

Picea glauca- Abies balsamea / Acer spicatum / Rubus pubescens Forest Association (CEGL002446)

FSF Spruce - Fir / Mountain Maple Forest

Populus tremuloides- Betula papyrifera / (Abies balsamea, Picea glauca) Forest Association (CEGL002466)

FAC Aspen - Birch / Boreal Conifer Forest

2. SHRUBLAND & GRASSLAND CLASS

2.C.1.c. Eastern North American Grassland, Meadow & Shrubland Division

MG123. Eastern Ruderal Shrubland & Grassland Macrogroup

G059. Eastern Ruderal Shrubland & Grassland Group [Placeholder]

SDX Deciduous Ruderal Shrubland

HMX Ruderal Grassland
Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes

E-9

Grand PortageNational Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

National Monument

Map-class Code Map-class Name

2.C.2.a. North American Boreal Grassland, Meadow & Shrubland Division

MG069. North American Boreal Shrubland & Grassland Macrogroup

G339. Eastern North American Boreal Shrubland & Grassland Group

Corylus cornuta - Amelanchier spp. - Prunus virginiana Rocky Shrubland Association (CEGL005197)

SHS Boreal Hazelnut - Serviceberry Rocky Shrubland

2.C.5.a. Eastern North America Freshwater Wet Meadow, Riparian & Marsh Division

MG069. Eastern & North-Central North American Marsh & Wet Meadow Macrogroup

G125. Eastern North American Freshwater Marsh Group

Equisetum fluviatile - (Eleocharis palustris) Herbaceous Vegetation Association (CEGL005258)

HHS Water Horsetail - Spikerush Marsh

G112. Eastern North American Wet Meadow Group

HWM Wet Meadow Mixed Herbaceous

Calamagrostis canadensis - Eupatorium maculatum Herbaceous Vegetation Association (CEGL005174)

HCC Bluejoint Wet Meadow

Carex (rostrata, utriculata) - Carex lacustris - (Carex vesicaria) Herbaceous Vegetation Association (CEGL002257)

HSG Northern Sedge Wet Meadow

5. AQUATIC VEGETATION CLASS

5.B.1.a. North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation Division

MG108. Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation Macrogroup

G114. Eastern North American Freshwater Aquatic Vegetation Group [Placeholder]

Nymphaea odorata - Nuphar (microphylla, variegata) Herbaceous Vegetation Association (CEGL002562)

HFA Northern Water-lily Aquatic Wetland

Potamogeton spp. - Ceratophyllum spp. Midwest Herbaceous Vegetation Association (CEGL002282)

HSV Midwest Pondweed Submerged Aquatic Wetland
Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes

E-10

Grand PortageNational Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

National Monument

Map-class Code Map-class Name

6. NONVASCULAR & SPARSE VASCULAR ROCK VEGETATION CLASS

6.B.2.a. Eastern North American Temperate Cliff, Scree & Rock Vegetation Division

MG111. Eastern North American Cliff & Rock Vegetation Macrogroup

G341. Great Lakes Cliff & Shore Group [Placeholder]

Basalt - Diabase Cobble - Gravel Great Lakes Shore Sparse Vegetation Association (CEGL005250)

VCB Great Lakes Basalt - Diabase Cobble - Gravel Shore

Basalt - Diabase Northern Open Talus Sparse Vegetation Association (CEGL005247)

VDT Northern Non-Carbonate Dry Talus Vegetation

Granite - Metamorphic Talus Northern Sparse Vegetation Association (CEGL002409)

VMT Northern Non-Carbonate Moist Talus Vegetation

8. DEVELOPED VEGETATION CULTURAL CLASS

Herbaceous & Woody Developed Vegetation Cultural Subclass (L2)

Other Developed Urban / Built Up Vegetation Formation (L3)

Developed Area (NLCD 2001; 21-24)

NDV Developed Area

NON-NVCS UNITS

Non-Vegetated Water & Land

Non-Vegetated Water

Open Water (NLCD 2001; 11)

NSR Stream & River

NWP Open Water Pond

NWL Open Water Lake
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-11

White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest (FCC and FCM)

The White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest map class represents the Thuja occidentalis / 

Abies balsamea - Acer spicatum Forest Association (CEGL002449) in the NVCS. This map class 

consists of two phases, including the conifer (FCC) and conifer - hardwood (FCM). The Whitecedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest map class captures mesic to wet-mesic forests wherein the 

RD of northern white-cedar and mixed conifers to hardwoods is >25%. The RD of white-cedar to 

white spruce and balsam fir is >25%. Balsam fir is often a primary component, and some eastern 

white pine can be present, although their RD to conifers should be <25%. Hardwoods typically 

consist of quaking aspen and paper birch, although some balsam poplar and black ash can be 

present in more wet-mesic locations. Eastern white pine can be scattered, but its RD to all 

conifers should be <25%.

When the RD of white pine to conifers was >25%, either the conifer mesic (FWM) phase or the 

conifer - hardwood mesic (FWA) phase of the White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest map 

class was considered, depending on the RD of hardwoods to conifers. Likewise, when the RD of 

white spruce and balsam fir to all conifers was >75%, the Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest (FCP) map 

class was considered. Furthermore, when the RD of conifers to hardwoods was <25%, the Aspen 

- Birch / Boreal Conifer Forest (FAC) map class was considered.

The conifer (FCC) phase captures mesic white-cedar forests wherein the RD of conifers to 

hardwoods is >75%. The conifer - hardwood (FCM) phase captures forests wherein the mutual 

RD of conifers and hardwoods is >25%.

For AA, the two map-class phases (FCC and FCM) were combined because they collectively 

represent one association type. They were left, however, as separate entities in the vegetation 

map layer.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-12

White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest (conifer phase)–FCC

The conifer (FCC) map-class phase represents the White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest 

map class (as described above) when the RD of the conifer component to hardwoods is >75%. 

When the RD of hardwoods to conifers was >25%, the conifer - hardwood (FCM) phase of this 

same map class was considered. A significant amount of balsam fir may be present, but its RD to 

northern white-cedar should be <75%. These forests are often dense, with a shaded understory 

and a lack of diversity in vegetation at the ground layer. The few hardwoods present include

quaking aspen and paper birch, yet may also include balsam poplar and even some black ash 

when in more wet-mesic locations.

Mapping of the FCC map-class phase was uncommon throughout GRPO—mapped with just 

over a dozen units and only at the western half of GRPO. The majority of units were mapped at 

the far western end of the Portage Corridor and at the Fort Charlotte Unit; furthermore, FCC was 

usually mapped in close proximity to FCM.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-13

White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest (conifer - hardwood phase)–FCM

The conifer - hardwood (FCM) map-class phase represents the White-cedar - Boreal Conifer 

Mesic Forest map class (as described above) when the mutual RD of conifers and hardwoods is 

>25%. When the RD of hardwoods to conifers was <25%, the conifer (FCC) phase of this same 

map class was considered. These forests are often less dense and more open than those mapped 

as FCC and, thus, have richer understory vegetation. Hardwood trees consist primarily of 

quaking aspen and paper birch, yet also of balsam poplar and even some black ash when in more 

wet-mesic locations. Because the hardwood canopy is often above the conifers (such that the 

conifers are obscured from an aerial viewpoint), it was essential to refer to spring, leaf-off aerial 

photographs during the mapping of FCM. Using this practice, not merely the RD of conifers to 

hardwoods could be determined, but also the RDs among conifer species (e.g., northern whitecedar RD to balsam fir) in order to identify the correct forest type.

Mapping of the FCM map-class phase was somewhat uncommon throughout GRPO—mapped 

with almost twenty units and only at the western half of GRPO. The majority of units were 

mapped at the far western end of the Portage Corridor and at the Fort Charlotte Unit; 

furthermore, FCM was often mapped in close proximity to FCC (yet was mapped independently 

as well).

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-14

White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (FWM, FWA, and FWD)

The White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest map class represents the Pinus strobus / Acer 

spicatum - Corylus cornuta Forest Association (CEGL002445) in the NVCS. This map class 

consists of three phases, including conifer mesic (FWM), conifer - hardwood mesic (FWA), and 

dry-mesic (FWD). The White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest map class captures mesic 

forests of eastern white pine wherein the RD of white pine to other conifers is >25% and the RD 

of hardwoods to conifers is <25%. Balsam fir and a significant tall-shrub layer are characteristic

of the White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest, where northern white-cedar is a common 

component throughout the western third of GRPO. Red pine is often present, but often only a 

scattered few.

When the RD of white pine to all other trees was <25%, other map classes were considered 

(depending on RDs of conifer and hardwood components), including the conifer (FCC) and 

conifer - hardwood (FCM) phases of the White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest, the Spruce -

Fir - Aspen Forest (FCP), and the Aspen - Birch / Boreal Conifer Forest (FAC).

The conifer mesic (FWM) phase captures mesic forests wherein the RD of conifers to hardwoods

is >75%. The conifer - hardwood mesic (FWA) phase captures mesic forests wherein the mutual 

RD of conifers and hardwoods is >25%. The dry-mesic (FWD) phase captures the dry-mesic 

forests.

