HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.04 Wildlife checklist, veg management plan & cultural resource studySEA TON SUBDIVISION
COMBINED PRELIMINARY PLAN & FINAL PLAT APPLICATION
EXHIBIT D
WILDLIFE CHECKLIST, VEGETATION MANAGEMENT
PLAN & CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDY
1
Garfield County IT Department GIS Resources:
Colorado Division of Wildlife WRIS Data Checklist for:
1�arce. I Tb 23�-e33- oo- 031 I--o.W.e, Frsv+-i
Rob 1yky3, GIS Malysi., ohykysageAkldtounly.00m 97-945-1377 x1590, FAX,• 970.384-3670 Sri0r2005 3.48:28 PM
Note: For additional information and interpretation of this data, contact Pam Schnurr, Wildlife
Biologist, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Grand Junction, at 970-297-1192.
Species & Habitat Type:
This property lies:
Entirely Partially Within Out
hi Area In Area 1 Mile of Area
Bald Eagle Active Nest Site ✓
Bald Eagle Communal Roost
Bald Eagle Roost Site ✓
Bald Eagle Winter Range ✓
Bald Eagle Winter Concentration Area
Bald Eagle Winter Foraging Area ✓
Black Bear Overall Range
Black Bear Fall Concentration Area
Black Bear Summer Concentration Area
Black Bear -Human Conflict
Brazilian Free -Tailed Bat Overall Range ✓
Bighorn Overall Range
Bighorn Winter Range
Bighorn Winter Concentration Area _
Bighorn Summer Range
Bighorn Production Area
Canada Goose Brood Concentration Area
Canada Goose Feeding Area
Canada Goose Production Area
Canada Goose Winter Range
Canada Goose Winter Concentration Area
Elk Winter Range
Elk Winter Concentration Area
Elk Severe Winter Range
Elk Overall Range
Elk Summer Range
Elk Summer Concentration Area
Elk Production Area
Elk Highway Crossing
Elk Limited Use Area
Great Blue Heron Nesting Area
Great Blue Heron Foraging Area
Lynx Overall Range _
Lynx Potential Habitat _
Mule Deer Winter Range ✓
Mule Deer Winter Concentration Area ✓
Mule Deer Severe Winter Range
Mule Deer Overall Range
Mule Deer Summer Range
Mule Deer Resident Population
Mule Deer Highway Crossing
Osprey Active Nest Site
1
7.7
This property lies:
Species & Habitat Type:
Entirety Partially Within Out
In Area in Area 1 Mile of Area
Osprey Foraging Area _ _ _ ✓
Peregrine Falcon Nesting Area _ _ ✓
Peregrine Falcon Potential Nesting Area _ _ _Z_
Pronghorn Antelope Overall Range_ _,,,_
Pronghorn Antelope Winter Range ._._
Pronghorn Antelope Winter Concentration Area__ _ __
Razorback Sucker _ ✓
River Otter Overall Range_ _ _ ✓
Sage Grouse Brood Area_ _,
Sage Grouse Overall Range_ ____ __
Sage Grouse Production Area.../ _ 1
Sage Grouse Winter Range,./ _ ,./
Sage Grouse Historic Habitat _
Wild Turkey Overall Range
Wild Turkey Production Area, „ —
Wild Turkey Winter Range
Wild Turkey Winter Concentration Area _ ✓
Wild Turkey Roosting Sites
ajekie
Cole ClacK.
GZS Teo,.riiCia^
Gari Cout
Seaton Subdivision
Vegetation and Wildlife Assessment
November 2009
e.m. ecological, LLC
Natural Resource and Restoration Consulting
r^.
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Purpose 2
Brief Description of the Property 2
Soils and Table 1- Soil Types on the Proposed Seaton Subdivided Property 2
Vegetation Resources and Noxious Weeds 3
Distinct Plant Communities 3
Narrowleaf Cottonwood -Willow Riparian Plant Community 3
Gambel Oak-Serviceberry Mountain Shrubland 4
Open Meadows 4
Noxious Weeds Present on the Seaton Proposed Subdivision 4
Garfield County Weed List 4
State of Colorado Weed List 5
Extent of Garfield County Listed Weeds -Overview 5
Extent of State of Colorado Listed Weeds -Overview 5
Integrated Weed Management 5
Garfield County Listed Noxious Weeds: Species Accounts and Management 6
1. Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense, syn, Brea arvense) 6
2. Common Burdock (Arctium minus) 8
3. Houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale) .9
4. Oxeye Daisy (Chrysanthemum leucanthemum) 10
State of Colorado Listed Noxious Weeds: Brief Species Accounts and Some Management 11
5. Absinth Wormwood (Artemisia absinthium), List B 12
6. Bull Thistle (Cirsium vulgare), List B 15
7. Common Mullein (Verbascum thapsis) List C 16
8. Common Tansy (Tanacetum vulgare) List B 17
9. Cheatgrass or Downy brome (Bromus tectorum, Syn. Anisantha tectorum), List C 19
10. Poison Hemlock (Conium maculatum), List C 21
Crownvetch (Securigera varia, syn. Coronilla varia) .22
General Comments for all weeds on the property and a seed mix recommendation 23
IWM Treatment Methods and the limitations of this document 24
Wildlife 25
Mountain Lions 25
American Elk 25
Mule Deer 25
Black Bears 26
Beaver 26
Fences and Dogs 26
Literature Referenced -Seaton Proposed Subdivision, Vegetation and Wildlife 27
Appenidix 1. Garfield County Noxious Weed List 2009 29
Appendix 2. Colorado Noxious Weed List 2009 30
Map 1. Seaton Proposed Subdivision, Weed Areas of Note
Map 2. Soil Map for Seaton Proposed Subdivision
Map 3. Mountain Lion Human Conflict Area and Overall Range for Mountain Lions
Map 4. Overall Summer Range and Calving Areas for American Elk
Map 5. Winter Range and Winter Concentration Areas for American Elk
Map 6. Mule Deer Summer Range
Map 7. Mule Deer Winter Range, Winter Concentration Areas and Severe Winter Range
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 1
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
Purpose
This document provides information and guidance regarding pertinent vegetation resources and wildlife on the
portion of the Seaton Property proposed for a property split or subdivision. The Seaton property is located along
Four Mile Road (CR117) roughly three and a quarter miles south of Glenwood Springs and up the Four Mile Creek
watershed. This property lies just south of Cheiyn Road off of Four Mile Road and includes a section of Four Mile
Creek approximately two plus river miles upstream from the confluence of Four Mile Creek and the Roaring Fork
River. The elevation is roughly 6,320 feet at the east edge of the Seaton property along Four Mile Creek Road
dropping down slightly to the creek bottom to the west. This area extending from the road to the creek consists of
the eastern half of the existing Seaton property and is now proposed as a separate lot (See Map 1, Seaton
Proposed Subdivision, Weed areas of Note).
Brief Description of the Property
The 4.448 acre piece of the Seaton property that is being proposed as a separate parcel is comprised mainly of a
riparian plant community, an adjacent remnant of the original native upland Gambel oakiserviceberry community,
and cleared meadow areas up on a higher terrace, now consisting of cultivated Eurasian pasture grasses. The
other half of the property, 8.6 acres with the existing house, comprises the western half. It consists mainly of an un-
manipulated native, upland, mixed -mountain shrub plant community extending uphill above the existing home.
Riparian and adjoining upland portions on the west parcel are now highly managed to be more open in and around
the current creek -side residence.
The section proposed for the split flanks Four Mile Road and consists of the area of the property reviewed for this
document (See Map 1), The lot split occurs more or less along Four Mile Creek giving the expectation that both
properties, after the lot split, will have adequate access to the creek (see Map 1 for the split property line, although
only approximate). Four Mile Creek drains the general vicinities of Sunlight Mountain and Baldy Mountain at its
headwaters, land areas both exceeding 10,000 feet, and eventually flows into the lower Roaring Fork River two
miles downstream from the reach at the Seaton Property. Here the creek is roughly 6,300 feet in elevation. The
Roaring Fork River drains the larger Roaring Fork watershed, an area roughly the size of Rhode Island which
includes Four Mile Creek, and then empties into the Colorado River at Glenwood Springs.
Soils
Soils are the foundations for ecosystem establishment and a brief review here completes a vegetation assessment.
The millions of years of geologic history and subsequent soil development influences vegetation, water quality, and
therefore wildlife. The majority of the soils on the Seaton property are derived from river born materials, namely
alluvium. Many of the Tertiary igneous rocks present came mainly from Basalt lava flows as evidenced by the large
Basalt boulders making up much of the creek bottom (see Figure 1) and unearthed elsewhere on the property,
during past digging projects or perhaps from nearby road work on Four Mile Road. Below see Table 1 for a
succinct summary table of the soils on the Seaton proposed parcel split. See Map 2 for the mapped locations of
the soil types. Soil data is accessed through the Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS), an arm of the
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the map may be somewhat inaccurate at the small scales being used
in Map 2, yet still informative. Soils are typically mapped at scales 011:24,000 feet. The map for this report is at a
scale closer to 1:1,000 feet for easier viewing.
Table 1. Soil Types on the Proposed Seaton Subdivided Property.
Soil nameOrigin
Landscape
Position
Soil
Description
Typical Vegetation
Type
Cochetopa-Antrobus
association (18)
Alluvium and/or colluvium
derived from Basalt
Fans, mountains
Well drained, loam,
gravelly clay loam;
very stony loam
5erviceberry, Gambel oak,
mt. mahogany, antelope
bitterbrush, wheatgrass
Fluvaquents (42)
Mixed alluvium
Flood plains, valley floors
Stratified gravelly
sand to clay to very
gravelly sand
Well drained cobbly
loam, clay loam
Sedge, inland saltgrass,
western wheatgrass, willows,
cottonwoods
Antelope bitterbrush, mt.
mahogany, big sagebrush,
mt. snowberry, cool season
grasses (needle and thread)
Showater-Morval
complex (94,95)
Alluvium derived from
Basalt
Alluvial fans, high
terraces, valley sides
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
2
Seaton Subdivision
Vegetation and Wildlife
November 2009
} 4ti
•
4 S fl,S Fr 8 { n .^ p� •:v 'r'f e? 4 a.. r : . . , i
Figure 1. Basalt boulders and cobbles line Four Mile Creek on the Seaton Property.
Vegetation Resources and Noxious Weeds
Distinct Plant Communities
A general assessment of the vegetation, including the presence of noxious weeds and other non-native weedy
species, was done in October 2009. Pertinent information was gathered to better understand the current
vegetation and intelligently inform future weed management decisions. The general extent of the weeds were noted
but not mapped extensively as that was beyond the scope and need of this document. There were essentially three
distinct plant communities or areas of distinctive vegetation cover from one site to another located on the proposed
eastern lot and they are briefly described below. Further information regarding the noxious weeds follows.
Narrowleaf Cottonwood -Willow Riparian Plant Community
The areas along Four Mile Creek, where more soil moisture is available due to the presence of the creek, support a
native riparian forest community dominated by narrowleaf cottonwoods and distinct from the surrounding
landscape. Coyote willows, red twigged dogwood, river hawthorn, alder, and three leaved sumac were all native
shrubs found within this riparian corridor associated with the creek and all are indicative of greater water availability
for plants typical of a riparian area. Unfortunately, "the thin green line", as these riparian areas of the west are
commonly referred, with their distinct vegetation associated with rivers and creeks, are also notorious for supporting
many of our escaped ornamental plants and undesirable noxious weeds. This site is no exception.
