Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1.06 Weed Mgmt Plan
Weed Management Plan Ursa Operating Company, Battlement Mesa Partners, and Battlement Mesa Land Investments Pipeline Grading Permit Application Battlement Mesa PUD Phase I OAProject No. 014-1829 U.S. Operations 792 Bockhorn Drive Rifle, CO 81650 (720)5808350 OPERATING COMPANY Noxious Weed Management Plan Battlement Mesa PUD Garfield County, Colorado June 2013 Revision #: 1 (April 2015) Table of Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Site Characterization 1 3. Weeds of Concern 2 4. Weed Inventory 2 5. Treatment Methods 2 5.1 Preventative Methods 3 5.3 Physical and Mechanical Methods 3 5.4 Biological Control Methods 3 5.5 Chemical Control 3 6. Treatment Recommendations 3 6.1 Pad Surfaces 3 6.2 ROWs and Surrounding Lands 3 6.3 Special Requirements 4 7. Management Strategies 4 7.1 Prevention 4 7.2 Revegetation and Rehabilitation 4 S. Conclusion 4 9. Amendments 5 10. Noxious Weed Management Resource Guide 6 11. References 7 B.1.2 Soil Characteristics 2 List of Figures Figure 1 Overview Map Figure 2 Soils Map Ursa Operating Company Battlement Mesa PUD Noxious Weed Management Plan i Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Appendix F Appendix G List of Appendices Asset Locations (PLSS) NRCS Soil Descriptions Colorado Noxious Weed List Garfield County Noxious Weed List Annual Weed Survey Maps Noxious Weed Inventory Form Noxious Weed Summary Documents Ursa Operating Company Battlement Mesa PUD Noxious Weed Management Plan 1. Introduction The Colorado Noxious Weed Act (C.R.S. Title 35, Article 5.5) declares that certain undesirable plants constitute a threat to the "continuous economic and environmental value of lands of the state" and requires that these "noxious weeds" be managed on private and public lands. The Act further declares that control of noxious weeds should use methods that are least damaging to the environment but also practicable and economically reasonable. Ursa Operating Company, LLC (Ursa) started operations in the Piceance on April 1, 2013 and will be responsible for management of noxious and undesirable species identified on land leased associated with these assets. The local government(s) management of noxious weeds for Ursa assets (known as Battlement Mesa), is Garfield County which requires that land owners or persons or entities leasing the land within the county manage noxious weed infestations on their respective land. By implementing a Noxious Weed Management Program, adverse economic and environmental impacts will be minimized for Ursa and surrounding stakeholders. Maintaining control of noxious weed populations within Ursa assets is important to keep the cost of noxious weed abatement, stormwater, and revegetation to a minimum. Since the three (3) elements are intertwined; improvement in one (1) area will facilitate improvements in the other areas of concern. It is also vital that the expansion of noxious weeds from Ursa assets to private land not associated with oil and gas exploration is monitored closely to ensure weed abatement measures are effective. For the most successful management of noxious weeds, regular communication between Ursa and property owners with adjacent land should be developed. This plan is intended to provide Ursa with a noxious weed management outline for the area of concern — in this instance, the asset known as Battlement Mesa. The objectives of the plan include: providing basic environmental information about the sites, locating and mapping of noxious weed populations, outlining and evaluating possible treatment methods, and establishing preventative measures to minimize noxious weed expansion. This plan will also provide an amendable document for current and future Ursa land managers. 2. Site Characterization Ursa assets covered under this plan are located in Garfield County in western Colorado (refer to Figure 1 for a map and Appendix A for listed locations). The assets can be found using the Public Land Survey System (PLSS) in Appendix A or by reviewing the map in Figure 1. The vegetative communities that characterize these sites include: sagebrush, rubber Rabbitbrush, snakeweed, Gambel oak, bunch grasses and pinyon juniper. This highland is characterized by moderate moisture levels, moderate temperatures and a moderate growing season. Snow is typically present on site from mid-November to late -March, with an average of 80-90 frost days per year. The soil type varies across assets. For more information on soil type, refer to Appendix B and Figure 2. The potential treatment area with regards to noxious and undesirable species will include appropriate and applicable pads, right of ways (ROWs) including access roads and pipeline ROWs, topsoil stockpile if applicable, and land surrounding the Ursa assets that has been disturbed by related Ursa activity. Ursa Operating Company Battlement Mesa PUD Noxious Weed Management Plan 1 3. Weeds of Concern To meet the requirements of the Colorado Noxious Weed Act (ACT), the operator shall conduct prescribed management techniques for noxious weeds control and prevention. Species warranting prescribed management control and prevention are included within the Colorado Noxious Weed Lists: List A — designated for statewide eradication; List B — managed to prevent further spread and, for selected species, designated for eradication in large areas; and List C — of more localized concern, but for which the State will provide education, research, and biological control assistance to jurisdictions that choose to manage the species. The complete Colorado Noxious Weed List can be found in Appendix C. In addition to the state wide weed list, individual counties have their own noxious weed lists. The county lists are comprised of noxious weeds from the state list that are more specific to the area of concern. Garfield County has designated twenty (21) of the seventy four (74) species from the Colorado Noxious Weed List to be likely species found in the vicinity of their jurisdiction. Appendix D contains the Garfield County Weed List, and specific details can be acquired through the Garfield County Noxious Weed Management Plan available online. 4. Weed Inventory Noxious weed surveys are conducted on Ursa assets prior to any earth disturbing activities. Please refer to Garfield County Impact Analysis for the BMC D well pad location for the weed survey. Additional surveys will be conducted annually by qualified individuals to ensure noxious weed treatments and noxious weed populations. Populations of noxious weed infestations will be mapped by qualified individuals using global positioning units (GPS) units. The Noxious Weed Inventory Form, Appendix F, can be used to provide supplemental survey information if the surveyor deems it appropriate. The surveys will provide a way to identify new noxious weed populations as well as an assessment tool for previously treated populations. The inventory is to be updated as the surveys are performed. There will be an annual review to assess the overall noxious weed populations and success of treatments applied. 5. Treatment Methods The treatment methods and descriptions listed below were obtained from the Mesa County Noxious Weed Management Plan (Mesa County, 2009). Management techniques include preventative, cultural, physical/mechanical methods, biological and chemical approaches. Optimal noxious weed management methods will vary with the environmental variables of the area of interest. Soil type and stability, grade, moisture regimes, growing season, pre-existing noxious weed populations, land use, water availability, weed type and stage of growth as well as the intensity of the infestations should all be taken into account when preparing a noxious weed management plan. The management methods should have minimal impact on the environment and be economically fitting for the Operator in charge of implementing the noxious weed management program. When assessing weed management on a property, it is important to evaluate possible modes of transportation for the noxious species. Areas to take into account include; waterways, roads, game trails, areas with livestock and equipment storage sites to name a few possibilities. The Ursa Operating Company Battlement Mesa PUD Noxious Weed Management Plan 2 transportation of noxious species is a problem shared by all the stakeholders in the affected area. Good communication should be established between the affected parties for proper management of the noxious weed populations. Most management plans utilize a combination of the treatments outlined below. 5.1 Preventative Methods Preventative methods include practices involving good land stewardship. These practices include, but are not limited to; using weed free certified products, erosion control measures, and regularly cleaning equipment. 5.2 Cultural Methods Cultural methods facilitate competition from desirable plants through actions such as; dense seeding, irrigation, carefully monitored grazing practices and fertilization. 5.3 Physical and Mechanical Methods Physical and mechanical methods include mowing, disking, hand removal, plowing, burning and solarization. The goal of these methods is predominantly to prevent seed production. Roots should be severed at least two (2) inches below the soils surface for optimal control. 5.4 Biological Control Methods Biological control methods involve the introduction of living organisms that are deleterious to the noxious weed species. This method is only applicable for infestations larger than five (5) acres in size, and rarely provides complete control of the noxious species. Frequent monitoring must be carried out with this method. 5.5 Chemical Control Chemical control can offer the most effective means of noxious weed control when applied at the appropriate time. Not all herbicides are equally effective against all weeds, nor can every herbicide be used in all settings. The respective herbicide applicator should consult with a weed manual before applying any herbicide to the land. 6. Treatment Recommendations 6.1 Pad Surfaces It is recommended that the area directly adjacent to structures be treated with a bare ground herbicide. The bare ground treatment will be applied once a year or as needed to a ten (10) foot perimeter around the structures located on Ursa developments. All other areas are to be spot treated with an appropriate herbicide. 