For AA, the three map-class phases (FWM, FWA, and FWD) were combined because they 

collectively represent one association type. They were left, however, as separate entities in the 

vegetation map layer.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-15

White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (conifer mesic phase)–FWM

The conifer mesic (FWM) map-class phase of the White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest

map class (as described above) represents mesic forests wherein the RD of conifers to hardwoods

is >75%. The few hardwoods present mostly include quaking aspen and paper birch. When the 

RD of hardwoods to conifers was >25%, the conifer - hardwood (FWA) phase of this same map 

class was considered. When the forest was in dry-mesic settings, the dry-mesic (FWD) phase of 

this same map class was considered.

Mapping of the FWM map-class phase was uncommon throughout GRPO, mapped with a half 

dozen units that were scattered throughout the Portage Corridor. The mapping of FWM was less 

extensive than of FWA, and it was often mapped in close proximity to FWA. It is noteworthy

that the sole unit of FWD, which was mapped near the Site of Fort Charlotte within the Fort 

Charlotte Unit, is more than 800 m in distance from any mapped units of FWM or FWA.

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-16

White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (conifer - hardwood phase)–FWA

The conifer - hardwood mesic (FWA) map-class phase of the White Pine / Mountain Maple 

Mesic Forest map class (as described above) represents mesic forests wherein the mutual RD of

conifers and hardwoods is >25%. Hardwoods mostly include quaking aspen and paper birch. 

When the RD of hardwoods to conifers was <25% RD, the conifer mesic (FWM) phase of this 

same map class was considered. When the forest was in dry-mesic settings, the dry-mesic (FWD) 

phase of this same map class was considered.

Mapping of the FWA map-class phase was uncommon throughout GRPO—mapped with almost 

twenty units that were scattered throughout the Portage Corridor. Mapping of FWA was more 

extensive than of FWM, and FWA was often mapped in close proximity to FWM (yet it was 

mapped independently as well). It is noteworthy that the sole unit of FWD, which was mapped 

near the Site of Fort Charlotte within the Fort Charlotte Unit, is more than 800 m in distance 

from any mapped units of FWM or FWA.

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-17

White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (dry-mesic phase)–FWD

The dry-mesic (FWD) map-class phase of the White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest map

class (as described above) represents forests in a dry-mesic setting. The understory vegetation 

layer is sparse, with low diversity and a significant needle duff layer. The few hardwoods present 

are mostly quaking aspen and paper birch. When in mesic settings, either the conifer mesic 

(FWM) phase or the conifer - hardwood (FWA) phase of this same map class was considered, 

depending on the RD of hardwoods.

Mapping of the FWD map-class phase was rare to GRPO—mapped with one unit encompassing 

the campsite along the Pigeon River in close proximity to the Site of Fort Charlotte. Noteworthy

is that this sole unit of FWD is more than 800 m in distance from any mapped units of FWM or 

FWA.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-18

Conifer - Hardwood Ruderal Forest (FMX)

The Conifer - Hardwood Ruderal Forest (FMX) map class represents the Northern & Central 

Hardwood & Conifer Ruderal Forest Group (G030) in the NVCS. Because of disturbance from 

anthropogenic activity and the inherent variability of floristic vegetation of these early 

successional forests, an association type was not determined. This map class captures opencanopy ruderal forests, with trees contributing >25% cover. Trees consist of any mixture of 

conifers and hardwoods, whether native or exotic to the GRPO area.

When trees contributed <25% cover, the Deciduous Ruderal Shrubland (SDX) map class was 

considered. Furthermore, when trees and shrubs both contributed <25% cover, the Ruderal 

Grassland (HMX) map class was considered.

Mapping of FMX was rare to GRPO—mapped with one unit in the Village Meadow of the 

Lakeshore Unit. FMX was mapped in close proximity to both SDX and HMX, both of which 

were also mapped only to the Lakeshore Unit.

Because of the disturbance regime inherent to ruderal forests, the FMX map class was not 

assessed for accuracy.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-19

Conifer Plantation (FPE)

The Conifer Plantation (FPE) map class represents the Northern & Central Conifer & Hardwood 

Plantation Group (G032) in the NVCS. The FPE map class captures conifer evergreen 

plantations of the Lakeshore Unit, consisting of jack pine, red pine, and/or spruce.

Mapping of FPE was rare to GRPO—mapped with four units in the northern half of the 

Lakeshore Unit. One of the mapped units of FPE is of the trailhead to The Grand Portage.

Because of the cultivated disposition of being a plantation, the FPP map class was not assessed

for accuracy.

 

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-20

Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp (FBA and FGA)

The Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp map class represents the Fraxinus nigra - Mixed 

Hardwoods - Conifers / Cornus sericea / Carex spp. Forest Association (CEGL002105) in the 

NVCS. This map class consists of two phases, including black ash (FBA) and green ash - elm

(FGA). The Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp map class captures wetland forests in basins 

and drainages wherein the RD of black ash to other hardwoods is >25%. Other hardwoods may 

include balsam poplar and quaking aspen, with paper birch less commonly included. Conifers 

may include northern white-cedar and balsam fir, with white spruce less commonly included.

The RD of conifers (often short-stature trees) to hardwoods is <25%. The hardwood forest 

canopy can be open with a significant speckled alder shrub understory. Typical settings range 

from wet drainages to swamp margins of beaver meadow complexes.

When in wet lowland settings wherein the RD of black ash to other hardwoods was <25%, the 

Aspen - Balsam Poplar Lowland Forest (FAP) map class was considered, particularly when 

balsam poplar and/or quaking aspen were dominant; however, when hardwoods altogether 

contributed <25% canopy cover, with alder shrubs contributing >25% cover, the Gray Alder 

Swamp Shrubland (SAS) map class was considered.

The black ash (FBA) phase captures hardwood wetland forests wherein black ash is either 

monotypic or is present with elements of balsam poplar, quaking aspen, and paper birch. The 

green ash - elm (FGA) phase captures the hardwood wetland forest as black ash, with a fair 

component of green ash and American elm present. The FBA phase is wide-ranging throughout

GRPO, where the FGA phase is found within the Pigeon River floodplain of the Fort Charlotte 

Unit.

For AA, the two map-class phases (FBA and FGA) were combined because they collectively 

represent one association type. They were left, however, as separate entities in the vegetation 

map layer.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-21

Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp (black ash phase)–FBA

The black ash (FBA) map-class phase of the Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp map class (as 

described above) represents wetland forests wherein the RD of black ash to other hardwoods 

(balsam poplar, quaking aspen, and paper birch) is >25%. Often, however, these swamps are 

located near monotypic black ash. Tree canopy is often open in swamp-like settings and closed 

in wet to wet-mesic basin-like drainage sites. A significant amount of speckled alder shrub can 

be present, particularly in swamp-like settings with an open hardwood canopy.

The Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp within the Pigeon River floodplain of the Fort 

Charlotte Unit has a significant component of green ash and/or American elm present, with black 

ash remaining the primary hardwood. When in these settings, the green ash - elm (FGA) phase of 

the same map class was considered.

Mapping of the FBA map-class phase was somewhat uncommon throughout GRPO—mapped 

with just over fifteen units. By far, the majority of units were mapped at the western half of the 

Portage Corridor and at the Fort Charlotte Unit. No units of FBA were mapped at the Lakeshore 

Unit. It is noteworthy that mapping of FBA was often in close proximity to mapping of Aspen -

Balsam Poplar Lowland Forest (FAP).

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-22

Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp (green ash - elm phase)–FGA

The green ash - elm (FGA) map-class phase of the Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp map 

class (as described above) represents riparian floodplain sites wherein black ash is the primary 

hardwood, yet there is also a significant presence of green ash and/or American elm. Some 

balsam poplar and quaking aspen may also be present. At the GRPO, these riparian versions of 

the Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp are known only to exist along the Pigeon River, north 

of the Site of Fort Charlotte.

The more typical version of the Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp map class does not have 

elements of green ash and/or American elm, but is either monotypically black ash or black ash 

mixed with a significant presence of balsam poplar and few quaking aspen and paper birch. For 

black ash hardwood forests throughout GRPO, other than along the Pigeon River, the black ash 

(FBA) phase of this same map class was considered.

Mapping of the FGA map-class phase was rare to GRPO—mapped with one unit along the 

Pigeon River at the far northwest corner of the Fort Charlotte Unit.

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-23

Aspen - Balsam Poplar Lowland Forest (FAP)

The Aspen - Balsam Poplar Lowland Forest (FAP) map class represents the Populus tremuloides

- Populus balsamifera - Mixed Hardwoods Lowland Forest Association (CEGL005036) in the 

NVCS. This map class captures wet lowland hardwood forests wherein quaking aspen and 

balsam poplar are the primary canopy trees, with lesser amounts of paper birch. The RD of black 

ash to other hardwoods is <25%. Conifers may include northern white-cedar and balsam fir, with 

white spruce less commonly included. The RD of conifers (often short-stature trees) to 

hardwoods is <25%. Speckled alder may be scattered throughout, only occasionally in high 

density.