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
Gambel Oak-Serviceberry Mountain Shrubland
A second conspicuous vegetation area on the property is a small remnant of a plant community that once occurred
on the upland sites towards the road prior to vegetation being cleared for ranching or development in the last
hundred or so years. This community consists of the native Gambel oak and serviceberry shrubland. This shrub
dominated area occurs along the steeper banks that rise up from the more or less forested lower elevation terraces
along the creek. This band of native shrubs and plants along steeper banks rising up from the creek is not
supporting the numbers of noxious weeds other sites are showing on the property. This is probably due to the
historical lack of soil and vegetation disturbances on these banks and the subsequent intact nature of the native
ground cover.
Open Meadows
The third distinct areas of plant cover are the open meadows on the higher terrain above the river and extending to
the edge of Four Mile Road. These areas are planted in Eurasian pasture grasses and a portion of them are
currently mowed closer to the existing building and along the driveways leaving a fenced, unmowed field an the
northeast section of the property. The predominant grass is smooth brome, a grass originating in China (USDA
Plants Database 2009) and, in the recent past, planted extensively for forage and hay. Unfortunately, the mowed
areas around the existing building as well as some un -mowed areas merging into the riparian area, are heavily
colonized with a native -look-alike that is a Colorado State listed noxious weed. This plant is absinth wormwood, a
silvery green plant that is commonly mistaken for one of our native sages and further discussed later in this
document. The proposed building envelopes are in these open meadows where managing any weeds will be an
easier and more manageable task than on the steeper banks or in the riparian area down by Four Mile Creek
where there is also greater concern for harming non -target native plant species.
Noxious Weeds
Non-native, invasive weeds are plants of concern because they utilize and take resources our native plants and/or
agricultural crops would otherwise be accessing. These aggressive plants then crowd out our native plant species
that are the foundations of our native ecosystems and support our native pollinators and animals and a whole web
of life that has evolved over hundreds of thousands of years. A "noxious" weed is further differentiated from other
non-native weedy species. A noxious weed is by legal definition a "specific plant species which has been
designated for mandatory control by branches of local, state, or federal governments in Colorado, the species must
be non-native to the state..." (State of Colorado website 2009). The Colorado state list of noxious weeds has gone
through exhaustive review. In addition to the weed control goals of most property owners to preserve the natural
and agricultural values of their property, the Colorado Noxious Weed Act and the Garfield County Weed
Management Plan further compels landowners by law to manage State and County listed noxious weeds. Because
of the aggressiveness of these plants and their economic impacts, a great deal of time and energy has gone into
understanding these invasive, non-native plants in the scientific and agricultural communities and a wealth of
information is now readily available.
Four of the weeds on the Seaton Subdivision property are on the Garfield County Noxious Weed List and six are on
the State of Colorado Noxious Weed List. The state of Colorado has over seventy species on the state noxious
weed list, while counties typically have much smaller lists with Garfield listing twenty one, Pitkin County listing thirty
five, and Eagle with fifteen (2009). All species listed for a county must also be on the state list. This document
fulfills a request by Garfield County and strives to provide information and guidance regarding the noxious weeds
on the Seaton proposed lot split. The information is meant to provide a general understanding of the vegetation
resources, any subsequent threats, and some potential strategies for management. The five Garfield County listed
species will receive more focus, with the exception of absinth wormwood, currently only on the state list, which has
a substantial population on the property.
Noxious Weeds Present on the Seaton Proposed Subdivision
(Garfield County Weed List)
Common Name:
Canada thistle
Common burdock
Scientific Name:
Cirsium arvense (syn. Brea arvense)
Arctium minus
em ecological, LLC P.Q. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 4
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
Houndstongue
Oxeye daisy
(State of Colorado Weed List)
Cynoglossum officinale
Chrysanthemum leucanthemum
Common Name: Scientific Name: List A, B. or C
Absinth wormwood Artemisia absinthium B
Bull thistle Cirsium vulgare B
Common mullein Verbascum thapsis C
Common tansy Tanacetum vulgare B
Downy brome/Cheatgrass Bromus tectorum C
Poison hemlock Conium maculatum C
Extent of Noxious Weeds on the Eastern Half of the Seaton Lot Split:
Extent of Garfield County Listed Weeds -Overview
The riparian area, like many riparian areas in the West, supports some fairly dense populations of noxious weeds in
spots. Canada thistle, a plant that is notorious for doing very well in wetter sites, is the most ubiquitous weed on
the terraces along the creek. Oxeye daisy is another plant that is very adept at moving into wetter areas and
populations have exploded along most waterways in the Roaring Fork Watershed. Oxeye daisy has created many
headaches for land owners and managers aware of the problem. This seemingly innocuous daisy has formed a
small dense patch on the Seaton Property near Chelyn Road in the riparian community (see Map 1). It can be
found intermittently throughout the creek -side areas. Houndstongue and Common Burdock, the other two listed
species in Garfield County, are found more intermittently mostly in the riparian area and each has distinctive fruits
rendering them unavoidable as both are adept at clinging to pant legs and fur. These two weeds are found more
often in bedding areas for mule deer near the creek on the property.
Extent of State of Colorado Listed Weeds -Overview
Six State of Colorado listed weeds were found (see Map 1). Absinth wormwood, already briefly mentioned in the
plant community descriptions, presented the densest weed population and perhaps the most extensive on the
property. There is approximately an eighth acre area where nothing but absinth appears to be growing (see Map 1 -
absinth high density area). This is probably the site where the plant got started. From this dense site and
extending down into the riparian area, level with the creek elevations, is more absinth where the population is not
as thick, but quite extensive. Other problem areas are around the red barn -like building, just downhill where the
absinth is allowed to grow into its shrub form and to the east of the building, again where a patch is growing
unimpeded, possibly because it is being mistaken for a native sagebrush. Much of the mowed area in this vicinity
also has absinth wormwood growing throughout where due to mowing, it stays in a form close to the ground.
The other five listed State of Colorado noxious weeds are much less extensive on the property. Common mullein
was only seen at one site near Chelyn Road (see Map 1, common mullein -trace). Poison hemlock wasn't seen
that extensively, although the time of year was not ideal for seeing this plant, nor was it ideal for several other
plants. Only a few bull thistle plants were discovered, again quite close to Chelyn Road. Common tansy was
found intermittently and mostly creek -side. For most of these particular weeds, a search combing the entire
property armed with tools to handle the plants would be the best strategy for eliminating them. Downy brome,
sometimes better known as cheatgrass, was seen intermittently within the open meadow areas. This grass is
typically found colonizing drier sites and this was mostly the case on the Seaton property. Cheatgrass is not
extensive yet, but with any soil disturbances it can quickly become a larger problem.
Integrated Weed Management
Successful long-term control of noxious weeds typically requires a range of different control methods and strategies
to be implemented in combination or sequentially. This is known as an Integrated Weed Management approach or
more broadly referred to as an Integrated Pest Management approach. This philosophy is well accepted in the land
management community. The goal is to prevent weed spread and establishment. Practices include: limiting weed
seeds and their dispersal, minimizing soil disturbances, containing current infestations, detecting any weed
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 5
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife
November 2009
introductions early and eradicating them when they are small, actively establishing desirable vegetation, and using
appropriate biological controls when suitable and appropriate grazing practices if and where applicable.
Garfield County Listed Noxious Weeds: Species Accounts and Management
1. Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense, syn, Brea arvense)
Canada thistle, a member
of the Sunflower Family
(Asteraceae) has been
declared a noxious weed in
at least 45 states and
Colorado is no exception.
It is an erect perennial
(returning every year) with
deep, extensive horizontal
roots allowing it to form
colonies. Stems are
smooth and spineless
relative to many other
noxious thistles and the
flowering heads are
relatively small, perhaps '/z
to 3/4 of an inch in diameter.
Flower color can range
from lavender to pink or
white. The flowers of
Canada thistle cluster at
the end of the flowering
stems and there can be
several branching flowering
stalks, meaning several
flowers at branch tips (see
Figure 3). The leaves are
alternate, lanceolate (long
and narrow, broadest at the base) with tips that end in a spine and upper leaves are much smaller than lower
leaves. As many as four different varieties of Canada thistle have been
recognized and the depth of the leaf lobes and degree of "spiny-ness" on
the leaves can vary with variety.
Biology
The key to Canada thistle management is understanding its biology.
Canada thistle spreads mainly by vegetative growth, although seeds
should always be kept from forming. The root system is extensive
growing horizontally as much as 18 feet and vertically 6 to 15 feet in a
season. Managers need to be aware that the root carbohydrates follow
an annual cycle. Reserves are lowest just before flowering which is
triggered by long days (14-16 hour days) in early summer. In fall, root
reserves begin to increase as shoot growth declines. By January, over-
wintering roots are developing new shoots and roots. These shoots form
rosettes when average weekly temperatures reach 41 degrees F (April to
May). The flush of root -derived shoots in spring and fall is typical but
can happen anytime during the growing season when moisture is
adequate.
Root buds will form shoots when the main stem or shoot is removed.
Until then, root buds remain inhibited by the presence of the main stem
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 6
th i"
'Rt
yl r` i '
tit:�f
C rltl
?sa .
✓
}' I
'y a
I Ir
11/..%.1:
pYiYJ}�jirlh
i �1 I'
i kY � i�f
y
t !
#i' jr9 ��y,>�`'
1 it
,Yr' "
It P�
111 1� k fd.�
h 1 f ern/
1 }4�
� `{
,y0 p
,
� ' L
�
'�
44. t ;.*
A
r< t,+,,
ii? � 3
y.
rJ�re
t- a
y'j�2 }�
9'si a
}
, by M Y ,R
. i+ Ikst :
ti}4 �. kYA
?A,....0,..04.4
i , „
1
,.
t It.
r1 `r ` t
ty.
Y'' fl F ,
iti i#1� R Yx.Y 6i' }r ,
F.,49 . x i 'A �# Jb T'r �1 � y y } k t dfd5L
ca `1 'qsl� <{1k,re
4.
ray+i` ri',5.
{ Leh ♦#i
R i ,.. ,'e�tJ P f' -.{i E�i ,y I
'�$i aft 3 r .� 4.r moi. r i
� ! 7, .+ 1 { r si#t
.iii 2k t9 !
I5 tl"'i44 jtta kl7+�)�S( ` y
R
�! i �71' Z+( 0 1 X 4
" 1rtM yG
'ill jyy , ail[ l { ,/ �r l 1 1 k �1'
mal 7th 9 . fi ° 4
�, r r , '� a .l " I i #� '
., ... ., ,,0 .• . , !
F
1 ,11
A�� )
4
14
y Y�j4
i..
f
)
L , -
....',7i7.
.E.
♦.�
Figure 2. Canada thistle -one of the infestations in the riparian area on the east
side of Four Mile Creek, Seaton Property.
Biology
The key to Canada thistle management is understanding its biology.
Canada thistle spreads mainly by vegetative growth, although seeds
should always be kept from forming. The root system is extensive
growing horizontally as much as 18 feet and vertically 6 to 15 feet in a
season. Managers need to be aware that the root carbohydrates follow
an annual cycle. Reserves are lowest just before flowering which is
triggered by long days (14-16 hour days) in early summer. In fall, root
reserves begin to increase as shoot growth declines. By January, over-
wintering roots are developing new shoots and roots. These shoots form
rosettes when average weekly temperatures reach 41 degrees F (April to
May). The flush of root -derived shoots in spring and fall is typical but
can happen anytime during the growing season when moisture is
adequate.
Root buds will form shoots when the main stem or shoot is removed.