6.2 ROWs and Surrounding Lands Ursa assets should be treated with a selective herbicide appropriate for the species where the noxious weed is found. The appropriate chemical to be applied will be determined by the licensed herbicide applicator. The specific herbicide applied will vary depending on the landowner, time of year and the stage of growth the plant has obtained at the proposed Ursa Operating Company Battlement Mesa PUD Noxious Weed Management Plan 3 treatment date. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) must be contacted prior to treatment on Federal lands. 6.3 Special Requirements At this point in time there are not any special requirements for Ursa assets or the associated ROWs with regards to management of noxious weeds or other undesirable species. Any and all special requirements will be amended to the document as soon as practicable. 7. Management Strategies 7.1 Prevention Taking preventative measures to abate the spread of noxious weeds is critical for proper land management. Noxious weeds can become established on or near disturbed land very rapidly and have the capacity, capability and potential to spread quickly to other areas. Noxious weed seeds and vegetative matter can be transported by means of animals, vehicles, shoes, and hay to name a few examples of transportation. Operators should be aware of established noxious weed populations and the possible transport mechanisms on their property and surrounding properties. 7.2 Revegetation and Rehabilitation After an area has been successfully eradicated of noxious species, or before establishment has taken place, actions to revegetate the disturbed area should be taken to minimize the chance of noxious weed establishment. If the disturbed land has desired species growing as a result of revegetation efforts, competition with noxious species will be increased. Therefore, the potential and capability of the noxious weed to establish in the disturbed area is limited. Noxious weed management strategies for Ursa will include a monitoring program. Surveys will be carried out between the months of April and October. Noxious weed populations will be monitored at this point through qualitative visual interpretation as well as mapping. 8. Conclusion This noxious weed management plan provides an outline for the treatment and management of noxious weeds. Please refer to Appendix G for the Noxious Weed Summary Documents which provide contact information as well as general information pertaining to Ursa assets. An annual report will be compiled to assess the overall management program. Noxious weed control is critical to guarantee the environment is preserved for future generations to enjoy and utilize. Adhering to this management guide will aid Ursa in managing noxious weeds encountered during active involvement at developed sites. These recommendations are not intended to be used as a definitive guide for noxious weed management. Herbicide recommendations are available from both the state and local governments and/or licensed applicators. Ursa Operating Company Battlement Mesa PUD Noxious Weed Management Plan 4 9. Amendments Please make note of any supplemental information as it becomes available in this section. Date Notes and Initials 2/21/14 Appendixes G, H have been amended. Maps have been updated. KL 12/15/14 Maps have been updated 4/16/15 Plan has been amended to reflect all sites within Battlement Mesa Ursa Operating Company Battlement Mesa PUD Noxious Weed Management Plan 5 10. Noxious Weed Management Resource Guide Garfield County Vegetation Management Steve Anthony — Garfield County Vegetation Manager P.O. Box 426, 0298 Cr 333A Rifle, CO 81650 Phone: 970.945.1377 ext. 4305 Fax: 970.625.8627 Email: santhony@garfield-county.com Colorado Weed Management Association Phone: 303.779.7939 http://www.cwma.org Colorado Department of Agriculture Division of Plant Industry- Biological Control Section P.O. Box 400 Palisade, CO 81526 Phone: 970.464.7916 Colorado Department of Agriculture Steve Ryder, State Weed Coordinator Noxious Weed Program Division of Conservation Services 700 Kipling Street, Suite 4000 Lakewood, CO 80215 Phone: 303.239.4173 www.ag.state.co.us/dpi/weeds/weed.html Ursa Operating Company Battlement Mesa PUD Noxious Weed Management Plan 6 11. References Colorado Department of Agriculture. (May 2013). Noxious Weed Species. Retrieved from http://www.colorado.govics/Satellite/ag Conservation/CBON/1251618 87443 8 Garfield County. (May 2001). Garfield County Noxious Weed Management Plan. Retrieved from http://www.garfield-county.com/vegetation-management/documents/ weed management_plan_adopted_.pdf Mesa County, Division of Pest Management. (November 2009). Mesa County Noxious Weed Management Plan. Retrieved from http://www.mesacounty.us/mcweb/pestcontrol/ weeds.pdf Pitkin County. (March 2010). Pitkin County Noxious Weed Management Plan. Retrieved from http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Public-Works/Land-Management/Weed-Management- Plan/ United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. (2008). Soil Survey Information. Retrieved from: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx Whitson, T. D., Burrill, L.C., Dewey, S.A., Cudney, D.W., Nelson, B.E., Lee, R.D., & Parker, R. (2006). Weeds of the West (9th ed.). Laramie, WY: University of Wyoming Ursa Operating Company Battlement Mesa PUD Noxious Weed Management Plan 7 Figure 1: Overview Maps APPENDIX A 111•111•111•111•111•111•111•111•111•111•111•111•11111 Tompkins -ti e Moriri a j Underwood _Raw: 0 Yater Sch Watson Ranch 0 0 Watson Ranch B 0 Monument Ridge 1 Miles lid #riff��►, J r ■. Battlement T fi es-FieliliP II.III.I/D � J�x - aque 0 4 8 8 own Miles Notes / Comments: Surface Ownership Private BLM State Park Service USFWS Other Federal Forest Service Ursa' COMPANY Field Location Map for Stormwater Battlement Mesa 39.433 -108.029 Township 7 South, Range 95 West ▪ Planned Assets ▪ Active Development Waterbody Highways = County Road Intermittent Stream Perennial Stream Author: Hall Revision: 0 Date: 4/13/2015 Figure 2: Soil Map Appendix A: Asset Locations within the Public Land Survey System (PM 6) Battlement Mesa Asset Sixth Central Meridian: T6S, R95W, Sections 25 and 32-36 T7S, R95W, Sections 1-4, 5, 6, and 7-30 T7S, R96W, Sections 12, 13, 18 23, 24, 25 and 26 Appendix B: National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Descriptions Appendix B-1 Battlement Mesa B.1.1 Site Location Battlement Mesa starts in Township 7 South Range 96 West along the west boundary of sections 23 and 26 to the east boundary of Township 7 South Range 95 West and from Interstate 70 south to the south boundary of sections 25-30 in Township 7 south Range 95 west and sections 25-26 in Township 7 south Range 96 west. Locations are on private property located within Garfield County. B.1.2 Soil Characteristics According to the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), the project area of Battlement Mesa consists of the following soils: Arvada loam, (6-20%): This deep, well drained, sloping soil is on fans and high terraces. Elevation ranges from 5,100 to 6,200 feet. Average annual precipitation is 12 inches. Average annual air temperature is about 48 degrees F and the average frost free period is 120 days. Permeability is very slow and available water capacity is high. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is moderately rapid and the hazard of water erosion is severe. Bucklon-Inchau loams, (25-50%): These moderately sloping to very steep soils are on ridges and mountainsides. Elevation ranges from 7,000 to 9,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is about 18 inches, the average annual air temperature is about 40 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is less than 75 days. The Bucklon soil is shallow and well drained. Permeability of the Bucklon soil is slow and available water capacity is very low. The effective rooting depth is 10 to 20 inches. Runoff is medium and the hazard of water erosion is severe. The Inchau soil is moderately deep and well drained. Permeability of the Inchau soil is moderate and available water capacity is moderate. The effective rooting depth is 20 to 40 inches. Runoff is medium and the hazard of water erosion is severe. Ildefonso stony loam, (6-25%): This deep, well drained, moderately sloping to hilly soil is on mesas, benches, and sides of valleys. Elevation ranges from 5,000 to 6,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is about 14 inches, the average annual air temperature is about 46 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 125 days. Permeability is moderately rapid and available water capacity is low. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. Idefonso stony loam, (25-45%): This deep, well drained, hilly to steep soil is on mesa breaks, sides of valleys, and alluvial fans. Elevation ranges from 5,000 to 6,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is about 14 inches, the average annual air temperature is about 46 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 125 days. Permeability is moderately rapid and available water capacity is low. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. Morval loam, (3-12%): This deep, well drained, gently sloping to rolling soil is on mesas and sides of valleys. Elevation ranges from 6,500 to 8,000 feet. The average annual precipitation is about 15 inches, the average annual air temperature is about 44 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 100 days. Permeability is moderate and available water capacity is moderate. