Ecological Land Classification of Mount Revelstoke and Glacie r ...

Alberta Instituteof PedologyUniversity of AlbertaEnvironmentCanadaEnvironnementCanad aEcological Land Classificationof Mount Revelstoke and Glacie rNational Parks, British ColumbiaVol . I :Integrated Resource DescriptionEditors : P. L . Achuff, W.D. Holland, G.M . Coen, and K. Van Tighem

Table of ContentsFIGURES - . ._ _ .._-.-_.---.- . ..-_ ..-. .-...---_.--..--.-_...- . ._ . iTABLES - _iüPLATESv ÜACKNOWLEDGEMENTSABSTRACTxüiCHAPTER l' PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 1LOCATION, PHYSIOGRAPHY AND DRAINAGE SYSTEMS 1LOCATION -' '''''''' ''-'--'' ' 1PHYSIOGRAPHY . ..--.-- . .- ._.-.-- . . ..-..-...----. ... 1DRAINAGE SYSTEMS . .--.----.. ._ ...-- ._ .-_.- . . 3CLIMATE .__._ . . . .---._ ._ . . .-.- . .- ---._ _._ . ._..._ . 4OVERVIEW AND EAST-WEST TRENDS - ._-.._ . . . ..-.-- ..--- ._ . 4CLIMATE AND ECOREGIONS --- -- 5GEOLOGY 9REGIONAL SETTING --- 9STRATI GBA9BJC FRAMEWORK . . ..-_- .-.---.-- ..- .--- ..-.- . ._ . ..- . ..- . 9STRUCTURAL FRAMEWORK ''_ . ..' ' ' '''' ' . ..' . . .'__''''' ' . . .'' . . . _ _GEOMORPHOLOGY _l 0OVERVIEW-llUNCONSOLIDATED MINERAL COMPONENT 1 2ORGANIC, CONSOLIDATED, AND ICE COMPONENTS 2 3CHAPTER lI - SOILS .- ..- . ..--- .._- . . ._ . ._- ..__._-_ .- . . . .---.__-- . . ..-- 2 5INTRODUCTI ON -.- ._ . ..--- . . .__- ..-.--_ .- -- .- .._-_.-- 2 5METHODS OF SOIL DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS 25FIELD DESCRIPTION METHODS _--.--__ ._ . .- ._ ..-.--..---..-- 25LABORATORY METHODS --- . ...-- .-._--.-.-_.. . . . .--25SOILS AND THEIR DISTRIBUTION - ..-- .-.- . .-..-.----.--.-..--- 20WELL DEVELOPED, WELL DRAINED SOILS 26WEAKLY DEVELOPED, WELL DRAINED SOILS 28WETLAND SOILS . .-._-- ...-.-.-_ .-.--_- . . .-_.-.- . . .- .%9EXCEPTIONAL SOILS ..--.---.. ...- . ..-- . . .-.. .-- ...-.--._---...30CHAPTER III - VEGETATION -... ._._ .- ..-- -.-_..- . .-33INTRODUCTION AND METHODS - -. .--.-- . . .33FIELD SAMPLING ._ . ._ -_-.--_ . ...- ..-_-- ..-_.- . .- .. 3 3VEGETATION CLASSIFICATION ._-..-- ..---_ .._--.--...--.. .33E[K%REGICND -._-_ --_----._--.-.--.. ..-_-_..- ._..---- . .-34VEGETATION TYPE DESCRIPTIONS -._-.--_.-- ..-.--- .-.-- . .-....-37CLOSED FOREST VEGETATION TYPES ._ . ..---._ -_ . . . ._.-__-.--.- .-37OPEN FOREST VEGETATION TYPES _ .- .... ..-_. . .-.- .-53SHRUB VEGETATION TYPES . ..--- .- . . . ... ._ --- h2LOW SHRUB-HERB VEGETATION TYPES -- .-_ .-- . . ._..-.--.---_ . ..-69HERB-DWARF SHRUB VEGETATION TYPES 70SUCCESSION AND CLIMAX _. .-.-.-.----.. . . .-79INTRODUCTI ON - . .--.--.- . . ._ . .- 7gINTERIOR CEDAR-HEMLOCK ECOREGION 8 1ENGELMANN SPRUCE-SUBALPINE FIR ECOREGION 8 1ALPINE ECOREGION . .- . . .---.. .-.----DlWETLANDS -._- ._ . . .-- . .--- ---- .- . . . .- .0lSIGNIFICANT FEATURES --- .-.--.. .-- .- .-.-_ . . .-._.- 82RARE SPECIES ----.--_- . . . ..-- ..--._... . .- .O%OTHER SIGNIFICANT BOTANICAL FEATURES 82CHAPTER IV - WILDLIFE ---.----.-. ._.---- .-.-- .-..-._..-.---.-85I NTRODUCTION _.__ ..---.--.-. .-.--.--- .- .-..---.-.- D5GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WILDLIFE 85METHODS . .--.-.-- ..--- . . ._---.- .D5SAMPLING RATIONALE .-_ . . . . ._-- .06FIELD SAMPLING - . ..---.-.-._--- . . .--.-- .88ECOLOGICAL INTEGRATION - .-_-. . .---_._..--- ..~__8 7SPECIES ASSEMBLAGES .-_ ..----.--- ..---- . ..--. .88SMALL MAMMAL ASSOCIATIONS _ . . .---.----.-_- .-.- .89

CHAPTER V - ECOLOGICAL INTEGRATION OF LANDFORMS, SOILS, VEGETATIONAND WILDLIFE 109ECOLOGICAL LAND CLASSIFICATION METHODOLOGY 109PHILOSOPHICAL PRINCIPLES 109MAPPING METHODOLOGY 109ECOLOGICAL (BIOPHYSICAL) LEGEND CORRELATION 113DESCRIPTION OF ECOSECTIONS/ECOSITES 113INTRODUCTION 11 3AB - ABBOTT ECOSECTION 114AK - ASULKAN ECOSECTION 11 7BU - BALU ECOSECTION 122CE - CHEOPS ECOSECTION 12 6CM - CATAMOUNT ECOSECTION 12 7CT - CUTBANK ECOSECTION 13 0GF - GRIFFITH ECOSECTION 13 5GH - GLACIER HOUSE ECOSECTION 13 8HE - HEATHER ECOSECTION 140HR - HERMIT ECOSECTION 14 2JD - JADE ECOŒECTION 148JN - JONAS ECOSECTION 152KX - KUSKANAX ECO6ECTION 155LK - LOOKOUT ECOSECTION 156LR - LAURETTA ECOSECTION 15 8NC - NORDIC ECOSECTION 160RD - REDOUBT ECOSECTION 166SN - STONEY ECOŒECTI ON 170WR - WITCH TOWER ECOSECTION 17 2ECOSITE MODIFIERS 17 3A - AVALANCHED 17 3B - BURNED 174F - FAILED 174X - LITHIC 174MISCELLANEOUS LANDSCAPES 17 5CR - COLLUVIAL RUBBLE 17 5GL - GLACIER 175M - RECENT MORAINE 175R - ROCKLAND 176RG - ROCK GLACIER 176T - TALUS 176WATER BODIES 177LITERATURE CITED 179APPENDIX A - PLANTS OF MOUNT REVELSTOKE AND GLACIER NATIONALPARKS 191APPENDIX B - ANIMALS OF MOUNT REVELSTOKE AND GLACIER NATIONA LPARKS 21 3INTRODUCTION 21 3AMPHIBIANS 21 3REPTILES 21 3BIRDS 21 3MAMMALS 21 6APPENDIX C - CORRELATION OF MAP UNITS 219APPENDIX D - PEDON DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYTICAL DATA 22 3APPENDIX E - VEGETATION TYPES OF MOUNT REVELSTOKE AND GLACIE RNATIONAL PARKS 259CLOSED FOREST VEGETATION TYPES 259OPEN FOREST VEGETATION TYPES 260SHRUB VEGETATION TYPES 260LOW SHRUB-HERB VEGETATION TYPES 26 1HERB-DWARF SHRUB VEGETATION TYPES 261

FIGURESLocation and drainage systems of Mount Revelstoke and Glacier National Parks 2Major bedrock groups of Mount Revelstoke and Glacier National Parks 11Textural variation among selected samples of coarse textured materials 15Textural variation among selected samples of medium textured materials 1 6Textural variation among selected Fluvial material A samples 2 2Ecoregions of Mount Revelstoke and Glacier National Parks 35Legend for landscape schematics 114Landscape schematic of topographic relationships among AB1 and other Ecosites 115Landscape schematic of topographic relationships among AK and RD Ecosites 11 8Landscape schematic of topographic relationships among BU, HR, JD and othe rEcosites 123Landscape schematic of topographic relationships among CT and other Ecosites 13 1Landscape schematic of topographic relationships among HR and other Ecosites 144Landscape schematic of topographic relationships among JD1, JN2 and other Ecosites 15 2Landscape schematic of topographic relationships among NC and other Ecosites 162i

TABLES1 . Temperature (°C) ranges of selected western Canadian stations 5' Temperature data (°C) for stations in and near MRNP and GNP 63. Mean annual precipitation for stations in and near MRNP and GNP 74. Snow depths for stations in and near MRNP and GNP 85. Characteristics of modal unconsolidated mineral genetic materials in MRNP and GNP 1 36. Characteristics of Residuum A 147. Characteristics of colluvial genetic material units 168. Characteristics of morainal genetic material units 1 89. Characteristics of Ice Contact Stratified Drift C 2010. Characteristics of Glaciofluvial material A 2 111. Characteristics of Fluvial material A 2212. Characteristics of Eolian material B 2 313. Ecological moisture regime classes 3414. Stands of the Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/false azalea (C14) v.t 3815. Stands of the Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/tall bilberry/liverwort (C21) v .t 4016. Stands of the Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/green alder (C25) y .t 4217. Stands of the balsam poplar/horsetail (C28) v .t 4 318. Stands of the spruce-aspen-lodgepole pine-(paper birch)/buffaloberry/pine grass (C44 )19. Stands of the mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C47) v .t 4620. Stands of the Engelmann spruce-mountain hemlock/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C48 )v .t 4 721. Stands of the mountain hemlock-Douglas fir-subalpine fir-Engelmann spruce/rhododen -dron-tall bilberry (C49) v .t 4822. Stands of the western hemlock-western red cedar/western yew/oak fern (C50) v .t 4923. Stands of the western red cedar-western hemlock/devil's club/oak fern (C51) v .t 5 124. Stands of the western hemlock-western red cedar-(Douglas fir)/mountain lover (C52 )v .t 5225. Stands of the Douglas fir-western red cedar/mountain lover (C53) v .t 5426. Stands of the Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/valerian-fleabane (09) y.t 5 527. Stands of the Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/heather (010) v .t 5 628. Stands of the spruce/Labrador tea/brown moss (011) y .t 5 8iii

29. Stands of the aspen-western white pine/mountain lover (015) v.t 5930. Stands of the subalpine fir-mountain hemlock/heather-luetkea (020) v .t 6031. Stands of the Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (021) v .t 6 232. Stands of the subalpine fir-whitebark pine-(Engelmann spruce)/tall bilberry-heathe r(022) v .t 6333. Stands of the Engelmann spruce-black cottonwood/yellow dryad (023) vet 6434. Stands of the subalpine fir-willow (S2) v.t 6535. Stands of the green alder/fem (S13) v .t 6636. Stands of the willow-mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/tall bilberry (S14) v .t 6737. Stands of the willow (S15) v .t 6838. Stands of the alder/skunk cabbage (S17) v .t 6939. Stands of the heather-everlasting (L5) v.t 7040. Stands of the mountain avens-snow willow-moss campion (Hl) v .t 7 141. Stands of the black alpine sedge-everlasting (H2) v.t 7 242. Stands of the yellow dryad-willow herb (H8) v.t 7 343. Stands of the water sedge-beaked sedge (H11) v .t 7444. Stands of the saxicolous lichen (H12) v .t 7645. Stands of the fleabane-valerian (H16) v.t 7746. Stands of the everlasting-white mountain heather-red heather (H18) v .t 7847. Stands of the sedge (H21) v .t 8048. Organization of Ecosections by Ecoregion and genetic material 11 249. Definitive features of the Abbott (AB) Ecosection 11450. Wildlife features of Abbott (AB) Ecosites 11 751. Definitive features of Asulkan (AK) Ecosites 11 752. Wildlife features of Asulkan (AK) Ecosites 12 153. Definitive features of Balu (BU) Ecosites 12 254. Wildlife features of Balu (BU) Ecosites 12 555. Definitive features of the Cheops (CE) Ecosection 12 656. Wildlife features of Cheops (CE) Ecosites 12 757. Definitive features of Catamount (CM) Ecosites 12858. Wildlife features of Catamount (CM) Ecosites 12959. Definitive features of Cutbank (CT) Ecosites 130iv

Wildlife features of Cutbank (CT) Ecosites 133Definitive features of Griffith (GF) Ecosites 135Wildlife features of Griffith (GF) Ecosites 138Definitive features of the Glacier House (GH) Ecosection 139Wildlife features of Glacier House (GH) Ecosites 140Definitive features of the Heather (HE) Ecosection 140Wildlife features of Heather (HE) Ecosites 142Definitive features of Hermit (HR) Ecosites 143Wildlife features of Hermit (HR) Ecosites 147Definitive features of Jade (JD) Ecosites 149Wildlife features of Jade (JD) Ecosites 151Definitive features of the Jonas (JN) Ecosection 153Wildlife features of Jonas (JN) Ecosites 154Definitive features of the Kuskanax (KX) Ecosection 155Wildlife features of Kuskanax (KX) Ecosites 156Definitive features of the Lookout (LK) Ecosection 157Wildlife features of Lookout (LK) Ecosites 15 8Definitive features of Lauretta (LR) Ecosites 15 8Wildlife features of Lauretta (LR) Ecosites 16 0Definitive features of Nordic (NC) Ecosites 16 1Wildlife features of Nordic (NC) Ecosites 16 5Definitive features of Redoubt (RD) Ecosites 167Wildlife features of Redoubt (RD) Ecosites 170Definitive features of the Stoney (SN) Ecosection 170Wildlife features of Stoney (SN) Ecosites 17 1Definitive features of the Witch Tower (WR) Ecosection 17 2Wildlife features of Witch Tower (WR) Ecosites 173v

PLATE S1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 .10 .11 .12 .13 .14 .15 .16 .17 .Subdued topography of recessive Horsethief Creek Group bedrock in the Purcell Mountains(right) contrasting with the rugged topography of resistant Hamill Group bedrock inthe Selkirk Mountains (left) . The Beaver River valley (Purcell Trench) divides the tw ophysiographic units .Areas underlain by Lardeau Group bedrock (foreground) have more subdued topograph ythan areas of Hamill Group bedrock (background and right) .Moraines along the forest edge are the boundary of AB1 landscape below Beaver Glacier .Sampled Orthic Dystric Brunisol of the AB1 Ecosite .Steeply sloping AB1 sample site with sparse vegetation .Sampled Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol (lithic phase) of the AK1 Ecosite .Sampled Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol of the AK5 Ecosite .Subalpine fir-mountain hemlock/heather-luetkea (020) is the dominant v .t . of AK1, AK2and AK4 .Steep, rocky slopes with subalpine fir-whitebark pine-(Engelmann spruce)/tall bilberry-heather(022) open forest typify AK6 .AK5 tract with fleabane-valerian (H16), one of several avalanche v .t .s in the Upper Subalpine.Sampled Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol of the BU1 Ecosite .Sampled Ortstein Humo-Ferric Podzol of the BU2 Ecosite .Mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C47) forest dominates all BUEcosites .Sampled Rego Gleysol of the CE1 Ecosite .Willow (S15) v .t . on CE1 in central MRNP .Sampled Orthic Ferro-Humic Podzol which is an accessory soil of CM2 . Characteristicsoils have similar humus-enriched profiles and include Orthic Dystric and Sombric Bruni -sols and Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzols .CM2 along upper Connaught Creek on a fluvial fan with green alder/fern (S13) vegetationand small patches of the sedge (H21) v .t .vii

18. Sampled Eluviated Dystric Brunisol of the CT1 Ecosite .19. Sampled Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol of CT3 with dark colors derived from LardeauGroup bedrock .20. Sampled Eluviated Dystric Brunisol of the CT5 Ecosite .21. Western hemlock-western red cedar/western yew/oak fern (C50) forest is one of two co -dominant v.t.s characterizing CT Ecosites .22. Fluvial wetland along Mountain Creek with the vegetation pattern typical of GF1, i.e . wetshrub thicket and sedge fen > cedar hemlock forest . The drier, forested fluvial fan(lower left) is mapped as LR1 .23. Sampled Orthic Gleysol of the GF2 Ecosite .24. Sampled Terric Fibrisol of the GF1 Ecosite .25. GF1 landscape with alder/skunk cabbage (S17) vegetation .26. Western red cedar-western hemlock/devil's club/oak fern (C51) forest typical of GF2 an dLR1 .27. Sampled undefined soil of the GH1 Ecosite .28. Landscape around the GH1 sample site with an open, western hemlock variant of th emountain hemlock-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C47) v .t. behind and asparsely vegetated site on blocky, fragmental material in the foreground .29. Sampled Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol (lithic phase) of the HE3 Ecosite .30. HE3 sample site with heather-everlasting (L5) vegetation and rock outcrops .31. Sampled Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol (lithic phase) of the HR6 Ecosite .32. Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/tall bilberry/liverwort (C21) forest is codominant wit hmountain hemlock-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C47) on HR1, HR2, HR 3and HR4 .33. Steep rocky slope with Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (021 )open forest typical of HR6 .34. HR5 (lower to mid slope) and AK5 (mid to upper slope) with a mosaic of avalanchetypes in Clachnacudainn Creek valley . HR6 and AK6 are on rocky terrain to the right o fthe avalanched area .

35. Sampled Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol of the JD4 Ecosite .36. Sampled Orthic Dystric Brunisol (lithic phase) of the JD2 Ecosite .37. Sampled Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol (lithic phase) of JD3 with dark colors derived fromLardeau Group bedrock .38. JD2 landscape on a ridgetop in western GNP with a pattern of tundra (heather-everlasting(L5))plus o n forest (subalpine fir-whitebark pine-(Engelmann spruce)/tall bilberry-heather(022 )39. JD4 landscape near Mount Revelstoke with a pattern of meadow (fleabane-valeria n(H16)) plus open forest (subalpine fir-mountain hemlock/heather-luetkea (020)) .40. Sampled Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol of the JN2 Ecosite .41. Everlasting-white mountain heather-red heather (H18) v .t. typical of JN2 .42. Sampled Eluviated Dystric Brunisol of the KX1 Ecosite .43. KX1 sample site with western hemlock-western red cedar-(Douglas fir)/mountain love r(C52) forest .44. Sampled Gleyed Humo-Ferric Podzol of the LK1 Ecosite. Gleyed Ferro-Humic Podzolsare more characteristic .45. LK1 sample site with a wet, open variant of the Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/tall bilberry/liverwort(C21) v .t .46. Mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C47) forest on an LR1 tract .47. Sampled Orthic Dystric Brunisol of the NC6 Ecosite .48. Aspen-western white pine/mountain lover (015) open forest on NC6 .49. NC5 sample site with the green alder/fern (S13) v .t .50. Sampled Orthic Dystric Brunisol of the RD3 Ecosite .51. Sampled Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol (turbic and lithic phases) of the RD4 Ecosite .52. Sampled Orthic Dystric Brunisol (lithic phase) of RD5 with dark colors derived from LardeauGroup bedrock .ix

53. RD3 sample site with the heather-everlasting (L5) and everlasting-white mountai nheather-red heather (H18) v .t .s .54. RD4 sample site with a stony surface and heather-everlasting (L5) vegetation .55. Bright green on an RD5 tract (midslope to crest) is the black alpine sedge-everlastin g(H2) v .t. The AK5 tract below is dominated by fleabane-valerian (H16) vegetation .56. Braided floodplain along the Incomappleux River consisting of recent glaciofluvial deposits.57. Sampled Orthic Regosol of the SN1 Ecosite .58. SNI sample site with a Engelmann spruce-black cottonwood/yellow dryad (023) open for -est .59. Sampled Orthic Gleysol of the WR1 Ecosite .60. WR1 sample site with fleabane-valerian (H16) vegetation .61. Recent fire has modified (Modifier B) forest vegetation on morainal landscape near CopperstainCreek .62. Valley glaciers, such as Beaver Glacier, are included in the Miscellaneous Landscape GL .63. Recent Moraine (M) below Woolsey Glacier .64. This matterhorn-like peak above the cirque glacier is mapped as R+GL .x

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT SThe Ecological (Biophysical) Land Classification of Mount Revelstoke and Glacier National Parkswas conducted jointly by :Environment Canada- Canadian Forestry Service, Northern Forest Research Centre, Edmonto n- Canadian Wildlife Service, Edmonto nAgriculture Canad a- Alberta Pedology Unit, Land Resource Research Institute, Edmonto nAlberta Institute of Pedolog y- University of Alberta, Edmonton .Major funding was provided by Parks Canada . Assistance provided by the Western Regional Office ,Parks Canada, Calgary is acknowledged, in particular : P .A . Benson, J .C . Holroyd and K .E. Seel .The authors also express their appreciation for the cooperation and assistance of W . Gallacher, J .Turnbull, B. McKinnon, J . Woods and all the wardens in both parks .Thanks go to the following for assistance in plant identification : S. Aitken, G .W . Argus, I . Brodo ,S. Darbyshire, D.G . Horton, J .E . Marsh, G .A. Mulligan, L . Pavlick and D .H . Vitt .Recognition is extended for assistance in the field and office by : L.M . Cole, S .M . Dupuis, J .R .Dyck, M. Dyer, M .D . Fairbarns, J . McGillis, K .J . Naess, D . Poll, K . Waite, R . Wershler, Z .Widtman and the volunteers listed in Volume II (Van Tighem and Gyug [1984]) . W .C . McKean an dA . Schwartzer conducted soil analyses .Excellent service was provided by helicopter pilots D . McTighe and B . Wilson .The Canadian Wildlife Service, Edmonton is acknowledged, including major assistance by S . Popowichand L . Strembiski and the support of B . Briscoe, G . Scotter and E. Telfer . Special thanks goto G .L . Holroyd. Wildlife inventory project leader until January 15, 1984 .The Land Resource Research Institute, Ottawa contributed in drafting of the maps by B . Edward sand the Cartography Section and in data processing through the Canada Soil Information Syste m(CanSI S) .The assistance of the Canadian Forestry Service, Edmonton including G.T . Silver, R .W . Reid, S .S .Malhotra, A .D. Kill, J . Powell and the administrative staff, is acknowledged . Special thanks go toW . Chow for computer services, to P . Debnam for photographic assistance, and to the stenographi cpool .xi

ABSTRACTMount Revelstoke and Glacier National Parks are in the Columbia Mountains of southeastern BritishColumbia between 51° 00' and 51° 29' N and 11T 12' and 118° 13' W . The Ecological Land Classificationof the parks is an integrated resource inventory of landform, soil, vegetation and wildlife in -formation presented in both report and 1 :50,000 map format . A three-level, hierarchical land classificationsystem was developed using existing landform and soil classifications plus a rlasscation o f34 vegetation types developed by the authors . The three levels are based on national guidelines forecological land classification and are, from highest to lowest level of generalization, Ecoregion, Eco -section and Ecosite .Ecoregion separations are based primarily on vegetation physiognomy and species composition whic hreflect macroclimate . Interior Cedar-Hemlock, Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir and Alpine Ecoregionsare recognized . The Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir Ecoregion is divided into Lower Subalpineand Upper Subalpine portions based on vegetational characteristics reflecting macroclimatic differences.The Ecoregions are divided into 19 Ecosections . Ecosection separations are based on landform ,drainage class and soil differences . Landforms are composed of eight genetic materials which are dividedinto 11 genetic material units based on textural and chemical (calcareousness/reaction) differences.The Ecosections are divided into 50 Ecosites based on bedrock, landform, soil and vegetational differencesinsufficient to warrant separation at the Ecosection level . Ecosites plus seven Miscellaneou sLandscapes are the map units delineated . The landforms, soils, vegetation and wildlife of each Eco -section and Ecosite are described . Wildlife information includes the importance of each Ecosite fo rmost of the common animals and descriptions of 11 breeding bird communities and 10 small mamma lassociations .A total of 239 animal species is recorded in the parks, including four amphibians, three reptiles, 17 8birds and 54 mammals . A total of 841 plant taxa occurs in the parks; 546 are vascular plants, 36 ar eliverworts, 130 are mosses and 129 are lichens .

CHAPTER I - PHYSICAL ENVIRONMEN TLOCATION, PHYSIOGRAPHY AND DRAINAGE SYSTEM SD .T. Allan, B.D .Walker and W .S . TaylorLOCATIONMount Revelstoke National Park (MRNP) and Glacier National Park (GNP) are in the Columbi aMountains (Holland 1964, Bostock 1970) of southeastern British Columbia (Fig . 1) . MRNP extend snorth to south approximately 20 km between 51°00' and 51°12' N and east to west about 22 km between11752' and 118°13' W . MRNP occupies 260 km 2 with the city of Revelstoke near the south -west boundary .GNP extends north to south for approximately 50 km between 51°02' and 51°29' N and east to wes tfor approximately 50 km between 11712' and 11755' W . It covers 1349 km 2 and is centered on Rog -ers Pass, British Columbia . The Trans-Canada Highway and Canadian Pacific Railway both transec tGNP extending from the northeastern corner along the Beaver River to the western boundary alon gthe Illecillewaet River .PHYSIOGRAPHYMRNP and GNP occur in the Columbia Mountains of the Southern Plateau and Mountain Are awhich is in the Interior System of the Canadian Cordillera (Holland 1964, Bostock 1970) .Physiography and landform in the Canadian Cordillera Region are governed by geomorphic process ,bedrock character, and orogenic or structural history (Holland 1964) . MRNP and GNP are underlainpredominantly by folded and faulted metasedimentary rocks uplifted by orogenic deformation durin gthe Tertiary (Holland 1964) . Erosion, mainly fluvial and glacial, has operated since then . The generaltopography is controlled by differences in resistance to erosion . Valleys reflect softer rocks whilepeaks and ridges are underlain by more resistant beds . Bedrock here trends northwesterly which controlsthe direction of the ranges and has imposed a trellis-like pattern on the drainage systems (Holland1964) .MRNP and GNP contain portions of the Selkirk Mountains and the northwestern flank of the Purcel lMountains, two of four major Columbia Mountain subdivisions (Holland 1964, Baird 1965, Bostoc k1970) . The Selkirks are composed mostly of three bedrock groups that control general topography i nMRNP and GNP : Hamill Group, Lardeau Group, and Shuswap Metamorphic Complex . With theaddition of the Horsethief Creek Group, which dominates the northwestern Purcells, MRNP an dGNP encompass four physiographic units that reflect bedrock geology .Easternmost GNP is in the Purcell Mountains and is separated from the more rugged Selkirks by th eBeaver River valley also called the Purcell Trench (Wheeler 1963) . Recessive, slate and schist bedroc kin this area of the Purcells controls the general topography which is the most rounded and subdued i nthe two parks (Plate 1) . High elevation topography, with low to moderate internal relief, includesboth broad and narrow, rounded, ridge tops and poorly defined cirques and valley shoulders. Most ofthese landscapes show evidence of glaciation but present glaciers are few and very small . Mountainpeaks are also poorly defined being little more than elevated parts of the interconnecting ridges . Mostare rounded or elongated and

NFig . 1 . Location and drainage systems of Mount Revelstoke and Glacier National Parks .

Massive, highly resistant lithologies, mainly quartzite, within the Hamill and granitic intrusive rock sproduce the most rugged topography in MRNP and GNP (Plate 1) . Massive, precipitous, mountai npeaks and narrow, craggy, serrated ridges are abundant with most peaks >2700 m . Several peaks inthe Hermit, Sir Donald, Dawson, Bishops, and Purity Ranges are 3200 m. The highest peaks are :Mount Dawson, consisting of Hasler Peak (3390 m), Mount Selwyn (3360 m), Feuz Peak (3350 m )and Michel Peak (3077 m) ; Mount Wheeler (3363 m); and Mount Sir Donald (3297 m) . Long, connectingridges are uncommon except around the northwestern boundary. Well defined cirques areabundant, particularly on northerly and easterly aspects . Glaciers and icefields occur extensively inthe highest areas. Deeply incised, narrow, glaciated valleys separate most mountain ranges . Thesehave very steep walls that often include craggy and gullied portions . Internal relief is frequently 1500m but ranges from 1000 m above low passes to nearly 2250 m between Mount Sir Donald and th eBeaver River. Vegetated landscape occupies a significantly greater proportion of this relief than doesunvegetated terrain, except in areas of high peaks and extensive glaciers .Recessive slate and schist bedrock of the Lardeau Group occupies a small area along the southwester nboundary of GNP (Plate 2) . The topography is similar to the Purcells in eastern GNP but valle ywalls are steeper and longer, internal relief is 1100 to 1800 m, and some have craggy sections . Thehighest elevations (Corbin Peak, 2712 m) occur along the connecting ridges that form the southwest -ern park boundary . Most of the vertical relief is vegetated . The mountain ridges are steeper and narrowerthan in the Purcells and well defined cirque valleys extend north and east from the main ridges .Current glaciers are few and very small .A great variety of metamorphic and granitic rocks of the Shuswap Metamorphic Complex characterizesMRNP . Thus, the variety of resistances to erosion gives more than one kind of topography .One type, occurring in Clachnacudainn Creek-Inverness Peaks and West Woolsey Creek areas, re -sembles the rugged topography of the Hamill area in GNP, in having narrow valleys with long, steep ,often craggy walls culminating in precipitous, cliffy, narrow ridge and mountain tops . A second ,more extensive ty of topography occurs in the vicinity of Mount Revelstoke . Narrow valley floors(e.g. Illecillewaet) are bounded by long, steep slopes which grade at about mid-slope (1500-1900 m )to broad, rounded, hummocky or ridged, plateau-like shoulders or cirques. Small isolated peaks ornarrow mountain ridges, well back from the valley wall, complete the profile . Valleys in MRNP aredeeply incised and narrow with little benchland along floors . Vertical relief of >1800 m is commo nalong the Illecillewaet and Columbia rivers . The maximum range is Revelstoke townsite (456 m) toMount Revelstoke summit (1938 m), and to Mount Coursier, the highest peak in MRNP (2646 m) .Most of this vertical relief is vegetated . Glaciers are extensive in MRNP, the largest occurring on thenortheast side of Inverness Peaks and Mount Coursier .DRAINAGE SYSTEMSMRNP and GNP occur within the Columbia Initial Drainage Division (Shera and Grant 1980), als ocalled the Columbia Basin . MRNP and GNP drain via the Columbia and Illecillewaet Major RiverWatersheds (Shera and Grant 1980) . The Beaver River, flowing north to the Columbia River, drain sthe eastern and northern parts of GNP . Main tributaries in east-central GNP are Connaught, Grizzly,East Grizzly, and Copperstain creeks . The largest tributary, Mountain Creek, and its tributarie sdrain the northwestern quarter of GNP .The Illecillewaet River and tributaries drain the central and southwestern portion of GNP and themajority of MRNP . Major tributaries of the Illecillewaet River in GNP include Bostock and Flatcreeks, and Asulkan, Cougar, and Loop brooks. Major tributaries of the Illecillewaet River i nMRNP include Maunder, West Woolsey, Woolsey, Clachnacudainn, Bridge, and Hamilton creeks. Al lare part of the Illecillewaet Major River Watershed which empties into the Columbia River at Revel -stoke townsite . Coursier and St. Cyr creeks and other smaller tributaries on the western side o fMRNP drain directly into the Columbia River .The Incomappleux River and tributaries drain the south central and southern portion of GNP . Majortributaries in GNP include Van Home and Bain brooks and Mitre and Black creeks .Very few lakes occur in GNP . The only named lakes are Schuss Lake on Mount Fidelity and MarionLake above Glacier station. A notable unnamed lake occurs at the mouth of Glacier Circle . Othe rsmall unnamed lakes and ponds occur in backwater localities along the Beaver River and MountainCreek .3

MRNP contains several high elevation lakes. The most notable include Millar, Eva, Upper and LowerJade, Heather, and Balsam lakes . Limnological studies on lakes (Donald and Alger 1984) an dstreams (Alger and Donald 1984) in MRNP and GNP were done as part of the ecological inventory .CLIMATEB.D . Walker and P .L . AchuffOVERVIEW AND EAST-WEST TRENDSClimatic data for MRNP and GNP are scarce . Except for a brief brochure on the climate of MRN Pand GNP (Parks Canada 1980), most climatic discussions of the area are generalized (Chapman 1952 ,Krajina 1965) .Mean annual temperature range (difference between mean temperatures of the warmest and coldes tmonths, Chapman 1952) and temperature range (difference between extreme maximum and minimumtemperatures, Janz and Storr 1977) have been suggested as simple measures of climatic continentality .Comparison of such data from various western Canadian stations (Table 1) shows that temperatur eregimes in MRNP and GNP more closely resemble those of continental climate (e.g. Prince GeorgeAirport, Edmonton International Airport) than of maritime climate (e.g. Prince Rupert) . Nevertheless,winter temperatures in the two parks tend to be weakly moderated by Pacific air and usuall yshow higher mean and extreme minima than stations in the Rockies to the east (Table 2) . The moderating,maritime influence increases with increasing elevation, although inversions, which are commonin mountainous areas (Chapman 1952, Janz and Storr 1977), may account for mild extreme an dmean minima at Mount Fidelity (Table 2) .Precipitation in MRNP and GNP better reflects maritime influence than does temperature. Meanannual precipitation (Table 3) is about three times greater on an equal elevation basis in the Columbiaswhen compared with the Rockies . The precipitation regime is characterized by a well definedwinter maximum in December or January, with heavy snowfall, and a summer minimum . A weaksecondary maximum usually occurs in June and reflects continental influence . Otherwise, 65 to 70%of total precipitation consistently occurs in the winter months (Table 3), which is comparable t oPrince Rupert (63%, Atmospheric Environment n .d .a) . Snow depth (Table 4), particularly for higherelevation stations, supports these precipitation trends .The northwest-southeast orientation of the mountains exerts considerable influence on air mass move -ment in Western Canada . The Rocky Mountains offer considerable resistance to westward movementof dry Arctic air masses although there is occasional spillover through large passes (Chapman 1952 ,Janz and Storr 1977) . The mountains offer less protection against cold air from the Yukon and Alas -ka that occasionally moves parallel to the trend of relief into the British Columbia Interior (Chapman1952) . Most often, MRNP and GNP are affected by eastward-moving, moist, mild Pacific air tha tlifts and cools over the Columbias where it releases much of its moisture before reaching the Rockies .Thus, the Columbias are much wetter than the Rockies or the Interior Plateau to the west .Precipitation trends related to the west to east flow of moist Pacific air also occur within the immediatepark area . Based on vegetational features, two areas were noted as being drier in MRNP an dGNP . Both are at low elevations within the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregion on southwesterl yaspects. The first is above Revelstoke townsite and the second on the east wall of the Beaver Rivervalley . The Revelstoke area is dry probably because of its very low elevation (Tables 2 and 3) an dpossibly because of a rain shadow effect of the Monashee Mountains to the west . Aside from aspectand low elevation, the eastern wall of the Beaver River valley is drier than other parts of GNP be -cause it occurs on the leeward side of the Columbia Mountains . Comparison of snow depth (Table 4 )on an equal elevation basis suggests that total precipitation is less in leeward (Sunbeam Lake, BuabooCreek, and Vermont Creek stations) vs . windward areas of the Columbias . On an equal elevationbasis, the Purcell Mountains are likely drier than the Selkirks and have decreasing total precipitationeastwards. These precipitation trends are consistent with previously delineated boundaries separatin gforest regions or systems (Interior Wet Belt vs. Dry Interior boundary follows the Purcell divide ,Wittneben 1980) and climatic regions (Wet Region vs . Moist Region boundary follows the Beave rRiver, Lloyd 1983) . There are few data with which to evaluate east-west temperature trends acros sthe park area .4

Table 1 . Temperature (°C) ranges of selected western Canadian stations . (Atmospheri cEnvironment n .d.a & n .d .b )StationWarmes tMonthDailyiColdestMonthMeanAnnua lRangeExt .Max .Ext .Min .Ext .RangePrince Rupert 13 .5 1 .7 11 .8 32 .2 -21 .1 53 . 352 mPrince George A 15 .1 -12 .1 27 .2 34.4 -50.0 84 .4676 mRevelstoke 19 .0 -6 .1 25 .1 40.6 -34.4 75 .0456 mMount Fidelity 11 .1 -9.5 20.6 27 .8 -30.5 58 . 31875 mRogers Pass 13 .3 -10 .9 24.2 32.8 -38 .9 71 . 71323 mYNP Boulder Ck . 15 .3 -10 .9 26.2 33 .0 -35 .0 68 .01219 mBanff 14.8 -11 .5 26.3 34 .4 -51 .1 85 . 51397 mEdmonton Intl . A 15 .8 -16 .5 32.3 35 .0 -48 .3 83 .3715 mCLIMATE AND ECOREGIONSAltitude plays a major role in modifying regional climate and its effects are especially noticeable i nmountainous areas (]Chapman 1952) . Vegetation, as a biotic component of an ecosystem, reflects elevationalcontrols on climate . Thus, vegetational features have been used to delimit climatic units .Based primarily on vegetational physiognomy and composition, four units have been delineated : InteriorCedar-Hemlock Ecoregion, Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir Ecoregion with Lower Subalpineand Upper Subalpine portions, and Alpine Ecoregion .INTERIOR CEDAR HEMLOCK ECOREGIO NMost of the climatic data for MRNP and GNP are from the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregio n(Tables 2 and 3), which is warmest and driest although much wetter than its elevational counterpar t(Montane Ecoregion) in the Rockies. Mean annual temperature is >1°C but the Interior Cedar- -Hemlock experiences the greatest temperature range with extreme minima of -30° to -35°C and mea nminima of -10° to -15°C . Mean maxima are 21° to 28°C and extreme maxima have reached 40°C at th elowest elevations (Table 2) . Summer frost at Glacier is less frequent than at Banff or Radiu m(Atmospheric Environment 1975a), which indicates mild climate . Various inversions (Janz and Storr1977) likely occur . The result, particularly of diurnal inversions common in summer, is cold ai rdrainage to valley bottoms and a thermal belt with warmer temperatures on valley walls . Cold airdrainage is likely pronounced in valleys below glaciers .Mean annual precipitation in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock is 1000 to 1700 mm with most occurring i nwinter (Table 3) . Minimum precipitation occurs in April or May and again in July to August or occasionallySeptember. June precipitation is consistently greater than in other spring and summe rmonths and often equals precipitation of late winter and early fall months . Mean annual snowfall is5

o'Table 2 . Temperature data (°C) for stations in and near MRNP and GNP .Station and ElevationEcoregionExt .Max .Ext .Min .Mean Maxima Mean MinimaMay Jun Jul Aug Se pNov Dec Jan Feb Ma rRevelstoke Airport ICH 36 .1 -29 .4 1 20 .6 23 .0 26 .6 25 .0 19 .2 -2 .0 - 6 .8 -11 .1 - 7 .5 -4 .4 6 . 52 19 .7 22 .3 26 .5 25 .3 19 .0 -2 .0 - 6 .2 - 9 .8 - 5 .9 -3 .8 6 . 6443 mRevelstoke ICH 40 .6 -34 .4 1 20 .6 23 .7 27 .8 25 .8 20 .4 -1 .8 - 6 .1 - 9 .1 - 5 .8 -3 .2 7 . 2456 m 2 20 .2 23 .4 27 .2 25 .8 19 .3 -2 .5 - 6 .8 - 9 .2 - 5 .1 -3 .3 6 . 9Glacier Avalanche RS ICH 35 .0 -35 .6 2 13 .3 17 .5 22 .1 20 .3 14 .6 -6 .6 -10 .9 -13 .1 -10 .1 -7 .9 2 . 31177 mGlacier ICH 36 .7 -35 .6 1 14 .1 18 .3 22 .2 20 .4 14 .8 -7 .1 -10 .7 -14 .1 -11 .2 -8 .4 2 . 11248 mRogers Pass ICH 32 .8 -38 .9 111 .5 16 .9 21 .8 20 .2 14 .8 -7 .3 -11 .7 -14 .7 -10 .4 -9 .0 1 . 51323 m 11 .4 16 .6 20 .9 19 .7 13 .6 -7 .4 -11 .4 -13 .6 - 9 .4 -8 .2 1 . 5Mount Fidelity ESSF 27 .8 -30 .5 2 7 .9 10 .9 16 .3 16 .0 9 .8 -8 .4 -11 .0 -11 .9 - 9 .1 -9 .0 0 . 21875 mGolden Montane 40 .0 -46 .1 119 .9 23 .3 27 .1 25 .1 20 .0 -5 .9 -11 .3 -15 .3 -11 .1 -7 .0 4 . 8787 m 19 .2 22 .7 26 .1 24 .8 18 .8 -6 .3 -11 .5 -15 .3 -10 .6 -6 .9 4 . 6YNP Boulder Creek Montane 33 .0 -35 .0 2 15 .7 19 .7 23 .7 22 .2 16 .7 -8 .4 -12 .0 -14 .5 -10 .3 -7 .5 2 .91219 mAnnualMea n' Atmospheric Environment (1975a) : 1941-70, 5-30 yrs . dat a2Atmospheric Environment (n .d .a) : 1951-80, 5-30 yrs . data

Table 3. Mean annual precipitation (MAP) for stations in and near MRNP and GNP .Station Elevation MAP `b Oct-Mar `b as snowICH1=1278 minRevelstoke A 443 m 947 2 65 37Revelstoke 456 m 1096' 65 361064 2 65 39Albert Canyon 640 m 1014' 64 ndGlacier Avalanche RS 1177 m 1725 2 67 6 4Glacier 1248 m 1493' 66 65Rogers Pass 1323 m 1606 2 70 6 8MontaneGolden 787 m 473' 57 44477' 56 44YNP Boulder Ck . 1219 m 557 2 47 4 5Banff 1397 m 477' 40 4 3471 2 40 44ESSF R=1995 mmMount Fidelity 1875 m 21692 69 7 81914 m 1821' 65 nd'Atmospheric Environment (1975b) : 1941-70, 5-30 yrs . data .'Atmospheric Environment (n .d.a & n.d .b) : 1951-80, 5-30 yrs . data .'Atmospheric Environment (n.d .c) : 1-7 yrs . data .35 to 70% of total precipitation and the proportion increases with increasing elevation (Table 3) . TheInterior Cedar-Hemlock is rarely snow-free in winter . Snow course data from MRNP and GNP forFebruary, March and April show no zero readings over a 40 to 44 year period (Inventory and EngineeringBranch 1980) .The only wind records available for the MRNP and GNP area from Revelstoke and Revelstoke Air -port (Atmospheric Environment 1982) suggest that winds are generally light in valleys . Mean win dspeeds are fairly uniform over the year (3 .5-6 .0 km/hr) with the highest speeds occurring in summer .Prevailing wind direction at Revelstoke is SE from October to February and NW from March to September.Frequencies are also high for westerly and easterly winds . At Revelstoke A, prevailing winddirection is NE in all months except February (SE) . Frequency is also high for SE, S and NW windsin most months . These differences show that surface wind direction is highly variable and determine dby the mountain topography . Calm periods are few in summer but common in winter (13% and 22 %frequency for the two stations in January, Atmospheric Environment 1982) .ENGELMANN SPRUCE-SUBALPINE FIR ECOREGIO NThe Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir Ecoregion occurs at elevations above the Interior Cedar-Hemlockand is moister and cooler . Mean annual temperature is probably

Table 4. Snow depths for stations in and near MRNP and GNP .Mean Snow Depth (cm )Station and elevation March 1 April 1 May 1 June 1ICHRevelstoke 95 71 24 nd560 mGlacier 185 188 155 5 91250 mNew Glacier 179 179 141 5 81250 mMontaneField 65 53 10 n d1280 mESSFMount Copeland 358 375 360 23 51700 mMount Revelstoke 285 311 288 1961830 mMount Fidelity 313 333 310 2391870 mMount Abbott 297 337 326 26 51980 mSunbeam Lake 235 272 248 nd2010 mSubalpin eBugaboo Creek 128 129 78 11510 mVermont Creek 144 154 131 nd1520 mPrecipitation generally increases with increasing elevation and the Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir inMRNP and GNP receives substantial amounts (1700 to >2100 mm mean annual precipitation, Tabl e3) . Most (60-80% or more) occurs as snow and deep snowpack often lasts well into June or Jul y(Table 4) . The precipitation regime is virtually the same as the Interior Cedar-Hemlock .Winds are generally light but increase with elevation . The windiest localities are in passes and at th ehighest Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir elevations where stunted and krummholz open forests ar eprevalent .8

ALPINE ECOREGIONThe Alpine Ecoregion occurs at elevations above the Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir Ecoregion andhas the coldest, most rigorous climate as demonstrated by the lack of forest vegetation . Cool meantemperatures are inferred from temperatures at lower elevations and temperature range is probablynarrowest in the Alpine . Precipitation increases with altitude but somewhere in the Alpine the tren dmay reverse. As in the Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir, most of the precipitation probably occursas snow .Wind is important in the Alpine . Janz and Storr (1977) report that areas above about 2300 m in theRockies are windy but winds may be light for several days in succession, particularly in summer. Thisis likely true of the Columbias as well and it appears that wind determines effective precipitation inthe Alpine. Most Alpine areas are exposed and snow is probably redistributed to lower elevations orto avalanche starting zones. On Bald Mountain in eastern GNP, wind exposure may be responsibl efor the unusually low elevation (about 2200 m) at which Alpine occurs. Thus, with wind as a con -trolling factor, the Alpine in MRNP and GNP may not receive significantly more effective precipitationthan Alpine areas in the Rocky Mountain parks . Within Alpine areas, complex vegetation pat -terns are often linked to varying topographic exposures and resultant snow depth variability .GEOLOGYW .S. TaylorREGIONAL SETTINGMount Revelstoke and Glacier National Parks lie within the Columbia Mountains which are in thesouthern portion of the Omineca Crystalline Belt, a central sector of the Cordilleran Orogen . TheCordilleran Orogen is a circum-Pacific orogenic belt that averages 800 km in width . It has beenevolving since the mid-Proterozoic, starting at that time as the Cordilleran Geosyncline . At present ,the region is tectonically quiet (Douglas et al. 1970) .STRATIGRAPHIC FRAMEWOR KMuch of the bedrock in MRNP and GNP was once sediment of the Cordilleran Geosyncline which isnow strongly altered. The metasediments have been grouped into rock-stratigraphic units (Okulitch1949, Wheeler 1963, 1965, Baird 1965,, Ross 1968, Douglas et al. 1970, Price and Mountjoy 1970 ,Gilman 1972, Poulton and Simony 1980) .The oldest strata make up the Late Precambrian Horsethief Creek Group . It contains some quartzite ,grit, metaconglomerate, and carbonate units, but most notable is the predominance of slate andschist. The Late Precambrian-Lower Cambrian Hamill Group occurs next in the sequence . It ismostly quartzite and contains minor slate, phyllite, schist, grit, and conglomerate . Grizzly Creek(GNP) contains one minor exposure of Lower Cambrian Donald Formation . The similarly agedBadshot Formation, though not extensive, outcrops in locations that are important because of thelimestone content . The Nakimu Caves are developed in the Badshot Formation in upper Couga rCreek. The Lardeau Group has the youngest metasedimentary rocks, possibly Middle Cambrian . Itcontains argillite, phyllite, metasiltstone, carbonate, and minor quartzite and conglomerate (all generallydark colored), but most notable are the carbonaceous slate and schist .Plutonic rocks also outcrop. Granitic rock, typically granodiorite, occurs in southwestern GNP(Wheeler 1963) and on west facing slopes above the Columbia River in MRNP (Ross 1968) . Quartzmonzonite is extensive in northcentral MRNP (Ross 1968) . The plutons probably evolved in pulsesover a long time period (Douglas et al. 1970), although a Cretaceous age has been given, probably fo rcompletion (Okulitch and Woodsworth 1977) . A body of granitic gneiss crops out in two parallelnorthwest trending bands that run from southeastern to northern MRNP (Ross 1968, Gilman 1972) .Though possibly plutonic, it may be a slice of Precambrian basement rock tectonically thrust into themetasediments . It was emplaced either prior to or during the regional metamorphism (Gilman 1972) .Okulitch and Woodsworth (1977) give a Devonian age for the gneiss .9

STRUCTURAL FRAMEWOR KBedrock in the parks has probably experienced several orogenic episodes, starting as early as the Pre- .cambrian (Douglas et at. 1970) . Traditionally it was held that the area was most affected by the ColumbianOrogeny, a period of deformation, regional metamorphism, granitic intrusion, and uplift tha tlasted from Late Jurassic to earliest Upper Cretaceous (Douglas et al. 1970, Price and Mountjoy1970) . However, Price and Mountjoy indicate no implicit separation between the influence of th eColumbian and later Laramide Orogenies on the eastern portion of the Cordilleran Geosyncline .Thus, mountain building probably occurred in successive pulses from Late Jurassic to Mid-Tertiar y(Eocene) . Structures produced are complex, resembling a crude anvil or mushroom shape in cros ssection at a gross scale (Douglas et al. 1970) .Within the Columbia Mountains, the Purcell (or Dogtooth) Mountains occur east of the Beaver Rive rin GNP . The Beaver River valley, referred to as the Purcell Trench (Wheeler 1963), separates th ePurcells from the Selkirk Mountains which extend west to the Columbia River at Revelstoke townsite .The Purcells in GNP are composed almost exclusively of Horsethief Creek Group strata . In the balanceof GNP, the Selkirks contain nearly the entire sequence of metasedimentary strata, as well a sgranitic rock . MRNP occurs on the western boundary of the Selkirks and as an eastward projectio nof the Shuswap Metamorphic Complex . shares some similarities with the Monashee Mountains to th ewest . Highly metamorphosed strata of the Horsethief Creek and Hamill Groups crop out along withthe granitic rock and gneiss in MRNP (Ross 1968) .The characteristics of unsorted sediments and their source bedrock are often linked . These relation -ships were identified for residual, colluvial, and morainal materials in MRNP and GNP . The pre -dominant lithologic influence in Horsethief Creek Group strata is the schists and slates that generat enoncalcareous, medium textured sediments . Quartzite portions of the Hamill Group give rise to non -calcareous, coarse textured deposits . However, the Hamill often consisits of interbedded quartzites ,schists, and quartzitic phyllites (Okulitch 1949), so textures vary unpredictably between coarse an dmedium. The predominance of carbonaceous schists and slates in the Lardeau Group is reflected i nits dark colored, noncalcareous, medium textured overburden . Limestone in the Badshot Formationand locally within the other Groups, especially Lardeau, produces small areas of calcareous, mediu mtextured drift . The granitic intrusives and gneiss erode to form noncalcareous, coarse textured sediments.Extensive areas of the major bedrock groups are shown in Fig . 2, compiled from Wheeler (1963 ,1965) . Source bedrock was a major criterion for separating Ecosites on colluvium and till . Fig . 2thus predicts areas where various Ecosites will occur .Other landscape features correlate with bedrock lithology. Quartzites and granitic rocks are more resistantthan schists and slates . The most rugged topography thus occurs in a northwesterly trendin gband through central GNP, flanked to the east and west by more subdued peaks . Medium texturedsediments from the slates and shales have a significant component of micaceous minerals, while thos efrom quartzite or granitic rock have predominantly quartz grains . Pedogenic cementing is common incoarse tills from the latter sources, but is virtually absent from the medium textured tills derived fromthe slates and schists . Thus, pedogenic cementing occurs in MRNP and through the band of HamillGroup in central GNP . Other relationships between bedrock and Ecosites are identified throughou tthe text .GEOMORPHOLOGYB.D .Walker, W .S . Taylor and D .T. AllanOVERVIEW- Soil and vegetation development is influenced by landform . Landform consists of genetic material ,surface expression, and modifying processes (C .S .S.C . 1978a) . Genetic materials are emphasized inthis section and are defined, with slight modification, according to the C .S.S .C. (1978a) landformclassification system. A similar system was used to map surficial materials of the Seymour Arm map10

Fig . 2. Major bedrock groups of Mount Revelstoke and Glacier National Parks .11

area (Fulton et al. 1984) which includes western MRNP . Genetic materials are organized into fourgroups : unconsolidated mineral, organic, consolidated (bedrock) and ice .UNCONSOLIDATED MINERAL COMPONENTThe unconsolidated mineral group is divided according to mode of formation or deposition with eightgenetic material classes recognized (modified from C .S .S .C . 1978a) . They are in Table 5 in order o fincreasing source diversity, increasing influence on properties by depositional agents, and decreasin gbedrock lithology influence. Seven classes are important to Ecosection/Ecosite separations in theEcological Land Classification legend .Genetic material classes are MRNP and GNP divided according to textural and chemical (calcareous )properites imparted either by source area lithology or modified by depositional media . Eleven geneti cmaterial units (Table 5) occur in MRNP and GNP but only ten are the basis for separations in th eEcological Land Classification . These units correspond to the genetic material units identified for th eBanff -Jasper (BNP -JNP) Ecological Land Classification (Walker et al. 1982a) .RESIDUAL GENETIC MATERIA LResidual material (. R U ) is physically and chemically weathered bedrock and includes saprolit e(C .S.S.C. 1978a) . It occurs as a thin veneer conforming to the underlying inclined, ridged, andsometimes hummocky bedrock . Residual landforms occur primarily on high elevation cirque floor sand ridge crests in the Alpine where they form the Heather 3 (HE3) Ecosite . Slopes are complex ,generally 15 to 45%, with local variations of 45% . Exposed bedrock on ridge crests andshort steep escarpments, till on parts of cirque floors, and colluvium on steep slopes, add to topo -graphic complexity of residuum dominated landscapes . The colluvium resembles the original residuu mbut has moved downslope by colluviation and solifluction . Cryoturbation also occurs sporadically .Eolian material B (altered, medium textured), which is important to soil formation, often forms athin, discontinuous veneer over the residuum on gentler slopes . Residuum occasionally occurs on col -luvial and morainal landforms as a thin veneer over slaty or schistose bedrock and below a thin depositof colluvium or till .Bedrock from which residual material is weathered is metasedimentary and usually noncalcareous .Thus, only one genetic material unit, Residuum A (Table 6), is recognized . Its characteristics ,though expanded to include some coarse textured material, are effectively the same as in BNP an dJNP (Walker et al. 1982a) . Medium textures (

Table 5 . Characteristics of modal unconsolidated mineral genetic materials in MR NP and GNP .GeneticGeneticCharacteristic sMaterialMateria lOrigin Symbol' Class Calcareousness Texture Genetic Material Uni tBedrock RU Residual Noncalcareous Medium to coarse Residuum AoGravity C A Landslide Noncalcareous Coarse to fragmental Landslide materia lNC Colluvial Noncalcareous Coarse Colluvium Amô Noncalcareous Medium Colluvium Biv Ice M Morainal Noncalcareous Coarse Till ANoncalcareous Medium Till Bm â Calcareous Medium Till C+qqa•aON ar) MF G Ice Contact Noncalcareous Variable Ice Contact Stratified Drift Cm •aStratifie dFlowing water FG Glaciofluvial Noncalcareous Coarse Glaciofluvial material AF Fluvial Non- to weak Coarse-stratified Fluvial material AAir E Eolian Altered Medium Eolian material BV1 Genetic material symbols are from C .S .S .C . (1978a) except for R U , C A and MFG which are defined in this section .2 Modified from C .S .S .C . (1978a) as outlined in this section .

Table 6. Characteristics of Residuum A .Textural PropertiesGenetic Dominant Calcareous- Fine CoarseMaterial Unit Source ness Earth FragmentsResiduum A Noncalcareous, Noncalcareous 20-90% sand, 50-90%medium and me-0-20% claydium to coars egrained, metasedimentarybedroc kto 90% angular coarse fragments of all sizes, including large boulders . At some sites, this rubbly materialappears till-like . It may have been valley wall till that descended with the landslide orice-modified material if the landslide fell onto a valley glacier . There is no strong evidence either wa yand the landslide age is either late glacial or early postglacial . Eolian material B (altered, mediu mtextured) often mantles well vegetated, rubbly localities as a thin, discontinuous veneer among th elarger coarse fragments . The ground surface remains very to exceedingly stony (C .S .S .C . 1978b) anda few boulders are as large as a house .The subdominant, but distinctive, blocky localities consist of loosely packed boulders (fragments>256 mm) and stones interspersed with large voids . Little or no fine earth is present and the fragmentalmaterial supports only sparse plant cover .The landslide surface is hummocky and reflects genesis rather than bedrock control . Slopes are 15 to30%, highly complex, and of various lengths . Short, gully-like features, often occurring in block ymaterial, and small river-cut terraces with gentle slopes add to topographic complexity .COLLUVIAL GENETIC MATERIA LColluvial genetic material (C) is generated either by gravity-induced slow mass movement or rapi ddownslope displacement of individual rock fragments. It is a subset of colluvial material as define dby C .S .S.C . (1978a) . Soil creep, rockfall, and snow avalanching, with avalanche related fluvial activityincluding mudflows (Ryder 1978, 1981), are mainly responsible for colluvial material accumulation.Colluvium is generally postglacial and mantles steep valley walls . Veneers are most abundant at highelevations (Alpine and Upper Subalpine) and the deposits often deepen downslope, if the slope doe snot steepen . Blankets and veneers are abundant at lower elevations (Interior Cedar-Hemlock an dLower Subalpine) . Colluvial aprons are the deepest deposits and form the lower walls in several valleys.They are invariably associated with snow avalanching but rockfall and avalanche related fluvia lactivity have also occurred . Consolidated bedrock usually underlies colluvium but, at a few sites ,weathering of the bedrock surface has been sufficient to produce veneers of Residuum A (noncalcareous,medium to coarse textured) . This is more likely to occur in recessive, highly jointed, slaty t oshistose strata . Small bedrock outcrops occur sporadically in most colluvial landscapes, except fo raprons and craggy terrain . The former have no exposed bedrock while the latter are characterized b ydiscontinuous colluvial veneers plus bedrock outcrops including large massive cliffs . Craggy terrain ismost extensive in areas with resistant bedrock (Hamill Group and Shuswap Metamorphic Complex ,Fig. 2) and increases in extent with increasing elevation .Colluvial slopes are usually long, straight and 45 to >100% although slopes

sparsely vegetated and unvegetated localities, excluding most exposed bedrock and blocky, fragmenta ltalus, are still active, being affected by both erosional and depositional processes .Two colluvial genetic material units (Colluvium A and Colluvium B) were distinguished in MRN Pand GNP primarily on textural characteristics (Table 7) . Both are noncalcareous and soils developedon them usually are strongly to extremely acid (pH

Table 7. Characteristics of colluvial genetic materials .Textural PropertiesGenetic Dominant Calcareous- Fine CoarseMaterial Unit Source ness Earth Fragment sColluvium A Noncalcareous, Noncalcareous 60-90% sand, 50-90%medium to coarse0-10% cla ygrained, metasedi -mentary andgranitic bedrockColluvium B Noncalcareous, Noncalcareous 20-60% sand, 35-70%medium grained,0-20% cla ymetasedimentarybedrock

Glaciation was a major factor shaping the landscapes of MRNP and GNP . Moraine (M) is extensiveand frequently dominates cirque and pass floors, valley wall shoulders, and broad mountain tops .Moraine also occurs on moderately sloping valley walls and with ice contact stratified drift on bench -lands of some broader valley floors .Moraine usually occurs as blankets and veneers . On valley walls, surface form reflects inclined bed -rock . Slopes are most often 45 to 65% and uncommonly up to 70% . Such long straight slopes frequentlyhave gullies oriented perpendicular to the contour . Less often slopes of 30 to 45% occur ,usually on upper and lower slopes transitional to more irregular terrain . These slopes are more characteristicof pass, cirque, and valley floors, valley shoulders, and broad mountain tops . This complextopography may be ridged and, less often, hummocky or a combination of inclined and ridged, all reflectingbedrock control . Deep, ridged and occasionally hummocky till, reflecting deposition ratherthan bedrock control, is virtually restricted to Neoglacial lateral and terminal moraines. Some irregularlandscapes have been produced or accentuated by slope failure (modifier F) of overburden or bed -rock. However, not all failed slopes have complex topography . Complex slopes are commonly 30 to45% although tracts with 0 to 30% or 30 to 70% also occur .Snow avalanching and solifluction also modify morainal landforms . Modification is primarily to vegetationor soils and is not sufficient to produce colluvial landforms .Colluvial, residual, eolian, and fluvial materials occur locally or as a thin mantle in some morainallandscapes . Colluvium occurs on local, steep slopes, particularly on terrain affected by slope failure .Residual veneer underlies till at some sites and was produced by bedrock weathering . It most oftenoccurs on gently sloping, high elevation areas with recessive, highly jointed bedrock . Discontinuou sfluvial or eolian veneers often thinly mantle gently to moderately sloping, high elevation moraines .The former are associated with morainal wetlands affected by seepage, the latter occur on drier ter -rain. Both are important to soil formation .The last major deglaciation in south central British Columbia was probably complete before 10,000years ago (Fulton and Smith 1978, Ryder 1978) . However, source bedrock lithology is more importantto textural and chemical properites of morainal material than is glacial chronology (Wittneben1980, Walker et al. 1982a) . These properties were imparted by the strata and remain distinct eventhough the products were mixed by glaciation . The deposits are divided into three morainal geneticmaterial units, Tills A, B, and C, on chemical and textural characteristics (Table 8) .Till ATill A is noncalcareous, coarse textured, and derived from noncalcareous, medium to coarse grained ,metasedimentary (mainly quartzitic) and granitic strata of the Hamill Group, granitic intrusive andShuswap Metamorphic Complex bedrock areas (Fig . 2) . Soils developed in Till A are normall ystrongly to extremely acid (pH

Table 8 . Characteristics of morainal genetic materials .Textural Propertie sGenetic Dominant Calcareous- Fine CoarseMaterial Unit Source ness Earth Fragment sTill A Noncalcareous, Noncalcareous 60-90% sand, 35-70%medium to coarse0-10% claygrained, metasedi -mentary andgranitic bedroc kTill B Noncalcareous, Noncalcareous 20-60% sand, 20-50%medium grained,0-20% cla ymetasedimentarybedroc kTill C Medium grained, >15% CaCO3 20-60% sand, 20-50%carbonate bedrock equivalent 0-20% cla yTill BTill B is noncalcareous and medium textured, being derived from noncalcareous, medium grained, slatyand schistose strata which are common throughout both parks . Soils developed in Till B are norm -ally strongly to extremely acid (pH

ICE CONTACT STRATIFIED GENETIC MATERIALIce contact stratified drift is deposited by glacial ice with local reworking by flowing and ponded glacialmeltwater . The result is extreme vertical and lateral textural variability over short distances . Inessence, ice contact stratified drift is a mixture of morainal and glaciofluvial sediments individuall yinseparable at a scale of 1 :50,000 . Glaciolacustrine sediment, common in many ice contact stratifie ddrift deposits in the Rocky Mountain national parks (Walker et al. 1982a, 1984a), was not found inMRNP and GNP . Ice contact stratified drift and morainal material are collectively called glacial de -posits .Ice contact stratified drift forms moraine-like landforms on benchlands and lower walls of major valleys. Hummocky and ridged surfaces, primarily depositional, are typical of benchland deposits . Asbenchland grades to valley wall, surface expression becomes more regular and reflects inclined bed -rock . The complex slopes of hummocky and ridged topography commonly are 15 to 45% and th esimple, inclined slopes are 30 to 70% . Occasionally, complex slopes of 5 to 15% occur and some ic econtact stratified drift landscapes include gently sloping glaciofluvial terraces too small to map separatelyat the study scale of 1 :50,000. The most important modifying processes are slope failure, channelling(Eroded modifer, C.S.S.C . 1978a) on benchlands, and gullying on steep slopes . Snow avalanchingalso modifies some tracts . All add to topographic complexity .Thin, discontinuous, eolian veneer occasionally mantles gentle to moderately sloping ice contact stratifieddrift on benchlands, and is most abundant in the Revelstoke townsite area . A limited amount ofhummocky to ridged landscape has poorly drained, seepy depressions in which organic and, occasion -ally, fluvial materials have accumulated . The organic materials are occasionally thick enough (>4 0cm) to be classed as fen landforms .Ice contact stratified drift deposits are generally downvalley from two or more source bedrock area s(Fig. 2) . For example, ice contact stratified drift in the Beaver River valley was derived mainly fro mHorsethief Creek and Hamill Group bedrock . The deposit above Revelstoke townsite was derive dfrom Shuswap Metamorphic Complex strata plus other rock types occurring upstream in the ColumbiaRiver valley . Deposits are lithologically complex but only one genetic material unit, Ice Contac tStratified Drift C, was recognized . Its chemical and textural characteristics (Table 9) span the constituentmorainal (Tills A and B) and glaciofluvial (Glaciofluvial material A) materials. The definitionis consistant with KNP (Walker et al . 1984a) except that weakly calcareous drift is not included .Acidic soils (usually pH

Table 9 . Characteristics of Ice Contact Stratified Drift C .Textural PropertiesGenetic Dominant Calcareous- Fine CoarseMaterial Unit Source ness Earth FragmentsIce Contact Noncalcareous, Noncalcareous 20-100% sand, 5-70 0Stratified Drift medium and 0-20% clayCcoarse grainedmetasedunentarybedrockmeandering reach . In contrast, the Incomappleux River is braided over much of its course in GNP .Poorly bedded, gravelly to cobbly, coarse textured, glaciofluvial material is being deposited on th ebraided bottomlands .Other situations in which it is difficult to distinguish between glaciofluvial and fluvial deposits includ ethe north half of Stoney Creek fan with a braided stream that is rapidly aggrading . Both features aretypically glaciofluvial . But the near-surface sediment consists of partially sorted, well stratified layers(coarse and medium textures with strongly contrasting coarse fragment contents) and was therefor ecalled fluvial. Mountain Creek fan was mapped as fluvial material but probably could have bee nequally well considered glaciofluvial .Early postglacial, glaciofluvial deposits form terraced landforms, mapped as Kuskanax 1 (KX1), a tthree locations : along the Beaver River upstream of the Beaver Pit, and at the mouth of Flat Cree kin GNP, and along the Trans-Canada Highway near the West Gate in MRNP . The terraces are wel ldeveloped with steep, prominent, (5 to 50 m) risers adjacent to contemporary floodplains . Slopes are0 to 15% but terrace treads, usually with slopes

Table 10 . Characteristics of Glaciofluvial material A .Textural PropertiesGenetic Dominant Calcareous- Fine CoarseMaterial Unit Source ness Earth FragmentsGlaciofluvial Noncalcareous Noncalcareous 60-100% sand, 35-70 %material A glacial deposits 0-5% clayFluvial landforms are of two types . The first is level floodplain, with simple slopes of 0 to 2%, whichcontains the major streams that formed it . Weak terracing with risers 1 m occur under sedge fen vegetation. Yet nearby localities may still receive substantial amounts o fsediment. Fresh silty material up to 7 cm thick was observed in 1983 on a few Beaver River flood -plain sites dominated by dense, wet shrub thicket vegetation .Mudflow beds, in contrast to stream deposits, tend to be unsorted and more uniformly textured wit hlittle or no internal stratification because each bed was usually produced by a single flow event (Sharpand Nobles 1953, Winder 1965, Ryder 1971, Roed and Wasylyk 1973, Rachocki 1981) . Coarse fragmentsvary in size, shape, and abundance and are usually embedded in a finer grained matrix . Th elargest debris is often deposited near fan and apron apexes (Sharp and Nobles 1953, Rochocki 1981) .Thus, mudflows are strongly influenced by source materials (e .g. till and colluvium) and the deposit soften resemble till (Sharp and Nobles 1953, Harland et al. 1966, Landim and Frakes 1968, Pe an dPiper 1975, Ryder 1981) .Fluvial Material AOnly one fluvial genetic material, Fluvial material A, was recognized in MRNP and GNP and is similarto Fluvial material A in BNP and JNP . Because of its polygenetic composition and wide textura lrange (Table 11, Fig. 5), it is termed coarse-stratified .21

Fig . 5 . Textural variation among Fluvial material A samples .Table 11 . Characteristics of Fluvial material A .Textural PropertiesGenetic Dominant Calcareous- Fine Coars eMaterial Unit Source ness Earth FragmentsFluvial material Noncalcareous,

Table 12 . Characteristics of Eolian material B .Textural PropertiesGenetic Dominant Calcareous- Fine CoarseMaterial Unit Source ness Earth FragmentsEolian material Local materials Pedogenic altera- 0-50% sand,

ORGANIC COMPONENTThe organic landform component (N) consists of peat with >30% organic matter by weight (>17 %organic carbon) that may be as thin as 10 cm over bedrock but is otherwise >40 cm thick (C.S.S .C .1978a). In MRNP and GNP, it is of very limited areal extent and thinly mantles fluvial and, les soften, glacial landforms where ground water discharge and high water tables create very poor drainageand where mineral deposition has ceased . While peat depths >1 m were recorded, maximum thicknesseswere not ascertained . Based on experience in the Rocky Mountains (Walker et al. 1982a ,1984a), modal peat depth is estimated at

CHAPTER II - SOILSW .S. Taylor, B .D .Walker and D .T. AllanINTRODUCTIO NSoil formation is a function of five environmental factors : climate, living organisms, topography ,parent material, and time (Buol et al. 1973) . Because these factors vary across the landscape, soilforms a continuum with varying properties . The intent of soil classification is to organize soil variabilityin a meaningful way. Ideally, each category is defined by criteria which are observable or measurablein the soil profile. Each classification system has certain objectives and the established criteriareflect the knowledge of the soils being classified (C .S .S .C . 1978a) . The Canadian system(C .S .S .C . 1978a) was used in MRNP and GNP . The taxa are based more on properties thought t oreflect genesis than on interpretations of properties for various uses .Soil taxa are convenient in ecological land classification because they summarize information on boththe properties and environment of the pedons . Taxa also facilitate the description of map units, al -though mapping necessitates a different type of generalization than taxonomy . Map units are designedto group landscape and soil patterns . These map units are described in terms of taxa . Thus amap unit represents a predictable spatial pattern of soil taxa which are related along pedogenic gradients,e.g. soils along a seepage slope may be in different taxa but are related along wetness, stability,organic matter, and geomorphic gradients . Thus, the limits of a map unit concept are broade rthan those of a soil taxon . The degree of generalization depends on soil complexity and predictability ,and on mapping scale .Much of the information available on soils near MRNP and GNP is about their distribution . Wittneben(1980) mapped soils of the Columbia Mountains in the Lardeau NTS area to the south, and Kowall(1980) surveyed the Seymour Arm sheet which includes the western portion of MRNP, both a t1 :100,000 scale . Knapik and Coen (1974) conducted a detailed survey (1 :6,000) of the Mount Revel -stoke summit area .Sneddon et al. (1972a, 1972b) investigated the genesis of several soils in the Alpine in British Columbia.McKeague and Sprout (1975) studied profiles with cemented subsoils, including some from th eColumbia forest and Interior subalpine of British Columbia .METHODS OF SOIL DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSI SFIELD DESCRIPTION METHOD SSoil and site data, including geomorphic information, were collected as part of this multidisciplinary ,ecological land inventory . Field crews, usually consisting of soils, vegetation, and wildlife specialists ,collected data at each site . Pedon and site data as suggested by Day et al. (1975) were recorded o nCanadian Soil Information System (CanSIS) computer coding forms (Dumanski et al. 1975, C .S .S .C .1978b) developed from the CanSIS Detail Form (Field Description Input Document) . Thirty-sevenpedons representing various soils, Ecosites, and Ecosections were described in detail on the CanSI SDetail Form and analyzed in the laboratory .LABORATORY METHODSChemical and physical analyses were done following air drying and grinding according to the routin eprocedures used by the Alberta Institute of Pedology (C.S.S.C. 1978c) . Results were entered on aCanSIS Detail Form (Methods and Analytical Data) for each pedon . The routine procedures involveddetermination of :25

Soil Reaction : with a pH meter using a 2 :1 ratio of 0 .01 m CaCI 2 solution to soil (Peech1965)[3 .11] .'Calcium Carbonate Equivalent : by the inorganic carbon manometric method of Bascomb e(1961) .Organic Carbon : by difference between total carbon and inorganic carbon. Total carbo nwas determined by dry combustion using an induction furnace (Allison et al . 1965) with agasometric detection of evolved CO2 (Leco model CR12) [3 .611] .Cation Exchange Capacity : by displacement of ammonium with sodium chloride (Chap -man 1965) except that an ammonium ion electrode was used to detect the displaced ammoniumion [3 .321]Exchangeable Cations : by extraction with neutral N NH,OAC (A .O.A .C 1955) and K ,Mg, Na, and Ca determined by inductively-coupled plasma spectroscopy [3 .321] .Sodium Pyrophosphate Extractable Iron, Aluminum, and Manganese : by the McKeagu e(1967) method. Fe, Al, and Mn were determined by inductively-coupled plasma spectroscopy[3 .53] . Several C .S .S .C . reference samples were included in the analyses to chec kdata quality . Results for them were the same to slightly lower than the tentative best valuesbut always within the range of values (McKeague et al . 1978) .Particle Size Distribution : by the pipette method of Kilmer and Alexander (1949) as modifiedby Toogood and Peters (1953), except that carbonates were not removed prior t odispersion. Separation of sand fractions, by ultrasonic sieving, and coarse fragments, bydry sieving with 3/4 inch and No .4 sieves, was done on some samples to facilitate engineeringclassification .Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index : by the ASTM (1970) method [2 .61 ,2 .62, 2.63] .One-third and Fifteen Bar Moisture : by the pressure plate method (U .S . Salinity LaboratoryStaff 1954) [2 .431] .Bulk Density : by the soil clod method using Saran (C .S.S.C. 1978c) Samples were ove ndried and weighed . Calculations were based on oven dry volume . Values reported are thearithmetic mean of 2 to 4 determinations per horizon [2 .21] .SOILS AND THEIR DISTRIBUTIO NFive of the nine orders in the Canadian soil classification system (C .S .S.C. 1978a) occur in MRNPand GNP, i.e. the Brunisolic, Gleysolic, Organic, Podzolic and Regosolic Orders . Numerous greatgroups, subgroups, and phases within these categories are present . Soil distribution complexity oftenparallels increases in bedrock complexity, wetness, or geomorphic instability . A more subtle increasein diversity occurs with increasing elevation .WELL DEVELOPED, WELL DRAINED SOILSMost soil parent materials in MRNP and GNP are medium or coarse textured and noncalcareous .That, combined with the moist climate and predominance of coniferous forest at low elevations an dheath vegetation at high elevations, makes Podzolics and strongly developed Brunisolics most corn -mon .PODZOLIC SOILSPodzolics are the most strongly developed of the well drained soils . Their salient feature is a thick(>10 cm) podzolic B horizon in which amorphous material, mainly humified organic matter with F e------------ -'The number in [ ] indicates the method in C .S .S .C . (1978c) .26

and Al, has accumulated . Two of the three Podzolic great groups are well to moderately well draine dand occur in MRNP and GNP . Humo-Ferric Podzols have podzolic Bf horizons (generally >0 .6%pyrophosphate-extractable Fe + Al and 5% organic carbon) . It is often difficult todistinguish the two great groups without laboratory data .Humo-Ferric Podzols are the most extensive of the two great groups, occurring with codominant o rdominant Dystric Brunisols tinder forest vegetation, with codominant Dystric and Sombric Brunisol sand, less often, Humic Regosols, under avalanche vegetation, and with codominant Dystric andSombric Brunisols under Alpine and Upper Subalpine vegetation . Well drained areas with few or noPodzolic soils are recent landscapes with incipient soils ; landslides with rubbly, coarse textured andfragmental soils ; Alpine colluvium derived from Lardeau Group rocks ; and at low elevations in th eInterior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregion on southwesterly aspects above Revelstoke townsite and on th eeast wall of the Beaver River valley . The latter areas are the warmest and driest in MRNP and GNP ,based on vegetational features . This mesoclimate coupled with certain parent material features - re -cent eolian veneers in the Revelstoke area and colluvium or till derived from Horsethief Creek Grou pstrata in the Beaver River area - are less conducive to podzolization than elsewhere in the parks .Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzols, the predominant subgroup, generally have friable or very friable podzolicB horizons underlain by thick, weak BC horizons that are transitional to noncalcareous C horizonswhich begin at depths often >1 m . Sometimes, Bm horizons occur between Bf and BC horizons. Thin (10 cm) Ah horizons, likely had the horizon thickened physically by pedoturbation .Orthic Ferro-Humic Podzols are related to the above subgroups . They occur, as codominants or accessorysoils, in Alpine and Upper Subalpine landscapes under tundra and meadow vegetation and inavalanched terrain . Bhf horizons of varying thickness frequently develop under Ah and Ahe horizon sand often have higher cation exchange capacity (CEC) than horizons above or below . Occasionally, athick Ah horizon (Sombric Ferro-Humic Podzols) may occur . In some landscapes however, differentiatingAh from Bhf is difficult . Under forest, Orthic Ferro-Humic Podzols occur most often as accessorysoils where soils are shallow to bedrock . Illuvial humus appears to accumulate above the bed -rock contact, occasionally in sufficient amounts to be classed as a Bhf horizon . In a few shallowsoils, discontinuous layers of black humus (H horizon) 3 cm thick, the horizon isortstein, labelled Bfc (occasionally Bhfc) and the soil is an Ortstein Humo-Ferric Podzol (occasionall yOrtstein Ferro-Humic Podzol) . Ortstein Humo-Ferric Podzols are codominant in Lower Subalpinemorainal landforms derived from Hamill Group bedrock . They are subdominant on the same materialin the Interior Cedar-Hemlock and on morainal landforms in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock an dLower Subalpine of MRNP (Shuswap Metamorphic Complex) . In the Upper Subalpine on the samematerials, Ortstein Humo-Ferric Podzols are less common, occurring as accessory soils . Cementedsoils occur sporadically on stable fluvial landforms and are rare in colluvial landscapes .27