Until then, root buds remain inhibited by the presence of the main stem
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 6
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
and leaves because of competition for water between the root bud and shoot. Root buds are quickly released and
new shoots emerge rapidly with main stem removal. Each meter of root averages 13 to 25 root buds, each capable
of forming a new shoot.
Canada thistle flowers from July to October and is almost exclusively insect pollinated. Female flowers produce
abundant nectar and a sweet odor described as vanilla -like. Flowers need only be open 8-10 days before seeds
mature enough to be able to germinate. A single plant produces on average 1500-5300 seeds. Seeds are not the
main mechanism for reproduction, but are considered important for long distance dispersal. Seed viability is related
to depth of burial in the soil. Seeds can remain viable for greater than 20 years with deep burial.
Non-native vs. Native Thistles
Canada thistle has long been recognized as an agricultural pest but only in the last decade or so has it been given
notable attention for its harmful impacts to natural ecosystems and native species. Estimates are in the tens of
millions of dollars for losses related to direct crop losses annually and additional millions are spent for control.
Unbeknownst to most land owners and managers, however, the majority of thistle species in the west are native,
and largely go unnoticed, fulfill natural ecological niches and are important members of natural, early successional
processes. Colorado has some 17 native species of thistle and Utah describes twenty four! But the introduced
native of southeastern Europe, Canada thistle, when looking strictly at numbers, is possibly the most widespread of
all thistle species at this point. The tenacious root systems are the reason this plant is able to effectively
outcompete our native and agricultural plants and pose such a problem.
Management of Canada thistle
Because of the root system stores, Canada thistle has an incredible capacity for recovery and a management plan
must be implemented over several years to typically achieve success. Priorities should be placed on killing
established clones and at the very least preventing their expansion. Emphasis should be put on preventing new
invasions in areas susceptible to new thistle establishment. It takes at least a couple growing seasons to determine
if a particular control method is going to be effective. Many studies have reported a decline in Canada thistle the
first year after treatment, followed by a return to previous densities the second growing season (Colorado State
Parks 2005). Follow up treatments are essential for success whereby the weed is continually stressed exhausting
nutrient stores in the root system which will eventually starve the plant.
Integrated Control: Most situations where Canada thistle has been effectively controlled have involved the use of
herbicides (see below). In situations where root growth is restricted (e.g. high water tables or compacted soils),
repeated mowing in addition to application of Milestone® (aminopyralid), Telar DF® (chlorsulfuron) or Redeem
R&P® (chlopyralid + 2,4-D) herbicides may improve control. Cattle, sheep and goats will graze on Canada thistle
when plants are very young and succulent and when the animals are concentrated on the infestation. This would
be followed by a fall herbicide application. On the Seaton Property this is not practical as much of the desirable
competition would also be negatively impacted and concentrating animals on disperse patches is impractical.
Using selective herbicides that work only on the thistle and leave much of the surrounding vegetation intact is most
desirable. Burning would not be practical in a subdivision situation.
Chemical Control: Milestone® (aminopyralid) is a relatively new and effective herbicide. In a backpack sprayer, the
rate to use is 1 teaspoon per gallon of water plus 1/3 ounce of non-ionic surfactant like Activator 90®. One of the better
times to apply Milestone@ is in the fall after the first light frost, but before a killing frost. The other recommended timing
is at pre -bud stage or early bud stage with the goal being that all plants have emerged. Rangestar® or Weedmaster®
(2,4-D and dicamba combined in one product) are also available. For use in a backpack sprayer, use 1 ounce of
Rangestar0 or Weedmaster® per gallon of water plus 1/3 ounce of non-ionic surfactant. Application timing is from
rosette to full bolt or bud stage and also in the fall after the first light frost, but before a killing frost.
Wet areas: In areas where the water table is close, a very targeted application of a systemic, less selective herbicide
such as Rodeo® (gyphosate) or a more selective herbicide such as Renovate 3® (triclopyr), with aquatically approved
2,4-D amine which can be used closer to water unlike many other herbicides, may be most effective. The Renovate 3®
and 2,4-D amine combination can be used in wetland areas and is effective when applied in the spring when Canada
thistle is in the pre -bud to early bud stages (about 10-15 inches tall). A mixture of Garton 3A® (triclopyr) at 2qts/acre
and aquatic 2,4-D at 1.5 qts/acre in mid -summer to fall is a possibility when the area is too close to water for the use of
Milestone®. Rodeo® can be applied after the reproductive stage with an aquatic surfactant. It is important to keep in
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 7
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
mind that an herbicide labeled for use near water is the only kind that can be used close to creeks, irrigation ditches
and in areas with high water tables. Caution is recommended with the use of Rodeo® as it will kill desirable competitive
vegetation as well, so very specific spot treating is imperative. Additionally, re-treating areas in the fall is needed to
prevent regrowth of plants.
Biological Controls: To date there is no single biological organism that controls Canada thistle, which is common.
Several agents have been reported to provide various degrees of very limited damage to individual plants but not to
populations. This may be reflective of the fact that Canada thistle is reported to have few or no natural enemies in its
native habitat where it is also a serious agricultural nuisance. More than 130 species, including diseases, insects, and
even birds utilize Canada thistle in its native range, but generally cause little damage as their densities are usually low.
At least 7 species have been either intentionally or unintentionally released for Canada thistle control in the U. S. but
none have been effective to date. For more information, contact the Palisade Insectary of the Colorado Department of
Agriculture at 970-464-7916.
Urophora cardui, a gall fly, has been reported to be available from the Division of Plant Industry's Biological Pest
Control Section but has had very limited efficacy to date. Ceutorhyncus Iitura (a weevil) and Cassidia rubignosa (a leaf
beetle) have also been available. A combination of biocontrol agents is thought to provide better control than any single
agent. A biocontrol applied with other methods, such as herbicides or properly timed mowing may be even more
effective. A combination of root- and shoot- feeding insects has been suggested to potentially be the best scenario, but
to date no root feeders are known to cause extensive damage to Canada thistle.
2. Common Burdock (Arctium minus)
A member of the Aster or Sunflower family
(Asteraceae), common burdock is an introduced
biennial plant that reproduces only by seeds. During
the first year of growth, the plant produces a rosette or
a cluster of closely crowded radiating leaves at the
ground level (see Figure 4). The second year the
plant sends up erect stems and flowers. The stem is
very rough, stout and grooved, grows up to 6 feet tall
and forms multiple branches. The heart shaped
leaves are whitish and woolly hairy beneath and soft
to the touch while darker green on top and smooth.
The flowers are purplish to white and in numerous
heads. Each flowering head is actually a group of
flowers forming a head enclosed in a prickly bur -like
structure called an involucre (see Figure 5). The
involucre is composed of little structures called bracts
that can be smooth to wooly with tips of hooked
spines. These spiny bracts are what catch in fur and
the clothes of unsuspecting animals and other visitors,
helping to dispense and spread the seeds.
Habitat and Biology
Figure 4. Common Burdock in rosette form.
This native of Eurasia can be found in this country growing along roadsides, ditch banks, in waste areas and
pastures. It appears to prefer riparian areas that have moist, fertile, often higher nitrogen laden soils. The bulk of
seed germination occurs in early spring. Following a year in rosette form, the second year flowering and seed
production occur from July to September. Seeds are mature by September and are shed continuously throughout
the fall, winter, and following spring. One plant typically produces between 6,000 and 16,000 seeds
Management of Common Burdock
Mechanical Control: Biennial species are relatively easy to mechanically control by simply digging the entire fleshy
tap root out during the plants first year in a rosette form. Common burdock does not reproduce by roots and is
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
8
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
limited to reproduction by seeds only. Mowing or cutting the plant can be used in the second year to eliminate seed
production. Mowing must occur after the plant has bolted but before it has flowered.
Chemical Control: Rangestar® or Weedmaster® (2,4-D and dicamba in one product) can be used at a rate of 1
ounce per gallon of water with a 1/3 ounce of non-ionic surfactant like Activator 90® when using a backpack sprayer.
These herbicides should be applied to first year rosettes, which can be found in spring or fall. Common burdock can
also be controlled with 2,4-D, picloram, dicamba, glyphosate, and aminopyralid or Milestone®,
Biological Control: None known. For more information, contact the Palisade Insectary of the Colorado Department of
Agriculture at 970-464-7916.
Integrated Control: As with all plants that reproduce solely by seed, management efforts must include elimination of
seed production and eventual depletion of the soil seed bank. Combining herbicide or tillage treatment of rosettes with
collection and removal of seed heads, thereby preventing dispersal of burs is a good management strategy.
Figure 5. Y inch long by 3/8 inch wide flowering
heads of common burdock.
Figure 7. Houndstongue rosette.
ll
7�I.Y
xi
1
i i. 1 A
s, e
y( 4
1 r
`e..4,
!'ori
is . 1- - t
- �1
1
I.
,
R/
4.., r q pit
r
s '+�a r
• lv 4"
1 I
�
At
I J� ♦C. Ar ��1¢?.
}•
0 L v{+fie`
'i 4,,,,, '',:
1.
54 •c -
"` '` -1. •
y .r 7 ., '^+A. { k E
,�+ 7
Figure 6. Common burdock —a late fall stalk with
"burs" on the Seaton Property. , , , I .:,,.
.,• l:A Ir. ..ids:..
3. Houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale)
This poisonous plant is present predominantly in the
riparian areas on the property. Houndstongue is a
member of the Boraginaceae Family and is listed as a
noxious, restricted, or prohibited weed in six states and
two Canadian provinces. A native of the mountains of
western Asia and Eastern Europe, it is thought to have
been introduced as a crop seed contaminant from
Europe. Toxic pyrroli-zidine alkaloids in Houndstongue
stop liver cells from reproducing and animals can live six
months even after ingesting a lethal dose. Unless it is
dried and mixed with hay, animals rarely eat it. Cows
and horses are more affected by houndstongue's toxicity
than sheep.
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
9
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
Biology
Houndstongue is considered a biennial or a short-lived perennial. Like many biennial plants, it has a taproot and the
Houndstongue taproot is thick, black and even branching and can reach 4 feet deep. It develops from a seedling to a
rosette the first year and typically the second year, produces a flowering stalk eight to forty inches high. Flowering
stems are sometimes produced later than two years if environmental conditions are stressful. Houndstongue
inflorescences have up to 35 dull red to burgundy or blue flowers each and are in the axils of the leaves or short
terminal branches. The leaves are said to resemble a hound's tongue and are soft due to numerous soft white hairs on
both surfaces. The leaves are simple, oblong shaped with smooth edges. Leaves are alternate, 1 to 12 inches long
and 1 to 4 inches wide. The tip of the leaf is sharply pointed but the leaf surfaces are soft. Leaves often appear dusty
and tattered or insect ridden. Houndstongue is poisonous to all grazing animals with little over 2 lbs being a fatal dose.
Reproduction is solely by seeds. Flowers form May to June and later individual plants can produce from 300-2,000
seeds. Most seeds fall close to the parent plant, but the seeds can travel large distances as they are armed with barbs
similar to Velcro. The hooked tips on the barbs cling to pant legs, animal fur, socks and machinery. Seed viability is 2
to 3 years. Soil disturbance provides ideal conditions for houndstongue seedling establishment. On Dutch coastal
dunes, Houndstongue only occurred where horses and cows were allowed to graze. It is also better adapted to wetter
sites, hence its propensity to favor the riparian area on the Seaton property.
Management of Houndstongue
Mechanical Control: When the plants are in the rosette stage,
removing the entire root crown while cutting or pulling the plants
is effective in killing the plant. Cut or mow to remove flowering
stems before seed nutlets develop and if they have already
developed, simply cutting them and placing them in a plastic bag
in the trash is preferable. To stimulate the germination of
desirable plants, removing the immediate litter layer (up to 4
inches) will help with the germination of native plants.