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow and the hazard of water erosion is slight. Morval-Tridell complex, (6-25%): These moderately sloping to hilly soils are on alluvial fans and sides of mesas. Elevation ranges from 6,500 to 8,000 feet. The average annual precipitation is about 15 inches, the average annual air temperature is about 44 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 100 days. The Morval soil is deep and well drained. Permeability of the Morval soil is moderate and available water capacity is moderate. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow and the hazard of water erosion is slight. The Tridell soil is deep and well drained. Permeability of the Tridell soil is moderately rapid and available water capacity is low. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. Nihill channery loam, (1-6%): This deep, well drained, nearly level to gently sloping soil is on alluvial fans and sides of valleys. Elevation ranges from 5,000 to 6,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is about 13 inches, the average annual air temperature is about 48 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 125 days. Permeability is moderately rapid and available water capacity is low. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. Potts loam, (3-6%): This deep, well drained, moderately sloping soil is on mesas, benches, and sides of valleys. Elevation ranges from 5,000 to 7,000 feet. The average annual precipitation is about 14 inches, the average annual air temperature is about 46 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 120 days. Permeability is moderate and available water capacity is high. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. Potts loam, (6-12%): This deep, well drained, moderately sloping to rolling soil is on mesas, benches, and sides of valleys. Elevation ranges from 5,000 to 7,000 feet. The average annual precipitation is about 14 inches, the average annual air temperature is about 46 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 120 days. Permeability is moderate and available water capacity is high. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium and the hazard of water erosion is severe. Potts-Ildefonso complex, (12-25%): These strongly sloping to hilly soils are on mesas, alluvial fans, and sides of valleys. Elevation ranges from 5,000 to 6,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is about 14 inches, the average annual air temperature is about 46 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 120 days. The Potts soil is deep and well drained. Permeability of the Potts soil is moderate and available water capacity is high. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. The Ildefonso soil is deep and well drained. Permeability is moderately rapid and available water capacity is low. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is medium and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. Torriorthents-Camborthids-Rock outcrop complex, (steep): This broadly defined unit consists of exposed sandstone and shale bedrock, loose stones, and soils that are shallow to deep. Torriorthents are shallow to moderately deep. Camborthids are shallow to deep. The Rock outcrop is mainly Mesa Verde sandstone and Wasatch shale. Elevation ranges from 5,000 to 8,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is about 10 to 15 inches, the average annual air temperature is 39 to 46 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 80 to 105 days. Torriorthents-Rock outcrop complex, (steep): This broadly defined unit consists of exposed sandstone and shale bedrock, and stony soils that are shallow to moderately deep. Torriorthents are shallow to moderately deep. The Rock outcrop is mainly Mesa Verde sandstone and Wasatch shale. Elevation ranges from 5,000 to 8,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is about 10 to 15 inches, the average annual air temperature is 39 to 46 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 80 to 105 days. Wann sandy loam, (1-3%): This deep, somewhat poorly drained, nearly level to gently sloping, low-lying soil is on terraces and bottom land in valleys. Elevation ranges from 5,000 to 6,500 feet. The average annual precipitation is about 12 inches, the average annual air temperature is about 48 degrees F, and the average frost -free period is 120 days. Permeability is moderately rapid and available water capacity is high. The effective rooting depth varies with the level of the water table but is about 2 feet. Runoff is slow and the hazard of water erosion is moderate. Appendix C: Colorado Noxious Weed Lists List A Noxious Weed Species In accordance with the revised Colorado Noxious Weed Act, 35-5.5-101-119 rev. 2003, which re - categorized the State noxious weed list into three lists, all populations of List A species in Colorado are designated by the Commissioner for eradication. African Rue Peganum harmala Camelthorn Alhagi pseudalhagi Common Crupina Crupina vulgaris Cypress Spurge Euphorbia cyparissias Dyer's Woad Isatis tinctoria Elongated Mustard Brassica elongata Giant Reed Arundo donax Giant Salvinia Salvinia molesta Hydrilla Hydrilla verticillata Japanese Knotweed Polygonum cuspidatum Giant Knotweed Polygonum sachalinense Bohemian Knotweed Polygonum x bohemicum Meadow Knapweed Centaurea pratensis Mediterranean Sage Salvia aethoiopis Medusahead Taeniatherum caput -medusae Myrtle Spurge Euphorbia myrsinites Orange Hawkweed Hieracium aurantiacum Purple Loosestrife Lythrum salicaria Rush Skeletonweed Chondrilla juncea Squarrose Knapweed Centaurea virgata Tansy Ragwort Senecio jacobaea Yellow Starthistle Centaurea solstitialis List B Noxious Weed Species List B noxious weeds are species for which the Commissioner, in consultation with the state noxious weed advisory committee, local governments, and other interested parties, develop and implements state noxious weed management plans designed to stop the continued spread of these species. Absinth Wormwood Artemisia absinthium Black Henbane Hyoscyamus niger Bouncingbet Saponaria officinalis Bull Thistle Cirsium vulgare Canada Thistle Cirsium arvense Chinese Clematis Clematis orientalis Common Tansy Tanacetum vulgare Common Teasel Dipsacus fullonum Corn Chamomile Anthemis arvensis Cutleaf Teasel Dipsacus laciniatus Dalmatian Toadflax, broadleaved Linaria dalmatica Dalmatian Toadflax, narrow -leaved Linaria genistifolia Dame's Rocket Hesperis matronalis Diffuse Knapweed Centaurea diffusa Eurasian Watermilfoil Myriophyllum spicatum Hoary Cress Cardaria draba Houndstongue Cynoglossum officinale Jointed Goatgrass Aegilops cylindrica Leafy Spurge Euphorbia esula Mayweed Chamomile Anthemis cotula Moth Mullein Verbascum blattaria Musk Thistle Carduus nutans Oxeye Daisy Chrysanthemum leucanthemum Perennial Pepperweed Lepidium latifolium Plumeless Thistle Carduus acnathoides Quackgrass Elytrigia repens Russian Knapweed Acroptilon repens Russian Olive Elaeagnus angustifolia Salt Cedar* Tamarix chinensis, T. parviflora, and T ramosissima Scentless Chamomile Matricaria perforate Scotch Thistle Onopordum acanthium, O. tauricum Spotted Knapweed Centaurea maculosa Spurred Anoda Anoda cristata Sulfur Cinquefoil Potentilla recta Venice Mallow Hibiscus trionum Wild Caraway Carum carvi Yellow Nutsedge Cyperus esculentus Yellow Toadflax Linaria vulgaris * Tamarisk is a noxious weed "preferred to be controlled" rather than mandatory List C Noxious Weed Species List C noxious weeds are species for which the Commissioner will develop and implement state noxious weed management plans designed to support the efforts of local governing bodies to facilitate more effective integrated weed management on private and public lands. The goal of such plans will not be to stop the continued spread of these species but to provide additional education research, and biological control resources to jurisdictions that choose to require management of List C species. Source: From the Department of Agriculture, Plant Industry Division, 8 CCR 1203-19, Rules Pertaining to the Administration and Enforcement of the Colorado Noxious Weed Act. Bulbous Bluegrass Poa bulbosa Chicory Cihorum intybus Common Burdock Arctium minus Common Mullein Verbascum thapsus Common St. Johnswort Hypericum perforatum Downy Brome Bromus tectorum Field Bindweed Convolvulus arvensis Halogeton Halogeton glomeratus Johnsongrass Sorghum halepense Perennial Sowthistle Sonchus arvensis Poison Hemlock Conium maculatum Puncturevine Tribulus terrestris Redstem Filaree Erodium cicutarium Velvetleaf Abutilon theophrasti Wild Proso Millet Panicum miliaceum Colorado Noxious Weed "Watch List" Species Species in the following "Watch List" are those that the state of Colorado has identified has potential threats to environmental and agricultural health and productivity. For these species, early identification and reporting is recommended as prevention is considered the best way of preventing these species from joining the preceding noxious weed lists and warranting more intensive treatment. Asian Mustard Brassica tournefortii Baby's Breath Gypsophilia paniculata Bathurst Burr / Spiney Cocklebur Xanthium spinosum Common Bugloss Anchusa officinalis Common Reed Phragmites australis Flowering Rush Butomus umbellatus Garlic Mustard Alliaria petiolata Hairy Willow -herb Epilobium hirsutum Himalayan Blackberry Rubus armeniacus Japanese Blood Grass / Cogongrass Imperata cylindrica Meadow Hawkweed Hieracium causpitosum Onionweed Asphodelus fistulosus Pampas Grass Cortideria jubata Scotch Broom Cytisus scoparius Sericea Lespedeza Lespedeza cuneata Swainsonpea Sphaerophysa salsula Syrian Beancaper Zygophyllum fabago Water Hyacinth Eichhornia Crassipes Water Lettuce Pistia stratiotes White Bryony Bryonia alba Woolly Distaff Thistle Carthamus lanatus Yellow Flag Iris Iris pseudacorus Appendix D: Garfield County Noxious Weed List, taken from the Garfield County Noxious Weed Management Guide, 2002 Leafy Spurge Euphorbia esula Russian Knapweed Acroptilon repens Yellow Starthistle Centaurea solstitalis Plumeless Thistle Carduus acanthoides Houndstongue Cynoglossum officinale Common Burdock Arctium minus Scotch Thistle Onopordum acanthium Canada Thistle Cirsium arvense Spotted Knapweed Centaurea maculosa Diffuse Knapweed Centaurea diffusa Dalmatian Toadflax Toadflax