BRUNISOLIC SOIL SBrunisolics occur with and are related to Podzolic soils but are more weakly developed . In MRNPand GNP, Brunisolics are predominantly acidic and characterized by thick, brownish or yellower, B mhorizons . They may also contain thin (10 cm) Bf or Bhf horizons . Differentiating Brunisols fromPodzols on field characteristics alone is often difficult . Dystric Brunisol (acidic with thin or no Ahhorizon) is the most extensive great group and is the dominant or codominant soil under forest vegetation. Dystric Brunisols, Sombric Brunisols, Podzolics, and, occasionally, Regosolics are codominan tunder avalanche, herb meadow, and herb and heath tundra vegetation . Eutric Brunisols, with p H>5.5 in upper to middle sola, are common in only a few landscapes and are discussed below wit hother incipient soils .Except for amounts and thickness of amorphous material accumulated in B horizons, Dystric an dSombric Brunisols are similar to Podzolics . BC horizons underlie Bm horizons and are transitional tononcalcareous C horizons which begin at depths often >1 m . As in the Podzolics, features of A horizonsvary and determine Brunisolic subgroup and great group classes . Orthic Dystric Brunisols ca nhave no A horizon or AB horizon mixtures where pedoturbation has affected the soil surface ; thin ,incipient eluvial (Ae) horizons ; or thin, (10 cm thick, are closely related to OrthicDystric Brunisols. Brunisolics with organo-mineral horizons commonly occur under avalanch evegetation at all elevations and under tundra and meadow vegetation at high elevation . In contrast ,Eluviated Dystric Brunisols have thick (>2 cm), well developed eluvial (Ae) horizons and are mos textensive under forest vegetation .As with Podzolics, Dystric Brunisols may have pedogenically cemented B and BC horizons . Cementingis usually too weak for the Duric subgroup and ortstein does not apply to Bm horizons or Brunisolics(C.S.S.C. 1978a) .Some well to moderately well drained Dystric and Sombric Brunisols illustrate a common taxonomi cproblem among similar soils of the Canadian Cordillera . They have upper B horizons with sufficientorganic carbon and pyrophosphate-extractable Fe low enough to meet the chemical criteria of a B hhorizon (C.S.S.C . 1978a) . However, since color values and chroma are too high for Bh horizons theyare designated as Bm horizons .WEAKLY DEVELOPED, WELL DRAINED SOILSWell drained soils at an early stage of development (i .e. some Regosolics, Brunisolics) are not extensivein MRNP and GNP . They are predominant in two Ecosections and occur sporadically elsewher eon unstable terrain . Regosolic soils normally lack pedogenic horizonation, but have thin, discontinuousorganic horizons (LF), either at the surface only (Orthic Regosols), or at the surface and a tdepth (Cumulic Regosols) . Pedogenic Ah horizons may be present, but are rare. Brunisolic soil susually have slight development of B horizons, shown by slightly browner colors (Orthic Eutric Bruni -sols) and a lower pH (Orthic Dystric Brunisols) both compared to parent materials .Some Regosolic soils reflect episodic terrain instability . Orthic Regosols and Cumulic Regosols occuron fluvial and glaciofluvial landforms where flooding, channel migration or mudflow are sufficientl yfrequent that surfaces are buried or eroded before profiles can develop . The lime in some locationsalso retards weathering .Cumulic Regosols occur on steep, snow avalanched colluvium in conjunction with Cumulic Humi cRegosols (>10 cm Ah, and buried organic matter) produced by mechanical mixing on geomorphicall yvery active sites . Small areas of Regosolics occur on colluvium where weathering is retarded by lim ein the profiles (e .g. parts of Jeopardy Slide, GNP) . Orthic Regosols usually reflect surface erosion ,and are rare .In the Alpine, some soils on colluvium derived from Lardeau Group bedrock are classified as Orthi cRegosols because horizonation was indiscernible. The inherently dark parent materials (Munsell N2 t oN4) mask horizonation if it is present, and the extent of colluviation and solifluction make it likelythat Regosolics are present. However, since most of the soils have acidic pHs, they could possibly b eBrunisolic instead .28

Some stable landscapes have weakly developed soils . Recently glaciated areas have predominantly OrthicRegosols where the till contains lime . These soils may have incipient Ah horizons and sho wweathering of some carbonates, especially in peripheral areas which have been ice-free longest .Recently glaciated areas with noncalcareous till have a mosaic of Regosolic and Brunisolic soils . Neoglaciallandscapes in MRNP and GNP are likely a maximum of 400 years old, based on an extrapolationof Heusser 's (1956) conclusions on the Rocky Mountains . This provides an estimate of the tim eover which these soils have developed . Orthic Regosols with little evidence of alteration occur closes tto the retreating glacier . Further away, Orthic Eutric Brunisols show weak B horizon developmen tand a strong pH gradient within the top few tens of centimeters . They are slightly acid at depth (pH6 .1-6 .5) and become strongly acid near the surface (pH 5 .1-5 .5) . Where quartzites are predominant ,there is little buffering capacity and pH rapidly becomes 40 cm, and develop where shallow water that lacks mineral sediment is ponded or flows slowl yacross the surface for most of the growing season . They are most common in the Interior Cedar- -Hemlock Ecoregion, but only because the flat, wet topography conducive to their development i sscarce at higher elevations . They are most extensive on flat valley bottomland (e .g. Beaver River andMountain Creek valleys) but occur locally in the troughs and depressions of hummocky glacial drif ton valley floors . In both settings, development is occasionally associated with beaver dams .The organic material is fen peat derived mainly from rushes, sedges, and mosses . The peat is mostl yfibric (i.e. weakly decomposed), especially in the upper horizons, and Fibrisols predominate . Mesic ,moderately decomposed horizons are common but Mesisols are less extensive . Humic, thoroughly de -composed horizons and Humisols are rare .The mean thickness of peat accumulation is not well known . The Terric subgroup (thickness 1 .2 m thick (Typic subgroups) may occur on the Beaver Rive rand Mountain Creek valley floors .Thin layers of fluvial and occasionally eolian material occur sporadically within the Organic soils .They usually have a high silt content and lack coarse fragments . Both they and the mineral materialsthat underlie the Organic soils are generally gleyed .Gleysols are mineral soils with dull colors or strong mottling within 50 cm of the surface . They occu rwith Organics, but have a broader distribution as well . Many are as wet as Organics and some eve nhave fen vegetation, but episodes of fluvial deposition in these preclude the buildup of thick organi clayers and the development of pedogenic horizons (Rego Gleysols) . Orthic Gleysols occur in bothfluvial and morainal, stable landscapes . They have B horizons with dull colors or mottles (Bg), andpeat or forest humus

Gleysolics are most common on flat to gently sloping topography, but also occur on steeper grade swhere seepage emerges on lower valley walls. They are least common in the Alpine, but only becauseof little suitable topography .Gleyed Cumulic Regosols are similar to Rego Gleysols but show less evidence of reducing condition sin the upper 50 cm, i.e . faint mottling or little dulling of matrix colors . They are imperfectly topoorly drained, but surfaces can be quite dry at times during the growing season. Gleyed CumulicRegosols develop on fluvial landscapes where surface organic materials which have built up for severa lyears are rapidly buried by floods that recur infrequently . They occur on lower slopes of fans and onfloodplains on transitional positions between the Gleysolics and better drained Regosolics . This limit stheir distribution mainly to the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregion because topography makes fluvia llandforms most extensive there .Podzolic soils occur on stable wetlands in association with the Orthic Gleysols . B horizons in theseimperfectly to very poorly drained areas often have greater enrichment with humus, iron and aluminumthan in adjacent uplands . Gleyed Ferro-Humic Podzols are usually similar in appearance toOrthic Gleysols, but analyses reveal >10 cm of Bhf (generally >0 .6% pyrophosphate-extractable F e+ Al and >5% organic carbon) . Orthic. Humic Podzols have >10 cm of dark colored Bh horizo n(generally, >1% organic carbon and 50 cm . On till, they fringe wet depressions and troughs in benchland or occu rwith seepage at the base of slopes . They can be extensive on gently sloping morainal topography .They also occur on stable fluvial landscapes with seasonally high water tables, either on floodplains o ron the lower margins of fans .EXCEPTIONAL SOILSSome mineral soils in MRNP and GNP consist almost exclusively of a few thick eluvial (Ae) horizon sthat extend the entire depth of the control section . They are not classifiable in a meaningful way b ythe Canadian system (C .S .S .C . 1978a) .These strongly eluviated soils occur on coarse textured parent materials that are almost purely quartz -itic, and thus are restricted to association with portions of the Hamill Group bedrock . They occur i ntwo distinct settings, i.e . within landslide materal on valley floors and in colluvial veneers on stee pvalley walls .In landslide material, the soils occur on hummocky surfaces under closed to open forest with a nearl ycontinuous moss and bryophyte cover . The drift has a till-like aspect but is loose, coarse, and hassubangular and angular fragments . Eolian material is usually incorporated into the mineral surface .Typical profile features include several cm of decomposing organic matter (LFH) that is being eluviated,staining the upper mineral horizon a faint gray . Within the eluvial mineral horizons, siltycappings have accumulated above coarse fragments, while small rusty patches stain the underside .The pH is extremely acidic (

Because these eluviated soils are intimately associated with Brunisolics and Podzolics, it appears th ecritical factor for their genesis is an initially low content of weatherable primary minerals in th eparent material .31

CHAPTER III - VEGETATIO NP .L .Achuff and H.A. Dudynsk yINTRODUCTION AND METHOD SFIELD SAMPLINGSince the prime objective of the vegetation study was to provide a vegetation classification for inte -f ration into the ecological land classification, the methods were subject to the constraints of th e:50,000 mapping program . Polygons of homogeneous composition were initially outlined on airphotos . Single sample plots (releves) were then established in homogeneous areas representative o fthe predominant vegetation of selected polygons . Plots were generally 20 x 20 m in forested vegetation,15 x 15 m in shrubby vegetation and 10 x 10 m in herbaceous and dwarf shrub vegetation .Smaller plots (5 x 5 m or 1 x 1 m ) were sometimes necessary to keep plot boundaries within a homogeneousarea, as in some intricately patterned Alpine areas .Within each plot, canopy cover (Daubenmire 1959) was estimated to the nearest percent both for individualspecies and for each layer . Plants with 5 m tal l2. Tall Shrub layer : woody plants 2 to 5 m tal l3. Low Shrub layer : woody plants 0 .5 to 2 m tall4. Herb-Dwarf Shrub layer : woody plants

Table 13 . Ecological moisture regime classes (Walmsley et al . 1980) . AWSC=available wate rstorage capacity .Moisture Regime Classxeric - very dry, little precipitation or highevapotranspiration, very low AWS Csubxeric - dry, low AWSCmesic - moist, intermediate to high AWSCsubhygric - moist to wet, variable AWSC ,seasonal seepag ehygric - wet, variable AWSC, permanen tseepagesubhydric - wet, variable AWSC, excesswater most of the tim ehydric - very wet, standing waterconstantl ySoil Drainagevery rapidalthough the bases and methods of recognition differ . V .t .s were delineated by tabular compariso n(Mueller-Dombois and Ellenberg 1974) and by both indirect ordination (Wisconsin ordination, Cot -tam et al. 1974) and direct ordination (direct gradient analysis, Whittaker 1973b) . Both serai and climaxv .t .s were recognized . In v .t . names, a hyphen (-) separates species in the same layer ; a virgul e(/) separates layers . Appendix E lists the v .t .s of MRNP and GNP .rapidwell to moderately wel limperfectpoorvery poo rECOREGIONSVegetation is used as the basis for the definition of Ecoregions in the ecological land classification .Ecoregional divisions reflect macroclimate and thus, vegetational features, which primarily reflect climaticfactors, rather than, for example, edaphic factors, are used to define Ecoregions . An Ecoregionis conceptually similar to the zone of Daubenmire (1968), La Roi (1975) and Lea (1980, 1983) ,the biogeoclimatic zone of Krajina (1965) and Utzig et al . (1983), the biophysical region of Lacate(1969), and the forest section of Rowe (1972) . Three Ecoregions are recognized in MRNP andGNP : Interior Cedar-Hemlock, Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir, Alpine (Fig . 6) .INTERIOR CEDAR-HEMLOCK ECOREGIONThe Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregion (ICH) is characterized by v .t.s dominated by Tsuga heterophyllaand Thuja plicata . It occurs from the lowest elevations in the parks, about 550 m in MRNPand about 830 m in GNP, to approximately 1500 m in MRNP and 1450 m in GNP . The upperboundary is a bit lower on cooler, northerly and easterly aspects and a bit higher on warmer, southerlyand westerly aspects. Typical v .t.s include : western hemlock-western red cedar/western yew/oa kfern (C50), western red cedar-western hemlock/devil 's club/oak fern (C51), western hemlock-westernred cedar-(Douglas fir)/mountain lover (C52), and Douglas fir-western red cedar/mountain love r(C53) . Tsuga heterophylla and Thuja plicata typically dominate mature v .t .s, while Pseudotsuga menziesii,Pinus monticola, and Picea engelmannii are usually seral species in the ICH . East of the BeaverRiver in GNP, the climate is drier than in MRNP or the rest of GNP . This is reflected in thevegetation, e.g . by the occurrence of Pinus contorta, which is absent further west and the restrictionof Thuja plicata and Oplopanax horridum to wetter sites .The Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregion corresponds to the Northern Columbia Forest Section (CL .2)of Rowe (1972) . The ICH west of the Beaver River in GNP and in MRNP corresponds largely t othe Wet Interior Cedar-Hemlock Subzone (ICHb) of the biogeoclimatic classification of the Britis hColumbia Ministry of Forests (Utzig et al. 1983) . This also corresponds to the Western Wet Sub -montane Interior Cedar-Hemlock Subzone (ICHw) and Western Wet Montane Interior Cedar-HemlockSubzone (ICHv) described for an area just west of MRNP (Lloyd 1983) . The ICH Ecoregion i nMRNP and west of the Beaver River in GNP appears somewhat drier than the ICHb Subzone . I nparticular, Oplopanax horridum is less common and Vaccinium membranaceum is more common thanindicated by Utzig et al. 1983) .34

Fig . 6 . Ecoregions of Mount Revelstoke and Glacier National Parks .Ecoregions of Mount Revelstokeand Glacier National Parks

ENGELMANN SPRUCE - SUBALPINE FIR ECOREGIO NThe Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir Ecoregion occurs at altitudes above the Interior Cedar-Hemloc kEcoregion and below the unforested Alpine Ecoregion . It is divided into Lower Subalpine and Uppe rSubalpine portions .Lower Subalpin eThe Lower Subalpine is characterized by closed forests dominated by Picea engelmannii and Abies lasiocarpa. Tsuga mertensiana is often codominant and Tsuga heterophylla occurs in the lower part ofthe Lower Subalpine . The Lower Subalpine occurs from 1500 to 1900 m in MRNP and 1450 to 200 0m in GNP . This range is slightly higher on warm aspects and lower on cooler aspects . Typical v .t .sinclude Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/tall bilberry/liverwort (C21), mountain hemlock-subalpinefir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C47), Engelmann spruce-mountain hemlock/rhododendron-tall bilberry(C48), mountain hemlock-Douglas fir-subalpine fir-Engelmann spruce/rhododendron-tall bilberry(C49) and Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (021) . The drier climat eeast of the Beaver River in GNP is also reflected in the vegetation of the Lower Subalpine as in th eICH Ecoregion . Pinus contorta occurs here and not further west, Tsuga mertensiana is mostly absent ,and Pachystima myrsinites is more common and widespread .The Lower Subalpine corresponds to the lower part of the Interior Subalpine Forest Section (SA.2) ofRowe (1972), although his lower boundary is about 300 m lower than recognized here . The Lowe rSubalpine west of the Beaver River corresponds to the lower part of the Wet Forested EngelmannSpruce-Subalpine Fir Subzone (ESSFb) of the biogeoclimatic classification of the Nelson Forest Region(Utzig et al. 1983) . It seems to correspond wholly with the Wet Central EngelmannSpruce-Subalpine Fir Subzone (ESSFw) of the Kamloops Forest Region, just to the west (Lloy d1983) . The Lower Subalpine east of the Beaver River comes closest to the Moist Southern ForestedEngelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir Subzone (ESSFc, Utzig et al. 1983) . Since eastern GNP is clearly inthe transition between the Wet and Moist Climatic Regions, it does not fit the central concept o fESSFc fully . For example, some Tsuga heterophylla occurs in eastern GNP, although it is typicall yabsent in ESSFc .Upper SubalpineThe Upper Subalpine typically has open forests dominated by Picea engelmannii and Abies lasiocarpa .Closed Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir forests occur on warm aspects and in the lower part of th eUpper Subalpine, but characteristically contain Cassiope mertensiana, Phyllodoce empetriformis andLuetkea pectinata and lack Menziesia glabella or Oplopanax horridum . Tsuga mertensiana is alsocommon, often as a codominant . The Upper Subalpine occurs from 1900 to 2200 m in MRNP an d2000 to 2300 m in GNP, the boundary being lower on cool aspects and higher on warm ones . Typicalv.t .s include subalpine fir-mountain hemlock/heather-luetkea (020), subalpine fir-whitebarkpine-(Engelmann spruce)/tall bilberry-heather (022) and mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tallbilberry (C47) . The Upper Subalpine east of the Beaver River is drier but the difference i snot as great as in the Lower Subalpine and Interior Cedar-Hemlock . The primary effect is a de -creased amount of Tsuga mertensiana and more of the Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/heather (010 )v .t . Lush herb meadows (fleabane-valerian (H16)) are also typical of the Upper Subalpine .The upper part of the Interior Subalpine Forest Section (Rowe 1972) corresponds to the Upper Sub -alpine . The Upper Subalpine west of the Beaver River corresponds to the upper part of the WetForested Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir Subzone (ESSFb) and to the Wet Parkland EngelmannSpruce-Subalpine Fir Subzone (ESSFbp) in the biogeoclimatic classification of the Nelson Forest Region(Utzig et al. 1983) . In the Kamloops Forest Region (Lloyd 1983), the Upper Subalpine fits bestthe Wet Upper Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir (ESSFu) and Wet Parkland Engelman nSpruce .Subalpine Fir (ESSFbp) Subzones . The Upper Subalpine east of the Beaver River is closest tothé Moist Southern Parkland Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir (ESSFbp) (Utzig et al . 1983) .36

ALPINE ECOREGIO NThe Alpine Ecoregion is treeless and occurs at elevations above the Upper Subalpine, i.e . above 2200m in MRNP and above 2300 m in GNP . Alpine vegetation forms a complex, fine-scale mosaic i nwhich marked changes in dominant species reflect microclimatic variations . Significant microclimaticfactors include : aspect, wind exposure, time of snow melt, soil moisture and snow depth . Typica lv .t.s are heather-everlasting (L5), black alpine sedge-everlasting (H2), everlasting-white mountai nheather-red heather (H18) and, at the highest altitudes, saxicolous lichen (H12) . The Alpine east ofthe Beaver River is drier than further west . Occurrence of the mountain avens-snow willow-mos scampion (H1) v .t . only east of the Beaver River reflects the drier climate . Alpine communities inMRNP and GNP generally contain more Luetkea pectinata than ones in Kootenay National Par k(Achuff and Dudynsky 1984) or Banff and Jasper National Parks (Corns and Achuff 1982), eve nthough they have the same v .t. designation .The Alpine Ecoregion corresponds to the Tundra of Rowe (1972) . West of the Beaver, it presumabl ycorresponds to the Wet Alpine Tundra Subzone (ATg) of the biogeoclimatic classification (Utzig et al.1983), while east of the Beaver River, the correspondence is apparently to Moist Alpine Tundra Sub -zone (ATe) . The correspondence can be only tentative since ATg and ATe have not been describe dfully .VEGETATION TYPE DESCRIPTION SThe v.t .s, names and symbols (e.g. C14) are part of a system common to BNP, JNP, KNP, MRN Pand GNP . All stands of a particular v .t. belong to one conceptual entity and some v .t .s occur in allfive parks (e.g. H16 and L5) although some occur in only one .In the stand tables with the v .t . descriptions, stands from outside MRNP and GNP have been adde din some cases to better characterize the v .t . where fewer than five stands were sampled in MRNP an dGNP . The additional stands are from KNP, BNP and JNP . Species with low frequency of occurrenceor low cover values have been deleted in many cases from the stand tables . Complete data ca nbe obtained from the authors .CLOSED FOREST VEGETATION TYPE SC14 : Picea engelmannil-Abies lasiocarpa/Menziesia glabella/Vaccinium scopariu m(Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/false azalea )Environment : C14 occurs on mesic Lower Subalpine (1650-1800 m) sites with moderate to steep slope sand mostly northerly and easterly aspects . Soils are well to moderately well drained Eutric and DystricBrunisols on morainal and colluvial landforms . The only stand sampled (P A1059) is in easter nGNP near Copperstain Creek, although it appears that much of the Copperstain burn was formerl yC14 forest .Vegetation : In the tree layer (20-45%), Abies lasiocarpa (5-25%) and Picea engelmannii (10-30%) aredominant (Table 14) . Menziesia glabella (15-70%) dominates the shrub layer (25-80%) with Rhododendronalbi florum (5-10%), Ribes lacustre (0 .5-3%) and Abies lasiocarpa (5-15%) often present also .The herb-dwarf shrub layer is well developed (15-50%) and commonly includes Vaccinium membranaceium(3 -25%), Vaccinium scoparium (2 -20%) , Abies lasiocarpa (1- 3%) , Arnica cordifolia (1-10%) ,Cornus canadensis (1-10%), Linnaea borealis (1-5%), Pyrola secunda (1-3%) and Lycopodium annotinum(

Table 14 . Stands of the Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/false azalea (CM) v .t. Values areper cent cover except for epiphytes where 0.5 indicates the species was present .BB BB HD HD HD HD PA PA P A10 10 10 10 11 20 10 10 2 022 25 07 11 29 34 59 71 4 5TREE LAYE RAbles lasiocarp aPicea engelmanni iPinus contort a25 10 15 .5 05 -- 23 05 1 015 15 02 08 02 03 07 18 2 0-- 05 02 .5 -- 01 -- 02 . 5TALL SHRUB LAYE RAbles lasiocarp aAlnus crisp aPicea engelmanni i04 07 -- -- 02 35 04 10 . 501 03 -- .5 -- .5 -- .5 . 5SHRUB LAYE RAbies lasiocarp aMenziesia glabell aRhododendron albifloru mShepherdia canadensi sRibes spp .10 05 01 -- 02 05 -- 10 0 538 20 03 10 40 15 60 50 4 5.5 .5 .5 01 . 5HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RAbies lasiocarpaArnica cordifoli aCornus canadensi sGoodyera oblongifoli aLinnaea boreali sLonicera involucrat aMoneses uniflor aPyrola secundaPyrola viren sSpiraea lucidaVaccinium membranaceu mVaccinium scopariu mLycopodium annotinu m01 -- 02 -- -- .5 -- 02 . 5-- 03 01 01 03 0 3-- 05 05 01 -- .5 -- -- 0 5-- 03 -- 03 -- .5 -- 1 05 -- .5 .5.5 -- 05 .5 .5 . 55 .5 -- 01 - --- 05 -- .5 .5 - -08 -- -- 10 01 01 10 15 - -02 02 01 03 10 01 -- 10 2 0- 5 -- .5 . 5BRYOID LAYE RDicranum fuscescen sDrepanocladus uncinatu sHylocomium splenden sPleurozium schreber iPtilium crista - castrensi sBarbilophozia lycopodioide sCladonia carneol aPeltigera aphthosa03 .5 03 -- 25 .5 35 05 - -10 15 -- .5 -- 05 -- -- 0 510 20 45 .5 -- 60 05 50 7 0-- 20 05 07 -- .5 -- -- 0510 -- -- .5 25 .5 50 25 - -05 -- .5 01 -- 02 .5 -- 0 5EPIPHYTE SAlectoria sarmentosa ssp . sarmentos aBryoria spp .Hypogymnia enteromorph aHypogymnia physode sLetharia vulpin aParmeliopsis ambigua.5 .5 -- .5 .5 .5 -- .5 . 538

C14 is mature successionally with stand ages 175 to 400 years . The dominance of Menziesia glabellain the shrub layer differentiates C14 from most other Picea engelmannii-Abies lasiocarpa v.t .s .Stands with moderate Rhododendron albiflorum cover intergrade with C21 .Other Studies: C14 is also described in BNP and JNP (Corns and Achuff 1982) and in KNP (Achuf fand Dudynsky 1984) . In British Columbia, McLean (1970) describes an Abies lasiocarpa -Menziesiaferruginea type, Kujala (1945) has a Picea engelmannii- Abies lasiocarpa/Menziesia-Vaccinium membranaceum/Tiarellatrifoliata- Rubus pubescens- Rhododendron albiflorum type, and Lea (1984) has analpine fir-smooth Pacific menziesia-grouseberry-heart-leaved arnica type . Numerous similar type shave been described in Alberta by Corns (1978 and 1983, Picea engelmannii-Abies lasiocarpa/Menziesiaglabella) in west central Alberta and in the northern foothills, by Kondla (1978, spruce-fir/false azalea-feathermoss) in Kananaskis Provincial Park, Ogilvie (1976, Kirby and Ogilvie 1969 ,Picea-Abies/Menziesia glabella-Lycopodium annotinum) . In JNP, similar types are described by Hettinger(1975, Picea engelmannii- Abies lasiocarpa/Menziesia glabella-Vaccinium membranaceum), LaRoi (1975, Picea engelmanniiAbies lasiocarpa/Menziesia glabella/Valeriana sitchensis/Vaccinium scoparium/Pleuroziumschreberi) , and Beil (1966) . In Banff, Trottier and Scotter (1973) recognize simi -lar types (Picea-Abies/Menziesia glabella-Vaccinium scoparium, Picea-Abies/Menziesia glabella/moss) . In other parts of Alberta, similar types are noted by Jacques and Legge (1974) in the Kananaskisarea (Picea-Abies/Menziesia ferruginea-Tiarella trifoliata, Picea-Abies/Menziesia-Lycopodiu mannotinum), Kuchar (1973) in Waterton Lakes National Park (fir/spruce/menziesia), and by Cormack(1953) . Shepherd (1959) describes a Picea engelmannii-Abies/Peltigera association in BNP ,JNP and Yoho National Park in Alberta and British Columbia . In Montana, Pfister et al . (1977 )describe an Abies lasiocarpa/Menziesia glabella type . Daubenmire and Daubenmire (1968), in northernIdaho and eastern Washington, have a similar Abies lasiocarpa/Menziesia ferruginea type, as doSteele et al. (1983) in eastern Idaho and eastern Wyoming, and Steele et al. (1981) in central Idaho .C21 :Picea engelmannii- Abies lasiocarpa/Vaccinium membranaceum/Barbilophozia lycopodioides(Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/tall bilberry/liverwort )Environment : C21 occurs on mesic Lower Subalpine to Upper Subalpine (1370-2070 m) sites through -out both parks, although a few stands occur in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregion . Slopes aremoderate to steep with a variety of aspects .Vegetation : Abies lasiocarpa (5-30%) and Picea engelmannii (5-10%) dominate the closed canop y(25-30%) (Table 15, Plate 32) . In the shrub layer, Vaccinium membranaceum (20-50%) is most importantalong with Rhododendron albiflorum (10-30%) and occasionally Sorbus sitchensis (2%), Alnuscrispa (5%) and Menziesia glabella (3%) . Species diversity in the herb-dwarf shrub layer is moderatelyhigh but cover values are low (10-30%) . Common species include Abies lasiocarpa (2%), Arnic alatifolia (10%), Cassiope mertensiana (2%), Deschampsia atropurpurea (

Table 15 . Stands of the Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/tall bilberry/liverwort (C21) v.t .Values are per cent cover except for epiphytes where 0 .5 indicates the species was present .JD MF PA PA PA PA PA S D10 21 10 10 20 20 30 2 078 24 13 52 34 40 25 9 9TREELAYE RAbies lasiocarp aPicea engelmanni iTsuga mertensiana10 15 10 10 20 20 15 3015 -- 05 .5 05 05 20 1 0-- 05 10 -- 2 0SHRUB LAYE RAbies lasiocarpaRhododendron albifloru mVaccinium membranaceu mVaccinium ovalifoliu mTsuga mertensian a04 15 01 02 05 03 -- 0 804 15 .5 50 10 20 .5 . 501 17 10 35 05 15 55 1 7HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RArnica latifoli aCassiope mertensian aClintonia uniflor aCornus canadensi sDeschampsia atropurpure aErigeron peregrinu sGaultheria humifus aLinnaea boreali sLuetkea pectinat aMitella pentandr aPedicularis bracteos aPhyllodoce empetriformi sPyrola secund aRubus pedatu sSmilacina racemos aThalictrum occidental eTiarella unifoliat aValeriana sitchensi sStreptopus roseu sDryopteris assimili sGymnocarpium dryopteri sLycopodium sitchense10 -- -- 10 -- .5 - -- -- 01 03 -- .5 0 501 -- 05 -- 40 -- -- 2001 -- 10 15 - -40 .5 10 02 -- 01 05 - -BRYOID LAYE RDicranum fuscescen sDicranum scopariu mRhizomnium nudu mPleurozium schreber iPohlia nutan sPtilium crista -castrensi sBrachythecium sp .Barbilophozia lycopodioide sCladonia carneol aCladonia chlorophae aCladonia ecmocyn a-- 05 10 05 05- -- .5 -- 05 -- -- 0510 03 .5 07 30 70 25 . 5- -- 03 02 .5 -- - -EPIPHYTE SAlectoria sarmentosa ssp . sarmentos aHypogymnia enteromorph aParmeliopsis ambigu aParmeliopsis hyperopta-- .5 .5 .5 .5 -- -- . 540

In the western Cascades of Washington, a similar type (Picea engelmannii -Ables lasiocarpa/Vacciniummembranaceum) is noted by del Moral and Fleming (1979) and similar vegetation occurs at Loga nPass in Glacier National Park, Montana as reported by Habeck (1969) .C25 :Picea engelmannii- Abies lasiocarpa/Alnus crispa/Vaccinium membranaceum/Dryopteris assimili s(Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/green alder )Environment : C25 occurs on mesic Lower Subalpine (1490-1750 m) sites in GNP on moderate t osteep slopes and southerly and easterly aspects . Soils are well to imperfectly drained Brunisolics andPodzolics on morainal and colluvial landforms .Vegetation: The closed tree canopy (15-50%) (Table 16) is composed mostly of Picea engelmannii(5-20%) and Abies lasiocarpa (5-15%) . Alnus crispa (15-30%) dominates the shrub layer (40-80%) .Other common shrub species are Ribes lacustre (3-10%) and Abies lasiocarpa (2-10%) . Theherb-dwarf shrub layer is dense (40-80%) and species-rich . Characteristic species include Dryopterisassimilis (1-10%) , Gymnocarpium dryopteris (10 -15%) , Cornus canadensis (1-10%) , Streptopus roseu s(2-3%) and Valeriana sitchensis (1-2%) . Bryoid cover is generally low (10-15%) with Brachytheciu mspp . most common .C25 is successionally mature with stand ages 100 to >300 years . C25 is distinguished by thedominance of Alnus crispa in the shrub layer .Other Studies : C25 is also described in KNP (Achuff and Dudynsky 1984) . Elsewhere in British Columbia,Lea (1984, Engelmann spruce-thin-leaved mountain alder-heart-leaved arnica) describes asimilar type in the East Kootenays .C28 :Populus balsamifera/Equisetum pratens e(balsam poplar/horsetail )Environment : C28 occurs on subhygric Interior Cedar-Hemlock (800-1100 m) sites in the Beaver Val -ley of GNP . Soils are imperfectly to poorly drained Regosolics and Gleysolics on nearly level fluvia llandforms .Vegetation : Populus balsamifera (10-55%) is the dominant tree (Table 17) . Shrub cover is variabl e(10-50%) with Alnus crispa (20-40%), Cornus stolonifera (5-10%) and Rubus strigosus (5%) mostcommon . The herb-dwarf shrub layer has high cover (50-80%) and characteristically contains Equiseturnarvense (5-20%), Rubus pubescens (1-5%) and Galium triflorum (

Table 16 . Stands of the Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/green alder (C25) v .t . Values ar eper cent cover except for epiphytes where 0 .5 indicates the species was present .BB MF MF PA PA SD S D10 20 20 10 30 20 3 036 17 30 14 26 26 1 1TREELAYE RAbies lasiocarpa 15 -- 10 10 05 10 0 5Picea engelmannii -- 30 05 05 15 0 5Pinus contort aPseudotsuga menziesi iSHRUBLAYE RAbies lasiocarpa -- 05 .5 0 5 20 0 5Alnus crispa 15 25 35 35 02 30 0 5Menziesia glabella 10 -- 35 -- -- 25 - -Rhododendron albiflorum .5 -- -- -- -- 05 1 0Ribes lacustre -- .5 03 02 .5 1 0Vaccinium membranaceum -- 15 10 .5 0 5HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RActaea rubra - -- -- 03 -- 0 2Arnica cordifoli aAster conspicuu sBerberis repen sCalamagrostis rubescen sClintonia uniflor aCornus canadensis 01 01 -- -- -- .5 - -Disporum trachycarpu mEpilobium angustifoliu mLinnaea boreali sPyrola secund aRubus parvifioru sThalictrum occidentale -- 05 -- 0 2Tiarella unifoliata 10 10 - -Valeriana sitchensis -- 02 .5 -- 0 5Streptopus roseus -- 05 02 -- 0 3Athyrium filix-femin aDryopteris assimilis -- 25 -- -- 10Gymnocarpium dryopteris -- 05 10 -- 1 5Polystichum lonchiti sDryopteris phaegopterisBRYOIDLAYE RBrachythecium curtum .5 -- -- 10 05 -- 0 5Dicranum fuscescens 10 -- 02 -- -- -- - -Hylocomium splendens 15 04 05 -- -- 10 - -Pleurozium schreberi 15 70 30 -- .5 05 - -Pohlia nutan sPtilium crist a -castrensi sTimmia austriac aBarbilophozia spp .Ptilidium pulcherrimu mPeltigera aphthosa 10 01 03 -- -- .5 - -EPIPHYTESBryoria spp .Alectoria sarmentosa ssp . sarmentosa -- .5 -- .5 - - -- . 5Hypogymnia spp . .5 .5 -- .5 -- .5 . 5Parmelia sulcat aParmeliopsis spp . -- .5 .5 .5 -- -- . 5Platismatia glauca42

Table 17 . Stands of the balsam poplar/horsetail (C28) v .t. Values are per cent covercept for epiphytes where 0 .5 indicates the species was present .IC JC70 7014 01MF M F2 143 2 13 5ex -TREELAYE RBetula papyrifer aPicea glauca -- 02 21 0 5Populus balsamifera 55 33 45 1 0SHRUBLAYE RAcer glabrum-- -- 09 - -Cornus stolonifera .5 .5 04 1 5Lonicera spp . 01 -- 05 - -Picea glauca 02 -- -- 1 5Populus balsamifera 15 -- - -Ribes spp . 02 -- 09 - -Rosa acicularis 02 02 -- - -Symphoricarpos albus -- 08 15 - -HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RActaea rubra 0 1Cornus canadensis 10Elymus innovatus 0 2Galium triflorum .5 .5 03 0 6Mertensia paniculata 01 1 5Mitella nuda 01 0 5Osmorhiza spp . .5 04 0 2Petasites palmatus 02 0 1Rubus pubescens 05 01 02 0 3Vicia americana 01 0 1Viola rugulosa .5 . 5Equisetum arvense 01 20 05 0 3Equisetum pratense 60 1 5Environment : C44 occurs on mesic to subhygric Interior Cedar-Hemlock sites (830-1040 m) in GN Pmainly along the lower Beaver River . Slopes and aspects vary widely and soils are well to moderatel ywell drained Eutric Brunisols on fluvial and morainal landforms .Vegetation : C44 is a mixedwood forest with Populus tremuloides (1-25%), Betula papyrifera(10-35%), Picea spp . (5-35%) and Pseudotsuga menziesii (3-15%) in the tree layer (Table 18) . Tot -al shrub layer cover is 30 to 70% and dominated by Shepherdia canadensis (15-35%) with Rosa acicularis(3-5%), Acer glabrum (5-20%), Lonicera utahensis (1-5%) and Amelanchier alnifolia (1-5% )also important . The herb-dwarf shrub layer is dense (50-90%) and species-rich with no single speciesconsistently dominant . Important species include Calamagrostis rubescens (3-15%), Linnaea borealis(3-15%) , Cornus canadensis (3-10%) , Pyrola secunda (

Table 18 . Stands of the spruce-aspen-lodgepole pine-(paper birch)/buffaloberry/pine gras s(C44) v .t . Values are per cent cover except for epiphytes where 0 .5 indicates the specieswas present .BB HD HD JD MF PA M F10 20 30 20 20 20 2 117 08 01 06 13 16 3 3TREELAYE RBetula papyrifera 01 -- -- 10 -- -- 3 5Picea spp . -- 08 05 05 -- 15 0 6Pinus contorta 10 03 -- 10 65 15 - -Populus tremuloides 05 02 01 02 05 20 0 8Pseudotsuga menziesi i- -- .5 01 -- -- 0 7SHRUBLAYERAlnus crispaAcer glabrum -- 20 -- . 5 20Amelanchier alnifolia -- .5 .5 01 01 0 5Lonicera utahensi s- -- 05 01 01 -- 0 1Menziesia glabellaPicea spp .05 -- -- 01 -- -- - -Populus tremuloidesRosa acicularis 15 01 -- 01 02 05 - -Shepherdia canadensis 35 25 -- 20 40 45 02Viburnum edule 03 .5 -- 02 .5 - -HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RAralia nudicaulisArnica cordifolia -- .5 -- 01 04 15 - -Aster conspicuus 03 -- -- .5 01 20 - -Calamagrostis rubescen s10 -- -- .5 03 03 - -Clematis verticellarisCornus canadensis 05 05 60 05 10 10 - -Elymus innovatus -- -- 01 10 05 - -Fragaria virginiana .5 -- -- -- 02 05 - -Linnaea borealis 08 03 01 02 10 10 - -Lonicera involucrata -- 01 01 .5 - -Oryzopsis asperifoli a.5 50 -- -- 07 - -Pachystima myrsinitesPyrola secunda -- .5 .5 .5 01 -- . 5Smilacina racemosa .5 -- -- .5 -- -- 0 5Spiraea lucida 01 -- -- 05 .5 05 0 4Vaccinium caespitosum 15 .5 -- -- 08 - -Vaccinium membranaceum -- 10 08 -- -- - -Lycopodium annotinum .5 05 .5 .5 02 -- - -BRYOIDLAYE RDicranum polysetum .5 -- -- -- 03 .5 - -Hylocomium splendens 55 10 10 30 12 -- - -Pleurozium schreberi 15 -- 45 45 30 .5 - -Ptilium crista-castrensis 05 .5 .5 05 -- -- - -Peltigera aphthos a01 05 .5 02 .5 .5 - -Cetraria pinastr iHypogymnia physode sLetharia vulpinaEPIPHYTES44

C47: Tsuga mertensiana-Abies lasiocarpa/Rhododendron albiflorum-Vaccinium membranaceum/Rubu spedatus(mountain hemlock -subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry )Environment : C47 occurs on mesic to subhygric mostly Lower Subalpine (1200-2000 m) sites through -out MRNP and GNP (Plates 13 and 46) . Slopes are moderate to very steep and aspects are varied .Soils are well to moderately well drained Dystric Brunisols and Podzolics on morainal and colluvia llandforms .Vegetation : Tsuga mertensiana (10-30%) and Ables lasiocarpa (2-15%) dominate the tree layer(25-60%) (Table 19) . Tsuga heterophylla occurs in the lowest elevation stands which are in the InteriorCedar-Hemlock Ecoregion . The shrub layer (20-55%) is dominated by Rhododendron albiflorum(10-50%) and Vaccinium membranaceum (10-30%) . Also common is regeneration of Abies lasiocarpa(1-10%) and Tsuga mertensiana (3-10%) . Cover of the herb-dwarf shrub layer is variabl e(5-65%) with Rubus pedatus (2-10%) often dominant . Other common species include Cassiope tetragona,Clintonia uniflora, Pyrola seconda, Valeriana sitchensis, Veratrum eschscholtzii, Streptopus roseusand Gymnocarpium dryopteris . The bryoid layer (20-75%) is species-rich and species cover valuesvary widely . Common species include Dicranum fuscescens, Dicranum pallidisetum, Plagiotheciumlaetum, Rhytidiopsis robusta, Barbilophozia lycopodioides, Barbilophozia floerkii and Cladonia spp .Epiphytes are moderately abundant with Alectoria sarmentosa and Parmeliopsis hyperopta typical .C47 is mature successionally with stand ages of 120 to >400 years . It is distinguished by th edominance of Tsuga mertensiana and Abies lasiocarpa . C48, which is dominated by Picea engelmanniiand Tsuga mertensiana, is similar and intergrades occur .Other Studies: I n British Columbia, Yarie (1980, Vaccinio-(membranacei)-Tsugetum mertensianae) inGaribaldi Provincial Park and Clement (1981, western hemlock-alpine fir-black blueberry-sitka valerian)in the Vernon area, describe similar types .C48: Picea engelmannii-Tsuga mertensiana/Rhododendron albiflorum-Vaccinium membranaceum/Clintoniauniflora(Engelmann spruce-mountain hemlock/rhododendron-tall bilberry )Environment : C48 occurs on mesic Lower Subalpine sites (1550-1780 m) with steep, easterly aspectslopes. Soils are Dystric Brunisols and Humo-Ferric Podzols on colluvial and morainal landforms .Vegetation : Picea engelmannii (5-5%), Abies lasiocarpa (2-25%) and Tsuga mertensiana (3-20% )dominate the closed tree layer (Table 20) . Rhododendron albiflorum (10-60%), Vaccinium membranaceum(15-35%) and Tsuga mertensiana (5-15%) are most important in the shrub layer (40-90%) .The herb-dwarf shrub layer is sparse (5-25%) and includes Clintonia uniflora (2-10%), Pyrola seconda(1- 5%) , Rubus pedatus (1-5%), Tiarella unifoliata (1-5%), Dryopteris assimilas and Gymnocarpiu mdryopteris (0 .5-1%) . Frequent in the bryoid layer (30-65%) are Dicranum pallidisetum (15-20%) ,Rhytidiopsis robusta (5-10%) and Barbilophozia spp. (10-65%) . Epiphytes are moderately abundant .The successional status of C48 is unclear . Stand ages are 120 to 240 years . In the lower part of theLower Subalpine, Picea engelmannii appears to be a seral species and the absence of Picea engelmanniiregeneration in the understory of C48 also suggests this, although evidence from older C47 stand sat these altitudes suggests that some Picea engelmannii continues to occur in older stands . Thus, C48is perhaps best termed advanced to mature based on the expectation that Picea engelmannii will de -crease with time and that Tsuga mertensiana and Abies lasiocarpa will increase . C48 is distinguishedby the dominance of Picea engelmannii and Tsuga mertensiana . It is similar to C47 and intergradin gstands occur .Other Studies : No similar types are described by other authors .C49: Tsuga mertensiana-Pseudotsuga menziesii -Ables lasiocarpa-Picea engelmannii/Rhododendron albiflorum-Vacciniummembranaceum(mountain hemlock-Douglas fir-subalpine fir-Engelmann spruce/rhododendron-tall bilberry)45

Table 19 . Stands of the mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C47 )v .t . Values are per cent cover except for epiphytes where 0 .5 indicates the species was pre -sent .HD HD HD JD JD PA PA PA SD S D10 10 10 10 10 10 20 20 21 2 152 55 66 43 45 50 31 32 15 2 2TREE LAYE RAbies lasiocarp aPicea engelmanni iTsuga heterophyll aTsuga mertensiana-- .5 02 .5 .5 .5 10 05 15 2 0- -- 12 .5 04 10 0 508 -- 01 01 40 - -10 05 -- 20 -- 15 15 10 -- 1 0SHRUB LAYE RMenziesia glabell aRhododendron albifloru mThuja plicat aVaccinium membranaceum- -- 03 05 10 -- - -07 35 -- 25 -- 30 25 20 15 1 503 25 .5 30 05 25 20 20 10 2 0HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RCassiope mertensian aClintonia uniflor aDisporum oreganu mLuetkea pectinat aPyrola secund aRubus pedatu sSenecio triangulari sValeriana sitchensi sVeratrum eschscholtzi iStreptopus roseu sGymnocarpium dryopteri s1 5.5 -- 0 3- 02 - -03 0 20 2031 0. 5• 0 1- 1 50 3• 10- 0 20 50 203BRYOID LAYE RDicranum fuscescen sDicranum pallidisetu mDicranum scopariu mPlagiothecium laetu mPohlia nutan sRhytidiopsis robust aBarbilophozia lycopodioide sLophozia ventricosa var . ventricos aBarbilophozia floerke iLophozia longidens ssp . longiden sCladonia bellidiflor aCladonia ecmocyna45 -- . 5.5 -- - --- 05 . 5.5 -- 0 1.5 -- . 5• 201 0• 20. 5- 10- . 5 - . 5- . 5---. 550- 10- .515- . 5. 50 2- 0 3. 50 2. 50 3. 50 2- 0 2EPIPHYTE SBryoria fremontii - 5 5 - .5 -- -Bryoria pseudofuscescens 5 .5 .5 .5 - -Alectoria sarmentosa ssp . sarmentosa .5 .5 -- .5 -- .5 .5 .5 .5 - -Hypogymnia physodes 5 .5 5 5 .5 - -Platismatia glauca 5 .5 .5 - 02 -Environment : C49 occurs on mesic Interior Cedar-Hemlock to Lower Subalpine sites (870-2140 m) inboth MRNP and GNP with moderate to very steep slopes and various aspects . Soils are DystricBrunisols and Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzols on morainal and colluvial landforms .Vegetation : Tsuga mertensiana (15-35%) is the dominant tree species (Table 21) although Tsuga heterophyllamay dominate Interior Cedar-Hemlock stands . Also often present are Abies lasiocarpa(5 - 20%) , Picea engelmannii (3 -5%), Pseudotsuga menziesii (2 -10%) and Pinus monticola (1- 5%) .The shrub layer (25-60%) is composed mostly of Rhododendron albiflorum (10-40%) and Vaccinium46

Table 20 . Stands of the Engelmann spruce-mountain hemlock/rhododendron-tall bilberr y(C48) v.t . Values are per cent cover except for epiphytes where 0 .5 indicates the specieswas present .JD JD JD MF MF P A10 10 10 21 21 1 049 51 68 15 27 3 3TREE LAYE RAbies lasiocarp aPicea engelmanni iTsuga mertensiana02 06 .5 -- -- 2 015 10 05 -- -- 0 503 04 20 40 40 . 5SHRUB LAYE RRhododendron albifloru mVaccinium membranaceu mVaccinium ovalifoliumTsuga mertensiana10 60 50 60 60 4 060 15 15 20 20 3 508 15 15 -- -- 0 1HERB-DWARFSHRUB LAYE RClintonia uniflor aPyrola secund aTiarella unifoliat aVeratrum eschscholtzi iStreptopus streptopoide sAthyrium filix -femin aDryopteris assimili sGymnocarpium dryopteri sPteridium aquilinum10 02 02-- .5 01 -- -- 0 505 01 .5BRYOID LAYE RDicranum pallidisetu mRhytidiopsis robust aBarbilophozia hatcher iBarbilophozia lycopodioide sLophozia sp .-- 50 15 20 .5 2 0- -- 10 -- 05 - -- -- 03 .5 65 - --- 10 -- 67 .5 - -EPIPHYTE SAlectoria sarmentosa ssp . sarmentos aLetharia vulpin aUsnea sp .Parmelia sp .membranaceum (3-20%) with Abies lasiocarpa (3-15%), Tsuga spp . (3-15%) and Menziesia glabellar -5%) common . The herb-dwarf shrub layer (10-40%) commonly contains Clintonia uniflora5%), Cornus canadensis (1-3%) , Gymnocarpium dryopteris (1-5%) and Pyrola secunda (< 1%) .Pleurozium schreberi, Pohlia nutans, Ptilium crista-castrensis, Rhytidiopsis robusta and Barbilophozialycopodioides are important in the bryoid layer (20-65%) . Epiphytes are moderately abundant wit hAlectoria sarmentosa, Letharia vulpina and Parmeliopsis hyperopta most frequent .C49 is advanced to mature successionally with stand ages 100 to >300 years. It is distinguished bythe occurrence of both Tsuga spp . and Pseudotsuga menziesii . Intergrades with C47 and C48 occur .Other Studies : No similar types are described by other authors .C50 :Tsuga heterophylla-Thug plicata/Taxus brevifolia/Gymnocarpium dryopteri s(western hemlock-western red cedar/western yew/oak fern )Environment : C50 occurs on mesic Interior Cedar-Hemlock sites (990-1450 m) on mostly moderat eslopes with various aspects throughout MRNP and GNP . Soils are Dystric Brunisols and Orthi cHumo-Ferric Podzols which are well drained and developed on morainal and colluvial landforms .47

Table 21 . Stands of the mountain hemlock-Douglas fir-subalpine fir-Engelmann spruce/rhododendron-tallbilberry (C49) v .t . Values are per cent cover except for epiphytes where 0 . 5indicates the species was present .HD HD HD JD JD MF PA PA P A10 10 11 10 10 21 10 10 1 071 99 02 58 71 25 26 39 6 6TREE LAYE RAbies lasiocarp aPicea engelmanni iPinus monticol aPseudotsuga menziesi iThuja plicat aTsuga mertensiana07 -- 02 -- -- 07 10 06 0 103 .5 03 .5 04 0 5-- 03 01 -- 05 - --- 02 -- 02 -- -- 15 -- - --- -- 04 35 33 -- 10 -- 1 5SHRUB LAYE RAbies lasiocarp aMenziesia glabell aRhododendron albiflorumThuja plicat aTsuga mertensian aVaccinium membranaceu mVaccinium ovalifolium.5 -- .5 -- -- 19 -- 05 - -- -- .5 10 -- 01 -- . 505 -- 40 .5 -- 08 -- 25 1 0-- .5 -- 02 15 -- 01 03 - --- 02 03 38 25 14 04 05 0 505 01 03 05 05 20 02 15 3 0-- .5 02 -- 05 -- .5 10 - -HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RChimaphila umbellat aClintonia uniflor aCornus canadensi sDisporum oreganu mLinnaea boreali sPachystima myrsinite sPyrola secund aRubus pedatu sStreptopus roseu sDryopteris assimili sGymnocarpium dryopteris05 -- .5 -- .5 -- .5 02 0 5- -- 02 01 -- 03 08 - --- -- 07 lO -- 35 - -01 -- 20 05 05 - -BRYOID LAYE RBarbilophozia lycopodioide sBrachythecium spp .Dicranum spp .Peltigera aphthos aPleurozium schreber iPohlia nutan sPtilium crist a -castrensi sRhytidiopsis robust aRhytidium rugosu mPtilidium pulcherrimurn05 -- .5 01 -- 05 -- -- 2 005 -- 05 .5 05 - --- 25 40 01 01 04 10 -- 0 580 85 -- 10 -- . 5.5 -- -- 02 03 -- 02 - --- 25 20 05 -- 4 0EPIPHYTE SAlectoria sarmentosa ssp . sarmentos aBryoria pseudofuscescen sHypogymnia enteromorph aLetharia vulpin aParmeliopsis spp .Platismatia glauca.5 .5 -- .5 .5 -- .5 .5 . 5.5 .5 -- .5 -- .5 -- .5 . 548

Table 22 . Stands of the western hemlock-western red cedar/western yew/oak fern (C50) v .t .Values are per cent cover except for epiphytes where 0 .5 indicates the species was present .HD HD HD HD MF PA PA PA PA S D10 10 10 30 21 10 10 10 20 2 151 97 98 02 1 9 10 12 17 33 2 4TREELAYE RAbies lasiocarpaPicea engelmannii -- -- 03 -- 17 10 -- -- -- - -Thuja plicata 25 -- 10 20 .5 03 10 05 30 40Tsuga heterophylla 20 45 30 05 03 05 35 20 15 40SHRUBLAYERTaxus brevifolia 01 -- -- -- 02 -- 08 05 20 1 0Thuja plicata -- -- 01 06 02 .5 05 -- 05 0 4Tsuga heterophylla .5 02 03 -- -- -- 02 .5 05 03Vaccinium membranaceum -- 01 -- 04 05 -- 05 -- -- 0 8HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RClintonia uniflora 05 -- 01 .5 05 -- 10 05 05 0 3Cornus canadensis 01 05 03 03 04 -- 05 .5 .5 0 3Disporum oreganu m-- - - - -- 05 15 .5 01 - -Oplopanax horridumPyrola secunda .5 .5 .5 .5 .5 -- 01 -- -- - -Rubus pedatu s.5 10 03 05 20 -- 02 .5 02 0 3Thuja plicataTiarella unifoliat a10 .5 -- 10 02 -- 08 01 10 0 2Vaccinium ovalifoliu mStreptopus roseu sAthyrium filix-feminaDryopteris assimilis 55 20 -- .5 -- -- 05 10 01 0 3Gymnocarpium dryopteris 30 05 15 60 1 0 20 30 30 65 0 5BRYOIDLAYE RDicranum fuscescens .5 10 30 .5 -- -- 02 02 - -Mnium spinulosum -- 01 -- -- -- 05 02 -- -- - -Plagiothecium laetum .5 -- -- .5 -- .5 02 -- .5 - -Pleurozium schreberi -- .5 15 -- 25 -- .5 05 20 10Ptilium crista - castrensis -- 10 10 .5 05 -- -- 03 -- 20Rhytidiopsis robusta .5 15 25 55 -- -- 50 20 05 - -Ptilidium californicum -- .5 .5 .5 -- -- 02 .5 .5 . 5EPIPHYTE SAlectoria sarmentosa ssp .Hypogymnia enteromorph asarmentosa .5 -- .5 .5 -- .5 .5 .5 .5 . 5Parmeliopsis ambigu aParmeliopsis hyperoptaPlatismatia glauca .5 .5 .5 .5 -- .5 -- -- -- .5Vegetation : Tsuga heterophylla (10-50%) and Thuja plicata (5-20%) dominate the closed tree laye r(30-65%) (Table 22, Plate 21) . The shrub layer (3-30%) is characterized by Taxus brevifolia (3-10% )along with Thuja plicata (1-5%), Tsuga heterophylla (1-3%) and Vaccinium membranaceum (1-5%) .Total cover of the herb-dwarf shrub layer varies widely (10-90%) depending on the cover of the tre eand shrub layers . Species diversity is high with Gymnocarpium dryopteris (10-30%), Dryopteris assimilis(3 -10%) , Tiarella unifoliata (1-10%), Rubus pedatus (2 -10%) , Pyrola secunda (< 1%) , Cornuscanadensis (1-5%) and Clintonia uniflora (1-5%) most prominent . Rhytidiopsis robusta (10-50%) ,Pleurozium schreberi (5-20%) and Pleurozium schreberi (5-20%) most often dominate the bryoid layer(20-60%) . Other common species with low cover include Dicranum fuscescens, Plagiothecium laetum ,Mnium spinulosum, and Ptilidium californicum . Epiphytes are sparsely to moderately abundant wit hAlectoria sarmentosa, Parmeliopsis hyperopta and Platismatia glauca most common .49

C50 is successionally mature with stand ages 90 to >400 years . It is distinguished by the dominanceof Tsuga heterophylla and Thup plicata in the tree layer and Taxus brevifolia in the shrub layer .Intergrades with C51 occur where Oplopanax horridum has moderate cover .Other Studies: Near Vernon, British Columbia, Clement (1981) describes several similar types (west -ern hemlock-western red cedar-western yew-bluebead clintonia, western hemlock-western re dcedar-unifoliate-leaved foamflower-oak fern) .C51 :Thujia plicata-Tsuga heterophylla/Oplopanax horridum/Gymnocarpium dryopteris(western red cedar-western hemlock/devil's club/oak fern )Environment : C51 occurs on subhygric Interior Cedar-Hemlock (670-1420 m) sites on moderat eslopes and various aspects in both MRNP and GNP (Plate 26) . Soils are imperfectly to moderatel ywell drained Brunisolics, which are often gleyed, developed mostly on fluvial landforms .Vegetation : C51 is dominated by Thu, plicata (10-40%) and Tsuga heterophylla (10-40%) (Table23) . Lesser amounts of Picea engelmannii (5-15%) occur in many stands . The shrub layer is characterizedby Oplopanax horridum (10-70%) with Thuja plicata (3-10%), Tsuga heterophylla (1-5%) ,Vaccinium membranaceum (1-5%) and Vaccinium ovalifolium (2-5%) also important. The herb-dwarfshrub layer (45-85%) is usually dominated by the ferns Dryopteris assimilis (3-10%), Gymnocarpiumdryopteris (10-50%) and Athyrium filix-femina (2-25%) . Other common species, usually with 300 years . It is distinguished by the dominance o fTsuga heterophylla and Thuja plicata in the tree layer and Oplopanax horridum in the shrub layer .C51 is similar to C52 and intergrades occur .Other Studies : In British Columbia, similar types are described by Clement (1981, wester nhemlock-western red cedar-devil's club-common lady fern) in the Vernon vicinity .C52 :Tsuga heterophylla-Thuja plicata-(Pseudotsuga menziesii)/Pachystima myrsinite s(western hemlock-western red cedar-(Douglas fir)/mountain lover )Environment : C52 occurs throughout MRNP and GNP on mesic Interior Cedar-Hemlock site s(660-1530 m) with moderate to steep, southerly aspect slopes (Plate 43) . Soils are well to rapidlydrained Dystric Brunisols on colluvial and morainal landforms .Vegetation : The closed tree layer (40-60%) (Table 24) is dominated by Tsuga heterophylla (30-50% )and Thu ja plicata (10-20%) . Pseudotsuga menziesii (5-15%), Picea engelmannii (

Table 23 . Stands of the western red cedar-western hemlock/devil's club/oak fern (C51) v .t .Values are per cent cover except for epiphytes where 0 .5 indicates the species was present .HD JD MF MF MF PA PA SD SD S D11 10 21 21 30 10 10 21 21 2 105 59 21 28 25 18 54 10 17 18TREELAYE RAbies lasiocarpaPicea engelmannii -- 05 05 -- -- -- -- 10 20 05Thuja plicata 01 25 40 35 05 10 15 20 10 2 0Tsuga heterophyll a35 -- 40 45 60 -- 10 40 15 1 5SHRUBLAYERAcer glabrumOplopanax horridum 08 .5 10 .5 -- 70 25 05 .5 2 0Rubus parviflorus .5 .5 02 -- -- 10 -- -- 10 - -Thuja plicata 01 20 02 01 02 05 03 02 -- 0 2Tsuga heterophylla .5 01 03 04 06 -- 02 02 -- 0 3Vaccinium membranaceum 02 -- 01 06 02 -- -- 03 .5 1 0Vaccinium ovalifoliu m03 15 05 02 -- 10 -- 03 .5 0 5HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RAralia nudicauli sCircaea alpinaClintonia uniflora .5 .5 02 04 02 03 -- .5 -- 0 3Cornus canadensis 08 01 01 25 .5 05 -- 02 -- . 5Galium trifloru m-- 03 -- -- -- 02 -- .5 03 - -Goodyera oblongifoli aMoneses unifloraPyrola secunda -- .5 -- 01 .5 -- -- .5 .5 - -Rubus pedatu s15 .5 03 03 04 .5 .5 02 -- 0 2Rubus strigosusSmilacina racemosa -- 02 01 .5 -- .5 -- .5 02 0 3Streptopus amplexifolius -- 01 02 -- -- .5 -- .5 -- . 5Tiarella unifoliata .5 01 04 02 02 05 -- .5 .5 02Tsuga heterophylla 01 -- 02 -- .5 .5 .5 -- -- - -Streptopus roseus -- .5 -- 05 02 01 -- -- -- - -Athyrium filix - femina 02 05 48 01 -- -- -- -- .5 - -Dryopteris assimili sDryopteris spinulosa10 -- -- -- .5 10 50 03 10 1 0Gymnocarpium dryopteris 05 50 14 25 04 50 10 03 20 1 5BRYOIDLAYE RDicranum fuscescens -- - - 20 20 25 -- 02 -- -- 10Rhizornnium nudu m-- 10 .5 -- -- 35 30 -- -- 0 3Plagiothecium laetumP1eurozium schreberi 25 20 -- -- -- -- .5 05 03 0 1Ptilium crista-castrensis 05 15 05 -- -- -- .5 05 -- - -Rhytidiopsis robusta 10 10 05 75 25 -- -- .5 -- 05Barbilophozia lycopodioides -- - - 15 -- -- 01 -- 20 - -EPIPHYTE SBryoria glabra 5 -- - - 5 - -Alectoria sarmentosa ssp . sarmentosa -- -- -- .5 .5 -- .5 .5 . 5Parmeliopsis ambigu s-- .5 .5 -- -- -- -Platismatia glauca5 1

Table 24 . Stands of the western hemlock-western red cedar-(Douglas fir)/mountain love r(C52) v .t . Values are per cent cover except for epiphytes where 0 .5 indicates the specieswas present .HD HD JO MF MF MF PA PA PA P A10 10 10 21 21 30 10 10 10 2 063 88 72 09 16 14 35 40 53 3 7TREE LAYE RPicea engelmanni iPinus monticol aPseudotsuga menziesi 1Thuja plicat aTsuga heterophylla.5 -- .5 .5 -- 20 . 503 15 -- 05 -- 03 15 -- 05 . 512 20 02 02 -- 02 12 10 09 1 006 -- 35 80 20 15 20 30 -- 3 0'FALL SHRUB LAYE RAcer glabru mThuja plicat aTsuga heterophylla-- 05 10 02 .5 02 10 -- 01 . 5- -- 20 01 -- 03 05 .5 -- . 5SHRUB LAYE RLonicera utahensi sSorbus sitchensi sThuja plicat aTsuga heterophylla01 -- .5 .5 02 02 .5 -- 01 - -- -- 02 02 .5 -- .5 -- - -03 03 05 -- -- 01 10 03 .5 0 3- -- 25 04 03 02 .5 02 - -HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RChimaphila umbellat aClintonia uniflor aCornus canadensi sGoodyera oblongifoli aLinnaea boreali sPachystima myrsinite sPyrola secund aThuja plicat aTiarella unifoliat aTsuga heterophy l l aVaccinium membranaceu mVaccinium ovalifoliu mViola renifoli aStreptopus roseu sLycopodium complanatu mPteridium aquilinum02 .5 01 03 -- 07 . 501 -- .5 05 03 05 02 03 02 - -- -- 01 -- -- 01 .5 05 - --- .5 .5 01 -- 01 .5 .5 .5 . 503 02 25 12 50 03 10 05 30 0 4.5 -- .5 01 -- .5 -- 01 -- . 525 04 -- .5 01 -- - -.5 -- .5 03 -- 02 .5 .5 -- - -.5 05 02 . 5- -- .5 03 01 .5BRYOID LAYE RDicranum spp . 03 25 -- 17 -- 01 10 02 10 05Mnium spinulosum 5 .5 - - - - 03 - -Pleurozium schreberi 05 -- 40 08 -- 10 -- 01 -- 3 5Ptilium crista-castrensis - 03 -- - 03 -- - -Rhytidiopsis robusta .5 20 01 40 -- 08 40 55 .5 . 5Peltigera aphthosa 5 .5 5 .5 - 5EPIPHYTE SAlectoria sarmentosa ssp . sarmentosa .5 .5 .5 .5 -- .5 .5 .5 .5 - -Cetraria chlorophylla 5 -- .5 .5 -Hypogymnia physodes 5 .5 5 5 - .5 -Parmeliopsis hyperopta - -- .5 - 5 .5 - -Other Studies: In British Columbia, Clement (1981) describes several types (Rocky Mountain Doug -las fir-Oregon boxwood-common western pipsissewa-large-leaved rattlesnake orchid, Rocky MountainDouglas fir-western hemlock-black blueberry-blue bead clintonia, Rocky Mountain Dougla sfir-western hemlock-Oregon boxwood-northern twinflower, Rocky Mountain Douglas fir-western re dcedar-Oregon boxwood-western bracken) from the Vernon area which are similar to C52 . In Oregon ,52

Binkley and Graham (1981) describe a similar "old growth" Douglas fir/western hemlock forest an din the eastern Cascades of Washington, del Moral and Fleming (1979) describe a Tsuga heterophylla-Thujaplicata/Cornus stolonifera-Clintonia uniflora type .C53 :Pseudotsuga menziesii-Thuja plicata/Pachystima myrsinite s(Douglas fir-western red cedar/mountain lover )Environment : C53 occurs in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregion (980-1440 m) of both MRNP an dGNP on mesic sites with moderate, southerly and westerly aspect slopes . Soils are well drained DystricBrunisols on fluvial and morainal landforms .Vegetation : The tree layer (25-65%) (Table 25) is dominated by Pseudotsuga menziesii (10-30%) andThuja plicata (5-15%) with Picea engelmannii (3-5%) and Abies lasiocarpa (10-20%) often present .The shrub layer is usually sparse (5-15%) with Thuja plicata (2-5%) and Lonicera utahensis (

Table 25 . Stands of the Douglas fir-western red cedar/mountain lover (C53) v .t . Values areper cent cover except for epiphytes where 0.5 indicates the species was present .MF PA PA PA SD S D30 1 0 1 0 30 2 1 2 117 34 36 06 02 0 3TREELAYE RAbies lasiocarp aBetula papyrifer aPicea engelmanni iPinus monticol aPseudotsuga menziesi iThuja plicat aTsuga heterophylla-- I O08 - -05 - --- 1 O03 1 515 1 510 --. 5- -03051 005.5- -05- -051 01 0.520- -0 5- -301 2- -2 5- -20- -0 50 3TALL SHRUBLAYE RAbies lasiocarp aAcer glabru mAlnus crisp aThuja plicat a-- 0 103 - -03 - -03 02- -0 1- -03- -1 0- -050 4- -0 3050 5- -. 50 2Lonicera utahensi sRubus parvifloru sThuja plicat aTsuga heterophylla01 0 1.5 0 202 - -01 --SHRUB. 5- -0 101LAYE R0 11 2- ---. 5- -0 3- -0 1. 50 3- -HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RChimaphila umbellata 03 -- 01 01 .5 . 5Clintonia uniflora 05 10 .5 -- 02 0 5Cornus canadensis 06 -- 03 -- -- 1 0Goodyera oblongifolia 01 .5 .5 -- 04 - -Hieracium albiflorum .5 .5 .5 01 .5 - -Pachystima myrsinites 11 08 10 30 15 0 6Pinus monticol aPseudotsuga menziesi iPyrola secunda .5 .5 .5 01 01 02Spiraea lucida 01 -- 01 -- .5 02Thuja plicata .5 -- 02 .5 -- - -Vaccinium membranaceum I1 05 15 .5 03 04Viola orbiculata .5 -- 01 -- .5 . 5Viola renifolia -- 01 .5 02 - -Rosa gymnocarp aPteridium aquilinum 03 -- 10 .5 -- - -BRYOIDLAYE RDicranum scoparium15 .5 10 -- -- - -Mnium spinulosum 01 -- .5 -- .5 - -Pleurozium schreberi 08 -- 25 -- 10 1 0Pohlia nutans 03 . .5 .5 -- .5 - -Ptilium crista - castrensis 05 -- .5 -- -- 1 0Rhytidiopsis robusta 05 .5 03 -- .5 - -Peltigera aphthosa 01 -- -- -- .5 . 5EPIPHYTESAlectoria sarmentosa ssp . sarmentosa -- .5 .5 .5 . 5. 5Hypogymnia enteromorpha -- .5 .5 -- .5 . 5Hypogymnia physodes .5 .5 .5 .5 -- - -Platismatia glauca 5 .5 .554

Table 26. Stands of the Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/valerian-fleabane (09) v .t . Valuesare per cent cover except for epiphytes where 0 .5 indicates the species was present .AW IC JM PA PA Si S D60 90 70 90 90 91 2 193 55 81 78 88 00 1 3. 1TREE LAYE RAbies lasiocarpaPicea engelmannii23 14 .5 10 05 06 1 027 01 07 05 10 08 0 5TALL SHRUB LAYE RAbies lasiocarp aPicea engelmanni iRhododendron albifloru mTsuga mertensiana16 10 04 .5 .5 05 2 0.5 .5 .5 02HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RAbies lasiocarp aAnemone occidentali sArnica cordifoli aEpilobium angustifoliu mErigeron peregrinu sFragaria virginian aParnassia spp .Pedicularis bracteos aPhyllodoce empetriformi sPolygonum viviparu mPyrola asarifoli aRanunculus spp .Senecio triangulari sThalictrum occidental eTrollius albifloru sVaccinium membranaceu mVaccinium scopariu mValeriana sitchensi sVeratrum eschscholtzii- - 18 -- .5 .5 -- 0 3-- 05 02 30 .5 -- 0 2.5 03 01 0 3.5 02 05 05 05 05 1 0-- .5 -- -- 03 05 -- -01 03 03 02 15 01 - -.5 -- 10 -- 05 .5 - -.5 -- -- 01 -- -- 0 2.5 -- -- 25 -- -- 0 3.5 03 07 10 -- 03 1 001 -- -- 05 -- 02 . 5BRYOIDLAYE RBarbilophozia lycopodioide sBrachythecium spp .Cladonia spp .Dicranum scopariu mEurhynchium pulchellu mPeltigera spp .Tortula norvegica18 -- 04 -- 05 02 - -20 .5 -- 0502 .5 .5 02 03 .5 - -- - .5 -- 03 02 - --- .5 -- 05 01 -- . 5and Dudynsky 1984) . In British Columbia, Clement (1981) describes a similar alpine fir-bracte dlousewort-broad-leaved arnica-sitka valerian type near Vernon, Eady (1971) has an Abies lasiocarpa-Valerianasitchensis type and Lea (1984) notes an alpine fir-subalpine fleabane-Sitka valeria ntype. In Alberta, similar types are described by Trottier and Scotter (1973, Picea-Abies/Trollius albijlorus/Carexspp.) in BNP and by Baig (1972, Pinus albicaulis-Abies-Picea/Valeriana sitchensis) inthe southern Rockies . Habeck (1969) has a similar type at Logan Pass, Glacier National Park, Montana.010 : Picea engelmannii-Abies lasiocarpa/Phyllodoce glanduliflora-Cassiope mertensiana(Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/heather )Environment : 010 occurs on mesic Upper Subalpine (2040-2250 m) sites in both MRNP and GNP o nmoderate slopes with southerly and easterly aspects . Soils are well drained Dystric Brunisols oncolluvial and morainal landforms .55

Vegetation : The open tree layer (5-10%) (Table 27) is dominated by Picea engelmannii (1-6%) andAbies lasiocarpa (3-10%) . The shrub layer is mostly Abies lasiocarpa (3-5%) . The herb-dwarf shru blayer (30-85%) is dominated by Cassiope mertensiana (10-55%) and Phyllodoce glanduliflora(5-30%) . Also common are Antennaria lanata, Arnica latifolia, Erigeron peregrinus and Valeriana sitchensis. Cover of the bryoid layer is variable (5-65%) with Dicranum scoparium, Cladonia ecmocynaand Peltigera rufescens most frequent . Epiphytes are scarce .Table 27 . Stands of the Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/heather (010) v .t . Values are per cent coverexcept for epiphytes where 0 .5 indicates the species was present .HD PA PA PA SD11 10 20 30 2007 37 30 22 3 4TREELAYE RAbies lasiocarpa 05 03 10 06 - -Picea engelmannii -- 02 01 06 1 3Pinus albicaulis - -- 01 05 - -HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RAnemone drummondi iAnemone occidental is -- .5 -- 08 - -Antennaria lanata 06 10 -- .5 . 5Arnica latifolia 05 01 01 01 - -Cassiope mertensiana 08 25 55 20 - -Erigeron peregrinus 08 01 -- 10 . 5Hieracium gracile -- 02 .5 - -Luetkea pectinata -- 15 35 - -Phyllodoce glanduliflora -- 30 -- 05 20Rhododendron albiflorum .5 -- 02 -- - -Sibbaldia procumbens 01 -- -- -- . 5Vaccinium membranaceum 05 -- 30 10 - -Valeriana sitchensis 03 .5 -- 10 . 5BRYOIDLAYE RDicranum scoparium -- 01 40 -- - -Rhacomitrium heterostichum 01 .5 -- -- - -Cladonia ecmocyna -- 02 .5 - -Peltigera rufescens -- -- .5 01 .5010 is mature successionally with stand ages of 200 to 400 years . 020 differs from 010 in havin gTsuga mertensiana codominant in the tree layer and Luetkea pectinata important in the herb-dwarfshrub layer. 010 is drier than 09 and is dominated by dwarf shrubs such as Cassiope mertensiana andPhyllodoce glanduliflora rather than herbs such as Valeriana sitchensis and Erigeron peregrinus .Intergrades with 020 occur .Other Studies : 010 is also described in BNP and JNP (Corns and Achuff 1982) and in KNP (Achuf fand Dudynsky 1984) . In British Columbia, Kuchar (1978, alpine fir forest, in part) describes a similartype from Yoho National Park, McLean (1970) has an Abies lasiocarpa-Vaccinium scopariumtype, Eady (1971) has an Abies lasiocarpa-Picea engelmannii-Vaccinium scoparium type and Lea(1984) describes an alpine fir-grouseberry-cream mountain heather type . In Alberta, similar typesare described by La Roi (1975, Picea engelmannii/Phyllodoce types) and Beil (1966) in JNP, by Bai g(1972, Abies-Picea/Phyllodoce), Kirby and Ogilvie (1969, krummholz/Vaccinium scoparium), Ogilvie(1976, Phyllodoce-Vaccinium scoparium), and Johnson (1975, Picea engelmannii-Vaccinium scoparium).56

011 : Picea spp ./Ledum groenlandicum/Tomenthypnum nitens(spruce/Labrador tea/brown moss )Environment : 011 occurs in subhygric to subhydric Interior Cedar-Hemlock sites (1150-1200 m) o nnearly level slopes of various aspects . The one stand sampled is in the Beaver River valley of GNP .Soils are poorly drained Gleysolics and Regosolics on fluvial landforms .Vegetation : The tree layer is open (5-15%) (Table 28) and dominated by Picea spp . (5-10%) . Th eshrub layer (20-50%) is composed mostly of Ledum groenlandicum (10-25%) and Juniperus corn -munis . The herb-dwarf shrub layer is dense (35-80%) and diverse . Common are Carex spp .(3 -10%) , Eqquuisetum spp . (1- 5%) , Cornus canadensis (1-3%) , Linnaea borealis (1-5%) and Mitellanuda (

Table 28 . Stands of the spruce/Labrador tea/brown moss (011) v .t. Values are per centcover except for epiphytes where 0 .5 indicates the species was present .BB HD MF MF SD10 20 20 21 2 126 19 35 47 0 4TREELAYE RAbies lasiocarpa 01 0 2Picea spp . 05 07 10 07 0 5Pinus contorta 10 01 -- 02 - -SHRUBLAYE RBetula glandulosa 02 - - 37 -- 0 3Juniperus communis 30 .5 11 - -Ledum groenlandicum 05 15 35 18 2 5Picea spp . 02 05 10 09 0 5Pinus contorta 06 - - 03 - -Potentilla fruticosa 10 03 - -Salix glauca .5 05 -HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RAster ciliolatus 02 -- 0 1Calypso bulbosa 03 -- - -Carex spp . 01 20 11 0 9Cornus canadensis .5 03 01 .5 0 5Elymus innovatu s3 5 -Empetrum nigrum15- -- 0 3Epiloblum angustifolium 0 2Fragaria virginiana 02 --- .5 0 2Habenaria dilatata 01 - -- .2 . 5Kalmia polifolia -- 02 . 5Linnaea borealis 01 05 04 0 2Mitella nuda .5 .5 04 0 1Oxycoccus microcarpus 01 -- 02 02 . 5Parnassia fimbriata .5 0 3Pedicularis bracteosa .5 0 2Petasites palmatus 02 0 2Rosa acicularis 01 03 0 1Rubus pubescens 01 .5 - - 0 5Equisetum spp . 05 -- 01 01 05Lycopodium annotinum 02 -- - - .5BRYOID LAYE RAulacomnium palustr eHylocomium splenden sPleurozium schreber iSphagnum spp .Tomenthypnum niten sCladonia ecmocyn aPeltigera aphthos aPeltigera polydactyla0 5 -- .5 0 3- 75 -- 260 1 .5 03 0 17 01 0----25 0801 0 5. 501-.5----0 20 2- -- 01 . 5. 5. 55 5. 5. 5EPIPHYTE SAlectoria sarmentosa ssp . sarmentos aCetraria pinastr iLetharia vulpin a.5 -- -- .5 . 5(10-20%), Vaccinium membranaceum (10-20%) and Phyllodoce spp . (5-10%) dominant . Other corn -mon species with low cover include Antennaria lanata, Hieracium gracile, Arnica spp. and Valerianasitchensis . The bryoid layer has 10 to 60% cover with Barbilophozia lycopodioides, Dicranum58

Table 29 . Stands of the aspen-western white pine/mountain lover (015) v .t . Values are pe rcent cover except for epiphytes where 0 .5 Indicates the species was present .PA SD SD SD M F30 21 21 21 3 007 31 32 33 1 8TREE LAYE RBetula papyrifer aPicea engelmanni iPinus monticol aPopulus tremuloide sPseudotsuga menziesi iThuja plicata-- 01 -- -- 2 8- - 01 -- 02 - -10 01 04 03 0 125 02 10 08 0 3.5 -- 03 -- . 5- -- 02 0 1TALL SHRUB LAYE RAcer glabru mAlnus crisp aBetula papyrifer aSalix scouleriana05 01 10 .5 0 7.5 -- 05 05 - --- .5 -- .5 0 3.5 01 05 05 0 2SHRUB LAYE RLonicera involucrat aLonicera utahensi sPachystima myrsinite sRubus parvifloru sShepherdia canadensi sVaccinium membranaceum.5 -- 03 -- . 530 07 20 10 2 3.5 .5 .5 02 0 2.5 .5 .5 .5 0 215 .5 03 .5 04HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RAmelanchier alnifoli aApocynum androsaemifoliu mAster ciliolatu sBerberis repen sChimaphila umbellat aClintonia uniflor aDanthonia spicat aEpilobium angustifoliu mFragaria virginian aHieracium albifloru mJuniperus communi sPyrola secund aRosa aciculari sPteridium aquilinu m. 510. 5. 50 2. 5. 50 1. 5. 52 - 0BRYOID LAYE RDryptodon paten sP1eurozIum schreber iPolytrichum juniperinu mRhacomitrium canescen sCladonia chlorophae aPeltigera aphthos aPeltigera canin aPeltigera rufescens.5 -- .5 .5 1 0-- 02 -- - -- -- 01 .5 . 5.5 .5 .5 -- 0 3.5 02 -- - -.5 .5 .5 - -.5 .5 .5 . 5.5 .5 -- - -EPIPHYTE SHypogymnia physode sPlatismatia glauca - - .5 -- .5 .559