Chemical Control: When rosettes are present in the spring and
fall, using Rangestar® or Weedmaster® (2,4-D and dicamba
combined in one product) at a rate of 1 ounce per gallon of
water in a backpack sprayer is recommended. The use of a
surfactant is necessary with Rangestar® or Weedmaster® at a
rate of 1/3 ounce of non-ionic surfactant per gallon (such as
Activator 90(D).
Integrated Control: Using a combination of control strategies
may be a good strategy starting with maintaining a healthy
vegetation community and minimizing disturbances to soils.
This followed by measures to prevent seed production of
houndstongue and then herbicide applications as needed after
that is a good integrated program to slow the spread or even
eliminate houndstongue.
Biological Control: No biological controls have been approved
to date for use in Colorado. For more information, contact the Palisade Insectary of the Colorado Department of
Agriculture at 970-464-7916.
4. Oxeye Daisy (Chrysanthemum leucanthemum)
Oxeye daisy looks like a typical daisy and is a member of the Sunflower Family
(Asteraceae). It has smooth stems growing from 1 to 3 feet tall and often
branching at the top. The leaves are rather distinctive and very helpful in
identification. Leaf size is rather small, but progressively increases as you go
down the stem starting from the flowers at the top. Lower leaves are lance -
shaped with "toothed" margins and leaf stalks that may be as long as the
leaves. The upper leaves are alternately arranged and clasp the stem. The
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
Figure 9. Oxeye daisy flower
10
Y _y
6
Mw
_
al t U..
{
�
l
Figure
8. Houndstongue seeds stick like. Velcro.
Mechanical Control: When the plants are in the rosette stage,
removing the entire root crown while cutting or pulling the plants
is effective in killing the plant. Cut or mow to remove flowering
stems before seed nutlets develop and if they have already
developed, simply cutting them and placing them in a plastic bag
in the trash is preferable. To stimulate the germination of
desirable plants, removing the immediate litter layer (up to 4
inches) will help with the germination of native plants.
Chemical Control: When rosettes are present in the spring and
fall, using Rangestar® or Weedmaster® (2,4-D and dicamba
combined in one product) at a rate of 1 ounce per gallon of
water in a backpack sprayer is recommended. The use of a
surfactant is necessary with Rangestar® or Weedmaster® at a
rate of 1/3 ounce of non-ionic surfactant per gallon (such as
Activator 90(D).
Integrated Control: Using a combination of control strategies
may be a good strategy starting with maintaining a healthy
vegetation community and minimizing disturbances to soils.
This followed by measures to prevent seed production of
houndstongue and then herbicide applications as needed after
that is a good integrated program to slow the spread or even
eliminate houndstongue.
Biological Control: No biological controls have been approved
to date for use in Colorado. For more information, contact the Palisade Insectary of the Colorado Department of
Agriculture at 970-464-7916.
4. Oxeye Daisy (Chrysanthemum leucanthemum)
Oxeye daisy looks like a typical daisy and is a member of the Sunflower Family
(Asteraceae). It has smooth stems growing from 1 to 3 feet tall and often
branching at the top. The leaves are rather distinctive and very helpful in
identification. Leaf size is rather small, but progressively increases as you go
down the stem starting from the flowers at the top. Lower leaves are lance -
shaped with "toothed" margins and leaf stalks that may be as long as the
leaves. The upper leaves are alternately arranged and clasp the stem. The
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
Figure 9. Oxeye daisy flower
10
Seaton Subdivision
Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
plant has branched rhizomes and reproduces well just by the root system. A bluegrass lawn has a rhizomatous root
system. Oxeye daisy is a prolific seed producer whereby a healthy robust plant can produce up to 26,000 seeds.
Seeds may be viable ten days after the flower blossoms and have been known
to still be viable after almost 40 years.
Figure 10. Oxeye daisy leaves
along a smooth stem r E
Oxeye daisy is native to Europe and was introduced as an ornamental and as
an accidental contaminant in seed. Its spread in pastures is exacerbated as
most large herbivores avoid it. Because oxeye daisy is such a pretty, showy,
recognizable daisy, proper management is often neglected. Therefore
education and awareness are critical for future adequate management goals.
Management of Oxeye Daisy
Mechanical Control: Mowing can be used to reduce seed production for the
current growing season, but is ineffective in harming the plant and may in fact
stimulate shoot production and subsequent flowering, Oxeye daisy can be
mowed as soon as flowers appear to remove flowering heads and reduce some
seed production. The root systems are shallow and attempts can be made to
dig the roots and remove the plant. However, the entire root system needs to be
removed as remaining roots may produce new shoots. Hand digging for
removal will have to be diligently continued for several years and perhaps
several times in a season. Seeds also remain viable in the soils for many years
and new plants may emerge even after parent plants have long been removed.
Chemical Control: Escort XP®, Telar0, Milestone® or
Cimrnaron® are all labeled as effective on oxeye
daisy. With Cimarron, use 1/2 gram per gallon of water
or 1,3 grams per 3 gallons of water when using a
backpack sprayer and also be certain to add a
surfactant such as 1/3 ounce of non-ionic surfactant
per gallon like Activator 90®. For Escort XP and
Telar, rates are set at 1 ounce/acre plus 0.25% v/v
non-ionic surfactant. When using Milestone®, use at
a rate of 1 teaspoon per gallon of water or one
tablespoon per 3 gallons of water for a backpack
sprayer plus a surfactant. This rate should work out to
4-7 ounces per acre for Milestone®. Milestone®
should be applied at the prebud stage of
development.
Biological Controls: No biological controls have been
discovered for oxeye daisy.
Integrated Controls: A combination of trying to dig
plants and/or mow newly emerged flowering heads in
addition to herbicide applications may give better
results. Also, prevention of new infestations by
minimizing disturbance to plants and thereby soils and maintaining healthy plant communities is a part of any weed
control strategy. This allows existing desirable plants to remain robust and competitive. Strategic reseeding after any
ground is laid bare is also a key to preventing new weed invasions.
Figure 11. Oxeye daisy on the Seaton Property. Note
the shape of the leaves at the ground compared to the
stem leaves above in Figure 10.
State of Colorado Listed Noxious Weeds: Brief Species Accounts and Some Management
The State of Colorado has its seventy plus list of noxious weeds divided into an A, B, and C list. There are no List
A species on the Seaton Property, but if there were, these are high priority species in the state and they would be
designated for eradication. The goal for List B species is to stop their continued spread and if possible, do better
than that. Landowners are expected to either eradicate, contain, or suppress List B species. Typically List C
species are plants that are so prolific that requiring strict management is unrealistic, while any efforts towards
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
11
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
containment or management and education are encouraged. Individual counties create their own lists and sets of
priorities from the state list. The following weeds are on either the List B or List C state list, but are not currently on
the Garfield County weed list. Absinth wormwood will be one of the greater management challenges as it occurs in
very high numbers on the Seaton Property while the other weeds, besides Canada thistle, are less extensive. The
landowner should become familiar with these List B and C species and attempt to contain them or even eradicate
them, but certainly attempt to keep them from spreading any further.
5. Absinth Wormwood (Artemisia absinthium), List B
Absinth wormwood is somewhat similar in its shrub -like appearance to our ecologically important, native big
sagebrush species and consequently is commonly overlooked. Its leaves are similar sage, blue-green color and
the plant habit is comparable to our native big sages with heights reaching 16 to 48 inches. A distinguishing
characteristic is the lower leaves as they are divided 2-3 times into deeply lobed leaflets. In contrast, our native big
sagebrush has the characteristic simple leaves with (mostly) three very small lobes at their tips. Additionally,
absinth wormwood is an herbaceous species dying back to the root crown, meaning the ground, each fall and
regrowing from the soil level each spring. Our native sages are woody and have leaves that persist over the winter.
Figure 12. A leaf of the noxious weed absinth
wormwood.
Figure 13. Leaves of our NATIVE, mountain big
sagebrush.
Biology
Absinth wormwood is a prolific seed producer. This is its primary mode of reproduction and the small seeds are
easily scattered by wind, water and animals and spread in hay. Seeds are viable for approximately 3-4 years and
germinate under a wide range of temperatures between 41 and 104 degrees Fahrenheit. There is some evidence
that absinth wormwood can vegetatively reproduce. If plowed under it may regenerate from shallow lateral roots.
Flower stalks appear at the node of each upper leaf from late July through September on the Seaton Property.
Absinth wormwood is a member of the Asteraceae (Compositae) family and in the same genera as many of our
native sages.
History
The introduction of absinth wormwood to North America was deliberate and related to its potential uses (Mitich
1975). Seeds for the plant can, unfortunately, still be easily obtained over the internet. Absinth wormwood is a
native of Eurasia, the Middle East, and North Africa. It has been used medicinally to kill intestinal parasites, hence
the name "wormwood". The seeds can be used in distilling alcohol and the plant is the principal ingredient in the
liquor absinthe. Absinth sage is discussed as a cultivated plant in North America as soon as 1832 (Bridgeman
1832; Mitich 1975). It was reported as escaping cultivated gardens by 1841. The first herbarium specimen in North
Dakota was from 1910 and by 1973 a state inventory reported 40,000 acres in 42 of 53 counties. Absinth was
designated as a noxious weed in North Dakota by 1971. In 63 years absinth went from a rarely seen plant to one
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 12
Seaton Subdivision vegetation and Wildlife
November 2009
designated as a noxious weed and present in the majority of the state of North Dakota. This plants potential for
spread is extreme as it can out compete grasses and other desirable plants creating a problem in native plant
communities, pastures and fields.
Management of absinth wormwood
Mechanical Control: Mowing is reported to be potentially
effective in reducing seed production of absinth wormwood.
However seed production can still occur on the low horizontal
branches growing from the base of the plant. Growth habit has
been reported to change and continue along the ground where
flowering and seed set will still occur. Repeated mowings are
occurring on the Seaton Property in some areas with absinth
wormwood and the plants appear to simply stay low to the
ground, but persist (Figure 14). No reported formal study has
been done on the long term effects of mowing. Hand digging
plants when the soil is moist and making certain to pull all the
roots, including horizontal short roots, may be possible.
Specimens must be carefully bagged so as not to spread seeds
if plants are removed during or after flowering. In the case of
large areas being cleared, seeding afterward to provide
desirable competition is necessary.
Chemical Control: When using a backpack sprayer,
Milestone® at a rate of 1 teaspoon per gallon of water or one
tablespoon per 3 gallons of water plus the addition of a non-
ionic surfactant like Activator 90® is recommended by Garfield
County. Rangestar® or Weedmaster® (2,4-D and dicamba
combined in one product) at a rate of 1 ounce per gallon of
water plus surfactant as above is also effective for backpack
spraying, according to Garfield County (Steve Anthony, personal comm. 2009). The recommended timing for
spraying plants is about the 12 inch growth stage. Other herbicides are also available and effective such as
Tordon® (picloram), but Tordon® is a restricted use herbicide and
cannot be used near trees, shrubs or water, making it problematic
here.
Figure 14. Mature absinth in late summer,
about 3 feet tail
Figure 15. Flowers of absinth wormwood in
mid-August.
Integrated Control: The best success in controlling absinth
wormwood is probably by using a combination of methods listed
here such as mechanical and chemical with the important goal of
not allowing any seed production at the very least and then
attempting to get rid of the parent plants.