When in wetland settings wherein the RD of black ash to other hardwoods is >25%, the Black 

Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp map class (two phases, FBA and FGA) was considered (most 

commonly the black ash [FBA] phase). The green ash - elm (FGA) phase was limited to specific 

site along the Pigeon River at the Fort Charlotte Unit; however, when hardwoods contributed

<25% canopy cover, with alder shrubs contributing >25% cover, the Gray Alder Swamp 

Shrubland map class (three phases, SAS, SAH, and SAW) was considered.

Mapping of the FAP map class was common throughout GRPO, with units mapped somewhat 

regularly from the shores of Lake Superior to the shores of the Pigeon River. Only a few 

stretches of the Portage Corridor are void of mapped FAP units.

For AA, the FAP map class was assessed independently of all other map classes.

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-24

Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (SAS, SAH, and SAW)

The Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland map class represents the Alnus incana Swamp Shrubland 

Association (CEGL002381) of the NVCS. It is worth pointing out that although a shrubland, this

association is located within the Forest & Woodland Class hierarchy of the NVCS. This map 

class consists of three phases, including the classic alder (SAS), hawthorn mix (SAH), and 

willow mix (SAW). The Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland map class captures wetlands having 

>25% shrub cover, with the RD of speckled alder (variant of gray alder) to all shrubs typically

>25%. These alder shrub wetlands are common to saturated drainages and beaver pond 

complexes.

The common expression of these shrub wetlands is characterized by tall, dense stands wherein 

alder is nearly monotypic, with few other shrub species (such as willows, redosier dogwood, and 

even some mountain maple) present. At the Lakeshore Unit, willows and black hawthorn are 

significantly present because of the unique history of anthropogenic use in that area. Hardwoods, 

such as black ash and balsam poplar, can be present; however, when hardwoods contributed

>25% cover, even as short-statured trees, either the Aspen - Balsam Poplar Lowland Forest 

(FAP) map class or the black ash (FBA) phase of the Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp map 

class was considered, depending on the RDs of hardwood components. On the contrary, when 

shrubs and trees together contributed <25% cover, the Bluejoint Wet Meadow (HCC) or the 

Northern Sedge Wet Meadow (HSG) map classes were considered.

The classic alder (SAS) phase is the most typical form of these shrub wetlands, wherein stands of 

alder are nearly monotypic. The hawthorn mix (SAH) phase captures these shrub wetlands when 

there is a significant component of black hawthorn. The willow mix (SAW) phase captures these

shrub wetlands when there is a significant component of tall willows, particularly prairie willow.

The latter two phases are known only to the Lakeshore Unit, whereas the SAS phase is found 

throughout the entire GRPO.

For AA, the three map-class phases (SAS, SAH, and SAW) were combined because they 

collectively represent one association type. They were left, however, as separate entities in the 

vegetation map layer.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-25

Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (classic alder phase)–SAS

The classic alder (SAS) map-class phase of the Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland map class (as 

described above) represents shrub wetlands wherein speckled alder are nearly monotypic, with 

some willows, redosier dogwood, and mountain maple in low densities. Likewise, short statured 

trees, including black ash, balsam poplar, and balsam fir, are also common in low densities. 

These alder-dominant shrub wetlands are common to fast running streambeds, gentle flowing 

drainages, and beaver meadows.

When the RD of black hawthorn and/or willows to alder and other shrubs was >25%, particularly

at the Lakeshore Unit, either the hawthorn mix (SAH) phase or the willow mix (SAW) phase of 

the same map class was considered, depending on the shrub components present.

Mapping of the SAS map-class phase was somewhat uncommon and spotty throughout GRPO.

The majority of units were mapped at the far western end of the Portage Corridor and at the Fort 

Charlotte Unit. Units of SAS were also mapped at the Beaver Meadow and at the Poplar Creek 

drainages. Only one unit was mapped at the Lakeshore Unit, because most shrub wetlands of this 

area were mapped with the SAH and SAW map-class phases of the same class.

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-26

Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (hawthorn mix phase)–SAH

The willow mix (SAH) map-class phase of the Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland map class (as 

described above) represents shrub wetlands consisting of speckled alder and a significant 

component of black hawthorn. Some redosier dogwood, mountain maple, and willows may also 

be present. This map-class phase was derived to capture the unique anthropogenic history that 

undoubtedly affected the shrub wetlands of the Lakeshore Unit. 

At the Lakeshore Unit, when tall willows were more prominent than black hawthorn, the willow 

mix (SAW) phase of the same map class was considered. Throughout GRPO, including the 

Lakeshore Unit, when black hawthorn, as well as tall willows, was only a minor shrub 

component or non-existent, the classic alder (SAS) phase of the same map class was considered.

Mapping of the SAH map-class phase was rare to GRPO—mapped as two units within the Grand 

Portage Creek of the Lakeshore Unit.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-27

Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (willow mix phase)–SAW

The willow mix (SAW) map-class phase of the Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland map class (as 

described above) represent shrub wetlands consisting of speckled alder and a significant 

component (even exceedingly dominant) of tall willows that mostly include prairie willow and

lesser amounts of diamondleaf willow. Some redosier dogwood and mountain maple may also be 

present. This map-class phase was derived to capture the unique anthropogenic history that 

undoubtedly affected the shrub wetlands of the Lakeshore Unit.

At the Lakeshore Unit, when black hawthorn was more prominent than tall willows, the 

hawthorn mix (SAH) phase of the same map class was considered. Throughout GRPO, including 

at the Lakeshore Unit, when tall willows and black hawthorn were only minor shrub components

or non-existent, the classic alder (SAS) phase of the same map class was considered.

Mapping of the SAW map-class phase was rare to GRPO—mapped as one unit within the 

Village Meadow of the Lakeshore Unit. This single unit of SAW adjoins with another unit 

mapped as the SAS phase of the same map class.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-28

Jack Pine - Aspen / Bush-honeysuckle Forest (FJM)

The Jack Pine - Aspen / Bush-honeysuckle Forest (FJM) map class represents the Pinus 

banksiana - Populus tremuloides / Diervilla lonicera Forest Association (CEGL002518) in the 

NVCS. This map class captures mesic forests wherein jack pine is dominant but mixed with

quaking aspen. Only one location of FJM is known to GRPO, within the Portage Corridor, about 

400 m west of the Beaver Meadow. The forest canopy is open, with short-statured balsam fir, 

white spruce, northern white-cedar, and paper birch. The northern bush honeysuckle is a primary

shrub component.

This only known site of FJM was discovered during the AA field effort (GRPO.AA085) while 

assessing a site originally mapped as the conifer - hardwood mesic (FWA) phase of the White 

Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest map class. For the benefit of the map user, this one unit 

(polygon) was updated to the FJM map class, reflected as such in the vegetation map layer. The 

jack-pine dominant forests on Mount Rose of the Lakeshore Unit are drier sites than FJM—

mesic to dry-mesic—and have less diverse understory vegetation. These forest sites were

mapped with the Jack Pine / Balsam Fir Forest (FJF) map class, even when quaking aspen and 

paper birch were present.

During AA, the FJM map class was not included with field-site selection because it was not part 

of the map classification; however, it was included with the AA results, shown as an error of 

omission (producers’ accuracy) in the contingency table. The purpose in handling FJM this way

in the AA results was to show that if more FJM exists at the GRPO, it might occur within units 

mapped as the White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest map class, and more specifically, the 

FWA map-class phase. It is noteworthy that, since the FJM map class did not exist at the time of 

site selection, the users’ accuracy for FJM is null.

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-29

Jack Pine / Balsam Fir Forest (FJF)

The Jack Pine / Balsam Fir Forest (FJF) map class represents the Pinus banksiana / Abies 

balsamea Forest Association (CEGL002437) in the NVCS. This map class captures jack-pine 

dominant, mesic to dry-mesic forests on Mount Rose at the Lakeshore Unit. The understory 

vegetation is less diverse than the more mesic sites of Jack Pine - Aspen / Bush-honeysuckle 

Forest (FJM). The only known site of FJM at the GRPO is about 9 km northwest of Mount Rose 

within the Portage Corridor, about 400 m west of the Beaver Pond Complex (discovered during 

field AA).

When the RD of jack pine to white spruce and balsam fir was <25%, either the Spruce - Fir / 

Mountain Maple Forest (FSF) map class or the Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest (FCP) map class was

considered, depending on the RD of quaking aspen and paper birch to conifers.

Mapping of the FJF map class was rare to GRPO—mapped as two units on Mount Rose at the 

Lakeshore Unit.

For AA, the FJF map class was assessed independently of all other map classes.

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-30

Boreal Pine Rocky Woodland (WPR)

The Boreal Pine Rocky Woodland (WPR) map class represents the Pinus banksiana - (Picea 

mariana, Pinus strobus) / Vaccinium spp. Rocky Woodland Association (CEGL002483) in the 

NVCS. This map class captures dry woodlands of mixed pine, with thin soil development and 

bedrock exposures covered with lichens. These woodlands are located on the basalt exposures 

somewhat anterior to Lake Superior where Highway 61 intersects the Portage Corridor. Trees

contribute >25% cover and consist of jack pine and white pine, along with white spruce, balsam 

fir, and northern white-cedar. A sparse amount of quaking aspen can be present.