Table 30 . Stands of the subalpine fir-mountain hemlock/heather-luetkea (020) v .t . Valuesare per cent cover except for epiphytes where 0 .5 indicates the species was present .HD JD JD MF PA .PA PA .PA PA S D1Ô 10 10 21 10 10 10 10 10 2 059 53 67 11 20 24 28 41 49 9 2TREE LAYE RAbies lasiocarp aPicea engelmanni iTsuga mertensian a07 12 15 .5 13 08 05 08 05 1 5-- 02 .5 .501 02 .5 01 05 05 03 04 08 0 1SHRUB LAYER 'Ables lasiocarp aRhododendron albifloru mTsuga mertensiana05 12 18 08 10 ' .5' 10 02 -- 1 0- -- 02 -- 03 -- -- 01 15 0 5.5'03 -- 02 05 05 05 -- .5 - -HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RAnemone occidentali sAntennaria lanat aArnica latifoli aCassiope mertensian aDeschampsia atropurpure aErythronium grandifloru mHieracium gracil eLuetkea pectinat aLuzula parviflor aPhyllodoce empetriformi sPhyllodoce glanduliflor aVaccinium membranaceu mValeriana ' sitchensis-- 05 01 --' .5 01 . 5-- 03 03 -- 05 . 520 40 25 40 2035 30 40 30 1 0.5 .5 .5 -- 01 .5 .5 01 -- . 550 20 35 20 10 05 01 10 10 0 512 10 02 -- 01 -- -- 10 -- - -- 07 -- 10 05 .5 - -- - .5 30 07 10 10 10'15 20 0 507 05 .5 -- .5 0 3BRYOID LAYE RDicranum pallidisetu mDicranum scopariu mRhacomitrium canescen sBarbilophozia hatcher iBarbilophozia lycopodioide sBarbilophozia fioerke iCladonia ecmocyna01 -- -- 08 03 30 - -.5 -- 10 -- .5 .5 -- .5 -- 1 025 15 -- -- 3025 -- 20 .5 ' .5 15 .5.5 .5 .5 .5 .5 10EPIPHYTE SBryoria fremonti iBryoria pseudofuscescen sLetharia vulpina .5 .5 .5 .5 -- .5 . 5scoparium, Rhacomitrium canescens and Cladonia ecmocyna having highest cover. Epiphytes ar escarce with Letharia vulpina, Bryoria fremontii and Bryoria pseudo fuscescens most common .Stand ages are 125 to >200 years and 020 is mature successionally . 020 is similar to 010 but differsin having Tsuga mertensiana important in the tree layer rather than Picea engelmannii and in Luetkeapectinata being important on the herb-dwarf shrub layer .Other Studies: In British Columbia, Yarie (1980, Vaccinio (mëmbranacei)-Tsugetum mertensianae)has a similar type .021 : Picea engelmannii- Abies lasiocarpa/Rhododendron albiflorum-Vaccinium membranaceu m(Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry )Environment : 021 occurs throughout MRNP and GNP on mesic, mostly Lower Subalpine (1800-2000m) sites on southerly, moderate to steep slopes . The soils are well drained Orthic Ferro-Humic Podzolsand Dystric Brunisols on morainal and colluvial landforms .60

Vegetation : The tree layer is open (5-10%) (Table 31, Plate 33) and dominated by Abies lasiocarpa(3-10%) and Picea engelmannii , (< 1-5%) . The shrub layer is well developed (35-80%) with Rhododendronalbiflorum (35-60%) dominant . Vaccinium membranaceum (20-55%) occurs both in this layerand the herb-dwarf shrub layer . Abies lasiocarpa (1-5%) usually occurs in the shrub layer also . Theherb-dwarf shrub layer (55-80%) . is dominated by Vaccinium membranaceum (20-55%), with lesseramounts of Valeriana sitchensis (1-10%) and Arnica latifolia (1-5%) . Luzula spp ., Abies lasiocarpaand Pedicularis spp . occur with low cover . Cover of the bryoid layer is variable (5-75%) with Dicranumscoparium, Polytrichum juniperinum, Barbilophozia lycopodioides and Cladonia ecmocyna mos tprominent . Epiphytes are sparse with Parmeliopsis hyperopta, Parmeliopsis arnbigua and Lethariavulpina most common .Stand ages are 75 to 325 years and 021 is mature successionally . Younger stands occur at lower elevationsbut are compositionally indistinguishable from older, higher stands . 021 is similar to C21 bu tdiffers primarily being an open forest and having lower cover values for Rhododendron albiflorum .Other Studies : In eastern British Columbia, Lea (1984) describes a similar alpine fir-white-flowere drhododendron-grouseberry-Sitka valerian type . In the eastern Cascade Mountains of Washington, de lMoral and Fleming (1979) describe a similar type .22: Abies lasiocarpa- Pinus albicaulis- Picea engelmannii/Vaccinium membranaceum-Cassiope mertensiana(subalpine fir-whitebark pine-Engelmann spruce/tall bilberry-white mountain heather )Environment : 022 occurs on mesic, Upper Subalpine (1950-2150 m) sites throughout MRNP andGNP on moderate, mostly westerly and southerly slopes . The soils are well drained Dystric Brunisol sdeveloped on colluvial and morainal landforms .Vegetation : The open tree layer (5-15%) (Table 32) is dominated by Abies lasiocarpa (2-10%), Pinu salbicaulis (2-5%) and Picea engelmannii (1-5%) . The shrub layer is usually well developed (20-50% )with Rhododendron alb/florum (5-40%), Abies lasiocarpa (2-5%) and Pinus albicaulis (

Table 31 . Stands of the Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (021) v .t .Values are per cent cover except for epiphytes where 0 .5 indicates the species was present .HD HD HD HD PA PA PA P A10 10 1 1 11 10 10 10 2 070 91 04 10 15 31 38 3 9TREE LAYE RAbies lasiocarp aPicea engelmanniiO5 05 03 02 10 05 03 0 501 .5 -- 05 .5 .5 -- . 5SHRUB LAYE RAbies lasiocarp aRhododendron alb iflorumSorbus spp .Vaccinium membranaceum.5 .5 01 .5 -- .5 -- 1 065 03 60 35 65 40 45 5 5-- 15 -- 10 -- .5 . 5-- .5 25 25 -- -- 40 - -HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RAbles lasiocarpa .5 03 03 05Arnica cordifolia .5 10 0 4Arnica latifolia .5 02 .5 10 0 1Cassiope mertensiana 08 -- 10Deschampsia atropurpurea 02 .5 . 5Epilobium angustifolium 02 . 5Hieracium gracile .5 . 5Luetkea pectinata 15 3 5Luzula glabrata 03 . 5Pedicularis bracteosa .5 - - .5 .5 0 3Phyllodoce empetriformis 03 .5 1 0Rubus pedatus 01 10 20 - -Vaccinium membranaceum 70 10 05 -- 55 40 4 5Valeriana sitchensis 10 .5 03 01 .5 20 . 5Gymnocarpium dryopteris 15 05 .05 - -Lycopodium spp . .5 .5 .5 . 5 .5 1 5BRYOI DLAYERDicranum fuscescens 20 03 - -Dicranum pallidisetum .5 20 -- - -Dicranum scoparium 02 10 40 .5 -- -- 20Polytrichum juniperinum .5 -- .5 -- -- 1 5Polytrichum piliferum 01 0 5Rhacomitrium canescens - - -- 0 5Barbilophozia lycopodioides .5 .5 .5 .5 .5 30 . 5Lophozia ventricosa var . ventricosa -- 05 -- .5 -- -- -- - -Barbilophozia floerkei 20 -- 10 -- - -Cladonia cenotea .5 .5 -- .5 - -- -Cladonia ecmocyna -- .5 -- .5 05 .5SHRUB VEGETATION TYPESS2 :Abies lasiocarpa-Salix spp ./Valeriana sitchensis(subalpine fir-willow )Environment : S2 occurs in central GNP on mesic Lower Subalpine to Upper Subalpine sites(1580-1960 m) with steep slopes and mostly easterly aspects . Soils are Dystric Brunisols and Regosolicson colluvial and morainal landforms which are snow avalanched .62

Table 32 . Stands of the subalpine fir-whitebark pine-(Engelmann spruce)/tall bilberry-heathe r(022) v .t . Values are per cent cover except for epiphytes where 0 .5 indicates the specieswas present .HD HD JD PA PA S D10 11 10 10 30 2 050 12 41 61 11 9 1TREE LAYE RAbies lasiocarp aPicea engelmanni iPinus albicauli sTsuga mertensian a10 02 07 02 05 0 5.5 .5 05 08 -- - -10 03 03 05 .5 0 2TALL SHRUB LAYE RAbies lasiocarp aPicea engelmanni iPinus albicauli sTsuga mertensiana02 .5 08 05 02 0 2.5 -- 01 -- -- . 5SHRUB LAYE RAbies lasiocarp aPinus albicauli sRhododendron albifloru mTsuga mertensiana03 -- 08 02 02 0 3.5 .5 02 .5 -- 0 245 40 .5 03 50 . 5HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RAbies lasiocarpa 02 -- -- .5 10 - -Arenaria capillaris - .5 0 2Arnica latifolia 05 -- .5 -- -- . 5Cassiope mertensiana -- 02 -- 35 25 05Hieracium gracile 01 -- -- -- -- . 5Luetkea pectinata -- -- 10 15 35 03Luzula wahlenbergi iPedicularis bracteos aPhyllodoce empetriformisPinus albicaulis-- 03 05 10 -- . 5Saxifraga ferrugine aVaccinium membranaceu m40 18 30 20 50 0 3Valeriana sitchensis 08 -- .5 -- -- . 5BRYOI DLAYE RCeratodon purpureu sDicranum fuscescens -- 10 -- 07 - -Dicranurn scopariumPolytrichum juniperinu m.5 .5 -- -- -- 0 1Rhacomitrium canescens .5 -- 10 .5 -- - -Barbilophozia spp . .5 .5 -- 25 -- . 5Lophozia longidens ssp . longiden sCladonia ecmocyna .5 45 10 .5 -- . 5Solorina crocea -- .5 .5 - .- .5 .5Vegetation : Stunted Abies lasiocarpa (10-50%) dominates the shrub layer (40-90%) (Table 34) wit hPicea engelmannii (3-5%) and Salix spp . (5-10%) also common . The herb-dwarf shrub layer(20-80%) is varied and typically contains Epilobium angustifolium (

Table 33. Stands of the Engelmann spruce-black cottonwood/yellow dryad (023) v .t . Valuesare per cent cover except for epiphytes where 0 .5 indicates the species was present .PA S D1 0 304 4 0 1TREELAYE RAbies lasiocarpa .5' . 5Picea engelmannii 10 18Populus trichocarp a05 1 2TALL SHRUBLAYE RAbies lasiocarpaPicea engelmannii 03 0 5Populus trichocarpa 0 2 1 0SHRUBLAYE RAbies lasiôcarpa .5 - -Alnus crispa .5 . 5Cornus'stolonifera .5 - -Picea engelmannii 02 05Populus trichocarpa 02 1 5Salix barclayi -- 10Salix commutata .5 - -HERB-DWARFSHRU BLAYE RDryas drummondii70 80Picea engelmannii -- . 5Pyrol a secundaSalix barclayi -- 1 0BRYOI D'LAYE RCeratodon purpureu s.5. 5Pleurozium schreberi -- 0 1Ptilium crista-castrensis .5 . 5Rhacomitrium canescens .5 . 5Cladonia cariosa .5 0 2Cladonia fimbriata .5 .5Other Studies : S2 is also described in BNP and JNP (Corns and Achuff 1982) and in KNP (Achuf fand Dudynsky 1984) . In British Columbia, similar types are described by Kuchar (1978, deciduousavalanche scrub) in Yoho National Park . In Alberta, Trottier and Scotter (1973, Picea-Abies/Alnu scrispa-Vaccinium scoparium/Heracleum lanatum) in BNP. have a similar type . Butler (1979) describesa comparable type in Glacier National Park, Montana .S13 : . Alnus crisps/fer n(green alder/fern )Environment : S13 occurs throughout GNP on mesic to subhygric Interior Cedar-Hemlock to Lowe rSubalpine sites (1040-1860 m) on steep to moderate slopes and predominantly southerly and westerl yaspects . Soils are well to moderately well drained Brunisolics, Regosolics and Podzolics on colluvialand fluvial landforms which are usually snow avalanched .64

Table 34 . Stands of the subalpine fir-willow (S2) v .t . Values are per cent cover .HD HD JD JD S D10 20 10 10 2 034 47 73 76 9 7TAL LSHRUBLAYE RAbies lasiocarpa20 03 05 - - 30Picea engelmannii .5 01 01 -- - -Pinus albicaulis .5 01 .5 01 - -SHRUBLAYE RAbies lasiocarpa 40 30 .5 50 40Picea engelmannii .5 0 5Rhododendron albiflorum -- 02 35 - -Salix commutata 0 1Salix drummondiana -- 05 10Salix glauca 0 5Salix vestita -- 25 .5HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE REpilobium angustifolium 03 -- .5 .5 - -Fragaria virginiana 05 .5 .5 - -Luzula parviflor aPyrola secunda .5 .5 -- -- . 5Vaccinium membranaceum -- 10 0 2Vaccinium scoparium -- 02 -- -- . 5BRYOIDLAYE RDicranum scoparium10 -- -- .5 0 1Drepanocladus uncinatus .5 30 -- -- - -Barbilophozia hatcheri -- -- -- .5 0 1Barbilophozia lycopodioides 35 05 -- -- 0 1Cladonia ecmocyna -- .5 -- 03 0 1Vegetation : Alnus crispa (70-95%) (Table 35, Plates 17 and 49) dominates the shrub layer . Theherb-dwarf shrub layer is varied with Dryopteris assimilas, Gymnocarpium dryopteris, Smilacina racemosaand Streptopus amplexifolius important. Bryoid layer cover is low with Brachythecium spp .common . S13 is mature successionally, maintained by periodic avalanches . It differs from S2 whic halso occurs on avalanche tracks by the dominance of Alnus crispa and by occurring at lower altitudes ,usually in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregion .Other Studies : S13 is also described in KNP (Achuff and Dudynsky 1984) . No similar types are de -scribed by other authors .S14 :Salix spp .-Tsuga mertensiana-Abies lasiocarpa/Vaccinium membranaceu m(willow-mountain hemlock -subalpine fir/tall bilberry )Environment : S14 occurs in GNP on mesic sites in the upper part of the Lower Subalpine to the lowerpart of the Upper Subalpine (1700-2170 m) on steep to very steep slopes of various aspect . Soils arewell drained Dystric Brunisols on colluvial landforms which are usually snow avalanched .Vegetation : The shrub layer (35-75%) (Table 36) consists mostly of Tsuga mertensiana (5-20%) ,Abies lasiocarpa (2-10%), Salix spp . (8-35%) and Rhododendron albiflorum (5-20%) . Vacciniummembranaceum (10-20%) usually dominates the herb-dwarf shrub layer (35-85%) . Also importantare Luetkea pectinata, Epilobium angustifolium and Carex spp. Bryoid layer cover is variable wit hCladonia spp ., Barbilophozia spp . and Dicranum spp . most common .6 5

Table 35. Stands of the green alder/fern (S13) v .t . Values are per cent cover .HD HD JD JD JD MF MF PA Sl) S D10 30 10 10 10 30 30 30 20 2 154 23 47 48 55 31 34 04 96 1 9SHRUB LAYE RAbles lasiocarp aAcer glabru mAlnus crispaRubus strigosu sSambucus puben sSorbus sitchensi sVaccinium membranaceu mVaccinium ovalifolium-- 05 -- .5 -- -- 01 -- 05 - --- 10 02 3 005 40 20 90 05 05 99 80 75 2 030 .5 10 03Calamagrostis canadensi sElymus glaucu sEpilobium angustifoliu mGalium trifloru mHeracleun, lanatu mLeptarrhena pyrolifoli aLuzula parviflor aMitella brewer iRibes lacustr eRubus parvifloru sSmilacina racemos aStreptopus amplexifoliu sThalictrum occidental eTiarella unifoliat aUrtica gracili sVeratrum eschscholtzi iViola renifoli aHERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RViola rugulos aSalix sitchensi sStreptopus roseu sAthyrium filix - femina -- 70 -- 01 13 15 -- - -Dryopteris assimilas .5 -- -- 05 -- 01 -- -- 20 - -Gymnocarpium dryopteris -- -- 02 .5 25 01 01 -- -- . 5Pteridium aquilinum 85 -- 46 -- 35Brachythecium curtu mPlagiothecium denticulatu mRhacomitrium canescen s05 -- - -01 -- .5 03 -- 07 - -08 05 05 0 2- -- .5 20 05 0 2BRYOTD LAYE RS14 is mature successionally due to periodic avalanching . It is distinguished by being dominated byTsuga mertensiana and Salix spp. rather than by Abies lasiocarpa as in S2 or Alnus crispa as in S13 ,both of which are also avalanched . Intergrades between S14 and S13 or S2 occur .Other Studies: No similar types are described by other authors .S15 :(willow )Salix commutata-Salix brachycarpaEnvironment : S15 occurs in central GNP on subhygric to subhydric Lower Subalpine (1810-1890 m )sites with gentle slopes and easterly aspects (Plate 15) . Soils are poorly drained Regosolics on fluvia llandforms often in the bottom of cirques .66

Table 36 . Stands of the willow-mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/tall bilberry (S14) v .t. Valuesare per cent cover .HD JD MF PA PA S D1 0761 0502 113104510602 12 7TALL SHRUB LAYE RAbles lasiocarpaPinus albicauli s02 05 10 02 -- 0 2Picea engelmanni iTsuga mertensiana 03 25 05 01 - -SHRUBLAYERAbies lasiocarpa 12 30 30 0 3Pinus albicaulis -- -- 05 . 52 5Rhododendron albiflorum 20 20 -- - - .5 09Salix spp . 3 5Vaccinium membranaceum -- 15 20 20 25 20Vaccinium ovalifolium 30 05 -- - -Tsuga mertensiana 15 15 05 04 10HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RAbies lasiocarpa -- .5 0 3Anaphalis margaritacea -- - 5 .5 -Cassiope mertensiana 30 -- -- -- . 5Epilobium angustifolium -- 05 60 0 2Hieracium gracile - .5 . 5Luetkea pectinata 15 10 -- -- 0 2Carex sp . 01 n3 -- - - - -BRYOI DLAYERDicranum spp . .5 03 07 05Rhacomitrium heterostichum -- -- 10Polytrichum sp . -- -- 4 0Barbilophozia lycopodioides -- 02 - - 0 5Barbilophozia floerkei 90 -- - - . 5Marchantia sp . -- -- 1 5Lophozia longidens ssp . longidens -- 15 - -Cladonie carneola 03 -- .5 . 5Cladonia ecmocyna .5 -- - - 0 3Cladonia pleurota -- .5 . 5Lecidea granulosa .5 -- .5 . 5Vegetation : Salix spp . dominate the shrub layer (25-85%) (Table 37) . The herb-dwarf shrub layer isdiverse with characteristic species including Leptarrhena pyrolifolia, Senecio triangularis, Phleum alpinum,Luetkea pectinata and Carex spp . Bryoid layer cover is variable (10-50%) withpalustre,AulacomniumBryum pseudotriquetrum, Calliergon stramineum and Philonotis fontana most typical .S15 is successionally mature due to wet conditions and perhaps being in snow avalanche run-out are -as . It is distinguished by the dominance of Salix spp .Other Studies: No similar types are described by other authors .S17 :Alnus tenuifolia/Lysichiton americant' m(alder/skunk cabbage )Environment : S17 occurs in both MRNP and GNP in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregion (650-870m) along the Beaver and Illecillewaet rivers . Sites are hydric to subhydric with very poorly drainedRegosolics on level or depressional fluvial landforms .6 7

Table 37. Stands of the willow (S15) v .t. Values are per cent cover .HD JD JD PA PA S D10 10 10 10 10 3 061 74 75 30 G2 0 3SHRUBLAYE RSali xSali xSalixbarclay ibarrattian abrachycarpa-- 25 -- 10 - -Salix commutata 80 40 30 25 -- 10HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RAgrostis thurberiana -- .5 .5 01 -- - -Arnica mollis 05 01 -- -- -- . 5Caltha leptosepala -- -- .5 15 -- . 5Carex lenticulari sCarex nigricans 15 -- 35 20 -- 0 2Cassiope mertensian aDeschampsia atropurpure aEpilobium alpinu mErigeron peregrinus -- 01 .5 -- -- 0 1Eriophorum angustifolium -- 02 -- -- 8 0Juncus mertensianus .5 -- -- 02 .5 - -Leptarrhena pyrolifolia 45 -- 25 01 -- 0 5Luetkea pectinata - -- 01 .5 -- . 5Phleum alpinum -- .5 .5 .5 01 - -Potentilla diversifoli aSenecio triangularis -- 10 .5' .5 -- 10Vaccinium membranaceu mValeriana sitchensi sVeronica alpina -- .5 .5 -- --Poa sp .0 1Ligusticum canbyi -- 20 -- 05 -- - -Equisetum arvense -- 01 .5 -- . 5BRYOIDLAYERAulacomnium palustre- -- 08 03 - - 05Brachythecium turgidu mBryum pseudotriquetrum -- 08 01 -- - -Calliergon strarnineum - 08 01 -- - -Drepanocladus uncinatu sPhilonotis fontana var .fontana -- 02 15 - -Vegetation : The shrub layer (30-80%) (Table 38) is mostly Alnus tenuifolia (10-55%) and Salix scouleriana(20-70%) with Lonicera involucrata (5%) also frequent (Plate 25) . Lysichiton americanum(5-65%) characterizes the herb-dwarf shrub layer . Cover of this species increases greatly through th egrowing season as the large leaves expand and cover estimates are likely influenced by the date o fsampling. Also important are Equisetum fuviatile (2-15%) and Scirpus microcarpus (10-50%) . Specieswith generally low cover include Athyrium filix-femina, Cicuta douglasii, Cinna latifolia, Epilobiurnglandulosum, Urtica gracilis and Galium trifidum . A bryoid layer is virtually absent due to fre -uent standing water and deposition of mineral material . Unvegetated mineral soil may occupy 50 t o10% of the ground surface .S17 is difficult to categorize successionally . It is at an early stage of primary succession but is mor eor less stable and in equilibrium with periodic flooding and the high water table . It is unlikely tochange substantially in the next few hundred years which is characteristic of the mature stage . Thus ,it is perhaps best regarded as mature . The occurrence of Alnus tenuifolia and Lysichiton americanumare distinctive for S17 .Other Studies : No similar types are described by other authors .68

Table 38 . Stands of the alder/skunk cabbage (S17) v .t . Values are per cent cover .HD HD HD HD P A30 30 30 30 3012 13 14 25 0 5SHRUBLAYE RAlnus tenuifolia55 45 10 25 30Cornus stolonifera .5 10 -- -- 1 5Salix scouleriana 25 20 70 05 - -Lonicera involucrata -- 05 05 .5 0 5HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RAthyrium filix - femina -- - - 10 .5 0 3Cicuta douglasii .5 - - .5 .5 0 2Cinna latifolia .5 05 .5 .5 . 5Epilobium glandulosum .5 .5 .5 . 5Galium trifidum 03 .5 .5 .5 . 5Poa palustris .5 .5 . 5Scirpus microcarpus 30 50 50 1 0Urtica dioica 50 . 5Aster modestus 03 01 0 3Lysichiton americanum 01 05 05 .5 6 5Equisetum fluviatile 15 20 .5 10 02LOW SHRUB-HERB VEGETATION TYPESL5 :Phyllodoce glanduliflora-Cassiope mertensiana-Antennaria lanat a(heather-everlasting )Environment : L5 occurs throughout MRNP and GNP on mesic Upper Subalpine to Alpine sites(2040-2500 m) with gentle to steep slopes and predominantly southerly and westerly aspects . Soilsare well drained Dystric Brunisols and Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzols on morainal and colluvial land -forms, often with eolian veneers . Stands on colluvium are typically snow avalanched .Vegetation : L5 is dominated by Cassiope mertensiana (15-50%), Phyllodoce glanduliflora (10-50% )and Antennaria lanata (2-20%) (Table 39, Plate 30) . Also important are Phyllodoce empetriformis(3-10%) and Luetkea pectinata (5-25%) . Characteristic species with low cover include Carex nigricans,Erigeron peregrinus, Hieracium gracile, Juncus drummondii, Sibbaldia procumbens and Valerianasitchensis . Bryoid layer cover is variable (3-50%) with Dicranum scoparium, Pogonatum alpin -urn, Polytrichum puniperinum and Cladonia ecmocyna most common .L5 is mature successionally and characterized by the dominance of Cassiope mertensiana, Phyllodoceglanduliflora and Phyilodoce empetriformis . Intergrades with 010, 020 and 022 occur near the Alpine-UpperSubalpine boundary .Other Studies : L5 is also described in BNP and JNP (Corns and Achuff 1982) and in KNP (Achuf fand Dudynsky 1984) . Numerous other workers describe types similar to L5 . In British Columbia ,similar types are described by Knapik and Landals (1974, Cassiope mertensiana) in MRNP, by Ku -char (1978, mountain heather tundra) in Yoho National Park, by Eady (1971, Phyllodoce empetriformis-AntennariaJanata), and by Lea (1984, mountain heather-grouseberry-wooly pussytoes) . I nJNP, similar types are noted by Crack (1977, Phyllodoce glanduliflora), Hrapko and La Roi (1978 ,Cassiope mertensiana-Phyllodoce glanduliflora), Kuchar (1975, Phyllodoce glanduliflora-Cassiopemertensiana), and La Roi (1975, Abies lasiocarpa/Cassiope mertensiana/Pseudoleskea radicosa) .Elsewhere in Alberta, Ogilvie (1976, Phyllodoce), Kondla (1978, everlasting-phyllodoce) , Kirby andOgilvie (1969, Phyllodoce), Mortimer (1978, Phyllodoce glanduliflora-Cassiope mertensiana), Jacque sand Legge (1974, yellow heather), and Trottier (1972, Phyllodoce) describe similar types .6 9

Table 39 . Stands of the heather-everlasting (L5) v .t. Values are per cent cover .HD HD HD JD JD JD MF PA PA S D10 10 10 10 10 10 30 10 20 2 153 79 94 44 52 62 21 56 38 2 0HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RAnemone occidentali sAntennaria lanat âCarex nigrican sCarex spectabili sCassiope mertensian aCastilleja miniat aDeschampsia atropurpure aEpilobium alpinu mErigeron peregrinu sHieracium gracil eJuncus drummondi iLuetkea pectinat aPhyllodoce empetriformi sPhyllodoce glanduliflor aRanunculus eschscholtzi iSibbaldia procumben sTriseturn spicatumVaccinium membranaceu mValeriana sitchensi sVeronica alpin aPoa sp .Arnica sp .• 05 -- - -- -- 02 . 5- 02 01 . 5• . 5 50 6 5- 0 - 5 -- - -- - - .5 . 5- .5 -- - -- 03 20 1 560 01 1 0- • 0 - 1 .5 . 5- • 01 -- .5BRYOID35 -- 10 - --- 06 15 10 0 5-- 03 -- .5 - -05 03 -- -- 0 405 40 45 15 1 0.5 -- -- .5 0 5.5 02 01 .5 - -.5 .5 -- -- 0 202 02 -- 01 0 5-- .5 .5 01 . 5-- .5 .5 -- . 5-- 15 05 20 4 0LAYE RDicranum scopariu mPogonatum alpinu mBarbilophozia floerke iCetraria subalpin aCladonia ecmocyn aLepraria neglect aPeltigera rufescen sRhizocarpbn geographicu mSolorina crocea- -- 06 -- -- 2 0-- 20 - . 5- - 20 1 5-- .5 .5.5 01 0 302 .5 .5 02 . 5.5 .5 -- - -.5 .5 50 -- -- .5 -- - -01 .5 .5. 5Hl :Dryas octopetala-Salix nivalis-Silene acaulis(mountain avens-snow willow-moss campion )HERB-DWARF SHRUB VEGETATION TYPESEnvironment : H1 occupies a very restricted range occurring only in easternmost GNP, principally o nridges above East Grizzly Creek especially between Dawn and Dauntless mountains . Generally, Hloccurs on mesic to subxeric Alpine sites (2300-2650 m) on various slopes and often southerly aspects .The soils are well drained Regosolics and Brunisolics on colluvial and morainal landforms . Solifluctionis common .Vegetation : Hl tundra is dominated by Dryas octopetala (10-50%) and Salix nivalis (3-20%) with totalherb-dwarf shrub layer cover of 20 to 80% (Table 40) . Other common species with low cover includeSaxifraga oppositifolia, Potentilla diversifolia, Oxytropis podocarpa, Carex scirpoidea, Anemon edrummondii, Astragalus alpinus, Erigeron aureus, Antennaria lanata, and Salix arctica . Bryoid coveris

Table 40. Stands of the mountain avens-snowper cent cover .willow-moss campion (Hl) v .t. Values ar eHD HD HD PA SD SD S D20 20 20 30 20 20 2 050 51 96 01 37 48 8 1HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RAnemone drummondi iAntennaria lanat aAstragalus alpinu sCarex spp .Draba incert aDraba lonchocarp aDryas octopetal aErigeron aureu sHedysarum sulphurescen sOxytropis podocarp aPolygonum viviparu mPotentilla diversifoli aSalix nivali sSaussurea dens aSaxifraga spp .Saxifraga oppositifoli aSilene acauli sSelaginella densa-. 503 . 5- - - .5 . 5- -- .5 0 50 105 .5 02 0 5. 5 - -- -- .5 - -- .5 - .- - -1 0 15 45 40 0 5. 5.5 .5 - -- - . 5- -05- -- 05 - -• -- .5 - -.5 15 20 2 0. 50 3. 5. 5. 5. 5• -- .5 . 5- - - 02 0 3-05 -- - -.5 .5 - -Tortula norvegic aTortula rurali sCetraria cuculiat aCetraria ericetoru mCetraria nivali sCetraria tilesi iLecanora spp .Rhizocarpon geographicu mThamnolia subuliformi sLecidea spp .-. 51 5-. 5 15.5BRYOID LAYE RHl is mature successionally and is characterized by the dominance of Dryas octopetala .Other Studies: Hl is also described in BNP and JNP (Corns and Achuff 1982) and in KNP (Achuf fand Dudynsky 1984) . In British Columbia, similar types are described by Kuchar (1978, white drya dtundra) in Yoho National Park and by Raup (1934) in the Mount Selwyn area in northeastern Britis hColumbia . In Alberta, similar types are described by many workers . In JNP, these include Hettinge r(]975, Dryas octopetala-Oxytropis campestris), Hrapko and La Roi (1978 ; Dryas octopetala-Oxytropiscampestris, Dryas octopetala-Festuca brachyphylla, Dryas octopetala-Salix nivalis), La Roi (1975 ,Dryas octopetala/Salix nivalis/Polytrichum piliferum-Rhizocarpon geographicum, Dryas octopetala/Salix nivalis/Rhacomitrium lanuginosum/Rhizocarpon geographicum), Kuchar (1975, Dryas octopetala/lichen,Dryas octopetala/Polytrichum piliferum), and Crack (1977, Dryas octopetala) . In BNP ,similar vegetation is described by Broad (1973, Dryas octopetala-Empetrum nigrum ), Trottier andScotter (1973 ; Dryas octopetala, Salix nivalis), Beder (1967, Dryas hookeriana-Oxytropis podocarpa-Cetrariacucullata-Cetraria nivalis), and Knapik et al . (1973, Dryas hookeriana, Dryas hookeriana -Carex scirpiformis) . Elsewhere in Alberta, similar types are described by Mortimer (1978, Dryasintegrifnlia-Oxytropis podocarpa) and See and Bliss (1980, Dryas integrifolia-Oxytropis podo •carpa-Salix myrtillifolia) in the northern Front Ranges, in the Kananaskis area by Kirby and Ogilvi e(1969, Dryas), Jacques and Legge (1974, Dryas octopetala), Kondla (1978, mountain avens), andTrottier (1972, Dryas octopetala), in the upper Oldman River by Jeffrey et al. (1968, alpine tundra) ,Ogilvie (1976, Dryas hookeriana), and by Kuchar (1973, Dryas tundra) in Waterton Lakes Nationa lPark. Similar types occur south in Montana as described by Bamberg and Major (1968), Choate an dHabeck (1967) on fellfields on Glacier' National Park, Montana, and Johnson and Billings (1962 ,Dryas octopetala) in southern Montana .71

H2 : Carex nigricans- Antennaria lanata(black alpine sedge -everlasting)Environment : H2 occurs throughout MRNP and GNP on mesic to subhygric Upper Subalpine to Al -pine (2100-2400 m) sites with a wide range of slopes and aspects . The soils are moderately wel ldrained Dystric Brunisols and Regosolics developed on morainal and colluvial landforms, often with a .fluvial veneer .Table 41 . Stands of the black alpine sedge-everlasting (H2) v .t . Values are per cent cover .HD HD JD JD PA P A21 30 10 tO 10 3 023 08 61 81 27 1 4HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RAntennaria lanata -- 05 -- .5 .5 . 5Arnica latifoli aCarex nigricans 60 60 75 98 75 70Cassiope mertensiana .5 .5 .5 -- 05 05Deschampsia atropurpurea .5 -- .5 01 -- 05Epilobium alpinum -- .5 -- .5 .5 . 5Hieracium gracileJuncus drummondi iJuncus parry i25 -- 10 .5 - -Luetkea pectinata .5 .5 .5 -- 05 05Luzula spp . -- 03 05 -- .5 t OPhyllodoce empetriformis 01 03 -- -- -- - -Phyllodoce glanduliflora -- -- 05 0 1Poa cusickiiRanunculus eschscholtzi iSaxifraga lyalli iSibbaldia procumben sValeriana sitchensi sVeronica alpinaBRYOID LAYE RCeratodon purpureu sPogonatum alpinu mPolytrichum juniperinu mPolytrichum piliferu mPolytrichum sexangular eRhacomitrium heterostichum var . hetePohlia sp .Asterella saccat aKiaeria sp .Rhizocarpon geographicu mStereocaulon spp .Alectoria sp .-- 05 0 1Vegetation : Total cover of the herb-dwarf shrub layer (Table 41) is 75 to 95% with Carex nigricans(10-75%) often forming a dense turf . Other common species include Antennaria lanata (

Other Studies : H2 is also described in BNP and JNP (Corns and Achuff 1982) and in KNP (Achuf fand Dudynsky 1984) . Carex nigricans dominated vegetation is widespread . In British Columbia ,similar types are described by Kuchar (1978, black alpine sedge types) in Yoho National Park and b yKnapik and Landais (1974, Carex nigricans) in MRNP . In Alberta, similar vegetation is described byKuchar (1975, Carex nigricans), Hrapko and La Roi (1978, Carex nigricans-Luzula wahlenbergii) ,and Crack (1977, Carex nigricans) in JNP, and by Trottier and Scotter (1973, Carex nigricanstypes), Broad (1973, Carex nigricans), Beder (1967, Carex nigricans), and Knapik et al. (1973 ,Carex nigricans) in BNP . Elsewhere in Alberta, similar types are described by Ogilvie (1976, Kirb yand Ogilvie 1969 ; Carex nigricans), Jacques and Legge (1974, black sedge), Trottier (1972, Carexnigricans), and Kondla (1978, alpine sedge-buttercup) .H8 :Dryas drummondii-Epilobium latifoliu m(yellow dryad-willow herb )Environment : H8 is limited to the upper Beaver River valley in GNP . It occurs on subxeric to subhygricLower Subalpine sites (1500-1680 m) with gentle to level slopes of various aspect . Soils arerapidly to imperfectly drained Orthic Regosols on fluvial landforms .Vegetation : The herb-dwarf shrub layer (30-65%) is dominated entirely by Dryas drummondii10-50%) (Table 42) . Also present are Potentilla fruticosa (1-7%), Poa spp . (2-3%), Picea spp .

H11 : Carex aquatilis-Carex rostrat a(water sedge-beaked sedge )Environment : H11 fens occur on subhydric to hydric sites in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregio n(850-1330 m) of GNP . Soils are poorly to very poorly drained Rego Gleysols and Organics on nearl ylevel fluvial landforms .Table 43 . Stands of the water sedge-beaked sedge (H11) v .t . Values are per cent cover .AW JD JD KS PA PA PA P A709860 8039 2660537 1348 1001 0191 04 7HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RArnica latifoli aBetula glandulos aCalamagrostis inexpans aCarex aquatili sCarex capillari sCarex pyrenaic aCarex rostrat aCarex spectabili sDeschampsia caespitosaEquisetum ssp .Epuisetum arvens eErigeron peregrinu sEriophorum angustifoliu mEriophorum scheuchzer iHierochloe odorat aPedicularis groenlandic aPenstemon graci1i sPetasites sagittatu sPolygonum spp .Potentilla diversifoli aPotentilla palustri sRubus acauli sSalix barrattian aSalix brachycarp aSalix nivali sSaxifraga ferrugine aSenecio triangulari sValeriana sitchensi sViola palustri sViola sp .Lycopodium sitchens e- -80- ---053 84 203.5 - -80 50.5 1 0.5 ---- 0 570 8 0--- - --- 05- -600 5--80- -- -BRYOIDLAYERAulacomnium palustre -- 10 -- -- 05 40 -- 0 1Bryum pseudotriquetrum 05 02 10 -- .5 -- -- - -Calliergon giganteu mCampylium stellatum -- 50 15 .5 10 - -Cinclidium stygiu mDrepanocladus revolvens 85 -- .5 60 10 .5 10 - -Drepanocladus uncinatu sMeesia triquetr aMyurella julace aPhilonotis fontana var .fontan aScorpidium spp .Spagnum squarrosu mTomenthypnum nitens 06 -- -- -- 30 30 -- --74

Vegetation : Carex aquatilis (50-80%) and Carex rostrata (5-60%) dominate the herb-dwarf shru blayer (Table 43) . H11 is species-poor and the cover of other species is variable and usually low .These include Equisetum spp ., Lemna minor and Utricularia spp . Bryoid layer cover varies but isusually

Table 44 . Stands of the saxicolous lichen (H12) v .t. Values are per cent cover .JE JE JE PA PA PA PA PA PA PA P A81 90 91 70 80 80 10 20 20 20 3 017 21 52 21 08 66 05 22 22 29 2 1.1 .2 .1 .1 .4 . 1HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RArenaria spp .Carex spp .Cassiope tetragon aCerastium beeringianu mDraba incert aDraba payson iDraba spp .Dryas octopetal aErigeron aureu sErigeron compositu sErigeron humilu sLuzula spicat aPapaver kluanensi sPotentilla nive aSalix nivali sSaussurea dens aSaxifraga bronchiali sSaxifraga caespitos aSaxifraga oppositifolia -- .5 -- 01 -- .5 .5 .5 -- .5 - -Saxifraga spp .Sedum stenopetalu mSenecio fremonti iSibbaldia procumben sSilane acaulis -- .5 01 .5 -- -- -- .5 -- .5 . 5Selaginella dens aBRYOIDLAYE RAcorospora spp .Aspicilia caesiocinerea 02 -- 03 - -- - - - -Aspicilia calcarea 06 - .5 - -- - -Bryum sp . - 5 .5 - - - - -- -Caloplaca elegan sCetraria ericetoru mCetraria nivalis 5 5 5 - 5Cetraria tilesii 6 03 O1 - -- - -- - - -Cladonia pyxidata Oi .5 - - - -Coelocaulon aculeatum 5 - .5 -- - - -Dactylina ramulosa 5 .5 - .5 - -- 5 - - -Ditrichum flexicaule -- .5 .5 .5 -- -- -- -- -Grimmia sp . 5 - .5 - -- - - -Hypnum revolutum 5 .5 .5 .5 -- - -- - -Lecanora spp . 05 .5 .5 -- .5 -- -- .5 .5 -- - -Lecidea spp . 03 .5 .5 -- .5 .5 -- -- . .5 .5 - -Omphalodiscus virginis 05 -- 03 -- -- - -- -- - -Physconia muscigena -- 01 -- .5 -- -- - -- - -- - -Rhacomitrium lanuginosum -- - -- -- - -- -- -- . 5Rhizocarpon geographicum 03 -- 08 -- .5 -- .5 .5 .5 -- 10Sporastatia testudinea 5 5 5 - - 5Thamnolia subuliformi sUmbilicaria spp . 02 -- 01 -- -- -- .5 .5 .5 .5 - -Xanthoria elegans 04 -- .5 -- - - - - --76

Table 45 . Stands of the fleabane-valerian (H16) v .t. Values are per cent cover .HD HD HD JD JD JD MF MF PA PAP A10 10 30 10 10 10 30 30 10 102 073 83 09 62 66 80 05 06 16 294 1HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RAnemone occidentali sAntennaria lanat aArnica latifoli aCarex nigrican sCarex spectabili sCassiope mertensian aCastilleja miniat aCastilleja occidentali sDeschampsia atropurpure aEpilobium alpinu mErigeron peregrinu sErythronium grandifloru mLuetkea pectinat aLuzula parviflor aMitella brewer iPhleum alpinu mPhyllodoce empetriformi sPoa spp .Ranunculus eschscholtzi iSalix arctic aSenecio triangulari sSibbaldia procumben sVaccinium membranaceu mValeriana sitchensi sVeratrum eschscholtzi iVeronica alpina03 03 25 35 30 10 -- 05 20 10 . 5.5 .5 02 -- 20 05 04 05 01 .5-- -- 05 -- 05 10 -- -- 08 1001 -- 05 05 .5 02 01.5 -- 10 05 .5 01 02 03 -- 07.5 .5 01 .5 10 1003 -- -- .5 03 01 -- 35.5 05 -- .5 05 -- -- 05 0 2.5 35 05 02 03 30 -- 15 20 150 5-- 05 .5 -- 05 01 -- -- 03 05- -20 -- 05 01 05 -- 08- 04 01 -- 01 . 5- -- 02 -- -- .5 -- 01 0 201 -- 02 -- 02 -- -- 02 -- 0205 -- .5 03 .5 02 01 21.5 -- 02 .5 -- 01 -- .5 - -- -- .5 01 .5 02 03 01 .5 --- -35 30 30 10 -- 05 -- .5 05 035 001 -- .5 -- .5 .5 .540Dicranum spp .Pogonatum alpinu mPolytrichum spp .BRYOID LAYE R-- .5 25 -- 15 03 05Pseudoleskea radicosa var . compacta .5 - -- 010 5Peltigera rufescen sRhizocarpon geographicu mCladonia spp ..5 10 01 01 .5Antennaria lanata (5-20%), Luetkea pectinata (10-20%) and Senecio triangularis (8-20%) . Also frequentbut generally with

H18: Antennaria lanata-Cassiope mertensiana-Phyllodoce empetriformi s(everlasting-white mountain heather-red heather )Environment : H18 occurs on mesic Upper Subalpine to Alpine (2220-2460 m) sites with a wide rangeof slopes and southerly and westerly aspects in GNP, mostly east of the Beaver River (Plate 41) .Soils are well drained Dystric Brunisols and Podzolics on morainal and colluvial landforms .Vegetation : The herb-dwarf shrub layer (75-90%) (Table 46) is dominated by Antennaria lanat a(40-55%) . Also important are Cassiope mertensiana (5-15%), Phyllodoce glanduliflora (10-20%) ,Luetkea pectinata (2-10%) and Erigeron peregrinus (< 5%) . Frequently present but with low cove rare Hieracium gracile, Sibbaldia procumbens, Deschampsia atropurpurea, Anemone occidentalis, Phleumalpinum and Carex spectabilis . Bryoid cover is low usually (1-10%) with Cladonia ecmocyna, Cetrariaislandica, Dicranum scoparium and Polytrichum piliferum common .Table 46 . Stands of the everlasting-white mountain heather-red heather (H18) v .t . Values are percent cover .HD HD HD JD MF MF PA PA PA S D10 21 30 10 30 30 10 10 30 3 068 22 16 40 27 28 07 57 03 0 6HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RAnemone occidentali sAntennaria lanat aCarex nigrican sCarex spectabili sCassiope mertensian aClaytonia lanceolat aDeschampsia atropurpure aErigeron aureu sErigeron peregrinu sHieracium gracil eJuncus drummondi iLuetkea pectinat aLuzula glabrat aLuzula parviflor aLuzula wahlenbergi iPhleum alpinu mPhyllodoce empetriformi sPhyllodoce glanduliflor aSibbaldia procumbens-- .5 02 01 15 -- . 525 40 .5 45 50 50 40 55 65 5 0-- 05 03 05 -- 01.5 -- -- 01 .5 05 0 103 05 -- 05 01 05 10 .5 20 1 5.5 01 03 -- .5 -- . 5.5 -- 20 02 01 .5 0502 .5 -- .5 01 .5 .5 -- -- . 515 30 -- -- .5 12 10 .5 10 0 2.5 -- 05 -- 01 01 .5.5 -- 05 -- 01 -- -- .5 -- . 515 05 .5 -- -- 1 0-- 05 -- 20 28 08 10 -- -- 20.5 .5 .5 .5 01 .5 .5 .5 02 . 5BRYDID LAYE RDicranum scopariu mPogonatum alpinu mPolytrichum juniperinu mPolytrichum piliferu mCetraria islandic aCetraria subalpin aCladonia ecmocyn aRhizocarpon geographicu mSolorina croce a.5 .5 -- 05 -- -- .5 05 - -.5 -- -- 25 02 -- .5 -- .5 - -- - .5 -- 03 .5 -- 05 -- -- . 502 -- -- 05 -- -- .5 .5 - --- .5 -- .5 .5 -- .5 10 -- . 5H18 is mature successionally . It is characterized by the dominance of Antennaria lanata and inter -grades with L5 occur where Cassiope spp ., Phyllodoce spp . and Antennaria lanata are codominant .Other Studies : Eady (1971) describes similar Antennaria lanata and Antennaria lanata-Sibbaldia procumbenstypes in central British Columbia .78

H21 : Carex spp .(sedge )Environment : H21 occurs on moderate to steep snow avalanche slopes of southerly aspect in MRN Pand western GNP . It occurs over a wide altitudinal range (1390-2380 m) mainly in the Lower Subalpineand Upper Subalpine, but extends slightly into both the Interior Cedar-Hemlock and AlpineEcoregions. The wide range is due to its occurrence on avalanched sites which are somewhat azonal .The soils are well drained Regosolics and Brunisolics on colluvial landforms .Vegetation : H21 is a lush, herbaceous meadow with total herb-dwarf shrub layer cover of 90 to 100 %(Table 47) . It is heterogeneous but a common feature is dominance by mesic Carex spp ., usuall yCarex spectabilis . Other leading species are Epilobium angustifolium (15-65%), Senecio triangularis(1-10%), Valeriana sitchensis (

Table 47 . Stands of the sedge (H21) v .t . Values are per cent cover .HD JD MF PA P A10 10 21 10 3084 57 26 51 1 3HERB-DWARF SHRUB LAYE RAgropyron sp .15 - -Anemone occidentalis -- 20 05 - -Antennaria lanata 01 1 0Arnica spp . 02 -- - - 15 - -Carex nigricans -- 05Carex preslii 30 - -Carex raynoldsii 40 - -Carex spectabilis 08 30 18 -- 20Castilleja miniata - -- 03 .5 . 5Deschampsia atropurpurea -- -- .5 .5 05Epilobium angustifolium 65 15 0 3Erigeron peregrinus 01 0 7Erythronium grandiflorum 05 10 - -Fragaria virginiana -- -- 0 4Heracleum lanatum .5 05 - -Hieracium gracile 10 . 5Luetkea pectinata 02 . 5Luzula parviflora .5 0 1Mitella spp . 02 03 0 2Pedicularis bracteosa -- 05 . 5Phleum alpinum -- .5 -- 0 5Poa spp .- -. 5 - - 0 5Ranunculus eschscholtzii-- 01 --. 5Salix arctica - -- .5 -- 05Senecio triangularis .5 10 04 -- 0 1Trisetum spicatum -- -- .5 -- 0 1Valeriana sitchensis .5 25 10 .5 . 5Veratrum eschscholtzii 10 03 25 .5 - -Veronica alpina - -- 01 -- 0 3Viola spp .- - 0 2Ligusticum canbyi20 - -Selaginella densa -- 10BRYOIDLAYE RBryum spp ..5 -- 01 - -Pseudoleskea radicosa var . compacta 01 -- -- -- - -Tortula norvegica 01 -- 04 - -Cladonia spp . -- .5 -- 05are probably also more influential at lower elevations . Other factors which initiate secondary successioninclude insect and disease infestations and wind damage .Since MRNP and GNP are predominantly forested, the successional roles of the tree species are fundamentalto understanding successional dynamics . In this regard, species are either successional orclimax . Successional species include Pinus monticola, Pinus contorta (east of the Beaver River), Pseudotsugamenziesii, Populus tremuloides, Populus trichocarpa, Betula papyrifera and Picea engelmannii(in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock and lower Lower Subalpine) . Climax species are Abies lasiocarpa ,Tsuga heterophylla, Pinus albicaulis, Tsuga mertensiana, Thu. z plicata and Picea engelmannii (in th eupper Lower Subalpine and Upper Subalpine) . In the Upper Subalpine particularly, successional speciesare often absent and climax species may occupy disturbed sites immediately after disturbance .The distinction between climax and successional roles becomes unclear in such situations .A four stage successional sequence is used to classify v .t .s in this report : early, intermediate, advancedand mature (climax) . The early successional stage is usually heterogeneous and unstable in composition,often not referable to a v.t. and usually

species not climax for the site . Successionally intermediate stands typically have in the tree laye rPinus contorta (east of the Beaver River), Pinus monticola (mostly west of the Beaver River), Populustremuloides, Populus trichocarpa, Pseudotsuga menziesii and Betula papyrifera (mostly west of th eBeaver River) . Regeneration in the understory of Picea engelmannii, Abies lasiocarpa, Pinus albicaulis,Thu ja plicata, Tsuga mertensiana and Tsuga heterophylla indicates eventual dominance by these climaxspecies. Forest communities in this stage are generally 50 to 100 years old although considerablevariation occurs . The advanced successional stage is usually 80 to 200 years old and dominated by amixture of successional and climax species . The duration of this stage varies but is typically 40 to 5 0years . The mature (climax) stage is compositionally stable, self-perpetuating and the end point o fvegetational succession . In MRNP and GNP it probably takes 100 to 300 years to reach this stage b ysecondary succession after fire in forest communities . The successional stage of each v .t. is indicatedin the v .t. description .INTERIOR CEDAR-HEMLOCK ECOREGIONMature forests in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregion are dominated mainly by Tsuga heterophyllaand Thuja plicata, e.g . the western hemlock-western red cedar/western yew/oak fern (C50) and west -ern red cedar-western hemlock/devil's club/oak fern (C51) v .t .s . Successional v.t .s includespruce-aspen-lodgepole pine-(paper birch)/buffaloberry/pine grass (C44), mountain hemlock-Douglasfir-subalpine fir-Engelmann spruce/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C49), Douglas fir-western red cedar/mountainlover (C53) and aspen-western white pine/mountain lover (015), with Pseudotsugamenziesii a characteristic successional species .ENGELMANN SPRUCE-SUBALPINE FIR ECOREGIO NIn the Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir Ecoregion, mature forests are dominated primarily by Piceaengelmannii, Abies lasiocarpa, and Tsuga mertensiana, e.g . the Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/tallbilberry/liverwort (C21), mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C47), subalpinefir-mountain hemlock/heather-luetkea (020) and subalpine fir -whitebark pine-(Engelmannspruce)/tall bilberry-heather (022) v .t .s. The Engelmann spruce-mountain hemlock/rhododendron-tallbilberry (C48) and mountain hemlock-Douglas fir-subalpine fir -Engelmann spruce/rhododendron-tallbilberry (C49) v .t.s are typical successional forests in this Ecoregion . In the UpperSubalpine portion, Pinus albicaulis occurs as a climax species and Pseudotsuga menziesii, a succession -al species, is virtually absent . Forest succession is slower in the Upper Subalpine and may take >30 0years to reach maturity . Some shrub and herb dominated v .t.s (e.g. subalpine fir-willow (S2), greenalder/fern (S13), willow-mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/tall bilberry (S14) and fleabane-valeria n(H16)) appear compositionally stable and in equilibrium with environmental factors such as sno wavalanching . Since they are apparently unchanging under current conditions, they have been terme dmature .ALPINE ECOREGIONSuccession in the treeless Alpine Ecoregion is more difficult to document than in forests where tree sprovide easily obtained evidence of stand age . Fire is infrequent in the Alpine and water erosion andcryogenic processes are the main agents of disturbance which initiate secondary succession . Successionis very slow and recovery, for example after trampling, may take hundreds of years (Willard andMan 1970, 1971) . All v .t .s in the Alpine are considered climax since they appear stable over severa lhundred years . Some, such as saxicolous lichen (H12), are at an earlier primary successional stag ethan others, but it is questionable whether substantial change will occur in H12 sites in the next fe whundred years. Overall, succession is not a significant process in the Alpine Ecoregion .WETLANDSSuccession in wetlands of all Ecoregions differs from that on uplands . Rates appear to be slower al -though the shrubby or herbaceous vegetation makes stand history determination difficult . Peat coring,needed to make an accurate assessment, was beyond the scope of this study . Since most wetland sappear stable over a 50 to 100 year period, they have been designated successionally mature . Landscapechanges due to peat accumulation, stream aggradation and erosion, and cryoturbation are ofte ncoincident with vegetational change on these sites, thus confounding successional historydetermination .81

SIGNIFICANT FEATURESRARE SPECIESThe following information on rare species is based on collections made during the ecological land classification,collections in the MRNP and GNP herbarium in Revelstoke, and lists of vascular plantscollected in GNP (Haber and Soper 1980) and MRNP (Soper n .d .) . Rarity is derived from a list o frare plants of British Columbia (Taylor 1983) . Four categories of rarity are used in that list and herealso :RI - single or few populationsR2 - several populations, locally commo nR3 - widespread or scattered distributionR4 - restricted distribution, large populations .This section deals only with vascular plants since insufficient information is available to evaluate non -vascular plants . The following list of rarc species is alphabetical by genus and species .Aspidotis densa : R 3Athyrium distentifolium : R 3Braya humilis : R2Camassia quamash : R4Carex illota : R ?Castilleja occidentalis : R 3Castilleja rhexifolia : R3Cryptogramma stelleri : R 3Dryopteris filix-mas : R 3Eleocharis rostellata : R?Epilobium luteum : R 3Gaultheria humifusa : R 3Heuchera richardsonii : R3Hypericum formosum : R 3Juncus bolanderi : R?Juncus parryi : R3Juncus regelii : R?Ligusticum canbyi : R 3Lilium philadelphicum : R4Luzula arcuata : R3Muhlenbergia glomerata : R 3Poa pattersonii : R 3Polygonum austiniae : R 1Polygonum engelmannii : R 1Potentilla hyparctica : R 3Primula mistassinica : R 2Ranunculus verecundus : R 3Romanzoffia sitchensis : R 3Salix vestita : R3Silene drummondii : R 3Spiraea densiflora : R4Taraxacum lyratum : R 3Vaccinium myrtillus : R2OTHER SIGNIFICANT BOTANICAL FEATURESFloristic composition is markedly influenced by substrate . The bedrock and soils of MRNP and GN Pare predominantly acidic or noncalcareous, in contrast with KNP, BNP and JNP where basic o r82

calcareous conditions are more common . Most bedrock units in MRNP and GNP contain smal lamounts of calcareous material in an unpredictable pattern . Thus in MRNP and GNP, species whichoccur on basic or calcareous substrates, so-called calciphiles, generally have small populations and ascattered distribution . Haber and Soper (1980) cite several calcareous localities, including FidelityMountain, upper Cougar Creek, below the Illecillewaet Glacier, and wetlands of the lower Beave rValley . Collections made during this study indicate a spotty distribution of calciphiles throughou tGNP and to a more limited extent in MRNP . Upper Cougar Creek and the Beaver Valley wetlandsare the two largest areas of this type . Conditions in upper Cougar Creek are due to limestones of th eBadshot Formation in which the Nakimu Caves are developed . Dissolved materials transported b yground water flow appear to produce calcareous conditions in the Beaver Valley wetlands . In thespecies list for MRNP and GNP (Appendix A), calciphiles are indicated by a t .Earlier workers in GNP (Butters 1932, Haber and Soper 1980) commented on the comparative paucityof the flora of GNP . By 1932, Butters had collected 262 vascular species and estimated the tota lvascular flora at

CHAPTER IV - WILDLIFEL .W. Gyug and K . Van TighemINTRODUCTIO NGENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WILDLIFEA total of 239 wildlife species has been recorded in MRNP and GNP . These include four amphibianspecies, three reptiles, 178 birds and 54 mammals . Because these parks are in a mountainous are awithin the Big Bend of the Columbia River, a number of species characteristic of the region either donot occur or are rare in the parks. The wetlands and south aspects of the Interior Cedar-Hemloc kEcoregion are important areas in the parks for some of these species, such as northern alligator lizard ,Pacific tree frog, long-toed salamander, Calliope Hummingbird, Nashville Warbler, Veery ,Black-headed Grosbeak, moose and white-tailed deer .One of the major factors affecting ungulate distribution in the mountains of western Canada is winte rsnow depth and the constraints it imposes on winter foraging . The Selkirk and Purcell mountains o fMRNP and GNP receive heavy precipitation and accumulate deep snowpacks . Mountain goats ,which use areas blown free of snow or too steep for snow accumulation, and caribou, which ar eadapted for travel in deep snow, are the only ungulates which have historically occurred year-round inthe two parks . Elk and white-tailed and mule deer generally migrate to areas of lower snowfall duringthe winter . Small numbers of moose reside year-round in some of the lower valleys of the mountains,but the majority of the moose habitat in this region is outside of the parks .Both black and grizzly bears are relatively abundant, being the most widely-distributed large mammal sin both parks . Other large carnivores are uncommon, due to scarcity of prey . Cougars and wolvesare recorded very rarely and are not residents of either park . Coyotes occur primarily at lower elevationsand, although most leave the parks in winter, a small number winter along the highway . Mar -tens, short-tailed weasels and wolverines are the most abundant carnivores ; mink are scarce and con -fined to the lowest valley bottoms and there is only a single otter record .Smaller mammals are abundant . Deep winter snow provides a sheltered environment for subniveanspecies such as voles and mice, and the moist climate provides abundant forage . Hoary marmots, pi -kas and Columbian ground squirrels are common at high elevations and locally along the highwa ycorridor .There have been 178 species of birds recorded in the parks, and six hypothetical species . A number ofspecies that breed in MRNP and GNP are rare or do not occur in the Rocky Mountain parks . Thes einclude Steller ' s Jay, Vaux's Swift, Chestnut-backed Chickadee, Nashville Warbler and Black-heade dGrosbeak . Despite heavy snowfalls, winters are sufficiently mild to support large numbers of chickadees,Red-breasted Nuthatchs, Red and White-winged Crossbills, Pine Siskins and Common Redpolls .Important bird habitats include the vegetation mosaics along the floodplains of the larger rivers, deciduousforest on south aspects, and snow avalanche slopes . The avifauna of the Interior Cedar- -Hemlock Ecoregion is protected in no other national park in Canada .Four amphibian and three reptile species occur in MRNP and GNP . Of these, only the western toadis widespread and common . The spotted frog is common but confined to low elevations .METHODSMethods are described in greater detail in Van Tighem and Gyug ([1984]) . Summaries of the majormethods for assessing wildlife abundance on Ecosites are presented here .85

SAMPLING RATIONALEMethods were chosen to collect data on the seasonal abundance, distribution, and habitat characteristicsof all species of mammals, birds, amphibians, and reptiles that occur in MRNP and GNP . Th ebroad scope of the inventory and the large area involved necessitated a variety of methods . Some .were directed specifically at relating wildlife abundance to the ecological land classification . Otherssurveyed the seasonal movements of selected species, to determine the actual density of some speciesand to locate less common species .The wildlife inventory in MRNP and GNP, unlike that in BNP and JNP, coincided with th elandform-soils-vegetation inventory . This integration of field effort necessitated the modification an dstreamlining of some sampling methods to be compatible in time and space with soil and vegetatio nsampling methods .SYSTEMATIC SAMPLING OF ECOSITE SIn order to assess the importance of 50 Ecosites to each of 239 wildlife species, sample technique sthat were fast and simple, yet quantitative, were used. Because of the large area to be inventorie dand the probability that wildlife use would vary on the same Ecosite from one part of the study are ato another, it was necessary to be able to obtain several samples of each Ecosite in different parts ofboth parks .The major constraints on developing these techniques were :1. Each sample must fit within the boundaries of one mapped tract and one vegetatio ntype (v .t .). The maximum area sampled was 500 m x 500 m .2. Each method must require a limited amount of time, effort and equipment, to allo wa small staff to sample numerous sites over a wide area and in rugged terrain .3. Each method must be standardized, easily taught to new staff, and based on the bes ttechniques in published literature at the time the project was initiated .4. Each method must be quantitative so that indices of abundance could be comparedbetween Ecosites .5. Each method, where possible, should be compatible with soil and vegetation samplin gmethods .The methods which fulfilled these requirements were pellet group counts, browse use transects, trac kcount transects, circular breeding bird census plots, and snap traplines. These are briefly describedbelow. In addition, random observations by park and inventory staff were related directly to Ecosit eimportance in many cases . The selection of sample locations varied . Pellet group and browse usetransects were conducted almost exclusively in conjunction with soil and vegetation sampling. Thesesamples were located in homogeneous areas representative of the predominant soil and vegetation ofthe map polygon . Sample locations for the other methods were chosen based on the need to sampleas many Ecosite-v .t . combinations as possible in each season and major watershed . Ecosites were selectedfrom the 1 :63,360 mapped air photos provided by the land inventory team and chosen fo rsampling based on vegetation sample data, accessibility, size of the tract, and proximity to other suit -able Ecosites . Complete coverage of all Ecosites in all drainages was not possible due to difficult ter -rain and seasonal hazards such as grizzly bear use or snow avalanche risk .The major requirement for locating any sample was that it had to fall entirely within the boundarie sof one Ecosite and one v .t . In some complex Ecosites, such as heavily gullied slopes, alluvial or colluvialareas, where vegetation was heterogeneous, this was not possible and the sample was considere dto have been collected in the most prevalent v .t . of that tract .FIELD SAMPLINGThe relative importance of an Ecosite to each ungulate species was determined by pellet group counts .Pellet groups were counted along four 2 x 50 m transects spaced at 20 m intervals and centere daround the 20 x 20 m vegetation and soil sample plot . The number of pellet groups of each speciesfrom each transect was multiplied by 100 to give pellet groups/ha and an average density wa s86

calculated for each Ecosite and v .t . On the same 50 m transects, the presence or absence of snowsho ehare pellets was determined in 1 m 2 plots spaced at 5 m intervals along each transect . An averagehare pellet frequency value was calculated for each Ecosite and v .t. Ungulate and snowshoe hare useof woody browse plants was assessed using a method adapted from Cole (1959) for ungulate use an dPease et al. (1979) for snowshoe hare use . Shrubs were rated for ungulate and snowshoe hare us eusing a nearest neighbor selection method in 2.5 m diameter plots at 5 m intervals along two of the 5 0m transects. The results were tallied for all transects within each Ecosite and v .t. This informationwas used to identify major browse species on each Ecosite and also in assigning importance ranking sto Ecosites for ungulates .Relative abundance of small mammals on each Ecosite was determined using traplines of 100 WoodstreamMuseum Special traps baited for two nights . The number of rodents and shrews caught wa saveraged for each Ecosite . The averages were used in a cluster analysis to identify Small Mamma lAssociations, and to determine the density ranking for each Ecosite .Winter mammal activity was assessed by counting the number of tracks intercepted by a straight transectof 0 .5 km or longer. Track counts were standardized to the mean number of tracks per te nkm-day by dividing the total track count by the total distance of the transects and the number of dayssince the last snowfall . These figures were averaged for each Ecosite and v .t. Snow depths wer emeasured on most transects . In addition, all birds seen or heard were recorded .Breeding bird populations were sampled using a modification of the variable circular plot metho d(Reynolds et al. 1980) . Sampling was conducted before 1000 h between June 1 and July 15 . Thenumber of birds recorded was corrected for detectibility (Emlen 1971, 1977) and density indices foreach species were calculated for all circular plots in each Ecosite and v .t . Cluster analyses, based onspecies density and diversity in each v .t ., were used to identify Breeding Bird Communities (BBC 's) .These were then related to each Ecosite . Red squirrel, Columbian ground squirrel and pika densitie swere also assessed by this method .ECOLOGICAL INTEGRATIONABUNDANCE RATING SOne of the objectives of the wildlife inventory is to determine the distribution of wildlife at a scale o f1 :50,000. Plotting sightings or sign would not accomplish this goal but would show only the locatio nof the observers when they found wildlife . An alternate approach is to identify important wildlif ehabitat and then map the habitats . The land classification provides the map base to show the distributionof habitat as long as the criteria used to identify Ecosites also define wildlife habitats . Mostwildlife habitats can be related to one or more Ecosites . Some habitats are too small to be identifie dat a scale of 1 :50,000; other habitats are complexes of Ecosites which are difficult to identify in aclassification system . Consequently, there are difficulties relating some wildlife habitats to Ecosites .However, many habitats can be readily related to Ecosites, and the classification and mapping schem ecan illustrate the distribution of these habitats .Important wildlife habitats are identified by sampling wildlife or their sign on all Ecosites and v .t .s .For each sample type and species, the results on each Ecosite were ranked as described below and alegend prepared correlating wildlife importance rankings with each Ecosite .These methods provide data on relative abundance but in numerical form they are difficult to use i ncomparing Ecosites . In addition, each method has a different range of numerical values. To simplifyuse of the data, they have been converted into rankings that allow easy comparison of Ecosites .ECOSITE RANKINGSData from the primary sample methods were computer-manipulated to produce an average quantit yfor each Ecosite. The quantities for the Ecosites are then ranked as none, low, moderate, high andvery high to compare the relative degree of use of each Ecosite . The ranking was determined by dividingnon-zero values into three equal groups . Ecosites having values in the lowest one-third are oflow importance . Those in the middle one-third are moderately important, and those in the uppe r87

third are highly important . The five or ten Ecosites having the highest values are very highly important.Thus, the importance of an Ecosite to a species is derived directly from the measured relative abundanceof that species on the Ecosite . For groups of species (e.g. Small Mammal Associations an dBreeding Bird Communities) the total of rankings of all species is combined with the number of speciesto evaluate the importance of Ecosites .Vegetation types (v .t.s) were similarly ranked as to their importance to wildlife . Important habitatsare Highly ranked Ecosites and v .t.s . Critical habitats are Very Highly ranked Ecosites and v .t.s, inaddition to habitats with special functions for wildlife (e .g. denning, calving, staging) . It should beborne in mind that critical areas may be site-specific and hence not predictable on the basis of habita tgeneralities . Assessment of the importance of a site to wildlife must be supported by field observationson that site .This ranking of Ecosites assumes that all Ecosites were sampled equally, and that animals and thei rsign are equally detectable on each Ecosite . While these assumptions are true in many instances, theydo not always apply . For example, in winter some moose use wetlands where their droppings end u pin standing water the following spring, and are not detected in pellet group counts. All rankings werereviewed subjectively and some were adjusted because of sampling bias .An additional method of ranking Ecosites was used for lynx and coyotes . Relatively few tracks ofthese species were recorded on track transects, yielding insufficient data to rank their occurrence o neach Ecosite. There are, however, considerable data on the distribution of prey species on each Eco -site. From knowledge of the food habits of coyote and lynx the proportion of each prey species i nthe predators' diet was determined and used as a weighting factor to estimate the potential importanc eof each Ecosite to the predator . For each Ecosite, the rank for each prey species was assigned a valu e(0 for none, 1 for low, 2 for medium, 3 for high and 4 for very high) . The following formula wa sused to derive values :Ecosite value = (prey species' rank value) X (proportion of that species in the predator' sdiet)summed for all prey .For lynx, which depend heavily on snowshoe hare, this resulted in importance rankings being th esame as those for hares . Coyote rankings compared well to the limited track count information avail -able .Ecosite importance for other carnivores was ranked on the basis of winter track count densities ; de -tails regarding what densities represented high, medium or low importance are presented in the specie saccounts in Van Tighem and Gyug ([1984]) .For other species which were poorly documented by the primary sample methods (e.g. non-territorialbirds in the breeding season ; uncommon and wide ranging carnivores such as wolverines and cougars ;and larger rodents such as beavers, porcupines, hoary marmots, and Columbian ground squirrel swhich were not sampled by snap trap methods), random observations were used to assign Ecosit erankings .In this volume, the importance of each Ecosite to wildlife is briefly discussed . Generally, only thespecies for which the Ecosite is highly or very highly important are identified . Factors that result inthe importance rating, such as snow depth, forage abundance, and prey availability are discussedbriefly . In addition, for ungulates and carnivores, a single rating of importance is presented for someEcosites. This rating is derived from the sum of the individual species ratings . It is not intended t obe used for site specific planning or management but only for planning at the park level or larger .SPECIES ASSEMBLAGE SMany wildlife species occur in MRNP and GNP . Some, like ungulates and carnivores, have traditionallybeen important in parks because of high public interest, relatively low population densities ,and significance as ecological indicators . In this report and the Map Supplement, the importance ofeach Ecosite is described for each of these species individually .It is not practical to develop an extended map legend and Ecosite accounts for all wildlife species ,however, and since the management of most other species is basically limited to habitat management ,88

it may not be necessary . Consequently, we have grouped small mammals and breeding birds into assemblagesof species that normally occur together because of overlapping habitat preferences . BreedingBird Communities (BBC's) and Small Mammal Associations (SMA s) are also described in BN Pand JNP (Holroyd and Van Tighem 1983) and in KNP (Poll et al . 1984) Similar BBC 's in MRNPand GNP are included in those already defined for BNP and JNP, and KNP . All BBC's are numberedconsecutively to form one system common to all the mountain parks . These assemblages ar esynthetic concepts ; they are not meant to reflect ecological relationships among species but are purel ydescriptive . They integrate a great deal of wildlife information into the ecological land classification ,particularly in the map legend .Several v .t.s may occur within one Ecosite . Thus, the v .t . is the basic unit in identifying wildlife speciesassemblages . It is assumed that each assemblage will occur in the v .t . in which it was found ,wherever that v .t . occurs. Ecosites that were not sampled by circular bird census plots or small mammaltrapping are assumed to support the species that occur elsewhere in the v .t .s that characterizethat Ecosite .SMALL MAMMAL ASSOCIATIONSSmall mammal associations are groups of insectivores and small rodents that are often found togethe rdue to similar habitat preferences . The 13 species (masked shrew, dusky shrew, wandering shrew ,water shrew, yellow-pine chipmunk, deer mouse, northern bog lemming, heather vole, red-backe dvole, meadow vole, long-tailed vole, Richardson's water vole and western jumping mouse) considere dhere are those which are relatively reliably sampled by snap-trapping . The SMA's defined here ar enumbered consecutively with those of Banff, Jasper and Kootenay National Parks . Of the ten SMA'sin MRNP and GNP, only two (SMA's 1 and 3) also occur in BNP and JNP . The results of the 47 . 5snap trap lines, three pitfall trap lines and three live trap plots were grouped to form SMA's on th ebasis of similarities in habitat, species captured and small mammal densities . Since Ecosites and v .t .swere not completely described until after field work was finished, most trap lines were placed in habitatthat appeared homogeneous . Trap lines in complex Ecosites, however, sampled several smal lmammal habitats since some species occur in microhabitats that are not recognizable at the 1 :50,00 0Ecosite level . SMA variants are described in some cases to account for minor habitat or species compositiondifferences on a scale too small to separate from the SMA as a whole (e.g. stream bank habitatvariants) .In the following discussion, definitive and additional species are listed for each SMA . Two numerica lvalues follow each species name : frequency is the number of the trap lines on which a species wascaptured in an SMA, divided by the total number of traplines in that SMA, and relative density is th enumber of captures per 100 trap nights . For the yellow-pine chipmunk and western jumping mouse ,frequency is based only on traplines sampled before mid-September since these hibernatory specie swere probably inactive later in the year .Definitive species are those whose combined presence defines the SMA . In some SMA's, definitivespecies were caught on fewer than 100% of the traplines because of low overall densities of smal lmammals. For these SMA's, more sampling effort is needed to detect all definitive species .Additional species are those caught rarely or at very low relative densities on trap lines in that SM Aand are not essential to defining the SMA .In the map legend and Ecosite accounts, importance rankings for small mammals were derived as fol -lows :V - Very High : an SMA or Ecosite in which more than one species has a relative densit y>5.0, and the total relative density of all species combined is >20 .0H - High : an SMA or Ecosite in which one species has a relative density >5 .0, or three ormore species have relative densities >2 . 0M - Medium : an association or Ecosite in which the greatest relative density of only one speciesis between 2 .0 and 5 .0L - Low : an association or Ecosite in which no species has a relative density >2 .0Ecosites that were not sampled by trapping are assumed to support SMA's that elsewhere occur in th ev .t .s that typify those Ecosites . The small mammal importance ratings of these Ecosites in the ma plegend and Ecosite accounts are thus based on density and diversity of small mammals in th eappropriate SMA .89

SMALL MAMMAL ASSOCIATION 1Shrubland and grasslandThis association occurs in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock and Lower Subalpine Ecoregions .Definitive Species freq . dens . freq. dens .deer mouse 2/2 7 . 3Additional Specieswestern jumping mouse 2/2 0.6 dusky shrewwandering shrew 1/2 1 . 11/2 0 .6RemarksThis association was found on only two trap lines and has been included within SMA 1 of BNP an dJNP because of the clear dominance of deer mice and absence of other common species . Deer miceoccur on all mesic or dry open habitats in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock and Lower Subalpine Ecoregions.Western jumping mice are present because of low herbaceous vegetation : in CE1, horsetailmeadows and in CTS, a man-made grassland on the Mount Revelstoke ski hill .Vegetation Type correlateswillow (S15 )green alder/fern (S13)yellow dryad-willow herb (H8)Subalpine fir/rhododendron fores tSMALL MAMMAL ASSOCIATION 3This association occurs in the Lower Subalpine on soils derived from till or colluvial material . It occursin mesic to subhygric closed forests of subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) or Engelmann spruce (Piceaengelmannii) with understories of Rhododendron albiflorum or Vaccinium spp .Definitive Species freq . dens . freq . dens .red-backed vole 5/5 9 .1 dusky shrew 3/5 0 .4Additional Speciesheather vole 1/5 0 .2 deer mouse 1/5 0 . 2RemarksAlthough this SMA is defined in BNP and JNP by yellow-pine chipmunks and masked shrews in additionto red-backed voles (Holroyd and Van Tighem 1983), the association was recognized in MRN Pand GNP on the basis of the dominance of red-backed voles and the physiognomic similarity of theassociated habitats. Northern bog lemming occur in this association in wet sedge (Carex spp . )90

meadows within Lower Subalpine closed forests . On two trap lines that included wet sedge meadows ,the average relative density of northern bog lemmings was 1 .1 and of long-tailed voles, 0 .25 .Vegetation Type correlate sEngelmann spruce-subalpine fir/tall bilberry/liverwort (C21 )mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C47 )Engelmann spruce-mountain hemlock/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C48 )mountain hemlock-Douglas fir-subalpine fir-Engelmann spruce/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C49 )Western hemlock - cedar forestSMALL MAMMAL ASSOCIATION 1 0Although this association is similar to SMA 2 (Holroyd and Van Tighem 1983) in terms of specie scomposition, it has much higher densities of deer mice and red-backed voles . This is possibly due tothe longer breeding season and lusher vegetation in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregion than in th eMontane in Banff and Jasper (see sec .4.4, Van Tighem & Gyug [1984]) .SMA 10 occurs in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregion on soils derived from till, colluvium ,ice-contact stratified drift or fluvial deposits in closed mesic forests of western red cedar (Thuja plicata),western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) or Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) or in mixe dconiferous-deciduous forests with understories of mountain lover (Pachystima myrsinites), Westernyew (Taxus brevifolia) or tall bilberry (Vaccinium membranaceum) .Definitive Speciesfreq . dens . freq . dens .deer mouseAdditional Speciesmasked shre wheather voleyellow-pine chipmun k9/9 9.0 red-backed vole 9/9 9 .04/9 1 .4 dusky shrew 2/9 0 .1 31/9 0.1 wandering shrew 1/9 0 .0 71/9 0.07Vegetation Type correlateswestern hemlock-western red cedar/western yew/oak fern (C50 )western hemlock-western red cedar-(Douglas fir)/mountain lover (C52 )Douglas fir-western red cedar/mountain lover (C53 )Alder shru bSMALL MAMMAL ASSOCIATION 1 1This association occurs in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock and the Lower Subalpine and has been dividedinto two SMA's based on habitat . Small mammal association 11A occurs on snow avalanch emeadow-shrub-forest complexes and SMA 11B occurs in hygric valley bottom forests or forest-shru bcomplexes . These are further described below .The only difference in definitive species between SMA's 11A and 11B is yellow-pine chipmunk, whichrarely occurs in hygric valley bottoms. Otherwise, the species groups are too similar to justify splittinginto two different SMA s . In number of species, this SMA is the most diverse and the one wher eany of the definitive species can show up in high densities .9 1