Linaria dalmatica Yellow Toadflax Linaria vulgaris Hoary Cress Cardaria draba Salt Cedar Tamarix parviflora; Tamarix ramosissima Oxeye Daisy Chrysanthemum leucantheum Jointed Goatgrass Aegilops cylindrica Chicory Cichorium intybus Musk Thistle Carduus nutans Purple Loosestrife Lythrum salicaria Russian Olive Elaeagnus angustifolia Appendix E: Annual Weed Survey Maps (Separate Binder) Legend N Canada thistle = Canada thistle O Common burdock Russian knapweed • Houndstongue Tamarisk • Russian knapweed I= 30 Meter Weeds Survey Area • Tamarisk Pad Disturbance Cheatgrass County Road BLM Figure 1 Ursa Operating Company BMC B & D Pads Integrated Vegetation and Noxious Weeds Management Plan nWestWater Engineering Consulting Engineers & Scientists 0 200 400 690 Feet September 2014 ap Snurce Z:lCardilleran Onmplrance Serijice sson ssocr. rsa a s igure 1 IVNWMPirn4 9110/20 Appendix F: Noxious Weed Site Specific Inventory Form Noxious Weed Inventory Form Date Surveyors Location Name of Waypoint Lat: Long: Photo Species Size Growth Stage Sensitive? New Site? Notes Appendix G: Noxious Weed Summary Documents Date: April 16, 2015 Project Name: Battlement Mesa PUD. Permittee Name: Ursa Operating Company, LLC Permittee Corporate Address: Ursa Operating Company, LLC 792 Buckhorn Drive Rifle, CO 81650 Permittee Contact: Mr. Dwayne Knudson Permittee Contact Phone Number(s): 970-625-9922 Permittee Contact email address: dknudson@ursaresources.com Property Owner: Private and Public lands County Assessor's Parcel No.: Multiple Address/Location of Property: Property Owner Phone Number(s): Property Owner email address (optional): Name & Address of Qualified Individual or Company Submitting Weed Plan: HRL Compliance Solutions, Inc. 2385 F'/2 Road, Grand Junction, CO 81505 Kay Lambert Phone Number(s): 970.243.3271 Email: klambert@hrlcomp.com Authorized Signature: Print Authorized Name: Kay Lambert Land Use Objectives: ▪ All noxious weeds, as defined in the Garfield County or List A and List B species slated for eradication or suppression in Garfield County by State Law (CRS 35-5.5), will be managed in all disturbed areas of the proposed project using recommendations in Garfield County or other biologically - based recommendations. ▪ All State List A and List B populations to be eradicated and any other species slated by the County for eradication will be reported upon discovery to the County Weed and Pest Inspector. ▪ The applicant/permittee and their designees agree to respond to landowner complaints about noxious weeds during development of the project site and take action to control such weeds when there is a complaint. Where do the weed(s) occur? (Check all that appl IDitch, waterway, roadside or corral Irrigated • Non -irrigated pasture pad/perimeter Well pad, compressor/pump station, etc. ❑ Other (describe): Rangeland Pipeline Easement, utility corridor or other right-of-way Access road Proposed method(s) of management: (check all that apply) Herbicide n Cultural ❑ Revegetation ▪ Mechanical n Preventive ❑ Biological ❑ Alternative (describe): • We plan to use the services of a professional weed control company. Company name: Remote Weeds Inc. Spray application records will be retained by and be available for inspection from. Preventative Measures to be used during the active phase of development a) U Track pad U gravel bed or n rumble strips will be installed at ingress/egress points. b) Certified Weed -Free - mulch - erosion control • seed will be used to prevent new weed infestations (check all that apply). c) n Vehicles and equipment entering the project site will be clean of mud and weed parts. d) Soil from infested areas of the project site: ▪ Will not be moved off site. ❑ Will be moved off site to: (indicate site location) ❑ Soil moved off site will be treated to control weeds at the new site. ❑ Soil stockpiled on site and left in place for 90 days or more will be treated to control weeds. Soil stockpiled on site and left in place for one year or more will be planted with to prevent weeds from establishing. e) Noxious weed infestations on specified access road(s) to the project site will be treated. Exceptions: f) ❑ Weeds in adjacent properties will be mapped. g) ❑ Weeds in adjacent properties will be treated with permission of landowner. h) ❑ Other: Monitoring Who will monitor the weed treatments, HRL Compliance Solutions, Inc. or another qualified entity/person? Monitoring will be done at least 3 time(s) per year in the Spring, Summer and Fall. Monitoring will be done for: nmonths n years until site is deemed restored. Mapping • A map of the property showing the GPS locations of weed infestation(s) is attached. (Infestations adjacent to or crossing borders of the property should be included) IMapping will be conducted 3 times per year until area is deemed restored complete. A revegetation plan is included as a separate document. Ursa Operating, Inc. — Battlement Mesa PUD Phase I Pipeline Integrated Vegetation and Noxious Weed Management Plan Garfield County, Colorado Cover photo: Looking southeast along proposed alignment in Battlement Mesa. Prepared for: Ursa Operating, Inc. Prepared by: WestWater Engineering 2516 Foresight Circle #1 Grand Junction, CO 81505 October 2014 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Project Description At the request of Ursa Operating, Inc., WestWater Engineering has prepared an Integrated Vegetation and Noxious Weed Management Plan for the proposed Battlement Mesa PUD Phase I Pipeline project. The proposed pipeline would be located on private lands in Garfield County consisting of Sections 17 and 18, Township 7 South, Range 95 West, Sixth Principal Meridian (Figure 1). The current primary uses of the project area are private residential, agriculture, and wildlife habitat. 1.2 General Survey Information Pedestrian surveys of the project area were conducted on October 20, 2014, which is after the active growing season for most plants in the project area. Identification of plant species was aided by using pertinent published field guides (Kershaw et al. 1998, Whitson et al. 2001, CWMA 2007, Weber and Wittmann 2012). Noxious weed locations were recorded with the aid of handheld global positioning system (GPS) receivers using NAD83 map datum, with all coordinate locations based on the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinate system in Zone 12. Mapped soil types, as published by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), were reviewed to determine the soil types and vegetation characteristics at the project site (NRCS 2014). 2.0 LANDSCAPE SETTING 2.1 Terrain The terrain in the project area consists of moderately sloping foothills, which generally drain westward to the Colorado River. Elevation of the project ranges from approximately 5,100 feet near the proposed western terminus to 5,920 feet near Monument Gulch. 2.2 Vegetation Vegetation communities in the project area have largely been altered from their native state. Small areas of native vegetation that remain consist of sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrubland, and pinyon juniper woodlands. In its current state, the project area is composed of mostly introduced pasture grasses, alfalfa, and a multitude of exotic, weedy species. 3.0 NOXIOUS WEEDS 3.1 Introduction to Noxious Weeds Most noxious weed species in Colorado were introduced, mostly from Eurasia, either unintentionally or as ornamentals that established wild populations. These plants compete aggressively with native vegetation and tend to spread quickly because the environmental factors that normally control them are absent. Disturbed soils, altered native vegetation communities, and areas with increased soil moisture often create prime conditions for weed infestations. The primary vectors that spread noxious weeds include humans, animals, water, and wind. The Colorado Noxious Weed Act (State of Colorado 2005) requires local governing bodies to develop noxious weed management plans. Both the State of Colorado and Garfield County maintain a list of plants that are considered to be noxious weeds. The State of Colorado noxious weed list segregates noxious weed species based on priority for control: 1. List A species must be eradicated whenever detected. 2. List B species' spread should be halted; may be designated for eradication in some counties. 3. List C species are widespread and the State will assist local jurisdictions which choose to manage those weeds. WestWater Engineering Page 1 of 12 October 2014 The Garfield County Weed Advisory Board has compiled a list of 21 plants from the State list considered to be noxious weeds within the county (Garfield County 2013) (Appendix A). The Garfield County Weed Advisory Board has duties to: 1. Develop a noxious weed list; 2. Develop a weed management plan for designated noxious weeds; and, 3. Recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that identified landowners submit an integrated weed management plan for their properties (Garfield County 2002). 3.2 Observations The noxious weed survey encompassed a 30 meter area surrounding the proposed pipeline. Noxious weeds were numerous and observations included Canada thistle, cheatgrass, chicory, common burdock, common mullein, field bindweed, houndstongue, jointed goatgrass, musk thistle, quackgrass, redstem filaree, Russian knapweed, Russian olive, tamarisk, spiny plumeless thistle, and whitetop. Cheatgrass mapping was impractical due to the size of the infestation. Noxious weeds detected during the survey are illustrated in Figure 1 and summarized in Appendix B. In areas where soil disturbances have created growing conditions that favor non-native vegetation, several unlisted nuisance weed species have become established. These plants can negate revegetation efforts and cause financial losses due to decreased seeding success and associated costs of replanting. The presence of these plants creates increased competition for resources and can negatively affect desirable native plant species. Plants in this category include cocklebur, kochia, prickly lettuce, prostrate spurge, prostrate vervain, Russian thistle, and tumble mustard. 