Burning: Burning is probably not an option on the Seaton
Property as it is very close to neighboring homes. The growth
habit of the plant suggests it may be knocked back by burning
with the potential to resprout depending on temperatures of the
fire and the injury to the root crown. Burning may not be effective
anyway.
Biological Control: No biological control is available at this time.
Since biological control agents take years to research and finally
release, no releases are expected in the near future.
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 13
Seaton Subdivision
Vegetation and Wildlife
November 2009
Figure 16. Absinth wormwood near the bridge and at the
edge of the lawn (clipboard is for size comparison).
rF;r
it i
bk •
+�yY
R'
�",.V1�K
,
.!
`
L
.41:-C..<4.. I
T . gf
1. u1I'
Figure 18. Absinth wormwood recovery after mowing.
Figure 19. Absinth are the pale tan shrubs (Oct.).
Figure 17. Absinth wormwood (after mowing)
are the sage green plants in contrast to the
grass.
Figure 20. Late fall plants that have not been
mowed. Absinth will die to the ground for winter.
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
14
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
6. Bull Thistle (Cirsium vulgare), List B
Bull thistle is an accidentally introduced biennial, living only two years, which can reach 2-5 feet tall in its second
year. The first year the plants are in rosette form closer to the ground and the second year they bolt, flower and set
seeds ending their life cycle. The flowers are showy, pinkish to dark purple and 1 and 1/2 to 2 inches in diameter. A
readily noticeable characteristic of Bull thistle is the thick and prickly hairiness on top of the leaves and cottony -
hairy layer on the undersides. Flower size, bract appearance and leaf surfaces can help distinguish bull thistle from
other thistles which can appear quite similar. Bull thistle is a relatively shallow tap -rooted plant that reproduces only
from seed. Preventing flowering and seed production is one of the first steps to take in stopping the spread of bull
thistle or any biennial noxious weed.
Bull thistle grows in dry to moist sunny habitats and is known to thrive on nitrogen rich soils and do fine on gravelly
to clay -textured soils. Disturbed areas, dear cuts or overgrazed pastures are ideal habitats for bull thistle.
Maintaining healthy plant communities and pastures and minimizing sail disturbances will help keep bull thistle out.
Management of Bull Thistle
Mechanical Control: Severing the taproot just below the root crown before the plant sets seed will eliminate the
current year's seed production, and if continued annually, eliminate an infestation. The best time to cut the root
crown (1 or 2 inches below the top of the root crown) is when most of the plants have bolted, but before a
significant number have flowered (FEIS 1996). Revisiting the plants a month after the first root cutting attempt will
eliminate any late bolting plants and improve the effectiveness of the manual control efforts.
Chemical Control: If good growing conditions exist,
apply Milestone® (aminopyralid), Transline® or
Stinger® (clopyralid), Curtail (clopyralid + 2,4-D), or
Banvel®, Vanquish®, or Clarity® (dicamba) to rosettes
in the spring or fall. Also available to apply to rosettes
in the spring is Rangestar® (2,4-D +dicamba).
Milestone® can also be effective when plants are at the
late bolt through early flowering, but 2,4-D should be
tank mixed with Milestone® if plants are at the late bud
stages. Tear (chlorsulfuron) and Escort XP®
(metasulfuron) mixed with a non-ionic surfactant are also
effective and applications should be from spring bolting to
flower bud stages. Tordon 22K® (picloram) is another
available herbicide but it is a restricted use chemical and
not very helpful on this property as it also kills shrubs and
trees. For herbicide rates and more information contact
the Garfield County Vegetation Manager and look up
current fact sheets on the internet.
Integrated Control: Guarding against disturbance or
overuse and maintaining healthy native plant
communities or pastures are good preventive measures
against bull thistle. Since bull thistle spreads only by
seed, the key to control is preventing seed production.
If an infestation is too large to handle by digging root
crowns alone, another strategy is to apply appropriate
herbicides in early spring to rosettes (May, June) and
then mow any plants after they have still managed to
bolt but before flowering (possibly late June to July). A
second mowing or cutting is suggested a month later to
pick up any late bolting plants. Combining reseeding
immediately after an herbicide application can also be effective
desirable plant competition as soon as possible.
Figure 21. Bull thistle in flower. Green, bristly bracts
are located below the showy purple flowers.
because it is highly desirable to attempt to provide
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
15
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
Biological Control: The fly predator, Urophora stylata, has been used to help control this thistle. However, a large
enough infestation of the plants is always necessary to sustain any biological controls. The female fly lays eggs in
the seed head of the bull thistle and the emerging maggot then consumes the seeds in the flowering heads.
Biological controls never eradicate a population, but can be helpful in containing and minimizing an infestation,
especially larger infestations that are difficult to access. Care must be taken in using other methods of control if a
biological control is added so as not to interfere with its presence. For more information, contact the Palisade
Insectary of the Colorado Department of Agriculture at 970-464-7916.
7. Common Mullein (Verbascum thapsis) List C
Once a population of this wooly leaved plant gets established it can be extremely difficult to eradicate. Also known
as wooly mullein, this prolific seed producer can overtake a disturbed site very quickly. It adapts readily to a wide
variety of site conditions.
•L
y1d,�+°s
1
y3{¢'t`
^,ir
SFr��"[
jaf it
�, % 1[�
i Ft 1
t .,ppsnr
'^ •,..-
1 epF� s#
�tg�'
,,,.,. -p
MY .
�, F4.
wgg"
~phi
r
F
11
t��"
o
x
��\
F
t `"'i
irk
l
4y7
f r# Z
r
�ir
1
"'%iifffzzz'
�
4i!br
IFS ti ::#.
�y rc,
�.I KJ rl�
p µSF%},�%Yyv
q�lf,�tj
t
1 Z
�5
' k: q,
'`'
4 .F,
s
r
_s.
t •I.`t
de
jp'•'r�`,"..
�
i\
"
S...f,
f
d
•
tw
+° rT{
a � .... 7•
1 ,w �S'Ff^1�
�;',iY+�t' f4ry.4'b7
}4',1
iIq.5•,yl,
y yifk
r �
a; ,i
`, ' r
g
L "' c i
s %$Mr
1, I f• iYM�I.
!-
r.,Ara
'�� I
r J° ! Yl
,,• i r�
r
r �fl�e1
1}' r- +C
Jif , r
dl I
, f y�!•
' 7
r ,G
a
1 'C 1
I
,
I
r;
R
M .
is,:
�.'
f.
i.
l
,
rye
i '!
o0;. f
1.i.
1.
,
Figure 22. Common mullein in flower.
On the Seaton property, there are very few
plants, but new soil disturbances will also favor
the spread of this native of Europe. This plant
was brought over by settlers to use as a
medicinal herb. Because there are very few
plants, a more cursory overview of this weed is
provided.
Common mullein is a monocarpic perennial
meaning it takes two or more years to set its
yellow flowers and die. The first year mullein
produces a tap root and a rosette of its felt -like
leaves. If conditions are right, the second year
plants bolt into maturity, flower, produce seed
and then die. Flowers closer to the base of the
stalk mature first sequentially followed by those
further up the stalk. Longer stalks increase the
blooming period and can continue to flower into
October. Most notable, a single plant can
produce 100,000-180,000 seeds that can
remain viable for more than 100 years. Seeds
tend to drop close to the parent plant during
autumn and winter.
Management
Bare soils are necessary for common mullein
seedling emergence. This is important
information for creating management
strategies. The rapid reduction of bare ground
through colonization by other plants has been
effective in decreasing infestations. Overall,
annual removal of plants before flowering, the
establishment of a dense vegetative cover, and minimizing the availability of bare soil are probably adequate to
control mullein, although additional strategies are presented below.
Mechanical Control: Common mullein has a relatively shallow taproot allowing for relative ease in mechanically
removing or even hand pulling the plant especially in loose soils. This method is extremely effective in reducing
populations and seed production where practical. If blooms and seeds are present, the reproductive structures
should be carefully removed and bagged for proper disposal in a sanitary landfill. Of utmost importance, is keeping
soil disturbances during these activities to a minimum since loose, bare soil facilitates mullein seed germination.
Chemical Control: Where hand pulling is not safe or practical or would cause significant soil disturbance, herbicide
control is an effective option. Apply Escort® (metasulfuron) at a rate of 1 az/acre early in the growing season (April
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 16
Seaton Subdivision vegetation and Wildlife
November 2009
or May) with a surfactant that is a mixture of both a non-
ionic surfactant and a silicone surfactant. The
surfactant is necessary for help in penetrating the thick
layer of surface hairs on common mullein leaves. Also a
2% solution of glyphosate (e.g. Roundup®) or Garlone
(triclopyr) and water plus a non-ionic surfactant, using a
tank or backpack sprayer to thoroughly cover all leaves
has also been found to be successful (Johnson 2005).
Use caution as Roundup® (glyphosate) is a non-
selective herbicide that may kill desirable plants even if
they are partially sprayed. If native or other desirable
grasses are present, Garlon0 (triclopyr) is selective to
broadleaf plants and is a better choice than Roundup®.
Using Roundup® (glyphosate) in early spring
applications is recommended as most other non -target
vegetation may be dormant and less susceptible to
accidental herbicide contact. Milestone® (aminopyralid)
at a rate of 7 fluid ounces per acre applied in the rosette
stage with the use of a surfactant is another choice for
control.
Biological Control: There are insects that have possible
biological control implications for common mullein.
Because the population is so limited on the Seaton
property, it is probable that biological controls will not be
very effective. The use of mechanical and/or chemical
strategies make more sense with such a small
infestation. For more information regarding the
European curculionid weevil (Gymnaetron tetrum) or the
mullein moth (Cucullia verbascr), contact the Palisade
Insectary of the Colorado Department of Agriculture at 970-464-7916.
Figure 23. Common mullein on the Seaton property
8. Common Tansy (Tanacetum vulgare) List B
This weed is scattered in low densities mainly along Fourmile Creek on the Seaton property. There is a larger
patch near Chelyn Road in the riparian corridor.
This yellow member of the Asteraceae or
Sunflower Family was originally introduced to
North America for use in folk remedies and as
an ornamental plant. The mature common
tansy plants are easily recognized by the flat-
topped, button -like yellow clusters of flowers
they produce in the summer. Leaves are finely
divided into leaflets giving the rosettes a fern-
like appearance.
Common tansy emits a very strong odor when
crushed. It has a long history of medicinal use
but has now become a potential threat to the
ecological health of areas it is invading.
Common tansy spreads mainly by seeds, and
less often from creeping rhizomes to form
dense clumps. The plants contain alkaloids that
are toxic to humans and livestock in large
doses. Plants are unpalatable to livestock and
wildlife and therefore increase in overgrazed
areas as reduction in desirable species allows
Figure 24. Common tansy (yellow flowers) on the bottom left
of photo on the Seaton property off Chelyn Road .
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
17
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
for the spread of common tansy. It appears to be most aggressive in its spread in areas with greater moisture
availability and nutrient rich soils such as along irrigation ditches and in riparian areas like that of the Seaton
property.
Management
Mechanical Control: On the Seaton property, the key to effective control of common tansy is to stop the plants
spread and seed production. Hand digging, pulling or cutting before plants go to seed will assist with limiting seed
production and set plants back, but will not eradicate the existing plants. Doing this diligently over several years
may, however, give good results. Part of the control strategies for controlling rhizomatous plants is to deplete the
storage of carbohydrates within the root system. This is tricky with a plant like common tansy since it can
regenerate from root fragments. Either hand pulling, mowing, or digging should be done during the bud stage as
this is reported to prevent the growth of flowering stalks (LeCain and Sheley 2002), at least for that year. Common
tansy is considered toxic so use of protective equipment, especially gloves, is highly recommended when
mechanically controlling the plant. Revegetating or
seeding after any extensive soil disturbances is
important for providing competition to any other non-
desirable plants that may move in including common
tansy.