Avalanche alder shru bSMALL MAMMAL ASSOCIATION 11 AThis association occurs in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock and Lower Subalpine on soils derived fromcolluvium or till . It occurs on snow avalanche or other non-forested or open forest slopes in al lmoisture classes from hygric seepage areas to subxeric and lithic sites . It is found on avalanche meadows,avalanche shrub and forest complexes and in hygric, seepage shrub slopes in recent burns ,wherever there is dense shrub or herbaceous understory .Definitive Species freq . dens . freq . dens .deer mouse 6/6 6 .1 red-backed vole 5/6 6 . 2heather vole 5/6 1 .6 western jumping mouse 4/4 1 . 6yellow-pine chipmunk 3/4 1 .6 long-tailed vole 5/6 1 . 3Additional SpeciesRichardson's water vole 2/6 2 .5 masked shrew 4/6 1 . 5dusky shrew 3/6 0 .6 wandering shrew 1/6 0 . 1RemarksThe density of red-backed voles varies from nil on subxeric avalanche shrub sites to very high o nmesic, open forest avalanche sites .Vegetation Type correlatesEngelmann spruce-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (021 )Engelmann spruce -subal ine fir/valerian-fleabane (09 )subalpine fir-willow (S2 )green alder/fern (S13 )fleabane-valerian (H16)Floodplain alder shrubSMALL MAMMAL ASSOCIATION 11 BThis association occurs in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregion on organic soils and soils derive dfrom fluvial deposits . It occurs in hygric valley bottom tracts in closed western red cedar (Thuja licata)or Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii) forests with understories of red-osier dogwood (Cornusstolonifera), devil's club (Oplopanax horridum) and bracted honeysuckle (Lonicera involucrata )and in open hygric alder (Alnus spp .) habitats with understories of skunk cabbage (Lysichiton americanum),willow (Salix spp.) or bracted honeysuckle .Definitive Speciesfreq . dens . freq . dens .deer mous eheather volelong-tailed vole4/4 12 .8 red-backed vole 4/4 7 . 12/4 2 .1 western jumping mouse 1/1 1 .23/4 1 .392-

Additional SpeciesRichardson's water vol edusky shrewwater shrew2/4 0.8 masked shrew 4/4 0 . 81/4 0.3 wandering shrew 2/4 0 . 31/4 0.2 yellow-pine chipmunk 1/4 0 . 2Remark sOne variant of this SMA occurs in spruce/Labrador tea/brown moss (011) fen forests in valley bot -toms where northern bog lemmings can also be present at low densities .Vegetation Type correlatesEngelmann spruce-subalpine fir/green alder (C25 )western red cedar-western hemlock/devil's club/oak fern (C51 )spruce/Labrador tea/brown moss (Oll )alder/skunk cabbage (S17)Moist Upper Subalpine open fores tSMALL MAMMAL ASSOCIATION 1 2This association occurs in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock and Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir Ecoregionson soils derived from till and recent alluvium . It is found in open subalpine fir forests neartreeline with a dominant understory of heathers and in open black cottonwood - spruce forest (Populustrichocarpa-Picea engelmannii) with yellow dryad (Dryas drummondii) understory .Definitive Species freq . dens . freq . dens .red-backed vole 3/3 2 .4 yellow-pine chipmunk 2/3 1 . 5deer mouse 2/3 0 .8 heather vole 2/3 0 . 5Additional Speciesnon eRemarksRed-backed vole is the most consistent species in this SMA, being found on all traplines ; the othe rthree definitive species may or may not be found since they occur at low densities .Vegetation Type correlatesEngelmann spruce-subalpine fir/heather (010 )subalpine fir-mountain hemlock/heather-luetkea (020 )Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (021 )Engelmann spruce-black cottonwood/yellow dryad (023 )Dry Upper Subalpine open forestSMALL MAMMAL ASSOCIATION 1 3This association is found in the Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir and Alpine Ecoregions on soils de -rived from till and colluvium . It occurs in subxeric open forests, subxeric shrublands and open lithi csites. The common denominator is subxeric sites with lithic tendencies .93

Definitive Speciesfreq . dens . freq . dens .deer mous eyellow-pine chipmunk6/7 1 .2 heather vole 3/7 0 . 52/5 0 . 3Additional Specieslong-tailed vol e2/7 0.1 wandering shrew 1/7 0 .1RemarksYellow-pine chipmunks are usually present and Golden-mantled ground squirrels are sometimes pre -sent in this SMA, although they are not always caught in snap traps . Both deer mice and heathervoles occur at such low densities that they may not both be found on the same trap line . No smal lmammals were snap-trapped in heather-everlasting (L5) meadows but winter heather vole latrineswere found there, indicating that densities may be low or that habitat use changes seasonally .Vegetation Type correlatessubalpine fir-whitebark pine-(Engelmann spruce)/tall bilberry-heather (022 )Engelmann spruce-black cottonwood/yellow dryad (023 )willow-mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/tall bilberry (S14 )heather-everlasting (L5 )yellow dryad-willow herb (H8 )fleabane-valerian (H16) (in part )Aspen open forestSMALL MAMMAL ASSOCIATION 1 4This association occurs in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregion on soils derived from colluvium . I twas found on only one Ecosite (NC6) .Definitive Species freq . dens . freq . dens .deer mouse 1/1 15 .0 long-tailed vole 1/1 3 .4Additional Speciesred-backed vole 1/1 0 . 6Remark sThis association is apparently limited to the open deciduous forests of NC6 tracts along the ClachnacudainnCliffs in MRNP . On less xeric NC6 tracts with mixed deciduous - coniferous forest, SMA 1 0is more likely to occur . This association is similar to SMA 1 because of the predominance of dee rmice .Vegetation Type correlatesaspen-western white pine/mountain lover (015 )94

Lower Subalpine burnSMALL MAMMAL ASSOCIATION 15This association occurs only in the Lower Subalpine on soils derived from till in dry, recently burne dhabitats where shrub regeneration is well underway .Definitive Species freq . dens . freq. dens;heather vole 1/1 7 .9Additional Specieslong-tailed vole 1/1 0 . 6RemarksThis association was found on only one trapline and is defined by a high density of heather voles . Asvegetation succession proceeds in burned tracts, other species of mice or voles may be expected to in -vade and the SMA to change . This association is one of the few where heather vole reaches hig hdensities .Vegetation Type correlateswillow-mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/tall bilberry (S14) (revegetating burn )Wet meadow (ESSF )SMALL MAMMAL ASSOCIATION 1 6This association occurs in the Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir Ecoregion on soils derived from till .It occurs only in open, herbaceous, hygric sites (often with standing water) dominated by sedge s(Carex spp .) or in seepage areas dominated by fleabane-valerian (H16) . On more mesic sites, north -ern bog lemming drops out of the association . Richardson's water vole is only found in streamban khabitats .Definitive Species freq . dens . freq . dens .northern bog lemming 2/3 1 .1 Richardson's water vole 3/3 0 . 7heather vole 2/3 0 . 6Additional Specie swestern jumping mouse 2/5 0 . 3RemarksThree of the traplines used to define this SMA were in hygric habitats and two were in more mesi chabitats. Overall density of small mammals is low and on more mesic sites (fleabane-valerian (H16) )there is almost no small mammal activity .95

Vegetation Type correlate swillow/horsetail (S7 )fleabane-valerian (H16 )sedge (H21)Wet meadow (ICH )SMALL MAMMAL ASSOCIATION 1 7This association is found only in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregion on organic soils in wet sedg e(Carex spp .) meadows .Definitive Species freq . dens .meadow vole 2/2 4 . 3freq . dens .Additional Specieswandering shrew 2/2 1.1 masked shre w1/2 0 . 8Remark sThis association is defined by the presence of meadow voles . The floodplains where this SMA occursare often complexes of sedge meadows and other habitats, so that on a single 500 m trap line othe rspecies of mouse and vole that are typical of forest and shrub habitats (e .g. SMA 11B) may befound .Vegetation Type correlateswater sedge-beaked sedge (H11)BREEDING BIRD COMMUNITIESIn MRNP and GNP, Breeding Bird Communities were defined on the basis of the data collected o n505 circular bird census plots . By the methods described above (Section 2), density indices (DI 's )were calculated for each species on each of the v .t .s sampled . These DI's generally fell between 0 .0 1and 10 .00 and are relative densities .BBC's were derived by comparing the species present, and their DI's, among each of the variou sv .t .s. In order to increase the significance of presence/absence, all non-zero DI values were increase dby ten and the values were then clustered by BMPD (Hartigan 1983) to find which v .t.s were mostsimilar with regard to bird species present and the relative densities at which they occur .BBC's were not identified solely on the basis of the cluster analysis, however, since the analysis treat sall species equally . Widespread species like American Robin and Golden-crowned Kinglet are of les svalue in defining BBC's than are species like American Redstart and Water Pipit with more specializedhabitat needs . When BBC's had been defined, the DI of each species was averaged for all th ev .t .s where the BBC occurs and the averages totalled to produce a DI for that BBC . By this means ,the relative density of birds in one BBC could be compared to another .BBC's are described by a number, a name for the characteristic habitat, followed by a description o fthe habitat . Next is a list of species with their DI's in that BBC . Since circular bird census plotswere used in MRNP and GNP rather than line transects as in BNP and JNP, DI's are not comparableto those in Holroyd and Van Tighem (1983) . Dominant species have DI's >0 .1 . That is, theyare the most frequent or prevailing species . Definitive species are dominant species which best defin ethe BBC; they are confined to that BBC, occur in it at much higher densities than elsewhere or occu r96

in combination with other definitive species with which they do not occur elsewhere . A species maybe definitive of more than one BBC . Additional species are all other species recorded in that habita twith DI 's lower than 0 .1 .The Remarks section describes the areal extent of the BBC and variability in composition, particularl yas it relates to habitat variability . Last is a list of Vegetation Types in which the BBC occurs . Thesev .t.s are described in Chapter III . BBC's for each Ecosite are presented in the wildlife map legen d(Map Supplement) and the Ecosite accounts in Chapter V .Upper Subalpine coniferous open forestBREEDING BIRD COMMUNITY 7BBC 7 is confined to Upper Subalpine open forests with heath (Cassiope mertensiana, Phyllodoce empetriformis)or herbaceous meadows . At highest elevations, coniferous cover is limited to krummhol zof subalpine fir, while at lowest elevations forest cover may be more closed, with only scattered openings.Definitive SpeciesWater Pipi tRosy FinchDominant SpeciesDark-eyed JuncoPine SiskinChipping SparrowAdditional Specie sYellow-rumped Warble rRuby-crowned KingletClark's Nutcracke rVaried ThrushGolden-crowned Sparro wMountain ChickadeeGolden-crowned KingletGray Ja yWhite-tailed Ptarmiga n.526 Fox Sparrow .206.500 Hermit Thrush .104.386 American Robin .13 5.377 Winter Wren .10 8.146.098 Townsend's Warbler .01 3.056 Townsend's Solitaire .01 2.051 Boreal Chickadee .01 1.048 White-crowned Sparrow .01 1.043 White-wined Crossbill .00 9.043 Hammonds Flycatcher .00 9.030 Wilson's Warbler .00 8.029 Red-breasted Nuthatch .10 2.027RemarksThe average DI is 3 .1, lower than any other forest BBC but still higher than the Alpine meadow BBC .None of the definitive species are unique to timberline ; rather, they are a mix of Subalpine (HermitThrush, Fox Sparrow) and Alpine (Water Pipit, Rosy Finch) species that occur here in close association.Clark's Nutcracker, Townsend's Solitaire and Golden-crowned Sparrow are strongly associate dwith this BBC . The composition of this BBC is very similar to its composition in the Rockies (Holroydand Van Tighem 1983, Poll and Porter 1984) .Vegetation Type correlate sEngelmann spruce-subalpine fir/valerian-fleabane (09 )Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/heather (010 )subalpine fir-mountain hemlock/heather-luetkea (020 )subalpine fir-whitebark pine-(Engelmann spruce)/tall bilberry-heather (022 )heather-everlasting (L5)9 7

Upper Subalpine coniferous closed forestBREEDING BIRD COMMUNITY 8BBC 8 is widespread and common in the coniferous forests of the Lower and Upper Subalpine . It i smost typical of closed canopy forests of subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa), mountain hemlock (Tsugamertensiana) and Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii) but also occurs in some open forests .Definitive SpeciesHermit Thrush .159 Golden-crowned Kinglet .105Yellow-rumped Warbler .144Dominant Specie sPine Siskin .745 Red-breasted Nuthatch .15 2Dark-eyed Junco .594 Hammond's Flycatcher .13 6Varied Thrush .411 Fox Sparrow .11 5Townsend's Warbler .399 Rufous Hummingbird .11 3Winter Wren .35 3Additional SpeciesChipping Sparrow .089 MacGillivray 's Warbler .03 3Swainson's Thrush .078 Clark 's Nutcracker .029Chestnut-backed Chickadee .073 Pine Grosbeak .012Gray Jay .068 Pileated Woodpecker .01 1American Robin .056 White-winged Crossbill .01 1Brown Creeper .055 Warbling Vireo .01 1Hairy Woodpecker .052 Steller's Jay .006Wilson's Warbler .052 Golden-crowned Sparrow .006Ruby-crowned Kinglet .046 American Kestrel .00 5Blackpoll Warbler .042 Song Sparrow .00 5Red Crossbill .039 Olive-sided Flycatcher .00 3Mountain Chickadee .034 White-crowned Sparrow .00 2RemarksThe average DI is 4 .8, lower than other closed forest BBC 's but higher than at timberline (BBC 7) .Most of the species in this BBC are widespread in coniferous forests . The definitive species occurmore consistently and at higher densities here than elsewhere . Species strongly associated with thi sBBC include Gray Jay, Ruby-crowned Kinglet, White-winged Crossbill and Yellow-rumped Warbler .The long list of Additional Species is due to the large number of samples collected in the C46 and C4 7v .t .s .In BNP and JNP this BBC is also widespread, being defined there by several species that are less ubiquitousin the Rockies than in the Columbia Mountains, and are hence more restricted to this BB Cwhen it occurs there .Vegetation Type correlatesEngelmann spruce-subalpine fir/tall bilberry/liverwort (C21 )mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C47 )Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (021 )Engelmann spruce-mountain hemlock/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C48 )98

Avalanche slopeBREEDING BIRD COMMUNITY 1 2BBC 12 is common and widespread in both parks, occurring wherever regular snow avalanching main -tains early successional mosaics of shrubs, lush herbaceous meadows and exposed rock . This BBC i sthe most diverse and sustains the highest density of breeding birds in the Interior Cedar-Hemloc kEcoregion, but also occurs as high as the Upper Subalpine . At the bases of low elevation avalancheslopes where there is considerable seepage and stands of mature poplar (Populus trichocarpa) andspruce (Picea engelmannii), BBC 12 may give way to BBC 22, while on exposed, well drained sites itmay be replaced by BBC 26 . Revegetating glacial moraine, such as AB1, may sustain deciduou sshrubs where this BBC also occurs .Definitive SpeciesWilson's Warble rMacGillivray's WarblerBrown-headed CowbirdDominant SpeciesRufous HummingbirdDark-eyed JuncoGolden-crowned KingletTownsend's Warble rPine SiskinAdditional Specie sAmerican RobinDusky FlycatcherVaux s Swif tHermit Thrus hHammond's Flycatche rSteller's Ja yRed-breasted Nuthatc hAmerican RedstartYellow-rumped WarblerSpotted SandpiperAmerican CrowWestern Tanage rPine Grosbeak.555 Orange-crowned Warbler .240.540 Yellow Warbler .15 9.50 5.943 Warbling Vireo .398.663 Chipping Sparrow .374.457 Swainson's Thrush .22 7.446 Winter Wren .149.440 Varied Thrush .11 9.095 Olive-sided Flycatcher .02 6.087 Tennessee Warbler .02 5.084 Blue Grouse .02 5.072 Cedar Waxwing .025.069 Northern Flicker .01 5.055 Northern Waterthrush .01 5.044 Clark's Nutcracker .01 5.039 Solitary Vireo .01 5.036 Ruby-crowned Kinglet .01 3.029 Western Wood Pewee .01 1.029 White-crowned Sparrow .006.026 Willow Flycatcher .006.026RemarksThe average DI is 6 .8, higher than coniferous forest and high elevation BBC 's but lower than those ofwetlands or deciduous forest .Many species are characteristic of forest edge (e.g. Chipping Sparrow, Pine Siskin, Rufou sHummingbird) and are widespread in MRNP and GNP . The definitive species are all characteristicof deciduous habitats . This BBC is distinguished from other deciduous BBC's by the lack of wetlandspecies like Common Yellowthroat and Song Sparrow, and the lack or scarcity of dry poplar fores tspecies like Calliope Hummingbird and Nashville Warbler . Lazuli Bunting and Tennessee Warbler ar eof limited distribution in MRNP and GNP but strongly associated with this BBC .99

Vegetation Type correlatessubalpine fir-willow SS2 )green alder/fern (S1 3willow-mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/tall bilberry (S14 )willow (S15)Dryad ma tBREEDING BIRD COMMUNITY 1 5BBC 15 is uncommon, occurring on gravelly river floodplains, glacial outwashes and recent moraine swhere early successional vegetation predominates . Mats of yellow dryad (Dryas drummondii) withscattered small Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii) and clumps of willow (Salix spp .) are characteristicand exposed gravel and small streams are common .Definitive SpeciesChipping Sparrow .32 Spotted Sandpiper .1 5Dominant Specie sPine Siskin .43 Hammond's Flycatcher .18Water Pipit .32 MacGillivray's Warbler .14Clark's Nutcracker .31 Ruby-crowned Kinglet J3Wilson's Warbler .29 Warbling Vireo .13Additional SpeciesWilson's Warbler .29 Rosy Finch .0 5Townsend's Solitaire .0 6RemarksThe DI is 2 .4, lower than most other BBC's . Dominant species are those characteristic of edges an dsemi-open habitats . The Chipping Sparrow, which favours semi-open, well drained habitats, and th eSpotted Sandpiper, which prefers gravelly and silty stream banks, together define this BBC .The greater diversity of BBC 15 here compared to the Rocky Mountain parks (Holroyd and Van Ti -hem 1983, Poll and Porter 1984) is largely due to the greater abundance of shrubs and young coniferson recent floodplains in the Columbia Mountains than in the Rockies .Vegetation Type correlatesyellow dryad-willow herb (H8)Moist Upper Subalpine and Alpine meado wBREEDING BIRD COMMUNITY 1 7Herb meadows and dryad (Dryas octopetala) mats at and above timberline are uncommon in MRN Pand GNP ; where they occur they support BBC 17 . Such sites are usually small and remain snow covereduntil well into June .100

Definitive SpeciesRosy Finch .617 Water Pipit .42 1Dominant SpeciesRufous Hummingbird .29 8Additional Specie sWhite-tailed Ptarmigan .079 Pine Siskin .06 9Horned Lark (Purcell Mountains )RemarksThe average DI is 1 .5, lower than that of any other BBC .The dominance of the Rufous Hummingbird is partly an artifact of the sampling, since hummingbird sare readily attracted to humans wearing bright clothing in the open meadows at timberline and ar econsequently seen at close range more often than their abundance warrants . All species also occur a ttimberline, and what is most characteristic is the absence of forest or shrub bird species .Vegetation Type correlatesheather-everlasting (L5) (in part )mountain avens-snow willow-moss campion (H1 )hairy wild rye-wild strawberry-fireweed (H5) (Achuff and Dudynsky 1984 )fleabane-valerian (H16 )everlasting-white mountain heather-red heather (H18 )ESSF burnBREEDING BIRD COMMUNITY 2 1This BBC occurs in recent burns where coniferous forest has been replaced by early successional ve getationdominated by fireweed (Epilobium angustifolium), hairy wild rye (Elymus innovatus), fir emosses (Polytrichum spp .) and berry producing shrubs . Most samples of this BBC were collected i nthe Copperstain burn in eastern GNP ; other burns further west and at lower elevations (in the InteriorCedar-Hemlock Ecoregion) may have somewhat different bird communities .Definitive SpeciesDark-eyed Junco 1 .25 Hermit Thrush .14Hairy Woodpecker .85 Mountain Chickadee .1 1Wilson's Warbler .2 1Dominant SpeciesPine Siskin .46 Yellow-rumped Warbler .2 7Hammond's Flycatcher .38 Winter Wren .1 8Additional SpeciesTownsend's Solitaire .09 Olive-sided Flycatcher .0 5Ruby-crowned Kinglet .07 Varied Thrush .0510 1

RemarksThe average DI is 4 .1 .In the middle of an extensive burn, only a few definitive species occur regularly ; these includeDark-eyed Junco and Hermit Thrush . Most of the other species that characterize this BBC are commonestnear the edges of burns or near unburned islands of forest . The abundance of dead ,insect-infested timber in burns provides food for Northern Flicker and Hairy Woodpecker and th eopen vegetation, with an abundance of voles, ground squirrels and insects, allows Red-tailed Haw kand American Kestrel to hunt efficiently .Vegetation Type correlatesThere are no defined v .t .s that describe early successional vegetation in these burns . Ground cover athighest elevations is dominated by Luetkea pectinata and some Vaccinium spp . At lower elevation sthere is a diverse ground cover of fireweed (Epilobium angustifolium) Arnica spp. and Polytrichu mspp ., and variable shrub cover composed of tall bilberry (Vaccinium membranaceum), oval-leaf blue -berry (Vaccinium ovali folium) , elderberry (Sambucus spp .), mountain ash ( Sorbus sitchensis), andother berry producing shrubs .Floodplain complexBREEDING BIRD COMMUNITY 2 2BBC 22 occurs at low elevations in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock and, locally, the Lower Subalpinewhere rivers and large streams meander through wide, low-gradient valley bottoms, creating a divers emosaic of habitats . This habitat mosaic falls mostly within the GF and LR Ecosections . Much ofthe vegetation is alder (Alnus crispa) thickets, frequently with skunk cabbage (Lysichiton americanum)and seasonally wet understories . Beaver ponds occur locally . Sedge (Carex spp .) meadows andfens occur in poorly drained sites, and spruce-cedar (Picea engeimannii-Thuja plicata) forest - frequentlywith a strong black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) component - occurs on better draine dsites . The complexity of the vegetation does not allow separation of BBC ' s for each vegetation typ eat our sampling scale .Definitive SpeciesBrown-headed Cowbird 6.857 Song Sparrow .47 4Common Yellowthroat 1 .417 Solitary Sandpiper .444Black -headed Grosbeak .796 Northern Waterthrush .42 5American Redstart .749 American Crow .29 8MacGillivray's Warbler .642 Cedar Waxwing .159Lincoln's Sparrow .622 Western Wood Pewee .13 8Red- wingea Blackbird .49 7Dominant SpeciesRufous Hummingbird 3 .349 Chipping Sparrow .30 4Yellow Warbler 1 .031 Warbling Vireo .23 6Steller's Jay 1 .024 Orange-crowned Warbler .19 1Hammond 's Flycatcher .556 Wilson's Warbler .17 9Pine Siskin .402 Townsend 's Warbler .17 2American Robin .316102

Additional SpeciesRed-breasted Nuthatch .097 Dark-eyed Junco M4 7Northern Flicker .096 Spotted Sandpiper .047Varied Thrush .078 Veery .039Willow Flycatcher .078 Black-capped Chickadee .039Common Snipe .078 Solitary Vireo .020Swainson's Thrush .078 Townsend's Solitaire .019Evening Grosbeak .063 Western Tanager .019Mountain Chickadee .050 Fox Sparrow .019Golden-crowned Kinglet .049 Savannah Sparrow .019RemarksThe average DI is 22 .4, considerably higher than that of any other BBC in MRNP and GNP .The diversity of species reflects the prevalence of habitat edge and variety of v .t .s . The definitivespecies are primarily those associated with productive wetlands . Many occur only rarely elsewhere inMRNP and GNP and their presence alone distinguishes this from other BBC's . Examples includeAmerican Redstart, Black-headed Grosbeak, Solitary Sandpiper and Song Sparrow . Common Snipe ,Magnolia Warbler, Savannah Sparrow, Veery, and Violet-green and Tree Swallows are species of limiteddistribution in MRNP and GNP that are strongly associated with this BBC . There is considerablesimilarity between this BBC and BBC 9 (Holroyd and Van Tighem 1983), but the prevalence of tal lshrubs in MRNP and GNP wetlands results in species like American Redstart and MacGillivray' sWarbler being more abundant and species like Steller's Jay and Black-headed Grosbeak, which ar erare in the Rockies, occur here in the Columbia Mountains .Vegetation Type correlate sEngelmann spruce-black cottonwood/yellow dryad (023) (in part )willow/horsetail (S7) (Corns and Achuff 1982 )alder/skunk cabbage (S17 )water sedge-beaked sedge (Hll) (in part)Wet forestBREEDING BIRD COMMUNITY 23BBC 23 is prevalent in Interior Cedar-Hemlock and Lower Subalpine wetlands where vegetation is lessdiverse and conifers are more predominant than in those areas where BBC 22 occurs . Wet sedg e(Carex spp .) meadows bordered by alder (Alnus spp.) thickets with scattered spruce (Picea engelmannii),and wet coniferous forests with abundant seepage support this BBC .Definitive Specie sCommon Yellowthroat .867 Boreal Chickadee .23 1Blackpoll Warbler .257 Yellow Warbler .228Northern Waterthrush .253 Wilson's Warbler .210Dominant SpeciesTownsend 's Warbler .885 American Robin .33 7Dark-eyed Junco .773 Chestnut-backed Chickadee .182Golden-crowned Kinglet .665 Red-breasted Nuthatch .154Chipping Sparrow .486 Yellow-rumped Warbler .130Varied Thrush .477 Brown Creeper .105Winter Wren .448 Pine Siskin .105Hammond's Flycatcher .35610 3

Additional SpeciesHermit Thrush .095 Savannah Sparrow .064Willow Flycatcher .067 Townsend's Solitaire .03 5Swainson's Thrush .064 Olive-sided Flycatcher .03 2RemarksThe average DI is 7 .5, much lower than BBC 22 but higher than coniferous forest BBC's .Many species that occur here are also present in hemlock-cedar (Tsuga heterophylla-Thuja plicata )and other coniferous forests . The definitive species include Blackpoll Warbler, which is confined t othis BBC, and species characteristic of wetlands (Common Yellowthroat and Northern Waterthrush) ,deciduous shrubbery (Yellow Warbler), dense coniferous forest . (Boreal Chickadee) and coniferousshrubbery and forest edges (Wilson's Warbler) . This unique assemblage, and the presence of Black -poll Warbler, distinguishes this BBC from others in MRNP and GNP . It is similar to BBC 6, whichoccurs in the Rocky Mountains (Holroyd and Van Tighem 1983), but the greater prevalence of tal lshrubs in MRNP and GNP wetlands increases the densities of species like Yellow Warbler and CommonYellowthroat .Vegetation Type correlate swater sedge-beaked sedge (Hll) (in part )spruce/Labrador tea/brown moss (Oll )Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/green alder (C25 )Hemlock-cedar fores tBREEDING BIRD COMMUNITY 2 4BBC 24 occurs primarily in the mature hemlock-cedar (Tsuga heterophylla-Thuja plicata) forests ofthe Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregion, but also occurs locally in the Lower Subalpine . Where deciduoustrees form a significant part of the canopy, it gives way to BBC 25 .Definitive SpeciesGolden-crowned Kinglet .898 Vaux's Swift .259Townsend's Warbler .584 Brown Creeper .170Chestnut-backed Chickadee .533 Evening Grosbeak .158Dominant SpeciesPine Siskin .675 Hammond's Flycatcher .180Varied Thrush .270 Swainson's Thrush .10 5Winter Wren .267 Three-toed Woodpecker .10 3Red-breasted Nuthatch .19 7Additional SpeciesDark-eyed Junco .094 Boreal Chickadee .01 9Hermit Thrush .087 Chipping Sparrow .019Hairy Woodpecker .065 Mountain Chickadee .01 7Red Crossbill .061 Warbling Vireo .016American Robin .060 Solitary Vireo .01 1MacGillivray's Warbler .055 Western Tanager .010Steller's Jay .040 Northern Flicker .010104

Gray Jay .032 Orange-crowned Warbler .00 6Yellow-rumped Warbler .028 White-winged Crossbill .00 5Pine Grosbeak .023 Black-capped Chickadee .00 5Pileated Woodpecker .021 Fox Sparrow .00 3Townsend's Solitaire .00 2RemarksThe average DI is 5 .1, reflecting the low productivity of the uniform, coniferous habitat . Densit yand diversity increase at openings and forest edges due to the concentration of both edge species an dspecies from other habitats .Most species in BBC 24 also occur in other coniferous habitats . Chestnut-backed Chickadee andVaux's Swift are largely limited to this BBC and species like Brown Creeper, Evening Grosbeak ,Golden-crowned Kinglet and Townsend's Warbler occur at much higher densities here than elsewhere .The Red Crossbill is also strongly associated with this BBC, but occurs at low densities .Vegetation Type correlatesmountain hemlock-Douglas fir-subalpine fir-Engelmann spruce/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C49 )western hemlock-western red cedar/western yew/oak fern (C50 )western red cedar-western hemlock/devil's club/oak fern (C51 )western hemlock-western red cedar-(Douglas fir)/mountain lover (C52 )ICH mixed fores tBREEDING BIRD COMMUNITY 25Particularly in MRNP above the Trans-Canada Highway and along the lower slopes of Mount Revel -stoke, and locally in the Beaver valley of GNP, a diverse forest comprised of both deciduous species ,e.g . aspen (Populus tremuloides), black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), paper birch (Betula papyrifera),and mountain maple (Ater glabrum) and coniferous species, e.g. western red cedar (Th?plicata), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), western white pine (Pinus monticola) and Douglas fi r(Pseudotsuga menziesii), covers much of the landscape . This vegetation is fire successional and ma ysucceed eventually to closed hemlock-cedar forest, but it is likely to persist for many years . Becauseof its diversity and location on low southerly aspects in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregion, it sus -tains a high diversity of birds .Definitive SpeciesGolden-crowned Kingle tWarbling VireoDominant SpeciesPine SiskinTownsend 's Warble rRed - breasted NuthatchVaried ThrushHammond's Flycatche rAdditional SpeciesWinter Wre nRed Crossbill.812 Chestnut-backed Chickadee .227.417 MacGillivray's Warbler .2191 .245 Yellow-rumped Warbler .18 5.542 Swainson's Thrush .17 8.247 Dark-eyed Junco .16 5.211 Chipping Sparrow .146.186 American Robin .13 3.086 Hermit Thrush .045.083 Solitary Vireo .04510 5

Brown Creeper .073 Nashville Warbler .03 8Gray Jay .062 Wilson's Warbler .03 7Orange-crowned Warbler .059 Ruby-crowned Kinglet .03 2Western Tanager .054 Blue Grouse .03 2Pileated Woodpecker .052 Evening Grosbeak .02 2Pine Grosbeak .046 Dusky Flycatcher .01 9Three-toed Woodpecker .045 Mountain Chickadee .01 8Black-capped Chickadee .045 Townsend's Solitaire .00 7RemarksThe average DI is 5 .8, higher than any coniferous forest BBC and lower than the deciduous fores tBBC .Most of the dominant species are widespread, common species that occur in most forests or fores tedges. The definitive species include both coniferous forest birds (Chestnut-backed Chickadee ,Golden-crowned Kinglet) and deciduous forest birds (Orange-crowned Warbler, Warbling Vireo) tha tdo not occur together in other BBC's . The disturbed area at the Mount Revelstoke ski hill ha sstronger affinities to BBC 26 (Calliope Hummingbird, Dusky Flycatcher, Lazuli Bunting) than to thi sBBC . The Pileated Woodpecker and Western Tanager are strongly associated with this BBC .Vegetation Type correlateswestern hemlock-western red cedar-(Douglas fir)/mountain lover (C52) (in part )Douglas fir-western red cedar/mountain lover (C53 )mixed forest (unclassified)ICH deciduous forestBREEDING BIRD COMMUNITY 26This BBC is rare and local in MRNP and the I lleciliewaet valley of GNP . I t occurs only in wel ldrained forests of aspen (Populus tremuloides) and paper birch (Betula papyrifera) on NC6, particularlyabove the west gate of MRNP, and in the disturbed area dominated by deciduous vegetation a tthe base of Mount Revelstoke . The relatively dry, semi-open structure of the vegetation appears t obe as important as its deciduous nature .Definitive SpeciesNashville Warbler .382 Cedar Waxwing .266Calliope Hummingbird .373 Dusky Flycatcher .18 7MacGillivray s Warbler .35 9Dominant Specie sRufous Hummingbird 2 .348 Black-capped Chickadee .169Dark-eyed Junco 1 .158 Swainson's Thrush .15 3Warbling Vireo .925 Solitary Vireo .14 7Hammond's Flycatcher .889 Golden-crowned Kinglet .13 6Western Tanager .825 Chipping Sparrow .13 1Orange-crowned Warbler .426 Yellow Warbler .11 8Wilson 's Warbler .228 Townsend's Warbler .11 1American Robin .177 Pine Siskin .10 1Yellow-rumped Warbler .169106

Additional SpeciesChestnut -backed Chickadee .084 Spotted Sandpiper .03 9White-winged Crossbill .081 Stelier's Jay .03 7Yellow -rumped Warbler .066 Song Sparrow .03 3Western Wood Pewee .059 White-crowned Sparrow .01 7Evening Grosbeak .052 Hermit Thrush .01 5Fox Sparrow .052 Alder Flycatcher .01 5Red-breasted Nuthatch .041 Townsend's Solitaire .01 5RemarksThe average DI is 10 .4 . Only BBC 22 has a higher DI .As with most other BBC's, the dominant species here are widespread and common in a variety ofhabitats. The definitive species, however, are largely confined to this BBC . The Calliope Humming -bird, Dusky Flycatcher and Nashville Warbler rarely occur in other habitats . The Cedar Waxwin gand MacGillivray's Warbler occur here at higher densities than elsewhere .Although this BBC is similar to BBC 2, which occurs in the Rocky Mountains, it contains a numbe rof species, like the Nashville Warbler and Calliope Hummingbird, that are rare or absent in the RockiesVegetation Type correlatesaspen-western white pine/mountain lover (015 )Engelmann spruce-black cottonwood/yellow dryad (023) (in part)10 7

CHAPTER V • ECOLOGICAL INTEGRATION OF LANDFORMS, SOILS, VEGETATION AN DWILDLIFEECOLOGICAL LAND CLASSIFICATION METHODOLOG YB.D . Walker, W .S . Taylor and G .M . CoenPHILOSOPHICAL PRINCIPLESThere have been various approaches to natural resource inventories in Canadian national parks .Experience has shown that, for ease of use, all resource sectors should be linked to one set of ma ppolygons of appropriate scale (1 :50,000 was chosen for MRNP and GNP) and the legend should de -scribe holistic, repeating, ecological map unit concepts . For the mountain national parks, this map -ping approach was developed during the Lake Louise pilot study (Holland 1976, Walker et al . 1978)and further refined in the BNP-JNP and KNP Ecological Land Classifications (Coen et al. 1982 ,Walker et al. 1982b, 1984c) . The MRNP and GNP Ecological Land Classification is based on desig nprinciples and concepts developed in the BNP, JNP and KNP projects and uses a few of the sam eEcosection concepts .Three guidelines were used to develop the mapping procedure for ecological land classification in th emountain national parks :1. Map, legend, and report should be easily interpretable .2. Map unit concepts should be repetitive and holistic .3. Map information should be uniform in reliability and intensity .These guidelines were met by using a controlled legend (Mapping Systems Working Group 1981) anda simple map symbol that encompasses a holistic ecological concept comprising landform, soil, an dvegetation . Only the slope and selected landscape modifying processes vary independently of the conceptas applied to map polygons . This allows the development of an ecological map unit concep t(Jurdant et al. 1975, Rowe 1979), limits the number of concepts, permits legend interpretation fol -lowed by mechanical labelling of repetitive map polygons, and encompasses many landscape feature sin an easily remembered symbol . It also allows transfer of experience from a familiar area to an un -familiar but similarly labelled area, without reference to the many specific landscape components suc has texture or calcareousness .Map delineations were chosen to correspond with changes in landscape features, usually landform .Such changes usually can be correlated with soil and vegetation changes, which allows reliable extrapolationof Ecosite boundaries on aerial photographs . At scale 1 :50,000, the smallest practical ma ppolygon, about 0 .5 to 1.0 cm', represents 10 to 25 ha . Thus, these were the smallest contrastin gpolygons delineated . Survey intensity corresponds to Level 3 of the Soil Mapping System for Canad a(Mapping Systems Working Group 1981) . The legend is organized hierarchically, i.e . the taxonomicunits Ecoregion, Ecosection, and Ecosite are conceptually hierarchical . Attempts have been madeelsewhere to map polygons named by hierarchical level and then to subdivide these large polygons ,naming the smaller units by a lower category in the hierarchical taxonomy (Airphoto Analysis Associates1975) . This hierarchical or nested mapping method was not used in the BNP and JNP (Coe net al . 1982), KNP or MRNP and GNP inventories .MAPPING METHODOLOGYMETHODOLOGY OF LEGEND DEVELOPMENTNo nationally acceptable taxonomic system for Ecological Land Classification presently exists . Thereare guidelines (Lacate 1969, Jurdant et al. 1975, Wiken 1980) useful for developing Ecological Lan dClassifications, but they are oriented more towards landscape mapping than to landscape taxonomy .They recommend utilizing, as building blocks, taxonomies developed for single components of th elandscape, e.g. a soil or vegetation classification . Ecological Land Classification in the mountai n109

national parks, as initiated by the BNP -JNP inventory, uses a conceptual taxonomy based on othe rtaxonomies . A vegetation community type taxonomy was developed (Achuff 1982, Corns and Achuf f1982) and an existing landform classification was slightly modified (C .S .S .C. 1978a, Walker et al .1982a) . These were combined with an existing soil taxonomy (C .S .S .C . 1978a) to form a legend thatdefined the mapping units (Ecosites) . In MRNP and GNP bedrock categories (Fig . 2), were addedto differentiate map units . However, the three legends covering the five mountain national parks ar ecomparable .An iterative process, involving large amounts of data, was used to develop the component taxonomie sand the Ecological Land Classification legend . Pretyping of probable map unit boundaries was don eon 1 :63,360 scale, black and white aerial photographs . During the next phase, landform, soil, vegetation,and some wildlife data were collected simultaneously along common transects and at commo nobservation sites in the field . Traverses were selected for optimal coverage of different landscapes ,particularly over an altitudinal range . Observation sites were selected to represent the most commo nlandform-soil-vegetation-wildlife condition within each map delineation . Occasionally, sites wer echosen to examine some special but less common set of conditions . Site locations were noted on th e1 :63 .360 photos . The data were computer coded and analyzed to develop the component taxonomie sand Ecological Land Classification legend .The pretyped map unit boundaries were corrected and refined as the field work progressed and th elegend was refined . Also used were 1 :25,000 scale, black and white and color IR photographs . Completedphoto mapping was transferred to 1 :50,000 base maps and then drafted and digitized by th eCartography Section, Land Resource Research Institute, Ottawa .In keeping with the holistic approach of the inventory, wildlife data were used to develop Ecosite imortanceratings for selected species (see methodologies in Chapter IV and Van Tighem and Gyu g[1984]) . In addition, wildlife data identified as critical by the wildlife team, influenced decision sabout Ecosite separations and about assignment of vegetation types (v .t .s) to Ecosites . Thus, th eEcosite concepts are defined in terms of bedrock, landform, soil, and vegetation components, some o fwhich were chosen for their usefulness in identifying wildlife habitat .DESIGN OF THE MAP LEGEN DThe current Ecological Land Classification guidelines (Wiken 1980) were the starting point for developingthe map legend used for the BNP -JNP, KNP, and MRNP and GNP ecological inventories . Todevelop the taxonomy, class limits should have been defined for each of the hierarchical levels an dtaxa . This would have resulted in a matrix of pigeon holes into which the ecological universe could b epartitioned . Since only a small portion of the ecological universe is present in MRNP and GNP, itwas possible to develop credible taxon limits for only portions of the taxonomy . Thus, a map legendwas developed which separates mapping concepts coincident with probable taxon limits wherever possible. Extending the ecological inventory from the Rocky Mountain parks to MRNP and GNP resultedin expansion of knowledge about the southeastern Canadian Cordillera . Consequently inMRNP and GNP there is some use of BNP-JNP and KNP Ecosections, although new Ecosite conceptswere developed .The following discussion of Ecoregions, Ecosections, and Ecosites show how the hierarchica ltaxonomic levels influenced the mapping legend . Ecodistrict separations (Wiken 1980) were no tmade .EcoregionsThree Ecoregions (ecological zones) occur in MRNP and GNP : Interior Cedar-Hemlock, EngelmannSpruce-Subalpine Fir, and Alpine (Fig . 6) . The Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir Ecoregion wa sfurther divided into Lower Subalpine and Upper Subalpine portions . The Ecoregion is the broadestlevel of ecosystem classification used in this study and is based primarily upon differences in vegetationphysiognomy and species composition which reflect differences in macroclimate . Because great -est ecological similarity occurs at high elevations, Alpine is the only Ecoregion common to both Rock yMountain and Columbia Mountain national parks . An Ecoregion, as used here, is conceptually similarto the zone of Daubenmire (1968), La Roi (1975), and Lea (1980, 1983), the biogeoclimatic zoneof Krajina (1965) and Utzig et al. (1983), the biophysical region of Lacate (1969), and the Fores tSection of Rowe (1972) . Climatic, soil, and vegetational characteristics of each Ecoregion are de -scribed in Chapters I to III of this report .110

EcosectionsEcoregions are conceptually divided into 19 Ecosections based on broad genetic material and drainag eclass differences . Ecosections are named after geographic features and assigned a two letter connotativesymbol . A few Alpine Ecosections established for the BNP-JNP inventory (Walker et al. 1982d )are used in MRNP and GNP .Six genetic material classes were used in the establishment of Ecosections (Table 48) . They are : glacial(including morainal and ice contact stratified drift), glaciofluvial, fluvial, colluvial, landslide, an dresidual . These six groups were divided into two moisture regimes : wet terrain with poorly and verypoorly drained soils (C .S .S .C . 1978a) and non-wet terrain with moderately well drained and driersoils . Imperfectly drained areas are considered wet or non-wet depending on their spatial and conceptualassociates . Wet terrain is not divided further at the Ecosection level . Non-wet terrain is dividedfurther according to two soil-vegetation classes that reflect geomorphic activity :1. Land areas dominated by Regosolic soils and other soils with weak profile develop -ment on young and active landforms . A variety of sera] and pioneer v .t .s are associ -ated with these incipient soils .2. Land areas dominated by Brunisolic and Podzolic soils and a variety of v .t.s types onolder, more stable landforms .Classes 1 and 2 differentiate glacial and fluvial (including glaciofluvial) landforms with current or re -cent geomorphic activity (AB and SN Ecosections) from those with much older surfaces (BU and L REcosections) . Soils on steep colluvial slopes also show differences related to the degree of geomorphi cactivity but these are much more localized and are emphasized at the Ecosite level .Noncalcareous bedrock and genetic materials characterize MRNP and GNP . Contributions by th efew limestone and calcareous clastic strata are localized or diluted and are virtually unmappable .Likewise, textural influence of the coarsest grained bedrock, being localized and diluted, cannot b emapped separately from that of the finer grained strata which predomiante . Genetic materials inMRNP and GNP are chemically and texturally more uniform than those in the Rocky Mountain nationalparks . Additionally, mesoclimatic differences producing contrasting soils and vegetation wer enot recognized in the classification of MRNP and GNP . Thus, Ecosection separations based onparent material and mesoclimate in BNP and JNP (Walker et al. 1982b) and KNP (Walker et al.1984c) were not necessary in MRNP and GNP . Instead, more subtle differences were expressed byseparations at the Ecosite level in MRNP and GNP .EcositesThe 19 Ecosections are further separated into 50 Ecosites . Ecosites are named as numerical subdivisionsof the Ecosection name, e.g. the Balu (BU) Ecosection is divided in to BU1, BU2, BU3, etc. .There are one to six Ecosites per Ecosection . Ecosites are separated on bedrock and vegetational differencesas well as differences in soil and landform . Factors controlling the choice of the followingcriteria include scale of mapping, reliability of photographic interpretation, and areal extent .Physiognomic/habitat groupings not previously separated at the Ecoregion and Ecosection levels wer eused to separate Ecosites as follows :1. Land areas dominated by avalanche complex vegetation (shrubs and herbs) were separatedfrom those dominated by forest (e .g. HR5 vs. other HR Ecosites, LR2 vs.LR1) .2. Wetland areas dominated by shrub and fen vegetation were separated from wetlan dareas dominated by forest (e .g. GF1 vs. GF2) .3. Land areas dominated by coniferous open forest or open mixedwood were separate dfrom land areas dominated by coniferous closed forest (e .g. HR6 vs. HR1 to 4 ,NC6 vs. NC1 to 4) .These groupings are useful in identifying wildlife habitat and sometimes correlate with soils and land -form differences .111

Table 48 . Organization of Ecosections by Ecoregion and genetic material .Genetic MaterialResidualEngelmann Spruce-Subalpine FirInteriorCedar-Hemlock Lower Subalpine Upper Subalpine AlpineLandslide GH -Colluvial NC HR AK RDGlacial (morainal CT AB,BU,LK• JD,WR` JN+ ice contac tstratified )Glaciofluvia lFluvialKX,(SN) tGFs,LR,(SN)tCE•,CM* Dominantly wet terrain .t SN is associated with two genetic material classes .Complex mapping units include land areas comprising two or more distinct but cartographically inseparablesoil-vegetation or genetic material components and were separated as follows :1. Land areas characterized by abundant bedrock outcrops and lithic soils were separatedfrom land areas with continuous soil cover (e .g. AK6 vs. AK1 to 4) . Rock ylandscapes with lithic soils are dominated by coniferous open forest but landscape swith continuous soil cover can have open or closed forests .2. Land areas dominated by ice contact stratified drift were separated from land area sdominated by morainal deposits (e .g. CT5 and CT6 vs . other CT Ecosites) .3. Land areas comprised of a distinct dry and wet pattern of soils and vegetation wereseparated from land areas comprised mainly of either end member (e .g. CT6 vs .CT5) .Four bedrock groupings (Fig . 2) were used to separate forested and tundra landscapes occurring onunsorted genetic materials . The four groupings and their derivative genetic materials are :1 . Horsethief Creek Group from which medium textured materials are derived (e .g .HR1, JD1, RD3) .2 . Hamill Group from which medium and coarse textured materials are derived (e .g .HR2, JD2, RD4) . Because of limited areal extent, materials derived from graniti cintrusive rocks are included with those of Hamill lithologies in GNP .3 . Lardeau Group from which medium textured, often dark gray to black materials ar ederived (e.g. HR3, JD3, RD5) .4. Shuswap Metamorphic Complex from which medium and coarse textured material sare derived (e.g. HR4, JD4, RD6) .Minor differences in soil and vegetation often correspond to different textural and, possibly, minera -logical characteristics imparted by the bedrock types .Soil and vegetation differences used to define Ecosites were considered insufficient in magnitude o rkind to warrant separations at the Ecosection level . An attempt was made to define repeating natura lEcosite concepts so that differences among central concepts are of equal magnitude .As with any criteria defining cartographic concepts, individuals falling close to class boundaries ma ybe more like each other than like the different central concepts with which they are classed . Thus ,cartographic separations of a continuum always necessitate some arbitrary decisions as to which clas san individual may belong . The guidelines above are reasonably precise with regard to the central conceptsof the classes and the guidelines have resulted in a useful organization of the natural phenomen abeing mapped .HE112

ECOLOGICAL (BIOPHYSICAL) LEGEND CORRELATIONSoil and terrain inventories of the Seymour Arm Area (Kowall 1980) and Lardeau Map Area (Wittneben1980) utilized varying degrees of ecological integration in their approaches . The former are a(N .T .S . map Sheet 82M) lies to the northwest and includes part of MRNP . The latter area (N .T.S .Map Sheet 82K) lies to the south of MRNP and GNP . The mapping units of the two inventories andof the MRNP and GNP Ecological Land Classification are correlated in Appendix C .The two British Columbia Ministry of Environment studies are basically soil inventories (1 :100,00 0scale) with Ecological Land Classification overtones, since the legends use forest zonation among th ehigher levels of generalization . The zonation classes correspond conceptually to the Ecoregions an dEcoregion subdivisions in the MRNP and GNP Ecological Land Classification but boundaries ofte ndiffer significantly and the Seymour Arm inventory (Kowall 1980) utilizes more zonation classes tha nthe other two inventories . Physiographic Regions, the first level of generalization, of the Seymou rArm Area were divided into major bedrock types before forest zonation was applied, which proliferatedthe number of mapping units and differs significantly from approaches in the other two inventories.Forest zones and subzones were divided into soil associations which form the basis of the soil mappin gand are identified by geographic names . Soil association criteria in the Seymour Arm inventory ar egenetic material/surface form classes (6 mineral, 1 organic), dominant soil development (soil sub -groups) and, sometimes, elevation and soil association location . In the Lardeau inventory, criteriainclude genetic material classes (5 mineral, 1 organic), deep vs . shallow colluvial deposits, bedrock lithologyor genetic material texture, fluvial landform surface expression, and dominant soil develop -ment (soil subgroup) . Soil associations, therefore, correspond approximately to Ecosections in th eMRNP and GNP ecological inventory but the criteria differ significantly for many landscapes . Somecriteria are applied in MRNP and GNP at the Ecosite level (e .g. parent material thickness, subgrou pclassification) or as modifiers and slope class on individual tracts, (e .g. slope class indicates level vs.fan forms of fluvial deposits) . Limits for soil association separations appear to be broader for highelevation landscapes (e .g. Alpine tundra) than for lower elevation zones and subzones . Difference sin soil taxonomy are due to differing interpretations of field characteristics and, more importantly ,use of older versions of the Canadian System of Soil Classification (C .S .S .C . 1978a) .Soil associations were divided into soil association components (soil association name plus a number )which are the basic mapping units . These are differentiated according to the proportions of sub -groups within the soil association . The subgroups are related but differ due to local variations in e.g .soil depth, drainage, texture or aspect. These criteria and those which differentiate Ecosites in th eMRNP and GNP inventory differ considerably .Another major difference between the British Columbia soil surveys and the MRNP and GNP inventoryis in legend form and mapping procedure . The two soil surveys utilized an uncontrolled legen d(Mapping Systems Working Group 1981) and each map delineation was identified with up to thre esoil association components resulting in a compound map unit . The number of possible combinationsis very high and many delineations may be unique . The MRNP and GNP inventory uses a controlle dlegend (Mapping Systems Working Group 1981) and a simple map symbol .DESCRIPTION OF ECOSECTIONS/ECOSITE SW .S . Taylor, D .T . Allan, P .L . Achuff, L .W . Gyug, B.D . Walker and K . Van TighemINTRODUCTIONA comprehensive discussion of each mapping concept used in the MRNP and GNP Ecological Lan dClassification is provided in this section . The descriptions are arranged alphabetically by Ecosectio nsymbol . Fig . 7 provides a legend for the schematic, cross-sectional diagrams . Appendix D contain spedon descriptions cited in the following Ecosection descriptions as, for example, Table Dl .113

Fig . 7 . Legend for landscape schematics .VEGETATIONGENETIC MATERIAL S,14fluOpen In -hemloc kClosed spruce-fir . hemloc kOpen spruce-fi rClosed spruce-fi rOpen mi .edwoo dAl14t4TundraMeadow or fenIto., w ShrublandClosed hemlock-ceda rBedroc kIce Contact Stratified Drif tResidua lA Discussion and Management Considerations section for each Ecosection deals with mapping conceptsimilarities between the MRNP and GNP and BNP and JNP inventories, distinguishes similar landscapeswithin MRNP and GNP, and highlights important features that may affect park uses . Thestatements are intended to broadly indicate potential suitability or limitation . Due to scale and loca lvariation, each tract should be evaluated in detail for specific proposed uses .AB - ABBOTT ECOSECTIONThe AB Ecosection occurs in the Lower Subalpine portion of the Engelmann spruce-subalpine fi rEcoregion and incorporates landforms of recently deposited till, well drained Regosolic and Brunisoli csoils, and both herb mat and shrub thicket vegetation . Only one Ecosite (AB1) is recognized (Tabl e49 )Table 49 . Definitive features of the Abbott (AB) Ecosection .Ecosite Bedrock Landlorm Soils Vegetatio nAB1 Various Tills A, B, C ; ridged or Orthic Eutric Brunisol, Or- herb mat (H8), shru bblanket & veneer over in- thic Dystric Brunisol, Or- thicket (S13 )clined & hummocky bed - thic Regoso lroc kAB1 occurs on lower slopes and floors of cirques and tributary valleys in areas with extensive valle yglaciers and icefields . Since AB1 is a vegetated landscape recently exposed by glacial retreat, landscapeages range from a few tens to a few hundreds of years. Age gradients exist within AB1 tracts ,the oldest landscape generally being farthest from the ice front . Because of scale, AB1 is only mappablewithin the Selkirk Mountains of GNP (i .e. west of the Beaver River) . Figs. 8 and 12 showAB1 in diagrammatic landscape settings .114

Fig . 8 . Landscape schematic of topographic relationships among AB1 and other Ecosites .GEOMORPHOLOG YThe predominant genetic material in AB1 is glacial till . All three till units (Table 8) occur extensively; their distribution being related to the bedrock lithologies in the source area . Till A (noncalcareous ,coarse textured) occurs where bedrock is predominantly quartzitic or granitic . Till B (noncalcareous ,medium textured) reflects a moderate to majority percentage of schistose source bedrock .Carbonate-bearing strata are most influential, creating Till C (calcareous, medium textured) if the yhave occupied as little as 15% of the till source area . Also present are low lime intergrades betwee nTill C and the two noncalcareous tills .The till most often occurs on cirque or valley walls as blankets or veneers over inclined bedrock . Onfloor positions, till mantles ridged bedrock to various depths . Bedrock often crops out extensivel ywhere it is especially resistant . Ridged lateral and terminal moraines that mark the position of maxi -mum ice advance often indicate the down valley boundary of AB1 (Plate 3) .Ice Contact Stratified Drift C (noncalcareous, variably textured) occurs locally in hummocks an dridges on valley and cirque floors . Calcareous exposures of this mixture of materials were observe dnear Grand Glacier (GNP) . Glacial meltwater flowing through AB1 often has deposited Glaciofluvialmaterial, either calcareous or noncalcareous, in terraces adjacent to present streams .Slopes are generally complex overall, although the valley wall portions often have linear slopes . Slopeangle varies markedly within tracts . Valley walls and morainal ridges have slopes

SOILSMost AB1 soils are moderately well to well drained Regosolics or Brunisolics (Table 49) . Brunisolicsoccur in noncalcareous areas where they do not differ greatly from Regosolics . They have weaklycolored, poorly differentiated sola that generally lack A horizons. B horizons contain little organi ccarbon or organically complexed Fe and Al . The pH's of lower sola are >5 .5 (Orthic Eutric Bruni -sols) except on older portions of tracts where textures are coarse and there is little buffering capacity .Table Dl presents data on an Orthic Dystric Brunisol (pH

Table 50 . Wildlife features of AB Ecosites . (w)=winter, (s)=summerUNGULATES CARNIVORES SMALL MAMMALS BIRD SEcosite Overall Important Overall Important Overall Important Overal lrank species rank species rank species ran kABl high low medium pika lo wgolden-m . gr .squirrelUse is limited by irregular topography and avalanching on tracts where slopes are >30% . Locally ,stony surfaces, coarse textures, and shallow soils may also limit use .AK - ASULKAN ECOSECTIONThe Asulkan (AK) Ecosection concept incorporates colluvial landforms composed of noncalcareou scolluvium and dominated by Upper Subalpine vegetation . Dystric Brunisols and Humo-Ferric Podzolsare the characteristic soils . Five AK Ecosites (Table 51) were differentiated . AK1, AK2, andAK4 all have fir-hemlock vegetation but different bedrock and soils . AK5 is dominated by vegetatio nindicative of fre quent snow avalanching and AK6 is characterized by very steep, rugged, rocky terrai nwith lithic phase soils. All occur high on valley walls, although AK5 occasionally extends across hig helevation valley floors . Figs . 9 and 12 show topographic relationship among several AK Ecosites .Table 51 . Definitive features of Asulkan (AK) Ecosites .Ecosite Bedrock Landform Soils Vegetatio nAK1 Horsethief Ck . Colluvium B ; veneer ove rGrou pinclined bedroc kAK2 Hamill Group Colluvium B & A ; venee rover inclined bedroc kAK4 Shuswap Metam . Colluvium B & A ; venee rComplexover inclined bedroc kAK5 Various Colluvium B & A ; venee rover inclined bedrock; avalanchedAK6 Various Colluvium B & A ; venee rover inclined bedrock +exposed bedrockOrt.hic & Eluviated Dystri cBrunisols, Orthic Humo -Ferric Podzo lEluviated Dystric Brunisol ,Orthic Humo-Ferric PodzolOrthic Humo-Ferric PodzolLithic phases: Orthic &Eluviated Dystric Brunisols ,Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzo lLithic phases: Orthic &Eluviated Dystric Brunisols ,Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol ;+ nonsoilsubalpine fir-mountai nhemlock open forest (020 )subalpine fir-mountai nhemlock open forest (020 )subalpine fir-mountai nhemlock open forest (020 )Avalanche complex 4 >subalpine fir-mountai nhemlock open forest (020 )subalpine fir-mountai nhemlock open forest (020) ,subalpine fir-whitebarkpine open forest (022 )GEOMORPHOLOG YAK is geomorphically characterized by colluvial landforms comprised of Colluvium B (non- to weakl ycalcareous, medium textured) and Colluvium A (noncalcareous, coarse textured) . Colluvium B ispredominant and characterizes AK1 on Horsethief Creek Group bedrock (Fig . 2) . Colluvium A iscodominant in areas underlain by Hamill Group (AK2) and Shuswap Metamorphic Complex bedroc k(AK4) . The former includes an area of granitic, intrusive bedrock . AK5 and AK6 on all bedroc ktypes, are dominated by Colluvium B or an unpredictable combination of Colluvial materials A an dB . Limestone occurs locally in most areas, thus calcareous, medium textured colluvium (cf11 7

Fig . 9 . Landscape schematic of topographic relationships among AK and RD Ecosites .AwikonAK 1Redoub tRD3Colluvium C, Walker et al . 1982a) is a minor constituent in a few AK tracts . Consolidated bedroc kusually underlies the colluvium at shallow depths but, at a few sites, sufficent weathering of the bed -rock produced veneers of Residuum A (noncalcareous, medium to coarse textured) . These are mor elikely to occur in recessive, highly jointed, slaty to schistose strata . Thin, discrete veneers of Eolia nmaterial B (altered, medium textured) are uncommon in AK . Intact eolian veneers occur only on th emost stable sites under forest vegetation .The colluvium most often occurs as a nearly continuous veneer over steeply inclined bedrock on valle ywalls . Discontinuous colluvial veneer plus exposed bedrock is the norm for AK6 but also characterizesabout 50% of the AK5 tracts . Deeper colluvial blankets occur as accessory features in all A KEcosites . The deepest deposits are colluvial aprons which occur occasionally in AK5 and have bee nconstructed by avalanching and rockfall, below very steep . often rocky slopes . Couloirs channe lmeltwater streams and mudflows onto the aprons . Thus, the aprons are often intercalated colluvial ,fluvial, and mudflow deposits .AK slopes are 55 to

Current landform construction is very slow and has virtually ceased under forest vegetation (AK1 ,AK2 and AK4), except on recently burned areas (e .g. upper Copperstain Creek valley) where surfacemodification by soil creep, slope wash and fluvial or mudflow erosion has occurred . Low intensit ymodification on forested terrain includes uprooting of trees and solifluction, although turbic phasesoils are uncommon . In contrast, colluvial activity on avalanched (AK5) and craggy (AK6) landscapesis more diverse . Ve getated portions, which are usually most common, are stable as indicate dby the predominance of well developed soils, even though low intensity processes may still be operating.Sparsely ve getated and unvegetated erosional and depositional sites (10 cm of Ah horizon are accessory soils of AK5 and AK6 . These soil slikely also occur occasionally in the other AK Ecosites . In AK5, their development is probably relate dto mechanical incorporation of humus into surface horizons. Under such conditions, SombricFerro-Humic Podzols, with podzolic Bhf and thick Ah horizons, may also occur . Where very shallowsoils are the norm, as in AK6, illuvial humus appears to accumulate above the bedrock contact, as i nthe Hermit 6 (HR6) pedon (Table D19) .I n strong contrast to the comparatively stable Brunisolics and Podzolics, Regosolic soils occur at site sthat have recently been intensely active geomorphically so that B horizon development has been inhibited. They are most abundant in avalanche terrain (accessory soils of AK5) although they likely oc -cur in minor amounts in other AK Ecosites . Cumulic and Cumulic Humic Regosols are most commonand occur in depositional localities . The variable organic matter content and color is related t omechanical incorporation of humus into surface horizons . Morphologically more uniform Orthic Regosolsoccur sporadically, particularly in erosional sites on AK5 and AK6 . The variety of Brunisolic ,Podzolic, and Regosolic soils on AK5 demonstrate the complex interactions of geomorphic activit yand pedogenic weathering on avalanche terrain, among the most complex landscapes in MRNP an dGNP .Lithic phase soils are common accessory soils in any AK Ecosite, but are characteristic of AK6 an dabout half of AK5 tracts . Nonsoil areas occupy

VEGETATIONAK1, AK2, and AK4 have similar vegetation (Table 51) characterized by fir-hemlock open forest ,mainly the subalpine fir-mountain hemlock/heather-luetkea (020) v .t . (Plate 8) . Accessory v .t .s inAK1, AK2, and AK4 are Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (021) occurrin gat low elevations within the Upper Subalpine, and subalpine fir-whitebark pine-(Engelmann spruce) /tall bilberry-heather (022), occuring on relatively dry, slightly disturbed sites (Plate 9) . Near theUpper Subalpine-Lower Subalpine boundary, the forest canopy occasionally becomes closed and re -sembles the Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/tall bilberry/liverwort (C21) or mountain hemlock-subalpinefir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C47) v .t .s .AK6 has similar, more open forest, although it contains

Table 52. Wildlife features of AK Ecosites . (w)=winter, (s) =summe rUNGULATES CARNIVORES SMALL MAMMALS BIRDSEcosite Overall Important Overall Important Overall Important Overal lrank species rank species rank species rankAK1 medium low medium pika mediumColumbian gr .squirre lgolden-m . gr .squirrelAK2 low low mediumAK4 low low mediumAK5 very high goat low very high pika mediumcaribou (s) marmotColumbian gr .squirrelAK6 high goat low lowAK2 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: No ungulate use was recorded .Carnivores : No carnivore use was recorded .Small Mammals: Association 13 .AK2 is of moderate importance to porcupines .Breeding Birds: Communities 7 and 1 7A moderate density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circula rcensus plots, this Ecosite is highly important to Clark's Nutcracker, Hermit Thrush andVaried Thrush .AK4 Wildlife Feature sAK4 occurs only as two small, relatively inaccessible tracts in MRNP which were not sampled fo rwildlife use . Use is likely similar to that of AK2 .AK5 Wildlife Feature sUngulates: This steep Ecosite is very highly important in summer to goats and highly important i nwinter on south-facing tracts that are blown free of snow . AK5 receives high summer andlow winter use by caribou .Carnivores: AK5 is of low importance to martens and wolverines, probably due to the diversity o fprey .Small Mammals: Association 13 .The varied terrain of AK5 provides highly important habitat for several species includingpika on talus slopes near meadows, hoary marmot in boulder fields near meadows and Columbianground squirrel in open meadows . AK5 is of medium importance to snowshoehares and porcupines .Breeding Birds:A low density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to Rosy Finch .AK6 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: The steep rockfaces of AK6 are highly important to mountain goats year round . AK6 isof low importance to caribou in summer .Carnivores: No carnivore use was recorded, probably because of steep slopes and low prey density .Small Mammals: Association 13 .The talus slopes, boulder fields and cliff faces of AK6 are of medium importance to hoar ymarmots and low importance to pikas .12 1

Breeding Birds: Communities 7 and 1 7A low density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to Clark's Nutcracker and Townsend's Solitaire .Burned tracts of AK6 support BBC 8 .DISCUSSION AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONSAK is an extensive Ecosection, accounting for 11 .3% of MRNP and GNP . Most is AK5 (6 .3%) an dAK6 (3 .8%) . The remaining three, AK1 (1 .0%), AK2 (0.2%), and AK4 ( Orthic Dystric Brunisol ,Orthic Humo-Ferric PodzolBU2 Hamill Group Till B & A ; blanket & ve- Eluviated Dystric Brunisol ,neer over inclined bedrock Ortstein Humo-Ferric PodzolBU3 Lardeau Group Till B; blanket & veneer Eluviated Dystric Brunisol ,over inclined bedrock Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzolmountain hemlock forest(C47) > Engelmannspruce-subalpine fir forest(C21 )mountain hemlock fores t(C47) > Engelman nspruce-subalpine fir fores t(C21 )mountain hemlock fores t(C47) > Engelman nspruce-subalpine fir fores t(C21 )BU4 Shuswap Metam . Till B & A ; blanket & ve- Eluviated Dystric Brunisol, mountain hemlock fores tComplex neer over inclined bedrock Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol (C47) > Engelmann> Ortstein Humo -Ferric spruce-subalpine fir forestPodzol (C21 )BU mainly occupies valley wall middle slopes and less commonly mountain shoulders, cirque floors ,and passes . Distribution of each Ecosite corresponds closely with bedrock type distribution (Table 53 ,Fig. 2) . BU is shown in diagrammatic landscapes in Figs . 10, 11, 13 and 14 .122

Fig . 10 . Landscape schematic of topographic relationships among BU, HR, JD and othe rEcosites .GEOMORPHOLOGYThe predominant genetic material in BU (Table 53) is Till B (noncalcareous, medium textured) .Coarser textured Till A is codominant in areas underlain either by Hamill Group bedrock (BU2 ,GNP) or Shuswap Metamorphic Complex bedrock (BU4, MRNP) .The till is most frequently blankets or veneers which mask inclined bedrock . Eolian material B (non -calcareous, medium textured) seldom forms discrete surface veneers in BU . Where present, it i snormally mixed into upper sola .Slopes are predominantly linear on valley walls but were mapped with complex slopes where they includebenches or cirque mouths and ravines . Valley wall tracts in which the till or bedrock has faile dalso have complex slopes. Linear slopes are commonly 50 to 65%, but may be 30 to 70% . Comple xslopes, common on shoulders, cirque floors, and in passes, are 5 to 45% .Gullying has modified many strongly sloping valley walls. Seepage is common in the bottom of som egullies. Bedrock is occasionally exposed in gully floors as well . Snow avalanching rarely initiates o nBU, but tracts downslope from starting zones often contain avalanche tracks or runout zones .SOILSMost BU soils are moderately well to well drained Brunisolics or Podzolics (Table 53) . EluviatedDystric Brunisols are common in both parks . They have eluvial surface horizons (>2 cm Ae), thickB horizons (20-50 cm) in which 1 m . Lower sola are strongly to extremely acidic (pH

strongly developed B horizons (Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzols with >10 cm Bf) . OrtsteinHumo-Ferric Podzols have >10 cm of Bf, of which >3 cm have pedogeriic cementing . Many BUsoils have thin, dark upper Bhf horizons, but Orthic rerro-Humic Podzols (Bhf >10 cm) are rare .Soil distribution in BU is a function of these A and B horizons . Data in Table D4 are from an Orthi cHumo-Ferric Podzol from BU1 east of the Beaver River below the Prairie Hills which is typical o fprofiles developed on till from Horsethief Creek Group bedrock (Plate 11) .Soil development in BU is related to genetic materials and bedrock . Profiles are usually deeper an dmore strongly developed on coarse textured, predominantly quartzitic drift than on medium texture swith sheet silicate mineralogy . Pedogenic cementing is distinctive of many coarse textured profiles .In BU2 and BU4, a duric tendency is often present in lower B and BC horizons . Though sometimescontinuous, it is more often patchy . Continuous to patchy cementing of upper B horizons (OrtsteinHumo-Ferric Podzol) occurs in the coarsest BU soils, and is characteristic of BU2 and BU4 . TablesD5 and D6 illustrate two pedons with cementing in the upper and lower sola . The first is an OrtsteinHumo-Ferric Podzol sampled from BU2 at Rogers Pass (Plate 12) . The second is called an OrthicHumo-Ferric Podzol because the cementing in the Bf horizon is insufficient for the Ortstein sub -group. It was sampled from BU4 near the MRNP summit road .Lithic phase soils occur occasionally in BU but are sometimes difficult to identify because of lus hvegetation. Some turbic phases occur, usually related to uprooting of trees . Gleyed soils occur insmall areas associated with seepage .BU3 soils often have dark profiles with much of the color inherited from parent material of the LardeauGroup, making identification of horizons difficult .Knapik and Coen (1974) conducted a detailed soil survey in MRNP . A small portion of their stud yarea is BU4 near the Mount Revelstoke summit . Kowall (1980) reported soil information at a scal eof 1 :100,000 on the western portion of MRNP .VEGETATIONThe characteristic v .t.s of BU occur in a consistent pattern (Table 53) . Mostly, the mountain hemlock-subalpinefir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C47) v .t . (Plate 13) is interspersed with lesseramounts of Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/tall bilberry/liverwort (C21) . The Engelmannspruce-mountain hemlock/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C48) and mountain hemlock-Douglas fir-subalpinefir-Engelmann spruce/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C49) v .t .s are accessory on all four BUEcosites . BU1 occurs chiefly in eastern GNP and has a distinctive accessory v .t ., lodgepole pine/fals eazalea/grouseberry (C20) (Achuff and Dudynsky 1984) . BU3 and BU4 both have some areas ofEngelmann spruce-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (021) which may be related to the fir ehistory and regeneration . Avalanched areas have Avalanche complex 5 vegetation which includes sub -alpine fir-willow (S2), green alder/fern (S13), willow-mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/tall bilberr y(S14), and sedge (H21), plus intergrades .WILDLIFEIn BU overall, red-backed voles occur at high densities and provide a prey base for martens .BU1 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: BU1 is of low importance to moose year round and to mule deer and caribou in summer .Carnivores: BU1 is highly important to martens and of low importance to weasels .Small Mammals: Association 3 .The mature closed forests are highly important to snowshoe hares and of low importanc eto red squirrels and porcupines . Pikas occur in talus slopes .Breeding Birds: Community 8A moderate density of birds was recorded . BU1 is not highly important to any bird species.Burned tracts support BBC 21 .124

Table 54 .EcositeWildlife features of BU Ecosites . (w) =winter, (s) =summerOveral lrankUNGULATES CARNIVORES SMALL MAMMALS BIRDSImportantspeciesOveral lrankImportantspeciesOverallrankBU1 medium high marten highlynxBU2 low medium highBU3 medium caribou (s) high marten mediumBU4 medium mule deer medium lowImportantspeciesharered-b . voleheather volered squirrelred-b . volered squirrelred-b . volered-b . voleOveral lrankmediummediummediummediumBU2 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: BU2 is of low importance to ungulates . Open, rocky tracts are of low importance t omountain goats during the summer .Carnivores: BU2 is of medium importance to martens and low importance to weasels .Small Mammals: Association 2 .BU2 is of high importance to red squirrels, and of low importance to porcupines andsnowshoe hares . Pikas and hoary marmots occur on open talus slopes or boulder field swithin BU2, but are of low importance overall .Breeding Birds: Community 7A moderate density of birds was recorded . BU2 is not highly important to any bird species.BU3 Wildlife Feature sUngulates: Burned, avalanched or otherwise open tracts of BU3 are highly important summer caribourange .Carnivores: The mature, closed forests are highly important to martens and of medium importanc eto weasels, possibly due to the abundance of voles for prey .Small Mammals : Association 3 .The mature closed forests are highly important to red squirrels and red-backed voles .Breeding Birds: Community 8A moderate density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circularcensus plots, this Ecosite is highly important to Boreal Chickadee, Red-breasted Nuthatc hand Varied Thrush. Burned tracts support BBC 21 .BU4 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: BU4 is highly important to mule deer during summer and of medium importance to caribouin winter .Carnivores: BU4 is of medium importance to both martens and weasels, possibly due to the abundanceof red-backed voles .Small Mammals: Association 3 .Winter tracking indicate BU4 is of low importance to red squirrels although in other sea -sons densities of red squirrels appear high . It is of high importance to red-backed voles .Breeding Birds: Community 8A moderate density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circula rcensus plots, this Ecosite is highly important to Boreal Chickadee, Hermit Thrush andWhite-winged Crossbill . Burned tracts support BBC 21 .125

DISCUSSION AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONSThe BU Ecosite accounts for 13.7% of MRNP and GNP (BU1 5 .3%, BU2 3 .9%, BU3 1 .9%, BU42 .5%) . The Jade (JD) Ecosite is the Upper Subalpine counterpart of BU, while Cutbank (CT) oc -curs on till in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregion . Gently sloping areas of BU resemble th eLookout (LK) Ecosite, but soils on the latter are poorly drained .Irregular topography and slopes >30% limit use . Locally, use may be limited by stony surfaces an dcoarse textures (BU2, BU4), avalanching (all), cemented soils (BU2, BU4), and seasonal seepag e(BU3, BU4) . Removal of vegetation may increase erosion on steep slopes .CE - CHEOPS ECOSECTIONThe Cheops (CE) Ecosection occurs in the Lower Subalpine portion of Engelmann Spruce-SubalpineFir Ecoregion and includes fan and level landforms of non-to weakly calcareous fluvial material ,poorly to very poorly drained Gleysolic soils, and shrub thicket vegetation. Only one Ecosite (CE1 )is recognized (Table 55) . CE1 occurs along streams in valley and cirque floors and is usually close t oglaciers or icefields . Fig . 10 shows the topographic position of CE1 .Table 55. Definitive features of the Cheops (CE) Ecosection .Ecosite Bedrock Landform Soils VegetationCE1 Various Fluvial material A; fan, le- Rego Gleysol wet shrub thicket (S15 )velGEOMORPHOLOGYFluvial material A (non- to weakly calcareous, stratified) is the main constituent of CE1 landforms .Modification by snow avalanching (A) and channeling (Eroded modifier, C .S .S.C. 1978a) is common. High water tables and groundwater discharge account for its wetness .Topographically, CE1 has gentle linear slopes on fans and level plains . Slopes are 0 to 15%. A tractnear Woolsey Glacier in MRNP is mapped as CE1 + M because >50% is Recent Moraine (M) .SOILSImperfectly to poorly drained Rego Gleysols are typical of CE1 . Prolonged periods of saturation plu srecent deposition inhibit pedogenic development other than gleization . Thin peat and humus-rich lay -ers may be present both at the surface and buried within the profile, as in the sampled Rego Gleysol(Table D7, Plate 14) . These layers indicate episodic deposition. The organic material accumulates a tthe surface when deposition is inactive . Gleyed Cumulic Regosols occur as accessory soils on imperfectlydrained sites .VEGETATIONCE1 is dominated by the willow (S15) v .t. (Plate 15) . Variants of S15 also occur . Small ponded localitiessupport the cottongrass/moss (H10) (Achuff and Dudynsky 1984) v .t . CE1 at upper elevationsof the Lower Subalpine may have species more typical of the Upper Subalpine .126

Table 56 . Wildlife features of CE Ecosites . (w)=winter, (s)=summerUNGULATES CARNIVORES SMALL MAMMALS BIRD SEcosite Overall Important Overall Important Overall Important Overal lrank species rank species rank species rankCE1 low low bog lemming lowWILDLIFECE1 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: In the eastern half of GNP, CE1 with lush meadows is moderately important feedinghabitat for elk in summer ; elsewhere, CE1 is of low importance .Carnivores: No carnivore sign was recorded, partly due to drifting snow which quickly obscure swinter tracks, but also due to lack of cover . During winter, CE is completely and heavil ysnow-covered .Small Mammals: Associations 1 and 16 .Where H16 or H21 meadows occur, Association 16 occurs at medium densities and suchtracts are highly important to northern bog lemmings . Where alder predominates, Association1 occurs at high density .Breeding Birds: Community 12A low density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to Spotted Sandpiper and White-crowned Spar -row . CE1 is important to wintering White-tailed Ptarmigan .DISCUSSION AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONSCE1 occupies 0 .1% of MRNP and GNP . The Griffith (GF) Ecosite is the Interior Cedar-Hemlockequivalent of CE .Imperfect to very poor drainage due to high water tables and flooding severely limits most uses .Also, fluvial deposition occurs on some tracts . Major construction (e .g. roads) may change hydro -logic patterns .CM - CATAMOUNT ECOSECTIONThe Catamount (CM) Ecosection occurs in the Lower Subalpine portion of the Engelmann Spruce- -Subalpine Fir Ecoregion . CM includes fan and apron landforms of non- to weakly calcareous fluvia lmaterial, well to moderately well drained Brunisolic, Podzolic, and Regosolic soils, and both close dconiferous forest and shrub thicket vegetation. CM1 and CM2 occur on valley floors of tributar yvalleys. Figs. 8 and 10 show the topographic position of both Ecosites. The two CM Ecosites diffe rin both vegetation and soils (Table 57) .GEOMORPHOLOGYFluvial material A (non- to weakly calcareous, stratified) is the main constituent of CM landforms .Glaciofluvial material A (noncalcareous, coarse textured) is an accessory genetic material of CM2 .Slope continuity on both Ecosites is often subtly broken by stream channels (Eroded modifier ,C .S .S.C . 1978a) .CM2 is modified by frequent snow avalanches (A) . Avalanched material is distributed downslope togentler runout zones. Layers in fans and aprons are a poorly sorted, till-like diamicton, usuall yindicative of mudflow, which are thought to be important in fan and apron construction .127