When the RD of tree cover was <25%, the Boreal Hazelnut - Serviceberry Rocky Shrubland 

(SHS) map class was considered. When the RD of tree cover was >25% and located on deeper 

soils and the forest canopy was not restricted by bedrock exposures and when the RD of pines to 

conifers was <25%, either the Spruce - Fir / Mountain Maple Forest (FSF) map class or the 

Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest (FCP) map class was considered, depending on the RD of quaking 

aspen and paper birch to conifers. Interestingly, surrounding each unit of WPR are mapped units 

of FCP.

Mapping of the WPR map class was rare to GRPO—mapped with three units near where 

Highway 61 intersects with the Portage Corridor. It is noteworthy that one of these three units 

was determined to be SHS during field AA. Nevertheless, upon further review of the unit in 

question, it became evident this was a case where an aerial perspective and a ground perspective 

posed different interpretations. Refer to the Accuracy Assessment Results section of the main 

report for further discussion of this particular scenario when WPR and SHS were confused.

For AA, the WPR map class was assessed independently of all other map classes.

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-31

Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest (FCP)

The Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest (FCP) map class represents the Picea glauca - Abies balsamea -

Populus tremuloides / Mixed Herbs Forest Association (CEGL002475) in the NVCS. This map 

class captures conifer - hardwood forests primarily consisting of white spruce and balsam fir that

co-dominate with quaking aspen and paper birch. The conifer component is often of short

stature, below the taller canopy of hardwoods; however, the RD of conifers >5 m height to 

hardwoods of all tree-height strata is >25%. The exception is when both hardwoods and conifers 

are of a shrub-height stratum (e.g., early successional response from windthrows), in which case

the forest amounts to a short-height stand of FCP.

Within the portage corridor, eastern white pine and northern white-cedar may be present, but the 

RD of each to other conifers is <25%. In the Mount Rose area, jack pine may be present, but its 

RD to other conifers is <25%. Although the FCP is most common to mesic sites of the Portage 

Corridor and the Fort Charlotte Unit, it is also commonplace to the dry-mesic slopes of Mount 

Rose.

Because the hardwood canopy is often above the conifers (such that the conifers are obscured 

from an aerial viewpoint), it was essential to refer to spring, leaf-off aerial photographs during 

the mapping of FCP. This practice was necessary to determine not merely the RD of conifers to 

hardwoods, but also the RDs among conifer species (e.g., the RD of northern white-cedar to 

balsam fir) to determine the correct forest type.

Normally the physiognomic coverage and height modifiers applied to the mapping of forests 

capture the total coverage of all trees and the average height of those trees throughout the unit 

mapped. An exception to this rule was, however, made to promote a better understanding of the 

canopy structure of FCP forests that have undergone intense disturbance, such as windthrow. 

Often, FCP at the GRPO has an open (e.g., 25–30% cover) supracanopy of tall (e.g., 25 m) 

quaking aspen over a dense (e.g., 70–80% cover) canopy of short (e.g., 10 m) white spruce, 

balsam fir, quaking aspen, and paper birch. Normally, all trees present (short and tall) are

considered to determine this scenario as “Closed Canopy/Continuous (60-100% coverage),” with 

an average tree height of “5–15 meters (16–50 feet).” From this convention, one cannot 

determine any difference from forest stands of FCP, where canopy height and density are more 

uniform throughout the forest strata; however, adjusting the modifiers to reflect the sparse 

supracanopy of quaking aspen relays to the user that the supracanopy is “Open 

Canopy/Discontinuous (25–60% coverage),” with a height of “15–30 meters (50–98 feet).” From 

this description, one can assume to know the typical forest structure below the supracanopy; e.g.,

an early successional forest mix of spruce, fir, aspen, and birch.

When the RD of white pine to conifers was >25%, the conifer - hardwood mesic (FWA) phase of 

the White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest map class was considered. Likewise, when the 

RD of white-cedar to conifers was >25% (RD of white pine <25%), the conifer - hardwood 

(FCM) phase of the White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest map class was considered. Also, 

on Mount Rose of the Lakeshore Unit, when the RD of jack pine to conifers (white spruce and 

balsam fir) was >25%, the Jack Pine / Balsam Fir Forest (FJF) map class was considered. 

Throughout GRPO, however, when the RD of hardwoods to conifers was <25%, the Spruce - Fir 

/ Mountain Maple Forest (FSF) map class was considered. Likewise, when the RD of conifers to 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-32

hardwoods was <25%, the Aspen - Birch / Boreal Conifer Forest (FAC) map class was likely 

considered.

Being one of the matrix forests of GRPO, mapping of the FCP map class was abundant

throughout, from the shores of Lake Superior to the shores of the Pigeon River. It was mapped 

regularly at a variety of environments as described above, from the dry slopes on Mount Rose of 

the Lakeshore Unit to the wet-mesic flats of the Fort Charlotte Unit. A few noticeable areas were 

not mapped with FCP, including the low-elevation flats in the northern portion of the Lakeshore 

Unit (e.g., the Village Meadow), which has received intense anthropogenic use since the days of 

fur trading during the late 18th century. Another area was a 2-km stretch eastward from the Fort 

Charlotte Unit within the Portage Corridor, which is where white-cedar and white pine are more 

prominent. These areas were mapped more frequently with the White-cedar - Boreal Conifer 

Mesic Forest and the White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest map classes (with various mapclass phases).

Some short-statured (shrub-height) FCP units, responsive to harsh environment and/or intense 

windthrow events, were mapped throughout GRPO. Two notable areas are the steep northwest 

slope on Mount Rose of the Lakeshore Unit and an area within the Portage Corridor, midway 

between Grand Portage Creek and Poplar Creek. These units of short-statured FCP were

designated with the 0.5–5-m physiognomic height modifier to distinguish them from more 

typical forest structures of FCP.

For AA, the FCP map class was assessed independently of all other map classes.

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-33
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-34

Spruce - Fir / Mountain Maple Forest (FSF)

The Spruce - Fir / Mountain Maple Forest (FSF) map class represents the Picea glauca - Abies 

balsamea / Acer spicatum / Rubus pubescens Forest Association (CEGL002446) in the NVCS. 

This map class captures conifer forests strongly dominated by white spruce and balsam fir. 

Within the portage corridor, eastern white pine and northern white-cedar may be present, but the 

RD of each to other conifers should be <25%. On Mount Rose of the Lakeshore Unit, jack pine 

might be present, but its RD to conifers should be <25%. Some hardwoods can be present, but

their RD to conifers should be <25%. Hardwoods should consist of quaking aspen and paper 

birch in mesic to dry-mesic locations (typic) and balsam poplar and black ash in wet-mesic 

locations (unique). Although the FSF is most common to the mesic sites of the Portage Corridor 

and the Fort Charlotte Unit, it is also commonplace to the dry-mesic slopes on Mount Rose.

Classic mesic sites of FSF are located on uplands surrounding beaver meadow complexes where 

hardwoods have been removed. These forests have transitioned from a once shaded understory of 

white spruce and balsam fir shrub and tree layer to a semi-open forest of thriving mature trees. 

This classic representation of FSF is common to the margins along the Beaver Meadow and the 

large beaver meadow complex within Snow Creek at the Fort Charlotte Unit. Noteworthy are the 

dense (doghair) moderately short-height stands of FSF located in the southwest corner of the Fort 

Charlotte Unit along the Pigeon River. These stands are so dense in places that they become

difficult to walk through. Some of these dense FSF stands have a component of jack pine. 

Although it is apparent that beaver have altered these forests, it also seems implicit that past 

anthropogenic activity may have spurred these forests into such dense tree cover.

Rarely is FSF recognized within a wetland margin of a beaver meadow complex. One is

recognized, however, known to the Beaver Meadow (south of the boardwalk, east side). Here the

forest is in transition, but it was once, perhaps, a classic representation of FSF. After years of 

saturation from the beaver pond, the site has changed from mesic toward wet, and it now 

supports balsam poplar, black ash, black spruce, speckled alder, and other wetland understory 

vegetation such as bluejoint. Again, this is a unique scenario, and perhaps the site at the Beaver 

Meadow is the only occurrence within a wetland margin at the GRPO.

When the RD of white pine to conifers was >25%, the conifer mesic (FWM) phase of the White 

Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest map class was considered. Likewise, when the RD of

white-cedar to conifers (RD of white pine <25%) was >25%, the conifer (FCC) phase of the 

White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest map class was considered. Also, on Mount Rose of 

the Lakeshore Unit, when the RD of jack pine to conifers (white spruce and balsam fir) was 

>25%, the Jack Pine / Balsam Fir Forest (FJF) map class was considered. Throughout GRPO, 

when the RD of hardwoods to conifers was >25%, the Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest (FCP) map 

class was considered.

Being somewhat of a matrix forest to GRPO, mapping of the FSF map class was common, yet 

scattered throughout, from the shores of Lake Superior to the shores of the Pigeon River. It was 

mapped regularly to a variety of environments as described above, from the dry slopes on Mount 

Rose of the Lakeshore Unit to the wet-mesic flats of the Fort Charlotte Unit.