Figure 25. Common tansy in flower,
mentioned above.
Biological Control: None are available.
Chemical Control: Because common tansy is a plant
that spreads through rhizomes, or underground
stems that root at the nodes and send up new
shoots, herbicides can be an effective choice.
Escort KP® (metasulfuron) is reported to give
effective control at very low rates. However it is
limited to areas where ground water contamination is
not an issue and the water table is not less than 20
feet, which poses a problem in the riparian area of
the Seaton property where the majority of the plants
are found. The recommended timing for applying
Escort XP® is when plants are in bolting to bud
growth stages, or in late spring to mid -summer. Use
1 oz. of Escort XP® per acre plus a 0.25% v/v of non-
ionic surfactant, a rate based on equipment with an
output of 30 gallons per acre. Glyphosate (Rodeo®)
and 2,4-D are alternative herbicides for use near
water but are apparently not very effective on
common tansy. As always, contact the Garfield
County Vegetation Manager and/or an experienced,
licensed herbicide applicator as well as the herbicide
labels for assistance.
Integrated Control: Use a combination of
mechanical, chemical and cultural controls
I USE HERBCIDES WISELY: Always read the entire herbicide label carefully, follow all mixing and application
instructions and wear all recommended personal protective gear and clothing. Contact your county or state
department of agriculture or herbicide professional for any herbicide use requirements, restrictions or
recommendations.
NOTICE: mention of herbicide products in this document does not constitute endorsement of any material.
em ecological, LLC P.Q. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
18
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife
November 2009
9. Cheatgrass or Downy brome (Bromus tectorum, Syn. Anisantha tectorum), List C
Cheatgrass is a noxious annual weed plaguing many land managers across the more arid ecosystems of the
western U. S., Canada and northern Mexico. Here in the Roaring Fork Valley, cheatgrass has made large inroads
in the last ten years (pers. obs.). The habitats with the most infamous infestations, the shrub -steppe communities,
have ecological similarities to those on the western Seaton property parcel, above the existing house looking up the
hillsides. On the eastern side of the property split, the focus of this document, there are small patches of
cheatgrass, mostly in the area of the drier open meadows. Cheatgrass is something to keep careful watch over in
the event of any future disturbances to soils (such as construction projects). Proper and timely seeding and/or
revegetation of disturbed soils are some of the keys to preventing cheatgrass invasions.
Cheatgrass is an annual or winter annual and a
member of the Grass Family (Poaceae). The
slender stems, hairy leaves and very long -awned
spikelets on twisted branches help to distinguish
Bromus tectorum (see Figure 26) from other
similar annual (B. japonicus, B. secalinus) and
perennial (B. inermis) Bromus species. Also,
cheatgrass matures 1 to 2 weeks earlier than other
annual bromes and many other species in general
(MSU Extension Weed Management 2001). In our
area, the majority of cheatgrass seeds germinate in
the early fall with the first good rains. Plants then
resume growth the following spring and depending
on conditions, can reach 2 inches to 1 1/ feet tall
during their single -season life cycle. Plants are
very green and soft in early spring, a condition
quickly forgotten when plants become purple then
brown, dry out and become a true nuisance when
walking through. The flowers are grass -like in what
is called a panicle arrangement with each spikelet
consisting of 5 to 8 florets which later contain the
seeds. These nodding panicles are very distinctive
as are their moderately awned spikelets. The
spikelets are what are the annoying feature of the
plant when it is mature as they penetrate socks,
pants, fur, even soft mouth tissue, and the seeds
are therefore widely dispersed.
Biology of Cheatgrass
Cheatgrass or downy brome is a prolific seed
producer. Even in extremely dry conditions, cheat
grass will produce viable seeds even though it may only reach 1-2 inches in height. The plants are mostly self -
pollinated and seeds can germinate very soon after they mature. Viable seeds exist even before the plant turns its
characteristic purple color on the fruits. After the first fall rain in infested areas, cheatgrass seeds can germinate
quickly and at very high rates, as high as 95%. The fall germinated seedlings grow little and over -winter in a semi -
dormant state, completing their lifecycle the next spring. Roots reportedly can grow in almost freezing soil
temperatures and continue to grow throughout the winter until soils drop to less than 37 degrees F. Plants head
out in late April to early May and seeds mature in June (CNAP 2000), ready to start the cycle all over again in the
fall. If conditions are dry, environmentally induced dormancy can occur in seeds, last several years and break
down at erratic intervals allowing seeds to remain in the soil bank for extensive periods.
Figure 26. Downy brome or cheatgrass.
One of the principal ways cheatgrass successfully competes with desirable, perennial grasses, especially
seedlings, is through early, soil moisture depletion. Additionally, thick mulch in dense cheatgrass stands favors
downy brome seedling establishment and inhibits germination of perennial bunchgrasses (CNAP 2000). Cover of
lichens and mosses on the surface is also inhibited by thick mulch and results in less competition for resources for
cheatgrass seedlings.
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 19
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
The seeds of cheatgrass are so ubiquitous that the potential for invasion is almost unlimited. Populations of
cheatgrass are genetically very similar but highly plastic which allows them to thrive in an extensive array of site
conditions. It is found in salt desert shrub communities with 6 inches of average annual precipitation to high
elevation conifer forests with greater than 25 inches precipitation per year. One of the most critical points of
expansion is when populations of cheatgrass become so vast that they then influence the wildfire regime, such as
rapidly accelerating the fire return intervals on huge acreages.
Management of Cheatgrass
Mechanical Control: Mowing or cutting plants is not really recommended. Cheatgrass cut before seeds ripen will
produce new stems and seeds at the height of the cut. Repeated rnowings may be more successful and one study
showed mowing every three weeks provided some control (Ponzetti 1997). This was very labor intensive. If plants
are cut after the seeds ripen, they will die but by this time seeds are already viable and any accidental spreading of
seeds is a possibility.
Hand pulling would eliminate the seed production and could be used in small infestations, but it would not eliminate
the population. Seeds would still be left in the seedbank. The pulling program would have to continue diligently for
several years or until the seed bank was exhausted. Care must be taken in being certain to get all of the roots so
the plant cannot simply regrow and produce new seeds.
Some of the literature states that cheatgrass has been considered a valuable forage in the spring (Emmerich et al.
1993, Weld County Fact Sheet 2009). However, grazing is not a recommended method of control for cheatgrass
(Carpenter and Murray 1998). If the plants are grazed in the spring, they will grow new stems and produce seeds.
When grazed in the summer or fall the plants will not regenerate, but by then viable seeds have already been
produced. Therefore seed production is not curtailed. Also, the long awns of the seeds on the mature plants may
damage the mouths and intestinal tracts of the livestock and any other unsuspecting animals.
Chemical Control: In our area, the best success with herbicides has
been from fall applications (Steve Anthony, Garfield County
Vegetation Manager, pers. comm. 2007). Spring applications are
another method as many non -target species are still dormant, the
best scenario for herbicide application. There are numerous types of
herbicides described in the literature that can be used alone or
combined to provide effective control of cheatgrass. For best results,
contact the Garfield County Vegetation Manager for the latest results
from current research and test plots. A backpack sprayer is good for
small infestations like the ones on the Seaton property as danger to
non -target plants is minimized.
Of the myriad of herbicides available, three are mentioned here.
Plateau@ (imazapic) is recommended at a rate of 4 to 6 ounces per
acre. The addition of a methylated seed oil surfactant (MSO) at 0.32
ozlgal of water is necessary. Optimal results locally with Plateau®
have occurred from fall applications after a light freeze, but prior to a
hard frost (Steve Anthony, pers. comm.). If applying during very early
spring growth, applications are best while other desirable plants are
Y
iv
1i'
1.{ 1 "
�r��'a(:�F
I '
l
-'
I,,
�
r
i
t J
f �
}}
k
y it , { {� ♦l, y ,.
A � ' rl, i+
y r i� :�1,1
f t4 ",',ua521oo25
L.J.MelUhDfr, U or4`{
;ir•
13, a CLor
7x
hopefully still dormant. Panoramic 2SL® (imazapic) at a rate of 6-12 oz/acre is to be applied as a pre- or post
emergent in late summer or early fall. Again, the additional use of a MSO surfactant at 0.32 ozlgal of water or 1
qt/100 gallons of water is necessary. The 12 oz rate of either Plateau@ or Panoramic 2SL@ can cause injury to
some cool season grasses, but both can safely be used under trees.
Roundup Ultra@ (glyphosate), a non-selective herbicide can be used for deliberate targeted spot spraying of
cheatgrass. Good results have been occurred with use of Roundup Ultra® as a post emergent just after the
cheatgrass has sprouted from seed. In a backpack, the rate is 4-5 oz/gal of water and for larger applications, the
rate is 4-5 qts/acre. Add a non-ionic surfactant at a rate of 0.32 ozlgal of water for a backpack or hand sprayer and
use 1 qt/100 gallons of water for larger applications. Since Roundup Ultra@ is a non-selective herbicide, caution
must be exercised as it will kill most surrounding vegetation greatly needed to compete with the cheatgrass.
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
20
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
Biological. Control: None known to date.
Garfield County Past Cost -Share Program for Cheatgrass.
The occurrence of cheatgrass on the Seaton property is very minimal. However, there is a cost share program that
has been offered by Garfield County in recent years. The herbicide Plateau® has also been available in smaller
amounts and at a reduced rate as well. Financial assistance may again be available for 2010. Contact Garfield
County Vegetation Manager Steve Anthony for further details at (970)625-3969 and check on the county website
for details.
10. Poison Hemlock (Conium maculatum), List C
Poison hemlock, a member of the Parsley Family, was not
found to be very prolific, but there were some plants down in
the riparian area of the Seaton parcel. Also, because of the
late time of year, other plants may have been overlooked.
This is a very poisonous plant from Europe with all parts of the
plant exhibiting toxicity. It is commonly found along streams,
ditch banks and pasture borders similar to the areas on the
Seaton property. It seems to do very well in areas with extra
moisture available, although that is not imperative. Poison
hemlock is a biennial forb. Leaves are found at the ground
level the first year that look very similar to carrot tops, a
mistaken identity resulting in a surprising number of accidental
deaths. The second year a white umbrella -like cluster of white
flowers forms between April and July and the plant can reach 6
to 10 feet high. The leaves are shiny, green and finely divided,
like parsley or carrot leaves, with a musty odor (don't get too
close or handle the plant!). Purple spots cover the smooth and
hollow stems, other helpful identifying characteristics.
Poison hemlock reproduces strictly from seeds, which are also
the most toxic part of the plant (Pitcher 1989). Seeds can be
carried by animal fur, mud, clothing, water, wind, vehicles,
farm machinery, and other means and may remain viable for
up to three years.
Management of Poison Hemlock
Mechanical Control: While mechanical control of poison
hemlock is relatively easy, great care should be taken to keep
from being exposed to the plants, especially after cutting or
chopping them. Also dug plants should be responsibly disposed of as they remain poisonous for several years and
it is unwise to leave dead plants where they might be eaten by wildlife or children (Pitcher 1989). Hand pulling
works best when soils are wet and when working on small infestations. Seeds may still remain in the soil and
pulling will probably have to be repeated for several years. Once much of the root is pulled, the plant is killed,
making this a potentially practical technique.
Figure 28. Poison hemlock in flower.