Table 57 . Definitive f- Itures of Catamount (CM) Ecosites .Ecosite Bedrock Landform soils Vegetatio nCM1 Various Fluvial material A; fan, Eluviated Dystric Brunisol, Engelmann spruce-subal -apron Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol pine fir forest (C21 )CM2 Various Fluvial material A ; fan, Orthic Dystric & Sombric moist shrub thicket (S13 )apron Brunisols, Orthic Humo -Ferric Podzol, Cumulic Hu -mic RegosolTopographically, CM displays linear slopes on fans and aprons . Slopes are 0 to 45%, with gentle rslopes confined to apron and fan toes on valley floors and to the less prevalent level floodplains an dglaciofluvial terraces . Some tracts have complex slopes because they contain both fan-apron and leve lfluvial landforms .SOILSCM is characterized by well to moderately well drained soils, but has accessory imperfectly draine dsoils . Eluviated Dystric Brunisols and Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzols are typical of CM1 . These soilshave B horizon development that is moderate to strong and ranges from Bm and thin Bf (Brunisoli csoils) to podzolic Bf (Podzolic soils) . Well developed (>2 cm) Ae horizons are usually present . AccessoryOrthic Eutric Brunisols occur where calcium carbonate content results in lower sofa pH >5 .5 .Ortstein Humo-Ferric Podzols, with strongly cemented podzolic Bfc horizons, occur sporadically i nCM1 associated with Hamill Group bedrock (e .g. CM1A along Mitre Brook) .Orthic Dystric Brunisols, Orthic Sombric Brunisols, Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzols, and Cumulic Humi cRegosols are characteristic of CM2 . The upper sola in these soils reflect both humus incorporatio nand modification by fluvial accretion . This physical accretion thickens surface Ah horizons of Orthi cSombric Brunisols and Cumulic Humic Regosols . Orthic Dystric Brunisols occur where Ae horizondevelopment is masked by humus incorporation or inhibited by surface disturbance . B horizon developmentis moderate to strong and ranges from Bm to thin Bf (Brunisolic soils) to podzolic Bf (Podzolicsoils) . Accessory soils on CM2 include Cumulic Regosols, Gleyed Dystric Brunisols, and Orthi cFerro-Humic Podzols . Cumulic Regosols occur where erosion or deposition is frequent and intense .Gleyed Dystric Brunisols occur where water tables are high along the lower margins of fans an daprons and on floodplains . Orthic Ferro-Humic Podzols (Table D8, Plate 16) have podzolic Bhf horizonsand, without laboratory data, are difficult to distinguish from typical soils . Their developmen tin CM2 is probably related to mechanical humus incorporation . The pedon in Table D8 was sample din the Connaught Creek valley (GNP) .VEGETATIO NForest vegetation of CM1 separates it from CM2 which has shrub thicket vegetation . CM1 is characterizedby spruce-fir and hemlock forests, chiefly the Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/tall bilberry/liverwort (C21) v .t. The mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C47) v .t. is anaccessory .CM2 vegetation is indicative of frequent snow avalanche activity . Green alder/fern (S13) is most extensive. Other v.t.s of Avalanche complex 5, including subalpine fir-willow (S2), willow-mountainhemlock-subalpine fir/tall bilberry (S14), and sedge (H21), also occur occasionally . S2 and S14 occupysteep tract fringes where materials are shallow . H21 occurs as small patches associated with S1 3(Plate 17) . Intergrades and variants of these v .t.s also occur .128

Table 58 . Wildlife features of CM Ecosites . (w)=winter, (s) =summe rUNGULATES CARNIVORES SMALL MAMMALS BIRDSEcosite Overall Important Overall Important Overall Important Overal lrank species rank species rank species rankCM1 low high marten medium lowwolverineCM2 low medium medium marmot lowWILDLIFECM1 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: CM1 is of no more than low importance to any ungulate, being most important in th eeastern half of GNP where elk and mule deer use Lower Subalpine valleys in summer .Carnivores: CM1 is highly important to martens because of its prey base . It is highly important t owolverines for long-distance travel, due to its position along Lower Subalpine valley bot -toms .Small Mammals: Association 3 .These Lower Subalpine forests are highly important to red-backed voles and of mediu mimportance to snowshoe hares .Breeding Birds: Community 8A moderate density of birds was recorded . CM1 is highly important to Three-toed Wood -pecker. Burned tracts support BBC 21 .CM2 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: Herb meadows at the base of avalanche paths are of low importance to elk in summer i nthe Purcell Mountains .Carnivores: CM2 is of medium importance to weasels in winter, since the terrain is usually deepl ysnow covered . Wolverines use CM2 as a travel route .Small Mammals: Association 11A and 1 .Tracts where boulders have collected from the surrounding colluvial slopes are highly importantto hoary marmots . No traplines were set in this Ecosite but SMA 11A is expectedat high densities in avalanche complexes and SMA 1 in tracts where alder predominates o ntalus .Breeding Birds: Community 1 2A low density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to Chipping Sparrow . CM2 is also importantwinter habitat for White-tailed Ptarmigan .DISCUSSION AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATION SCM accounts for 0.5% of Mount Revelstoke and Glacier National Parks . CM1 accounts for 0 .1% andCM2 for 0 .4%. CM is the Lower Subalpine counterpart of the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Laurett a(LR) Ecosection. CM2 may resemble some HR5 tracts but the latter occur on steeper colluvia lslopes .Use may be limited where slopes are >30% . CM2 is frequently avalanched and some tracts are locallyaggrading . Locally occurring coarse textures and high water tables may present problems for sew -age disposal . The gravelly coarse textured material is suitable aggregate for construction except wherestony . Most tracts have streams that are suitable domestic water supplies . Exceptional floods andmudflows may occur, although soil development on CM1 indicates it is less likely to be disturbed tha nCM2 . Cemented soils in CM1 may limit some uses .129

CT - CUTBANK ECOSECTIO NThe CT Ecosection concept incorporates landforms composed of noncalcareous glacial materials (til land ice contact stratified drift), well to moderately well drained Brunisolic and Podzolic soils, and InteriorCedar-Hemlock coniferous closed forests. Six CT Ecosites have been differentiated (Table 59 )including one with a dry > wet landscape pattern (CT6) .Table 59 . Definitive features of Cutbank (CT) Ecosites .Ecosite Bedrock Landform Soil sVegetationCT1 Horsethief Ck . Till B; blanket & veneer Eluviated Dystric BrunisolGroup over inclined bedrock > Orthic Dystric BrunisolCT2 Hamill Group Till B & A; blanket & ve- Eluviated Dystric Brunisol ,neer over inclined bedrock Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol> Ortstein Humo-Ferri cPodzo lCT3 Lardeau Group Till B; blanket & veneer Eluviated Dystric Brunisol ,over inclined bedrock Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzo lCT4 Shuswap Metam . Till B & A ; blanket & ve- Eluviated Dystric Brunisol ,Complex neer over inclined bedrock Orthic Humo-Ferric PodzolCT5 Various Ice Contact Stratified Drift Eluviated Dystric Brunisol ,C; ridged, hummocky & Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzolblanket over inclined bed -roc kCT6 Various Ice Contact Stratified Drift Dry 70: Eluviated Dystri cC ; ridged & hummocky Brunisol, Orthic Humo -Ferric Podzo lWet 10: Rego Gleysol, Gley -ed Ferro-Humic Podzol ,Terric Fibrisolwestern hemlock-wester nred cedar forest (C50, C52 )western hemlock-wester nred cedar forest (C50, C52 )western hemlock-westernred cedar forest (C50, C52 )western hemlock-westernred cedar forest (C50, C52 )western hemlock-westernred cedar forest (C50, C52 )western hemlock-wester nred cedar forest (C50, C52 )wet spruce open fores t(011 )CT mainly occupies valley wall lower slopes and benchland . Distribution of CT1, 2, 3, and 4 correspondsclosely with distribution of the associated bedrock (Table 59, Fig . 2) . Two CT Ecosites areshown in a diagrammatic landscape in Fig . 11 .GEOMORPHOLOG YThe predominant genetic material in CT (Table 59) is Till B (noncalcareous, medium textured) .Coarser textured Till A is codominant in areas underlain by Hamill Group bedrock (CT2, GNP) o rShuswap Metamorphic Complex bedrock (CT4, MRNP) . Till B is a major component of the ic econtact stratified drift (ICSD) in CT5 and CT6 .The till occurs most frequently as blankets or veneers which mask inclined bedrock (CT1, 2, 3, 4) .Where the ice contact stratified drift (CT5, 6) is ridged or hummocky, bedrock seldom influence ssurface expression . Eolian material B (noncalcareous, medium textured) seldom forms discrete sur -face veneers, although a few were observed adjacent to the Columbia River (MRNP) . Where pre -sent, eolian material is normally mixed into upper sola . Fens occur in some poorly drained depressionsin CT6 .130

Fig. 11 . Landscape schematic of topographic relationships among CT and other Ecosites .Bol,BU1CT1CutbankCT5Stone ySN1GriffithGF1LourettaLR1Nordi cNC 1Slopes are predominantly linear on valley walls but, because of scale, tracts were occasionally mappe dwith complex slopes if benches were included . Valley wall tracts in which the till or bedrock hasfailed also have complex slopes . Linear slopes are most commonly 50 to 65% but may be 30 to 70% .Complex slopes, common on the benchland, are 5 to 45% .Gullying has modified many strongly sloping valley walls . Seepage is common in the bottom of som egullies. Bedrock is occasionally exposed in gully floors as well . Snow avalanching is rarely initiated i nCT landscape, but tracts downslope from starting areas often contain avalanche tracks or runou tzones .SOILSMost CT soils are moderately well to well drained Brunisolics or Podzolics (Table 59) . EluviatedDystric Brunisols are common in both parks . They have eluvial surface horizons (>2 cm Ae), thickB horizons (20-50 cm) in which 1 m. Lower sola are strongly to extremely acidic (pH 10 cm of Bf, of which >3 cm have pedogenic cementing . CTsoils occasionally have thin, dark upper Bhf horizons, but Orthic Ferro-Humic Podzols (Bhf >1 0cm) are rare. Soil distribution in the upland portions of CT is a function of these A and B horizons .Data in Table D10 represent an Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol from CT3 adjacent to Flat Creek and i stypical of CT profiles developed on till derived from Lardeau Group bedrock (Plate 19) . The darkhorizon colors were inherited from the parent material . Table D11 illustrates soils with Bhf horizons ,the pedon being one of the few with sufficient development to be an Orthic Ferro-Humic Podzol . I twas sampled from the CT4 tract near the MRNP summit road .131

Soil development in the well drained portions of CT is related to genetic materials and bedrock . Pro -files are usually deeper and more strongly developed on coarse textured, predominantly quartzitic drif tthan on medium textures with a sheet silicate mineralogy . Pedogenic cementing is distinctive of man ycoarse textured profiles . In CT2 and CT4, a duric tendency is often present in lower B and BC horizons. Though sometimes continuous, it is more often patchy . Continuous to patchy cementing ofupper B horizons (Ortstein Humo-Ferric Podzol) occurs in the coarsest CT soils, frequently enoug hto be characteristic in CT2 and an accessory in CT4 . Table D12 presents data on an Eluviated Dystri cBrunisol with cementing in the lower solum (Plate 20) . The pHs of the eolian veneer are above averagesuggesting that lime may have been received from the nearby Columbia River floodplain. Stratificationbelow the veneer is typical of ice contact stratified drift . The pedon was sampled on th eCT5 tract close to the gate on the MRNP summit road . The pedon in Table D11 also shows cementation.A variety of soils (Table 59) occurs in the imperfectly to very poorly drained portions of CT6 .Imperfectly drained margins have gleyed subgroups (Gleyed Dystric Brunisols, Gleyed Eluviated DystricBrunisols, Gleyed Humo-Ferric Podzols) of the surrounding well drained soils . Poorly draine dsoils with pedogenic development include Orthic Gleysols, Gleyed Ferro-Humic Podzols and OrthicHumic Podzols . Rego Gleysols occur where flowing water redistributes surface materials . Organi csoils (Terric Fibrisol, Terric Mesisol) occur where there is ponding .Lithic phase soils occur occasionally in CT but are sometimes difficult to identify because of lush vegetation. Some turbic phases occur, usually related to uprooting of trees . Gleyed soils occur in smal lareas associated with seepage .Kowall (1980) reported soil information at a map scale of 1 :100,000 on the western portion ofMRNP .VEGETATIONThe characteristic v .t.s on well drained portions of CT (Table 59) occur consistently on each Ecosite .Western hemlock-western red cedar/western yew/oak fern (C50) (Plate 21) and wester nhemlock-western red cedar -(Douglas fir)/mountain lover (C52) are most abundant .The lodgepole pine/false azalea/grouseberry (C20) v .t . (Achuff and Dudynsky 1984) is a distinctiv eaccessory of CT1 and of CT5 and CT6 in eastern GNP . Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/tall bilberry/liverwort(C21) is another notable v .t. on CT5 and CT6 in eastern GNP . The Douglasfir-western red cedar/mountain lover (C53) v .t . occurs as an accessory of CT4 (MRNP) . Seepage o nlower valley wall slopes is often reflected by the western red cedar-western hemlock/devil's club/oa kfern (C51) v .t .Poorly drained portions of CT6 are characterized by the spruce/Labrador tea/brown moss (011) v .t .Imperfectly drained margins or areas with fluvial activity may have closed forests like C51 . The ,watersedge-beaked sedge (H11) v .t . usually occurs with ponding .Snow avalanche areas have Avalanche complex 6 vegetation which includes green alder/fern (S13) andsedge (H21) plus variants .WILDLIFEThe forested slopes of CT are generally of high importance to both small mammals and their predators.All CT Ecosites are of high potential importance to lynx because of the high densities of snow -shoe hares. Porcupines also occur at low densities in all Ecosites . The mixed deciduous-coniferousforests which occur occasionally in CT sustain moderate to high densities o0 breeding birds .CT1 Wildlife Feature sUngulates: CT1 is used by a variety of species and is of medium importance overall, but it is of n omore than low importance to any species in any season .Carnivores: CT1 is of medium importance to weasels and of low importance to martens .Small Mammals: Association 10 .CT1 is of high importance to snowshoe hares, masked shrews, red-backed voles and deermice .132

Table 60. Wildlife features of CT Ecosites . (w) =winter, (s) =summerUNGULATES CARNIVORES SMALL MAMMALS BIRDSEcosite Overall Important Overall Important Overall Important Overal lrank species rank species rank species • rankCFI medium medium lynx high hare highmasked- shrewred-b . voledeer mouseCT2 medium high lynx high hare highmarten red-b . voledeer mouseCT3 low high lynx high hare highmarten red squirrelred-b . voledeer mouseCT4 medium caribou (w) high lynx high hare highmarten red-b . voledeer mouseCT5 high w .t . deer high lynx high hare highred squirrelred-b . voledeer mouseCT6 medium high lynx medium hare mediummarten red-b . voledeer mouseBreeding Birds: Community 24A high density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to Chestnut-backed Chickadee, Golden-crowne dKinglet and Townsend's Warbler .CT2 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: CT2 is used by a variety of species and is of medium importance overall . CT2 is of n omore than low importance to any species in any season .Carnivores: CT2 is of high importance to both martens and weasels .Small Mammals: Association 10 .CT2 is of high importance to snowshoe hares, red-backed voles and deer mice . Pikas areplentiful on tracts where scree slopes occur ,Breeding Birds: Community 24A high density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to Chestnut-backed Chickadee and Brow nCreeper .CT3 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: CT3 is of low importance although moose recently have been recorded in low densities inwinter in the Bostock Valley . Mule deer may be expected in the summer . Along BostockCreek, CT3 may have been formerly used as a caribou migration route . CT3 may be potentiallyimportant as winter range for caribou on the western edge of GNP .Carnivores: CT3 is of high importance to martens and weasels .Small Mammals: Association 10 .CT3 is of high importance to snowshoe hares, red squirrels, red-backed voles and dee rmice .Breeding Birds:CT3 was not sampled for breeding birds but, based on its similar vegetation and physica lfeatures, the birds appear to be similar to CT1 and CT2 .13 3

CT4 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: CT4 is of medium importance overall . I t is of high importance to caribou in winter o nMount Revelstoke and of medium importance to mule deer in summer .Carnivores: CT4 is of high importance to martens . The only recorded fisher track in MRNP durin gthe inventory was on a CT4 tract in March 1982 .Small Mammals: Association 10 .CT4 is of high importance to snowshoe hares, red-backed voles and deer mice .Breeding Birds: Communities 24 and 25A high density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to Brown Creeper . Burned tracts are expectedto support BBC 21 .CT5 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: CT5 is of high importance because of its regular, easily-traversed slopes and its positio nnear valley bottoms . It is of high importance to white-tailed deer during the summer an dof medium importance to mule deer in summer and to moose in winter .Carnivores: CT5 is used by a variety of species and is of high importance overall . It is moderatel yimportant to martens and of low importance to other carnivores .Small Mammals: Association 10 .CT5 is of high importance to snowshoe hares, red squirrels, deer mice and red-backe dvoles. The Beaver small mammal live-trap plot was on this Ecosite (see sec . 3 .11, Va nTighem and Gyug [1984]) .Breeding Birds: Communities 24 and 2 5A moderate density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circularcensus plots, this Ecosite is highly important to Pileated Woodpecker, also Norther nPygmy-Owl and Barred Owl have been recorded here .CT6 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: CT6 is of medium importance overall . It is of moderate importance to white-tailed deerin summer and of low importance to other ungulates . The wet, open forests (011 )showed more browsing by ungulates than the other v .t. in CT6 but still not as muchbrowsing as in the similar forests of the GF Ecosection .Carnivores: CT6 is of high importance to martens .Small Mammals: Associations 10 and 11B .CT6 closed forests are of high importance to snowshoe hares, deer mice and red-backedvoles and SMA 10 . The wet open forests are of high importance to northern bog lemmings(SMA 11B) .Breeding Birds: Communities 23 and 2 4A moderate density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circularcensus plots, this Ecosite is highly important to Golden-crowned Kinglet, Red-breaste dNuthatch and Townsend's Warbler .DISCUSSION AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONSThe CT Ecosection accounts for 12.8% of MRNP and GNP (CT1 2.9%, CT2 2 .8%, CT3 0.5%, CT43 .3%, CT5 3 .0%, CT6 0 .3%) . The Balu (BU) Ecosection is the Lower Subalpine counterpart of CT .Areas with glaciofluvial materials that resemble the Kuskanax (KX) Ecosection are mapped as CT 5and CT6 ; they are not separated because of their small areal extent . Wet areas with fluvial activit ythat resemble the Griffith (GF) Ecosite, but are too small to separate at a scale of 1 :50,000, are includedin CT6 .Irregular topography and slopes >30% limit use . Locally, use may be limited by wet depression sCT6), stony surfaces and coarse textures (CT2, CT4), gravelly coarse textures of ice contact depositsFCT5, CT6), avalanching (CT1 to CT5), cemented soils (CT2, CT4), and seasonal seepage (all) .Removal of vegetation may increase erosion on steep slopes .134

GF - GRIFFITH ECOSECTIO NThe Griffith (GF) Ecosection concept incorporates wetland soils and vegetation on fluvial landform sin the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregion . Various water-laid deposits may occur but the prevalen tfeature is wetness generated primarily by high water tables and surface water collection . Two GFEcosites (Table 61) were differentiated, primarily by vegetational features . They occur on valley bot -toms along the Beaver and Illecillewaet rivers, Mountain Creek, and at Rogers Pass (Plate 22) . MostGF terrain occurs where surface water drainage has been impeded by downstream and surroundin glandforms . Fig . 11 shows GF1 relative to several other Ecosites .Table 61 . Definitive features of Griffith (GF) Ecosites .Ecosite Bedrock Landform Soils Vegetatio nGF1 Various Fluvial material A; level > Orthic & Rego Gleysols, wet shrub thicket (S17) ,horizontal fen Terric Fibrisol sedge fen (Hll) > wester nhemlock-western red cedarforest (C51 )GF2 Various Fluvial material A ; level Orthic & Rego Gleysols, western hemlock-wester nGleyed Dystric Brunisol red cedar forest (C51) >wet shrub thicket (S17 )GEOMORPHOLOGYFluvial material A (non- to weakly calcareous, coarse-stratified) is the characteristic constituent o fGF landforms . Because of GF distribution in MRNP and GNP, all bedrock types except granitic intrusive(Fig. 2) contribute material to the fluvial sediment which is therefore predominantly noncalcareous.However, weakly calcareous localities reflect contributions from small limestone source are -as .Textural diversity of GF sediments reflects depositional environments . Textural changes may b eabrupt or gradual and occur vertically or laterally . Glaciofluvial material A (noncalcareous, coars etextured) may extensively underlie fluvial material on major floodplains but usually occurs below th econtrol section (i.e. >1 or 2 m from the ground surface) . Its texture, including abundant coars efragments, indicates deposition by high energy, unrestricted, stream flow . Exposures of gravell yglaciofluvial material are rare on current GF surfaces although it can be argued that the overlying ,finer textured, fluvial sediments are glaciofluvial because stream volume and sediment loads are con -trolled primarily by glacial melt . Textures within the fluvial sediment usually become finer (siltierwith fewer coarse fragments) upwards and reflect a change to low energy fluvial deposition as strea mflow became restricted . Upper mineral deposits on the broad floodplains tend to be silty with virtuallyno coarse fragments and resemble fluviolacustrine material (Walker et al. 1982a) . On or adjacentto fan and apron landforms and on sites near stream channels, silty deposits may be locally replace dby sandier layers, some with coarse fragments .Incorporation of humus in upper mineral layers indicates that organic layers developed as sedimentationdiminished . Where deposition has virtually ceased, peat layers mantle the mineral soil . Thicknessof peat in GF soils ranges from zero, where mineral accretion is still active, to >1 m . Maximumdepths were not ascertained . Horizonal fen landforms occur where the peat is >40 cm thic kand are the subdominant landform of GF1 and accessory in GF2 . The peat is predominantly fibric ,occasionally mesic, rarely humic (C .S.S .C . 1978a), and occasionally contains wood fragments . Localitieswith peat, although wet and often inundated, are protected from mineral deposition, likely b yentrapment of sediments in dense vegetation nearer the major stream channels . Fresh silty material

Landform surface expression for both GF Ecosites is predominantly level floodplain but often grade sto gently sloping fans and aprons near tract boundaries, particularly adjacent to Lauretta (LR) landscapes. Slopes commonly are 0 to 5% but may locally exceed 5% . Both simple and complex slopesoccur, the latter including some subtly terraced terrain or floodplain plus apron and fan . Slope continuityon GF2 is often subtly broken stream channels (Eroded modifier, C .S.S.C . 1978b), includingnarrow, slightly elevated ridges along the banks .SOILSGF is characterized by imperfectly to very poorly drained soils of the Brunisolic, Gleysolic, and Organicorders . GF1 is consistently wetter (poorly to very poorly drained) than GF2 (imperfectly t opoorly drained) but there is substantial overlap of soil taxa (Table 61) . The combination of wetnes sand mineral accretion has precluded pedogenic horizonation in the Rego Gleysols . They are usuall ystrongly gleyed and may have buried humus-rich layers indicative of intermittent deposition . Somecontain buried wood, likely alder (Alnus spp.) .The other mineral soils, Orthic Gleysols and Gleyed Dystric Brunisols, have escaped mineral deposit -ion long enough for B horizons, mainly Bm or Bg, to develop . Orthic Gleysols, the wetter of the tw osubgroups, are strongly gleyed within 50 cm of the mineral surface and are common in both GF Eco -sites . A sampled Orthic Gleysol (Table D14, Plate 23), from a GF2 tract at the BeaverRiver-Connaught Creek confluence, is strongly gleyed but has both a Bm and a Bg indicating that th eupper solum is periodically oxidized . It also contains a sequence of buried pedogenic horizons, demonstratingthat episodic deposition has occurred . The Cg horizons illustrate textural stratificatio ncommon to fluvial deposits. Gleyed Dystric Brunisols resemble this pedon but do not have Bg an dwell developed Ae horizons and are not as strongly gleyed in the upper 50 cm of mineral soil . Theseimperfectly drained soils are codominant in GF2, accessory in GF1, and occupy slightly elevated sites ,particularly sloping tract fringes .Thin organic layers may mantle any of the mineral soils . These may be forest litter (LFH horizons )where surface drainage is relatively good or fen peat (O horizons) under wetter conditions . Thic kpeat deposits have accumulated under fen vegetation in very poorly drained localities that have lon gbeen protected from sedimentation . Where the peat is >40 cm thick, the landform is horizonal fe nand the soils are Organic . The peat is predominantly fabric (Of horizons), giving Fibrisols, althoug hmesic material (moderately decomposed Om horizons) and Mesisols also occur occasionally . Humisols,with humic peat (Oh horizons), are likely rare, although a Terric Humisol was found on a small ,sloping, artificially drained fen at the base of an avalanched slope near Rogers Pass . Depths of fe npeat were not ascertained . Based on experience in the Rocky Mountains, it is estimated that moda lpeat depth is 5 cm cumulative depth of mineral layers in the middle and bottom tiers belong to Cumulo sub -groups (C.S.S.C . 1978a) . Thus, Cumulo Fibrisols also likely occur in GF .VEGETATIONGF1 and GF2 are characterized by similar v .t.s but they are arranged in different patterns (Tabl e61) . GF1 is wettest and characterized by wet shrub thicket and sedge fen interspersed with strips o fhemlock-cedar forest. The alder/skunk cabbage (S17) (Plate 25) and water sedge-beaked sedg e(H11) v.t .s are dominant and the proportion of each varies . Western red cedar-western hemlock/devil's club/oak fern (C51) is subdominant and occupies sloping tract margins, especially where fa nand apron landforms are included, and the narrow, slightly elevated ridges bordering stream channels .Balsam poplar/horsetail (C28), an accessory v .t . of GF1, often replaces C51 along stream banks .GF2 is drier than GF1 and is characterized by hemlock-cedar forest (C51) (Plate 26) intersperse dwith patches of wet shrub thicket (S17) . C28, in patches along stream banks, and Hll, in ponded localitiesare accessory v.t .s of GF2 .136

WILDLIFEGF is the most important to wildlife of all the Ecosections in MRNP and GNP . By far the highestnumber of wildlife species occurs here and many species are either confined to this Ecosection or oc -cur here at greater densities than elsewhere . Abundant moisture, a long snow-free season and a di -verse mosaic of productive vegetation types contribute to the value of GF1 and GF2 to wildlife . Thebulk of the parks ' wetlands and ponds occur here . Because of the complex patterns of ponds, fens ,wetlands, shrublands and forest comprising this Ecosection, many distinct wildlife habitats cannot beadequately mapped or defined at the mapping scale of 1 :50,000 map scale .The wet fens and ponds of GF are very highly important to amphibians and it is the only Ecosectionwhere all four species of amphibians have been found to breed in both MRNP and GNP .GFI Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: The fens, shrublands and meadows of GF1 are very highly important, being highly importantto moose all year round and moderately important to mule and white-tailed dee rin summer . GF1 is also highly important to the small numbers of elk that winter in th eBeaver Valley . The most important GF1 tracts are in the Beaver River and MountainCreek watersheds . Shrubs heavily browsed by moose here are red-osier dogwood (Cornusstolonifera), bracted honeysuckle (Lonicera involucrata) and willows (Salix spp .) .Carnivores: GF1 is of very high importance due to the high diversity and density of prey . The onlyrecent wolf records were from this Ecosite and it is also highly important to coyotes, weaselsand mink . It is moderately important to martens and lynx . Fish and muskrat populationsadequate to sustain populations of mink occur here but are rare elsewhere . Theonly record of an otter in either park is in GF1 .Small Mammals: Associations 11B and 17 .H11 fens of GF1 are highly important to meadow vole, a species of limited distribution inthese parks . GF1 wetlands are highly important to beavers and muskrats, and the shrublandsand open forests are highly important to deer mice and long-tailed voles .Breeding Birds: Communities 22 and 23A very high density of birds was recorded . The bulk of breeding and migrant waterfowl inboth parks rely on this Ecosite . Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to Canada Goose, Mallard, Green-winged Teal ,Barrow's Goldeneye, Belted Kingfisher, Barred Owl, American Kestrel, Alder Flycatcher ,American Redstart, American Robin, Black-headed Grosbeak, Blackpoll Warbler ,Brown-headed Cowbird, Cedar Waxwing, American Crow, Northern Flicker, Commo nSnipe, Common Yellowthroat, Lincoln's Sparrow, Northern Waterthrush, Red-winge dBlackbird, Rufous Hummingbird, Savannah Sparrow, Song Sparrow, Steller's Jay, Veery ,Violet-green Swallow, Western Wood Pewee, Willow Flycatcher and Yellow Warbler . Th eMixed Mountain Bottomland breeding bird census plot was in this Ecosite (sec . 3 .3, VanTighem and Gyug [1984]) .GF2 Wildlife Feature sUngulates: GF2 is very highly important to ungulates, being highly important to the small numbe rof elk that winter in the Beaver Valley, to moose all year round and to white-tailed deer insummer. Tracts in the western half of GNP and in MRNP are less important than tractsin the Beaver River and Mountain Creek watersheds . Shrubs showing heavy browsing bymoose are red-osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera), bracted honeysuckle (Lonicera involucrata)and willows (Salix spp .) .Carnivores: GF2 is of very high importance because of the high density and diversity of prey . It ishighly important to coyotes, martens, weasels and lynx and of medium importance t omink .Small Mammals: Association 11B .The ponds, fens and shrublands of GF2 are of high importance to beavers and muskrats .The forests are of high importance to porcupines . Shrublands and open forests are ofhigh importance to snowshoe hares, heather voles, red-backed voles and long-tailed voles .Breeding Birds: Communities 22 and 23A high density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circular137

Table62 . Wildlife features of GF Ecosites . (w)=winter, (s)=summerUNGULATES CARNIVORES SMALL MAMMALS BIRD SEcosite Overall Important Overall Important Overall Important Overal lrank species rank species rank species rankGF1 very high moose very high coyote high beaver very hig helk (w) weasel deer mous eminkmeadow volelong-t . voleGF2 very high moose very high coyote very high beaver very hig helk (w) weasel porcupinew .t . deer marten harelynx heather volered-b . volelong-t . volecensus plots, this Ecosite is highly important to Black-headed Grosbeak, Northern Flicker ,Common Snipe, Common Yellowthroat, Lincoln's Sparrow, Northern Waterthrush ,Olive-sided Flycatcher, Solitary Vireo, Steller's Jay, Vaux's Swift, Western Wood Pewee ,Western Tanager and Wilson's Warbler . With LR1, this is the most important Ecosite i nMRNP and GNP for Barred Owl .DISCUSSION AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATION SGF is not extensive, accounting for only 1 .3% of MRNP and GNP, but is important because of it stopographic position . GF1 and GF2 account for 0.6% and 0 .7%, respectively .GF is the Interior Cedar-Hemlock counterpart of the Lower Subalpine Cheops (CE) Ecosection . Thecompound Ecosite Cutbank 6 (CT6) is a dry > wet pattern on glacial landforms . The wetlands ,which are too small to map at 1 :50,000, occasionally resemble GF2 although spruce-fir open fores tand a diverse range of wet soils are more characteristic of the glacial materials . The Lauretta 1(LR1) Ecosite has parent material and vegetation similar to GF2 but is characterized by drier soil sand often occurs on steeper slopes . A catenary soil sequence marks the boundary between GF2 andLR1 which are often adjacent to one another .Imperfect to very poor drainage, due to high water tables and flooding, severely limits most uses .Also, fluvial deposition occurs on some tracts . Construction may change hydrologic patterns . Organicsoil in some tracts also limits use .GF wetlands are unique in the national parks system and contain the highest density and diversity o fwildlife of any Ecosection in MRNP and GNP . Pond systems are maintained by beavers . Destructionof beaver dams may significantly decrease the potential of this Ecosection for wildlife .GH - GLACIER HOUSE ECOSECTIONThe Glacier House (GH) Ecosection concept incorporates landslide deposits dominated by InteriorCedar-Hemlock vegetation . Only one GH Ecosite (GH1, Table 63) was recognized and only one trac twas mapped . It is a distinctive, prominent landscape on the valley floor where Asulkan Brook valle ymeets the Illecillewaet River valley . Another landslide deposit similar to GH, dissected by th eTrans-Canada Highway south of Cougar Mountain, is too small to delineate at 1 :50,000 . Other pre -dominantly colluvial landscapes affected by bedrock failure often contain small blocky and rubbly localitiesthat resemble GH1 .138

Table 63 . Definitive features of the Glacier House (GH) Ecosection .Ecosite Bedrock Landform soils VegetationGH1 Hamill Group Landslide material ; hum- Eluviated Dystric Brunisol, mountain hemlock forestmocky undefined soils, nonsoil (C47 )GEOMORPHOLOGYThe hummocky landslide deposit that forms GH1 likely originated after failure of Hamill Grou pquartzite on the slope of Glacier Crest . The textural properties reflect the massive bedrock and it scataclysmic failure . Noncalcareous, coarse textured, rubbly (about 70% coarse fragments) material ispredominant but blocky (coarse fragments >256 mm), fragmental localities are also common . Eolia nmaterial B (altered, medium textured) often mantles well vegetated, rubbly localities as a thin, dis -continuous veneer among the larger coarse fragments . The ground surface remains very to exceedinglystony (C .S.S .C . 1978b) . At some sites, the rubbly material appears till-like . It may have beenvalley wall till that descended with the landslide or ice-modified material if the landslide fell onto avalley glacier. There is no strong evidence either way and the landslide age is either late glacial orearly postglacial .The hummocky surface expression reflects the landslide genesis rather than bedrock control . Slopesare highly complex, of various length, and 15 to 30% . Short, gully-like features, often occurring i nblocky material, and small river-cut terraces with gentle slopes add to topographic complexity .SOIL SA variety of rapidly to well drained soils and nonsoil occur on GH1 (Table 63) . Rubbly areas, wit hsufficient fine earth material for soil formation, are dominated by Eluviated Dystric Brunisols or un -defined soils, depending on thickness of Eolian material B veneer . Eluviated Dystric Brunisols occurwhere the eolian veneer is sufficiently thick for B horizon development . They generally have well developedAe horizons and moderately to strongly developed Bm horizons . Thin Bf horizons may b epresent and related Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzols occur in minor amounts .Undefined soils (Table D15, Plate 27) occur where the eolian veneer is very thin or absent . This pedonis an extremely acid, strongly weathered, base-poor, silica-dominated, soil material of relativel yuniform light gray to white color . It could be mistaken for fresh parent material except for the ver ylow pH and weakly colored, silty cappings on the tops of coarse fragments . All characteristics impl ythat this profile is strongly leached . There is no category for such pedons in either the Canadia n(C .S .S .C . 1978a) or most other soil taxonomic systems because B horizons are not present within th e2 m control section .Blocky localities are dominated by nonsoil because they contain little if any fine earths for soil development.They are accumulations of fragmental, angular boulders and stones interspersed with larg evoids .VEGETATIONGH1 is characterized by western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) forest, best described as a mountainhemlock-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C47) v .t . variant in which western hemlock re -places mountain hemlock (Tsuga mertensiana) as the dominant or codominant of an atypically ope ncanopy (Plate 28) . This v .t . variant is virtually restricted to GH1 . The landslide position, in the up -per part of the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Ecoregion, in the shade of steep mountains to the south an dwest, and downstream from two large glaciers has resulted in vegetation that has affinities with boththe Interior Cedar-Hemlock and Lower Subalpine . Further, the stone and boulder strewn, hummock ylandscape of GH1 has inhibited the development of closed forest canopies . Blocky, fragmental localitiesare sparsely vegetated and irregularly distributed across the landscape, adding to the overall vegetationalcomplexity . A small portion along the eastern margin of the landslide has avalanche vegetation,mainly green alder/fern (S13) .139

Table 64 .Wildlife features of GH Ecosites. (w) =winter, (s) =summerUNGULATES CARNIVORES SMALL MAMMALS BIRD SEcosite Overall Important Overall Important Overall Important Overal lrank species rank species rank species rankGH1 low medium weasel medium red squirrel lo wdeer mouseWILDLIFEGH1 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: No ungulate use was recorded . Based on historical records GH1 may be potentially importantto caribou, particularly tracts with old-growth forests .Carnivores: GH1 is of high importance to weasels and low importance to martens .Small Mammals: Association 1 .GH1 is highly important to red squirrels . In blocky areas with sparse forest cover, GH1 isalso of high importance to pikas . Deer mice occur here in very high densities .Breeding Birds: Community 24A moderate density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circula rcensus plots, this Ecosite is highly important to Evening Grosbeak, Mountain Chickade eand Winter Wren .DISCUSSION AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATION SGH1 is of very low areal extent, accounting for

GEOMORPHOLOGYHE3 is geomorphically characterized by veneers of Residuum A (noncalcareous, medium to coarsetextured) overlying inclined and ridged bedrock . Medium textures are prevalent, particularly on th ehighly jointed, medium grained, recessive bedrock of the Horsethief Creek and Lardeau Groups (Fig .2) . HE3 on Hamill Group bedrock includes medium and coarse textured materials, the latte rweathered from medium to coarse grained strata . In a few localities, physically weathered residuu mor colluvium is rubbly and fragmental with little or no fine earth . Limestone and calcareous clasticsoccur locally in most bedrock areas, thus calcareous, medium textured residuum (c . Residuum B ,Walker et al. 1982a) is a minor constituent in a few HE tracts . Eolian material B (altered, mediu mtextured), which is important to soil formation, often forms a thin, discontinuous veneer over the residuumand is generally restricted to gentler slopes .Some, if not all, HE3 tracts were at least partially glaciated and contain till occurring locally or mixe dwith the residuum . Because of a wide variety of slopes and relief, many tracts include colluvium o nthe steepest slopes . It resembles the original residuum but has moved downslope by colluviation an dsolifluction . Sites affected by cryoturbation also occur sporadically . Exposed bedrock outcrops onridge crests and short steep escarpments add to the topographic complexity . In most tracts, exposedbedrock is minor but may constitute 20 to 50% of a few, steeper HE3 landscapes .All tracts have complex topography consisting of either ridged and sometimes hummocky slopes o rlong, straight slopes culminating in ridges . A few tracts have ridged bedrock oriented perpendicula rto the contour and on inclined slopes . Surface expression is bedrock controlled . Slopes generally are15 to 45%, but locally slopes 45% also occur .SOILSWell drained, moderately to well developed, lithic phase soils characterize HE3 . The soils althoug hbelonging to two taxa (Table 65) are related and have characteristics grouped around taxonomi cboundaries . B horizon development ranges from Bm and thin Bf or Bhf (Brunisolic soils) to podzoli cBf or Bhf (Podzolic soils), with Bf and Bhf horizons usually developed in Eolian material B veneer .Thus, Podzolics, such as the Orthic Ferro-Humic Podzol (Table D16, Plate 29) from HE3 in upperEast Grizzly Creek, occur where Eolian material B is thickest . This pedon has unusually thin residualveneer compared to most HE3 soils and, like many Alpine, Upper Subalpine, and avalanched soils ,the lower Ah horizon is difficult to distinguish from Bhf .A horizons of HE soils are usually humus rich (Ah), may be weakly eluviated (Ahe), and vary inthickness. Most of the codominant soils (Table 65) have thin Ah or Ahe horizons but Orthic SombricBrunisols have >10 cm of Ah . Podzolic soils occasionally have >10 cm of Ah . Sombric Humo-FerricPodzols are accessory soils, although Sombric Ferro-Humic Podzols also likely occur sporadically .Given the range of parent material depth and horizon characteristics, it is likely that Ah horizon sresting on bedrock (hthic Orthic Humic Regosol) may also occur sporadically . Nonsoil, occurring a sfragmental rubble, exposed bedrock, or where there is

Table 66 .Wildlife features of HE Ecosites . (w)=winter . (s)=summerUNGULATES CARNIVORES SMALL MAMMALS BIRDSEcosite Overall Important Overall Important Overall Important Overallrank species rank species rank species rankHE3 high goat (s) low low chipmun kWILDLIFEHE3 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: HE3 is of high importance overall to ungulates . It is of high importance to mountai ngoats, and medium importance to mountain caribou in summer . Tracts in the Purcel lMountains are used in summer by mule deer and elk .Carnivores: Martens and weasels occur at low densities in winter . At this season, prey is limited toWhite-tailed Ptarmigan and some snowshoe hares .Small Mammals: Association 13 .HE3 is of low importance . The snowshoe hare was recorded at low densities in winte rwhere forage on ridge tops is blown free of snow . Yellow-pine chipmunks occur on mostHE3 tracts . Pikas and hoary marmots occur near scree slopes and boulders .Breeding Birds: Community 1 7A low density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to Water Pipit and White-tailed Ptarmigan .DISCUSSION AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATION SThe HE Ecosection concept was developed in the BNP and JNP inventory (Walker et al . 1982d) andextended to KNP (Walker et al . 1984b) and MRNP and GNP to accommodate similar landscap e(0.3% of MRNP and GNP) . HE3, established for the Columbia Mountains, differs from HE1 of th eRocky Mountains in having more Podzolic and fewer Regosolic soils, as well as heath tundra instea dof avens tundra .No counterparts of HE occur in other Ecoregions . Jonas 2 (JN2) resembles HE3 but is characterize dby morainal material overlying bedrock and nonlithic soils .Shallow soil and occasional outcrops limit use . Vegetation will recover only slowly from disturbance .Removal of vegetation will increase erosion, especially by wind .HR - HERMIT ECOSECTIO NThe Hermit (HR) Ecosection concept incorporates colluvial landforms comprised of noncalcareou scolluvium and dominated by Lower Subalpine vegetation . Dystric Brunisols and Humo-Ferric Podzolsare the characteristic soils . Six HR Ecosites (Table 67) were differentiated. HR1, HR2, HR3 ,and HR4 have the same spruce-fir-hemlock vegetation but different bedrock groups with concomitan tsoils differences . In contrast, HR5 is dominated by vegetation indicative of frequent snow avalanchingand HR6 is characterized by very steep, rugged rocky terrain with lithic phase soils . All occu rhigh on valley walls, although HR5 often extends across valley floors. Figs. 10, 12 and 14 show topographicrelationships among several HR Ecosites and a few others .142

Table 67. Definitive features of Hermit (HR) Ecosites .Ecosite Bedrock Landtorm Soils VegetationHR1 Horsethief Ck . Colluvium B ; blanket & ve -Groupveer over inclined bedroc kHR2 Hamill Group Colluvium B & A ; blanke t& veneer over inclined bed -roc kHR3 Lardeau Group Colluvium B ; blanket & veneerover inclined bedrockHR4 Shuswap Metam . Colluvium B & A ; blanke tComplex & veneer over inclined bed -roc kHR5 Various Colluvium B & A ; blanke t& veneer over inclined bed -rock, apron ; avalanchedHR6 Various Colluvium B & A ; venee rover inclined bedrock +exposed bedrockEluviated Dystric Brunisol> Orthic Dystric Brunisol ,Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzo lEluviated Dystric Brunisol ,Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzo lEluviated Dystric Brunisol ,Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzo lEluviated Dystric Brunisol ,Orthic Humo-Ferric PodzolOrthic & Eluviated Dystri cBrunisols, Orthic Sombri cBrunisol, Orthic Humo -Ferric Podzo lLithic phases: Eluviated &Orthic Dystric Brunisols ,Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol ;+ nonsoilEngelmann spruce - subal -pine fir forest (C21) ,mountain hemlock fores t(C47 )Engelmann spruce-subalpinefir forest (C21) ,mountain hemlock fores t(C47 )Engelmann spruce - subal -pine fir forest (C21) ,mountain hemlock forest(C47 )Engelmann spruce - subal -pine fir forest (C21) ,mountain hemlock forest(C47 )Avalanche complex 5 >Engelmann spruce - subal -pine fir forest (C21) ,mountain hemlock fores t(C47 )Engelmann spruce-subalpinefir open forest (021 )GEOMORPHOLOG YHR is geomorphically characterized by colluvial landforms comprised of Colluvium B (non- to weakl ycalcareous, medium textured) and Colluvium A (noncalcareous, coarse textured) . Colluvium B ispredominant and characterizes HR1 and HR3 on Horsethief Creek and Lardeau Group bedrock type s(Fig. 2), respectively . Colluvium A is codominant in areas underlain by Hamill Group (HR2) an dShuswap Metamorphic Complex (HR4) bedrock . The former includes an area of granitic, intrusiv ebedrock . HR5 and HR6 on all bedrock types, contain mostly Colluvium B or an unpredictable combinationof Colluvial materials A and B . Limestone occurs locally in most bedrock areas, thus calcareous,medium textured colluvium (cf Colluvium C, Walker et al. 1982a) is a minor constituent in afew HR tracts . Consolidated bedrock usually underlies the colluvium but, at a few sites, weatheringof the bedrock surface has been sufficient to produce veneers of Residuum A (noncalcareous, mediu mto coarse textured) . These are more likely to occur in recessive, highly jointed, slaty to schistos estrata . Discrete veneers of Eolian material B (altered, medium textured) thinly mantling the colluvia lsurface are uncommon in HR . Intact eolian veneers occur only on the oldest, most stable sites underforest vegetation .The colluvium most often occurs as nearly continuous blankets and veneers mantling steeply incline dbedrock on valley walls . Discontinuous colluvial veneer plus exposed bedrock is the norm for HR 6but also characterizes the few HR5X tracts. The X modifier, meaning lithic soils are dominant, i salso occasionally applied to polygons of the other HR Ecosites, except HR6 where lithic soils are th enorm . The deepest deposits are colluvial aprons, which occur only in HR5 where they have been constructedby avalanching and rockfall below very steep, often rocky slopes . Couloirs cut into the143

Fig. 12 . Landscape schematic of topographic relationships among HR and other Ecosites .source slopes channel meltwater streams and mudflows onto the aprons . Thus, the apron landform sare often a mixture of intercalated colluvial, fluvial and mudflow deposits .HR slopes are usually long, straight, and 55 to >100%, although there are some slopes as low as 45% .HR6 typically has the steepest (rarely 50%) HR5 .However,

wash and soil creep . A few tracts are complexes of an HR Ecosite + T (Talus) or CR (colluvia lrubble) (e.g. HR4F+T) because of unusually high proportions of unvegetated localities . These include(50-80% for HR5 and HR6+T or CR ; 20-80% for HR4+T) active sites, massive bedrock cliff sand blocky talus with little or no fine earth material .SOILSWell to rapidly drained Dystric Brunisols and Humo-Ferric Podzols characterize the soil componentof HR . Soils, even though classed in different taxa (Table 67), are similar and have characteristic sgrouped around taxonomic boundaries . B horizon development is moderate to strong and ranges fromBm and Bf (Brunisolic soils) to podzolic Bf (Podzolic soils), even under avalanche vegetation . Twolithic Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol pedons, one (Table D18) from HR4 near Jade Lakes and the othe r(Table D19, Plate 31) from HR6 below Balu Pass, have dark reddish brown B horizons and typifwell developed Podzolic soils of HR . A third pedon, an Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol (Table D1 7from HR3AB on the south slope of Mount Fidelity, has dark brown B horizons although the color sreflect, in part, the black parent material derived from Lardeau Group slate . It also appears to haveinherently high organic carbon and pyrophosphate-extractable Fe and Al contents . Thus, the degreeof pedogenic development, implied by the Podzolic classification, is in doubt . Dystric Brunisols aredefined as having brownish or yellower B horizons; distinguishing Podzolics from Brunisolics on fieldcharacteristics alone is often difficult .Whether Brunisolic or Podzolic, the soils have a similar range of A horizon characteristics that reflectvarious geomorphic-vegetational environments . Acidic Brunisols are classified according to kind andthickness of A horizon . Eluviated Dystric Brunisols have >2 cm of Ae horizon and are dominant orcodominant in all HR Ecosites . Most forested soils have well developed Ae horizons (Tables D18 an dD19) . Orthic Dystric Brunisols and some Podzols can have little or no A horizon, A mixed with B(AB or A +B horizons), or thin (10 cm thick . Orthic Sombric Brunisols ar ecodominant in HR5 where closely related Sombric Humo-Ferric Podzols occur occasionally .Two Podzolic subgroups, other than the characteristic Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzols, occur occasionallyin HR and without laboratory data are often difficult to distinguish from typical soils. Sombri cHumo-Ferric Podzols with >10 cm of Ah horizon, are accessory soils of HR5; Orthic Ferro-Humi cPodzols, with podzolic Bhf horizons, are accessory soils of HR5 and HR6 . These soils likely also oc -cur occasionally in the other HR Ecosites . In HR5, their development is probably related to mechanicalincorporation of humus into surface horizons . Under such conditions, Sombric Ferro-Humi cPodzols, with podzolic Bhf and thick Ah horizons, may also occur . Where very shallow soils are th enorm, as in HR6, illuvial humus appears to accumulate above the bedrock contact as in Table D19 .In strong contrast to the comparatively stable Brunisolic and Podzolic soils, Regosolic soils occur a tsites that are or have recently been subjected to intense geomorphic activity so that B horizon developmenthas been inhibited. They are most abundant in avalanched terrain (accessory soils of HR5 )although they likely occur in minor amounts in other HR Ecosites . Cumulic and Cumulic HumicRegosols are most common and occur in depositional localities . Their variable organic matter conten tand color is related to mechanical incorporation of humus into surface horizons . The morphologicallymore uniform Orthic Regosols occur sporadically, particularly in erosional sites on HR5 and HR6 .The variety of Brunisolic, Podzolic, and Regosolic soils on HR5 demonstrates the diverse and comple xinteractions of geomorphic activity and pedogenic weathering on avalanched terrain, among the mos tcomplex landscapes in MRNP and GNP .Lithic phase soils are common as accessory soils in any HR Ecosite, but are characteristic and distinctiveof HR6 . Nonsoil areas are also extensive (up to 80%) on these very steep, rugged, craggy landscapes,occurring as exposed bedrock or where there is 1 m of overburden) occur inminor amounts on craggy terrain . Tracts of HR5X often have a similar lithic soil plus nonsoil pattern. In contrast, HR2X, HR3X, and HR4X tracts are dominated by lithic soils and usually hav eonly minor amounts of nonsoil .145

VEGETATIO NThe well forested HR Ecosites (HR1, HR2, HR3, HR4) have similar vegetation (Table 67) characterizedby spruce-fir and hemlock forests, mainly the Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/tall bilberry/liverwort(C21) (Plate 32) and mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C47) v .t.s .Although the two v .t.s are similar, there is a gradient with C21 most abundant in the east (HR1 i nthe Purcells) and C47 most abundant in the west (HR4 in MRNP) . Two similar v.t .s, mountai nhemlock-Douglas fir-subalpine fir-Engelmann spruce/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C49) occurring a tlow elevations within the Lower Subalpine, and Engelmann spruce-mountain hemlock/rhododendron-tallbilberry (C48), are accessory v .t .s in these four Ecosites . At a few sites, the forest canopyis more open than normal and the vegetation resembles the Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tallbilberry (021) v .t .021 characterizes HR6 (Plate 33) . Unvegetated bedrock and very active sites occupy

Table 68 .Wildlife features of HR Ecosites . (w)=winter, (s)=summerUNGULATES CARNIVORES SMALL MAMMALS BIRDSEcosite Overall Important Overall Important Overall Important Overal lrank species rank species rank species rankHR1 low low medium red-b . vole lowHR2 low low medium red-b . vole lowHR3 low medium marten low red-b . vole lowHR4 low low low red-b . vole lowHRS high goat medium high pika mediummarmotlong-t . voleHR6 high goat (w) low medium pika mediumHR2 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: HR2 is of medium importance to goats in winter, due to its steep terrain, combined wit hsheltering forest and forage .Carnivores: HR2 is of low importance to martens and lynx . Wolverines are recorded here .Small Mammals: Association 3 .HR2 is of high importance to red-backed voles and of medium importance to red squirrels.Breeding Birds: Community 8A moderate density of birds was recorded . Burned tracts support BBC 21 . Based ondensity indices derived from circular census plots, this Ecosite is highly important to Win -ter Wren .HR3 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates : HR3 is of low importance as summer range for goats .Carnivores: HR3 is of high importance to martens but of only moderate importance to carnivore soverall .Small Mammals: Association 3 .HR3 is of low importance to small mammals overall but of high importance to red-backe dvoles .Breeding Birds:HR3 was not sampled for breeding birds, but based on similar vegetation and physica lcharacteristics, it appears similar to HR2 .HR4 Wildlife Feature sUngulates: HR4 is of low importance to mountain caribou in winter and to goats in summer .Carnivores: HR4 is of low importance .Small Mammals: Association 3 .HR4 is highly important to red-backed voles but of low importance to small mammal sotherwise .Breeding Birds :HR4 was not sampled for breeding birds, but based on similar vegetation and physica lcharacteristics, the birds appear similar to those of HR2 .HR5 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: The cliffs and rock faces typical of HR5X tracts, are of high importance as goat rang ethroughout the year .Carnivores: HR5 is of medium importance overall . It is of medium importance to martens and o flow importance to weasels, wolverines and lynx .147

Small Mammals: Association 11A .HR5 supports a high density of mice and voles because of its habitat diversity . I t is highlyimportant to long-tailed voles and, where open meadows abut talus slopes andboulder-fields, to pikas and hoary marmots .Breeding Birds: Communities 12 and 8A low density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to Golden-crowned Sparrow and Wilson's Warbler. It is also important winter White-tailed Ptarmigan habitat and potentially importan tfor foraging Golden Eagles .HR6 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates : HR6 is very highly important as winter range for goats and of medium importance a ssummer range .Carnivores: HR6 is of medium importance to weasels but of low importance to carnivores overall .Small Mammals: Association 11A .HR6 is of medium importance to small mammals, supporting a diversity of species . It ishighly important to pikas, due to its combination of rocky terrain and herbaceous vegetation.Breeding Birds: Communities 12 and 8A high density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to Chipping Sparrow, Dusky Flycatcher ,MacGillivray 's Warbler, Olive-sided Flycatcher, Pine Grosbeak, Pine Siskin, Red Crossbill,Rufous Hummingbird and Yellow-rumped Warbler . Most of these species are con -fined to snow avalanched tracts . Burned tracts support BBC 8 .DISCUSSION AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATION SHR is an extensive Ecosection, accounting for 16.4% of MRNP and GNP . Each of the six Ecosite sare fairly extensive with HR1 accounting for 2 .9%, HR2 2 .3%, HR3 1 .1%, HR4 1 .4%, HR5 6 .0%, andHR6 2 .7%. HR is the Lower Subalpine counterpart of the Interior Cedar-Hemlock Nordic (NC) ,Upper Subalpine Asulkan (AK), and Alpine Redoubt (RD) Ecosections . Few other Lower Subalpinelandscapes resemble HR . An exception is Catamount 2 (CM2) which resembles parts of some HR 5tracts . CM2 occurs on more gently sloping fluvial fans and aprons on or adjacent to valley floors ,often below HR .Steepness and colluviation are major limitations . The Ecosites from most to least active are : HR 5(avalanched), HR6 (craggy), and the others (forested) . Removal of vegetation may increase erosion .Locally, coarse textures, stony surfaces and shallow soils limit use .The open cliffs of HR6 are highly important to mountain goats . Goats may abandon critical range sor sustain mortality where they occupy avalanche control zones . Avalanched HR tracts are importantgrizzly bear habitats; recreational developments on such sites will lead to bear/human conflicts .JD - JADE ECOSECTIONThe Jade (JD) Ecosection concept incorporates landforms composed of noncalcareous till, well tomoderately well drained Brunisolic and Podzolic soils, and Upper Subalpine coniferous open forest ,heath tundra, and herb meadow vegetation . Four JD Ecosites have been differentiated (Table 69) .JD usually occupies mountain shoulders and high cirque floors and less frequently, valley wall uppe rslopes . Distribution of each Ecosite corresponds closely with bedrock type distribution (Table 69 ,Figs. 2, 10, 12 and 13) .GEOMORPHOLOG YThe predominant genetic material in JD (Table 69) is Till B (noncalcareous, medium textured) .Coarser textured Till A is codominant in areas underlain by Hamill Group bedrock (JD2, GNP) o rShuswap Metamorphic Complex bedrock (JD4, MRNP) .148

Table 69 . Definitive features of Jade (JD) Ecosites .Ecosite Bedrock Landform Soils VegetationJDI Horsethief Ck . Till B ; blanket & venee rGroup over inclined & ridged bed -roc kJD2 Hamill Group Till B & A; veneer over inclined& ridged bedrockJD3 Lardeau Group Till B; blanket & venee rover inclined & ridged bed -roc kJD4 Shuswap Metam . Till B & A ; blanket & ve -Complexneer over inclined & ridge dbedrockOrthic & Eluviated Dystri cBrunisols, Orthic Humo -Ferric PodzolLithic phases: Orthic &Eluviated Dystric Brunisols ,Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzo lOrthic & Eluviated Dystri cBrunisols, Orthic Humo -Ferric PodzolOrthic Sombric Brunisol ,Orthic & Sombric Humo -Ferric Podzolssubalpine fir-mountainhemlock open forest (020 )+ heath tundra (L5 )subalpine fir-mountainhemlock open forest (020 )+ heath tundra (L5 )subalpine fir-mountainhemlock open forest (020 )+ heath tundra (L5 )subalpine fir-mountainhemlock open forest (020 )+ heath tundra (L5), herbmeadow (H16 )The till is most frequently blankets or veneers which subtly mask inclined or ridged bedrock . Bedrockcrops out occasionally and does so most consistently in JD2, in which morainal veneers are the rule .Eolian material B (altered, medium textured) veneers sporadically mantle JD .Slopes are complex on the cirque floor and mountain shoulder positions and linear on valley walls .Slopes are commonly 30 to 45%, and range from 5 to 70% .Solifluction often modifies strong slopes especially under meadow or tundra vegetation . Some cryoturbationoccurs in meadows and tundra, regardless of slope, mainly near the Alpine boundary . Bothprocesses are best expressed where textures are medium . Snow avalanche runout zones occur nea rsteep cirque walls, a situation common where resistant bedrock predominates .SOILSMost JD soils are moderately well to well drained Brunisols or Podzols (Table 69) . Orthic Dystri cBrunisols are common throughout GNP but are only an accessory feature in MRNP . They usuall yhave restricted A horizons (10 cm Bf j, or both (Sombric Humo-Ferric Podzol with >10 cm Ah and>10 cm Bf) . Many JD soils have thin, dark upper Bhf horizons . Orthic Ferro-Humic Podzols (Bhf>10 cm) are accessory soils in JD4 (MRNP) .Soil distribution in JD is a function of these A and B horizons and several trends exist . Under forest ,soils may lack A horizons or have a thin Ah, but tend to develop thick Ae horizons (Orthic DystricBrunisols, Eluviated Dystric Brunisols, Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzols) . Moderately developed Ah horizons(2-10 cm) are the rule under tundra (Orthic Dystric Brunisols, Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzols) .Accessory turbic phase soils are usually among these . A wide range of Ah thicknesses occur unde rmeadow vegetation (Orthic Sombric Brunisol, Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol, Sombric Humo-FerricPodzol, occasionally Orthic Dystric Brunisol) .Soil development is also related to genetic materials and bedrock . Other factors being equal, sofa ar eusually deeper and more strongly developed on coarse textured, predominantly quartzitic drift than o nmedium textures with sheet silicate mineralogy . Pedogenic cementing is distinctive of some coarse rtextured profiles. In JD2 and JD4, a duric tendency is occasionally continuous in lower B and B C149

horizons but is more often patchy . Continuous to patchy cementing of upper B horizons (Ortstei nHumo-Ferric Podzol) occurs in the coarsest soils and is an accessory in JD2 . Both types of cementingoccur more under forest than under meadow or tundra vegetation and in deeper rather than lithi csoils . Table D22 presents data on a Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol with cementing from JD4 (Plate 35) .Lithic phase soils may occur in any JD tract, but are common in JD2 . Some JD2 tracts are 20 to50% nonsoil (bedrock outcrop and veneers

Table 70 . Wildlife features of JD Ecosites . (w)=winter, (s)=summerUNGULATES CARNIVORES SMALL MAMMALS BIRD SEcosite Overall Important Overall Important Overall Important Overal lrank species rank species rank species rankJD1 high caribou (s) medium medium Columbian gr . mediummule deersquirrelelk (s)JD2 low medium high Columbian gr . mediumsquirrelporcupin emarmotJD3 high caribou medium medium Columbian gr . mediumsquirrelJD4 high caribou medium medium Columbian gr . mediumsquirrelmarmotJD2 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: JD2 is of low importance to ungulates overall . It is of low importance to goats yearround. It is potentially important to mountain caribou since it is similar to their habitatoutside the parks, but caribou densities are too low to assess its present importance .Carnivores: JD2 is of medium importance overall, since it is used by most species, but it is only o flow importance to any single species .Small Mammals: Association 12 .This diverse Ecosite is of high importance to porcupines, hoary marmots and Columbia nground squirrels and of medium importance to pikas .Breeding Birds : Community 7A low density of birds was recorded .JD3 Wildlife Feature sUngulates: JD3 is of high importance to caribou in winter and summer, and of medium importanc eto mountain goats in summer .Carnivores: JD3 is of medium importance to carnivores, particularly to martens .Small Mammals: Associations 12 and 16 .JD3 meadows are of high importance to Columbian ground squirrels and the open forest sare of medium importance to porcupines . Wet meadows surrounding small lakes are o fhigh importance to northern bog lemmings and Richardson's water voles .Breeding Birds: Communities 7 and 1 7A high density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to Fox Sparrow, Gray Jay and Pine Siskin .JD4 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: JD4 is of high importance to caribou in both winter and summer and of low importanc eto mule deer and goats in summer .Carnivores : JD4 is of medium importance to martens and weasels .Small Mammals: Associations 12 and 16 .JD4 meadows are of high importance to Columbian ground squirrels and the open forest sare of high importance to porcupines . Wet meadows near lakes and streams are highlyimportant to SMA16 . The Mount Revelstoke small mammal live-trap plot was in this Eco -site (see sec . 3 .11, Van Tighem and Gyug [1984]) .Breeding Birds: Communities 7 and 1 7A moderate density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circula rcensus plots, this Ecosite is highly important to Dark-eyed Junco, Fox Sparrow, Gray Ja y15 1

and Hermit Thrush . The abundance of prey and open vegetation make this an importan thabitat for Golden Eagles and Red-tailed Hawks, and for Northern Hawk-Owls whic hhave been observed frequently and may breed here . A breeding bird census plot was i nthis Ecosite (see sec . 3 .3, Van Tighem and Gyug [1984]) .DISCUSSION AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATION SThe JD Ecosection accounts for 6 .1% of MRNP and GNP (JD1 2.4%, JD2 2 .0%, JD3 0.7%, JD41.0%) . The Balu (BU) Ecosection is the Lower Subalpine counterpart while Jonas (JN) occurs o ntill in the Alpine . JD2 and JD3 were locally extended into the normal range of Alpine because no J NEcosites were established for tills derived from Hamill or Lardeau Group bedrock in the Alpine .Areas of JD with meadow vegetation resemble Witch Tower (WR), but soils are poorly drained o nthe latter .Irregular topography and slopes >30% limit use. Locally, use may be limited by stony surfaces an dcoarse textures (JD2, JD4), snow avalanching (all), shallow soils and outcrops (JD2), cemented soil s(JD2, JD4), and seasonal seepage (all) . Removal of vegetation may increase erosion on steep slopes .Revegetation following disturbance may be slow .JD is highly important to caribou in MRNP . Disturbance in winter and early spring by humans o raircraft may result in stress or abandonment of ranges . Disturbance of Columbian ground squirre land hoary marmot colonies may harm an important prey for eagles, or other raptors and carnivores .JN -JONAS ECOSECTIONThe Jonas (JN) Ecosite concept incorporates Alpine tundra vegetation, morainal landforms compose dof noncalcareous, medium textured till (Till B), and well to moderately well drained, acidic, Brunisolicand Podzolic soils . Only one JN Ecosite (JN2, Table 71) was recognized . It occupies broa dmountain tops and high cirque floors among the subdued topography of the Purcell Mountains i neastern GNP . Fig . 13 shows JN2 in a diagrammatic landscape setting in the Purcell Mountains .Fig . 13. Landscape schematic of topographic relationships among JD1, JN1 and other Ecosites .152

GEOMORPHOLOG YThe predominant genetic material in JN2 is Till B (noncalcareous, medium textured) derived fro mHorsethief Creek strata . Thin, Eolian material B (altered, medium textured) veneers over till are importantto soil formation. Consolidated, recessive bedrock usually underlies the till but, at severa lsites, bedrock weathering has produced veneers of Residuum A (noncalcareous, medium to coarse textured).The till occurs most frequently as either blankets or veneers which subtly mask inclined and ridgedbedrock . Small bedrock outcrops occur sporadically and are most abundant on JN2X below Copper -stain Mountain where morainal veneer is dominant .All tracts have complex topography consisting of either ridged and sometimes hummocky slopes o rridged apexes flanked by long, straight, gentle slopes . Surface expression is bedrock controlled evenin JN2F below Dawn Mountain where bedrock failure has produced an irregular, hummocky topography,including steep slopes mantled with colluvium . Slopes are 5 to 45%, with 5 to 30% most commonand slopes 45% occurring locally . Solifluction and, less often, cryoturbation occasionallymodify steep slopes to produce turbic soil phases .SOILSWell to moderately well drained, moderately to well developed soils characterize JN2 . The soil taxa(Table 71) are related and have characteristics grouped around taxonomic boundaries . B horizon developmentranges from Bm and thin Bf or Bhf (Brunisolic soils) to podzolic Bf or Bhf (Podzoli csoils), with Bf and Bhf horizons usually developed in Eolian material B veneer . Thus, Podzolics ,such as the Orthic Ferro-Humic Podzol pedon (Table D23, Plate 40) from JN2 in upper East GrizzlyCreek, occur where Eolian material B is thickest . The upper three mineral horizons in this pedon ar edeveloped in a mixture of till and eolian material. As in many Alpine, Upper Subalpine, and avalanchedsoils, the upper Bhf horizon is difficult to distinguish from Ah .Table 71 . Definitive features of the Jonas (JN) Ecosection .Ecosite Bedrock Landform Soils Vegetatio nJN2 Horsethief Ck . Till B; blanket & veneer Orthic Dystric & Sombric heath tundra (L5), her bGroup over inclined & ridged bed- Brunisols, Orthic Humo- tundra (H1S )rock Ferric & Ferro-Humic Pod -zol sA horizons of JN soils are usually humus rich (Ah), may be weakly eluviated (Ahe), and vary inthickness . Most of the codominant soils (Table 71) have thin Ah or Ahe horizons but Orthic SombricBrunisols have >10 cm of Ah . Podzolic soils occasionally have >10 cm of Ah . Sombric Humo-FerricPodzols are accessory soils, although Sombric Ferro-Humic Podzols also likely occur sporadically .Soils with strongly eluviated A horizons (e .g. Eluviated Dystric Brunisols) occur infrequently .Lithic phases are common as accessory soils in JN2 but characterize JN2X below Copperstain Mountain.This tract also contains more than the usual low proportion of nonsoil, which occurs on ex -posed bedrock and

VEGETATIO NJN2 is characterized by a mosaic of tundra v .t.s, mainly heather-everlasting (L5) and everlasting-whitemountain heather-red heather (H18) . H18 (Plate 41) is more extensive than L5 . Black al -pine sedge-everlasting (H2) is an accessory v .t . that occurs frequently but not extensively . It occur sin late lying snow beds and seepy depressions . Fleabane-valerian (H16) occurs in minor amounts ,usually bordering Upper Subalpine wetland of the Witch Tower 1 (WR1) Ecosite .JN2 on Bald Mountain extends to an unusually low elevation of about 2200 m. This is likely due towind exposure on the broad, smooth, gently sloping, mountain top . Small patches and strips ofkrummholz, usually subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa) or Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmannii), arescattered around ridge crests on the Bald Mountain JN2 tracts, but account for 30% limit use . Removal of vegetation may increase erosion o nsteep slopes . Revegetation following disturbance may be slow . Locally, use may be limited by solifluction,shallow soils, and seepage .Large populations of Columbian ground squirrels in JN form an important prey for both breedin gand migrating raptors in GNP and disturbance should be minimized .Table 72. Wildlife features of JN Ecosites. (w)=winter, (s) =summerUNGULATES CARNIVORES SMALL MAMMALS BIRDSEcosite Overall Important Overall Important Overall Important Overallrank species rank species rank species rankJN2 medium caribou (s) low medium Columbian gr . mediumsquirrel154

KX - KUSKANAX ECOSECTIONThe Kuskanax (KX) Ecosection concept incorporates Interior Cedar-Hemlock forest vegetation occurringon terraced landforms composed of Glaciofluvial material A (noncalcareous, coarse textured) .Dystric Brunisols and Humo-Ferric Podzols are the characteristic soils . Only KX1 (Table 73) wa srecognized and only three tracts were mapped. All three are on the floors of major valleys : along theBeaver River upstream of the Beaver Pit and at the mouth of Flat Creek in GNP, and along theTrans-Canada Highway near the West Gate in MRNP . Fig . 14 shows topographic relationship samong KX1 and some other landscapes .Table 73 . Definitive features of the Kuskanax (KX) Ecosection .Ecosite Bedrock Landform Soils VegetationKX1 Various Glaciofluvial material B ; Eluviated Dystric Brunisol, western hemlock-wester nterraced Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol red cedar forest (C50, C52 )GEOMORPHOLOGYKX1 is geomorphically characterized by roglacial, terraced landforms composed of glaciofluvial materialA (noncalcareous, coarse textured) . A thin, discontinuous, surficial veneer of Eolian materialB (altered, medium textured) is occasionally present, particularly on the oldest and highest terrac elevels. The terraces are well developed with steep, prominent (5 to 50 m relief) risers adjacent t ocontemporary floodplains and between terrace levels. Slopes are 0 to 15% but terrace treads, usuall ywith slopes 2 cm) Ae horizons ar eusually present and are thickest and best developed in the absence of Eolian material B veneers .The sampled Eluviated Dystric Brunisol (Table D24, Plate 42), from KX1 adjacent to Beaver Pit, exemplifiesweakly developed KX1 soils . It illustrates a common taxonomic problem in similar soils ofthe Canadian Cordillera . The organic carbon and pyrophosphate-extractable Fe values of the upper Bhorizon meet the chemical criteria of a Bh horizon (C .S .S .C . 1978a) . However, the color value andchroma are too high for Bh and the horizon was labelled Bm .VEGETATIONKX1 is characterized by western hemlock-western red cedar forest with western hemlock-western re dcedar/western yew/oak fern (C50) and western hemlock-western red cedar-(Douglas fir)/mountai nlover (C52) (Plate 43) the predominant v .t .s . Mountain hemlock-Douglas fir-subalpine fir-Engelmannspruce/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C49) occurs as an accessory v .t . on the two higher elevatio ntracts in GNP .155

Table74 . Wildlife features of KX Ecosites. (w) =winter, (s) =summe rUNGULATES CARNIVORES SMALL MAMMALS BIRD SEcosite Overall Important Overall Important Overall Important Overallrank species rank species rank species rankKX1 high w.t . deer high high red squirrel lowred-b . voleWILDLIFEKX1 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: KX1 is of high importance to ungulates, and is highly important to white-tailed deer .All ungulates occurring in the parks, except mountain goats, have been recorded in KX1 .Moose in the Beaver Valley appear to use KX1 only as an easy travel corridor, whereas elkand deer appear to use it for feeding in early summer . In MRNP, it is highly importan twinter habitat for mule deer and elk, when they remain in the park . The tract at FlatCreek was historically used by caribou in autumn .Carnivores: KX1 is of medium importance to martens, weasels and lynx, and of low importance t ocoyotes .Small Mammals: Association 10 .KX1 is highly important to red squirrels and red-backed voles .Breeding Birds: Community 24A low density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to Vaux's Swift . A breeding bird census plot issituated in a KX1 tract in the Beaver River valley (see sec . 3 .3, Van Tighem and Gyug[1984]) .DISCUSSION AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATION SThe KX Ecosection (0 .2%) correlates with the Kuskanax (KX) Soil Association (Kowall 1980, Wittneben1980) of British Columbia soil surveys in and around MRNP and GNP . The soil componen tof the Ecosection concept, by including both Humo-Ferric Podzols and Dystric Brunisols, is broaderthan Humo-Ferric Podzols of the Soil Association as used by Kowall or Wittneben .Level topography and valley floor positions are conducive to many uses . Gravelly coarse texturesprovide extensive aggregate supplies but are poor for sewage disposal due to poor ion filtration .KX is highly important to ungulates . Because it occurs in valley bottoms and at only three sites inMRNP and GNP, it is sensitive to disturbance . Vegetation removal may reduce its value to ungulates,particularly in winter . Each of the three tracts has already been partially disturbed and thei ruse should be reviewed .LK - LOOKOUT ECOSECTIONThe Lookout (LK) Ecosection concept incorporates : Lower Subalpine vegetation of the EngelmannSpruce-Subalpine Fir Ecoregion ; morainal blankets and veneers of noncalcareous, medium textured til l(Till B) overlying inclined and ridged bedrock; and imperfectly to poorly drained Orthic Gleysols ,Gleyed Dystric Brunisols, and Gleyed Ferro-Humic Podzols . Only one Ecosite (LK1) is recognized(Table 75) . The salient feature of LK1 is wetness from seepage and high water tables . Landscapepositions include valley floors and adjacent lower slopes in valleys and cirques (Fig. 10) .156

Table 75 . Definitive features of the Lookout (LK) Ecosection .Ecosite Bedrock Landform soils Vegetatio nLK1 Various Till B; blanket & veneer Orthic Gleysol, Gleyed Engelmann spruce-subal -over inclined & ridged bed- Dystric Brunisol, Gleyed pine fir forest (C21, C25) ,rock Ferro-Humic Podzol mountain hemlock fores t(C47 )GEOMORPHOLOG YLK1 is characterized by morainal blankets and veneers of Till B (noncalcareous, medium textured )overlying inclined and ridged bedrock . Thin, discontinuous veneers of Fluvial material A (non- t oweakly calcareous, stratified) often overlie the till . They are a product of slope wash from adjacen tslopes . Intact veneers of Eolian material B (altered, medium textured) occur occasionally . Eolianmaterial has often been reworked by slope wash and is likely a significant constituent of the fluvia lveneers .Topographically, LK1 has linear, inclined slopes on lower valley walls and irregular, ridged slopes onvalley and cirque floors. Slopes are 15 to 45% . Inclined slopes generally reflect the underlying bed -rock. Ridged surfaces reflect underlying bedrock or glacial deposition .SOILSSoils of LK1 reflect different degrees of gleying and periods of saturation . The Orthic Gleysol ,Gleyed Dystric Brunisol, and Gleyed Ferro-Humic Podzol subgroups with imperfect to poor drainag eare typical . Gleying is variable in these soils but B horizons indicate that upper sola are periodicall yoxidized . B horizons range from Bg, Bm, and thin Bf, Bhf, and Bh (Gleysolic and Brunisolic) t o>10 cm of podzolic Bf, Bhf, and Bh (Podzolic) . The latter iron, aluminum, and humus enriche dhorizons usually develop in a silty veneer over glacial materials . Gleyed Ferro-Humic Podzols arecharacteristic, while Humo-Ferric and Humic Podzols are accessory soils . Gleyed Sombric Brunisolsand Gleyed Eluviated Dystric Brunisols occur occasionally . A few Organic soils occur in GlacierCircle (GNP) .A Gleyed Humo-Ferric Podzol pedon (Table D25, Plate 44) from Glacier Circle illustrates soils o fLK1. The organic carbon content varies irregularly with depth because episodic deposition has burie dsurface organic matter .VEGETATIONLK1 vegetation (Table 75) is characterized by spruce-fir and hemlock forests, mainly the Engelmannspruce-subalpine fir/tall bilberry/liverwort (C21) (Plate 45), Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/greenalder (C25), and mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C47) v .t .s. Fleabane-valerian(H16) is an accessory v .t . at elevations close to the Upper Subalpine boundary .WILDLIFELK1 Wildlife Feature sUngulates: LK1 is of low importance to ungulates overall except where the forests have beenburned, as at Copperstain Creek where the regenerating vegetation is of low importance t oelk and mule deer in summer .Carnivores: LK1 is highly important to martens and weasels .Small Mammals: Association 3 and 11A .LK1 is of medium importance to small mammals overall. The forests are of medium importanceto porcupines, snowshoe hares and red-backed voles (SMA 3) . Where th e157