3.3 Integrated Weed Management Control of invasive species is a difficult task and requires intensive on-going control measures. Care must be taken to avoid negatively impacting desirable plant communities and inviting infestation by other pioneer invaders. Weed management is best achieved by employing varied methods over several growing seasons to include inventory (surveys), direct treatments, prevention through best management practices, monitoring of treatment efficacy, and subsequent detection efforts. Weed management is often limited to control and prevention rather than eradication, but eradication can be possible in small to medium sized infestations. Assessment of the existence and extent of noxious weeds in an area is essential for the development of an integrated weed management plan. This report provides an initial assessment of the occurrence of noxious weeds for the project area. In order to continue effective management of noxious weeds, further inventory and analysis is necessary to 1) determine the effectiveness of the past treatment strategies; 2) modify the treatment plan, if necessary; and 3) detect new infestations early, which would result in more economical and effective treatments. 3.4 Prevention of Noxious Weed Infestations Weed management can be costly, and heavy infestations may exceed the economic threshold for practical treatment. Prevention is an especially valuable and economical strategy for noxious weed management. Several simple practices should be employed to prevent weed infestations. The following practices will prevent infestation and thereby reduce costs associated with noxious weed control: Prior to delivery to the site, all equipment and vehicles, including maintenance vehicles, should be thoroughly cleaned of soils from previous sites which may be contaminated with noxious weeds. WestWater Engineering Page 2 of 12 October 2014 If working in sites with weed -seed contaminated soil, equipment should be cleaned of potentially seed -bearing soils and vegetative debris at the infested area prior to moving to uncontaminated terrain. Avoid driving vehicles through areas where weed infestations exist. Use of weed free materials such as mulch and seed. 3.5 Treatment and Control of Noxious Weed Infestations The several landowners along the alignment are likely to have various preferences for weed control and differing weed treatment strategies already in place; any control efforts should be coordinated with individual property managers. The following general control methods for the weeds in the project area are provided for reference (Table 1). Table 1. General noxious weed control methods for species in the nroiect area. Common Name Scientific Name USDA Symbol Type* Control Methods Canada thistle Cirsium arvense CIAR4 P Prevent seed production; deplete energy reserves in roots. Small infestations should be treated aggressively with herbicides that translocate to the root system. In large infestations, mow three times per growing season, followed by herbicide treatment in the fall. Biological control agents are available but ineffective in populations less than 5 acres in size or in wet areas. Tillage is not effective and will result in denser populations. Cheatgrass Bromus tectorum BRTE A Prevent seed production. Apply herbicides in fall and spring in large monocultures where there are few if any desirable grasses. Till when plants are in the seedling stage followed by seeding with native cool -season grasses. Avoid overgrazing. Best management practices are most effective in preventing and controlling infestations. Chicory Cichorium intybus CIIN B Prevent seed production. Herbicide application or mechanical removal when plants are in the rosette stage, spring or summer. Sever root at least 2" below soil level. Remove seed or flower heads from plants that have bolted. Common burdock Arctium minus ARMI B Prevent seed production. Herbicide application or mechanical removal when plants are in the rosette stage, spring or summer. Before spraying, remove and bag flower or seed heads from plants that have bolted. Sever root at least 2" below soil level. Common mullein Verbascum thapsus VETH B Prevent seed production. Herbicide application or mechanical removal when plants are in the rosette stage, spring or summer. Before spraying, remove flower or seed heads from plants that have bolted. Sever root at least 2" below soil level. Field bindweed Convolvulus arvensis COAR4 P Deplete energy reserves in roots. Herbicide treatment when plants are beginning to flower. Biological controls are available and fairly effective for large populations growing in sunny dry conditions. Tillage is not effective and will result in denser populations. WestWater Engineering Page 3of12 October 2014 Table 1. General noxious weed control methods for species in the nroiect area. Common Name Scientific Name USDA Symbol Type* Control Methods Houndstongue Cynoglossum officinale CYOF B Prevent seed production. Herbicide application or mechanical removal when plants are in the rosette stage, spring or summer. Before spraying, remove and bag flower or seed heads from plants that have bolted. Sever root at least 2" below soil level. Jointed goatgrass Aegilops cylindrica AECY A Prevent seed production. A complex management strategy of tillage, planting desirable species and herbicide treatment should be designed for specific areas of infestation. Target seedlings in the spring for most effective control. Use tillage where possible to reduce seed bank by bringing some seeds up to the germination zone and burying others. Follow tillage with planting of desirable species Musk thistle Carduus nutans CANU4 B Prevent seed production. Herbicide application or mechanical removal when plants are in the rosette stage, spring or summer. Before spraying, remove and bag flower or seed heads from plants that have bolted. Sever root at least 2" below soil level. Biological control agents are available but ineffective in populations less than 5 acres in size. Quackgrass Elymus repens ELRE P Prevent seed production. A complex management strategy of tillage, planting desirable species, and both pre- and post- emergent herbicide treatment should be designed for specific areas of infestation. Target seedlings in early spring for most effective control. Vigorous tillage where possible to reduce seed bank and set back current growth. Follow tillage with planting of desirable species Redstem filaree Erodium cicutarium ERCI A Prevent seed production. Apply herbicides in the fall or spring when plants are in rosette stage. Hand digging in the rosette stage when soil is moist can be effective for small, isolated populations. Preventing introduction of seeds through clean vehicles and careful management of soil stocks can help reduce introductions. Seeding with competitive grasses and avoiding creation of open, bare areas aids in control. Russian knapweed Acroptilon repens ACRE3 P Prevent seed production, deplete energy reserves in roots. Use an herbicide that translocates to the root system. Apply herbicides in the fall for best results; spring treatment when flowers just start to open is also effective. Repeated mowing to stress plants followed by herbicide treatment in fall may be effective in some areas. Seed with competitive grasses and avoid overgrazing. Russian olive Elaeagnus angustifolia ELAN P Deplete energy reserves in roots. Cut mature trees and treat cut stump immediately with herbicide. Treat stump sprouts for at least 2 years. Mowing of large infestations can be effective; remove all cut material. WestWater Engineering Page 4 of 12 October 2014 Table 1. General noxious weed control methods for species in the nroiect area. Common Name Scientific Name USDA Symbol Type* Control Methods Salt cedar, Tamarisk Tamarix ramosissima TARA P Deplete energy reserves in roots. Cut mature trees and treat cut stump immediately with herbicide. Spray bark of smooth -barked immature trees with herbicide. Treat resprouts for at least 2 years. Biological agents available for large infestations. Spiny plumeless thistleB Carduus acanthoides CAAC 2. Herbicide treatment at bud to bloom stage or in the fall (recommended after August 15 when natural precipitation is present). In the fall plants draw nutrients into the roots for winter storage. Herbicides will be drawn down to the roots more efficiently at this time due to translocation of nutrients to roots rather than leaves. If the weed patch has been present for a long period of time another season of seed production is not as important as getting the herbicide into the root system. Spraying in fall (after middle August) will kill the following year's shoots, which are being formed on the roots at this time. Prevent seed production. Herbicide application or mechanical removal when plants are in the rosette stage, spring or summer. Before spraying, remove and bag flower or seed heads from plants that have bolted. Sever root at least 2" below soil level. Whitetop Cardaria draba CADR P Deplete energy reserves in roots. Herbicide treatment in the spring when plants start to bud. Mowing and tillage are not effective. * Type: A = annual; B = biennial; P = perennial; Bold = Garfield County List 3.6 Recommended Treatment Strategies The following treatment strategies are presented for reference. It is important to know whether the weed species being managed is an annual, biennial, or perennial to select strategies that effectively control and eliminate the target. Treatment strategies vary depending on plant type, which are summarized in Table 2. Herbicides should not always be the first treatment of choice when other methods can be effectively employed. Table 2. Treatment Strategies for Noxious Weeds. Annual and Biennial Noxious Weeds Target: Prevent seed production 1. Hand grub (pull), hoe, till, cultivate in rosette stage and before flowering or seed maturity. If flowers or seeds develop, cut and bag seed heads. 2. Cut roots with a spade 2"-3" below soil level. 3. Treat with herbicide in seedling, rosette or bolting stage, before flowering. 