Chemical Control: Several herbicides are effective in controlling poison hemlock. Roundup® or Rodeo®
(glyphosate) is effective on newly emerged sprouts, but care must be taken as it is a non-selective herbicide and
can harm desirable surrounding vegetation. In early spring, the most effective post -emergent herbicides are
phenoxy herbicides such as 2,4-D (amine and ester formulations), 2,4D -B and MCPA (all at 1.0 to 2.0 Ib active
ingredient per acre). A wetting agent should be combined with 2,4-D when applied. In the amine form it can be
applied up to the water's edge, but without direct contact to the water). The Rodeo® formulation of glyphosate can
be applied with direct contact to water (Pokorny and Sheley 2000). Chemical control or poison hemlock may
require repeat applications to deplete the soil seedbank. Once poison hemlock is gone, it is important to implement
proper management techniques to promote the growth of desired species and reduce the risk of reinfestation, as
with any noxious weed.
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
21
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife
November 2009
Biological Control: The hemlock moth or the European
palearctic moth (Agonopterix atstroemeriana) is widely
dispersed. It is unknown how the moth was introduced to
the United States, but its only known host in Europe and the
U.S. at this time is poison hemlock. The larvae feed on the
foliage, buds, immature seeds, sterns, and flowers in spring
and early summer. Several hundred larvae can defoliate
most of a poison hemlock plant. However, these moths
appear to have difficulty reproducing from year to year at
higher altitudes (Crystal Yates -White, pers. comm.). For
further information regarding the hemlock moth contact the
Palisade Insectary of the Colorado Department of
Agriculture at 970-464-7916.
Integrated Control: Few integrated programs have been
implemented and are therefore largely unknown. However,
as with most weed infestations, integration of techniques
such as biological control and herbicides may be more
effective because the plant is being attacked in more than
one site. Timely broadcast seeding with native plants on any bare soils after manual or chemical control to
increase competitive pressure may be another helpful action.
ri--1 "r1,,;'(\r,. j —•! 1t fit\
1 ,- II
` • r1 JCC 1„y T
F t r i.
f k �- r' 1 ITI
' , a I ar tr •f ,'
l�1 ..I r,! '�
-_.)'`Nit t. ` ; ifi i
i JI / i +A pp t Y, -�i 1.
{I.
yt'
1 _
4,71
Figure 29. First year poison hemlock on the
Seaton Property.
Crownvetch (Securigera varia, syn. Coronilla varia)
Crownvetch is not a Colorado state listed noxious weed, but it has impressive tendencies to be very aggressive and
choke out all other vegetation in its path. It is listed as a noxious weed in other states and can be found on the
internet on several sites with lengthy discussions and strategies of how to attempt to get rid of it. There is an
impressively thick area of crownvetch on the south side of Fourmile Creek and just off Chelyn Road in the riparian
area of the Seaton property (see Map 1 for the mapped location of this site). It is highly recommended that this
vine -like plant be controlled or even removed from the property. Crownvetch is capable of growing over all
vegetation and suffocating any competition in this location where it is growing. This is probably largely due to the
availability of more than adequate soil moisture because of its proximity to Fourmile Creek. Removing the
crownvetch and replanting the area with native seeds or plants would be a better scenario and more supportive of
the local flora and fauna. The possibility of this plant continuing to spread is motivation enough to contain it.
i �, r. c�`iS -•y,�'rly y9' !^`,'�.''II . ,
Jo, to ,t , w� •; .. 4 ii , Y4 ..0 r' Fr:.
Figure 30. Crownvetch on the Seaton property just off Chelyn Road and east of Fourmile Creek. Note the
ability for this vine to completely cover any other ground vegetation. Clipboard is for size perspective.
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 22
Seaton Subdivision
Vegetation and Wildlife
November 2009
Figure 31. Close-up of the flower clusters and pinnately divided leaves of crownvetch (Securigera varia, syn.
Coronilla varia), a very aggressive, vine -like plant from Europe that may be best eliminating.
General Comments for all weeds on the property and a seed mix recommendation
The reality is that there are no silver bullets to weed control and "occasional" weed management rarely provides
long-term success. The key to success is found in developing an integrated weed management or IWM program.
1WM includes many facets of good land management. These include implementation of good landscape and
pasture management strategies, inventory to know what weeds are present and where they are located, prevention
of new weed introductions, early detection and rapid response to new infestations, containment of existing weed
problems, large scale control where possible, and revegetation if necessary. For success, these components
require assessment, flexibility, and potential adjustment over time (Dewey, Steven A. et al 2007.),
As has already been stressed, the most effective method of managing weeds is to prevent their spread and
subsequent establishment, One effective strategy for construction sites is pressure washing of all heavy
equipment prior to leaving the site and requiring any equipment arriving to have been cleaned prior. These activities
are very effective in stopping the spread of any noxious or aggressive unwanted weeds. Many weeds have been
spread by the soils caked on heavy equipment moving from site to site. Additionally, fencing the periphery of your
area of disturbance greatly reduces the chances of heavy equipment operators disturbing more soils outside of
your construction zone. Wherever possible, great care should be used to keep soil disturbances, especially
shallow disturbances on the periphery of project sites, to an absolute minimum. Proper and thoughtful handling of
weed infested soils from the site will greatly improve prospects for future weed infestations. Aggressive and timely
revegetation of disturbed soils after construction is helpful in providing competition and closing weed infestation
opportunities on soils laid bare due to project activities.
The recommended species mix for reseeding would include: slender wheatgrass (Elymus trachycaulus),
bluebunch wheatgrass (Agropyron spicatum, syn. Pseudoroegneria spicata), western wheatgrass (Pascopyrum
smithlr), Indian ricegrass (Oryzopsis hymenoides), green needlegrass (Stipa viridula), Idaho fescue (Festuca
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 23
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
idahoensis), needle and thread grass (Stipa comata, Hesperostipa comata) and Sandberg bluegrass (Poa
secunda, syn. Poa sandbergii) all readily available from several sources within Colorado.
Any soils or fill materials brought in from outside the property should be avoided unless the seller can guarantee
weed free materials. Any soils transported off the property should be avoided from areas where weeds now reside.
IWM Treatment Methods and the limitations of this document. It is the intent of this document to list some of
the more apparent noxious weed problems on the Seaton property and to report some of the facts and methods
currently used and discussed in the weed literature and given by professional weed managers. The information
here is not meant to be complete, but to be used as an initial reference and starting point and treated as an
evolving, growing document, one that is to change with the changes in available science as well as the changes in
herbicide labeling. In regards to herbicides, herbicide use must be consistent with the herbicide label information.
The herbicide label is the LAW. It is a legal, binding document and all uses of an herbicide must be done in a
manner consistent with the most current label to avoid any unwanted or injurious circumstances. Before using any
herbicide product, thoroughly read the entire label and follow all label directions. Complete labels and MSDS
information for the products listed in this document can be viewed on the web at: http://www.greenbook.net
Follow chemical recommendations with the understanding that no discrimination or endorsement is intended or
implied for any particular product by E.M. Ecological, LLC and that information may have changed. Other
herbicides are available in addition to the ones mentioned within this document and newer products are being
developed and may be better suited to your situation than any products listed in this document. The changes in
herbicide labels and registrations occur constantly. Read and follow the latest label directions carefully. Trade
names are given only to give the reader that much more information for potentially recognizing an herbicide.
Before embarking on a y application of herbicides contact the Garfield County Vegetation Manager at 970-625-
3969 and/or a weed professional with excellent plant identification skills and an herbicide applicators license. Also
taking time to refer to the Colorado Department of Agriculture website and the information given on individual listed
noxious weeds, especially regarding herbicide recommendations, is another important step to take before
embarking on weed control efforts. http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/Agriculture-Main/CDAG/1174084048733
or just Google "Colorado State Weed List".
Biological Controls- Release of biological controls into natural environments is always experimental and should
be entered into only after full and careful consideration of potential non -target species impacts. Once released into
nature, biological control agents are difficult if not impossible to control.
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 24
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
Wildlife
The proposed split of the Seaton property creating a lot with a buildable site adjacent to Four Mile Road is
discussed here with regards to potential impacts mostly to elk and deer. The placement of the lot and subsequent
building envelope will not affect the elk and deer in the area much more than they have already been impacted by
the surrounding subdivision and adjacent development. Because the building envelope location is up out of the
riparian corridor and flanking Four Mile Road, it is precisely this placement that minimizes impacts and groups the
potential new residence in with existing impacts, like Four Mile Road itself and nearby houses across the road and
across the creek in the other direction. While there is still an impressive array of wildlife in this area because of its
setting near large areas of intact, native, plant communities and refugia, like the shrubs and trees along the creek
and the nearby shrub covered hillsides and varied mountainous terrain, and understanding any development has a
level of impact to wildlife here, due to this parcel's placement impacts are highly minimized. Impacts are really
grouped in with existing wildlife impacts and therefore not highly additive. If noxious weed control and careful
stewardship of the property, especially the riparian area, meaning retaining and even planting or encouraging the
native vegetation in all forms (trees, shrubs, and herbaceous vegetation), is undertaken, then the property could
actually be improved for numerous wildlife and birds. Mowing or removal of riparian vegetation would degrade the
riparian corridor and should be prohibited unless part of an interim stage of weed control.
Mountain Lions
The Seaton property and the immediate surrounding developed area, including Chelyn Acres subdivision, is located
within a Colorado Department of Wildlife (CDOW) mapped Mountain Lion Human Conflict Area (see Map 3).
These are areas where mountain lions have potentially been involved in conflicts with humans. This mapped site
reflects that reports may have been made of incidents that could include predation on domestic pets, or predation
on livestock held in close proximity to human habitation, or even a direct human mountain lion incident. This is
simply a precautionary disclosure to encourage property owners take important safety measures to avoid such
incidents. The primary food source for mountain lions is deer and with the abundance of mule deer in the area,
mountain lions are to be expected. Also note on Map 3 the entire map is shaded as Overall Range for mountain
lions.
American Elk
The CDOW has maps of the summer, winter, severe winter ranges and the winter concentration areas for both elk
and deer in the area. The Seaton property resides within CDOW mapped elk summer range, mapped elk winter
range, and elk overall range. It does
not lie within severe winter range nor
does it lie within a winter range
concentration area, both areas of great
concern with regards to development by
CDOW officials. See Map 4 for the
overall summer range and calving areas
for elk in the area and see Map 5 for
winter range, severe winter range and
winter concentration areas for elk in the
Four Mile Creek area. The Seaton
property does lie within overall elk
habitats, but again, because the
location of this proposed parcel lies
within an area already developed and
near an increasingly busy road, the
added impacts to elk should be minimal. ! *;t "��, ` ;1'�'','
Mute Deer
Just walking through the Chelyn Acres
subdivision area, one should expect to
see mule deer most of the time and
during much of the year. The area is
Figure 32. Mule deer entering the Seaton property in the riparian
area off of Chelyn Road and just east of Four Mile Creek.
em ecological, LLC P,O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
25
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
mapped as summer (see Map 6) and winter range with winter concentration areas and severe winter ranges less
than a mile away (see Map 7). Mule deer were seen on the property during the field work for this document and
mule deer scat is common. Numerous bedding areas existed in the riparian corridor along the river on the east
side. The deer encountered were habituated to fairly close, but quiet human presence.