Table 76 . Wildlife features of LK Ecosites . (w)= winter, (s) =summerUNGULATES CARNIVORES SMALL MAMMALS BIRD SEcosite Overall Important Overall Important Overall Important Overal lrank species rank species rank species rankLK1 low high marten medium mediumweaselforests have been burned and are regenerating as at Copperstain Creek, SMA 3 is replace dby SMA 11A ; these tracts are also important to Columbian ground squirrels .Breeding Birds: Communities 23 and 8A moderate density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circularcensus plots, this Ecosite is highly important to Mountain Chickadee and Winter Wren .The only park record of a Gray-cheeked Thrush was from this Ecosite (see sec . 4 .3, VanTighem and Gyug [1984]) .DISCUSSION AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATION SThe LK1 Ecosite accounts for 0 .4% of MRNP and GNP . LK1 is the counterpart of the Upper Sub -alpine Witch Tower (WR) Ecosection .Imperfect to poor drainage due to ground water discharge severely limits most uses . Locally, LK mayplay a role in regulating streamflow . Construction may change hydrologic patterns .LR - LAURL-I1 A ECOSECTIONThe Lauretta (LR) Ecosection concept incorporates : Interior Cedar-Hemlock forest and shrub thicke tvegetation ; fan, level, and apron landforms of non- to weakly calcareous fluvial material ; and well tomoderately well drained Brunisolic, Podzolic, and Regosolic soils . The two LR Ecosites (Table 77 )differ in vegetation and soils . LR1 and LR2 occur on valley floors of most major and tributary valleys(Figs . 8, 11 and 14) .Table 77 . Definitive features of Lauretta (LR) Ecosites .Ecosite Bedrock Landform Soils VegetationLR1 Various Fluvial material A; fan, Eluviated Dystric Brunisol, western hemlock-westernapron, level Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol red cedar forest > mountainhemlock forest (C51 >C50, C47)LR2 Various Fluvial material A; fan, Orthic Dystric & Sombric moist shrub thicket (S13 )apron Brunisols, Orthic Humo -Ferric Podzol, Cumulic Hu -mic Regoso lGEOMORPHOLOG YFluvial material A (non- to weakly calcareous, stratified) is the main constituent of LR landforms .Glaciofluvial material A (noncalcareous, coarse textured) is an accessory genetic material of LR2 andoccurs as an inclusion in LR1 . Slope continuity on both Ecosites is often subtly broken by streamchannels (Eroded modifier, C.S.S .C. 1978a) . LR2 is modified by frequent snow avalanche activit y(A) . Avalanche material is distributed downslope to gentler runout zones on LR2 . Layers in fans158

and aprons are a poorly sorted, till-like diamicton, usually indicative of mudflows, which are also importantin fan and apron construction .Landform surfaces range from fans and aprons with straight to concave slopes, to level or subtly ter -raced terrain bordering streams . Most slopes are 0 to 30%, but complex slopes occur where tract scontain both level and fan or apron fluvial landforms .SOILSLR is characterized by well to moderately well drained soils and accessory imperfectly drained soils .Eluviated Dystric Brunisols and Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzols are typical of LR1 . These soils aregenetically related but are separated taxonomically . B horizon development is moderate to strong an dranges from Bm and thin Bf (Brunisolic soils) to >10 cm of podzohc Bf (Podzolic soils) . Well developed(>2 cm) Ae horizons are usually present . Orthic Eutric Brunisols and Gleyed Dystric Bruni -sols are accessory soils of LR1 . Orthic Eutric Brunisols occur where calcium carbonate content result sin lower sola pH's >5 .5 . Gleyed Dystric Brunisols occur where water tables are high along the lowe rmargins of fans and aprons and on floodplains .Orthic Dystric Brunisols, Orthic Sombric Brunisols, Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzols, and Cumulic Humi cRegosols characterize LR2 . The upper sola reflect both humus incorporation and modification b yfluvial accretion . Physical accretion thickens surface Ah horizons of Orthic Sombric Brunisols an dCumulic Humic Regosols . Orthic Dystric Brunisols occur where Ae horizon development is maske dby humus incorporation or inhibited by surface disturbance . B horizon development is moderate t ostrong and ranges from Bm to thin Bf (Brunisolic soils) to >10 cm of podzolic Bf (Podzolic soils) .Accessory Cumulic Regosols occur where erosion or deposition is frequent and intense . OrthicFerro-Humic Podzols (>10 cm Bhf) and imperfectly drained Gleyed Dystric Brunisols are also accessorysoils on LR2 .The sampled Eluviated Dystric Brunisol pedon (Table D26), from LR1 on the Mountain Cree kCampground fan, exemplifies weakly developed LR soils . The pedon illustrates a common taxonomi cproblem in soils of the Canadian Cordillera. The organic carbon and pyrophosphate-extractable F evalues of the upper B horizon are low but meet the chemical criteria of Bh horizon (C .S .S .C. 1978a) .Because the color value and chroma are too high for Bh, the horizon was labelled Bm .VEGETATIO NLR1 is dominated by the western red cedar-western hemlock/devil's club/oak fern (C51), wester nhemlock-western red cedar/western yew/oak fern (C50), and mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tailbilberry (C47) (Plate 46) v .t.s. C51 occurs more often than C50 or C47 . Engelmannspruce-subalpine fir/tall bilberry/liverwort (C21) is an accessory v .t. on LR1 .LR2 vegetation is indicative of frequent snow avalanching and is dominated by the green alder/fer n(S13) v .t . S13 variants also occur, including stands that resemble the willow (S15) v .t. because ofabundant willow (Salix spp .) and grassy stands with abnormally low alder (Alnus spp .) cover . Thesevariants can be extensive, as on LR2 opposite the new west tunnel portal on the Illecillewaet River .Avalanche vegetation also occupies 20 to 50% of LR1A .WILDLIFELR1 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: LR1 is of very high importance to ungulates overall . It is of high importance to mul edeer, white-tailed deer and moose in summer and to caribou, moose and elk in winter .Carnivores: LR1 is very highly important to carnivores overall and to weasels, in particular . Carni -vore diversity is high .Small Mammals: Associations 10 and 11B .LR1 is highly important to masked shrews in dry C51 forests and Richardson's water vole sin wet C51 forests . It is of medium importance to snowshoe hares, beavers and red squirrels. The Lauretta small mammal live-trap plot was in an LR1 tract (see sec . 3 .11, Va nTighem and Gyug [1984]) .159

Table 78 . Wildlife features of LR Ecosites . (w)=winter, (s) =summe rUNGULATES CARNIVORES SMALL MAMMALS BIRDSEcosite Overall Important Overall Important Overall Important Overallrank species rank species rank species ran kLR1 very high caribou (w) very high weasel high masked- shrew highmoosewater voleelk (w)deer mousemule deerw .t . dee rLR2 medium high weasel high highBreeding Birds: Communities 22 and 24A high density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to Blackpoll Warbler, Evening Grosbeak ,Hammond 's Flycatcher and Veery . Beaver ponds in LR1 are important breeding and staginghabitats for park waterfowl . LR1 is highly important to Barred Owl, Norther nPygmy-Owl, Red-tailed Hawk, American Kestrel and other raptors .LR2 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: LR2 is of medium importance overall . It is of medium importance to moose and caribouin winter .Carnivores: LR2 is highly important to carnivores overall and to weasels in particular .Small Mammals: Associations 11A and 11B .SMA 11A occurs in alder-covered snow avalanche paths and SMA 11B in wet, openforests. LR2 is of medium importance to beavers and porcupines . Where colluvial rubbl ehas collected in narrow valley bottoms (e.g. along Asulkan Brook) it is highly important tohoary marmots .Breeding Birds: Communities 12 and 2 2A high density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to Dark-eyed Junco, MacGillivray 's Warbler ,Swanson 's Thrush and Varied Thrush . LR2 is important in winter for White-tailed Ptarmiganand wintering Redpolls .DISCUSSION AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONSThe LR Ecosection accounts for 3 .1% of MRNP and GNP . LR1 occupies 2 .5% and LR2 0 .6% . LRis the Interior Cedar-Hemlock counterpart of the Lower Subalpine Catamount (CM) Ecosection .Use may be limited where slopes are >30% . LR2 is frequently avalanched and some tracts are locall yaggrading. Locally occurring coarse textures and high water tables may present problems for sewag edisposal . The gravelly coarse textured material is suitable aggregate for construction except wher estony . Most tracts have streams that are suitable domestic water supplies. Exceptional floods andmudflows may occur, although soil development on LR1 indicates stability .LR is highly important to ungulates and because it occurs in valley bottoms is highly prone to disturbance. Undisturbed forest may be critical to wintering moose and other ungulates . Barred Owl, NorthernPygmy-Owl and Pileated Woodpecker depend on LR1 and breed in large dead trees . Remova lof dead trees would be detrimental .NC - NORDIC ECOSECTIONThe Nordic (NC) Ecosection concept incorporates colluvial landforms comprised of noncalcareouscolluvium and dominated by Interior Cedar-Hemlock vegetation . Dystric Brunisols and Humo-FerricPodzols are the characteristic soils . Six NC Ecosites (Table 79) were differentiated . NCI, NC2 ,160

NC3, and NC4 have the same hemlock -cedar vegetation but are differentiated on the basis of bedroc kgroups with concomitant soil differences. In contrast, NC5 is dominated by vegetation indicative o ffrequent snow avalanching and NC6 is characterized by open mixedwood . All occur on valley wallsalthough NC5 often extends across valley floors. Figs . 11 and 14 shows topographic relationshipsamong several NC Ecosites and a few others .Table 79 . Definitive features of Nordic (NC) Ecosites .Ecosite Bedrock Landform Soil sVegetationNCI Horsethief Ck . Colluvium B ; blanket & ve - Eluviated & Orthic Dystri cGroup neer over inclined bedrock BrunisolsNC2 Hamill Group Colluvium B & A ; blanket Eluviated Dystric Brunisol ,& veneer over inclined bed - Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzo lroc kNC3 Lardeau Group Colluvium B ; blanket & ve - Eluviated Dystric Brunisol ,neer over inclined bedrock Orthic Humo-Ferric PodzolNC4 Shuswap Metam . Colluvium B & A ; blanket Eluviated Dystric Brunisol ,Complex & veneer over inclined bed - Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzolroc kNC5 Various Colluvium B & A ; blanket Orthic & Eluviated Dystric& veneer over inclined bed - Brunisols, Orthic Sombricrock, apron ; avalanched Brunisol, Orthic Humo -Ferric PodzolNC6 Shuswap Metam . Colluvium B & A ; veneer & Orthic Dystric Brunisol ,Complex blanket over inclined bed - Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzolrockwestern hemlock-wester nred cedar forest (C50, C52 )western hemlock-wester nred cedar forest (C50, C52 )western hemlock-wester nred cedar forest (C50, C52 )western hemlock-westernred cedar forest (C50, C52 )Avalanche complex 6 >western hemlock-westernred cedar forest (C50, C52 )mixed open forest (015 )GEOMORPHOLOG YNC is geomorphically characterized by colluvial landforms comprised of Colluvium B (non- to weakl ycalcareous, medium textured) and Colluvium A (noncalcareous, coarse textured) . Colluvium B ispredominant and characterizes NC1 and NC3 which occur on Horsethief Creek and Lardeau Grou pbedrock types (Fig . 2), respectively . Colluvium A is codominant in areas underlain by Hamill Grou p(NC2) and Shuswap Metamorphic Complex (NC4) bedrock types . NC5, mapped on all bedrocktypes, contains mostly Colluvium B or an unpredictable combination of Colluvial materials A and B .NC6 occurs principally on Shuswap Metamorphic Complex bedrock and is thus most extensive inMRNP . Two NC6 tracts occur in western GNP, one on Lardeau Group and the other on Hamil lGroup bedrock .Limestone occurs locally in most areas, thus calcareous, medium textured colluvium (cf ColluviumC, Walker et al. 1982a) is a minor landform constituent in a few NC tracts . Consolidated bedrockusually underlies the colluvium but, at a few sites, weathering of the bedrock surface has been sufficientto produce veneers of Residuum A (noncalcareous, medium to coarse textured) . These are morelikely to occur in recessive, highly jointed, slaty to schistose strata . Discrete veneers of Eolian materialB (altered, medium texture) thinly mantling the colluvial surface are uncommon in NC .Intact eolian veneers occur only on the oldest, most stable sites under forest vegetation .The colluvium most often occurs as nearly continuous blankets and veneers over steeply inclined bed -rock on valley walls . The Ecosite Modifier X, meaning lithic phases are dominant, occurs in any N CEcosite (e.g. NC6X above the MRNP east gate) and indicates that colluvial veneer is the dominan tlandform . Some such tracts have discontinuous, colluvial veneer plus exposed bedrock . The deepestdeposits are colluvial aprons which occur occasionally in NC5 and have been constructed by snow161

Fig . 14 . Landscape schematic of topographic relationships among NC and other Ecosites .avalanching and rockfall below steep slopes . Couloirs channel meltwater streams and mudflows ont othe aprons . Thus, the apron landforms are often a mixture of intercalated colluvial, fluvial and mud -flow deposits .NC slopes are usually long, straight (simple) and 55 to >100%, with occasional slopes as low as 45 %A few tracts with the modifier F (e.g. NC4F above the MRNP east gate) have a subdued, hummockyto ridged, bench-like topography on an inclined slope . This subtly irregular topography i sproduced by bedrock failure . Tension cracks and short slip scars may be evident, particularly wher ethe overburden is shallow .Snow avalanching (A) is the most common Ecosite modifier in NC and characterizes (>50%) NC5 .However,

from Bm and Bf (Brunisolic soils) to podzolic Bf (Podzolic soils), even under avalanche vegetation .Three sampled pedons, a lithic Orthic Dystric Brunisol (Table D27) from NCI near the East Gate o fGNP, an Eluviated Dystric Brunisol (Table D28) from NC2A on the south slope of Cougar Mountain,and an Orthic Dystric Brunisol (Table D30, Plate 47) from NC6 southwest of Lauretta picni csite, illustrate the range of Dystric Brunisols in NC . All three pedons have brownish B horizons as domany Podzolic soils, e .g. a Sombric Humo-Ferric Podzol (Table D29) above Illecillewaet campsite .When classifying such similarly colored soils on field characteristics alone, it is often difficult to distinguishBrunisols from Podzols . NC also contains soils with distinctly redder B horizons than thos eof the sampled pedons .Sombric Humo-Ferric Podzols (Table D29) are among accessory soils of NC5 . Chemical characteristicsplace the pedon very near the taxonomic boundary with Orthic Sombric Brunisols, which are mor ecommon under avalanche vegetation . Another accessory soil of NC5, Orthic Ferro-Humic Podzol, isalso difficult to distinguish without laboratory data . This latter group has podzolic Bhf horizons an dlikely occurs occasionally in other NC Ecosites . In NC5 ., development of these two Podzolic groups i sprobably related to mechanical incorporation of humus into surface horizons . Under such conditions ,Sombric Ferro-Humic Podzols, with podzolic Bhf and thick Ah horizons, may also occur . The NC 6pedon (Table D30) illustrates a common taxonomic problem in similar Brunisolic-Podzolic soils o fthe Canadian Cordillera. Organic carbon and pyrophosphate-extractable Fe values of the upper Bhorizon meet the chemical criteria of Bh horizon C S . C . 1978a) . However, the color value an dchroma are too high for the morphological criteria . Thus, the horizon was labelled Bm and the pedon,Orthic Dystric Brunisol .The four sampled pedons illustrate nearly the complete range of A horizons in NC soils, whethe rBrunisolic or Podzolic . However, the acidic Brunisolic soils are classified according to kind and thicknessof A horizon. Eluviated Dystric Brunisols have >2 cm of Ae horizon and are dominant or co -dominant in all NC Ecosites . Most forested soils have well developed Ae horizons . Orthic Dystri cBrunisols and some Podzolics, can have little or no A horizon, A mixed with B (AB or A +B horizons),or thin (10 cm thick and is codominant in NC5 .In strong contrast to the comparatively stable Brunisolic and Podzolic soils, Regosolic soils occur a tsites that are or have recently been intensely active geomorphically so that B horizon development ha sbeen inhibited . They are most abundant in snow avalanche terrain (accessory soils of NC5) althoug hthey likely occur in minor amounts in other NC Ecosites . Cumulic and Cumulic Humic Regosols ar emost common and occur in depositional localities . The variable organic matter content and color i srelated to mechanical incorporation of humus into surface horizons . The morphologically more uni -form Orthic Regosols occur sporadically, particularly in erosional sites on NC5 . The variety ofBrunisolic, Podzolic, and Regosolic soils on NC5 demonstrates the diverse and complex interactions o fgeomorphic activity and pedogenic weathering on avalanched terrain, among the most complex landscapesin MRNP and GNP .Lithic phases occur often as accessory soils in any NC Ecosite, but are dominant on tracts with th eEcosite Modifier X (e .g. NC6X) . Nonsoil localities, occurring as exposed bedrock or where there i s

NC6 is characterized by open mixedwood, mainly aspen-western white pine/mountain lover (015 )(Plate 48), a serai v .t . that occurs on steep, sometimes rocky, colluvial slopes that were burned abou t60 years ago. The tree layer is predominantly open, although a closed variant is common in some localities. A variant of C53, with minor amounts of paper birch (Betula papyrifera) and aspen (Populustremuloides), occurs occasionally and is extensive in a few places . NC6 occurs predominantly onsoutherly aspects and is rapidly to well drained .The geomorphic-soil diversity of avalanched terrain also applies to vegetation . Avalanched segment sdominate NC5 and are characterized by a heterogeneous complex of v .t .s; Avalanche complex 6, thatincludes green alder/fern (S13) (Plate 49), sedge (H21), and variants plus other unidentified assemblages.S13 is most extensive . S13 variants, in which mountain maple (Acer glabrum) or western redcedar (Thuja Licata) are abundant in the tall shrub layer, occur occasionally. H21 occurs as smal lpatches, usually in avalanche runout zones on colluvial aprons . Forested localities, virtually unaffectedby avalanching, usually constitute significantly

Table 80 .Wildlife features of NC Ecosites . (w) =winter, (s) =summerUNGULATES CARNIVORES SMALL MAMMALS BIRDSEcosite Overall Important Overall Important Overall Important Overal lrank species rank species rank species rankNCI medium elk (w) medium medium deer mouse highred-b . vol eNC2 low medium medium deer mouse highred-b . vol eNC3 low medium high deer mouse highred-b . vol eNC4 low low low deer mouse highred-b . vol eNC5 high goat (w) low high pika highmarmotdeer mousejumping -mousewater vol echipmunkmasked- shrewNC6 medium goat (w) low medium deer mouse very highlong-t . vol eNC3 Wildlife Feature sUngulates: NC3 is of low importance overall and is of low importance to mountain goats in winter .Carnivores : NC3 is of medium importance .Small Mammals: Association 1 .NC3 is of high importance to deer mice and red-backed voles, and of medium importanc eto snowshoe hares .Breeding Birds:NC3 was not sampled for breeding birds . Based on its similar vegetation and physica lcharacteristics, bird use is likely very similar to that of NC1 and NC4 .NC4 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: NC4 is of low importance both overall and to mountain goats in winter .Carnivores: NC4 6 of low importance .Small Mammals: Association 10 .NC4 is highly important to deer mice and red-backed voles but of low importance to smal lmammals overall .Breeding Birds: Community 2 4A high density of birds was recorded. Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to Warbling Vireo . Burned tracts support BBC21 .Na Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: This avalanched Ecosite is of very high importance to mountain goats in winter and o fmedium importance to mountain goats in summer .Carnivores: NC5 is of low importance in winter because of frequent avalanching and deep sno wcover . Data are not available for the summer but it is probably important because of th ediverse and dense prey base .Small Mammals: Association 11A .NC5 is highly important, particularly to pikas on talus or scree slopes, hoary marmots i n16 5

oulder fields, deer mice, western jumping mice, yellow-pine chipmunks and maske dshrews in avalanche vegetation, and Richardson's water voles along streams and in wetareas .Breeding Birds: Communities 12 and 2 5A high density of birds was recorded. Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to Brown-headed Cowbird, Lazuli Bunting, Orange-crownedWarbler and Swainson ' s Thrush . Avalanched tracts support BBC 12 .Burned tracts support BBC 21 .NC6 Wildlife FeaturesNC6 is important to reptiles in MRNP, particularly northern alligator lizards and wandering gartersnakes .Ungulates:NC6 is of low overall importance but is highly important to goats in winter on th eClachnacudainn Cliffs and lower reaches of Cougar Mountain . It is of medium importanceto mule deer in summer, particularly along the Clachnacudainn Cliffs .Carnivores: No winter tracking samples were done here. It is likely of low importance overall .Coyotes apparently denned here in 1982 and 1983 .Small Mammals: Association 14 .SMA14 is unique to NC6 and, while of low importance to small mammals overall, NC6 i shighly important to deer mice and long-tailed voles .Breeding Birds: Community 26A high density of birds was recorded . NC6 is very highly important because it sustains aunique bird community of several species rare elsewhere in the parks . Based on densityindices derived from circular census plots, this Ecosite is highly important to Black-cappe dChickadee, Calliope Hummingbird, Dusky Flycatcher, Hammonds Flycatcher, Nashvill eWarbler, Orange-crowned Warbler, Solitary Vireo, and Warbling Vireo . Lewis' Wood -pecker has been observed here .DISCUSSION AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATION SNC is a moderately extensive Ecosection, accounting for 6 .0% of MRNP and GNP . NC1 account sfor 0.9%, NC2 0 .9%, NC3 0 .7%, NC4 1 .1%, NC5 2 .1%, and NC6 0 .5%. NC is the Interior Cedar- -Hemlock counterpart of the Lower Subalpine Hermit (HR), Upper Subalpine Asulkan (AK), and Al -pine Redoubt (RD) Ecosections . Few other Interior Cedar-Hemlock landscapes resemble NC, th emain exception being resemblance between Lauretta 2 (LR2) and some NC5 tracts . LR2, however ,occurs on gentler sloping fluvial fans and aprons on and adjacent to valley floors, often below th ecolluvial NC tracts .Steepness and colluviation are major limitations . The Ecosites from most to least active are : NC 5(avalanched), NC6 (craggy and recently burned), and the others (forested) . Removal of vegetatio nmay increase erosion . Locally, coarse textures, stony surfaces and shallow soils limit use .NC contains critical grizzly bear habitat . Recreational developments in or near NC will lead t obear/human conflicts . NC6 has a unique v .t . (015), BBC (26) and SMA (14) and is one of onl ytwo sites where northern alligator lizards occur in MRNP and GNP .RD - REDOUBT ECOSECTIONThe Redoubt (RD) Ecosection concept incorporates colluvial landforms composed of noncalcareou scolluvium and dominated by Alpine vegetation. Dystric Brunisols and Humo-Ferric Podzols arecharacteristic . Four RD Ecosites (Table 81) were differentiated according to bedrock groups, occasionallywith minor soil differences. All occur high on valley walls and a few tracts straddle mountai nridges and peaks . Fig. 9 shows topographic relationships among several RD and Asulkan (AK) Eco -sites .166

Table 81 . Definitive features of Redoubt (RD) Ecosites .Ecosite Bedrock Landform Soils Vegetatio nRD3 Horsethief Ck . Colluvium B ; veneer overGroupinclined bedroc kRD4 Hamill Group Colluvium B & A ; veneerover inclined bedrockRD5 Lardeau Group Colluvium B ; veneer overinclined bedroc kRD6 Shuswap Metam . Colluvium B & A ; venee rComplexover inclined bedrockOrthic Dystric Brunisol >Orthic Humo-Ferric PodzolLithic phases: Orthic DyscricBrunisol, Orthic Humo -Ferric Podzo lOrthic Dystric Brunisol ,Orthic RegosolLithic phases: Orthic DystricBrunisol, Orthic Humo -Ferric Podzolheath tundra (L5), her btundra (H18 )heath tundra (L5), her btundra (H18 )heath tundra (L5), her bmeadow (H2), herb tundra(H18)heath tundra (L5), herbtundra (H18 )GEOMORPHOLOGYRD is geomorphically characterized by colluvial landforms comprised of Colluvium B (non- to weakl ycalcareous, medium textured) and Colluvium A (noncalcareous, coarse textured) . Colluvium B ispredominant and characterizes RD3 and RD5 on Horsethief Creek and Lardeau Group bedrock (Fig .2) . Colluvium A is codominant in areas underlain by Hamill Group (RD4) and Shuswap MetamorphicComplex (RD6) bedrock . The former includes an area of granitic intrusive bedrock . Limestoneoccurs locally in most bedrock areas, thus calcareous, medium textured colluvium (cf ColluviumC, Walker et al. 1982a) is a minor landform constituent in a few RD tracts . Consolidatedbedrock usually shallowly underlies the colluvium but, at a few sites, sufficent weathering of the bed -rock surface has produced veneers of Residuum A (noncalcareous, medium to coarse textured) . Residualveneer most often develops in recessive, highly jointed, slaty to schistose strata and is an accessoryfeature of RD3 and RD5 . Thin, discrete veneers of Eolian material B (altered, medium textured)are uncommon in all RD Ecosites except RD3 were they are an accessory feature .The colluvium most often occurs as a nearly continuous veneer over steeply inclined bedrock on valle ywalls . Discontinuous colluvial veneer plus exposed bedrock characterizes about 50% of RD4 and RD 6tracts, including the few tracts of RD5X and RD5 +R . Deeper colluvial blankets occur as accessor yfeatures in all RD Ecosites . The deepest deposits are colluvial aprons, which occur sporadically a ssmall, localized landforms at slope breaks below couloirs .RD slopes are usually long, straight, and 55 to >100%, and occasionally as low as 45% . RD4 andRD6 are consistently the steepest (rarely

SOILSWell drained Dystric Brunisols and . Humo-Ferric Podzols characterize the soils of RD, althoug hRegosolics are also abundant in RD5 . The soils, even though classed as different taxa (Table 81), ar esimilar and have characteristics grouped around taxonomic boundaries . B horizon development ismoderate to strong, except in RD5, and ranges from Bm and Bf (Brunisolic soils) to podzolic B f(Podzolic soils) . Three sampled pedons, illustrate the range of soils in RD . An Orthic Dystric Brunisol(Table D31, Plate 50), from RD3 in the Prairie Hills, has thick, moderately developed Bm horizonsoverlain by thin Bhf horizons developed in Eolian material B veneer . This pedon is virtually un -disturbed compared to the turbic pedons surrounding the sample site . A lithic and turbic phase OrthicHumo-Ferric Podzol (Table D32, Plate 51), from RD4 on Cheops Mountain, illustrates strongly developedsoils with a thick Bf horizon . Solifluction and soil creep have affected the upper horizons .The third pedon, a lithic Orthic Dystric Brunisol (Table D33, Plate 52) from west of Flat Creek Pass ,illustrates weakly developed RD5 soils . Its faint horizons, with dark colors inhereted fromLardeau-derived parent material, were tenuously classified on subtle color differences and chemicaldata . Horizonation is even less perceptible in the closely related Orthic Regosols, which are co -dominant in RD5 . Cumulic, Cumulic Humic, and Orthic Humic Regosols also occur sporadically .Regosolics occur on recently active sites in which B horizon development has been inhibited . The yalso occur in minor amounts in RD Ecosites other than RD5 and are most abundant in tracts of R Dplus CR or T (e.g. RD3+CR, RD4+T) .RD soils often have thin Ah or Ahe horizons (Tables D31 and D33) developed under tundra vegetation. But A horizons may be absent (Table D31) or mixed with underlying B material (AB horizon) .Occasionally, Ah horizons >10 cm thick occur, giving Orthic Sombric Brunisols, Sombric Humo-FerricPodzols, and Orthic and Cumulic Humic Regosols . Orthic Sombric Brunisols are most abundan tand are accessory soils of each RD Ecosite . Thick Ah horizons appear to be related to physical thickeningby pedoturbation at the surface .Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzols are subdominant or codominant with Orthic Dystric Brunisols in all R DEcosites except RD5 (Table 81) where they are accessory soils . Closely related, Orthic Ferro-Humi cPodzols occur as accessory soils and without laboratory data are often difficult to distinguish fromthe more common Humo-Ferric Podzols . Orthic Ferro-Humic Podzols have podzolic Bhf horizon slikely developed by mechanical thickening of upper solum B horizons or in unusually thick veneers o fEolian material B .Lithic soils are common accessory features in any RD Ecosite, but are characteristic of RD5X an dabout half of RD4 and RD6 tracts . Nonsoil areas occupy

WILDLIFESMA 13 is assumed to be present in RD but direct evidence is only available for the presence of th eyellow-pine chipmunk, not the other mouse or vole components of SMA13 .RD3 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: RD3 is of high summer and medium winter importance to goats and of medium importanceto elk in summer .Carnivores: No carnivore use was recorded .Small Mammals : Association 13 .RD3 is highly important to Columbian ground squirrels and of low importance to pikas .Breeding Birds: Community 1 7A low density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to Rosy Finch and Horned Lark . Columbianground squirrel colonies provide an important prey source for Golden Eagles an dRed-tailed Hawks .RD4 Wildlife Feature sUngulates: RD4 is of high summer and medium winter importance to goats .Carnivores: No carnivore use was recorded .Small Mammals: Association 13 .RD4 is highly important to hoary marmots and of low importance to pikas and Columbia nground squirrels .Breeding Birds: Community 1 7A low density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to White-tailed Ptarmigan . Hoary marmot coloniesare important prey sources for Golden Eagles .RD5 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: RD5 is of high summer and medium winter importance to goats .Carnivores : No carnivore use was recorded .Small Mammals: Association 13 .RD5 is of low importance .Breeding Birds:RD5 was not sampled for breeding birds . Use by birds is probably very similar to that ofRD3 and RD4 .RD6 Wildlife Feature sUngulates: RD6 is of high summer and medium winter importance to goats .Carnivores: No carnivore use was recorded .Small Mammals: Association 13 .RD6 is of low importance .Breeding Birds:RD6 was not sampled for breeding birds . Use by birds is probably very similar to that ofRD3 and RD4 .DISCUSSION AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONSThe RD Ecosection concept was developed in the BNP and JNP inventory (Walker et al. 1982d) . Itwas extended to KNP (Walker et al. 1984b) and MRNP and GNP to accommodate similar landscap eF .3% of MRNP and GNP) . Four new Ecosites, RD3 (0 .6%), RD4 (1 .3%), RD5 (0 .3%), and RD 6.2%), were established for the Columbia Mountains . These differ from RD1 and RD2 in theRocky Mountains by having more Podzolic and, except for RD5 ; fewer Regosolic soils, as well asonly minor amounts of avens tundra (Hl) .169

Table82 . Wildlife features of RD Ecosites. (w)=winter, (s) = summe rUNGULATES CARNIVORES SMALL MAMMALS BIRDSEcosite Overall Important Overall Important Overall Important Overallrank species rank species rank species rankRD3 high goat (s) low Columbian gr . mediumsquirrelRD4 high goat slow marmot lowRD5 high goat s low lowRD6 high goat s low lowRD is the Alpine counterpart of the Upper Subalpine Asulkan (AK), Lower Subalpine Hermit (HR) ,and Interior Cedar-Hemlock Nordic (NC) Ecosections . No other Alpine landscapes resemble RD .Steepness and colluviation are major limitations . Removal of vegetation may increase erosion an drevegetation will be slow . Locally, outcrops, solifluction, avalanching, coarse textures, stony sur -faces, and shallow soils limit use .SN - STONEY ECOSECTIONThe Stoney (SN) Ecosection concept includes Interior Cedar-Hemlock vegetation ; fan and level land -forms of non- to weakly calcareous fluvial and glaciofluvial materials, and well to moderately wel ldrained Regosolic soils . Only one Ecosite (SN1, Table 83) was recognized and only two tract smapped, both in GNP . One occurs on the north half of the Stoney Creek fan, the other (SN1A), ison the Incomappleux River floodplain south of Jeopardy Slide . Fig. 11 shows the topographic positionof SN1 .Table 83 . Definitive features of the Stoney (SN) Ecosection .Ecosite Bedrock Landform Soils Vegetatio nSN1 Various Fluvial material A & Gla- Orthic Regosol mixed open forest (023) ,ciofluvial material A ; fan &leve lherb mat (H8 )GEOMORPHOLOG YFluvial material A (non- to weakly, calcareous stratified) and Glaciofluvial material A (noncalcareous,coarse textured) are the main constituents of SNI fan and level landforms . SNI is a rapidlyaggrading landscape originating from glacial meltwater streams with heavy sediment loads . Th estreams are braided (Plate 56), with numerous, shifting, shallow channels on fans and floodplains .Daytime warming produces diurnal fluctuations of meltwater volume. These sites have little or nosoil development, stratified fluvial and glaciofluvial materials, and fluctuating water tables . SNI surfaceexpression ranges from fan to level plain . Slopes are simple and 0 to 5% . Slope continuity o nboth tracts is often subtly broken by stream channels (Eroded modifier, C .S .S .C . 1978a), includingnarrow, slightly elevated ridges along the banks . Channels are better developed and more abundan ton level landforms than on fans .SOILSSN1 is characterized by well to moderately well drained Regosolic soils with depositional layers rathe rthan pedogenic horizons . These indicate recurrent fluvial deposition which precludes pedogenic development.Cumulic Regosols, accessory in SNI, show both pedogenic and physical incorporation of organicmaterial either as buried Ah horizons or as organic matter that varies irregularly with depth .170

Such soils indicate episodic deposition with surficial organic layers being formed during inactive periods.Orthic Regosols, dominant in SN1, are more uniform in color and organic matter conten t(Table D34, Plate 57) . indicating more frequent and continuous geomorphic activity . Gleyed CumulicRegosols and Rego Gleysols occur locally on imperfectly drained sites .VEGETATIO NSNI is characterized by the Engelmann spruce-black cottonwood/yellow dryad (023) and yello wdryad-willow herb (H8) v .t .s . The SN1 tract on Stoney Creek fan is dominated by 023 (Plate 58) .H8 and accessory unvegetated localities occupy the remainder of the area adjacent to the active strea mchannels . SN1A on the Incomappleux River floodplain is dominated by unvegetated localities and ayellow dryad-poor variant of H8 . Intergrades of the green alder/fern (S13) and alder/skunk cabbag e(S17) v.t .s occur on snow avalanche runout zones on the tract margins .WILDLIFESN1 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates: SNI is of high importance overall being used by all species occurring in GNP excep tmountain goat and mountain caribou . It is of medium importance to moose and elk inwinter. Browsing on black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) and willows (Salix spp . )was recorded on forage use plots .Carnivores: SNI is of medium importance both overall and to lynx .Small Mammals: Association 12 .SN1 is of low importance overall but of high importance to yellow-pine chipmunks .Breeding Birds: Communities 22 and 1 1A high density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to Cedar Waxwing, Song Sparrow ,White-crowned Sparrow, Yellow Warbler and Yellow-rumped Warbler . Highest bird densitiesare on poorly-drained sites where 023 forest borders wetland vegetation communities .SN1 is also important to Barred Owl, Red-tailed Hawk and American Kestrel . The un -common Tennessee Warbler and Blackpoll Warbler have been recorded here during th ebreeding season in the Beaver Valley .Table 84 . Wildlife features of SN Ecosites . (w)=winter, (s) =summerUNGULATES CARNIVORES SMALL MAMMALS BIRD SEcosite Overall Important Overall Important Overall Important Overal lrank species rank species rank species ran kSNI high medium low chipmunk highDISCUSSION AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATION SSN occupies 0 .1% of MRNP and GNP . Use is limited by aggrading landforms, gravelly coarse textures,and high water tables . Parts are flooded annually .SN is of very limited area in GNP, occurring at only two sites . Because of its situation in valley bot -toms, early successional vegetation and importance to birds and ungulates, its wildlife potential wouldbe reduced by facility developments that remove habitat or increase disturbance by humans .171

WR - WITCH TOWER ECOSECTIO NThe Witch Tower (WR) Ecosection concept incorporates: Upper Subalpine vegetation of the EngelmannSpruce-Subalpine Fir Ecoregion ; morainal blankets and veneers of noncalcareous medium texturedtill (Till B) overlying inclined and ridged bedrock ; and imperfectly to poorly drained Orthi cGleysols, Gleyed Dystric Brunisols, and Gleyed Ferro-Humic Podzols . Only the WR1 Ecosite is recognized(Table 85) . The salient feature of WR1 is wetness due to high water tables and associate dseepage. WR occurs on valley walls, benchlands and shoulders within valleys, broad ridges, passes ,and cirque floors . WR1 is more common in areas underlain by recessive bedrock (Horsethief Cree kand Lardeau Groups) . Fig. 13 shows the topographic position of WR1 .Table 85 . Definitive features of the Witch Tower (WR) Ecosection .Ecosite Bedrock Landform Soils VegetationWR1 Various Till B; blanket & veneer Orthic Gleysol . Gleyed Engelmann spruce-subal -over inclined & ridged bed- Dys;ric Brunisol, Gleyed pine fir open forest (09) ,rock Ferro-Humic Podzol herb meadow (H16 )GEOMORPHOLOG YWR1 is characterized by morainal blankets and veneers of Till B (noncalcareous, medium textured )overlying inclined and ridged bedrock . Thin, discontinuous veneers of Fluvial material A (non- t oweakly calcareous, stratified) often overlie the till, and are from slope wash from higher adjacen tslopes . Intact veneers of Eolian material B (altered, medium textured) occur on portions of the landscape,although it has often been redistributed by slope wash and likely has become a significant constituentof the fluvial veneers . Thin organic layers occasionally mantle the mineral soils as in th esampled pedon (Table D35) .Topographically, WR1 displays linear, inclined slopes on valley shoulders and upper valley walls, an dirregular, ridged slopes on cirque and pass floors . Slopes are 5 to 45%. Inclined slopes usually reflectthe bedrock . Ridged surfaces reflect either underlying bedrock, glacial deposition or, in a few cases ,post-depositional failure . Failed till slopes on WR1 are usually seepage induced, rotational slumps .Solifluction and cryoturbation are subtly expressed on some WR1 tracts .SOILSWR1 soils reflect various degrees of gleying and saturation . Orthic Gleysols, Gleyed Dystric Bruni -sols, and Gleyed Ferro-Humic Podzols have imperfect to poor drainage and are characteristic WR 1soils . Gleying is variable but the B horizons indicate that upper sols are periodically oxidized. B horizonsinclude BF, Bm, Bf, Bhf, and Bh (Gleysolic and Brunisolic) as well as podzolic Bf, Bhf, an dBh (Podzolic soils) . The iron, aluminum and humus enriched B horizons usually develop in the silt yveneer overlying glacial materials . Gleyed Ferro-Humic Podzols are typical of Podzolic great group sand include Humo-Ferric and Humic Podzols as accessory soils . An Orthic Gleysol (Table D35, Plate59) was sampled on WR1 in the Prairie Hills (GNP) . The pedon has a surface organic layer (OM )different from fen peat . Ah horizons are common, especially under herb meadow . Turbic phase soil sare associated with minor occurrences of solifluction and cryoturbation which have disrupted andmixed upper horizons .VEGETATIO NVegetation of WR1 reflects the degree of seepage . The fleabane-valerian (H16) v .t . is predominanton most tracts (Plate 60), but a few are mainly Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/valerian-fleaban e(09) . Black alpine sedge-everlasting (H2) is an accessory v .t. that occurs in slight depressions an dreflects late snow lie . Other v .t .s in drier localities include heather-everlasting (L5) and everlasting-whitemountain heather-red heather (H18) .172

WILDLIFEWR1 Wildlife FeaturesUngulates : The extensive herb meadows of WR1 are highly important summer elk range in easternGNP . WR1 is potentially important to the now rare mountain caribou, but caribou ar enow too rare to assess their use of any habitats in GNP without detailed study .Carnivores: WR1 is of low importance overall because of high snow accumulation and gentle topographywith the resultant lack of breaks in snow cover . It is of medium importance onlyto weasels .Small Mammals: Association 16 .Tracts with well drained meadows are of high importance to Columbian ground squirrels .Richardson's water voles and jumping mice occur along streambanks but no other smal lmammals regularly occur here .Breeding Birds: Communities 7 and 1 7A low density of birds was recorded . Based on density indices derived from circular censusplots, this Ecosite is highly important to the Water Pipit . WR1 is important to rap -tors such as Golden Eagles and Red-tailed Hawks due to its abundant prey base .White-tailed Ptarmigans occur here year round .Table 86 .Wildlife features of WR Ecosites . (w)=winter, (s)=summe rUNGULATES CARNIVORES SMALL MAMMALS BIRDSEcosite Overall Important Overall Important Overall Important Overal lrank species rank species rank species ran kWRI medium elk (s) medium low water vole mediumDISCUSSION AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONSThe WR1 Ecosite accounts for 0.3% of MRNP and GNP and is the counterpart of the Lower SubalpineLookout (LK) Ecosection .Imperfect to poor drainage due to ground water discharge and seasonal seepage severely limit mos tuses. Locally, WR may play a role in regulating streamflow and potential slope failure should beconsidered . Major construction (e .g. roads) may change hydrologic patterns .ECOSITE MODIFIERSA - AVALANCHEDThe Ecosite Modifier Avalanched (A) is added to a map symbol when 20 to 50% of the tract is modifiedby frequent snow avalanches and the modification is not an integral part of the Ecosite concept .This modifier is used on many tracts in the Interior Cedar-Hemlock and Engelmann Spruce-SubalpineFir Ecoregions. A discussion of avalanche processes and terminology is provided by Perla and Martinelli(1975) . Avalanching affects mainly vegetation and to a lesser extent soils . Common v .t.s onavalanche paths include subalpine fir-willow (S2), green alder/fern (S13), willow-mountai nhemlock-subalpine fir/tall bilberry (S14), willow S15), fleabane-valerian (H16), and sedge (H21) .Schaerer (1972) discusses specific terrain and vegetation relationships with avalanching at Roger sPass .Management Consideration sEcosites affected by avalanching require modified management considerations, particularly for winte ruses .173

B - BURNEDThe Ecosite Modifier Burned (B) is used when >50% of the vegetation of a tract is modified by fireand is not a recognized v .t. (Plate 61) . Ecosites modified by B occur in the Interior Cedar-Hemloc kand Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir Ecoregions of MRNP and GNP .Management ConsiderationsBurned areas may be conducive to accelerated rates of erosion, especially in the few years immediatel yfollowing fire . They are often favorable for wildlife since fire usually results in forest being replace dby herbaceous or shrubby vegetation . Also, burned areas may serve as a research sites to determin ethe pathways and rates of vegetational succession .F - FAILEDThe Ecosite Modifier Failed (F) identifies three types of landscape . The first and most common typeis bedrock failure resulting in irregular, hummocky to ridged, bench-like topography often superimposedon an inclined slope . Tension cracks are often present . The second is severe solifluction thathas created prominent solifluction benches on a slope . The third type encompasses extinct rock glaciersthat originated as talus and protalus ramparts below rock walls . This type is most common i nareas of Horsethief Creek Group bedrock .Management Consideration sFailed tracts with old rock glacier landforms should not receive changed management consideratio nbecause the rock glaciers are not expected to reactivate . Failed terrain that includes mass movementand severe solifluction will influence management considerations for park uses . Such tracts should beevaluated individually to determine the potential for further slope failure .X -LITHI CThe Ecosite Modifier Lithic (X) is added to a map symbol when >50% of a tract has shallow, unconsolidatedmaterial overlying a iithic layer and lithic phase soils are not part of the Ecosite concept . Alithic layer is a consolidated bedrock layer within the control section below a depth of 10 cm(C .S .S .C . 1978a) . The control section of most mineral soils in MRNP and GNP is 1 m . Eventhough lithic phase soils dominate X-modified tracts, bedrock outcrops may not be abundant . Lithicmodified tracts occur in all Ecoregions .Management ConsiderationsShallow soils and bedrock will change management considerations for Lithic Ecosites . Uses that re -quire deep unconsolidated material (e .g. sewage disposal) will be precluded .174

MISCELLANEOUS LANDSCAPE SCR - COLLUVIAL RUBBLEThe Miscellaneous Landscape Colluvial Rubble (CR) consists of Colluvium A and B . Physical weathering(joint block separation) of highly jointed bedrock, followed by slow, gravity-induced move -ment, produces colluvial rubble . This process is less prominent in resistant, massive quartzites ,gneisses and granites . Slow displacement of material downslope is caused by surface creep, solifluction,and sheet erosion .Colluvial Rubble (CR) occurs in the Alpine Ecoregion and the Upper Subalpine portion of the EngelmannSpruce-Subalpine Fir Ecoregion in GNP . CR is not mapped in MRNP . Nonsoil and Regosoli csoils dominate CR . Regosolics occur in association with fine earths formed in situ by weathering ortransported by surface creep, wind, or water erosion . CR may be unvegetated or sparsely vegetated .V .t .s such as saxicolous lichen (H12) and mountain avens-snow willow-moss campion (Hl) occu ronly in patches and occupy 80% and have virtually no soil development .Patchy vegetation on these landscapes includes heather-everlasting (L5), mountain avens-snow willow-mosscampion (Hl), and yellow dryad-willow herb (H8) . Regosolic soils occur under these vegetatedpatches .175

M tracts account for 1 .4% of MRNP and GNP . Compound mapping units involving M are M +G L(1 .4% of MRNP and GNP), M +R (2 .5%), and T +M (0 .9%) . Tracts with these compound symbol scontain inseparable areas of M plus Glacier (GL), Rockland (R), and Talus (T) .Management Consideration sAreas of Recent Moraine have scientific, ecological, and tourist interest, particularly for geomorphologicaland pedological studies, as well as paleoecological studies of vegetational succession . The lackof soil and vegetation preclude many recreational park uses .R -ROCKLANDThe Miscellaneous Landscape Rockland (R) is composed of consolidated bedrock of all lithologies an doccurs in the Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir and Alpine Ecoregions . Rockland is most abundant onresistant bedrock of the Hamill Group and Shuswap Metamorphic Complex and is dominantly nonsoi land unvegetated . Some tracts are sparsely vegetated with v .t .s such as saxicolous lichen (H12) an dmountain avens-snow willow-moss campion (Hl) . Portions have stunted trees growing in cracks an dshallow pockets of soil .R tracts account for 0 .1% of MRNP and GNP . Compound mapping units involving R are M+ R(2 .5% of MRNP and GNP), R+CR (1 .3%), R+GL (4.8%) (Plate 64) and R+T (1 .4%) . Tractswith these compound symbols contain inseparable areas of R plus Recent Moraine (M), Colluvia lRubble (CR), Glacier (GL) or Talus (T) .Management ConsiderationsLack of soil and vegetation preclude many recreational park uses . Steepness and safety problems areother limitations to their use. Aesthetic values are high, as is their use for geological studies .RG - ROCK GLACIERThe Miscellaneous Landscape Rock Glacier (RG) is a mass of poorly sorted, angular coarse fragmentsand fine earth material cemented by interstitial ice >1 m below the surface . RG is a productof colluvial and glacial processes . Material is fed from talus (protalus ramparts) along cirque an dvalley walls . The surface of RG is marked by a series of transverse, arcuate, and rounded ridges suggestiveof slow flow . These forms probably result from a combination of flow and melting of interstitialor underlying ice . RG is dominantly nonsoil and unvegetated .RG is inseparable from Talus (T) because of mapping scale and occurs in tracts mapped as T+ R G(0 .2% of MRNP and GNP) . These occur only in GNP in Alpine and Upper Subalpine areas associatedwith Horsethief Creek Group bedrock .Management ConsiderationsRG areas are of scientific, ecological, and tourist interest. Steepness and lack of soil and vegetationare severely limiting factors for most recreational park uses .T - TALUSThe Miscellaneous Landscape Talus (T) consists of loose deposits of Colluvium A or B that includ eabundant, angular, coarse fragments. Talus is formed chiefly by gravitational falling, rolling, or slidingof fragments dislodged by physical weathering from very steep, resistant rock walls . In somecases, mudflows and avalanches also deposit material (Gray 1972, Luckman 1972) . Talus occurs assteep, usually concave slopes in the form of cones, aprons, and fans . Material thickness diminishesfrom the bottom to the top of a slope with smaller fragments more abundant near the top . The up -per slope is usually steeper than the lower . Talus has dominantly nonsoil or Regosolics and is176

unvegetated . A few tracts have sparse vegetation . T tracts occur in the Engelmann Spruce-SubalpineFir and Alpine Ecoregions . T tracts account for 0 .2% of MRNP and GNP . Compound mappin gunits involving T are R+T (1 .4% of MRNP and GNP), T+GL (0 .1%), T+M (0.9%), and T+RG(0 .2%) . Tracts with these compound symbols contain inseparable areas of T plus Rockland (R) ,Glacier (GL), Recent Moraine (M), or Rock Glacier (RG) . Ecosites characterized by colluvial land -forms also may be complexed with T (e .g. AK5+T) .Management ConsiderationsSteepness, instability, and lack of soil and vegetation result in severe limitations for most recreationa lpark uses .WATER BODIESThe Miscellaneous Landscape Water Bodies (blue on the map) includes lakes, ponds, and streams occurringin all Ecoregions . Water Bodies are delineated at the high water level where seasonal fluctuationsare evident . Mappable Water Bodies are about 0 .1% of MRNP and GNP .Management Consideration sWater bodies are described by Donald and Alger (1984, Alger and Donald 1984) .177

LITERATURE CITEDAchuff, P .L . 1982 . Vegetation : Introduction and methods . In W .D . Holland and G .M . Coen(eds.), Ecological (biophysical) land classification of Banff and Jasper National Parks .Vol . II : Soil and vegetation resources. Alberta Inst. Pedol. Publ . SS-82-44 . Univ . ofAlberta, Edmonton . pp. 71-75 .Achuff, P .L . and H .A. Dudynsky . 1984. Vegetation . In P .L . Achuff, W .D. Holland, G .M .Coen and K. Van Tighem (eds .), Ecological land classification of Kootenay Nationa lPark, British Columbia . Vol . I : Integrated resource description . Alberta Inst. Pedol .Publ . M-84-10. Univ . of Alberta, Edmonton .Airphoto Analysis Associates . 1975. Biophysical resource inventory of Gros Morne National Park ,Newfoundland . Rep . to Parks Can ., Halifax .Alger, D .J . and D .B . Donald . 1984. Limnological studies in Kootenay National Park. Part Two :The streams . Env . Can., Can . Wildlife Serv ., Edmonton, Alberta .Allison, L .E ., W .B . Bollen and C.D. Moodie . 1965. Total carbon . In Black, et al. (eds .) . Methodsof soil analysis . Amer . Soc. Agron . Monogr . 9 : 1345-1378 .American Ornithologists ' Union . 1982 . Thirty-fourth Supplement to the American Ornithologists 'Union Check -List of North American Birds . suppl . Auk 99 : 16 pp .A.O.A .C . (Association of Official Agricultural Chemists) . 1955 . Official methods of analysis .Eighth ed . Washington, D.C .Arno, S .F . and J .R. Habeck . 1972 . Ecology of alpine larch (Larix lyallii Parl .) in the PacificNorthwest . Ecol . Monogr . 42 : 417-450 .A .S .T.M . (American Society for Testing and Materials) . 1970. Annual book of A .S .T.M . Stan -dards, part II . Amer . Soc. Testing Mater ., Philadelphia . 982 pp .Atmospheric Environment . 1975a . Canadian normals . Vol. I - SI . Temperature. 1941 - 1970 .Env . Can ., Atmos . Env . Serv ., Downsview, Ont .Atmospheric Environment . 1975b. Canadian normals . Vol. II - SI . Precipitation . 1941- 1970 .Env . Can ., Atmos. Env. Serv ., Downsview, Ont .Atmospheric Environment . 1982. Canadian climate normals . Vol . 5 . Wind . Env . Can ., Atmos .Env. Serv., Downsview, Ont . 283 pp .Atmospheric Environment . No date a. Canadian climate normals. Temperature and precipitation .1951-1980 . British Columbia . Env. Can., Atmos . Env . Serv ., Downsview, Ont. 26 8PP .Atmospheric Environment. No date b. Canadian climate normals . Temperature and precipitation .1951-1980 . Prairie provinces. Env. Can., Atmos . Env . Serv ., Downsview, Ont. 42 9PP .Atmospheric Environment . No date c . Supplementary precipitation data . 25 publications (Vol . 1-12 ,No . 3) January 1966 - March 1981 . Env . Can., Atmos. Env. Serv . (originally Dep .Transp ., Met. Br .), Downsview, Ont .Baig, M.N. 1972. Ecology of timberline vegetation in the Rocky Mountains of Alberta . PhD thesis ,Univ. of Calgary . 444 pp .Baird, D.M. 1965. Glacier and Mount Revelstoke National Parks. Geol . Surv . Can., Misc . Rep .11 : 104 pp .179

Bamberg, S .A. and J . Major . 1968 . Ecology of the vegetation and soils associated with calcareou sparent materials in three Alpine regions of Montana . Ecol . Monogr . 38 : 127-167 .Banfield, A .W.F . 1974. The mammals of Canada . Univ . of Toronto Press. 438 pp .Bascombe, C .L . 1961 . Calcimeter for routine use on soil samples. Chem . Ind ., Part II : 1826-1827 .Beder, K . 1967 . Ecology of the alpine vegetation of Snow Creek Valley, Banff National Park, Alberta. MSc thesis, Univ . of Calgary . 228 pp .Beil, C .E . 1966. An ecological study of the primary producer level of the subalpine spruce-fir ecosystemof Banff and Jasper National Parks, Alberta . MSc thesis, Univ . of Alberta . 233 pp .Beke, G .J . and S . Pawluk . 1971 . The pedogenic significance of volcanic ash layers in the soils of a neast slope (Alberta) watershed basin . Can. J . Earth Sci . 8 : 664-675 .Binkley, D. and R . L. Graham. 1981 .Biomass, . production, and nutrient cycling of mosses in anold-growth Douglas-fir forest . Ecology 62 : 1387-1389 .Bostock, H .S. 1970 . Physiographic regions of Canada . Geol. Surv . Can . Map 1254A .Botkin, D .B ., J .F . Janek and J .R. Wallis 1972. Some ecological consequences of a computer mode lof forest growth. J . Ecol. 60 : 849-872 .Bowen, W .D. 1978 . Social organization of the coyote in relation to prey size . PhD thesis, Univ . ofBrit . Col. 230 pp .Brayshaw, T.C. 1965. Native poplars of southern Alberta and their hybrids . Can. Dep. For .Publ . 1109: 40 pp .Broad, J . 1973 . Ecology of alpine vegetation at Bow Summit, Banff National Park . MSc thesis ,Univ . of Calgary . 93 pp .Broscoe, A.J . and S . Thomson . 1969 . Observations on an alpine mudflow, Steele Creek, Yukon .Can . J . Earth Sci . 6 : 219-229 .Bryant, J .P . and E . Scheinberg . 1970 . Vegetation and frost activity in an alpine fell -field on th esummit of Plateau Mountain, Alberta . Can . J . Bot . 48 :751-771 .Buol, S.W ., F .D. Hole, and R .J . McCracken . 1973 . Soil genesis and classification . Iowa StateUniv . Press, Ames . 360 pp .Butler, D.R . 1979 . Snow avalanche path terrain and vegetation, Glacier National Park, Montana .Arc. Alp. Res . 11 : 17-32 .Butters, F.K . 1932. The flora of the Glacier district. Can. Alpine J . 21 : 139-147 .Cattelino, P .J ., I .R . Noble, R.O. Slatyer and S .R . Kessell 1979 . Predicting the multiple pathwaysof plant succession. Env . Manage . 3 : 41-50 .Chapman, H.D. 1965 . Cation exchange capacity . In Black, et al. (eds .) . Methods of soil analysis .Amer. Soc. Agron . Monogr . 9 : 891-901 .Chapman, J .D. 1952. The climate of British Columbia . Fifth Brit . Col . Nat. Resour . Conf . ,Victoria. pp. 8-54 .Choate, C .M. and J .R . Habeck. 1967 . Alpine plant communities at Logan Pass, Glacier Nationa lPark . Proc. Mont . Acad . Sci . 27 : 36-54 .Clement, C .J . 1981. Vegetation resources of the Vernon map sheet area . Vol. 1 . Vegetation and selectedinterpretations . Brit . Col. Min . Env ., APD Bull . 19 .180

Clements, F.E. 1916 . Plant succession : an analysis of the development of vegetation . Carnegie Inst .Wash . Publ . 242 : 512 pp .Clements, F.E . 1936 . Nature and structure of the climax . J . Ecol . 24 : 252-284 .Coen, G .M . and P . Kuchar. 1982 . Biophysical (ecological) inventory of Yoho National Park, BritishColumbia, Canada . Agr. Can., Research Br ., LRRI Contribution No. 82-20 andAlberta Inst. Ped. No . M-82-2 . 92 pp .Coen, G .M ., B.D . Walker and W .S . Taylor . 1982. Philosophical principles governing the develop -ment of the ecological methodology . In W .D . Holland and G .M . Coen (eds .), Ecological(biophysical) land classification of Banff and Jasper National Parks . Vol . II : Soiland vegetation resources . Alberta Inst . Pedol . Publ . SS-82-44. Univ . of Alberta ,Edmonton. pp . 157-159 .Cole, G .F. 1959 . Key browse survey method . Paper pres . West. Assoc . Fish Game Comm ., Port -land, Oregon . 10 pp .Cormack, R .G.H. 1953 . A survey of coniferous forest succession in the eastern Rockies . For .Chron. 29 : 218-232 .Corns, I .G .W. 1978 . Tree growth prediction and plant community distribution in relation to environmentalfactors in lodgepole pine, white spruce, black spruce and aspen forests of west -ern Alberta foothills . PhD thesis, Univ. of Alberta . 229 pp .Corns, I .G.W . 1983 . Forest community types of west-central Alberta in relation to selected environ -mental factors. Can . J . For . Res . 13 : 995-1010 .Corns, I .G .W . and P .L . Achuff. 1982 . Vegetation type descriptions . In W .D . Holland and G.M .Coen (eds.), Ecological (biophysical) land classification of Banff and Jasper NationalParks . Vol . II : Soil and vegetation resources . Alberta Inst . Pedol. Publ . SS-82-44 .Univ. of Alberta, Edmonton, pp . 75-142 .Cottam, G., F .G. Goff and R.H . Whittaker . 1974 . Wisconsin comparative ordination . In R .H .Whittaker (ed.), Ordination and classification of communities, Handbook of VegetationScience 5 : 193-222, W . Junk, The Hague .Crack, S .N. 1977 . Flora and vegetation of Wilcox Pass, Jasper National Park . MSc thesis, Univ . ofCalgary. 284 pp .Crum, H .A ., W .C . Steere and L.E . Anderson . 1973 . A new list of mosses of North America nort hof Mexico . Bryol. 76 : 85-130 .C .S.S .C . (Canada Soil Survey Committee) . 1978a. The Canadian system of soil classification . Agr .Can . Publ. 1646 : 164 pp .C .S .S .C . (Canada Soil Survey Committee) . 1978b. The Canada Soil Information System (CanSIS) :Manual for describing soils in the field . J . Dumanski (ed .), Rev . ed . Agr. Can ., Ottawa.92 pp . plus appendices .C .S .S .C. (Canada Soil Survey Committee) . 1978c. Manual on soil sampling and methods of analysis. J .A. McKeague (ed .), Can. Soc. Soil Sci ., Ottawa . 212 pp .Daubenmire, R .F . 1959. A canopy-coverage method of vegetation analysis . Northw . Sci . 33 :43-64 .Daubenmire, R .F . 1968 . Plant communities . Harper and Row, New York, 300 pp .Daubenmire, R . and J .B. Daubenmire. 1968 . Forest vegetation of eastern Washington and norther nIdaho . Wash. Agr. Exp. Sta. Tech . Bull. 60 : 104 pp .181

Day, D., C. Zinkan and G. Wickware . 1975 . A multidisciplinary approach to resource inventory i nnational parks . Parks Can., Calgary . 59 pp .del Moral, R. and R .S . Fleming. 1979. Structure of coniferous forest communities in western Washington: Diversity and ecotope properties . Vegetatio 41 : 143-154 .Dix, R .L. and J .M .A . Swan . 1971 . The roles of disturbance and succession in upland forest a tCandle Lake, Saskatchewan. Can. J . Bot . 49 : 657-676 .Donald, D .B . and D .J . Alger . 1984. Limnological studies in Kootenay National Park . Part One :Thè lakes . Env . Can ., Can . Wildlife Serv ., Edmonton, Alberta . 125 pp .Douglas, G .W . 1974. Montane zone vegetation of the Alsek River region, southwestern Yukon . Can .J . Bot . 52 : 2505-2532 .Douglas, R .J .W ., H . Gabrielse, J .O . Wheeler, D .F . Stott and H .R . Belyea . 1970 . Geology ofWestern Canada . In R .J .W . Douglas (ed .) . Geology and economic minerals of Canada .Geol . Surv . Can ., Econ . Geol . Rep . 1 : 366-488 .Dumanski, J ., B . Kloosterman and S .E . Brandon . 1975 . Concepts, objectives and structure of th eCanada Soil Information System . Can. J . Soil Sci. 55 : 181-187 .Eady, K. 1971 . Ecology of the alpine and timberline vegetation of Big White Mountain, British Columbia. PhD thesis, Univ . of Brit . Col ., Vancouver .Eis, S . 1980 . Effect of vegetative competition on regeneration of white spruce . Can . J . For . Res .11 : 1-8 .Emlen, J .T . 1971 . Population densities of birds derived from transect counts . Auk 88 : 323-342 .Emlen, J .T . 1977 . Estimating breeding season bird densities from transect counts . Auk 88 : 323-342 .Fulton, R .J ., N .F . Alley, and R .A . Achard . 1984. Surficial geology, Seymour Arm, British Columbia. Geol . Surv . Can ., Open File 1002 .Fulton, R .J . and E .C. Halstead . 1972 . Quaternary geology of the southern Canadian Cordillera .Guidebook, Field Excursion AO2, 24th Int . Geol. Congr., Montréal . 49 pp .Gary, M ., R . McAfee and C .L . Wolf (eds.) . 1972. Glossary, of geology . Amer. Geol . Inst . ,Washington, D .C ., 805 pp .Gilman, R .A . 1972 . Geology of the Clachnacudainn salient near Albert Canyon, British Columbia .Can. J . Earth Sci . 9 : 1447-1454 .Gray, J .T . 1972 . Debris accretion on talus slopes in the central Yukon Territory . In H.O. Slaymakerand H .J . McPherson (eds .), Mountain geomorphology : Geomorphological processes inthe Canadian Cordillera. Brit. Col . Geogr. Ser., No . 14, Tantalus Research Ltd ., Van -couver. pp .75-84 .Habeck, J .R. 1969. A gradient analysis of the timberline zone at Logan Pass, Glacier Park, Montana. Northw . Sci . 43 : 65-73 .Haber, E . and J .H. Soper . 1980. Vascular plants of Glacier National Park, British Columbia, Cana -da . Syllogeus 24 : 34 pp .Hale, Jr., M .E . and W .L. Culberson . 1970 . A fourth checklist of the lichens of the continenta lUnited States and Canada . Bryol . 73 : 499-543 .Harland, W .B ., K.N . Herod and D.H . Krinsley . 1966. The definition and identification of tills an dtillites . Earth - sci . Rev . 2 : 225-256 .182

Hartigan, J . 1983 . Cluster analysis of variables . In W .J . Dixon (chief ed.), BMPD statistical soft -ware, Univ. of Calif . Press, Berkeley, pp . 448-455 .Harward, M .E . and C.T . Youngberg . 1969. Soils from Mazama ash in Oregon : Identification, distributionand properties . In S . Pawluk (ed .), Pedology and Quaternary research . AlbertaInst . Pedol ., Univ . of Alberta, Edmonton, pp . 163-178 .Hawksworth, D .L ., P .W . James and B .J . Coppins . 1980. Checklist of British lichen-forming, lichenicolousand allied fungi . Lichenol. 12 : 1-115 .Hettinger, L.R . 1975. Vegetation of the Vine Creek drainage basin, Jasper National Park. PhD the -sis, Univ . of Alberta . 269 pp .Heusser, C .J . 1956 . Postglacial environments in the Canadian Rocky Mountains . Ecol. Monogr .26 : 263-302 .Hitchcock, C .L . and A . Cronquist . 1973 . Flora of the Pacific Northwest . Univ. of Washin . Press ,Seattle, 730 pp .Holland, S .S . 1964. Landforms of British Columbia . Brit . Col . Dep. Mines Petrol . Resource sBull. 48 : 138 pp .Holland, W.D. 1976. Biophysical land classification in Banff and Jasper National Parks . In J . Thieand G . Ironsides (eds.), Ecological (biophysical) land classification in Canada . Env .Can ., Lands Dir., Ecol . Land Classif . Ser. 1 : 221-237 .Holroyd, G .L . and K .J . Van Tighem . 1983. Ecological (biophysical) land classification of Banffand Jasper National Parks . Vol . IIl : The wildlife inventory . Can . Wildl . Serv . Rep .to Parks Can ., Calgary . 444 pp .Hrapko, J .O . and G .H . La Roi . 1978 . The alpine tundra vegetation of Signal Mountain, Jasper NationalPark . Can. J . Bot . 56 : 309-332 .Inventory and Engineering Branch . 1980 . Snow survey measurements . Summary . 1935 - 1980. Brit .Col . Min . Env., Inv. Eng. Br ., Victoria . 219 pp .Jackson, L .E ., Jr. 1979. A catastrophic glacial outburst flood (jokulhlaup) mechanism for debri sflow generation at the Spiral Tunnels, Kicking Horse River basin, British Columbia . Can .Geotech. J . 16 : 806-813 .Jackson, L .E ., Jr ., G .M . MacDonald and M .C . Wilson . 1982 . Paraglacial origin for terraced rive rsediments in Bow Valley, Alberta . Can. J . Earth Sci . 19 : 2219-2231 .Jacques, D .R. and A .H . Legge . 1974 . Living Environment : Vegetation. In The Mountain Environ -ment and Urban Society, Kananaskis Pilot Study, Env . Sci. Centre (Kananaskis), Univ .of Calgary, pp. 193-280 .Janz, B . and D . Storr. 1977 . The climate of the contiguous mountain parks : Banff, Jasper, Yoho ,Kootenay. Env . Can ., Atmos. Env . Serv ., Met . Applic. Br ., Proj . Rep . No . 30 .Jeffrey, W .W ., L .A . Bayrock, L .E. Lutwick and J .F . Dormaar . 1968 . Land-vegetation typologyin the upper Oldman River basin, Alberta . Can . Dep . For . Rur. Dev . Publ . 1202 : 45PP .Johnson, J .D. 1975 . An evaluation of the summer range of bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis canadensisShaw) on Ram Mountain, Alberta . MSc thesis, Univ . of Calgary .Johnson, P .L . and W .D. Billings . 1962. The alpine vegetation of the Beartooth Plateau in relatio nto cryopedogenic processes and patterns. Ecol . Monogr . 32 : 105-135 .183

Jurdant, M., D .S . Lacate, S .C. Zoltai, G .G . Runka and R. Wells . 1975 . Biophysical land classificationin Canada . In Forest Soils and Forest Land Management . Proc . Fourth N .Amer . For . Soils Conf ., Les Presses de l'Univ . Laval . pp . 485-495 .Kershaw, H .M . 1981 . A study of plant community characteristics of Prairie Creek alluvial fan, NahanniNational Park, N .W .T. MSc thesis, Univ . of Alberta, 198 pp .Kilmer, V .J . and L.T . Alexander . 1949 . Methods of making mechanical analyses of soils . Soil Sci .68 : 15-24 .King, R .H . and G.R . Brewster . 1976 . Characteristics and genesis of some subalpine Podzols (Spodosols),Banff National Park, Alberta . Arct . Alp . Res . 8 : 91-104 .Kirby, C .L. and R .T . Ogilvie. 1969 . The forests of the Marmot Creek Watershed Research Basin .Dep. Fish. For., Can . For. Serv . Publ. 1259 : 1-37 .Knapik, L .J . and G .M . Coen. 1974 . Detailed soil survey of the Mount Revelstoke summit area .Alta . Inst . of Pedology Publ . M-74-3, Soil Res. Inst . Publ . No . 504. 118 pp .Knapik, L .J . and M .M . Landais . 1974. Environmental fragility rating . In L .J . Knapik and G .M .Coen. Detailed soil survey of the Mount Revelstoke summit area . Alberta Inst . Pedol .Publ . M-74-3, Univ . of Alberta, 118 pp .Knapik, L .J ., G .W . Scotter and W .W. Pettapiece . 1973 . Alpine soil and plant community relation -ships of the Sunshine area, Banff National Park . Arct . Alp . Res. 5 : A161-A170 .Kondla, N. 1978 . An overview vegetation survey of Kananaskis Provincial Park . Alberta Rec .Parks Wildl ., Edmonton . 123 pp .Kowall, R .C. 1980 . Soil and terrain of the Seymour Arm Area (N .T .S . Map 82M) . Brit . Col .Min . of Env ., Victoria . RAB Bulletin 19 : 115 pp .Krajina, V .J . 1965 . Biogeoclimatic zones and classification of British Columbia . Ecol. West . Nor .Am. 1 : 1-17 .Kuchar, P . 1973 . Habitat types of Waterton Lakes National Park . Rep . to Parks Can ., Calgary ,Alberta . 301 pp .Kuchar, P . 1978 . The vegetation of Yoho National Park . Rep . to Parks Can ., Calgary, Alberta . 38 5PP .Kujala, V . 1945 . Waldvegetationsuntersuchungen in Kanada . Annal . Acad. Sci . Fenn ., Ser . A, 4 :1-426 .Lacate, D.S. 1969 . Guidelines for biophysical land classification . Can . For . Serv . Publ. 1264 : 6 1PP -Laidlaw, T.F . 1971 . The black spruce (Picea mariana) vegetation of Jasper and Banff Parks . MScthesis, Univ . of Alberta, 190 pp .Landim, P .M . and L .A . Frakes. 1968 . Distinction between tills and other diamictons based on texturalcharacteristics . J . Sed . Petrol . 38 : 1213-1223 .La Roi, G .H . 1975. A description and delineation of the major plant community types along theSignal-Pyramid environmental transect in Jasper National Park . In G .H . La Roi, T.D .Lee and G.F . Tande . A study of vegetation in relation to elevation and fire history inthe Athabasca River valley near Jasper townsite . Rep . to Parks Can., Calgary . 291 pp .Lea, E .C . 1980 . Explanatory legend for vegetation maps of the East Kootenay area . Brit . Col .Min. Env ., Kelowna, 36 pp .184

Lea, E .C . 1983 . Explanatory legend for the Purcell study area vegetation maps . Brit. Col . Min .Env ., Kelowna, 45 pp .Lea, E.C. 1984. Biophysical resources of the East Kootenay area : Vegetation . Vol. 1 . Regiona lVegetation . Brit. Col . Min . Env ., Kelowna .Leopold, L .B ., M.G. Wolman and J .P . Miller. 1964 . Fluvial processes in geomorphology. W.H .Freeman and Co., San Francisco . 522 pp .Lewis, F .J ., E.S . Dowding and E.H . Moss . 1928 . The vegetation of Alberta . II . The swamp, moor ,and bog forest vegetation of central Alberta . J . Ecol . 16 : 19-70 .Lloyd, D .A . (comp .) 1983. Identification and interpretation of ecosystem units in the Nort hThompson-Shuswap drainage basins . Brit . Col . Min . For ., Kamloops, 68 pp .Luckman, B .H. 1972 . Some observations on the erosion of talus slopes by snow avalanches in Sur -prise Valley, Jasper National Park, Alberta . In H .O. Slaymaker and H .J . McPherson(eds.), Mountain geomorphology : Geomorphological processes in the Canadian Cordillera .Brit. Col . Geogr . Ser., No . 14, Tantalus Research Ltd ., Vancouver, pp . 85-92 .Mapping Systems Working Group . 1981 . A soil mapping system for Canada : Revised . Agr. Can . ,Land Resource Research Inst ., Contrib . No. 142, 94 pp .McKeague, J .A. 1967 . An evaluation of 0 .1 m pyrophosphate and pyrophosphate-dithionite in comparisonwith oxalate as extractants of the accumulation products in Podzols and some othersoils . Can . J . Soil Sci . 47 : 95-101 .McKeague, J .A ., B .H . Sheldrick and J .G . Desjardins . 1978. Compilation of data for C .S .S.C. referencesoil samples . Agr. Can ., Soil Research Inst ., 35 pp .McKeague, J .A. and P .N . Sprout . 1975. Cemented subsoils (duric horizons) in some soils of BritishColumbia . Can . J . Soil Sci . 55 : 189-203 .McLean, A. 1970 . Plant communities of the Similkameen Valley, B .C . and their relationships t osoils. Ecol. Monogr . 40 : 403-424 .Mortimer, P .R. 1978 . The alpine vascular flora and vegetation of Prospect Mountain, Front Range ,Rocky Mountains, Alberta . MSc thesis, Univ . of Alberta, 238 pp .Moss, E .H . 1953 . Forest communities in northwestern Alberta . Can . J . Bot . 31 : 212-252 .Mueller-Dombois, D . and H. Ellenberg . 1974 . Aims and methods of vegetation ecology . John Wileyand Sons, New York . 547 pp .Nasmith, H ., W .H . Mathews and G .E . Rouse. 1967. Bridge River ash and some other recent ashbeds in British Columbia . Can . J . Earth Sci . 4 : 163-170 .Nasmith, H .W . and A .G . Mercer. 1979. Design of dykes to protect against debris flows at Por tAlice, British Columbia . Can . Geotech . J . 16 : 748-757 .Noble, I .R. and R .O. Slatyer, 1977. Post-fire succession of plants in Mediterranean ecosystems . InH.A. Mooney and C .E . Conrad (eds .), Proc . Symp. Environmental Consequences ofFire and Fuel Management in Mediterranean Climate Ecosystems. USDA For. Serv .Gen . Tech. Rep. WO-3 : 27-36 .Noble, I .R . and R .O. Slatyer . 1978 . Recent developments in ecological succession theory . In A .O .Nicholls (ed .), Workshop on Succession and Disturbance in Australia . CSIRO, Div .Land Use Research Tech . Mem. 78126 : 14-24 .Noble, I .R . and R .O. Slatyer. 1980. The use of vital attributes to predict successional changes inplant communities subject to recurring disturbance . Vegetatio 43 : 5-21 .185

Ogilvie, R .T . 1976 . The Alpine and Subalpine in the Rocky Mountains of Alberta . In H .A .Luttmerding and J .A . Shields (eds .), Proc . Workshop on alpine and subalpine environments,Victoria, B .C .Okulitch, V.J . 1949. Geology of part of the Selkirk Mountains in the vicinity of the main line of th eCanadian Pacific Railways, British Columbia, Geol . Surv . Can . Bulletin 14: 26 pp .Okulitch, A .V. and G .J . Woodsworth . 1977. Kootenay River, Canada - U .S.A . Geol . Surv . Can . ,Open File 481 .Orloci, L . and W . Stanek . 1979 . Vegetation survey of the Alaska Highway, Yukon Territory : type sand gradients . Vegetatio 41 : 1-56 .Packer, J .G. 1983 . Flora of Alberta . Second ed . Univ . of Toronto Press, Toronto . 687 pp .Parks Canada . 1980 . Mount Revelstoke and Glacier National Parks . Climate . Supply Serv. Can ., 4PP -Pawluk, S . and R . Brewer. 1975 . Micromorphological, mineralogical and chemical characteristics ofsome Alpine soils and their genetic implications . Can. J . Soil Sci . 55 : 415-437 .Pe, G.G . and D .J .W . Piper. 1975 . Textural recognition of mudflow deposits . Sediment. Geol . 13 :303-306 .Pease, J .L ., R.H . Vowles and L .B . Keith . 1979. Interaction of snowshoe hares with woody vegetation. J . Wildl . Manage . 43 : 43-60 .Peech, M . 1965 . Hydrogen ion activity . In Black, et al. (eds .), Methods of soil analysis . Amer .Soc . Agron . Monogr . 9 : 914-926 .Perla, R .I . and M . Martinelli Jr. 1975 . Avalanche Handbook . USDA, Agr . Handb . 489 : 238 pp .Pettapiece, W .W . and S . Pawluk. 1972 . Clay mineralogy of soils developed partially from volcanicash . Soil Sci. Soc. Amer . Proc. 36 : 515-519 .Pfister, R .D ., B.L . Kovalchik, S.F . Arno and R .C . Presby. 1977 . Forest habitat types of Montana. USDA For . Serv . Gen . Tech. Rep. INT-34 : 174 pp .Poll, D .M., M .M . Porter, R .M . Wershler and L .W . Gyug. 1984. Ecological land classification o fKootenay National Park, British Columbia . Vol . II : Wildlife resource . Can. Wildl .Serv . rep . to Parks Can ., Calgary .Poore, M .E .D . 1962 . The method of successive approximation in descriptive ecology . Adv. Ecol .Res . 1 : 35-68 .Porter, S.C . and G .H. Denton . 1967 . Chronology of Neoglaciation in the North American Cordillera.Amer. J . Sci. 265 : 177-210 .Poulton, T .P . and P .S . Simony . 1980. Stratigraphy, sedimentology, and regional correlation of th eHorsethief Creek Group (Hadrynian, Late Precambrian) in the northern Purcell and Sel -kirk Mountains, British Columbia . Can. J . Earth Sci . 17 : 1708-1724 .Powers, H.A . and R.E . Wilcox . 1964. Volcanic ash from Mount Mazama (Crater Lake) and fro mGlacier Peak . Science 144 : 1334-1336 .Price, R.A . and E .W . Mountjoy. 1970. Geologic structure of the Canadian Rocky Mountains betweenBow and Athabasca rivers - A progress report . Geol . Assoc . Can ., Spec . PaperNo . 6 : 25 pp .Rachocki, A . 1981 . Alluvial fans. John Wiley & Sons, Toronto. 161 pp .186

Raup, H .M . 1934 . Phytogeographic studies in the Peace and upper Liard River regions, Canada .Contr . Arn . Arb . 6 : 1-111 .Raup, H.M. 1947 . The botany of the southwestern Mackenzie. Sargentia 6 : 1-275 .Reynolds, R .T ., J .M. Scott and R .A . Nussbaum . 1980 . A variable circular-plot method for estimatingbird numbers . Condor 82 : 309-313 .Roed, M .A. and D.G . Wasylyk . 1973 . Age of inactive alluvial fans - Bow River valley, Alberta .Can . J . Earth Sci . 10 : 1834-1840 .Ross, J .V. 1968 . Structural relations at the eastern margin of the Shuswap Complex, near Revel -stoke, southeastern British Columbia . Can. J . Earth Sci . 5 : 831-849 .Rowe, J .S. 1972 . Forest regions of Canada . Can . For. Serv . Publ . 1300 : 172 pp .Rowe, J .S. 1979. Revised working paper on methodology/philosophy of ecological land classificatio nin Canada . In C .D .A . Rubec (ed .), Applications of ecological (biophysical) land classificationin Canada . Env . Can ., Lands Dir ., Ecol . Land Classif . Ser . No . 1 : 23-30 .Russell, S .O. 1972 . Behavior of steep creeks in a large flood . In H.O. Slaymaker and H .J .McPherson (eds .), Mountain geomorphology : Geomorphological processes in the CanadianCordillera . Brit . Col . Geogr. Ser ., No . 14, Tantalus Research Ltd., Vancouver, pp .223-227 .Ryder, J .M . 1971 . The stratigraphy and morphology of para-glacial alluvial fans in south-centra lBritish Columbia. Can. J . Earth Sci . 8 : 279-298 .Ryder, J .M . 1978 . Geology, landforms and surficial materials . In K .W .G . Valentine, P .N .Sprout, T .E. Baker and L.M . Lavkulich (eds .), The soil landscapes of British Columbia .Brit . Col . Min . Env., Resource Anal . Br ., pp .11-33 .Ryder, J .M . 1981 . Biophysical resources of the East Kootenay area : terrain . Brit. Col. Min .Env., Terrestrial Studies Br. APD Bull . 7 : 152 pp .Schaerer, P .A . 1972 . Terrain and vegetation of snow avalanche sites at Rogers Pass, British Columbia. In H.O. Slaymaker and H .J . McPherson (eds .) Mountain geomorphology B .C .Geog. Series, No . 14. Tantalus Research Ltd ., Vancouver, pp . 215-222 .See, M .G . and L .C . Bliss . 1980. Alpine lichen-dominated communities in Alberta and the Yukon .Can . J . Bot . 58 : 2148-2170 .Sharp, R .P . and L .H . Nobles. 1953 . Mudflow of 1941 at Wrightwood, southern California . Geol .Soc . Am. Bull. 64 : 547-560 .Shepherd, R .F . 1959. Phytosociological and environmental characteristics of outbreak an dnon-outbreak areas of the two-year cycle spruce budworm, Choristoneura fumiferana .Ecology 40 : 608-620 .Shera, W .P . and D .J . Grant . 1980. A hierarchical watershed coding system for British Columbia .Brit. Col . Min . Env., Resource Anal . Br ., RAB Tech . Paper 3 : 22 pp .Smith, C .A.S ., G .M . Coen, and D .J . Pluth . 1981 . Podzolic soils with luvisolic-like morphologies inthe Upper Subalpine subzone of the Canadian Rockies . 1 . Stratigraphy and mineralogy .Can . J . Soil Sci . 61 : 325-335 .Smith, C .A .S ., G .A . Spiers, G .M . Coen, and D .J . Pluth . 1983. On the origin of Fe in some Podzolicsoils formed on calcareous parent materials in the Canadian Rocky Mountains . Can .J . Soil Sci. 63 : 691-696 .187