For AA, the FSF map class was assessed independently of all other map classes.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-35

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-36
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-37

Aspen - Birch / Boreal Conifer Forest (FAC)

The Aspen - Birch / Boreal Conifer Forest (FAC) map class represents the Populus tremuloides -

Betula papyrifera / (Abies balsamea, Picea glauca) Forest Association (CEGL002466) in the 

NVCS. This map class captures hardwood mesic forests dominated by quaking aspen and paper

birch. Shrub-height conifers consisting of white spruce, balsam fir, and northern white-cedar are 

abundant in the understory, along with mountain maple, northern bush honeysuckle, and beaked 

hazelnut; however, the RD of conifers that are >5 m in height to hardwoods should not exceed 

25%. Within the Portage Corridor, eastern white pine may be scattered.

Because the hardwood canopy is often above the conifers (such that the conifers are obscured 

from an aerial viewpoint), it was essential to refer to spring, leaf-off aerial photographs during 

the mapping of FAC in order to determine the height conifer component for the correct forest 

classification. When the RD of conifers >5 m height to hardwoods of all tree-height strata was 

>25%, either the Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest (FCP) map class or the conifer - hardwood (FCM) 

phase of the White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest map class was considered, depending on 

dominance within the conifer component. However, when the upper canopy was of shrub-height 

(e.g., early successional response from windthrows), the FCP or FCM map classes were 

considered but modified for short-statured forests.

Normally, the physiognomic coverage modifier for forests does not go below 25% cover. In such 

instances, the stand no longer functions as forest, but rather as understory vegetation layers, 

whether shrubland or herbaceous. An exception to this rule was made, however, to capture 

stands of FAC having canopy <25%. This was particularly true of some forests far west within 

the Portage Corridor and extensively of forests in the southern half of the Fort Charlotte Unit. 

These forests have undergone extensive windthrow, yet from field observations, these stands

with their understory layer, are functioning as forests. Much of the understory is of young shrubheight quaking aspen in regeneration. The application of the coverage and height physiognomic 

modifiers, in relation to younger trees below the supracanopy of quaking aspen, was applied 

similarly to how it was applied for the Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest (FCP) map class (refer to the 

FCP map-class description for further explanation).

When the RD of conifers to hardwoods was >25%, and the RD of white pine to conifers was 

>25%, the conifer - hardwood mesic (FWA) phase of the White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic 

Forest map class was considered. Likewise, when the RD of white-cedar to conifers (RD of 

white pine <25%) was >25%, the conifer - hardwood (FCM) phase of the White-cedar - Boreal 

Conifer Mesic Forest map class was considered. Furthermore, when the RD of white spruce and 

balsam fir to all conifers was >75%, the Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest (FCP) map class was 

considered. On a different note, when sites of quaking aspen were in wet-mesic to wet locations, 

especially with balsam poplar present, the Aspen - Balsam Poplar Lowland Forest (FAP) map 

class was considered.

Being one of the matrix forests to GRPO, mapping of FAC was abundant throughout the Portage 

Corridor and the Fort Charlotte Unit; however, only a few units of FAC were mapped at the

Lakeshore Unit.

For AA, the FAC map class was assessed independently of all other map classes.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-38

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-39

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-40

Deciduous Ruderal Shrubland (SDX)

The Deciduous Ruderal Shrubland (SDX) map class represents, in part, the Eastern Ruderal 

Shrubland & Grassland Group [Placeholder] (G059) of the NVCS. Because of disturbance from 

anthropogenic activity and the inherent variability of floristic vegetation of these shrublands, an 

association type was not determined. This map class captures ruderal upland shrublands of the 

Lakeshore Unit. Although shrub cover is open, it contributes >25% cover. Shrubs consist of 

deciduous species that may be either native or exotic to the GRPO area.

When trees contributed >25% cover, the Conifer - Hardwood Ruderal Forest (FMX) map class 

was considered. To the contrary, when trees and shrubs together contributed <25% cover, the 

Ruderal Grassland (HMX) map class was considered, which also represents, in part, the Eastern 

Ruderal Shrubland & Grassland Group [Placeholder] (G059) in the NVCS.

Mapping of the SDX map class was rare to GRPO—mapped as two units within the northeast 

portion of the Lakeshore Unit, one unit within the Village Meadow, and the other unit between 

the Lake Superior shore and some picnic grounds. The SDX was mapped in close proximity to 

FMX and HMX (both of which were mapped only at the Lakeshore Unit) and to Developed Area 

(NDV).

Because of the disturbance regime inherent to ruderal shrublands, the SDX map class was not 

assessed for accuracy.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-41

Ruderal Grassland (HMX)

The Ruderal Grassland (HMX) map class represents, in part, the Eastern Ruderal Shrubland & 

Grassland Group [Placeholder] (G059) of the NVCS. Because of disturbance from anthropogenic 

activity and the inherent variability of floristic vegetation of these shrublands, an association type 

was not determined. This map class captures a mosaic of mesic to wet-mesic, ruderal herbaceous 

meadows located within the Village Meadow of the Lakeshore Unit. Shrubs and trees each 

contribute <25% cover. Herbaceous vegetation consists of various graminoids and forbs that may 

be either native or exotic to GRPO. From an informal transect of the herbaceous meadow just 

east of Highway 17, the following description provides a snapshot of the vegetation (informal 

transect collected September 2007). It is noteworthy that the ruderal herbaceous meadow as a 

whole is more characteristic of mesic than of wet-mesic environments.

• Dryer meadow vegetation (mesic): timothy, smooth brome, Kentucky bluegrass, Canada 

thistle, bird's-foot trefoil, goldenrod, agrimony, Lindley's aster, raspberry, rose, and saplings 

of hawthorn.

• Wetter meadow vegetation (wet-mesic): giant mountain aster, purplestem aster, Lindley's 

aster, rush, bluejoint, whitetop, and saplings of redosier dogwood, willow, and black ash.

When shrubs contributed >25% cover, the Deciduous Ruderal Shrubland (SDX) map class was 

considered, which also represents, in part, the Eastern Ruderal Shrubland & Grassland Group 

[Placeholder] (G059) in the NVCS; however, when trees contributed >25% cover, the Conifer -

Hardwood Ruderal Forest (FMX) map class was considered.

Mapping of HMX map class was rare to GRPO—mapped with two units within the Village

Meadow of the Lakeshore Unit. The HMX was mapped in close proximity to FMX and SDX

(both of which were mapped only at the Lakeshore Unit) and to Developed Area (NDV).

Because of the disturbance regime inherent to ruderal herbaceous fields, the HMX map class was 

not assessed for accuracy.

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-42

Boreal Hazelnut - Serviceberry Rocky Shrubland (SHS)

The Boreal Hazelnut - Serviceberry Rocky Shrubland (SHS) map class represents the Corylus 

cornuta - Amelanchier spp. - Prunus virginiana Rocky Shrubland Association (CEGL005197) in 

the NVCS. This map class captures dry, open shrublands on thin soils, often with rocky outcrops 

and exposed bedrock. Shrubs contribute >25% cover, with tree canopy contributing <25% cover.

Shrub density and vegetation diversity tend to be lower on steeper sites than on more level sites. 

Level sites have a somewhat sparse layer of short-shrubs, mostly of serviceberry and northern 

bush honeysuckle, along with pin cherry, lowbush blueberry, kinnikinnick, and common juniper. 

The herbaceous layer is a broad cover of poverty oatgrass, with smooth brome and Canada 

bluegrass commonly included, along with a significant layer of reindeer lichen. Steeper sites, on 

the other hand, have a denser—yet still open—coverage of shrubs consisting of a diverse mixture 

of short shrubs, tall shrubs, and shrub-height trees, including serviceberry, beaked hazelnut, 

currant, pin cherry, snowberry, dogwood, hawthorn, mountain maple, northern mountain ash, 

quaking aspen, paper birch, and balsam fir. The herbaceous layer may be of low density, 

although of high diversity. Regardless of level or steep position, the ecotonal edges toward 

neighboring forests often have higher densities of short-statured quaking aspen and paper birch.

When the RD of tree cover (consisting of quaking aspen, paper birch, white spruce, and balsam 

fir) was >25%, either the Aspen - Birch / Boreal Conifer Forest (FAC) map class or the Spruce -

Fir / Mountain Maple Forest (FSF) map class was considered.

Mapping of the SHS map class was rare to GRPO—mapped with three units on Mount Rose at 

the Lakeshore Unit. It is noteworthy that a unit mapped as WPR just south of where Highway 61 

intersects with the Portage Corridor was determined as SHS during field AA. Nevertheless, upon 

post-review of the polygon unit in question, it became evident that this was a case where the

aerial perspective and the ground perspective posed different interpretations. Refer to the 

Accuracy Assessment Results section of the main report for further discussion of this particular 

scenario SHS and WPR were confused.

For AA, the SHS map class was assessed independently of all other map classes.