4. Mow biennials after bolting stage but before seed set. Mowing annuals will not prevent flowering but can reduce total seed production. Perennial Noxious Weeds Target: Deplete nutrient reserves in root system, prevent seed production 1. Allow plants to expend as much energy from root system as possible. Do not treat when first emerging in spring but allow growth to bud/bloom stage. If seeds develop cut and bag if possible. 2. Herbicide treatment at bud to bloom stage or in the fall (recommended after August 15 when natural precipitation is present). In the fall plants draw nutrients into the roots for winter storage. Herbicides will be drawn down to the roots more efficiently at this time due to translocation of nutrients to roots rather than leaves. If the weed patch has been present for a long period of time another season of seed production is not as important as getting the herbicide into the root system. Spraying in fall (after middle August) will kill the following year's shoots, which are being formed on the roots at this time. 3. Mowing usually is not recommended because the plants will flower anyway, rather, seed production should be reduced. Many studies have shown that mowing perennials and spraying the regrowth is not as effective as spraying without mowing. Effect of mowing is species dependent therefore it is imperative to know the species and its basic biology Timing of application must be done when biologically appropriate, which is not necessarily convenient. WestWater Engineering Page 5of12 October 2014 Table 2. Treatment Strategies for Noxious Weeds. 4. Tillage may or may not be effective or practical. Most perennial roots can sprout from pieces only 0.5 inch — 1.0 inch long. Clean machinery thoroughly before leaving the weed patch. 5. Hand pulling is generally not recommended for perennial species unless you know the plants are seedlings and not established plants. Hand pulling can be effective on small patches but is very labor intensive because it must be done repeatedly. (Sirota 2004) Some weeds, particularly annuals and biennials, can develop resistance to herbicides. The ability of these plants to quickly develop immunity to herbicides, especially when they are used incorrectly, makes the use of proper chemicals at the correct time and in the specified concentration (according to the product label) imperative. Excessive application, either in frequency or concentration, can result in top kill without significantly affecting the root system. Repeated excessive applications may result in resistant phenotypes. 3.7 Noxious Weed Management — Best Management Practices Construction: The following practices should be adopted for any construction project to reduce the costs of noxious weed control and aid in prevention efforts: Prior to delivery to the site, equipment should be cleaned of soils remaining from previous construction sites which may be contaminated with noxious weeds. Equipment and material handling should be done on established sites to reduce the area and extent of soil compaction. In all cases, temporary disturbance should be kept to an absolute minimum. Top soil, where present, should be segregated from deeper soils and replaced as top soil on the final grade, a process known as live topsoil handling. If stored longer than one growing season, topsoil stockpiles should be seeded with non-invasive sterile hybrid grasses. Wetland vegetation, if encountered, should be live handled like sod, temporarily watered if necessary, and placed over excavated sub -soil relative to the position from which the wetland sod was removed. Cut-off collars should be placed on all wetland and stream crossings to prevent back washing (seed vector) and to ensure that soil moisture conditions are not impacted after construction so that native plants can re-establish from the existing seed bank. If working in weed infested sites, equipment should be cleaned of potentially seed -bearing soils and vegetative debris prior to moving to uncontaminated terrain. After construction, disturbed areas should be immediately reseeded with an appropriate seed mix. Herbicides: Many of the listed noxious weed species in Colorado can be controlled with commercially available herbicides. Annual and biennial weeds are best controlled at the pre -bud stage after germination or in the spring of the second year. Selective herbicides are recommended to minimize damage to desirable grass species. It is important that applicators adhere to concentrations specified on herbicide containers. Herbicides generally do not work better at higher concentrations. Herbicide failures are frequently related to high concentrations that result in top kill before the active ingredient can be transported to the roots through the nutrient translocation process. If directed on the herbicide label, a surfactant or other adjuvant should be utilized. WestWater Engineering Page 6 of 12 October 2014 Grazing: In the event grazing is allowed in the project area, it should be deferred in reclaimed areas until revegetation of desirable species has been successfully established and seeded plants have had the opportunity to reproduce. Monitoring: Weed treatment areas should be inspected over time to ensure that control methods have been effective to reduce and suppress the identified infestation. Sites should be monitored until the infestations are eliminated. These inspections can then be used to prioritize future weed control efforts. 3.8 Commercial Applicator Recommendations A certified commercial pesticide applicator licensed in rangeland and/or right-of-way/industrial weed control (depending on site characteristics) is a necessary choice for herbicide control efforts. An applicator has the full range of knowledge, skills, equipment, and experience desired when dealing with tough noxious weeds. In addition, the purchase and use of restricted use herbicides requires a Colorado pesticide applicator license. 4.0 REVEGETATION — RECLAMATION The following recommendations provide project specific methods for reclamation of this site based on soil types and vegetative communities present. Topsoil Handling Proper handling and storage of topsoil is critical to successful revegetation, especially in the case of reestablishing important native plant species on disturbed areas. The topsoil contains soil microbes (bacteria, micorrhiza, invertebrates) and viable seed banks of the native plants present on the site. Many native plant species depend upon the activity of soil microbes for germination in some instances and for establishment and survival of most seedlings. Topsoil should be stripped and segregated from other soil horizons removed from the trench to prevent mixing. Topsoil should also be salvaged from under the spoil storage area. The storage pile should be left with table slopes and be positioned to minimize exposure to wind and water erosion and should include breaks in the stockpiles at drainage crossings to allow drainage where flow is anticipated. Topsoil piles stored for long periods of time should be seeded to provide cover to reduce erosion, provide competition for weed species, and to maintain viability of the soil fungi and microbe communities. Several fast germinating sterile cover crops ("Regreen" and "Quickguard") are commercially available that should be used for short period storage of topsoil. Although not expected, topsoil stored for more than one growing season the stockpile should be seeded with the recommended seed mixes as described in Appendix C. Using the recommended seed mixes on long-term storage piles will help maintain biological activity and provide a seed bank of viable seed. If long-term stockpiling or deep stockpiling cannot be avoided, application of micorrhizal inoculants (see section below) may be beneficial. The alignment should be returned to its natural grade and contour to blend the ROW into the surrounding landscape and to reestablish natural drainage patterns. The stockpiled topsoil should be uniformly spread after construction has been completed. Soil Preparation Compaction can reduce water infiltration and also hinder the penetration of the sprouting seed. Practices that will reduce compaction and prepare the seedbed include: scarification, tillage, or harrowing (Colorado Natural Areas Program et al. 1998). No special soil preparation techniques are anticipated to be necessary as soil compaction should not be an issue along the pipeline alignment if typical topsoil management practices for projects of this nature are employed. WestWater Engineering Page 7 of 12 October 2014 Soil Amendments Soil amendments for reclamation using fertilizer containing nitrogen can disproportionately benefit undesirable annual plants (Perry et al. 2010). If the proponent determines the use of soil amendments to be beneficial, the type and rate should be based on chemical analysis of soil samples near the site. Application of 500 to 800 lbs/ac of Sustane 4-6-4 organic fertilizer, or a similar product, is a generic starting point for soil amendments in this region. A potentially beneficial alternative method to enhance reclamation success, particularly where there is poor or destroyed topsoil, is the application of vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF). These fungi, mostly of the genus Glomus, are symbiotic with about 80 percent of all vegetation. Endo- mycorrhizal fungi are associated mostly with grasses and forbs and could be helpful in reclamation. In symbiosis, the fungi can increase water and nutrient transfer capacity of the host root system (Barrow and McCaslin 1995). Over-the-counter commercial products are available, and the best products should contain more than one fungus species. Seed Mixture With proper topsoil handling the pipeline disturbance should revegetate well. The pipeline corridor will affect multiple landowners with varying land management goals and seed mixes should be coordinated with the landowners. The recommended seed mix provided in Appendix C is well suited for the project area and consists of perennial native grasses and forbs that should establish well, protect topsoil, and provide a basis for rehabilitation for the site upon reclamation. Seeding Methods Drill seeding would be the most appropriate and economical method for seeding the majority of the project area. Hydroseeding or hand -broadcast seeding at twice the recommended drill seed rate is recommended for areas where drill seeding is deemed to be ineffective, impractical, or dangerous. Mulching Crimped weed -free straw mulch would be the most cost effective and practical method of mulching areas prone to erosion after drill seeding this site. No mulching is recommended for areas that are hydroseeded. Potential detrimental effects of mulching include the introduction of weed species and the establishment of non-native cereal grains. Use of a certified weed -free sterile wheat hybrid straw would limit these effects. BMPs Excelsior wattles or straw bales at water discharge points would be appropriate to help control water velocity flowing off the alignment during storm runoff. Terracing slopes near or exceeding 3:1 will reduce erosion, benefitting topsoil and seed retention and thereby improving revegetation success. 