Sneddon, J .I ., L.M . Lavkulich, and L . Farstad . 1972a. The morphology and genesis of some Al -pine soils in British Columbia, Canada : I . Morphology, genesis, and classification . SoilSci. Soc . Amer . Proc. 36 : 100-104 .Sneddon, J .I ., L.M . Lavkulich, and L . Farstad . 1972b. The morphology and genesis of some Al -pine soils in British Columbia, Canada : II . Physical, chemical, and mineralogical determinationsand genesis . Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 36 : 104-110 .Soper, J .H . no date. The vascular plants of Mount Revelstoke National Park, British Columbia ,1969-70. Rep. to Parks Can . 7 pp .Stebbins, R.C. 1966 . A field guide to western reptiles and amphibians . Houghton Mifflin Co., Bos -ton .Steele, R ., R .D . Pfister, R .A . Ryker, and J .A. Kittams. 1981 . Forest habitat types of central Ida -ho. USDA For. Ser . Gen. Tech . Rep . INT-114 : 138 pp .Steele, R ., S .V . Cooper and D .M. Ondov. 1983 . Forest habitat types of eastern Idaho-western Wyoming. USDA For . Serv . Gen. Tech . Rep . INT-144 : 122 pp .Stotler, R . and B . Crandall-Stotler . 1977. A checklist of the liverworts and hornworts of Nort hAmerica. Bryol . 80 : 405-428 .Sukachev, V . and N . Dylis . 1964. Fundamentals of forest biogeocoenology (transl . J .M . Maclennan). Oliver and Boyd Ltd., London .Tansley, A .G. 1935 . The use and abuse of vegetational concepts and terms . Ecology 16 : 284-307 .Tate, J . Jr. and D.J . Tate. 1982. The blue list for 1982 . Amer . Birds 36 : 126-135 .Taylor, R .L. (coord. ed.) 1983 . Preliminary list of the rare plants of British Columbia . Bot .Gard., Univ . of Brit . Col., Vancouver, 55 pp .Thornbury, W .D . 1954. Principles of geomorphology . John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York . 61 8PP -Trottier, G .C. 1972 . Ecology of the alpine vegetation of Highwood Pass, Alberta . MSc thesis, Univ .of Calgary, 229 pp .Trottier, G .C . and G.W . Scotter . 1973 . A survey of backcountry use and the resulting impact nea rLake Louise, Banff National Park . Can . Wildl . Serv ., Edmonton, Alberta . 254 pp .Toogood, J .A. and T.W . Peters. 1953. Comparison of methods of mechanical analysis of soils .Can. J . Agric . Sci . 33 : 159-171 .U.S. Salinity Laboratory Staff . 1954 . Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkaline soils . L.A .Richards (ed .) . Agric . Handbook 60, U .S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington, D .C .Utzig, G.F., P .G . Comeau, O.L. Macdonald, M .V. Ketcheson, T .F. Braumandl, A.R . Warnerand G.W . Still, 1983. A field guide for identification and interpretation of ecosystems inthe Nelson Forest Region . Brit . Col . Min . For., Nelson, 75 pp .Valentine, K .W .G. and L.M. Lavkulich. 1978 . The Soil Orders of British Columbia . In K .W .G .Valentine, P .N. Sprout, T .E . Baker and L .M. Lavkulich (eds .), The soil landscapes ofBritish Columbia. Brit. Col . Min . Env ., Resource Anal . Br ., pp. 87-95 .Van Tighem, K . and L.W . Guyg . [1984] . Ecological land classification of Mount Revelstoke an dGlacier National Parks, British Columbia . Vol. II : Wildlife resource . Can . Wildl .Serv . rep . to Parks Can., Calgary . 254 pp .188

Walker, B .D., S. Kojima, W .D . Holland and G .M . Coen . 1978. Land classification of the Lak eLouise Study Area, Banff National Park ., Can . For. Serv . Inf . Rep . NOR-X-160 : 12 1PP .Walker, B .D ., D .T. Allan and W .S . Taylor. 1982a . Geomorphology . In W .D . Holland and G .M .Coen (eds .), Ecological (biophysical) land classification of Banff and Jasper Nationa lParks . Vol . II : Soil and vegetation resources . Alberta Inst. Pedol . Pub! . SS-82-44 .Univ. of Alberta, Edmonton . pp . 20-61 .Walker, B .D ., I .G .W . Corns, W.S. Taylor and G .M . Coen . 1982b . Mapping methodology . InW .D . Holland and G .M .Coen (eds .), Ecological (biophysical) land classification o fBanff and Jasper National Parks . Vol. II : Soil and vegetation resources . Alberta Inst .Pedol . Publ . SS-82-44. Univ . of Alberta . Edmonton . pp . 159-167 .Walker, B.D ., W .D . Holland and G .M . Coen . 1982c. Soils . In W .D . Holland and G .M . Coen(eds .), Ecological (biophysical) land classification of Banff and Jasper National Parks .Vol . II : Soil and vegetation resources . Alberta Inst. Pedol . Publ. SS-82-44 . Univ . ofAlberta, Edmonton . pp . 62-70 .Walker, B .D ., W.S. Taylor, D .T. Allan and R .E . Wells . 1982d . Ecosection/Ecosite Descriptions .In W.D. Holland and G .M . Coen (eds .), Ecological (biophysical) land classification o fBanff and Jasper National Parks. Vol . II : Soil and vegetation resources. Alberta Inst .Pedol . Publ . SS-82-44 . Univ . of Alberta, Edmonton .Walker, B .D ., D .T . Allan and W .S . Taylor. 1984a . Geomorphology . In P .L . Achuff, W .D .Holland, G .M . Coen and and K . Van Tighem (eds.), Ecological land classification ofKootenay National Park, British Columbia. Vol. I : Integrated resource description .Alberta Inst . Pedol . Publ . M-84-10. Univ . of Alberta, Edmonton .Walker, B.D., W .S. Taylor, P .L . Achuff, D .M. Poll, D .T . Allan and M.M. Porter . 1984b. Descriptionsof Ecosections/Ecosites . In P .L . Achuff, W .D. Holland, G.M . Coen and K .Van Tighem (eds .), Ecological land classification of Kootenay National Park, British Columbia.Vol . I : Integrated resource description. Alberta Inst . Pedol . Publ . M-84-10 .Univ . of Alberta, Edmonton .Walker, B .D ., W .S . Taylor, and G .M . Coen . 1984c. Ecological land classification methodology . InP .L . Achuff, W .D . Holland, G.M . Coen and K . Van Tighem (eds .), Ecological lan dclassification of Kootenay National Park, British Columbia. Vol . I : Integrated resourc edescription . Alberta Inst. Pedol. Publ . M-84-10 . Univ . of Alberta, Edmonton .Walmsley, M ., G. Utzig, T. Vold, D . Moon and J . van Barneveld (eds .) . 1980 . Describing ecosystemsin the field . Brit. Col . Min. Env ., Res . Anal . Br . Tech . Paper 2 : 224 pp .Westgate, J .A . and A . Dreimanis . 1967 . Volcanic ash layers of recent age at Banff National Park ,Alberta, Canada . Can. J . Earth Sci . 4 : 155-161 .Westgate, J .A., D.G .W. Smith and H . Nichols. 1969 . Late Quaternary pyroclastic layers in th eEdmonton area, Alberta . In S . Pawluk (ed .), Pedology and Quaternary research. AlbertaInst. Pedol ., Univ . of Alberta, Edmonton, pp . 179-186 .Westgate, J .A. 1977. Identification and significance of late Holocene tephra from Otter Creek ,southern British Columbia, and localities in west-central Alberta . Can. J . Earth Sci . 14 :2593-2600 .Westhoff, V . and E. van der Maarel . 1973 . The Braun-Blanquet Approach . In R.H . Whittake r(ed .), Ordination and Classification of Communities, Handbook of Vegetation Science 5 :617-726, W. Junk, The Hague .Wheeler, J .O. 1963 . Rogers Pass map-area, British Columbia and Alberta. Geol . Surv. Can ., Paper62-32 .Wheeler, J .O. 1965 . Big Bend map-area, British Columbia . Geol . Surv . Can ., Paper 64-32 .189

Whittaker, R .H . 1967 . Gradient analysis of vegetation . Biol . Rev . 42 : 207-264 .Whittaker, R .H. 1973a. Dominance-types . In R.H . Whittaker, (ed.), Ordination and classificatio nof communities, Handbook of Vegetation Science 5 : 387-402 ., W . Junk, The Hague .Whittaker, R .H . 1973b . Direct gradient analysis . In R .H . Whittaker (ed.), Ordination and classificationof communities, Handbook of Vegetation Science 5 : 7-32, W . Junk, The Hague .Wiken, E .B . 1980 . Rationale and methods of ecological land surveys : an overview of Canadian approaches. In D.G . Taylor (comp . and ed.), Land/Wildlife Integration . Env . Can . ,Lands Dir ., Ecol . Land Classif. Ser . No . 11 : 11-19 .Willard, B.E. and J .W . Marr. 1970. Effects of human activities on alpine tundra ecosystems i nRocky Mountain National Park, Colorado . Biol . Conserv . 2 : 257-265 .Willard, B.E . and J .W. Marr. 1971 . Recovery of alpine tundra under protection after damage b yhuman activities in the Rocky Mountains of Colorado . Biol . Conserv . 3 : 181-190 .Winder, C .G . 1965 . Alluvial cone construction by alpine mudflow in a humid temperate region .Can . J . Earth Sci . 2 : 270-277 .Wittneben, U. 1980 . Soil resources of the Lardeau map area . Brit . Col. Min. Env ., Resourc eAnal . Br . Bull . 15 .Wittneben, U . and L . Lacelle. 1978 . The Columbia Mountains and the southern Rockies . InK .W .G . Valentine, P .N . Sprout, T.E . Baker and L .M . Lavkulich (eds .), The soi llandscapes of British Columbia . Brit . Col . Min . Env ., Resource Anal . Br . pp .135-147 .Yarie, J . 1980. The role of understory vegetation in the nutrient cycle of forested ecosystems in th emountain hemlock biogeoclimatic zone . Ecology 61 : 1498-1514 .190

APPENDIX A - PLANTS OF MOUNT REVELSTOKE AND GLACIER NATIONALPARKSThis list is based on collections made during the ecological land classification, collections in theMRNP and GNP herbarium, and checklists for MRNP (Soper n .d .) and GNP (Haber and Soper(1980) . Nomenclature for vascular plants follows primarily Packer (1983) and Hitchcock and Cronquist(1973), for liverworts Stotler and Crandall-Stotler (1977), for mosses Crum et al. (1973), andfor lichens Hale and Culberson (1970) and Hawksworth et al. (1980) . The two parks together have atotal of 546 vascular taxa (MRNP - 359, GNP - 533), 36 liverwort taxa (MRNP - 18, GNP - 36) ,130 moss taxa (MRNP - 65, GNP - 130) and 129 lichen taxa (MRNP - 70, GNP - 129) . Specie swith a t are considered calciphiles (see Chap . III) . A G following the taxon name indicates occurrenceonly in GNP and an R only in MRNP . Taxa with neither occur in both parks .LYCOPODIOPHYTALYCOPODI ACEAELycopodium alpinum L .Lycopodium annotinum L .Lycopodium complanatum L .Lycopodium obscurum L . RLycopodium selago L .Lycopodium sitchense Rupr .SELAGI NELLACEA ESelaginella densa Rydb .Selaginella selaginoides (L.) LinkEQUISETOPHYT AEQUI SETACEAEEquisetum arvense L .Equisetum fluviatile L .Equisetum palustre L . GEquisetum pratense Ehrh . GEquisetum sylvaticum L . GEquisetum variegatum Schleich .G tPOLYPODIOPHYT AOPHI OGLOSSACEAEBotrychium lunaria (L .) Sw .Botrychium multifcdum (Gmel .) Rupr .Botrychium simplex Hitchc . GBotrychium virginianum (L .) Sw . GG191

POLYPODIACEAEAdiantum pedatum L . var . aleuticum Rupr . tAspidotis densa (Brackenr .) Lell . = Cheilanthes siliquosa Maxon RAsplenium trichomanes L . tAsplenium viride Huds . tAthyrium distentifolium Taush ex Opiz = A . alpestre (Hoppe) RylandsAthyrium flix-femina (L.) RothBlechnum spicant (L .) Roth RCryptogramma crispa (L .) R.Br . var . acrostichoides (R .Br .) ClarkeCryptogramma stelleri (Gmel .) Prantl G tCystopteris fragilis (L .) Bernh . tDryopteris assimilas S . WalkerDryopteris filix-mas (L .) Schott . tGymnocarpium dryopteris (L.) Newm .Polypodium hesperium Max . = P. vulgare L . RPolystichum lonchitis (L .) Roth GPteridium aquilinum (L .) Kuhn var . pubescens Underw .Thelypteris phegopteris (L .) Slosson = Dryopteris phegopteris (L .) C . Chr . RWoodsia scopulina Eat .PINOPHYTACUPRESSACEAEJuniperus communis L . var . montana Ait .Juniperus horizontales Moench RThu,ta plicata DonPI NACEAEAbies lasiocarpa (Hook.) Nutt .Picea engelmannii ParryPinus albicaulis Engelm .Pinus contorta Dougl . ex Loud . var . latifolia Engelm .Pinus monticola Dougl . ex D. DonPseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb .) Franco var . glauca (Beissn .) FrancoTsuga heterophylla (Raf .) Sarg .Tsuga mertensiana (Bong.) Carr .TAXACEAETaxus brevifolia Nutt .MAGNOLIOPHYT AMAGNOLIATAEACERACEAEAcer glabrum Ton . var . douglasii (Hook .) Dipp .192

APOCYNACEAEApocynum androsaemifolium L .ARALIACEAEAralia nudicaulis L .Oplopanax horridum (Sm .) Miq .Asarum caudatum Lind] .ARISTOLOCHIACEAEBALSAMI NACEA EImpatiens noli-tangere L .RBERBERIDACEA EBerberis repens Lind] .RBETULACEAEAlnus crispa (Ait .) Pursh = A . viridis (Chaix) DC .Alnus tenuifolia Nutt . = A. incana (L.) MoenchBetula papyrifera Marsh .Corylus cornuta Marsh .RBORAGINACEAEMyosotis arvensis L . GMyosotis alpestris SchmidtGCAMPANULACEAECampanula lasiocarpa Cham .Campanula rotundifolia L .GCAPRIFOLIACEA ELinnaea borealis L .Lonicera involucrata (Rich.) Bank sLonicera utahensis Wats .Sambucus coerulea Raf . R193

Sambucus racemosa L. var . melanocarpa (Gray) McMinnSymphoricarpos albus (L.) BlakeSymphoricarpos occidentales Hook . RViburnum edule (Michx .) Raf .CARYOPHYLLACEAEArenaria capillaris Poir .Arenaria lateriflora L . = Moehringia lateriflora (L.) Fenil . GCerastium beeringianum Cham . & Schl .Cerastium vulgatum L . GDianthus armeria L .Dianthus deltoides L . RMinuartia biflora (L.) Schinz and Thell . = Arenaria sajanensis Willd .Minuartia obtusiloba (Rydb .) House = Arenaria obtusiloba (Rydb.) Fern . GMinuartia rubella (Wahl .) Graebn . = Arenaria rubella (Wahl.) Smith GSagina saginoides (L.) Karsten GSilene acaulis L . tSilene alba (Miller) Krause = Lychnis alba Miller GSilene cserei Baumg . GSilene drummondii Hook . GSilene scouleri Hook . GSilene uralensis (Rupr .) Bocq . = Lychnis apetala L . GSpergularia rubra (L .) J . & C . Presl . GStellaria calycantha (Ledeb .) Bon g .Stellaria crispa Cham . & Schl . GStellaria longipes Goldie GVaccaria pyramidata Medic . = V. segetalis (Neck .) Garcke ex Asch . GCELASTRACEAEPachystima myrsinites (Pursh) Raf .CHENOPODI ACEAEChenopodium album L .GCOMPOSITAEAchillea millefolium L .Adenocaulon bicolor Hook .Agoseris aurantiaca (Hook .) GreeneAnaphalis margaritacea (L.) Benth . & Hook .Antennaria alpina (L .) Gaertn .Antennaria corymbosa E. Nels .Antennaria lanata (Hook .) Greene GAntennaria racemosa GreeneAntennaria rosea Greene GAntennaria umbrinella Rydb . RArnica alpina (L .) OlinArnica amplexicaulis Nutt .Arnica cordifolia Hook . GArnica diversifolia Green eArnica latifolia Bong .Arnica longifolia D .C . Eaton G194

Arnica louiseana Farr GArnica mollis Hook .Arnica rydbergii Greene GArtemisia campestris L . GArtemisia michauxiana Bess .Aster adscendens Lindl . GAster borealis (Torr . & Gray) Prov . GAster ciliolatus Lindl . RAster conspicuus Lindl . RAster engelmannii (D .C . Eat .) Gra yAster foliaceus Lindl .Aster hesperius Gray GAster modestus Lindl .Aster sibiricus L . GCentaurea maculosa Lam . RChamomilla suaveolens (Pursh) Rydb . = Matricaria matricarioides (Less .) PorterChrysanthemum leucanthemum L .Cichorium intybus L .Cirsium arvense (L .) Scop .Cirsium brevistylum Cronq . GCirsium hookerianum Nutt . GCirsium vulgare (Savi) TenoreConyza canadensis (L .) Cronq . = Erigeron canadensis L .Crepis nana Rich . GCrepis tectorum L . GErigeron acris L . var . asteroides (Andrz . ex Bess .) DC .Erigeron acris L . var . elatus (Hook .) Cronq .Erigeron acris L . var . debilis GrayErigeron aureus Green eErigeron compositus PurshErigeron humilus Grah .Erigeron peregrinus (Pursh) Greene var . callianthemus (Greene) Cronq .Erigeron philadelphicus L . GGnaphalium microcephalum Nutt . RHaplopappus lyallii GrayHieracium albiflorum Hook .Hieracium canadense Michx . RHieracium cynoglossoides Arv .-Touv .Hieracium triste Willd . ssp . gracile (Hook.) Calder = H. gracile Hook .Lactuca biennis (Moench) Fern .Lactuca canadensis L . RLactuca muralis (L .) Fresen . GPetasites sagittatus (Banks) Gray GPetasites vitifolius Greene GRudbeckia hirta L .Saussurea densa (Hook .) Rydb . = S . nuda Ledeb . GSenecio fremontii Torr . & Gray GSenecio integerrimus Nutt .Senecio pauperculus Michx . GSenecio pseudaureus Rydb . RSenecio streptanthifolius Greene GSenecio triangularis Hook .Solidago canadensis L . var . subserrata (DC.) Cronq .Solidago multiradiata Ait . var . scopulorum GraySonchus arvensis L . Bieb . GSonchus asper (L .) Hill GTaraxacum eriophorum Rydb . GTaraxacum laevigatum (Willd .) DC . GTaraxacum lyratum (Ledeb .) DC .Tragopogon pratensis L. R195

CORNACEAECornus canadensis L .Cornus stolonifera Michx .CRASSULACEAESedum lanceolatum Torr .CRUCI FERA EArabis divaricarpa Neb . GArabis drummondii Gray G tArabis hirsuta (L .) Scop . GArabis holboellii Hornem . var . retrofracta (R .C . Grah .) Rydb . GArabis lemmonii Wats . GArabis lyallii Wats .Arabis lyrata L .Braya humilis (C .A . Meyer) Robins . GCapsella bursa-pastoris (L .) Medic . GCardamine bellidifolia L . GCardamine occidentalis (Wats .) Howell GCardamine oligosperma Nutt .Cardamine pensylvanica Muhl . ex Willd . GDraba aurea Vahl GDraba crassifolia R .C . Grah . GDraba incerta Payson GDraba lonchocarpa Rydb . var . lonchocarpa GDraba praealta GreeneDraba stenoloba Ledeb . GDROSERACEAEDrosera anglica Huds .G tELAEAGNACEAEShepherdia canadensis (L .)Nutt . tEmpetrum nigrum L .EMPETRACEAEERICACEAECassiope mertensiana (Bong .) DonCassiope tetragona (L .) Don var . saximontana (Small) Hitchc .Gaultheria humifusa (Graham) Rydb .Gaultheria ovatifolia Gra y196G

Kalmia polifolia Wang . var . microphylla (Hook .) Helle rLedum groenlandicum Oede rMenziesia glabella Gray = M. ferruginea Smith var . glabella (Gray) PeckOxycoccus microcarpus Turcz . GPhyllodoce empetriformis (Sw .) D. DonPhyllodoce glanduliflora (Hook.) Colvill ePhyllodoce x intermedia (Hook .) Camp GRhododendron albiflorum Hook .Vaccinium caespitosum Michx . GVaccinium membranaceum Dougl . ex Hook .Vaccinium myrtilloides Michx . RVaccinium myrtillus L . GVaccinium ovalifolium Sm .Vaccinium scoparium Leiber gVaccinium uliginosum L . GFUMARI ACEAECorydalis aurea Willd .RGENTIANACE.AEGentiana glauca Pallas GGentianella propinqua (Richards .) Gillet GMENYANTHACEA EMenyanthes trifoliata L. G tHIPPURI DACEAEHippuris vulgaris L .GHYDROPHYLLACEA EPhacelia hastata Doug1 . ex Lehm .Phacelia sericea (Graham) GrayRomanzo ffia sitchensis Bong . GGGHYPERICACEA EHypericum formosum H .B.K . var . scouleri (Hook .) Coult . GHypericum perforatum L . R197

LABIATAEGaleopsis tetrahit L .Lycopus uniflorus Michx .Mentha arvensis L . RPrunella vulgaris L .GLEGUMI NOBA EHedysarum boreale Nutt . RLathyrus ochroleucus Hook . GLupinus polyphyllus Lind] . var . burkei (Wats.) Hitchc . GLupinus latifolius Agardh RLupinus polyphyllus Lindl . RMedicago lupulina L . GMedicago sativa L .Melilotus alba Desr . GMelilotus officinalis (L .) Lam . GTrifolium agrarium L . RTrifolium aureum Poll . GTrifolium hybridum L . GTrifolium pratense L .Trifolium repens L . GVicia cracca L .LENTI BULARI ACEA EPinguicula vulgaris L. G tUtricularia intermedia HayneUtricularia minor L . GUtricularia vulgaris L . GGLOBELIACEA ELobelia kalmii L .G tMONOTROP ACEA EMonotropa hypopitys L .Monotropa uniflora L .RONAGRACEA ECircaea alpina L .Epilobium alpinum L . var . alpinum = E. anagallidifolium Lam .Epilobium alpinum L . var . clavatum (Trel .) Hitchc . = E. clavatum Trel . GEpilobium alpinum L . var . lactiflorum (Haussk.) Hitchc . = E . lactiflorum Haussk .Epilobium alpinum L . var . nutans (Hornem .) Hitchc . = E. hornemannii Reichenb .Epilobium angustifolium L .Epilobium glandulosum Lehm . = E. ciliatum Raf .Epilobium latifolium L .Epilobium luteum Pursh198G

Epilobium palustre L . GEpilobium watsonii Barbey var . occidentale (Trel .) Hitchc . GPLANTAGINACEA EPlantago lanceolata L .Plantago mapr L .POLYGONACEAEFagopyrum sagittatum Gilib . GOxyria digyna (L .) Hil lPolygonum amphibium L . GPolygonum austiniae Green ePolygonum douglasii Greene var . douglasiiPolygonum douglasii Greene var . latifolium (Engelm.) GreenePolygonum engelmannii GreenePolygonum minimum Wats . RPolygonum persicaria L . RPolygonum viviparum L . GRumex acetosella L .Rumex obtusifolius L . GGPORTULACACEAEClaytonia lanceolata Pursh GMontia parvi flora (Moc .) Green ePRI MULACEAEAndrosace septentrionalis L . GLysimachia thyrsiflora L . RPrimula mistassinica Michx . G tTrientalis europaea L . ssp . arctica (Fisch.) Hult . GPYROLACEA EChimaphila umbellata (L .) BartonMoneses uniflora (L.) Gra yPyrola asarifolia Michx .Pyrola chlorantha Sw . = P . virens Schweig . GPyrola minor L .Pyrola picta Sm .Pyrola secunda L . = Orthilia secunda (L .) HouseRANUNCULACEA EActaea rubra (Ait .) Willd .Anemone drummondii Wats .Anemone multi ida Poir . tAnemone occidentalis Wats .G199

Anemone parviflora Michx. G tAquilegia flavescens Wats .Aquilegia formosa Fisch . GCaltha leptosepala DC . GDelphinium nuttallianum Pritz . GRanunculus acris L .Ranunculus aquatilis L . RRanunculus eschscholtzii Schlecht .Ranunculus gmelinii DC. var . hookeri (Don) Benso nRanunculus pensylvanicus L .f . RRanunculus uncinatus D. DonRanunculus verecundus B .L . Robins .Trollius albiflorus (Gray) Rydb .RHAMNACEAECeanothus sanguineus PurshCeanothus velutinus Dougl . ex Hook .Rhamnus purshianus DC . RROSACEA EAmelanchier alnifolia Nutt .Aruncus sylvester Koste lDryas drummondii Richards . GtDryas octopetala L . var . hookeriana (Juz .) Breit . tFragaria virginiana Duchesne GFragaria vesca L . RGeum macrophyllum Willd . var . perincisum (Rydb .) RaupHolodiscus discolor (Pursh) Maxim . RLuetkea pectinata (Pursh) KuntzePotentilla argentea L . RPotentilla diversifolia Lehm .Potentilla drummondii Lehm .Potentilla fruticosa L. G tPotentilla hyparctica Malte GPotentilla norvegica L . GPotentilla palustris (L .) Scop . GPotentilla uniflora Ledeb .Potentilla villosa Pall .Prunus emarginata (Dougl .) WalpersPrunus pensylvanica L.f . RPrunus virginiana L . RRosa gymnocarpa Nutt . GRubus acaulis Michx . GRubus idaeus L . = R . strigosus Michx .Rubus parviflorus Nutt .Rubus pedatus Smit hRubus procerus Muell . = R. discolor Weihe & Nees RRubus pubescens Raf . GSibbaldia procumbens L .Sorbus scopulina Green eSorbus sitchensis Roeme rSpiraea densiflora Nutt . GSpiraea douglasii Hook . RSpiraea lucida Dougl . = Spiraea betulifolia Pallas var . lucida (Dougl .) Hitchc .200

RUBIACEAEGalium trifidum L . GGalium triflorum Michx .SALICACEAEPopulus balsamifera L . ssp . trichocarpa (Torr . & Gray) Braysha wPopulus tremuloides Michx .Sa ix arctica Pallas GSalix arctophila Cock . GSalix barclayi Anders .Salix barrattiana Hook . RSalix brachycarpa Nutt . ssp . brachycarpa GSalix candida Fluegge ex Willd . G tSalix commutata Bebb . GSalix drummondiana Barr . GSalix glauca L . var . villosa (Hook .) Anders .Salix lasiandra Benth . GSalix melanopsis Nutt . GSalix nivalis Hook . = S. reticulata L . var . nivalis (Hook .) Anders . GSalix prolixa Anders . GSalix pseudomonticola Ball = S. monticola BebbSalix scouleriana Barr .Salix sitchensis Sans . GSalix vestita Pursh GSANTALACEA EGeocaulon lividum (Richards .) Fern .GSAXI FRAGACEAEHeuchera cylindrica Dougl .Heuchera glabra Willd .Heuchera richardsonii R . Br . RLeptarncc ,za pyrolifolia (D . Don) R. Br .Mitella breweri Gra yMitella pentandra Hook . GMitella trifida Grah . GParnassia fimbriata Koni gParnassia parviflora DC. G tRibes lacustre (Pers.) Poir .Ribes laxiflorum Purs hSaxifraga adscendens L . GSaxifraga aizoides L. G tSaxifraga bronchialis L .Saxifraga caespitosa L. G tSaxifraga cernua L . GSaxifraga debilis Engelm . = S. rivularis L . GSaxifraga ferruginea Grah .Saxifraga lyallii Engelm .Saxifraga mertensiana Bong .Saxifraga occidentalis Wats .Saxifraga oppositifolia L . #Saxifraga rhomboidea Greene G201

Tellima grandiflora (Pursh) Dougl .Tiarella unifoliata Hook .GSCROPHULARI ACEAECastilleja hispida Benth .Castillep miniata Dougl .Castillefa occidentalis Torr .Castilleja rhexifolia Rydb .Collinsia parvifora Dougl . ex Lindl . GDigitalis purpurea L .Euphrasia canadensis Townsend GMelampyrum lineare Desr . GMimulus guttatus DC .Mirnulus lewisii PurshMimulus moschatus Dougl .Mimulus tilingii Regel .Pedicularis bracteosa Benth .Pedicularis racemosa Dougl .Penstemon ellipticus Coult . & Fisch .Penstemon fruticosus (Pursh) GreenePenstemon serrulatus Menzies RVerbascum thapsus.L .Veronica alpina L . var . unalaschensis Cham . & Schl .Veronica americana (Raf.) Schw .Veronica officinales L . RVeronica serpyllifolia L . GVeronica serpyllifolia L .UMBELLI FERAEAngelica genufexa Nutt . RCicuta douglasii (DC.) Coult . & RoseHeracleum lanatum Michx .Ligusticum canbyi Coult . & RoseOsmorhiza chilensis Hook . & Arn .Osmorhiza purpurea (Coult . & Rose) Suksd .Osmorhiza depauperata Phil . GURTI CACEAEUrtica dioica L . ssp . gracilis (Ait .)SelanderValeriana sitchensis Bong .VALERIANACEAEVI OLACEAEViola adunca J .E . SmithViola glabella Nutt . GViola orbiculata Geye rViola palustris L . G202

Viola reni folia Gra yViola rugulosa Greene = V. canadensis L . var . rugulosa (Greene) Hitchc .ARACEA ELysichiton americanum Hulten & St. JohnCYPERACEAELILIATA ECarex aenea Fern . GCarex albo-nigra Mack . GCarex angustior Wahl . GCarex aperta Boott . RCarex aquatilis Wahl . GCarex aurea Nutt. G tCarex brunnescens (Pers . ) Poir . GCarex canescens L . GCarex capillaris L . GCarex deweyana Schw . GCarex disperma Dewey GCarex eleusinoides Turcz . ex C .A . Meyer GCarex flava L . GCarex gynocrates Wormskj .Carex illota Bailey GCarex interior Bailey G tCarex kelloggii Boott . GCarex lasiocarpa Ehrh . GCarex lenticularis Michx .Carex leptalea Wahlenb . GCarex limosa L . GCarex macrochaeta C .A . MeyCarex mertensii Presc .Carex microglochin Wahl . GCarex microptera Mack .Carex nardina Fries GCarex nigricans MeyerCarex norvegica Retz . GCarex pachystachya Cham .Carex phaeocephala Pipe rCarex praticola Rydb . GCarex pyrenaica Wahl .Carex rossii Boott . GCarex rostrata Stokes GCarex scirpoidea Michx .Carex spectabilis DeweyCarex tenera Muhl . GCarex trisperma DeweyEleocharis nitida Fern . GEleocharis rostellata Torr . GEleocharis tenuis (Wild .) Schulte s var . borealis (Svens .) GleasonEriophorum angustifolium Honck .Eriophorum chamissonis MeyerEriophorum gracile Koch REriophorum viridi-carinatum (Engelm . ) Fern. GScirpus acutus Muhl . ex Bigel . GScirpus caespitosus L . GScirpus microcarpus Presl .G203

GRAMI NEA Ex Agroelymus mossii Lepage GAgropyron pectiniforme Roem . & Schul .Agropyron repens (L .) Beauv . GAgropyron trachycaulum (Link) Malte var . trachycaulum GAgropyron violaceum (Hornem .) Lang eAgrostis alba L . GAgrostis borealis Hartm . RAgrostis scabra Willd .Agrostis stolonifera L .Agrostis tenuis Sibth . GAgrostis thurberiana Hitchc .Agrostis variabilis Rydb .Aira praecox L . GBromus carinatus Hook . & Arn . = B. marginatus Ness GBromus ciliatus L .Bromus inermis Leysser GBromus sitchensis Trin . RBromus vulgaris (Hook.) Shea rCalamagrostis canadensis (Michx .) Beauv .Calamagrostis inexpansa Gray GCalamagrostis purpurascens R . Br . RCalamagrostis rubescens Buckl . RCinna latifolia (Trev.) Griseb .Dactylis glomerata L . GDanthonia spicata (L.) Beauv .Deschampsia atropurpurea (Wahl .) Scheele = Vahlodea purpurea (Wahl .) Frie sElymus glaucus Buckl . var . jepsonii Dav yElymus innovatus Beal RFestuca occidentalis Hook . RFestuca ovina L . var . brachyphylla (Schultes) Pipe rFestuca rubra L .Festuca subulata Trin . GGlyceria elata (Nash) Hitchc .Glyceria grandis Wats .Glyceria pulkhella (Nash) Schum . GGlyceria striata (Lam.) Hitchc . RHierochloe odorata (L.) Beauv . GHordeum jubatum L . GLolium perenne L .Melica smithii (Porter) Vasey GMelica subulata Scribn . GMuhlenbergia glomerata (Wind.) Trin . GPhleum alpinum L . = P. commutatum Gaudin GPhleum pratense L . GPoa alpina L . GPoa annua L .Poa arctica R . Br .Poa cusickii Vasey var . purpurascens (Beal) Hitchc .Poa epilis Scribn .Poa fendleriana (Steud .) Vasey GPoa gracillima Vasey RPoa grayana Vasey RPoa leptocoma Trin . GPoa nervosa (Hook .) Vasey RPoa palustres L .Poa pattersonii Vasey GPoa pratensis L . G204

Poa reflexa Vasey & Scribn . GPoa rupicola Nash = P . glauca Vahl GPoa stenantha Trin . GStipa columbiana Macoun GTrisetum cernuum Trin .Trisetum spicatum (L .) Richte rJUNCACEAEJuncus acuminatus Michx .Juncus alpinus Vill . = J. alpinoarticulatus ChaixJuncus balticus Willd . GJuncus bolanderi Engelm . GJuncus dudleyi Wieg . = J. tenuis Willd . var . dudleyi (Wieg .) Herm . RJuncus drummondii MeyerJuncus ensifolius Wickstr .Juncus mertensianus Bong .Juncus parryi Engelm .Juncus regelii Buch . GJuncus saximontanus Nels .Luzula arcuata (Wahl .) Wahl .Luzula hitchcockii L . Hamet-Ahti = L. glabrata (Hoppe) Desv .Luzula parviflora (Ehrh .) Desv .Luzula piperi (Cov .) Jones = L . wahlenbergii Rupr . GLuzula spicata (L .) DC .JUNCAGINACEA ETriglochin maritima L .Triglochin palustris L .GG j'LI LI ACEAECamassia quamash (Pursh) Greene GClintonia uniflora (Schult .) KunthDisporum hookeri (Torr .) Britt . var . oreganum (Wats .) JonesDisporum trachycarpum (Wats .) Benth . & Hook . GErythronium grandiflorum PurshLilium columbianum Hanson RLilium philadelphicum L . var . andinum (Nutt .) Ker . RSmilacina racemosa (L .) Desf . var . amplexicaulis (Nutt.) Wats .Smilacina stellata (L .) Desf . GStreptopus amplexifolius (L .) DC . var . amplexifoliusStreptopus amplexifolius (L . ) Desf . var . chalazatus Fassett RStreptopus roseus Michx . var . curvipes (Vail) FassetStreptopus roseus Michx . var . perspectus Fasset tStreptopus streptopoides (Ledeb.) Frye & Rigg GTofieldia glutinosa (Michx .) Pers . G tTofieldia pusilla (Michx.) Pers . GVeratrum eschscholtzii Gray = V. viride Ait .Zygadenus elegans Pursh G tZygadenus gramineus Rydb . = Z . venenosus Wats . var . gramineus (Rydb .) Walsh205

ORCHIDACEA ECorallorhiza maculata Raf . RCorallorhiza mertensiana Bong . GCorallorhiza striata Lindl .Corallorhiza trifida Chat .Goodyera oblongifolia Raf .Habenaria dilatata (Pursh Hook. var . albiflora (Cham.) Correll GHabenaria dilatata (Pursh Hook. var . dilitat aHabenaria hyperborea (L . R . Br .Habenaria orbiculata (Pursh) Torr . RHabenaria saccata GreeneHabenaria unalascensis (Spreng .) Wats. var . elata (Jeps .) Correll GHabenaria unalascensis (Spreng.) Wats. var . unalascensisHabenaria viridis (L .) R .Br. var . bracteata (Muhl .) Gray RListera caurina (L.) GListera cordata (L.) R . Br .Spiranthes romanzoffiana Cham .POTAMOGETONACEAEPotamogeton alpinus L . GPotamogeton gramineus L .Potamogeton natans L . GGSPARGANIACEAESparganium angustifolium Michx .Sparganium minimum (Hartm.) FriesGTypha latifolia L .TYPHACEAELIVERWORTSAnastrophyllum minutum (Schreb .) Schust . GAsterella ludwigii (Schwaegr .) Underw . GAsterella saccata (Wahlenb .) Evans GBarbilophozia barbata (Schmid . ex Schreb .) Loeske RBarbilophozia hatcheri (Evans) LoeskeBarbilophozia lycopodioides (Wallr.) LoeskeBarbilophozia radicosa GBlepharostoma tricophyllum (L.) Dum . GCalypoge1a muelleriana (Schiffn .) K. Mull . GChiloscyphus polyanthos (L .) Corda var . polyanthos GConocephalum conicum (L .) Lindb . GDiplophyllum albicans (L.) Dum .Diplophyllum taxifolium (Wahlenb.) Dum . GGeocalyx graveolens (Schrad.) Ness . GGymnocolea inflata (Huds .) Dum . GGymnomitrion concinnatum (Lightf .) Corda GJamesoniella autumnalis (DC .) Steph .Lepidozia reptans (L .) Dum .206

Lophocolea heterophylla (Schrad .) Dum .Lophocolea minor Nees RLophozia excisa (Dicks.) Dum .Lophozia foerkei (Web . & Mohr) Schiffn . = Barbilophozia floerkii (Web . & Mohr) LoeskeLophozia kunzeana (Hub .) Buch = Barbilophozia kunzeana (Hub .) GamsLophozia longidens (Lindb .) MacounLophosia obtusata (Lindb .) Evans GLophozia porphyrolueca (Nees) Schiffn . = L. guttulata (Lindb . & H . Arnell) Evans GLophozia ventricosa (Dicks .) Dum .Lophozia wenzelii (Nees) Steph . var . wenzeliiMarchantia polymorpha L . GMylia anomala (Hook.) S . Gray GPellia endiviifolia (Dicks.) Dum .Plagiochila asplenioides (L .) Dum . GPleuroclada albescens (Hook.) Spruce GPorella codaeana (Hub .) Moore RPreissia quadrata (Scop .) Nees GPtilidium californicum (Aust.) Underw .Ptilidium pulcherrimum (G . Web.) HampeScapania subalpina (Nees) Dum . GSolenostoma cordifolium (Dum .) Steph . GMOSSESAmblystegium serpens (Hedw .) B .S .G . RAndreaea nivalis Hook . GAndreaea rupestris Hedw . RAulacomnium palustre (Hedw .) Schwaegr .Barbula icmadophila Schimp . ex C . Muell . GBrachythecium albicans (Hedw .) B .S .G .Brachythecium collinum (Schleich . ex C . Muell .) B .S .G . GCalliergon cordifolium B.S .G . GBrachythecium groenlandicum (C . Jens .) Schljak .Brachythecium hylotapetum B . Hig . & N . Hig .Brachythecium leibergii GroutBrachythecium nelsonii Grout GBrachythecium plumosum (Hedw.) B .S .G . GBrachythecium populeum (Hedw .) B .S.G . GBrachythecium refexum (Starke ex Web . & Mohr) B .S .G . GBrachythecium rivulare B .S .G . GBrachythecium salebrosum (Web . & Mohr) B .S .G .Brachythecium starkeiBrachythecium turgidum (C .J . Hartm.) Kindb . GBryoerythrophyllum recurvirostrum (Hedw .) Chen GBryum caespiticium Hedw . GBryum cuspidatum S .L . GBryum pseudotriquetrum (Hedw .) Gaertn ., Meyer & Schreb .Bryum weigelii Spreng . GCalliergon cordifolium (Hedw .) Kindb . RCalliergon giganteum (Schimp .) Kindb . GCalliergon stramineum (Brid .) Kindb . GCampylium chrysophyllum (Brid .) J . Lange GCampylium hispidulum (Brid.) Mitt . RCampylium polygamum (B .S .C .) C . Jens GCampylium stellatum (Hedw .) C. Jens . GCeratodon purpureus (Hedw .) Brid .Cladopodium bolanderi Best RCratoneuron commutatum (Hedw .) Roth GDesmatodon latifolius (Hedw.) Brid .Dichodontium pellucidum Schimp .Dicranella crispa (Hedw .) Schimp . G207

Dicranella heteromalla (Hedw .) Schimp . GDicranoweisia crispula (Hedw .) Lindb . ex MildeDicranum acutifolium (Lindb . & Arnell) C . Jens . ex Weinm . GDicranum brevifolium Kindb . GDicranum bistratosum Kindb . var . bistratosum Peters . GDicranum elongatum Schleib . & Schwaegr . GDicranum fragilifolium Lindb . GDicranum fuscescens Turn .Dicranum groenlandicum Brid . GDicranum muehlenbeckii B .S.G .Dicranum pallidisetum (Bail . ex Holz .) Irel .Dicranum polysetum Sw . GDicranum scoparium Hedw .Dicranum tauricum Sapeh .Distichium capillaceum (Hedw .) B.S.G . GDisrichum flexicaule (Schwaegr.) Hampe GDrepanocladus exannulatus (B .S.G.) Warnst . GDrepanocladus revolvens (Sw .) Warnst . GDrepanocladus uncinatus (Hedw .) Warnst .Drepanocladus vernicosus (Lindl . ex C . Hartn .) Warnst . GDryptodon patens (Hedw .) Brid .Encalypta rhaptocarpa Schwaegr . GEurhynchium pulchellum (Hedw .) Jenn .Fissidens adiantoides Hedw . GGrimmia affinis Hoppe & Hornsch . ex Hornsch . GGrimmia apocarpa Hedw .Heterocladium procurrens (Mitt .) Rau & Herv .Hylocomium pyrenaicum (Spruce) Lindb .Hylocomium splendens (Hedw .) B .S .G .Hypnum callichroum Funck ex Brid . GHypnum circinale Hook .Hypnum cupressiforme Hedw . GHypnum dieckii Ren . & Card . ex Roell RHypnum lindbergii Mitt .Hypnum revolutum (Mitt .) Lindb . GIsopterygium pulchellum (Hedw .) Jaeg . & Sauerb . RKiaeria blyttii (Schimp.) Broth .Kiaeria falcata (Hedw .) Hag . GLeptobryum pyriforme (Hedw .) Wils . GLescuraea incurvata Hedw . = Pseudoleskea incurvata (Hedw .) LoeskeLescuraea radicosa Mitt . = Pseudoleskea radicosa (Mitt .) Macoun & Kindb .Lescuraea stenophylla (Ren . & Card .) Kindb . = Pseudoleskea stenophylla Ren . & Card . ex Roel lGMnium blyttii B.S .G . GMnium lycopodioides Schwaegr .Mnium spinulosum B .S .G .Mnium thompsonii Schimp . GOligotrichum hercynicum (Hedw .) DC . GOrthotrichum anomalum Hedw . GOrthotrichum obtusifolium Brid . ROrthotrichum rupestre Schleich . ex Schwaegr . RParaleucobryum enerve (Thed . ex C.J . Hartm .) Loeske GPhilonotis fontana (Hedw .) Brid . GPlagiomnium ciliare C . Muell . = Mnium ciliare (C . Muell .) Schimp . GPlagiomnium rugicum (Laur .) Koponen = Mnium rugicum Laur . GPlagiomnium insigne (Mitt.) Koponen = Mnium insigne Mitt . RPlagiomnium medium (B .S .G .) Koponen = Mnium medium B .S.G . GPlagiothecium denticulatum (Hedw .) B .S.G . GPlagiothecium laetum B .S.G .Pleurozium schreberi (Brid.) Mitt .Pogonatum alpinum (Hedw .) Roehl .Pogonatum urnigerum (Hedw.) P . -Beauv . GPohlia cruda (Hedw .) Lindb .208

Pohlia drummondii (C . Muell .) Andr . GPohlia elongata Hedw . GPohlia nutans (Hedw .) Lindb .Pohlia wahlenbergii (Web . & Mohr) Andr . GPolytrichadelphus lyallii Mitt . = Polytrichum lyallii (Mitt .) Kindb . GPolytrichum commune Hedw . GPolytrichum formosum Hedw . GPolytrichum juniperinum Hedw .Polytrichum piliferum Hedw .Polytrichum sexangulare Brid .Polytrichum strictum Brid . GPterigynandrum filiforme Hedw .Ptilium crista-castrensis (Hedw .) DeNot .Rhacomitrium canescens (Hedw .) Brid .Rhacomitrium fasciculare (Hedw .) Brid . RRhacomitrium heterostichum (Hedw .) Brid .Rhacomitrium lanuginosum (Hedw.) Brid . GRhacomitrium lawtonae Irel .Rhacomitrium sudeticum Funck = R . heterostichum (Hedw .) Brid . var . sudeticum (Funck) Dix .BauerexGRhizomnium magnifollum (Horik .) Koponen GRhizomnium nudum (Williams) Koponen = Mnium nudum Williams ex Britt . & WilliamsRhizomnium pseudopunctatum (Bruch & Schimp .) Koponen = Mnium pseudopunctatum BruchSchimp .&Rhytidiadelphus squarrosus (Hedw.) Warnst . GRhytidiadelphus triquetrus (Hedw .) Warnst .Rhytidiopsis robusta (Hedw .) Broth .Roellia roellii (Broth . ex Roell) Andr . ex Crum .Scorpidium scorpioides (Hedw .) Limpr . GSphagnum girgensohnii Russ . GSphagnum nemoreum Scop . GSphagnum russowii Warnst . GSphagnum squarrosum CromeSphagnum teres (Schimp.) Angstr . ex C . Hartm . GSphagnum warnstorfii Russ . GTetraphis pellucida Hedw . GThuidium abietinum (Hedw .) B.S.G . GTomenthy num nitens (Hedw .) Loeske GTortella fragilis (Drumm .) Limpr . GTortella inclinata (Hedw .) Limpr . GTortella tortuosa (Hedw .) Limpr .Tortula norvegica (Web .) Wahlenb . ex Lindb .Tortula ruralis (Hedw.) Gaertn ., Meyer & Schreb .Trichostomum crispulumLICHENSAcarospora chlorophana (Wahlenb . ex Ach.) Mass . GAcarospora fuscata (Schrad .) Arn . GAlectoria sarmentosa (Ach .) Ach .Arthroraphis citrinella (Ach .) Poelt GBacidia obscurata (Somm .) Zahlbr . GBacidia vermifera (Nyl.) Th . Fr . GBaeomyces ru fus (Huds .) Rebent . GBryoria abbreviata (Muell. Arg .) Brodo & D . Hawksw .Bryoria capillaris (Ach .) Brodo & D . Hawksw .Bryoria fremontii (Tuck .) Brodo & D . Hawksw .Bryoria fuscescens (Gyeln .) Brodo & D . Hawksw .Bryoria glabra (Mot.) Brodo & D . Hawksw .Bryoria lanestris (Ach.) Brodo & D . Hawksw .Bryoria oregana (Tuck.) Brodo & D . Hawksw . G209

Bryoria pseudofuscescens (Gyeln.) Brodo & D . Hawksw .Buellia papillata (Somm .) Tuck . GBuellia punctata (Hoffm.) Mass . GBuellia triphragmioides Anzi GCalicium salicinum Pers . GCaloplaca sinapisperrna (Lam .) Mah . & Gill . GCandelariella aurella (Hoffm .) Zahlbr . GCetraria chlorophylla (Wind.) Vain .Cetraria cucullata (Bell.) Ach .Cetraria ericetorum Opi zCetraria islandica (L.) Ach .Cetraria nivalis (L .) Ach .Cetraria pinastri (Scop.) S . Gra yCetraria platyphylla Tuck . GCetraria subalpina I msh .Cetraria tilesii Ach . GChrysothrix chlorina (Ach.) Laundon GCladonia arbuscula (Wallr . GCladonia bacillaris (Ach .) Nyl .Cladonia bacilliformis (Nyl.) Dalla Torre & Sarnth .Cladonia bellidifora (Ach .) Schaer . GCladonia cariosa (Ach .) Spreng .Cladonia carneola (Fr .) Fr .Cladonia cenotea (Ach .) Schaer .Cladonia cervicornis (Ach.) Flot . ssp . verticillata (Hoffm.) AhtiCladonia chlorophaea (Floerke ex Somm.) Spreng .Cladonia cocci fera (L .) Willd .Cladonia coniocraea (Floerke) Spreng .Cladonia cristalella Tuck . GCladonia deformis (L.) Hoffm .Cladonia ecmocyna (Ach .) Nyl .Cladonia ftmbriata (L.) Fr . GCladonia gracilis (L .) Willd .Cladonia mitis (Sandst.) Hale & W . Culb .Cladonia multiformis Merr .Cladonia phyllophora Ehrh . ex Hoffm .Cladonia pleurota (Floerke) Schaer . GCladonia pyxidata (L.) Hoffm .Cladonia rangiferina (L .) Wigg . RCladonia scabriuscula (Del .) Leigh . RCladonia sulphurina (Michx .) Fr .Cladonia uncialis (L.) Wigg . GCoelocaulon aculeatum (Schreb .) Link GConiocybe furfuracea (L .) Ach . GCyphelium karelicum (Vain .) Raes .Dactylina arctica (Hook .) Nyl . GDactylina ramulosa (Hook.) Tuck . GDermatocarpon weberi (Ach .) Mann . GHaematomma lapponicum Raes . GHuilia crustulata (Ach.) Hert . GHuilia macrocarpa (DC.) Hert .Hypogymnia austerodes (Nyl .) Raes . GHypogymnia enteromorpha (Ach.) Nyl .Hypogymnia imshaugii Krog GHypogymnia physodes (L.) Nyl .Hypogymnia subobscura (Vain .) Poelt GHypogymnia tubulosa (Schaer .) Hav . RIcmadophila ericetorum (L.) Zahlbr . GLecanora epibyron (Ach.) Ach . GLecanora thamnoplaca Tuck . GLecidea berengeriana (Mass.) Nyl . - GLecidea cinnabarina Somm . GLecidea fuscescens Somm .210G

Lecidea granulosa (Hoffm .) Ach .Lecidea pantherina (Hoffm .) Th . Fr . RLecidea plana (Lahm in Koerb .) Nyl . GLecidella glomerulosa (DC.) Choisy GLepidoma demissum (Rutstr.) Choisy GLepraria incana (L .) Ach . RLepraria membranacea (Dicks .) Vain .Lepraria neglecta (Nyl .) Lett . GLetharia columbiana (Nutt.) Thorns . GLetharia vulpina (L.) Hue GLobaria linita (Ach .) Rabenh . GLobaria pulmonaria (L .) Hoffm . GMycoblastus affinis (Schaer .) Schauer GNephroma arcticum (L .) Torss . GNephroma bellum (Spreng.) Tuck . GNephroma parile (Ach .) Ach . ROchrolechia androgyna (Hoffm .) Arn .Ochrolechia arborea (Ljubitz.) Almb . GOchrolechia pseudopallescens Brodo GPachyospora verrucosa (Ach .) Mass .Pannaria pezizoides (G . Web.) Trev . GParmelia omphalodes (L.) Ach . GParmelia sphaerosporella Muell . Arg . GParmelia subaurifera Nyl . RParmelia sulcata Tayl .Parmeliopsis aleurites (Ach .) Nyl . GParmeliopsis ambigua (Wulf.) Nyl .Parmeliopsis hyperopta (Ach .) Arn .Peltigera aphthosa (L.) Willd .Peltigera canina (L .) Willd .Peltigera leucophlebia (Nyl.) Gyeln . GPeltigera malacea (Ach.) Funck .Peltigera polydactyla (Neck.) Hoffm . GPeltigera rufescens (Weis .) Humb .Peltigera venosa (L .) Hoffm . RPhyscia aipolia (Ehrh . ex Humb .) Fuernrohr RPhyscia millegrana De el . GPlatismatia glauca (L .) W . Culb . & C . Culb .Pseudephebe miniscula (Nyl . ex Arn.) Brodo & D . Hawksw . GPseudephebe pubescens (L .) Choisy GPsora decipiens (Hedw.) Hoffm . G tPsora rubiformis (Ach .) Hook . GPsoroma hypnorum (Vahl) S. GrayRamalina fastigiata (Pers.) Ach . R = R . americana Hal eRamalina sinensis JattaRhizocarpon eupetraeum (N 1.) Arn . GRhizocarpon geo ra hicum (L .) DC .Solorina crocea (L .) Ach . GSphaerophorus globosus (Huds .) Vain . GStereocaulon alpinum Laur .Stereocaulon condensatum Hoffm . GStereocaulon grande (Magn.) Magn . GStereocaulon tomentosum Fr .Thamnolia subuliformis (Ehrh.) W . Culb . GTremolecia jurana (Schaer.) Hert . GUmbilicaria angulata Tuck . GUmbilicaria cylindrica (L.) Del . ex Duby GUmbilicaria deusta (L .) Baumg . GUmbilicaria hyperborea (Ach .) Hoffm .Umbilicaria krascheninnikovii (Sav .) Schol . GUmbilicaria vellea (L.) Ach .Umbilicaria virginis Schaer . RUsnea glabrescens (Nyl . ex Vain .) Vain. R211

Usnea scabrata Nyl . RXanthoria elegans (Link) Th . Fr . G212

APPENDIX B - ANIMALS OF MOUNT REVELSTOKE AND GLACIER NATIONAL PARK SINTRODUCTIONNomenclature for this checklist is based on Stebbins (1966), American Ornithologists' Union (1982) ,and Banfield (1974) . Records are based on observations by the wildlife inventory team during th eecological land classification, and information in the Warden Service and Interpretive Service files a tRevelstoke . Further details are in Van Tighem and Gyug [1984] . Names in brackets are hypothetica lspecies for which there is no verified record for either park . MRNP and GNP have a total of fou ramphibian species, three reptile species, 176 bird species (plus eight hypothetical), and 44 mamma lspecies .Long-toed salamander Ambystoma macrodactylumWestern toad Bufo borea sWood frog Rana sylvaticaSpotted frog Rana pretiosaAMPHIBIAN SREPTILESNorthern alligator lizard Gerrhonotus coeruleusCommon (red-sided) garter snake Thamnophis sirtalis parietalisWestern terrestrial (wandering) garter snake Thamnophis elegans vagran sBIRDSCommon Loon Gavia immer (Brtinnich )Horned Grebe Podiceps auritus (Linnaeus )Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias (Linnaeus )Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis (Linnaeus )Swan (unidentified) Cygnus spp .White-fronted Goose Anser albifrons (Scopoli)Snow Goose Chen caerulescens (Linnaeus )Canada Goose Branca canadensis (Linnaeus )Wood Duck Aix sponsa (Linnaeus )Green-winged Teal Anas crecca (Linnaeus )Mallard Anas platyrhynchos (Linnaeus )Northern Pintail Anas acuta (Linnaeus )Blue-winged Teal Anas discors (LinnaeusCinnamon Teal Anas cyanoptera (Vieillo tNorthern Shoveler Anas clypeata (Linnaeus )American Wigeon Anas americana (Gmelin )Redhead Aythya americana (Eyton )Ring-necked Duck Aythya collaris (Donovan )Lesser Scaup Aythya affnis (Eyton )Harlequin Duck Histrionicus histrionicus (Linnaeus )White-winged Scoter Melanitta fusca (Linnaeus )Common Goldeneye Bucephala clangula (Linnaeus )Barrow 's Goldeneye Bucephala islandica (Gmelin)Bufflehead Bucephala albeola (Linnaeus)Hooded Merganser Lophodytes cucullatus (Linnaeus )Common Merganser Mergus merganser (Linnaeus)213

Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura (Linnaeus )Osprey Pandion haliaetus (Linnaeus )Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus (Linnaeus )Northern Harrier Circus cyaneus (Linnaeus )Sharp-shinned Hawk Accipiter striatus (Vieillot )Cooper ' s Hawk Accipiter cooperii (Bonaparte )Northern Goshawk Accipiter gentilis (Linnaeus )Swainson's Hawk Buteo swainsoni (Bonaparte )Red-tailed Hawk Buteo jamaicensis (Gmelin )Rough-legged Hawk Buteo lagopus (Pontoppidan)Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos (Linnaeus )American Kestrel Falco sparverius (Linnaeus )Merlin Falco columbarius (Linnaeus )[Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus (Tunstall) ]Prairie Falcon Falco mexicanus (Schlegel )Spruce Grouse Dendragapus canadensis (Linnaeus )Blue Grouse Dendragapus obscurus (Say )White-tailed Ptarmigan Lagopus leucurus (Richardson )Ruffed Grouse Bonasa umbellus (Linnaeus )Sora Porzana carolina (Linnaeus )American Coot Fulica americana (Gmelin)Sandhill Crane Grus canadensis (Linnaeus)]Killdeer Charadrius vociferus (Linnaeus )Greater Yellowlegs Tringa melanoleuca (Gmelin) )Solitary Sandpiper Tringa solitaria (Wilson )Spotted Sandpiper Actitis macularia (Linnaeus)Upland Sandpiper Bartramia longicauda (Bechstein )Western Sandpiper Calidris mauri (Cabanis )Baird's Sandpiper Calidris bairdii (Coues)Common Snipe Gallinago gallinago (Linnaeus)Wilson's Phalarope Phalaropus tricolor (Vieillot)Red-necked Phalarope Phalaropus lobatus (Linnaeus )Bonaparte ' s Gull Larus philadelphia (Ord)Ring-billed Gull Larus delawarensis (Ord )Black Tern Chlidonas niger (Linnaeus )Rock Dove Columba livia (Gmelin )Band-tailed Pigeon Columba fasciata (Gmelin)Mourning Dove Zenaida macroura (Linnaeus )[Flammulated Owl Otus flammeolus (Kaup )Great Horned Owl Bubo virginianus (GmelinNorthern Hawk-Owl Surnia ulula (Linnaeus )Northern Pygmy-Owl Glaucidium gnoma (Wagler)Barred Owl Strix varia (Barton)Long-eared Owl Asio otus (Linnaeus)Boreal Owl Aegolius funereus (Linnaeus )Northern Saw-whet Owl Aegolius acadicus (Gmelin )Common Nighthawk Chordeiles minor (Forster)Black Swift Cypseloides niger (Gmelin )Vaux's Swift Chaetura vauxi (Townsend)Calliope Hummingbird Stellula calliope (Gould)Rufous Hummingbird Selasphorus rufus (Gmelin )Belted Kingfisher Ceryle alcyon (Linnaeus )Lewis' Woodpecker Melanerpes lewis (Gray )Yellow-bellied Sapsucker Sphyrapicus varius (Linnaeus )Downy Woodpecker Picoides pubescens (Linnaeus )Hairy Woodpecker Picoides villosus (Linnaeus )Three-toed Woodpecker Picoides tridactylus (Linnaeus )Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus (Linnaeus )Pileated Woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus (Linnaeus )Olive-sided Flycatcher Contopus borealis (SwainsonWestern Wood Pewee Contopus sordidulus (Sclater)Alder Flycatcher Empidonax alnorum (Brewster )Willow Flycatcher Emipdonax traillii (Audubon)214

Least Flycatcher Empidonax minimus (Baird & Baird )Hammond's Flycatcher Empidonax hammondii (Xantus de Vesey)Dusky Flycatcher Empidonax oberholseri (Phillips )Western Kingbird Tyrannus verticalis (Say )Eastern Kingbird Tyrannus tyrannus (Linnaeus )Horned Lark Erernophila alpestris (Linnaeus )Tree Swallow Tachycineta bicolor (Vieillot )Violet-green Swallow Tachycineta thalassina (Swainson )Northern Rough-winged Swallow Stelgidopteryx serripennis (Audubon)Bank Swallow Riparia reparla (Linnaeus )Cliff Swallow Hirundo pyrrhonota (Vieillot)Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica (Linnaeus )Gray Jay Perisoreus canadensis (Linnaeus )Steller's Jay Cyanocitta stelleri (Gmelin )Clark's Nutcracker Nucifraga columbiana (Wilson )Black-billed Magpie Pica pica (Linnaeu sAmerican Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos Brehm )Common Raven Corvus corax (Linnaeu sBlack-capped Chickadee Parus atricapillus (Linnaeus )Mountain Chickadee Parus gambeli (Ridgway )Boreal Chickadee Parus hudsonicus (Forster)Chestnut-backed Chickadee Parus rufescens (Townsend)Red-breasted Nuthatch Sitta canadensis (Linnaeus )White-breasted Nuthatch Sitta carolinensis (Latham )Brown Creeper Certhia americana (Bonaparte )Rock Wren Salpinctes obsoletus (Say)House Wren Troglodytes aedon (Vieillot )Winter Wren Troglodytes troglodytes (Linnaeus )American Dipper Cinclus mexicanus (Swainson )Golden-crowned Kinglet Regulus satraps (Lichtenstein )Ruby-crowned Kinglet Regulus calendula (Linnaeus )Mountain Bluebird Sialia currucoides (Bechstein)Townsend's Solitaire Myadestes townsendi (Audubon)Veery Catharus fuscesens (Stephens )Gray-cheeked Thrush Catharus minimus (Lafresnaye )Swainson's Thrush Catharus ustulatus (Nuttall )Hermit Thrush Catharus guttatus (Pallas )American Robin Turdus migratorius (Linnaeus )Varied Thrush Ixoreus naevius (Gmelin )Sage Thrasher Oreoscoptes montanusWater Pipit Anthus spinoletta (Linnaeus )Bohemian Waxwing Bombycilla garrulus (Linnaeus)Cedar Waxwing Bombycilla cedrorum (Vieillot )Northern Shrike Lanius excubitor (Linnaeus )European Starling Sturnus vulgaris (Linnaeus )Solitary Vireo Vireo solitarius (Wilson )Warbling Vireo Vireo gilvus (Vieillot )Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus (Linnaeus )Tennessee Warbler Vermivora peregrina (Wilson )Orange-crowned Warbler Vermivora celata (Say )Nashville Warbler Vermivora ruficapillus (Wilson )Yellow Warbler Dendroica petechia (Linnaeus )Magnolia Warbler Dendrioca magnolia (Wilson )Yellow-rumped Warbler Dendroica coronata (Linnaeus )Townsend's Warbler Dendroica townsendi (Townsend)Blackpoll Warbler Dendroica striata (Forster)American Redstart Setophaga ruticilla (Linnaeus)Northern Waterthrush Seiurus noveboracensis (Gmelin )MacGillivray's Warbler Oporornis tolmiei (Townsend )Common Yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas (Linnaeus )Wilson's Warbler Wilsonia pusilla (Wilson )Western Tanager Piranga ludoviciana (Wilson)Black-headed Grosbeak Pheucticus melanocephalus (Swainson)215

Lazuli Bunting Passerina amoena (Say)American Tree Sparrow Spizella arborea (Wilson )Chipping Sparrow Spizella passerina (Bechstein)Vesper Sparrow Pooecetes gramineus (Gmelin )Savannah Sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis (Gmelin )Fox Sparrow Passerella iliaca (Merrem )Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia (Wilson )Lincoln's Sparrow Melospiza lincolnii (Audubon )Golden-crowned Sparrow Zonotrichia atricapilla (Gmelin )White-crowned Sparrow Zonotrichia albicollis (Forster)Dark-eyed Junco Junco hyemalis (Linnaeus )Lapland Longspur Calcarius lapponicu sSnow Bunting Plectrophenax nivalis (Linnaeus)Red-winged Blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus (Linnaeus )Western Meadowlark Sturnella neglecta (Audubon )Yellow-headed Blackbird Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus (Bonaparte)Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus (Muller)Brewer's Blackbird Euphagus cyanocephalus (Wagler )Common Grackle Quiscalus quisculaBrown-headed Cowbird Molothrus ater (Boddaert )Rosy Finch Leucosticte arctoa (Pallas )Pine Grosbeak Pinicola enucleator (Linnaeus )Purple Finch Carpodacus purpureus (Gmelin )Cassin 's Finch Carpodacus casinii (Baird )Red Crossbill Loxia curvirostra (Linnaeus )White-winged Crossbill Loxia leucoptera (Gmelin )Common Redpoll Carduelis flammea (Wilson )Hoary Redpoll Carduelis hornemani (Holboll )Pine Siskin Carduelis pinus (Wilson )American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis (Linnaeus)Evening Grosbeak Coccothraustes vespertinus (Cooper )MAMMAL SMasked shrew Sorex cinereus (Kerr)Dusky shrew Sorex monticolus (Merriam )Wandering shrew Sorex vagrans (Baird )Water shrew Sorex palustris (Richardson )Little brown bat Myotis lucifugus (Le Conte )Northern long-eared bat Myotis septentrionales (Merriam )Long-eared bat Myotis evotis (H . Allen)Long-legged bat Myotis volans (H . Allen)California bat Myotis californicus (Audubon & Bachman )Silver-haired bat Lasionycteris noctivagans (Le Conte)Hoary bat Lasiurus cinereus (Palisot de Beauvois )American pika Ochotona princeps (Richardson )Snowshoe hare Lepus americanus (Erxleben )Yellow-pine chipmunk Eutamias amoenus (J .A . Allen)Woodchuck Marmota monax (Linnaeus )Hoary marmot Marmota caligata (Eschscholtz)Columbian ground squirrel Spermophilus columbianus (Ord )Golden-mantled ground squirrel Spermophilus lateralis (Say )Red squirrel Tamiasciurus hudsonicus (Erxleben )Northern flying squirrel Glaucomys sabrinus (Shaw )Beaver Castor canadensis (Kuhl)Deer mouse Peromyscus maniculatus (Wagner)Bushy-tailed wood rat Neotoma cinerea (Ord )Gapper's red-backed vole Clethrionomys gapperi (Vigors )Northern bog lemming Synaptomys borealis (Richardson )Heather vole Phenacomys intermidius (Merriam )116

Muskrat Ondatra zibethicus (Linnaeus )Richardson's water vole Arvicola richardsoni (DeKay )Meadow vole Microtus pennsylvanicus (Ord)Long-tailed vole Microtus longicaudus (Merriam )Western jumping mouse Zapus princeps (J .A . Allen )Porcupine Erethizon dorsatum (Linnaeus)Coyote Canis latrans (Say )Wolf Canis lupus (Linnaeus )Red fox Vulpes vulpes (Linnaeus )Black bear Ursus americanus (Pallas )Grizzly bear Ursus arctos (Linnaeus )Marten Martes americana (Turton)Fisher Martes pennanti (Erxleben )Short-tailed weasel Mustela erminea (Linnaeus )Long-tailed weasel Mustela frenata (Lichtenstein )Mink Mustela vison (Schreber )Wolverine Gulo gulo (Linnaeus )Striped skunk Mephitis mephitis (Schreber )River otter Lontra canadensis (Schreber )Cougar Felis concolor (Linnaeus )Canada lynx Lynx lynx (Linnaeus )Bobcat Lynx rufus (Schreber )Mountain caribou Rangi fer tarandus (Linnaeus )Mule deer Odocoileus hemionus (Rafinesque )White-tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus (Zimmermann )Moose Alces alces (Linnaeus )Elk Cervus elaphus (Linnaeus )Mountain goat Oreamnos americanus (de Blainville )Bighorn sheep Ovis canadensis (Shaw)217

APPENDIX C - CORRELATION OF MAP UNIT STwo nearby land inventories were compared with the MRNP and GNP Ecological Land Classificatio nto correlate map unit concepts . The inventories are : Soil resources of the Lardeau Map Area (Wittneben1980) and Soil and terrain of the Seymour Arm Area (Kowall 1980) . Listed below are mapunits or groups of map units that correspond most closely to MRNP and GNP Ecosites . The followinglandscape components were evaluated .1 . Physiographic Regions : Correlation is restricted to map units of the Interior We tBelt, Southern Plateau and Mountain Area (Wittneben 1980) and of the SelkirkMountains Physiographic Region (Kowall 1980) . Not all extrapolations may be va -lid because MRNP and GNP may contain different bedrock types or PhysiographicRegions (e.g. Purcell Mountains) than occur in the soil inventory areas .2 . Ecoregion and Ecoregion subdivision vs . forest zone or subzone are correlated as fol -lows :a) Interior Cedar-Hemlock (MRNP and GNP) is equated with the Interior Wes -tern Hemlock-Western Red Cedar Zone (Kowall 1980, Wittneben 1980) .b) Lower Subalpine (MRNP and GNP) is equated with the Lodgepol epine-whitebark pine Subzone of the Subalpine Engelmann Spruce-Alpine Fir Zoneplus the Subalpine Mountain Hemlock Zone (Kowall 1980) and to the Forested Sub -zone of the Subalpine Engelmann Spruce-Alpine Fir Zone (Wittneben 1980) .c) Upper Subalpine (MRNP and GNP) is equated with the Krummholz subzon eof the Engelmann Spruce-Alpine Fir Zone (Kowall 1980, Wittneben 1980) .d) Alpine (MRNP and GNP) is equated with the Alpine tundra zone .3 . Landform and parent materials : Each inventory uses a similar rationale to divide th elandscape according to geomorphic features, but the classes and the levels at whic hthey are important in the legends differ .4 . Soil classification : Most Ecosites are characterized by a group of different soil samong which predominance was not established . However, soil associations have asingle, dominant Subgroup, and predominance is always implicit in soil associatio ncomponents . This different philosophical approach is reflected by the single asteris kbelow . Seepage phases in the soil association components are not important to th ecorrelation . Some differences in soil taxonomy are due to differing interpretation sof field characteristics and, more importantly, to use of older versions of the Canadiansoil taxonomy .The following symbols and conventions are used in the list below :Virgule (/) : one of three things in descending order of use :1. Soil associations differentiated by bedrock lithology or texture are regrouped, bu tseparated by a virgule, opposite one MRNP and GNP Ecosite .2. Two soil associations, each from a different forest zone or subzone, correspond t oone MRNP and GNP Ecosite of the Lower Subalpine and are separated by a virgulein the list (see 2b above) .3. Occasionally, soil associations differentiated by fan vs. plain fluvial landforms are re -grouped, but separated by a virgule, opposite one MRNP and GNP Ecosite .Plus (+) and greater than (>) : a combination of soil associations or soil association component sbest correspond to a MRNP and GNP Ecosite (e.g., a soil association of till + one of glaciofluvialequates to an Ecosite of ice contact stratified drift) .Asterisk Cr) : indicates that the dominant Subgroup of a soil association is the same as one of the soil scharacterizing an Ecosite and the other characteristic soils have no soil association equivalent .Bullet (•) : indicates that the dominant soil of a soil association differs at the Subgroup level fro mone of the soils characterizing the Ecosite .Double Asterisk (**) : indicates that the landscapes appear similar but soil classification is different atthe Great Group or Order levels .Dagger (t) : indicates that the elevational range of a soil association extends well below the lower lira -it (in one case, above the upper limit) of the corresponding Ecosite, the latter being defined by th e219

Ecoregion (or subdivision) in which it occurs. Thus, there are probably significant vegetation differencesbetween an Ecosite and its corresponding soil association . For example, RL occurs in theAlpine tundra zone but was assigned an elevational range >1980 m (Wittneben 1980) which, i nMRNP and GNP, extends below the Alpine to include much of the Upper Subalpine . The correlationof the AB1 Ecosite with the SO and TY soil associations is the only exception to the Ecoregion-fores tzone correlation outlined above . SO and TY occur in the Alpine tundra zone but were assigned elevationsas low as 1675 m (Kowall 1980) which in MRNP and GNP extends well into the Lower Subal -pine where AB1 occurs .MR & GNP Lardeau Seymour Ar mAB 1AK 1AK2AK 4AK 5AK 6BU 1BU2BU3BU 4CElCM 1CM2CT 1CT2CT3CT4CT5CT6GF1GF2GH 1HE3HR 1HR 2HR 3HR 4HR 5HR 6JD 1JD2JD3JD4CH•tCF2• /CH`tCF2 /CHtCS2 t t/CT2•tBC4•t/BO4t t/BU3`tSDSH3•/STl•22•/SD•SDSH3`/STI R,2•/SD *SL2•,4•SN• + SR 1 • ,2•/SL2• ,4• +SB2•SL2•,4• +SB2 •SN•+SR•,2•/SL2•,4•+SB2'(SN• +SR1',2•/SL2•,4• +SB2') +(KXI•+KO1• )(SN• +SR1',2•/SL2•,4•+SB2•) +(KXl•+KO1•) > seepy phases +0*AS5 **,6** +O•AS5••,6••CY3CC1•/CY3•CY3CCl'/CY3•CS2•t/CT2•tBA5•/BE5•/BT5 `SA'tSA•tSO•t/TYYtSDl ssSDl'•FBI** /SD1**tGN• /HH•tSD6•` /FB6 * *tRR1•,5•/DE1`,5`RR10,50/DE10,5 0RR1•,5•/DE1•,5•WS5 */RR1`,5`/DE1•,5 *MH1•*,5"MH1•,5•MH1•,5•SB1•,5•/MH1•,5•MH1•,5•/SB1•,5• +AE1'/KX1 •MH1•,5•+AE1* > w & y phase s+BEl•BE• + y phases of : MMl••/ASl"y phases of MM1• •BM1•,5•/RK1•,5`BM1•,5`/RK1•,5`BM1•,5`/RK1`,5`BA1•t,5•t/BM1•,5*/RK1•,5 *GN•t/HH•tBM6`/BA6`/B06 s/RK6`220

MR & GNP Lardeau Seymour ArmJN2KX1 KX1•+KO1• AE1•/KX1•LK1 w & y phases of :RR1••,5••/DE1••,5* *LRI FT2• KV*/AU *LR2NCI CL1 • GM1••,5••NC2 CP1•+CXI•t/CLl•+CE1• GM1•,5•NC3 CLl•+CE1• GM1•,5•NC4 CP1•+CX1•t/CL1•+CE1• BY1•,5•/GM1•,5 •NC5 CS2•t/CT2•t GH•/CS•NC6 CP1•+CX1•t/CLl•+CE ?• BY1•,5•/GM1•,5 •RD3 RLl•t,2•t AD•t,5•tRD4 RL•t AD•tRD 5RL1••t,2••tADP*t,5•tRD6RL•tSS•t/AD•tSNI AS1 MMlWR1221

APPENDIX D - PEDON DESCRIPTIONS AND ANALYTICAL DATAAppendix D contains descriptions and analytical data of 35 pedons chosen to represent soils of selectedEcosites and Ecosections . The tables are arranged alphanumerically by Ecosite symbol . The tabletitle includes the Provincial Identification Number (e .g. Alberta 1982 No. 970) by which the pedoninformation can by accessed in the Canada Soil Information System (CanSIS), Agriculture Canada ,Ottawa .223

Table D1 . Pedon (Alberta 1983 No . 36) describing an Orthic Dystric Brunisol of the AB1 Ecosite .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978, SUBGROUP : ORTHIC DYSTRIC BRUNISOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : AB1 .LOCATION: MILITARY GRID REF . 11 U1G 6720 7760 ; NTS MAP AREA 82N 6R .CLIMATE : 1580 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT ROGERS PASS HAS POOR RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1 WAS10 DEGICI AT 50 CM IN JULY .VEGETATION : VPN=MF3004+, .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : WEAK CHEMICAL WEATHERING . SKELETAL (>35% OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND SANDY, EXTREMELY TO STRONGL YACIDIC (PH .5 .51, COLLUVIAL, MIXED ; PARENT MATERIAL 2 : WEAK CHEMICAL WEATHERING . SKELETAL (>351 OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) ANDCOARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILTY (

Table D2 . Pedon (Alberta 1983 No . 50) describing an Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol of the AK1 Eco -site .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978, SUBGROUP : GRTHIC HOMO-FERRIC PODZOL . SOIL MAP MIT : NOTATION : AK1 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 UMG 7290 9310 ; NTS MAP AREA 82N ON .CLIMATE : 2090 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT ROGERS PASS HAS POOR RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1 WA S3 DEG(CI AT 50 CM IN JULY .VEGETATION : VPN=ND3007+VTN=022N .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : WEAK CHEMICAL WEATHERING . SKELETAL (>35% OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILTY (

1 =li slu!