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-43

Water Horsetail - Spikerush Marsh (HHS)

The Water Horsetail - Spikerush Marsh (HHS) map class represents the Equisetum fluviatile -

(Eleocharis palustris) Herbaceous Vegetation Association (CEGL005258) in the NVCS. This 

map class captures narrow wetland margins of the Pigeon River that are dominant with water 

horsetail and/or sessilefruit arrowhead. Spikerush, broadleaf arrowhead, single-vein sweetflag, 

sedges, and other wetland herbaceous forbs often complement these emergent wetlands. The RD 

of sedges and/or bluejoint to horsetail, arrowhead, and Spikerush is <50%. Otherwise, the 

Northern Sedge Wet Meadow (HSG) or the Bluejoint Wet Meadow (HCC) map classes were 

considered.

Mapping of the HHS map class was rare to GRPO—mapped with three units along the shores of

the Pigeon River within the Fort Charlotte Unit.

For AA, the HHS map class was assessed independently of all other map classes.

 

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-44

Wet Meadow Mixed Herbaceous (HWM)

The Wet Meadow Mixed Herbaceous (HWM) map class represents mixed herbaceous wetlands 

within the Eastern North American Wet Meadow Group (G112) in the NVCS. This map class 

captures wetland meadows with a diverse mix of emergent herbaceous vegetation—pioneering 

and persistent—receiving disturbance from dynamic hydrology changes caused by beaver 

activity. The disturbance is such that the community of vegetation is non-distinct to any one 

established herbaceous vegetation type, particularly Bluejoint Wet Meadow (HCC) and Northern 

Sedge Wet Meadow (HSG). Although bluejoint and sedges are common to HWM, the RD of

each to the mix of herbaceous vegetation is <25%. Woolgrass can be a primary component of 

these disrupted beaver meadows, along with various amounts of asters, jewelweed, and other 

pioneering herbaceous vegetation.

It is noteworthy that herbaceous beaver meadows can be HWM, HCC, or HSG, depending on 

beaver activity and subsequent vegetation response. A beaver meadow that received a sudden

change (e.g., dam breach) just prior to the aerial photography collection (August 2006) was in 

good position to receive the HWM map class during mapping.

Trees and shrubs are often present, each contributing <25% cover. When shrubs of 

predominantly speckled alder contributed >25% cover, the Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (SAS) 

map class was considered. When tree canopy contributed >25% cover, with balsam poplar and 

quaking aspen most prominent, the Aspen - Balsam Poplar Lowland Forest (FAP) map class was 

considered.

Mapping of the HWM map class was rare to GRPO—mapped with one unit of a small beaver 

meadow located within the southern portion of the Fort Charlotte Unit.

For AA, the HWM map class was assessed independently of all other map classes.

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-45

Bluejoint Wet Meadow (HCC)

The Bluejoint Wet Meadow (HCC) map class represents the Calamagrostis canadensis -

Eupatorium maculatum Herbaceous Vegetation Association (CEGL005174) in the NVCS. This 

map class captures herbaceous wetland meadows dominated by bluejoint and that are receptive

to beaver activity. Sedges are often present, but their RD to all herbaceous vegetation is <25%. 

Barring sedges, the RD of bluejoint to all other emergent herbaceous vegetation is >25%. When 

the RD of sedges to bluejoint was >25%, the Northern Sedge Wet Meadow (HSG) map class was 

considered. Also, when the amount of bluejoint component relative to sedges could not be 

determined from aerial photographs, the HSG was typically the default map class. When 

herbaceous vegetation consisted of a diverse mix wherein the RD of bluejoint and sedges to 

herbaceous vegetation was each <25%, the Wet Meadow Mixed Herbaceous (HWM) map class 

was considered.

Mapping of the HCC map class was rare to GRPO—mapped with two units within the beaver 

meadow complex along Snow Creek in the Fort Charlotte Unit and with one unit along the 

boardwalk of the Beaver Meadow.

For AA, the HCC map class was assessed independently of all other map classes.

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-46

Northern Sedge Wet Meadow (HSG)

The Northern Sedge Wet Meadow (HSG) map class represents the Carex (rostrata, utriculata) -

Carex lacustris - (Carex vesicaria) Herbaceous Vegetation Association (CEGL002257) in the 

NVCS. This map class captures wetland meadows that are receptive to beaver activity and 

include emergent herbaceous coverage, wherein the RD of sedges to herbaceous vegetation 

(including bluejoint) is >25%. When RD of sedges to herbaceous vegetation was <25%, either 

the Bluejoint Wet Meadow (HCC) map class or the Wet Meadow Mixed Herbaceous (HWM) 

map class was considered, depending on density of herbaceous components. It is noteworthy that

when the amount of bluejoint component relative to sedges could not be determined from the 

aerial photographs, HSG was typically the default map class.

Mapping of the HSG map class was somewhat rare to GRPO—mapped with three units within 

the beaver meadow complex along Snow Creek at the Fort Charlotte Unit and with two units 

within the Beaver Meadow.

For AA, the HSG map class was assessed independently of all other map classes.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-47

Northern Water-lily Aquatic Wetland (HFA)

The Northern Water-lily Aquatic Wetland (HFA) map class represents the Nymphaea odorata -

Nuphar (microphylla, variegata) Herbaceous Vegetation Association (CEGL002562) in the 

NVCS. This map class captures deep water marshes with floating-leaved aquatic vegetation (e.g., 

American white waterlily, watershield) contributing >10% cover and emergent herbaceous 

vegetation contributing <25% cover; submergent aquatic vegetation (e.g., pondweeds) may be of 

high density. When floating-leaved aquatics contributed <10% cover, yet with submergent 

aquatics contributing >10% cover, the Midwest Pondweed Submerged Aquatic Wetland (HSV) 

map class was considered. If vegetation contributed <10% cover over open water, the Open 

Water Pond (NWP) map class was considered, which is a non-NVCS map class.

Only one location at the GRPO was classified with mappable HFA—the large beaver meadow 

complex within Snow Creek at the Fort Charlotte Unit. During spring of 2008, about one and a 

half years after the project’s aerial photography was collected (August 2006), a series of beaver 

dams had breached, resulting in a dramatic shift in vegetation. Much of the meadow reverted to 

annual herbaceous vegetation (e.g., smartweed) during the summer of 2008. By the summer of

2009, persistent emergent vegetation (e.g., fowl mannagrass) had taken root and some deep 

water pools had reestablished with submergent and floating-leaved aquatic vegetation, as the 

beaver began rebuilding the dams. Based on the appearances of floating aquatic vegetation in the 

August 2006 aerial photographs, and viewing firsthand the onset of floating aquatic vegetation 

being reestablished within the beaver ponds, the HFA map class was applied to portions of this 

beaver pond complex.

Mapping of the HFA map class was rare to GRPO—mapped with two units within the beaver 

meadow complex along Snow Creek at the Fort Charlotte Unit, as described above.

For AA, the HFA map class was not assessed. Since HFA was mapped only at the large beaver 

meadow complex that had breached prior to the AA field season, no AA sites were selected for a 

field visit because the vegetation had changed considerably.

No representative pictures were available.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-48

Midwest Pondweed Submerged Aquatic Wetland (HSV)

The Midwest Pondweed Submerged Aquatic Wetland (HSV) map class represents the 

Potamogeton spp. - Ceratophyllum spp. Midwest Herbaceous Vegetation Association 

(CEGL002282) in the NVCS. This map class captures deep water marshes wherein submergent 

aquatic vegetation (e.g., pondweeds) contributes >10% cover, with floating-leaved aquatic

vegetation (e.g., American white waterlily, watershield) and persistent emergent vegetation (e.g., 

sedges, bluejoint) contributing <25% cover. When open water bodies in beaver ponds were 

determined too deep for submergent and floating-leaved aquatic vegetation to grow, the Open 

Water Pond (NWP) map class was considered, which is a non-NVCS map class.

Only one location at the GRPO was classified with mappable HSV—the large beaver meadow 

complex within Snow Creek of the Fort Charlotte Unit. During the spring of 2008, about one and 

a half years after the aerial photography was collected (August 2006), a series of beaver dams 

within this beaver complex had breached, resulting in a dramatic shift in vegetation. Much of the 

meadow reverted to annual herbaceous vegetation (e.g., smartweed) during the summer of 2008, 

and during the summer of 2009, persistent emergent vegetation (e.g., fowl mannagrass) had 

taken root and some deep water pools had reestablished with submergent and floating-leaved 

aquatic vegetation, as the beaver began rebuilding the dams. Based on the appearances of

submergent aquatic vegetation in the August 2006 aerial photographs, and viewing firsthand the 

onset of submergent aquatic vegetation being reestablished within the beaver ponds, the HSV

map class was applied to portions of this beaver pond complex.

Mapping of the HSV map class was rare to GRPO—mapped with two units within the beaver 

meadow complex along Snow Creek at the Fort Charlotte Unit, as described above.

For AA, the HSV map class was not assessed. Since HSV was mapped only of the large beaver 

meadow complex that had breached prior to the AA field season, no AA sites were selected for 

field visit because the vegetation had changed considerably.