5.0 WETLANDS and WATERS of the U.S. Riparian areas and wetlands, although small in comparison to the remainder of the project, can require special considerations for minimization and mitigation of impacts, as well as successful revegetation. Such areas that could be affected by this project were documented during surveys (Figure 2; Appendix D). Aerial photographs and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 1:24,000 topographic maps were examined for perennial, intermittent, or ephemeral streams, marked wetlands, and drainages (ACOE 2007). Mapped wetlands and waters, along with other areas of interest, were verified during pedestrian surveys of the project area and locations were recorded with hand held GPS units. All blue line streams were recorded whether or not they exhibited an Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM). Blue line channels with no OHWM did not show signs of flow (i.e., defined channel, water marks, debris deposits, etc.); however, WestWater Engineering Page 8 of 12 October 2014 these drainages are indicated as intermittent channels on the USGS topographic map and are considered WOUS for pre jurisdictional determination purposes. A pre -construction notification (PCN) is required for utility line activities crossing perennial waters and/or a special aquatic site, including wetlands, in the Colorado River basin (ACOE 2012). Efforts should be made to avoid or minimize impacts to perennial waters and wetlands. Boring (directional utility installation) is a good method to avoid impacts. If direct impacts are necessary, precautions should be taken to protect the integrity of perennial stream and associated riparian ecosystems within the project area. Best Management Practices (BMPs), including adequate barriers and filtration methods, should be used to prevent soil erosion and sedimentation of perennial streams and riparian areas. The construction area of disturbance should be minimized at all crossing to reduce the impacts to affected wetland environments. Wetlands are characterized by hydric soils, which develop as a result of an area being saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic (oxygen -deficient) conditions (USGS 2011). In wetland areas topsoil (the top 12 inches of soil) and wetland vegetation outside the trench line and graded areas, should be removed and set aside from other soils until the pipeline trench is backfilled and the pipeline crossing re-contoured. Wetland vegetation should be cut off at ground level, leaving existing root systems intact, and the remaining sod should be removed from the wetlands and placed in a separate stockpile from other soils. The following protective measures should be used when crossing and/or working near wetland areas: Wetland boundaries should be clearly marked in the field with highly visible flagging and signs until construction and ground disturbing activities are completed. Sediment barriers and BMPs should be installed across the entire construction ROW immediately upslope of the wetland boundary at all wetland crossings to prevent sediment flow into the wetland. Where the construction ROW passes through wetlands, sediment barriers should be installed along the edge of the construction ROW, as necessary, to contain spoil and sediment within the construction ROW. Equipment mats should be used under vehicles and construction equipment at all times while working in wetland areas to minimize disturbance to wetland soils. Wetland vegetation should be stockpiled no longer than 48 hours, if feasible. If wetland soils are stockpiled for longer than 48 hours the soils should be kept wet until returned to wetland areas. Stockpiled wetland soils should be piled no deeper than 2 feet. During wetland crossings, actively flowing water channels within wetlands should be flumed so as not to be impeded. Once the channel has been restored to its original contours and wetland soils are placed back (first out/last in) then wetland vegetation should re-establish in areas identified as wetlands in Figure 2and Appendix D, and no seeding is recommended in these areas. WestWater Engineering Page 9 of 12 October 2014 6.0 REFERENCES ACOE. 2007. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jurisdictional Determination Form Instructional Guidebook. Prepared jointly by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. ACOE. 2012. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Sacremento District Nationwide Permit Regional Conditions for Colorado. Barrow, J. R., and B. D. McCaslin. 1995. Role of microbes in resource management in arid ecosystems. In: Barrow, J. R., E. D. McArthur, R. E. Sosebee, and Tausch, R. J., comps. 1996. Proceedings: shrubland ecosystem dynamics in a changing environment. General Technical Report, NT - GTR -338, Ogden, Utah: U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service, Intermountain Resource Station, 275 pp. Colorado Natural Areas Program, Colorado State Parks, Colorado Department of Natural Resources. 1998. Native Plant Revegetation Guide for Colorado. Available online: http: //www.parks.state. co.us/SiteCollectionlmages/parks/Programs/CNAP/CNAPPublications/Re vegetationGuide/revegetation.pdf. CWMA. 2007. S. Anthony, T. D'Amato, A. Doran, S. Elzinga, J. Powell, I. Schonle, K. Uhing. Noxious Weeds of Colorado, Ninth Edition. Colorado Weed Management Association, Centennial. Garfield County. 2002. Garfield County Vegetation Management and Garfield County Weed Advisory Board. Garfield County Noxious Weed Management Plan, Resolution #2002-94, October 21. Garfield County. 2013. Vegetation Management Section — Noxious Weed List. Available online: http://www.garfield-county.com/vegetation-management/noxious-weed-list.aspx. Accessed Feburary 4, 2014 Kershaw, L., A. MacKinnon, and J. Pojar. 1998. Plants of the Rocky Mountains. Lone Pine Publishing, Auburn, Washington. NRCS. 2014. Web Soil Survey, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service, URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov Perry, L.G., D.M. Blumenthal, T.A. Monaco, M.W. Paschke, and E.F. Redente. 2010 Immobilizing nitrogen to control plan invasion. Oecologia: 163:12-24. Sirota, J. M. 2004. Best management practices for noxious weeds of Mesa County. Colorado State University, Cooperative Extension Tri River Area, Grand Junction, Colorado. URL: http://www.coopext.colostate.edu/TRA/Weeds/weedmgmt.html State of Colorado. 2005. Rules pertaining to the administration and enforcement of the Colorado Noxious Weed Act, 35-5-1-119, C.R.S. 2003. Department of Agriculture, Plant Industry Division, Denver, 78 pp. USGS. 2011. Restoration, Creation, and Recovery of Wetlands. U.S. Geological Survey, National Water Summary on Wetland Resources, Water Supply Paper 2425. Online: Accessed November 10, 2011. http://water.usgs.gov/nwsum/WSP2425/restoration.html Weber, W.A., and R.C. Wittmann 2012. Colorado Flora, Western Slope. Fourth Edition, University Press of Colorado, Boulder. Whitson, T. D. (editor), L. C. Burrill, S. A. Dewey, D. W. Cudney, B. E. Nelson, R. D. Lee and R. Parker. 2001. Weeds of the West — 9th edition. Western Society of Weed Science in cooperation with Cooperative Extension Services, University of Wyoming, Laramie. WestWater Engineering Page 10 of 12 October 2014 1 MESA LAND B.AT- L Est ENT3 MESA• LAND' l-41 a J VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION I3ATTLENIRNT MESA?LAND ' I N'JESTMEN B, PARCELEETRK 5 LC BATTLEMENT MESA LAND4INV ES T MENTS PARCELS -t. TRK AND SAVA.CGI JOAN L. JOHN W ROY E MARSHALL 1 & DANIEL W BATTLEMENT r ESA RT ERS :;ATJTLEMENTME JINVLStr•.',i..,' PARCEL 5.2'T Rp{ BATTk. Sr. METROPOLITAN .i STRICT HA- IIIP \7. mi SA PARCEL 5, LLC ....7/ SAINT PAUL EVANGELICAL // LUTHERAN CHURCH -\MELS //CIF GRAND JUNCTION, d ) BATTLEMENT MESA LAND -INVESTMENTS BATTLEMEN MESA LAN INVESTMENT RFIELD`CApUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT i, GFTIN,,'GAR t'P &`.LINOAI'A 1 r 1 Legend 0 Quackgrass 1 Musk thistle I=1 30 Meter Weeds Survey Area ■ Canada thistle 1 Plumeless thistle '7 Proposed Pipeline Chicory ♦ Redstem fllaree Q Parcels Common burdock * Russian knapweed County Road Common mullein Russian olive Streams Field bindweed i Tamarisk BLM Houndstongue Whitetop A Jointed goatgrass - Russian knapweed Figure 1 Ursa Operating Company Battlement Mesa PUD Phase 1 Pipeline Biological Survey Location and Noxious Weeds n\NestWater Engineering Consulting Engineers & Scientists 6 0.1 0.2 0.3 p Source- Z-1Cor reran Compliance Service (Olsson As Mes October 2014 eJiUrsaIBMC PipeIin e12O1 d\GIS'Figure 1.m>t6 10130,2014 rob BATTLEMENT MESALAND VALLEY VIEW VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION SAVAGE;... BATTLEMENTTMESALAN DIN MENS, PARCELS-.2IITRIQ5 LLC. BATTLEMENT MESA LAND4ITtiVE aT MENTS siA°±_RCE05-1.TRKAND 11 BASTITLEMENT MESA. I SETROP6II_DAN DISTRICT ;\T,TLEMENT MESA NO;INVESTML N PARCEL' MESA. LLrC ire[ _oL-•- -• � r_tr-� -mu CHURCH-WELS JUNCTION, CO WOUS-1' BATTLEMENT MESA ND TER, &,BRENDAS SCHOOL 