1 OsPi'; I oeNOUu1-1 e ea1r4. F.é~~1W~o'Ess i. i ,W0 ~[Li ! Il 15 ! ; ;iâQhi -M I I l ;g _g g .Is Eil g.i l: : : u. !ii (s( F ~i3 ~,~yAE ,r.« •y 1 y 11NFOY•~yI ►MAM 1•+"M/IW l i ;; ; :QS YFIg F W J! CF

Table D5. Pedon (Alberta 1981 No . 33) describing an Ortstein Humo-Ferric Podzol of the BU2 Eco -site .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978, SUBGROUP : ORTSTEIN HUMO-FERRIC PODZOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : BU2 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 MG 6340 8290 ; NTS MAP AREA 82N 5* . - -CLIMATE : 1480 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT ROGERS PASS HAS GOOD'RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1 WA S7 DEGIC) AT 50 CM IN SEPTEMBER .VEGETATION : VPN=PA1066+VTR: C49* .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : MODERATE CHEMICAL WEATHERING, SKELETAL (>351 OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILT Y(

Table D6 . Pedon (Alberta 1983 No . 54) describing an Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol of the BU4 Eco -siteCLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978, SUBGROUP : ORTHIC HUD-FERRIC PODZOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : BU4 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 (1MG 1940 5340 ; NTS MAP AREA 82M 1A .CLIMATE : 1620 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT REVELSTOKE HAS POOR RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1 WAS 5DEG(C) AT 50 CM IN AUGUST .VEGETATION : VPN=H03010AVTN=0210 .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : MODERATE CHEMICAL WEATHERING . SKELETAL (>35X OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILT Y) 18X CLAY), EXTREMELY TO STRONGLY ACIDIC (P11 .5 .51, MORAINAL (TILL) . METAMORPHIC ; LANOFORM CLASSIFICATION : MORAINAL, BLANKET ;SLOPE : 23% COMPLEX SLOPE OF CLASS 6 (16-30X) . FACING SOUTH . SITE AT MIDDLE POSITION, STRONGLY MOUSED MICROTOPOGRAPHY ,200 M LONG ; SOIL MOISTURE AND DRAINAGE : MODERATELY WELL DRAINED . MODERATELY PERVIOUS . MODERATE SURFACE RUNOFF, SEEPAGE PRESENT ;MODERATELY STONY ; NONROCKY .SPECIAL NOTES : 5SN=BW3011ADATE=83/08/01AAPN=BC5378-083 A LFM = MB/RH AUPPER 3 MIN-HOR•S STREAKED,BLOTCHY .CONTAIN FEW CHARCOAL FRAGMENTS ;PERHAPS CHURNED BY TREE THROW • SLOPE WASH+COLOR 2 FOR BCC IS MINOR,MAINLY AROUND COARSE FRAGMENTS+AIR DRY BCC CLOD SLAKED I NWATER .LF :4 TO 0 CM, RANGE 3 TO 6 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 5YR 2 .5/2 . MATRIX MOIST 10YR 2/1 ; ABUNDANT, MICRO AND VERY FINE AN DFINE AND MEDIUM AND COARSE ROOTS ; WAVY, ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .AHE : 0 TO 8 CM . RANGE 4 TO 10 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 7 .5YR 4/2, MATRIX MOIST 7 .5YR 5/2 ; GRAVELLY FINE SANDY LOAM ; WEAK ,FINE TO MEDIUM, SUBANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; ABUNDANT, MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE AND MEDIUM AN DCOARSE ROOTS ; 60% GRAVELLY AND COBBLY AND STONY (BOULOERY) COARSE FRAGMENTS ; WAVY, ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .BFU : 8 TO 33 CM, RANGE 18 TO 28 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 5YR 3/4, MATRIX MOIST 7 .5YR 3/3 ; GRAVELLY COARSE SANDY LOAM ;MODERATE TO STRONG, FINE TO MEDIUM, SUBANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE ; FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; PLENTIFUL, MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINEAND MEDIUM AND COARSE ROOTS ; COMMON . MICRO AND VERY FINE PORES ; 601 GRAVELLY AND COBBLY AND STONY (BOULDERYI COARSE FRAGMENTS ;WAVY, CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY .BFUCJ : 33 TO 45 CM, RANGE 10 TO 14 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 5YR 3/3 . MATRIX M OOIST 5YR 3/2 ; GRAVELLY COARSE SANDY LOAM ;MODERATE TO STRONG, FINE TO MEDIUM . SUBANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE ; FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; WEAKLY CEMENTED ; PLENTIFUL . MICRO ANDVERY FINE AND FINE AND MEDIUM ROOTS ; COMMON, MICRO AND VERY FINE PORES ; 501 GRAVELLY AND COBBLY AND STONY (BOULDERY) COARS EFRAGMENTS ; WAVY, CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY .BFCJ1 : 45 TO 75 CM, RANGE 25 TO 35 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 5YR 3/3 ; GRAVELLY COARSE SANDY LOAM ; WEAK TO MODERATE, FINE T OMEDIUM, SUBANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE ; FIRM CONSISTENCE ; WEAKLY CEMENTED ; FEW, MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE ROOTS ; COMMON, MICR OAND VERY FINE PORES ; 50X GRAVELLY AND COBBLY AND STONY (BOULDERY) COARSE FRAGMENTS ; WAVY, CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY .BFCJ2 : 75 TO 81 CM . RANGE 0 TO 10 CM ; HORIZON WET ; MATRIX MOIST 7 .5YR 4 .5/4 . MATRIX MOIST 5YR 4/4 ; GRAVELLY SANDY LOAM ; MODERATE .MEDIUM . SUBANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE ; FIRM CONSISTENCE ; WEAKLY CEMENTED ; VERY FEW . MICRO AND VERY FINE ROOTS ; COMMON . MICRO ANDVERY FINE PORES ; 50X GRAVELLY AND COBBLY AND STONY (BOULDERY) COARSE FRAGMENTS ; BROKEN, CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY .BCC :81 TO 105 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 5/4, MATRIX MOIST 5YR 4/4 ; GRAVELLY SANDY LOAM ; STRUCTURELESS, MASSIV ESTRUCTURE ; MODERATE TO STRONG . VERY COARSE . SUBANGULAR BLOCKY SECONDARY STRUCTURE ; VERY FIRM CONSISTENCE ; WEAKLY CEMENTED ANDSTRONGLY CEMENTED ; MANY, MICRO AND VERY FINE PORES ; 50X GRAVELLY AND COBBLY AND STONY (BOULDERY) COARSE FRAGMENTS .CHEMICAL DATA (SURVEY)HORIZONPHORGC(X)C .E .C .(ME/100G)BUFF . PERM .CHARGEXCHANGEABLE CATIONSBUFFERED (ME/100G)CA MG NA KEXTRACT EXTRACTIRON ALUMINUM(X) 1X 1HORIZON 1 2 1 2LF I 3 .4 52 .6 LF IAHE I 3 .5 2 .7 16 .4 0 .3 0 .1 - .1 0 .1 AME I 0 .1 0 .1 0 . 0BFU I 4 .2 2 .1 19 .4 0 .1 - .1 - .1 - .1 BFU I 0 .8 0 .4 0 . 0BFUCJ I 4 .1 3 .3 19 .4 0 .1 - .1 - .1 0 .1 BFUCJ 0 .5 0 .4 0 . 0BFCC1 I 4 .2 2 .1 15 .3 0 .1 - .1 - .1 - .1 BFCJ1 I 0 .5 0 .3 0 . 0BFCJ2 I 4 .2 2 .0 14 .4 0 .1 - .1 - .1 - .1 BFCJ2 0 .3 0 .3 0 . 0BCC I 4 .5 8 .2 0 .1 - .1 - .1 - .1 BCC 0 .1 0 .2 0 .0EXT RM NIX )PHYSICAL DATA (SURVEY)HORIZONLFAH EBF UBFUC JBFCJ 1BFCJ 2BCCPARTICLE SIZE ANALYSI SX PASSING% OF SAMPL E70- 50- BUL K3" .75" NO .4 NO .10 V .C . C . MED . F . V .F . TOT . 2U 2U 2U 0 .2U DENSSIEVE SIEVE SIEVE SIEVE SAND SAND SAND SAND SAND SAND SILT SILT CLAY CLAY 6/C C4 12 11 12 11 50 45 59 17 18 16 8 68 27 510 16 16 14 8 64 30 67 18 18 15 9 67 27 65 14 16 18 11 64 31 599 69 57 47 5 11 15 13 14 58 37 5 2 . 0ENGINEERINGMOISTURE STATUS (X)ATTERBURG ATTERBURG SHRINKAGE OPT MOIST MAX DR Y0 .1 0 .33 15 HYGR . FIELD PLASTIC LIQUID LIMIT CONTENT DENSITY COLE AASHO UNIFIEDHORIZON ATM ATM ATM MOIST MOIST LIMIT IX) LIMIT (X) (X) (X) (G/CCU VALUE CLASS CLAS SLFAHEIBF UBFUCJBFCJ1IBFCJ2BCC I 13 .B 3 .7 18 1 903229

44 M W N. M M .VI+MM Mw.N3

i iWTlltlt ;T T T N W WW N WHsaaaaaa aW N W1NQi 1 1 ;! ;" ! !1 .1 1 .1 1 .1. N.. y rglO O~jyT- s lÇ{eil : y I . g F ! O, g ~^2iR a • .kg h 9• . F8'T ~ 9. le !1- 11- Iv 1 ;1 11 agi Fig ! I l9~ ,1$ 112 li g O ih 777 •O* : 11 ; 0!1 CCC 1 III1 . 8ai. 111 1 1g 1a1 - -; 9i g -Pir9 9 i1111 . . ;i i N aiw!III+MN M' i!i 11 1 il! !el! Ii : 1 :i 9g• 0a . 1 1 s l i r i6 I!! i !l :1 II! gy ! 1 5Ts ! ly 'i i 1 ;1 s i ; i i 1. .0I I 1! ; ;' ihl11 si 'it 0 0 1li 6V--- -O .WOMOP W111I'I• - 1• •211 J 111 . n ~":, sil :1 ii 11 1 ;i 'l I !so o ..Fr€ bNil---- ------ -e g i

Table D9 . Pedon (Alberta 1983 No . 63) describing an Eluviated Dystric Brunisol of the CT1 Ecosite .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE TEAR 1978, SUBGROUP : ELUVIATED DYSTRIC BRUNISOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : CT1 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 UMG 7020 8720 ; NTS MAP AREA 82N 6r .CLIMATE : 1260 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT ROGERS PASS HAS GOOD RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1 WAS7 DEG(C) AT 50 CM IN JULY .VEGETATION : VPN=SD3007+,VTN-C52R . .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : WEAK CHEMICAL WEATHERING . COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILTY (

Table D10. Pedon (Alberta 1982 No . 950) describing an Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol of the CT3Ecosite .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE TEAR 1978 . SUBGROUP : ORTHIC HUMO-FERRIC PODZOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : CT3 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 (MG 5330 7380 ; HTS MAP AREA 82N 44 .CLIMATE : 1130 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT GLACIER HAS MODERATE RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1 WAS7 0EG(C) AT 50 CM IN SEPTEMBER, NO . 2 WAS 5 DEGIC) AT 2 CM IN SEPTEMBER .VEGETATION : VPN=HD2129AVTN=CS0R .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL WEATHERING . SKELETAL (>35Z OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARS ESILTY (

Table 11 . Pedon (Alberta 1983 No. 68) illustrating Podzolic soils of the CT4 Ecosite .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978 . SUBGROUP: ORTHIC FERRO-RUNIC PODZOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : CT4 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 UMG 1770 5210 ; NTS MAP AREA 82M 1K .CLIMATE : 1200 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT REVELSTOKE HAS MODERATE RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1WAS 10 OEG(C) AT 50 CM IN AUGUST .VEGETATION : VPN=MF3016 .VTN=C51+ .+ .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : WEAK CHEMICAL WEATHERING, SKELETAL (»35X OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILTY (

ZUD• $ Y Z é~p 4 0 L > y ~Y JpQdm W m N J Z ICM 7 0I4 O O M na Ô]L< 5YgU..pL OW J H p-pp •• C oÇ Z Ta 0~WN s \ZyN ò!I iI { Z ZZN LL « N~WI~1 I-lM M O < }~HN d Ji 1C1D

Table D13. Pedon (Alberta 1983 No . 44) describing an Terric Fibrisol of the GF1 Ecosite .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978 . SUBGROUP : TEPRIC FIBRISOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : GF1 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 UMG 6770 9430 ; NTS MAP AREA 82N 6+ .CLIMATE : 850 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT ROGERS PASS HAS MODERATE RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1WAS 14 DEG(C) AT 50 CM IN AUGUST .VEGETATION : VPN=HO3011* .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : STRATIFIED (MINERAL AND ORGANIC), ORGANIC, PEAT ; LANOIFORM CLASSIFICATION : FEN, HORIZONTAL ; SLOPE : OXSIMPLE SLOPE OF CLASS 1 (0-0 .5X), FACING LEVEL, SITE AT MIDDLE POSITION . SLIGHTLY MOUNDED MICROTOPOGRAPHY . ; SOIL MOISTURE ANDDRAINAGE : VERY POORLY DRAINED . PONDER SURFACE RUNOFF, 0 M TO APPARENT WATERTABLE ; NO)ISTONY ; NONIOCKY ; PRESENT LAND USE : FEN .SPECIAL NOTES : SSN=WT3016 ..APN=391-140*DATE : 16/08/83•LFM=NH .. HZN 4,6,8 NOT SAMPLEO*O,C REFLECTS A RECENT INCREASE IN MINERA LDEPOSITION•. FRAGMENT FREE *O,C :0 TO 15 CM ; HORIZON NET ; NATURAL WET/REDUCED 10YR 3/3 ; ABUNDANT, MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE ROOTS ; SMOOTH . CLEAR HORIZONBOUNDARY .OM :15 TO 26 CM ; HORIZON WET ; NATURAL NET/REDUCED 7 .5YR 3/2 ; MATERIAL COMPOSITION 95Z SEDGE AND REED, SLIGHT DECOMPOSITION ; VO NPOST SCALE 05 ; PLENTIFUL, MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE ROOTS ; SMOOTH, CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY .OF1 :26 TO 62 CM ; HORIZON WET ; NATURAL WET/REDUCED 7 .5YR 3/3, NATURAL WET/OXIDIZED SYR 4/5 ; MATERIAL COMPOSITION SLIGHTDECOMPOSITION ; VON POST SCALE 03 ; FEN, MICRO AND VERY FINE ROOTS ; S)l0OTH . ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .CG1 : 62 TO 63 CM ; HORIZON WET ; NATURAL WET/REDUCED N 6 ; SILTY CLAY LOAM ; STRUCTURELESS, MASSIVE STRUCTURE ; SLIGHTLY STICKYCONSISTENCE ; SMOOTH, ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .OF2 :63 TO 70 CM ; HORIZON WET ; NATURAL WET/REDUCED 7 .5YR 3/3, NATURAL WET/OXIDIZED 5YR 4/5 ; MATERIAL COMPOSITION SLIGHTDECOMPOSITION ; VON POST SCALE 03 ; SMOOTH . ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .CG2 : 70 TO 71 CM ; HORIZON WET ; NATURAL WET/REDUCED N 6 ; SILTY CLAY LOAM ; STRUCTURELESS, MASSIVE STRUCTURE ; SLIGHTLY STICKYCONSISTENCE ; SMOOTH, ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .OF3 :71 TO 84 CM ; HORIZON NET ; NATURAL WET/REDUCED 7 .5YR 3/3, NATURAL WET/OXIDIZED SYR 4/5) MATERIAL COMPOSITION 95X SEDGE AN DREED, SLIGHT DECOMPOSITION ; VON POST SCALE 03 ; SMOOTH, ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .CG3 : 84 TO 85 CM ; HORIZON WET ; NATURAL WET/REDUCED N 6 ; SILTY CLAY LOAM ; STRUCTURELESS, MASSIVE STRUCTURE ; SLIGHTLYCONSISTENCE ; SMOOTH, ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .STICKYOF4 : 85 TO 110 CM ; HORIZON WET ; NATURAL WET/REDUCED 7 .5YR 3/3, NATURAL NET/OXIDIZED 5YR 4/5 ; MATERIAL COMPOSITION 95X SEDGE ANDREED . SLIGHT DECOMPOSITION ; VON POST SCALE 03 .CHEMICAL DATA (SURVEY)C .E .C . EXCHANGEABLE CATIONSIME/100G) BUFFERED (ME/1006 )ORGHORIZON PH C BUFF . PERM . CA MG NA K1 (X) CHARGO•C 6 .5 23 .2 75 . 8OM 5 .7 45 . 2OF1 5 .7 55 . 5CGIIOF2 5 .9 55 . 7CG2OF3 I 5 .6 54 . 7CG3OF4 5 .7 57 . 939 .6 6 .6 0 .2 0 . 6PHYSICAL DATAENGINEERINGATTERBURG ATTERBURG SHRINKAGE OPT MOIST MAX DRYPLASTIC LIQUID LIMIT CONTENT DENSITY COLE AASNO UNIFIEDHORIZON LIMIT (Z) LIMIT (Z) (X) IX) (6/CCI VALUE CLASS CLAS SO* COMOF 1CG 1OF 2CG 2OF 3CG 3OF4 15236

Table D14 . Pedon (Alberta 1983 No . 41) describing an Orthic Gleysol of the GF2 Ecosite .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE TEAR 1978, SUBGROUP: ORTHIC GLETSOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : GF2 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 U1G 6940 9100 ; NTS MAP AREA 82N 6 + .CLIMATE : 850 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT ROGERS PASS HAS MODERATE RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1WAS 8 DEG(C) AT 50 CM IN JULY .VEGETATION : VPN-MF3009RVTN-C51R .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : WEAK CHEMICAL WEATHERING . STRATIFIED (MINERAL) . MEDIUM ACID TO NEUTRAL (PH 5 .6-7 .3), FLUVIAL ;LANOFORM CLASSIFICATION : FLWIAL . EROOED(CHAN(ELLED), LEVEL ; SLOPE : 2% SIMPLE SLOPE OF CLASS 2 (0 .5-2X1 . FACING NORTH, SITE ATMIDDLE POSITION ; SOIL MOISTURE AND DRAINAGE : POORLY DRAINED, MODERATELY PERVIOUS, SLOW SURFACE RUNOFF . SEEPAGE ABSENT .0 .9 M TO APPARENT WATERTABLE ; NONSTONY ; NONROCKY .SPECIAL NOTES : SSN=WT3009 R DATE=30/07/83RAPN=391-140RTHIN ORGANIC STAINING ABOVE HZNS S AND 10"BCG2 IS STRATIFIED'SEVERAL COARS EROOT CHANNELS IN BCG2 INFLUENCE AERATION AND MOTTLING R EFM=FT-EAPEDON IS FRAGMENT FREE RLF :4 TO 0 CM . RANGE 3 TO 5 CM : HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 3/1 ; PLATY STRUCTURE ; ABUNDANT, MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE AN DMEDIUM, HORIZONTAL AND RANDOM ROOTS ; WAVY, ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .AE : 0 TO 3 CM, RANGE 1 TO 5 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 7/1 ; SILT LOAM ; VERY WEAK, VERY FINE, PLATY STRUCTURE ; VERTFRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; FEW, MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE AND MEDIUM . HORIZONTAL AND RANDOM ROOTS : SLIGHTLY POROUS, FEW . FINE ,HORIZONTAL PORES ; WAVY, CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY .BMGJ : 3 TO 10 CM, RANGE 5 TO 9 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 7 .5YR 5/4 ; SILT LOAM ; COMMON, MEDIUM AND COARSE, DISTINCT MOTTLES ;7 .SYR 5/6 MOTTLES ; VERY WEAK, MEDILOI, SUBANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; PLENTIFUL, MICRO A)O VERY FINEAND FINE AND MEDIUM AND COARSE . HORIZONTAL AND RANDOM ROOTS ; SLIGHTLY POROUS, FEW, FINE, RANDOM PORES ; WAVY, CLEAR HORIZO NBOUNDARY .BCG1: 10 TO 19 CM . RANGE 7 TO 13 CM : HORIZON MOIST : MATRIX MOIST 10YR 6/3 ; SILT ; COMMON . MEDIUM AND COARSE, PROMINENT MOTTLES :7 .5YR 5/6 MOTTLES ; WEAK TO MODERATE, MEDIUM . SUBANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE PSEUDO ; FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; FEN . MICRO AND VER YFINE AND FINE AND MEDIUM AND COARSE . HORIZONTAL AND RANDOM ROOTS ; MODERATELY POROUS, COMMON . FINE AND MEDIUM AND COARSE, RANDO MPORES ; SMOOTH . ABRUPT HORIZON BOU DARY .AEGB : 19 TO 22 CM, RANGE 2 TO 7 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 7/1 ; VERY FINE SANDY LOAM ; FEW. COARSE, PROMINENT MOTTLES ;7 .5YR 5/6 MOTTLES ; VERY WEAK, FINE, PLATY STRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; VERT FEW . MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE ,HORIZONTAL AND RANDOM ROOTS ; SLIGHTLY POROUS, FEN, FINE . HORIZONTAL PORES ; WAVY . CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY .BGB : 22 TO 36 CM, RANGE 11 TO 16 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 5/5, MATRIX MOIST 2 .5Y 6/1 ; SILT LOAM ; MANY, COARSE ,PROMINENT, 7 .5YR 4/6 MOTTLES ; 7 .5YR 5/6 MOTTLES ; VERY WEAK, COARSE, ANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE ; FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; FEW, MICROAND VERY FINE AND FINE, HORIZONTAL AND RANDOM ROOTS ; SLIGHTLY POROUS, VERY FEW, FINE, RANDOM PORES ; NAVY, CLEAR HORIZO NBOUNDARY .BCG2: 36 TO 63 CM, RANGE 25 TO 30 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 5/4, MATRIX MOIST 10YR 5/3 ; VERY FINE SANDY LOAM ; MANY ,COARSE, PROMINENT MOTTLES ; 7 .5YR 5/6 MOTTLES ; STRUCTURELESS, MASSIVE STRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; VERY FEN, MICRO ANDVERY FINE AND FINE . HORIZONTAL AND RANDOM ROOTS ; WAVY, CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY .CG1: 63 TO 90 CM . RANGE 25 TO 35 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 5/3 . MATRIX MOIST 10YR 6/4 ; SILT LOAM ; MANY, COARSE ,PROMINENT . 5Y 6/1 MOTTLES ; 7 .5YR 5/6 MOTTLES ; STRUCTURELESS, MASSIVE STRUCTURE ; FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; VERY FEW . MICRO AND VERYFINE ROOTS ; WAVY, ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .CG2: 90 TO 96 CM . RANGE 4 TO 10 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 4/3 ; LOAMY SAND ; MANY . COARSE, PROMINENT MOTTLES ; 7 .5YR 5/6MOTTLES ; STRUCTURELESS, MASSIVE STRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; WAVY, ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .CG3: 96 TO 109 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST SY 6/1 ; SILT LOAM ; MANY . COARSE . PROMINENT. 7 .SYR 4/6 MOTTLES ; STRUCTURELESS .MASSIVE STRUCTURE ; FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; WAVY, CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY .CG4: 109 TO 120 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 2 .5Y 6/1 ; FINE SANDY LOAM ; MANY, COARSE . PROMINENT MOTTLES ; 7 .5YR 5/6 MOTTLES ;STRUCTURELESS, MASSIVE STRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; WAVY, CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY .CGS : 120 TO 130 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 5Y 6/1 ; SILT LOAM ; MANY . COARSE, PROMINENT, 7 .5YR 4/6 MOTTLES ; STRUCTURELESS ,MASSIVE STRUCTURE ; FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ;PHYSICAL DATA (SURVEY)3" .75"HORIZON SIEVE SIEVEILFAEBMGJIECG 'AEGSBGBBCG2CGlICG2CG3ICG4 99 9 9CGS 99 99X PASSINGNO .4 NO .1 0SIEVE SIEVE99 9 999 9 9V .C .SANDPARTICLE SIZE ANALYSISC . MED . F .SAND SAND SAND0 0 0 1 10 0 0 70 0 0 10 0 1 2 00 0 0 70 0 4 2 70 0 1 1 14 12 31 2 50 0 1 20 1 9 2 90 0 4 13V .F . TOT .SAND SAND30 4 132 3 96 727 4 820 2828 5 922 348 8030 1 320 5 916 33X OF SAMPLE70- 50-2 U 2 USILT SILT2UCLAYBULKDENSG/CC57 259 285 849 369 339 263 319 178 938 362 6 1 .5ATTERBURGPLASTI CLIMIT (XI00ENGINEERINGATTERBURGLIQUIDLIMIT (X)UNIFIE DCLASS0 0 90 09CHEMICAL DATA (SURVEY)EXTRACT EXTRACTC .E .C .(ME/100G)EXCHANGEABLE CATIONSBUFFERED (ME/100G)IRON(X)ALIRIINUI(XI MOISTURE STATUS (X )OR GEXT RHORIZON PH C BUFF . PERM . CA MG NA KMN 0 .33 1 51 (%) CNARG HORIZON 1 2 1 2 (X) ATM ATMLF I 4 .9 46 .5 L FAE 1 4 .3 0 .9 4 .8 1 .3 0 .1 - .1 - .1 A EBHGJ I 3 .9 1 .0 8 .2 0 .6 0 .1 - .1 - .1 OMGJ 0 .3 - .1 - . 1BCG1 I 4 .0 1 .5 11 .4 0 .3 0 .1 - .1 - .1 BCG1AEGB I 4 .3 0 .6 4 .8 0 .1 0 .1 - .1 - .1 AEGBBGB I 4 .3 0 .6 6 .5 0 .2 0 .1 - .1 - .1 BGB 0 .4 0 .1 - . 1BCG2 I 4 .6 2 .9 0 .3 - .1 - .1 - .1 BCG2CG1 I 4 .8 4 .2 1 .1 0 .1 0 .1 - .1 CG 1CG2 I 5 .0 2 .1 0 .5 - .1 - .1 - .1 CG 2CG3 I 5 .0 7 .5 3 .0 0 .3 - .1 0 .1 CG 3CG4 I 5 .1 3 .4 1 .1 0 .1 - .1 - .1 CG4 12 .1 2 . 9CG5 1 5 .1 4 .5 1 .6 0 .2 - .1 - .1 CGS 18 .8 3 .323 7

Table D15 . Pedon (Alberta 1983 No . 34) describing an undefined soil of the GH1 Ecosite .SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : 6H1 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 1176 6640 7810 ; PITS MAP AREA 82N 6+ .CLIMATE : 1370 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT ROGERS PASS HAS GOOD RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1 WA S6 DESICI AT 50 CM IN JULY .VEGETATION : VPN=MF3003+VTN=C47.OPEN VARIANT+ .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : MODERATE CHEMICAL WEATHERING . SKELETAL (>351 OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM1 AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILT Y(

Table D16. Pedon (Alberta 1983 No. 61) describing an Orthic Ferro-Humic Podzol of the HE3 Ecosite.CLASSIFICATION : TAX3OIIC SYSTEM OF THE TEAR 1978 . SOUP : ORTHIC FERRO-5J1IC POOZOL . SOIL MAP UNIT . NOTATION : HE3 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 U MG 8380 8150; NIS MAP AREA 82H 6+ .CLIMATE : 2410 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT ROGERS PASS HAS POOR RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1 WASS DEGIC) AT 20 CM IN JULY .VEGETATION : VPN=503005+VFN=LS+ . .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : WEAK CHEMICAL WEATHERING . COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILTY 1(18X CLAY) . EXTREMELY TO STRONGLY ACIDICIPH .5 .5) . EOLIAN . UNDIFFERENTIATED OR UNDETERMINED ; PARENT MATERIAL 2 : UNSPECIFIED WEATHERING . SKELETAL (>355 OF PARTICLE S2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY ANTI COARSE SILTY ((18X CLAY), EXTREMELY TO STRONGLY ACIDIC (PH .5.5) . RESIDUAL . SCHIST AND PHYLLIT EAND SLATE ; DEPTH TO BEDROCK IS 0 .2 M ; LANDFORM CLASSIFICATION : BEDROCK . HUMMOCKY ; SLOPE : 195 COMPLEX SLOPE OF CLASS 6 116-30X) .FACING SOUTHWEST . SITE AT MIDDLE POSITION ; SOIL MOISTURE AND DRAINAGE : WELL DRAINED . MODERATELY PERVIOUS . MODERATE SURFACERUNOFF, SEEPAGE ABSENT ; SLIGHTLY STONY ; MODERATELY ROCKY .SPECIAL NOTES : SSN=OA3005+0ATE=83/07/29+APN=391-104+UTHIC RNASE+LF IS TURFY+LF NOT SAMPLED+LF : 3 TO 0 CM . RANGE 2 TO 4 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10TR 2/2 ; ABUDANT . MICRO AND VERT FINE AND FINE AND MEDIUM ROOTS ;SMDOTM . ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .AH1:AH2:0 TO 5 CM . RANGE 2 TO 7 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10TR 2/2 ; LOAM ; WEAK . FINE . GRANULAR STRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLECONSISTENCE ; ABUNDANT . MICRO AHD VERY FINE AND FINE AND MEDIUI ROOTS ; 10Z SLATY AND ANGULAR COBBLY AHD FLAGGY COARSE FRAGMENTS ;NAVY . ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .S TO 6 CM . RANGE 2 TO 6 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 7 .5YR 4/4 ; SILT LOAM ; WEAK . FINE . GRANULAR STRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABL ECONSISTENCE ; FEW . MICRO AND VERT FINE AND FINE ROOTS ; 10X SLATY AND ANGULAR COBBLY AND FLAGGY COARSE FRAGMENTS ; WAVY . ABRUP THORIZON BOUNDARY .BHF :8 TO 20 CM . RANGE 0 TO 12 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 2 .5TR 4/6 . MATRIX MOIST 2 .5TR 3/4 ; SILT LOAM ; WEAK . FINE . GRANULA RSTRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; FEW . MICRO AND VERT FINE AND FINE ROOTS ; 10X SLATY AND ANGULAR COBBLY AND FLAGGY COARS EFRAGMENTS; BROKEN . ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .2BC : 20 TO 22 CM . RANGE 0 TO 8 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 5/6 . MATRIX MOIST 10YR 5/8 ; SANDY LOAM ; STRUCTLRELESS . MASSIVESTRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; 505 SLATY COARSE FRAGMENTS ; BROKEN . ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .R :22 CMCHEMICAL DATA (SURVEY )HORIZONPH1ORGCIX)C .E .C .(ME/100G)BUFF . PERM .CHARDEXCHANGEABLE CATIONSBUFFERED (ME/100G)CA MG NA KEXTRACT EXTRACTIRON ALUMINUM1Z) (Z )HORIZON 1 2 1 2LF I LF 1AH1 1 4 .0 12 .7 38 .5 0 .5 0 .3 0 .1 0 .4 AH 1AH2 I 4 .3 10 .3 38 .5 0 .2 0 .1 - .1 0 .1 AH2 1 1 .0 1 .0 - . 1BHF 1 4 .6 8 .1 59 .5 0 .2 0 .1 0 .1 0 .1 BHF I 0 .5 1 .0 - . 128C I 4 .5 10 .8 0 .2 0 .1 0 .1 0 .1 2BCR I R IPHYSICAL DATA (SURVEY )EXTRNON1Z )HORIZON3"SIEVEZ PASSINNG.75" NO .4 N0 .1 0SIEVE SIEVE SIEVEV .C .SANDPARTICLE SIZE ANALYSISC . MED .SAND SANDX OF SAMPLE70- 50-F . V .F . TOT . 2U 2U 2U 0 .2USAND SAND SAND SILT SILT CLAY CLAYLF 1AH1 I 41 46 1 1AH2 I 32 59 9BHF I 17 68 152BC I 99 84 53 36 47 47 6R 1PHYSICAL DATAENGINEERINGMOISTURE STATUS (X )ATTERBURG ATTERBUR6 SHRINKAGE OPT MOIST MAX DRY0 .1 0 .33 15 HYGR . FIELD PLASTIC LIQUID LIMIT CONTENT DENSITY COLE AASNO UNIFIEDHORIZON ATM ATM ATM MOIST MOIST LIMIT (Z) LIMIT (X1 (Z) (XI 16/CC) VALUE CUSS CLASSLFIAH1IAH2IBHF2BC I 24 .2 5 .2 19 35RI0423 9

Table D17. Pedon (Alberta 1983 No . 67) describing an Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol of the HR3 Eco -site .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978, SUBGROUP : ORTHIC HUMO-FERRIC PODZOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : HR3 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 UMG 5170 7580 ; NTS MAP AREA BIN 4N .CLIMATE : 1630 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT MOUNT FIDELITY HAS GOOD RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1WAS B OEG(C) AT 50 CM IN AUGUST .VEGETATION : VPN=SD3011'VTN=C259 .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : WEAK CHEMICAL WEATHERING . SKELETAL (>351 OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILTY (

Table D18. Pedon (Alberta 1983 No . 56) describing an Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol of the HR4 Eco -site .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978 . SUBGROUP : ORTHIC HIAIO-FERRIC PODZOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : HR4 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 IMG 2550 5940 ; NTS MAP AREA 82M 1R .CLIMATE : 1770 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT REVELSTOKE HAS POOR RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1 WAS 4DEG(C) AT 50 CM IN AUGUST .VEGETATION : VPN . SD3015+VTN=C47 . .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : MODERATE CHEMICAL WEATHERING, SKELETAL ('35Z OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILT Y(

Table D19. Pedon (Alberta 1983 No. 47) describing an Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol of the HR6 Eco -site .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978, SUBGROUP : ORTMIC HUMO-FERRIC PODZOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : MR6 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 MG 5980 8080 ; NTS MAP AREA 82N 5M .CLIMATE : 1930 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT MT FIDELITY HAS MODERATE RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1WAS 5 DEG(C) AT 20 CM IN JULY, NO . 2 WAS 5 DEGIC) AT 40 CM IN JULY .VEGETATION : VPN=H03003"VTN=020" .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : MODERATE CHEMICAL WEATHERING, SKELETAL ('35V OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILT Y1

Table D20. Pedon (Alberta 1983 No . 48) describing an Orthic Dystric Brunisol of the JD2 Ecosite .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978, SUBGROUP : ORTNIC DYSTRIC BRUNISOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : JD2 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 1816 5950 8120 ; NTS MAP AREA 82N SA . -CLIMATE : 2080 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT MT FIDELITY HAS MODERATE RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1WAS 4 DEGICI AT 20 CM IN JULY .VEGETATION : VPN=HO3005

Table D21 . Pedon (Alberta 1983 No . 53) describing an Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol of the JD3 Eco -site .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978 . SUCCRO'JP : ORTHIC HUMO-FERRIC PODZOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : JD3 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 MG 5350 6620 ; NTS MAP AREA BEN 4A .CLIMATE : 2150 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT MT FIDELITY HAS 6000 RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1 WAS4 DEG(C) AT 50 CM IN JULY .VEGETATION : VPN=HO3009RVTN=H16R .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : WEAK CHEMICAL WEATHERING, SI :ELETAL (>35Z OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILTY (

Table D22. Pedon (Alberta 1983 No . 55) describing an Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol of the JD4 Eco -site .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978, SUBGROUP : ORTHIC HUMO-FERRIC PODZOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : JD4 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 UMG 2050 5640 ; NTS MAP AREA 82M 1 . .CLIMATE : 1880 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT REVELSTOKE HAS POOR RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1 WAS 5DEG(C) AT 50 CM IN AUGUST .VEGETATION : VPN=S03012*VTN=020* .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : WEAK CHEMICAL WEATHERING, SKELETAL (>351 OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILTY (

Table D23. Pedon (Alberta 1983 No . 62) describing an Orthic Ferro-Humic Podzol of the JN2 Ecosite.CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978, SUBGROUP : ORTHIC FERRO-HUMIC PODZOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : JN2 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 UMG 8330 8170 ; NTS MAP AREA 82N 6 9 .CLIMATE : 2320 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT ROGERS PASS HAS POOR RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1 WAS6 DEG(C) AT 50 CM IN JULY .VEGETATION : VPN=SO3006•VTN=H18* . .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : WEAK CHEMICAL WEATHERING, SKELETAL (>35M OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILTY (

33) describing an Eluviated Dystric Brunisol of the KX1 Eco-Table D24 . Pedon (Alberta 1983 No .site .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978, SUBGROUP : ELUVIATED DYSTRIC BRUNISOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : KX1 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 LING 7030 8940 ; NTS MAP AREA 82N 6+ .CLIMATE : 920 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT ROGERS PASS HAS MODERATE RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE .VEGETATION : VPH=MF3001AVTN=C52+ .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : MODERATE CHEMICAL WEATHERING, COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILTY (35Z OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND SANDY, EXTREMELY TO STRONGLY ACIDI C(PH .5 .5), GLACIOFLUVIAL, MIXED ; LANDFORM CLASSIFICATION : GLACIO FLUVIAL . TERRACED ; SLOPE : OZ SIMPLE SLOPE OF CLASS 1 (O-0 .51) ,FACING LEVEL . SITE AT MIDDLE POSITION, SLIGHTLY MOUNDED MICROTOPOGRAPHY . ; SOIL MOISTURE AND DRAINAGE : WELL DRAINED, MODERATELYPERVIOUS, SLOW SURFACE RUNOFF, SEEPAGE ABSENT ; SLIGHTLY STONY ; NONROCKY .SPECIAL NOTES : SSN=WT3001RAPN=391-140RLFM=EV/FGT .DATE=260783RPH=5 .3 AT 30CI1 HZN4 IS BRITTLE *LF :AE :BM :S TO 0 CM, RANGE 4 TO 7 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 2/1 ; ABUNDANT, MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE AND MEDIUM AN DCOARSE, HORIZONTAL ROOTS ; SMOOTH, ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .0 TO 4 CM, RANGE 2 TO 5 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 7 .5YR 6/1 ; SILT LOAM ; WEAK, FINE, PLATY STRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLECONSISTENCE ; PLENTIFUL, MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE AND MEDIUM AND COARSE, HORIZONTAL ROOTS ; 10Z GRAVELLY COARSE FRAGMENTS ;SMOOTH . ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .4 TO 12 CM, RANGE 5 TO 23 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 5YR 5/6 . MATRIX DRY 7 .5YR 6/6 ; SILT LOAM ; VERY WEAK . VERY FINE TOFINE, ANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE ; STRUCTURELESS, MASSIVE SECONDARY STRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; PLENTIFUL . MICRO ANDVERY FINE AND FINE AND MEDIUM, RANDOM ROOTS ; WAVY . CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY .2BM :2BC :12 TO 24 CM, RANGE 7 TO 16 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 5YR 4/5 ; SANDY LOAM ; WEAK, FINE TO MEDIUM, ANGULAR BLOCK YSTRUCTURE ; FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; WEAKLY CEMENTEDBY HUMUS-ALUMINUM AND IRON . DISCONTINUOUS ; FEW, MICRO AND VERT FINE AND FINE .RANDOM ROOTS ; 30% GRAVELLY AND CHANNERY AND COBBLY COARSE FRAGMENTS ; WAVY, CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY .24 TO 70 CM, RANGE 25 TO 50 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 4/4 ; GRAVELLY LOAMY COARSE SAND ; STRUCTURELESS . MASSIV ESTRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; VERY FEW, MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE, RANDOM ROOTS ; 50X GRAVELLY AND CHANNERY AN DCOBBLY COARSE FRAGMENTS ; WAVY, GRADUAL HORIZON BOUNDARY ; STRONGLY ACID 5 .1-5 .5 FIELD PH .2C :70 TO 105 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 5/4 ; GRAVELLY LOAMY COARSE SAND ; STRUCTURELESS, MASSIVE STRUCTURE ; LOOSECONSISTENCE ; VERY FEW . MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE, RANDOM ROOTS ; 70Z GRAVELLY AND CHANNERY AND COBBLY AND STONY (BOULDERY )COARSE FRAGMENTS .CHEMICAL DATA (SURVEY )HORIZONPH1ORGC(Z)C .E .C .(ME/100G)BUFF . PERM .CHARGEXCHANGEABLE CATIONSBUFFERED (ME/100G)CA MG NA KHORIZONEXTRACTIRONCZ)EXTRAC TALUMINUM(Z)1 2 1 2LF I 3 .1 58 .6 LF IAE 3 .1 2 .2 20 .2 0 .2 - .1 - .1 0 .2 A EBM I 5 .2 3 .0 34 .9 0 .2 - .1 - .1 0 .2 8M I 0 .1 0 .4 - . 12BM I 5 .1 0 .5 8 .8 0 .2 - .1 - .1 0 .1 2BM I - .1 0 .1 0 . 02BC I 5 .0 2 .4 0 .1 - .1 - .1 - .1 26C I - .1 - .1 0 . 02C I 4 .8 2 .9 0 .1 - .1 - .1 - .1 2C IEXTRMN(X )PHYSICAL DATA (SURVEY)PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSISZ PASSINGZ OF SAMPLE70- 50 -3" .75" NO .4 NO .10 V .L . C . MED . F . V .F . TOT . 2U 2U 2U 0 .2UHORIZON SIEVE SIEVE SIEVE SIEVE SAND SAND SAND SAND SAND SAND SILT SILT CLAY CLA YILFAE 1BM20M28CI2C I 99 70 45 28PHYSICAL DATA1 5 5 9 11 31 66 36 9 6 6 13 40 54 65 14 13 14 7 53 43 412 26 22 12 5 77 22 19 22 24 15 6 76 22 2ENGINEERIN GMOISTURE STATUS (Z)ATTERBURG ATTERBURG SHRINKAGE OPT MOIST MAX DRY0 .1 0 .33 15 HYGR . FIELD PLASTIC LIQUID LIMIT CONTENT DENSITY COLE AASHO UNIFIEDHORIZON ATM ATM ATM MOIST MOIST LIMIT (2) LIMIT (Z) (Z) (XI (G/CC) VALUE CLASS CLAS SL FAEIBM2BMI2BC 12C 1 10 .6 2 .5 0 0 01247

Table 25 . Pedon (Alberta 1983 No. 60) illustratin g gleyed Podzolic soils of the LKl Ecosite .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978, SUBGROUP : GLEYED HUMO-FERRIC PODZOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : LK1 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 (MG 7240 6910 ; HIS MAP AREA 82N 3. .CLIMATE : 1820 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT ROGERS PASS HAS POOR RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1 WA S5 DEGIC) AT 50 CM IN JULY .VEGETATION : VPN .SD3004•VTN=C21R .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : UNSPECIFIED WEATHERING, COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILTY (351 OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARS ESILTY (

Table D26 . Pedon (Alberta 1983 No. 45) describing an Eluviated Dystric Brunisol of the LR1 Eco -site .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978 . SUBGROUP : ELUVIATED DYSTRIC BRUNISOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : LR1 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 UMH 6630 10 ; NTS MAP AREA 82N 6• .CLIMATE : 830 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT ROGERS PASS HAS MODERATE RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1WAS 7 DEGICI AT 50 CM IN JULY .VEGETATION : VPN= MD3001+VTN=C44• .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : WEAK CHEMICAL WEATHERING, STRATIFIED (MINERAL) AND SANDY, EXTREMELY TO STRONGLY ACIDIC (P14 .5 .5) ,FLUVIAL, MIXED AND METAMORPHIC ; LANDFORM CLASSIFICATION : FLUVIAL, ERODED(CHANNELLED), FAN ; SLOPE : 3% SIMPLE SLOPE OF CLASS 3(2-5%1, FACING SOUTHEAST, SITE AT MIDDLE POSITION, SLIGHTLY MOUNDED MICROTOPOGRAPHY „ SOIL MOISTURE AHD DRAINAGE : WELL DRAINED .RAPIDLY PERVIOUS, MODERATE SURFACE RUNOFF, SEEPAGE ABSENT ; MODERATELY STONY ; NOIIROCKY ; FRESENT LAND USE : OUTDOOR RECREATION .SPECIAL NOTES : SSN=BW3001•0ATE=83/07/26•APN=BCS391-217APOSSIBLY EOLIAN MATTER INCLUDED IN AE A BM1• THIN OISCONT SYR4/6M BAND A TTOP BM1+WEAK PATCHY BRITTLENESS IN BC1 "LF :5 TO 0 CM . RANGE 3 TO 9 CM ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 2/2 ; ABUNDANT, MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE ROOTS ; WAVY, ABRUPT HORIZONBOUNDARY .AE : 0 TO 4 CM, RANGE 1 TO 11 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 5YR 5/1, MATRIX MOIST 10YR 4/2 ; GRAVELLY SILT LOAM ; WEAK . VERY FINETO FINE . SLOANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; ABUtDIANT, MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE AND MEDIUM AND COARSEROOTS ; 40% GRAVELLY AND COBBLY AND STONY (BOULDERY) COAPSE FRAGMENTS ; WAVY, ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .BM1: 4 TO 21 CM . RANGE 12 TO 20 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 7 .SYR 5/6 . MATRIX MOIST SYR 4/6 ; GRAVELLY SILT LOAM ; WEAK, MEDIUM ,SUBANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; ABUNDANT, MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE AND MEDIUM AND COARSE ROOTS ; 50 %GRAVELLY AND CODBLY AND STONY (BOULDERY) COARSE FRAGMENTS ; WAVY, CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY .BM2:BC1:BC2:BC3:21 TO 41 CM, RANGE 16 TO 30 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 7 .5YR 4/6 ; GRAVELLY LOAMY COARSE SAND ; STRUCTURELESS . SINGL EGRAIN STRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTEZ ;CE ; PLENTIFUL . MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE ROOTS ; 60% GRAVELLY AtD C068LY Atm STONY(BOULDERY) COARSE FRAGMENTS ; WAVY . CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY .41 TO 49 CM . RANGE 0 TO 15 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 5/4 ; GRAVELLY LOAMY COARSE SAND ; STRUCTURELESS, SINGLE GRAINSTRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; FEW . MICRO AND VERY FINE ROOTS ; 70% GRAVELLY AND COBBLY AND STONY (BOULDERYI COARS EFRAGMENTS ; BROKEN, ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .49 TO 60 CM, RANGE 0 TO 22 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 6/4 ; VERY GRAVELLY COARSE SAND ; STRUCTURELESS, SINGLE GRAINSTRUCTURE ; LOOSE CONSISTENCE ; VERY FEW, MICRO AND VERY FINE ROOTS ; 70% GRAVELLY AND COBBLY COARSE FRAGMENTS ; BROKEN . CLEARHORIZON BOUNDARY .60 TO 90 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 5 .5/4 ; GRAVELLY LOAMY COARSE SAND ; STRUCTURELESS, SINGLE GRAIN STRUCTURE ; LOOS ECONSISTENCE ; VERY FEW, MICRO AND VERY FINE AHD FINE ROOTS ; 70X GRAVELLY AND COBBLY AND STONY (DOULDERYI COARSE FRAGMENTS ;STRONGLY ACID 5 .1-5 .5 FIELD PH .CHEMICAL DATA (SURVEY)L FA EBM1BM2BC 1BC 2BC3EXTRACT EXTRACTC .E .C . EXCHANGEABLE CATIONS IRON ALUMINUM(ME/1000) BUFFERED (ME/100G) 1%1 1% )HORIZON PHORGC BUFF . PERM . CA MG NA KEXTR1 (%1 CHARG HORIZON 1 2 1 2 (Z )4 .2 60 .1 LF3 .3 2 .0 17 .9 0 .8 0 .1 - .1 0 .2 AE4 .8 4 .6 54 .9 0 .5 - .1 - .1 0 .2 8M 14 .5 0 .6 6 .5 0 .2 - .1 - .1 - .1 BH 24 .6 2 .8 0 .2 - .1 - .1 - .1 DC 14 .6 2 .4 0 .1 - .1 - .1 - .1 BC24 .7 4 .2 0 .1 - .1 - .1 - .1 6C30 .2 0 .7 - . 10 .1 0 .1 0 . 0PHYSICAL DATA (SURVEY)PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSISPASSING% OF SAMPLE70- 50 -3" .75" NO .4 NO .10 V .C . C . MED . F . V .F . TOT . 2U 2UHORIZON 2U 0 .2USIEVE SIEVE SIEVE SIEVE SAND SAND SAND SAND SAND SAND SILT SILT CLAY CLAYLFAEBM 1BM 2BC 1BC2BC31 4 4 12 1S 36 61 36 8 6 9 12 41 53 618 23 16 14 9 80 17 36 21 21 19 12 79 18 399 51 32 2130 32 14 7 4 87 11 212 26 26 15 7 86 12 2PHYSICAL DATAENGINEERIN GMOISTURE STATUS 1%)ATTERBURG ATTERBURG SHRINKAGE OPT MOIST MAX DRY0 .1 0 .33 15 HYGR . FIELD PLASTIC LIQUID LIMIT CONTENT DENSITY COLE AASMO UNIFIE DHORIZON ATM ATM ATM MOIST MOIST LIMIT l%) LIMIT 1%) (%) (Xl (6/CC) VALUE CLASS CLAS SLFIA EBM1IB(12 IBC1IBC2 1SC3 I 4 .1 1 .8 0 0 01249

Table D27. Pedon (Alberta 1983 No . 66) describing an Orthic Dystric Brunisol of the NC1 Ecosite .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978 . SUBGROUP : ORTHIC DYSTRIC BRUNISOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : NCI .LOCATION: MILITARY GRID REF . 11 UIG 6720 9700 ; NTS MAP AREA 82N 6" .CLIMATE : 970 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT ROGERS PASS HAS POOR RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1 WAS 9DEG(C) AT 50 CM IN AUGUST .VEGETATION : VPN=503010"VTN=CS2* .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : WEAK CHEMICAL WEATHERING . SKELETAL (>35X OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILTY (

Table D28 . Pedon (Alberta 1983 No. 46) describing an Eluviated Dystric Brunisol of the NC2 Eco -site .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE TEAR 1978 . SUBGROUP : ELUVIATED DYSTRIC BRLNISOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : NC2 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 U1MG 5750 7810 ; NTS MAP AREA 82N 5* .CLIMATE : 1190 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT ROGERS PASS HAS MODERATE RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING HO . 1WAS 6 DEG(CI AT 50 CM IN JULY .VEGETATION : VPN= HO3002*VTN=C5011 .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : WEAK CHEMICAL WEATHERING . SKELETAL ('352 OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILTY (

Table 29 . Pedon (Alberta 1983 No. 51) illustrating Podzolic soils of the NC5 Ecosite .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1976, SUBGROUP : SOMBRIC HUMO-FERRIC PODZOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : NCS .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 UIG 6550 7980 : NTS MAP AREA 82N 6* .CLIMATE : 1310 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT ROGERS PASS HAS 600D RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1 WAS7 DEG(C) AT 50 CM IN JULY .VEGETATION : VPN=PA3004*VTN=S13* .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : WEAK CHEMICAL WEATHERING, SKELETAL (>35X OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILTY (

Table D30 . Pedon (Alberta 1983 No . 43) describing an Orthic Dystric Brunisol of the NC6 Ecosite .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE TEAR 1976 . SUBGROUP : ORTHIC DYSTRIC BRU I60L . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : NC6 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . li U1G 3400 5700 ; NTS MAP AREA 82H 4+ .CLIMATE : 1000 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT REVELSTOKE HAS MODERATE RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1WAS 13 DEG(C) AT 50 CM IN AUGUST .VEGETATION : VPN.MF3015RVTN=015 CLOSED VARIANT* .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : MODERATE CHEMICAL WEATHERING . SKELETAL ('35X OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILT Y(

Table D31 . Pedon (Alberta 1983 No . 39) describing an Orthic Dystric Brunisol of the RD3 Ecosite .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978, SUBGROUP : ORTHIC DYSTRIC BRUNISOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : RD3 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 UMG 7450 9310 ; NYS MAP AREA 82N 6* .CLIMATE : 2350 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT ROGERS PASS HAS POOR RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1 WA S4 DEGICI AT 50 CM IN JULY .VEGETATION : VPN=MF3007*VTN=L5* .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : MODERATE CHEMICAL WEATHERING . COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILTY (35X OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILTY (

Table D32. Pedon (Alberta 1983 No . 37) describing an Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol of the RD4 Ecosite.CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978 . SUBGROUP : ORTHIC HU7O-FERRIC PODZOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : tOTATION : RD4 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 lAD 6120 8130 ; NTS MAP AREA 82H 5R .CLIMATE : 2500 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT MT FIDELITY HAS POOR RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE .VEGETATION : VPN =MF3005RVTN=LSR .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : MODERATE CHEMICAL WEATHERING . SKELETAL (>351 OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILT Y(€18% CLAY), EXTREMELY TO STRONGLY ACIDIC (PH .5 .51 . COLLUVIAL . SCHIST AND PHYLLITE AND QUARTZITE ; DEPTH TO BEDROCK IS 1 M ;LANDFORM CLASSIFICATION : COLLUVIAL, AVALANCHED AND SOLIFLUCTED . VENEER ; SLOPE : 70Z SIMPLE SLOPE OF CLASS 9 (71-100%1 . FACIN GSOUTHWEST, SITE AT MIDDLE POSITION . 270 M LONG ; SOIL MOISTURE AND DRAINAGE : WELL GRAINED . MODERATELY PERVIOUS, RAPID SURFAC ERUNOFF, SEEPAGE ABSENT ; EXCEEDINGLY STONY ; SLIGHTLY ROCKY .SPECIAL NOTES : SSN=WT1005RDATE=280783RAPH=391-101RLFM=CV/RI-S .A .`PEDON TURBIC AND LITHIC PHASESRPH=4 .8 AT 30 CM.LF :3 TO 0 CM . RANGE 5 TO 1 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 2/1 ; PLENTIFUL, MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE AND MEDIUM ROOTS ;30% ANGULAR GRAVELLY AND CHANNERY AND ANGULAR COEBLY AND STONY (BOULDERY) COARSE FRAGMENTS ; WAVY, ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .AHE : 0 TO 4 CM . RANGE 3 TO 6 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 7 .5YR 5/2 ; SILT LOAM ; WEAK, MEDIUM . SUSANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE ;STRUCTURELESS . MASSIVE SECONDARY STRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; PLENTIFUL . MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE ANN MEDIUM ROOTS ;50Z ANGULAR GRAVELLY ANN CHANNERY A10 ANGULAR COBBLY AND STONY (BOULDERT) COARSE FRAGMENTS ; WAVY, CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY .BM : 4 TO 16 CM . RANGE 4 TO 16 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 7 .5YR 4/4 ; SILT LOAM ; WEAK . MEDIUM . SUBANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE ;STRUCTURELESS . MASSIVE SECONDARY STRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; FEW, MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE AND MEDIUM ROOTS ; 60%ANGULAR GRAVELLY AND CHANNERY AND ANGULAR COG3LY AND STONY (BOULDERYI COARSE FRAGMENTS ; BROKEN . CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY .AEB : 16 TO 20 CM . RANGE 0 TO 8 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 5/2 ; SILT LOAM ; WEAK, MEDIUM . SUBANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE ;STRUCTURELESS . MASSIVE SECONDARY STRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; FEW . MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE AND MEDIUM ROOTS ; 60%ANGULAR GRAVELLY AND CHANNERY AND ANGULAR COBBLY AND STONY IBOULOERYI COARSE FRAGMENTS ; BROKEN . CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY .A,BU : 20 TO 55 CM, RANGE 20 TO 45 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST SOYR 5/4, MATRIX MOIST 10YR 5/2 ; SILT LOAM ; WEAK . MEDIUM .SUBANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE ; STRUCTURELESS, MASSIVE SECONDARY STRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; VERY FEW ROOTS ; 60% ANGULARGRAVELLY AND CHANNERY AND ANGULAR COBBLY AND STONY (BCULOERY) COARSE FRAGMENTS ; WAVY . CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY ; VERY STRONGL YACID 4 .6-5 .0 FIELD PH .BF :55 TO 71 CM . RANGE 8 TO 20 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 4/4 ; FINE SANDY LOAM ; WEAK, FINE AND MEDIUM, SUBANGULAR BLOCK YSTRUCTURE ; STRUCTURELESS, MASSIVE SECONDARY STRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; VERT FEW ROOTS : 60% ANGULAR COBBLY AND STONY(BOULDERYI COARSE FRAGMENTS ; WAVY . CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY .' BC : 71 TO 95 CM, RANGE 15 TO 30 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 6/5 ; FINE SANDY LOAM ; COMMON, MEDIUM . FAINT . IOYR 5/6MOTTLES ; STRUCTURELESS . MASSIVE STRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; VERY FEW, MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE ROOTS ; 30% ANGULARGRAVELLY AND CHANNERY AND ANGULAR COBSLY COARSE FRAGMENTS .R :95 CMCHEMICAL DATA (SURVEY )C .E .C .(ME/100G)EXCHANGEABLE CATIONSBUFFERED (ME/IOOGIEXTRAC TIRON1% )EXTRACTALUMINUM(Z )HORIZON PHORGC BUFF . PERM . CA MG NA KEXT RMN1 IZI CHARG HORIZON 1 2 1 2 IX )LF 3 .7 18 .4 LF IAHE I 3 .8 5 .3 14 .1 0 .5 - .1 - .1 0 .2 AH EBM I 4 .4 2 .3 13 .5 0 .1 - .1 0 .1 - .1 BM I 0 .3 0 .3 0 . 0AEB 1 4 .3 3 .6 14 .1 0 .2 - .1 - .1 0 .1 AE BA .BU I 4 .6 2 .4 15 .2 0 .2 - .1 - .1 - .1 A .BU I 0 .3 0 .4 0 . 0BF I 4 .7 1 .8 15 .2 0 .2 - .1 - .1 - .1 BF I 0 .3 0 .4 - . 1BC I 4 .8 3 .1 0 .1 - .1 - .1 - .1 BC 1R I R 1PHYSICAL DATA (SURVEY )HORIZON3 "SIEVEL FAH EE MAE BA .BUB FBC 99RPHYSICAL DATA.75"SIEVEZ PASSINGNO . 4SIEVENO .1 0SIEVEV .C .SANDPARTICLE SIZE ANALYSI SC .SAIDMED .SANDF .SANDV .F .SANDTOT .SANDZ OF SAMPL E70 - 50 -2 U 2 U 2USILT SILT CLAY2 9 3 11 13 38 61 14 8 8 12 12 44 5S 12 8 8 11 11 40 57 34 11 10 10 10 45 54 13 8 9 15 16 51 45 493 82 71 3 8 11 21 22 65 34 1ENGINEERING0 .2 UCLAYMOISTURE STATUS (Z)ATTERBURG ATTERBURG SHRIN(AGE OPT MOIST MAX DR Y0 .1 0 .33 15 HYGR . FIELD PLASTIC LIQUID LIMIT CONTENT DENSITY COLE AASHO UNIFIE DHORIZON ATM ATM ATM MOIST MOIST LIMIT I%) LIMIT I%) (Z1 (Z) (6/CC) VALUE CLASS CLASSLFAR EBMAEBA.BUBF6CRS .2 2 .4 0 00725 5

Table D33 . Pedon (Alberta 1983 No . 52) describing an Orthic Dystric Brunisol of the RD5 Ecosite .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978 . SUBGROUP : ORTHIC DYSTRIC BRUNISOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : RD5 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 U1G 5370 6690 ; NTS MAP AREA 82H 4* .CLIMATE : 2410 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT MT FIDELITY HAS POOR RELEVANCE2 DEG(C) AT 50 CM IN JULY .TONE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1 WASVEGETATION : VPN-H03008*VTH=H2* . .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : WEAK CHEMICAL WEATHERING, SKELETAL (>35X OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILTY (35X OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AHD COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILTY (

Table D34 . Pedon (Alberta 1983 No . 57) describing an Orthic Regosol of the SN1 Ecosite .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978 . SUBGROUP : ORTHIC REGOSOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : 5N1 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 U11G 6810 9260 ; NTS MAP AREA 82N 69 .CLIMATE : 870 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL. STATION AT ROGERS PASS HAS MODERATE RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1WAS 13 DEGIC) AT 50 CM IN JULY .VEGETATION : VPN-S03001 . VTN=023. .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : WEAK CHEMICAL WEATHERING, SKELETAL (>351 OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND STRATIFIED (MINERAL) . WEAKL YCALCAREOUS (1 TO Al CAC031 . FLUVIAL . MIXED ; LANOFORM CLASSIFICATION : FLWIAL, ERODEDICHANNELLED) . FAN ; SLOPE : 8% SIMPLE SLOPEOF CLASS 4 (6-9X1 . FACING NORTH, SITE AT MIDDLE POSITION ; SOIL MOISTURE AND DRAINAGE : RAPIDLY DRAINED AND WELL DRAINED .RAPIDLY PERVIOUS, MODERATE SURFACE RUNOFF, SEEPAGE ABSENT ; MODERATELY STONY ; HONROCKY .SPECIAL NOTES : SSN=DA3001FDATE=83/07/26+APH>391-140 :,CK HORIZONS LIKE TILL . POSSIBLE MUDFLOWNLF : 3 TO 0 CM . RANGE 1 TO 5 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 2 .5YR 2 .5/2 ; PLENTIFUL, MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE AND MEDIUM .HORIZONTAL ROOTS ; SMOOTH, ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .Cl,0 TO 6 CM, RANGE 2 TO 10 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 4/0 ; GRAVELLY LOAMY COARSE SAND ; STRUCTURELESS . SINGLE GRAI NSTRUCTURE ; LOOSE CONSISTENCE ; PLENTIFUL, MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE AND MEDIUM, HORIZONTAL ROOTS ; 401 GRAVELLY COARS EFRAGMENTS ; WAVY, CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY .C2: 6 TO 10 CM, RANGE 0 TO 8 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 5/3 ; GRAVELLY COARSE SANDY LOAM ; STRUCTURELESS, SINGLE GRAI NSTRUCTURE ; LOOSE CONSISTENCE ; PLENTIFUL . MICRO AND VERY FINE AHD FINE, HORIZONTAL ROOTS ; 40% GRAVELLY COARSE FRAGMENTS ; BROKEN ,ABRUPT HORIZON BOUNDARY .C3: 10 TO 16 CM . RANGE 3 TO 11 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 4/2 ; VERY GRAVELLY COARSE SAND ; STRUCTURELESS . SINGLE GRAI NSTRUCTURE ; LOOSE CONSISTENCE ; FEW, MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE, HORIZONTAL ROOTS ; 60% GRAVELLY COARSE FRAGMENTS ; WAVY . CLEARHORIZON BOUNDARY .CK1: 16 TO 31 CM . RANGE 12 TO 21 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 5/3 ; VERY GRAVELLY COARSE SANDY LOAM ; WEAK . FINE .SUBANGULAR BLOCKY STRUCTURE ; VERY FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; FEW, MICRO AND VERY FINE AND FINE, HORIZONTAL ROOTS ; VERT WEAKEFFERVESCENCE ; 801 GRAVELLY AND COBBLY AND STONY (BOULDERY) COARSE FRAGMENTS ; WAVY . CLEAR HORIZON BOUNDARY .CK2: 31 TO 90 CM ; HORIZON MOIST ; MATRIX MOIST 10YR 5/4 ; GRAVELLY SANDY LOAM ; STRUCTURELESS . MASSIVE STRUCTURE ; WEAK . COARSE .SUBANGULAR BLOCKY SECONDARY STRUCTURE ; FRIABLE CONSISTENCE ; VERY WEAK EFFERVESCENCE : 401 GRAVELLY AND COBBLY AND STON Y(BOULDERYI COARSE FRAGMENTS .CHEMICAL DATA (SURVEY)C .E .C .(ME/100G )ORG CAICHORIZON PH C CARD BUFF . PERM .1 1X1 EOU .% CHAR DLF I 5 .4 50 . 1Cl I 5 .5 0 .7 3 . 3C2 I 5 .5 0 .4 2 . 5C3 1 5 .8 0 .5 2 . 4CK1 6 .2 0 .5 0 .4 3 . 7CK2 I 6 .7 1 . 7EXCHANGEABLE CATIONSBUFFERED (ME/100G)CA MG NA KEXTRACTIRON(X)EXTRACTALUMINUMIX )HORIZON 1 2 1 2EXTRMH1X 1L F I2 .4 0 .2 - .1 0 .1C1.1 - .1 - . 11 .9 0 .3 - .1 - .1 C2 .1 .1 . 2 .6 0 .1 - .1 - .1 C3 - .1 - .1 - . 13 .8 0 .4 - .1 0 .1 CK1 CK2IPHYSICAL DATA (SURVEY )HORIZONZ PASSIN G3" .75" NO .4 NO .1 0SIEVE SIEVE SIEVE SIEVEL FC1IC2C3 99 74 53 3 1CK1CK2 I 99 85 69 57PHYSICAL DATAMOISTURE STATUS (X)V .C .SANDPARTICLE SIZE ANALYSISC .SANDMED .SANDF .SANDV .F .SANDTOT .SAIDX OF SAMPLE70- 50 -2 U 2U 2USILT SILT CLAY0 .2 UCLAYBULKDEN S6/CC8 23 23 18 7 79 20 112 22 13 11 8 66 32 216 24 23 16 8 87 13 015 20 11 8 7 61 35 48 12 10 12 12 54 42 4 2 .0ENGINEERINGATTERBURG ATTERBURG SHRINKAGE OPT MOIST MAX DR Y0 .1 0 .33 15 HYGR . FIELD PLASTIC LIQUID LIMIT CONTENT DENSITY COLE AASHO UNIFIEDHORIZON ATM ATM ATM MOIST MOIST LIMIT (Z) LIMIT IX) IX) 1X) (6/CC) VALUE CUSS CUSSLFClC2C3CK 1CK24 .0 2 .1 0 014 .6 1 .6 19 2 00507257

Table D35 . Pedon (Alberta 1983 No . 40) describing an Orthic Gleysol of the WR1 Ecosite .CLASSIFICATION : TAXONOMIC SYSTEM OF THE YEAR 1978 . SUBGROUP : ORTHIC GLEYSOL . SOIL MAP UNIT : NOTATION : WR1 .LOCATION : MILITARY GRID REF . 11 U1G 7410 9290 ; NTS MAP AREA 8211 6* .CLIMATE : 2180 METERS ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL . STATION AT ROGERS PASS HAS POOR RELEVANCE TO THE SOIL SITE . SOIL TEMP READING NO . 1 WA S4 DEGICI AT 50 CM IN JULY .VEGETATION : VPN=MF3008*VTN =H16* .SOIL SITE : PARENT MATERIAL 1 : MODERATE CHEMICAL WEATHERING . COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILTY (351 OF PARTICLES 2-25 CM) AND COARSE LOAMY AND COARSE SILT Y(

APPENDIX E - VEGETATION TYPES OF MOUNT REVELSTOKE AND GLACIER NATIONA LPARKSCLOSED FOREST VEGETATION TYPE SC14 :Picea engelmannii -Ables lasiocarpa/Menziesia glabella/Vaccinium scoparium(Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/false azalea )C21 :Picea engelmannii -Ables lasiocarpa/Vaccinium membranaceum/Barbilophozia lycopodioides(Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/tall bilberry/liverwort )C25 : Picea engelmannii -Ables lasiocarpa/Alnus crispa/Vaccinium membranaceum/Dryopterisassimilis(Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/green alder )C28 :C44 :Populus balsamifera/Equisetum pratens e(balsam poplar/horsetail )Picea spp.-Populus tremuloides-Pinus contorta-(Betula papyrifera)/Shepherdia canadensis/Calamagrostisrubescens(spruce-aspen-lodgepole pine-(paper birch)/buffaloberry/pine grass)C47: Tsuga mertensiana-Ables lasiocarpa/Rhododendron albiflorum-Vaccinium membranaceumn /Rubus pedatu s(mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry )C48: Picea engelmannii-Tsuga mertensiana/Rhododendron albiflorum-Vaccinium membranaceum/Clintoniaunifora(Engelmann spruce-mountain hemlock/rhododendron-tall bilberry )C49: Tsuga mertensiana - Pseudotsuga menziesii- Abies lasiocarpa- Picea engelmannii/Rhododendronalbi/lorum-Vaccinium membranaceum(mountain hemlock-Douglas fir-subalpine fir-Engelmann spruce/rhododendron-tall bilberry)C50: Tsuga heterophylla-Thuja plicata/Taxus brevifolia/Gymnocarpium dryopteri s(western hemlock-western red cedar/western yew/oak fern )C51: Thu,la plicata-Tsuga heterophylla/Oplopanax horridum/Gymnocarpium dryopteri s(western red cedar-western hemlock/devil's club/oak fern )C52: Tsuga heterophylla-Thu,ja plicata-(Pseudotsuga menziesii)/Pachystima myrsinites(western hemlock-western red cedar-(Douglas fir)/mountain lover )C53: Pseudotsuga menziesii-Thug plicata/Pachystima myrsinites(Douglas fir-western red cedar/mountain lover)259

OPEN FOREST VEGETATION TYPES9: Picea engelmannii-Abies lasiocarpa/Valeriana sitchensis- Erigeron peregrinu s(Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/valerian-fleabane )10: Picea engelmannii-Abies lasiocarpa/Phyllodoce glanduliflora-Cassiope mertensian a(Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/heather )11: Picea spp ./Ledum groenlandicum/Tomenthypnum nitens(spruce/Labrador tea/brown moss )015 : Populus tremuloides-Pinus monticola/Pack stima myrsinites(aspen-western white pine/mountain lover20: Abies lasiocarpa-Tsuga mertensiana/Cassiope mertensiana-Phyllodoce empetriformis-Luetkeapectinata(subalpine fir-mountain hemlock/white mountain and red heather-luetkea )21: Picea engelmannii-Abies lasiocarpa/Rhododendron albiflorum-Vaccinium membranaceu m(Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir/rhododendron-tall bilberry )22: Abies lasiocarpa-Pinus albicaulis-Picea engelmannii/Vaccinium membranaceum-Cassiopemertensiana(subalpine fir-whitebark pine-Engelmann spruce/tall bilberry-white mountain heather )23: Picea engelmannii-Populus trichocarpa/Dryas drummondi i(Engelmann spruce-black cottonwood/yellow dryad )SHRUB VEGETATION TYPE SS2 :Abies lasiocarpa-Salix spp ./Valerian sitchensis(subalpine fir-willow )S13: Alnus crispa/fern(green alder/fern )S14: Salix spp .-Tsuga mertensiana -Ables lasiocarpa/Vaccinium membranaceu m(willow-mountain hemlock-subalpine fir/tall bilberry )S15: Salix commutata-Salix brachycarpa(willow )S17 :Alnus tenuifolia/Lysichiton americanum(alder/skunk cabbage )260

LOW SHRUB-HERB VEGETATION TYPE SL5 :Phyllodoce glanduliflora - Cassiope mertensiana- Antennaria lanata(heather-everlasting )HERB-DWARF SHRUB VEGETATION TYPE SH1: Dryas octopetala-Salix nivalis-Silene acauli s(mountain avens-snow willow-moss campion )H2: Carex nigricans-Antennaria lanat a(black alpine sedge-everlasting )H8 :Dryas drummondii- Epilobium latifoliu m(yellow dryad-willow herb )H11: Carex aquatilis -Carex rostrat a(water sedge-beaked sedge )H12: Saxicolous liche n(saxicolous lichen )H16 :H18 :Erigeron peregrinus-Valeriana sitchensis(fleabane - valerian )Antennaria lanata-Cassiope mertensiana- Phyllodoce empetriformi s(everlasting-white mountain heather-red heather )H21 : Carex spp .(sedge )261

COLORPLATE S1-64

4 . Sampled Orthic Dystri cHrunisol of the AH tEcosite .h . Sampled Orthic J lunuM-Ferric Podvul (lithic :phase( of the AK tEcosile .Sanipl€al Orlhic Iluruol^erricPodzol of the AK bEc:ositfi .1 . Subdued topography of recessive Florsethic iCreek Group bedrock in the Purcell Mountains(right) constrasting with the rugge dtopography of resistant IlandII Grou pbedrock in the Selkirk Mountains (left) . TheBeaver River valley (Purcell Trench) divide sthe two physiographic units .2 . Areas underlain by I .ardeau Group bedroc k(foreground) have more subdued topograplt vthan areas of lianrill Group bedroc kIbac:kgrotind and right) .3 . Moraines along the forest edge are the boundaryof AB1 landscape below Heave rGlacier .5 . Steeply sloping AB 1 sample site with spars evegetation .

11 . Sampled C)rtbic Ilumo -Eerric ; Podzol nl the 11l_1 11Jt:osilr( .12 . Sampled OI'lstein Hump-Ferric Podzol of the 13t1 21Ecosite .14 . Sampled Rego Gleysol nl 'Ihe Cl.1 Eco.siie .B . Subalpine fir-rnounlain hemlocklheather -luelkea (020) is the dominant v .l . ol AK1 ,A K2 and A K4 .9 . Sleep, rocky slopes vvitl.i subalpine hrwhitebarkpine-(Engelmann spruce)/tal lbilberry-Lucialher (022) open forest lypif yA K(t .10 . AK5 tract kvith Fleabane-valerian (111EÙ), oneof several avalanche v .I .s in the Uppe rSubalpine .13 . Mountain hemlock-subalpin eFir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C47) fores tdominates all 111.1 Ec:osiles .

lït . Sampled Eluvialed Dyslri c13ruiiisol of the CT 1Ecosile .W. Sampled Orlhic llumo-Ferric Podzol of C'l' 3with dark colors derive dfrom Lardeaii Crou pbedrock .17. CM2 along uppe rConnaught Creek on afluvial fan with gree na lder/fern (513) vegetatio nand small patches of th esedge (1121) v .t .15 . Willow (515) v.t . on CEI in central MRNP .JEi . Sampled Orthic FerrollumicPodzol which isan accessory soil of CM2 .Characleristic soils hav esimilar humus-enriche dprofiles and includ eOrlhic Dystric an dSom bric Brunisols an dOrthic Hiuno-Ferri cPodzols .20. Sampled l?luviated Dystric: Bruiiisol of the

21 . Western hemlock-wester nred cedar/wester nyewloak tern (C50) Sores tis ont! ()I' two co-dominan tv .t .s characterizing CTEcosiles .Sampled Orthic Gleyso lof the GF2 Ecosite .24 . Sampled 'l 'erro : Hbriso lof the GF1 Ecusite .22 . Fluvial wetland along Mountain Creek wit hthe vegetation pattern typical of GFI . i.e. we tshrub Ihickel and sedge Fen> cedar -hemlock forest . The drier, forested fluvial fa n(lower left) is mapped as I .IZ1 .25 . GPI landscape with alcierlskunk cabbag e(S 17) vegetation .2fi .Western red cedar-wcslern hemlock/devil' sclub/oak fern IC51) forest typical of GF2 an d1 .R I .

27 . Sampled undefined soil of 2J . Sampled Orthic Hnmo -the GHI Ecosite .Ferric Podzol (lit hicpliiise) of the HE 3Ecosite .31 . Sampled Orthic HumolâerricPodzol (lithi cphase) of the 1IR 6Ecosite .28. Landscape around the GHl sample site wit han open, western hemlock variant of th emountain hemlock-subalplicn efirlrhododendron-tall bilberry (C47) v.t .behind and a sparsely vegetated site o nblocky, fragmental material in th eforeground .32 . Engelmann spruce-subalpine firltall bilberry !Liverwort (C21) forest is codominant wit hmountain hemlock-subalpin efir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C47) on HRI ,HR2, HR3 and HR4 .30 . HE3 sample site with heather-everlasting )L5 )vegetation and rock outcrops .33 . Steep rocky slope with Engelmann spruce -subalpine firlrhododendron-tall bilberry (021 )open forest typical of FIRE) .

34. HR5 (lower to mid slope (and AK5 (mid to uppe rslope) with a mosaic o favalanche types i nC1a1 hnacudainn Cree kvalley. HR6 and AK6 ar eon rocky terrain to th eright of the avalanche darea .35 . Sampled Orthic Humo-Ferric Podzol of the 11) 4Ecosite .37 . Sampled Orthic Hum p -Ferric Pc dzol (Ethi cphase) of JD3 with dar kcolors derived fro mLan-lean Group bedrock .38. 1172 landscape on a riclgetop iii western GN Pwith a pattern of tundra (heather-everlastin g(L5)) plus open forest (subalpine fir-whilehar kpine-(Engelmann spruce)Itall bilberry-heathe r(022)1 .36. Sampled Orthic Dystric Brunisol (litlri cphase) of the JD2 Ecosilc .39. JD4 landscape near Mount Revelstoke with apattern of meadow (fleabane-valerian (1-IlG) )plus open forest lsuhalpine fir-mountain

40 . Sampled Orthic Ilcno -Ferric Podzol of the JN 2Ecosite .42 . Sampled Eluviated Dvstric :Rrunisol of' the KX 1Ecosile .41 . Everlasting-white mountain heather-re dheather (H18) v .t . typical of IN2 .43. KXI sample site with western hemlock -western red cedar-(Douglas fir)/mountai nlover (C52) forest .44 . Sampled Cloyed Humo-Ferric Podzol of theLK1 I?cosite . Cloyed Ferre-Humic Podzolsare more characteristic : .45 . LK1 sample site with a wet. open variant o fthe Engelmann spruce-subalpine Fir/tal lbilherrylliverworl (C21) v .t .

47. Sampled Orthic Dystri cBrunisol of the NC6Ecosite .49 . NC5 sample site with th egreen alder/ ern (S -13) v .t .50. Sampled Orthic Dystri cBrunisol of the RD 3Ecosite .4fi. Mountain hemlock-subalpinefir/rhododendron-tall bilberry (C47) forest o nan I.R1 tract .Si . Sampled Orlhsc Hnssio -Ferric Podzol (turbic andIilhic phases) of the RD4Ecosite .48. Aspen-western white pinelrnountain love r(015) open forest on NC6 .

52 . Sampled Orthic Dystri cBrnnisol (lithic phase) ofRD5 with dark colorsderived from Lard ea uCroup bedrock .57 . Sampled Orthic Regoso lof the SN1 Ecosite .53. RD3 sample site with the heather-everlastin g[L5) and everlasting-white mountain heather -red heather (1118) v .t.s .54. RD4 sample site with a shiny surface an dheather-everlasting (I.,5) vegetation .55 . Bright green on an RD5 tract [midslope t ocrest) is the black alpine sedge-everlastin g(i-12) v .t . The AK5 tract below is dominate dby fleabane-valerian [N76) vegetation .56. Braided floodplain along the in .:omappleu xRiver consisting of recent glaciolluvia ldeposits .

59. Sampled Orthic Glevsol u fthe WRI Ecosite .61 . Recent fire has modified(Modifier HI forestvegetation on moraina llandscape nea rCïc.rpperstain Creek .64 . This matterhorn-like pea kabove the cirque glacie ris mapped as l' -C;l, .58. SN I sample site with an Engelmann spruceblackcollonwoodlyellow dryad (023] ope nforest .60. VVR I sample site with fleabane-valerian (1-116 )vegetation .62 . Valley glaciers, such as Beaver Glacier, ar eincluded in the Miscellaneous Landscap eGI . .63 . Recent Moraine (M) below Woolsey Glacier .

Ecological Land Classification of Mount Revelstoke and Glacie r ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?