No representative pictures were available.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-49

Great Lakes Basalt - Diabase Cobble - Gravel Shore (VCB)

The Great Lakes Basalt - Diabase Cobble - Gravel Shore (VCB) map class represents the Basalt -

Diabase Cobble - Gravel Great Lakes Shore Sparse Vegetation Association (CEGL005250) in 

the NVCS. This map class captures narrow cobble or gravel beaches along the Lake Superior 

shoreline that are sparsely vegetated with a variety of vegetation, from shrubs to herbaceous

species, including redosier dogwood, pin cherry, willow, speckled alder, Canada goldenrod, 

American red raspberry, common yarrow, oxeye daisy, common evening-primrose, birdfoot, 

deervetch, aster, willowherb, Norwegian cinquefoil, and white sweetclover. The shrubs occur on 

the less dynamic areas of the upper beach ridge. The more dynamic areas closest to the water

edge is mostly void of vegetation because of wave action.

Mapping of the VCB map class was rare to GRPO—mapped with one unit along the Lake 

Superior shoreline of the Lakeshore Unit.

For AA, the VCB map class was assessed independently of all other map classes.

 
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-50

Northern Non-Carbonate Dry Talus Vegetation (VDT)

The Northern Non-Carbonate Dry Talus Vegetation (VDT) map class represents the Basalt -

Diabase Northern Open Talus Sparse Vegetation Association (CEGL005247) of the NVCS. This 

map class captures the sparsely vegetated, steep, east-facing talus slope on Mount Rose at the 

Lakeshore Unit. The sites are dry, rapidly drained, and unstable (subject to talus rock slippage). 

Talus rocks are in high density, covering almost the entire ground. Lichens are dominant on the 

talus rocks, with only a slight presence of polypody, essentially the only herbaceous plant known 

to exist on these talus slopes. An occasional paper birch may take root amongst the talus rock, 

yet individuals tend to remain short in stature.

Mapping of the VDT map class was rare to GRPO—mapped with one small (0.1 ha) unit on the 

east-facing slope of Mount Rose at the Lakeshore Unit; however, more sites of VDT might exist

along the eastern slope of Mount Rose. If so, these sites would be mapped as inclusions to the 

surrounding forest encompassing them, because they would be much too small for mapping (well 

below the size of a MMU). Much of the eastern slope of Mount Rose was mapped with the

Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest (FCP) map class.

For AA, the VDT map class was assessed independently of all other map classes.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-51

Northern Non-Carbonate Moist Talus Vegetation (VMT)

The Northern Non-Carbonate Moist Talus Vegetation (VMT) map class represents the Granite -

Metamorphic Talus Northern Sparse Vegetation Association (CEGL002409) of the NVCS. This 

map class captures the sparsely vegetated, boulder talus sites on the steep, northwest-facing 

slopes of Mount Rose at the Lakeshore Unit. Talus rock boulders are rather large and irregularly 

shaped, and they cover most of the ground layer. A semi-sparse layer of shrubs and trees 

(consisting of paper birch, northern mountain ash, balsam fir, redosier dogwood, American 

cranberrybush, and currant) take root amongst the boulder field. The herbaceous component is 

mostly rock polypody, with non-vascular vegetation (including lichens and some feathermoss)

fairly widespread.

The inception of the VMT map class into the GRPO vegetation mapping project was unique. The 

vegetation type that is represented by VMT was discovered in route to an AA field site. The field 

crew stopped to collect a vegetation sample to document this type at GRPO. After AA, the VMT 

from the northwest slope of Mount Rose was added to the vegetation map layer. Because of the 

unique location where VMT can exist, the northwest talus slope on Mount Rose is believed to be 

the only occurrence of VMT at the GRPO.

Mapping of the VMT map class was rare to GRPO—mapped with one unit on the northwestfacing slope of Mount Rose at the Lakeshore Unit.

For AA, the VMT map class was not assessed, because the map class was derived after AA.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-52

Developed Area (NDV)

The Developed Area (NDV) map class falls under the Developed Vegetation Cultural Class (8)

in the NVCS and is defined in the NVCS down to Level 3—Other Developed Urban / Built Up 

Vegetation Formation. From there, finer break outs are defined with the use of modifiers to 

depict the amount of impervious surface of developed areas. These modifiers represent classes 

21–24 of the National Land Cover Database (NLCD) 2001. The NDV map class captures areas 

having regular human use. Examples at the GRPO include roads and their right-of-ways, parking 

lots, GRPO buildings and grounds (such as headquarters and the stockade complex), and open 

lawns of multi-purpose use, including picnic areas.

Mapping of the NDV map class was uncommon throughout GRPO. Of those mapped, most units 

were at the Lakeshore Unit. The only units of NDV mapped outside the Lakeshore Unit were at 

roads crossing the Portage Corridor, including Highway 61, Old Highway 61, and Cowboys 

Road.

Because NDV is a cultural vegetation map class, it was not assessed for accuracy.

The following sections describe NLCD classes 21–24, which were used to further attribute 

(using a special modifier) the NDV map class. The Low Intensity (22) and High Intensity (24) 

classes were not used for the mapping of GRPO, yet remains included here for completeness and 

comparison purposes. Definitions are taken from the NLCD.

Open Space–21 (O)

This class includes areas with a mixture of some constructed materials but mostly includes 

vegetation in the form of lawn grasses. Impervious surfaces account for less than 20% of total 

cover. These areas most commonly include large-lot, single-family housing units, parks, golf 

courses, and vegetation planted in developed settings for recreation, erosion control, or aesthetic 

purposes.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-53

 

Low Intensity–22 (L)

This class includes areas with a mixture of constructed materials and vegetation. Impervious 

surfaces account for 20–49% of total cover. These areas most commonly include single-family 

housing units.

No representative pictures were available.

Medium Intensity–23 (M)

This class includes areas with a mixture of constructed materials and vegetation. Impervious 

surfaces account for 50–79% of total cover. These areas most commonly include single-family 

housing units.

 

High Intensity–24 (H)

This class includes highly developed areas where people reside or work in high numbers. 

Examples include apartment complexes, row houses, and commercial/industrial facilities. 

Impervious surfaces account for 80–100% of the total cover.

No representative pictures were available.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-54

Stream & River (NSR)

The Stream & River (NSR) map class represents, in part, the NLCD 2001 Open Water (11) class. 

This map class captures open water portions within the Pigeon River at the Fort Charlotte Unit, 

where vegetation contributes <10% cover. Herbaceous vegetation consisting of water horsetail 

and/or sessilefruit arrowhead is common along the shore margins; however, when these margins 

were vegetated with >10% cover and were of mappable width and size, the Water Horsetail -

Spikerush Marsh (HHS) map class was considered.

Mapping of the NSR map class was rare to GRPO—mapped with one unit for the open water 

portions within Pigeon River at the Fort Charlotte Unit.

Because NSR is a non-vegetation map class, it was not assessed for accuracy.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-55

Open Water Pond (NWP)

The Open Water Pond (NWP) map class represents in part the NLCD 2001 Open Water (11)

class. This map class captures open water bodies that are <8 ha in area. These ponds are usually 

deep enough that vegetation is unable to take root. Wetland vegetation—emergent and/or 

aquatic—may be present but should contribute <10% cover and is usually in shallower waters 

close to shorelines. When aquatic vegetation contributed >10% cover, either the Northern Waterlily Aquatic Wetland (HFA) map class or the Midwest Pondweed Submerged Aquatic Wetland 

(HSV) map class was considered, depending on vegetation composition. It is noteworthy that in 

areas >8 ha, the Open Water Lake (NWL) map class was considered, which also represents, in 

part, the Open Water (11) class in the NLCD. In essence, the NWL map class captures the Lake 

Superior waters along the shores of the Lakeshore Unit.

Only one location at the GRPO was classified with mappable NWP—the large beaver meadow 

complex within Snow Creek at the Fort Charlotte Unit. During the spring of 2008, about one and 

a half years after the aerial photography was collected (August 2006) for the project, a series of 

beaver dams within this beaver complex had breached, resulting in a dramatic shift in vegetation. 

With careful study of the August 2006 aerial photographs, it was determined, however, that the 

deepest portion of this beaver pond complex was void of vegetation; thus, the NWP map class 

was applied.

Mapping of the NWP map class was rare to GRPO—mapped with one unit within the beaver 

meadow complex along Snow Creek at the Fort Charlotte Unit.

Because NWP is a non-vegetation map class, it was not assessed for accuracy.

No representative pictures were available.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-56

Open Water Lake (NWL)

The Open Water Lake (NWL) map class represents, in part, the NLCD 2001 Open Water (11)

class. This map class captures open water bodies that are >8 ha in area and have <10% 

vegetation present. In essence, NWL covers the Lake Superior waters of the Lakeshore Unit. It is 

noteworthy that when open water bodies were <8 ha, the Open Water Pond (NWP) map class 

was considered, which also represents, in part, the Open Water (11) class in the NLCD. In 

essence, the NWP map class captures the deep, open water portions within beaver pond 

complexes, as found within the large beaver meadow complex along Snow Creek at the Fort 

Charlotte Unit.

Mapping of the NWL map class was rare to GRPO—mapped with one unit for the Lake Superior 

waters within the Lakeshore Unit. Although the map unit itself is <8 ha because of the project 

boundary limits, the context of Lake Superior constituted mapping this unit as NWL.

Because NWL is a non-vegetation map class, it was not assessed for accuracy.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes E-57

Table E-2. Map classification listing, sorted alphabetically by map-class code, used for the Grand Portage 

National Monument vegetation mapping project.