0INVESTMENT V VO US -10 C 1 N (Aft`•' - h 1 NOAA Legend Potential Waters of the US ® 30 Meter Weeds Survey Area Proposed Pipeline Parcels - County Road - Streams Potential Wetlands Potential Wetlands Figure 2 Ursa Operating Company Battlement. Mesa PUD Phase 1 Pipeline Biological Survey Potential Waters of the US WestWater Engineering Consulting Fngineers & Scientists 0 ©.1 0.2 Map Source- Z-1Cordilleran Com no 5 M es October 2014 0.3 son AswCJ'1Ursa'aMC PipeBin e120141,5151Figure 2.m5r4 10,30+2014 rbb Appendix A Garfield County Noxious Weed List 1 Species J Common name Species Code Growth Form Life History State Listing Acroptilon repens Russian knapweed ACRE3 Forb Perennial B Aegilops cylindrica Jointed goatgrass AECY Grass Annual B Arctium minus Common (Lesser) burdock ARMI2 Forb Biennial C Cardaria draba Hoary cress, Whitetop CADR Forb Perennial B Carduus acanthoides Spiny plumeless thistle CAAC Forb Biennial / Winter Annual B Carduus nutans Musk (Nodding plumeless) thistle CANU4 Forb Biennial B Centaurea diffusa Diffuse knapweed CEDI3 Forb Perennial B Centaurea maculosa Spotted knapweed CEMA4 Forb Perennial B Centaurea solstitialis Yellow starthistle CESO3 Forb Annual A Chrysanthemum leucanthemum Oxeye daisy CHLE80 Forb Perennial B Cichorium intybus Chicory CIIN Forb Perennial C Cirsium arvense Canada thistle CIAR4 Forb Perennial B Cynoglossum officinale Houndstongue, Gypsyflower CYOF Forb Biennial B Elaeagnus angustifolia Russian olive ELAN Tree Perennial B Euphorbia esula Leafy spurge EUES Forb Perennial B Linaria dalmatica Dalmatian toadflax, broad-leaved LIDA Forb Perennial B Linaria vulgaris Yellow toadflax LIVU2 Forb Perennial B Lythrum salicaria Purple loosestrife LYSA2 Forb Perennial A Onopordum acanthium Scotch thistle ONAC Forb Biennial B Tamarix pary flora Smallflower tamarisk TAPA4 Tree Perennial B Tamarix ramosissima Salt cedar, Tamarisk TARA Tree Perennial B WestWater Engineering Appendix A - 1 October 2014 Anuendix B. Noxious weed locations in the nroiect area (NAD 83/UTM Zone 12). Species Northing Easting Number of plants Canada thistle 4369786 754520 50 Canada thistle 4369484 754222 500 Canada thistle 4369450 754276 100 Canada thistle 4369235 757196 1000 Canada thistle 4369225 757198 100 Canada thistle 4369373 755545 100 Canada thistle 4368845 757237 100 Canada thistle 4369776 754533 100 Canada thistle 4368839 757215 100 Chicory 4369443 754255 6 Chicory 4369552 756173 8 Chicory 4369372 755751 6 Chicory 4369224 757199 12 Chicory 4369678 755157 10 Chicory 4369631 755158 10 Chicory 4369603 755159 20 Chicory 4369289 757197 5 Chicory 4369231 757199 10 Chicory 4369383 755662 4 Chicory 4369394 755925 75 Chicory 4369881 755120 50 Chicory 4369373 755812 50 Chicory 4369540 755961 30 Chicory 4369372 755920 10 Common burdock 4369467 754349 8 Common burdock 4368849 757247 10 Common burdock 4368861 757243 50 Common burdock 4369849 755153 10 Common burdock 4369874 755138 10 Common burdock 4369896 755106 10 Common burdock 4369881 755121 10 Common mullein 4369297 757184 7 Common mullein 4368964 757153 1 Common mullein 4369049 757238 5 Common mullein 4368852 757240 4 Common mullein 4369583 756438 1 Common mullein 4369584 756449 5 Common mullein 4369587 756491 1 Common mullein 4369585 756512 10 WestWater Engineering Appendix B - 1 October 2014 Anuendix B. Noxious weed locations in the nroiect area (NAD 83/UTM Zone 12). Species Northing Easting Number of plants Common mullein 4369597 756732 1 Common mullein 4369597 757189 1 Common mullein 4369370 757196 5 Field bindweed 4369816 754831 10 Field bindweed 4369829 754861 5 Field bindweed 4369796 754893 5 Field bindweed 4369807 754971 8 Field bindweed 4369796 755068 15 Field bindweed 4369641 755136 5 Field bindweed 4369384 755557 100 Field bindweed 4369624 755132 30 Field bindweed 4369179 757216 30 Houndstongue 4369221 757197 10 Houndstongue 4369787 754523 50 Houndstongue 4368838 757218 10 Houndstongue 4369774 754520 10 Houndstongue 4369845 755155 10 Houndstongue 4369466 754347 18 Jointed goatgrass 4369021 757195 1000 Jointed goatgrass 4368861 757201 500 Musk thistle 4369366 755836 4 Musk thistle 4369426 755929 1 Musk thistle 4369484 755970 12 Musk thistle 4368840 757217 2 Musk thistle 4369035 757219 4 Musk thistle 4368863 757233 1 Musk thistle 4368851 757248 5 Musk thistle 4368829 757222 1 Musk thistle 4369597 756552 1 Musk thistle 4369487 755946 5 Musk thistle 4369375 755585 1 Musk thistle 4369392 755498 10 Musk thistle 4369372 755520 10 Musk thistle 4369379 755528 15 Musk thistle 4369049 757241 50 Musk thistle 4369363 755549 10 Musk thistle 4369878 755144 10 Musk thistle 4369357 755514 10 Plumeless thistle 4369780 754520 6 WestWater Engineering Appendix B - 2 October 2014 Anuendix B. Noxious weed locations in the nroiect area (NAD 83/UTM Zone 12). Species Northing Easting Number of plants Quackgrass 4369878 754523 100 Quackgrass 4369386 755596 100 Quackgrass 4369422 755926 100 Redstem filaree 4369818 755038 100 Redstem filaree 4369820 754506 100 Russian knapweed 4369819 755019 1000 Russian knapweed 4369564 756705 1000 Russian knapweed 4369581 756901 1000 Russian knapweed 4369319 757171 10 Russian knapweed 4369298 757185 15 Russian knapweed 4368876 757202 6 Russian knapweed 4369473 754202 100 Russian knapweed 4369476 754207 100 Russian knapweed 4369574 756059 5 Russian knapweed 4369580 756251 1 Russian knapweed 4369598 756693 1 Russian knapweed 4369610 757081 20 Russian knapweed 4369349 757197 50 Russian knapweed 4369281 757208 1000 Russian knapweed 4368854 757249 1000 Russian knapweed 4368989 757163 1000 Russian knapweed 4368821 757193 1000 Russian knapweed 4369387 755616 50 Russian knapweed 4368826 757211 100 Russian knapweed 4369703 755148 30 Russian knapweed 4368863 757231 20 Russian knapweed 4369813 755025 100 Russian knapweed 4369382 755593 100 Russian knapweed 4369204 757186 100 Russian knapweed 4369002 757153 100 Russian knapweed 4369584 756672 100 Russian knapweed 4369568 756764 100 Russian olive 4369546 755980 1 Russian olive 4369588 756546 1 Russian olive 4369454 757192 1 Tamarisk 4368838 757201 5 Tamarisk 4369836 754503 2 Tamarisk 4369788 754520 1 Tamarisk 4369585 754211 1 WestWater Engineering Appendix B - 3 October 2014 Anuendix B. Noxious weed locations in the nroiect area (NAD 83/UTM Zone 12). Species Northing Easting Number of plants Tamarisk 4369456 754291 1 Whitetop 4369375 755591 30 Whitetop 4369381 755620 50 Whitetop 4369390 755504 100 WestWater Engineering Appendix B - 4 October 2014 Appendix C. Recommended seed menu for pinyon -juniper woodland and/or mountain/Wyoming big sagebrush shrubland. Common Name 1 Scientific Name Variety Season Form PLS lbs/acre* Plant Both of the Following (15% Each, 30% Total) Bottlebrush Squirreltail Elymus elymoides, Sitanion hystrix VNS Cool Bunch 2.0 Bluebunch Wheatgrass Pseudoroegneria spicata, Agropyron spicatum P-7, Secar, e, Anaton Golder Cool Bunch 2.8 and Two of the Following (20% Each, 40% Total) Thickspike Wheatgrass Elymus lanceolatus ssp. lanceolatus, Agropyron dasystachyum Critana, Bannock, Schwendimar Cool Sod- forming 3.4 Slender Wheatgrass Elymus trachycaulus, Agropyron trachycaulum Revenue, Pryor Cool Bunch 3.3 Western Wheatgrass Pascopyrum [Agropyron] smithii Rosana, Arriba Cool Sod- forming 4.8 and Three of the Following (10% Each, 30% Total) Indian Ricegrass Achnatherum [Oryzopsis] hymenoides Paloma, Rimrock Cool Bunch 1.9 Arizona Fescue Festuca arizonica Redondo Cool Bunch 0.5 Galleta Pleuraphis [HilariaJ jamesii Viva florets Warm Bunch/Sod- forming 1 7 Muttongrass Poa fendleriana VNS Cool Bunch 0.3 Sandberg Bluegrass Poa sandbergii, Poa secunda VNS Cool Bunch 0.3 Sand Dropseed Sporobolus cryptandrus VNS Warm Bunch 0.1 OPTIONAL: Any combination from the following species may be substituted for up to 10% of the above grasses. Rocky Mountain Beeplant Cleome serrulata VNS Annual Sunflower Helianthus annuus VNS Arrowleaf Balsamroot Balsamorhiza sagittate VNS Sulfur Flower Eriogonum umbellatum VNS Utah sweetvetch Hedysarum boreale VNS Scarlet Globemallow Sphaeralcea coccinea VNS Four -Wing Saltbush Atriplex canescens VNS White Sagebrush Artemisia ludoviciana VNS *Based on 60 pure live seeds (PLS) per square foot, drill -seeded. Double this rate (120 PLS per square foot) if broadcast or hydroseeded WestWater Engineering Appendix C - 1 October 2014 Appendix D. Potential Wetlands and Waters of the U.S. (NAD 83/UTM Zone 12). Potential Wetlands Points Label Northing Easting Comment Wet -1 4369439 754249.3 Potential wetland; Cattails along road. Wet -2 4369778 754522.6 Potential wetland 5m radius soil saturated. Typha latifolia, Rumex maritimus, Solanum dulcamara, Tamarix ramosissima, Nepeta cataria, Almutaster pauciflorus. Potential Wetlands Line Length (Meters) Northing Easting Comment 320.255 4369394 757195.8 Potential wetland along ditch. Potential Waters of the US Label Northing Easting Comment WOUS-1 4369351 754181.5 No water. OHWM 3 feet wide, 5 inches deep. WOUS-2 4369467 754347.9 Live water, 24 inches wide, 6 inches deep. WOUS-3 4369559 755161 No water. OHWM 15feet wide by 1 inch deep. WOUS-4 4369537 755214 No water. OHWM 15 feet by linch. WOUS-5 4369392 755497.6 No OHWM, blue line on map - drainage about 20 feet wide 2 feet deep; entirely vegetated, no evidence of flow. WOUS-6 4369485 755957 No OHWM blue line on map no evidence of flow drainage about 15 feet wide by 4 feet deep completely vegetated. WOUS-7 4369573 757176.8 Ditch, live water, 15 inches wide by 3 inches deep. WOUS-8 4369425 757187.2 Live water, 36 inches wide by 6 inches deep. WOUS-9 4369276 757186.9 Ditch, live water, 24 inches by 6 inches, vegetated. WOUS-10 4369227 757199.2 Irrigation ditch flowing 12 inches wide and 2 inches deep. Fringe 18 inches on either side with hydrophytic vegetation: Juncus arcticus and Phalaris arundinacea. WOUS-11 4368836 757214.9 No OHWM. Diverted upstream, no evidence flow, completely vegetated with upland vegetation. Drainage about 30 feet wide by 10 feet deep WOUS-12 4368833 757226.1 OHWM is 6inches deep and 2 feet wide. This drainage was diverted upstream although water appears to flow in this drainage at times. WestWater Engineering Appendix D - 1 October 2014