Map-class Code Map-class Name

FAC Aspen - Birch / Boreal Conifer Forest

FAP Aspen - Balsam Poplar Lowland Forest

FBA Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp (black ash phase)

FCC White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest (conifer phase)

FCM White-cedar - Boreal Conifer Mesic Forest (conifer - hardwood phase)

FCP Spruce - Fir - Aspen Forest

FGA Black Ash - Mixed Hardwood Swamp (green ash - elm phase)

FJF Jack Pine / Balsam Fir Forest

FJM Jack Pine - Aspen / Bush-honeysuckle Forest

FMX Conifer - Hardwood Ruderal Forest

FPE Conifer Plantation

FSF Spruce - Fir / Mountain Maple Forest

FWA White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (conifer - hardwood mesic phase)

FWD White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (dry-mesic phase)

FWM White Pine / Mountain Maple Mesic Forest (conifer mesic phase)

HCC Bluejoint Wet Meadow

HFA Northern Water-lily Aquatic Wetland

HHS Water Horsetail - Spikerush Marsh

HMX Ruderal Grassland

HSG Northern Sedge Wet Meadow

HSV Midwest Pondweed Submerged Aquatic Wetland

HWM Wet Meadow Mixed Herbaceous

NDV Developed Area

NSR Stream & River

NWL Open Water Lake

NWP Open Water Pond

SAH Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (hawthorn mix phase)

SAS Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (classic alder phase)

SAW Gray Alder Swamp Shrubland (willow mix phase)

SDX Deciduous Ruderal Shrubland

SHS Boreal Hazelnut - Serviceberry Rocky Shrubland

VCB Great Lakes Basalt - Diabase Cobble - Gravel Shore

VDT Northern Non-Carbonate Dry Talus Vegetation

VMT Northern Non-Carbonate Moist Talus Vegetation

WPR Boreal Pine Rocky Woodland

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix F: Accuracy Assessment Form F-1

Appendix F: Accuracy Assessment Form

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix F: Accuracy Assessment Form F-3

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE VEGETATION INVENTORY PROJECT: ACCURACY ASSESSMENT FORM

CLASSIFICATION, LOCATION, AND ENVIRONMENT

AA Observation Code: GRPO.AA_________ Survey Date: ____/____/2009 Survey Time: ___________ No Access: ______

State: Minnesota NPS Park Name: Grand Portage National Monument Park Location: _________________________________

Surveyors: ⁭ _____________________ ⁭ _____________________ ⁭ _____________________ ⁭ _____________________

1st Veg Type Name: ______________________________________________________ New? ⁮ Veg Type Code: ____________

2nd Veg Type Name: _____________________________________________________ New? ⁮ Veg Type Code: ____________

Other Veg Type Name within 25 m: _________________________________________ New? ⁮ Veg Type Code: ____________

Field Coordinate (UTM Zone 16, NAD83): X ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ m Easting Y ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ m Northing

GPS Unit: ⁭ Trimble Recon / Pathfinder XC (PDOP: ______ HDOP: ______ ) ⁭ Garmin ___ (DOP: ______ EPE: ______ )

Elevation: ____________ Slope: ____________ Aspect: _____________ Topographic Position: ________________________

Pictures (N – E – S – W – Best): ______________________________________________________________________________

Representativeness of site within polygon: ⁭Good ⁭Fair ⁭Poor ⁭Unknown

Comments (other types nearby, complications at site, uncertainty with type, etc.):

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION

Leaf phenology (of dominant stratum)

Trees and Shrubs

___Evergreen

___Cold-deciduous 

___Mixed evergreen - cold-deciduous

Herbs

___Annual ___Perennial

Leaf Type (of dominant stratum)

___Broad-leaf

___Needle-leaf

 Mixed broad-leaf/Needle leaf

___Micro-phyllous

___Graminoid

___Forb

___Pteridophyte

Physiognomic class

___Forest

___Woodland

___Shrubland

___Dwarf Shrubland

___Herbaceous

___Nonvascular

___Sparsely Vegetated
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix F: Accuracy Assessment Form F-4

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE VEGETATION INVENTORY PROJECT: ACCURACY ASSESSMENT FORM

VEGETATION DESCRIPTION (Continued)

Strata Height Cover Dominant species (mark Diagnostic species with a *) Cover

Class Class Class

T1 Emergent _____ _____ __________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

T2 Canopy _____ _____ __________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

T3 Sub-canopy _____ _____ __________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

S1 Tall shrub _____ _____ __________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

S2 Short Shrub _____ _____ __________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

S3 Dwarf-shrub _____ _____ __________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

H Herbaceous _____ _____ __________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

N Non-vascular _____ _____ __________________________________________________________________

Comments: *** All Cover Estimates Are Absolute!***

Height Scale 

01 <0.5 m

02 0.5-1m

03 1-2 m

04 2-5 m

05 5-10 m

06 10-15 m

07 15-20 m

08 20-35 m

09 35-50 m

10 >50 m

Cover Scale 

T 0-1%

P >1-5%

1 >5-15%

2 >15-25%

3 >25-35%

4 >35-45%

5 >45-55%

6 >55-65%

7 >65-75%

8 >75-85%

9 >85-95%

10 > 95%
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix G: Accuracy Assessment Contingency Table G-1

Appendix G: Accuracy Assessment Contingency Table

National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program

Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix G: Accuracy Assessment Contingency Table G-3

Explanation of the Contingency Matrix

The accuracy assessment contingency matrix for the Grand Portage National Monument 

vegetation map layer is an array of numbers set out in rows and columns to compare results of 

vegetation types represented on the map layer to vegetation types as verified on the ground. 

Map-class codes are used to identify vegetation types for ease of comparison during the analysis.

(A crosswalk between map classes and vegetation types is provided in the main report and in 

Appendix E: Descriptions of Map Classes. The crosswalk reveals the various vegetation types 

assigned to the map-class codes that are used to label vegetation types in this contingency table.)

The columns represent vegetation types in the National Vegetation Classification Standard 

(NVCS).These columns tabulate the producer’s accuracy by showing errors of exclusion 

(omission errors) present in the map. The rows represent the map classes listed by their 

respective map-class codes. (Again, refer to the crosswalk for map-class names and links to 

vegetation types.) These rows tabulate the users’ accuracy by showing errors of inclusion 

(commission errors) present in the map.
National Park Service Vegetation Inventory Program Grand Portage National Monument

Appendix G: Accuracy Assessment Contingency Table G-4

MAP CODES

FWM, 

FWA, 

FWD

FCC, 

FCM FBA, FGA FAP

SAS, 

SAH, 

SAW

FJF FJM FSF FAC FCP WPR SHS HWM HSG HCC HHS VDT VCB TOTAL

USERS' 

ACCURACY

 - + 

FWM, FWA, FWD 11 1 1 13 85% 64% 105%

FCC, FCM 13 1 14 93% 78% 108%

FBA, FGA 6 6 100% 92% 108%

FAP 1 9 1 11 82% 58% 105%

SAS, SAH, SAW 10 10 100% 95% 105%

FJF 5 5 100% 90% 110%

FJM 0 0 x x x

FSF 11 11 100% 95% 105%

FAC 1 1 25 3 30 83% 70% 96%

FCP 1 28 29 97% 89% 104%

WPR 2 1 3 67% 5% 128%

SHS 3 3 100% 83% 117%

HWM 1 1 100% 50% 150%

HSG 5 5 100% 90% 110%

HCC 2 2 100% 75% 125%

HHS 2 2 100% 75% 125%

VDT 1 1 100% 50% 150%

VCB 1 1 100% 50% 150%

Total 12 13 7 11 11 5 1 11 25 33 2 4 1 5 2 2 1 1 147

PRODUCERS' ACCURACY 92% 100% 86% 82% 91% 100% 0% 100% 100% 85% 100% 75% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

90% Confidence Interval - 74% 96% 57% 58% 72% 90% -50% 95% 98% 73% 75% 27% 50% 90% 75% 75% 50% 50%

90% Confidence Interval + 109% 104% 115% 105% 110% 110% 50% 105% 102% 97% 125% 123% 150% 110% 125% 125% 150% 150%

MAP DATA - PREDICTION DATA

135

OMISSION

HSV, HFA, VMT were not assessed for accuracy and thus, are not shown in this matrix.

OVERALL ACCURACY = 91.8% KAPPA INDEX = 90.7% KAPPA INDEX LOWER 90% CONFIDENCE LEVEL = 86.4% KAPPA INDEX UPPER 90% CONFIDENCE LEVEL = 95.0%

COMISSION

90% Confidence 

Intervals

FIELD SAMPLES - REFERENCE DATA

Total Correct = 135

Total Samples = 147
The Department of the Interior protects and manages the nation’s natural resources and cultural heritage; provides scientific and 

other information about those resources; and honors its special responsibilities to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and affiliated 

Island Communities.

NPS 398/102527, May 2010
National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

Natural Resource Program Center

1201 Oakridge Drive, Suite 150

Fort Collins, CO 80525

www.nature.nps.gov

EXPERIENCE YOUR AMERICA TM