Black Bears
Bear scat was found on the Seaton property in the riparian corridor. With the abundance of acorn and berry
producing shrubs as well as human food sources in the area, bears are to be expected. Contacting the Department
of Wildlife for literature on how to live with bears is helpful and an abundance of information on the subject is readily
available. Securing trash and compost piles are essential in helping to avoid encounters. Locking windows and
doors and securing residences in the spring, summer and fall are other essential precautionary measures to adopt
when living amongst bears. Protecting any agricultural activities such as raising chickens, if allowed by law, is also
imperative and many of these activities should probably be avoided in the first place unless extensive, secure
fencing and caging is built.
Beavers
Old signs of beaver activity on Four Mile Creek were photographed on the Seaton property. Beaver appear to be in
the area and have built impressive dams on the property on Four Mile Creek in the past. Beaver are a keystone
species and their dams and subsequent pools of water provide numerous functions within riparian corridors like
water filtering and water storage helping creek flows in late summer and providing refugia for fish. The dams
inspected appear to have been dismantled. Investigating whether impacts are truly unmanageable or simply just
perceived to be and looking at the possibility of how to live with beavers is highly recommended. Flow alterations
are extreme at times on Fourmile Creek due to diversions and may also influence the abilityof beaver to remain in
the immediate area.
Fences and Dogs
Briefly, contacting the Division of Wildlife for advice on fences that are less impact on local wildlife before any new
fencing is considered is recommended in this area where wildlife are still abundant. Additionally, dogs should never
be allowed out unaccompanied by their owners and leashes are highly recommended at all times. In order to
protect pets, enclosed kennels are a sensible idea since, as mentioned, the area resides in a CDOW Mountain Lion
Human Conflict Area. Additionally, kennels are very helpful in protecting wildlife from dog encounters near homes.
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 26
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
Literature Referenced -Seaton Proposed Subdivision, Vegetation and Wildlife
Anthony, Steve. 2009. Personal communication with Steve Anthony. Garfield County Vegetation Manager and
weed specialist, Garfield County, P.O. Box 426, Rifle, Colorado. Phone: 970-625-8601.
Bridgeman, T. 1832. The Young Gardners's Assistant. George Robertson, New Your. 164 pp.
Carpenter, Alan T. and Thomas A. Murray. 1998. Element Stewardship Abstract for Bromus tectorum,
cheatgrass, downy brome. Land Stewardship Consulting, the Nature Conservancy. Boulder, CO.
http://tncweeds.ucdavis.edu/esadocs/bromtect.html
Dewey, Steven A. et al. 2007. Weed Management Handbook for Montana, Utah and Wyoming Cooperative
Extension Services. The Bulletin rooms of Montana State University (406-994-3273), Utah State University
(435-797-2251) and the University of Wyoming (307-766-2115).
Colorado Department of Agriculture, Conservation Services Division. 2008. Absinth Wormwood Identification
and Management. http://www.colorado.gov/cs/SatellitefAgriculture-Main/CDAG/1174084048733
Colorado Department of Agriculture, Conservation Services Division. 2008. Bull Thistle Identification and
Management. http://www.colorado.gov/cs/SatellitelAgriculture-Main/C DAG/1174084048733
Colorado Department of Agriculture, Conservation Services Division. 2008. Canada Thistle Identification and
Management. http://www.colorado.gov/cs/SatellitelAgriculture-Main/C DAG/1174084048733
Colorado Department of Agriculture, Conservation Services Division. 2008. Common Tansy Identification and
Management. http://www.colorado.gov/cs/SatellitelAgriculture-Main/C DAG/1174084048733
Colorado Department of Agriculture, Conservation Services Division. 2008. Houndstongue Identification and
Management. http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/Agriculture-Main/CDAG/1174084048733
Colorado Department of Agriculture, Conservation Services Division. 2008. Oxeye Daisy Identification and
Management. http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/Agriculture-Main/CDAG/1174084048733
CDOW. 2009. Colorado Species Distribution Maps Metadata. Available online at http://ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/.
Natural Diversity Information Source, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO.
Colorado Natural Areas Program (CNAP). 2000. Creating an Integrated Weed Management Plant, Caring for the
Land Series IV. Colorado Department of Natural Resources, Denver, CO.
Colorado State Parks. 2005. Best Management Practices, Weed Profile, Canada Thistle, Cirsium arvense, Brea
arvensis. Colorado State Parks Website 2009.
Colorado Weed Management Association (CWMA). 2007. Noxious Weeds of Colorado, Ninth Edition.
Emmerich, F.L., F.H. Tipton, and J.A. Young. 1993. Cheatgrass: Changing perspectives and management
strategies. Rangelands 15:37-39.
FEIS - Fire Effects Information System . 1996. Prescribed Fire and Fire Effects Research Work Unit, Rocky
Mountain Research Station (producer), US Forest Service. http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ [Version 12
DEC 09].
Fitzgerald, J. P., C. A. Meaney, and D. M. Armstrong 1994. Mammals of Colorado. Denver Museum of Natural
History; University Press of Colorado, Niwot, Colo.
La Plata County. 2009. La Plata County Weed Management and Enforcement Plan Pursuant to Article II of
Chapter 58 of the La Plata County Code and the Colorado Noxious Weed Act, La Plata County, CO.
ern ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 27
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
Literature Referenced -Seaton Proposed Subdivision, Vegetation and Wildlife (continued)
LeCain, R. and R. Sheley. 2002. Common tansy (Tanacetum vufgare). Montana State University Extension
Service Montguide MT 199911 AG. Bozeman, MT.
Mitich, L.W. 1975. Absinth wormwood -a problem weed? Proc. NC Weed Cont. Conf. 30:41-42.
MSU Extension Weed Management, Land Resources and Environmental Sciences Department. 2001.
Bozeman, MT. www.weeds.montana.edu
NatureServe: Explorer. An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. 2007. Version 1.6. Arlington (VA):
Association for Biodiversity Information. Available: http://www.natureserve.org/.
Pitkin County Land Management. 2009. Poison hemlock, Conium maculatum. Website information sheet.
http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Public-Works/Land-Management/Noxious-Weed-List/
Pokorny, Monica L. 2007. Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum). Montana State University Extension Weed
Management.http://www.ipm.montana.edu/cropweeds/Extension/weed%20species%20not%20every%2
Ofile%20is%20here-/Downy%20brome.htm Bozeman, MT
Pokorny, Monica L. and Roger L. Sheley. 2000. Poison hemlock. Montana State University Extension
Service Montguide MT 2000-13. Bozeman, MT.
Swearingen, Jil M. 2005. Fact Sheet: Common Mullein. Plant Conservation Alliance's Alien Plant Working
Group and the National Park Service, Washington, D.C. http://www.nps.gov/plants/alien
University of Wyoming, College of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service. 2009. Weed Management
Handbook. Laramie, WY. http:/Ices.uwyo.edu/WeedManagementHandbook.asp
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service, 1992. Soil Survey of
Aspen -Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties.
USDA, NRCS. 2009. The PLANTS Database (http://plants.usda.gov). National Plant Data Center, Baton
Rouge, LA 70874-4490 USA.
Whitson, T.D.(ed.), L.C. BurriII, S.A. Dewey, D.W. Cudney, B.E. Nelson, R.D. Lee, R. Parker. 2006. Weeds
of the West. Western Society of Weed Science, in cooperation with the Western United States Land
Grant Universities Cooperative Extension Services and the University of Wyoming, Jackson, WY.
Weld County Fact Sheet. 2009. Cheatgrass Identification and Management, Rangeland Pasture
Recommendations. http://www.co.weld.co.us/departments/weed_pest/pdf/factSheets/cheatgrass_2.pdf
Weber, W.A. and R. C. Whitman 2001. Colorado Flora: West Slope. Third Edition. University Press
Colorado. Boulder, CO.
Yates -White, Crystal. 2009. Personal communication with Crystal Yates -White. Pitkin County Land
Manager, 26 Service Center Road, Aspen, Colorado, 81611. Phone: 970-920-5214.
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 28
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife
November 2009
Appendix I. Garfield Count Noxious Weed List 2009
Noxious Weed Program
Garfield County
County Weed Supervisor: Steve Anthony
MailingAddress: P.O.Box426
Rifle, CO 81650
Phone Number: 970-625-3969
GARFIELD COUNTY NOXIOUS WEED LIST
Common name Scientific name
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
Dalmation toadflax Linaria dalmatica
Yellow toadflax Linaria vulgaris
Hoary cress Cardaria draba
Saltcedar Tamarix parviflora
Saltcedar 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
:.11 M.611Yw,rcnv r
isrvnn.rn tiixr
*Absinth wormwood Artemisia absinthium note this is a Colorado listed noxious
weed, but not on the Garfield County List.
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 29
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
Appendix II. State of Colorado Noxious Weed List 2009
Colorado Noxious Weed List
List A species in Colorado that are designated by the Commissioner for eradication:
African rue (Peganum hamiala)
Camelthom (Aihagi pseudalhagi)
Common crupina (Crupina vulgaris)
Cypress spurge (Euphorbia cyparissias)
Dyer's woad (Isatis tinctoria)
Giant saivinia (Saivinia molesta)
Hydrilla (Hydrilla verticillata)
Meadow knapweed (Centaurea pratensis)
Mediterranean sage (Salvia aethiopis)
Medusahead (Taeniatherum caput -medusae)
Myrtle spurge (Euphorbia myrsinites)
Orange hawkweed (Hieracium aurantiacum)
Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria)
Rush skeletonweed (Chondrilla juncea)
Sericea Iespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata)
Squarrose knapweed (Centaurea virgata)
Tansy ragwort (Senecio jacobaea)
Yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis)
List B weed species are species for which the Commissioner, in consultation with the
state noxious weed advisory committee, local governments, and other interested parties,
develops 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)
Com chamomile (Anthemis arvensis)
Cutleaf teasel (Dipsacus laciniatus)
Dalmatian toadflax, broad-leaved (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 feucanthemum)
Perennial pepperweed (Lepidium latifolium)
Plumeless thistle (Carduus acanthoides)
Quackgrass (Elytrigia repens)
Russian knapweed (Acroptilon repens)
Russian -olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia)
Salt cedar (Tamarix chinensis. T.oarviflora. and T. ramosissimal
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 30
Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009
Scentless chamomile (Matricaria perforata)
Scotch thistle (Onopordum acanthium)
Scotch thistle (Onopordum 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)
List C weed species are species for which the Commissioner, in consultation with the
state noxious weed advisory committee, local governments, and other interested parties,
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.
Chicory (Cichorium intybus)
Common burdock (Arctium minus)
Common mullein (Verbascum thapsus)
Common St. Johnswort (Hypericum perforatum)
Downy brome (Bromus tectorum)
Field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis)
Halogeton (Halogeton giomeratus)
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)
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
31
Legend
General Area -County and State Listed Weeds
Garfield:
Canada thistle
Common burdock
Houndstongue
Oxeye daisy
Colorado:
Absinth wormwood
Bull thistle
Common mullein
Common tansy
Downy brome
Poison hemlock
• Absinth wormwood
Higher Density Areas
• Oxeye Daisy
High Density Area
• Common Mullein
Trace
Seaton Proposed Subdivision
Weed Areas of Note
Building Envelope •
Seaton Property
Approx. Proposed Property Split
Map: Brian Pnrnig
em ecoiogkal, u.0
natural rcwurce oomtiting
p.o. box 1990
mtbardale, co 61673
970.946.4857
Legend
Soil Map - Seaton Proposed Subdivision
Approx. Seaton Property Lines
Soils on the Seaton Property
Cochetopa-Antrobus association
42 Fluvaquents
94 Showalter-Morval complex
95 Showalter-Morval complex, steeper slopes
Springs
0 954ft
Soil Survey Data from the Natural Resource Conservation Service.
Aspen -Gypsum Area, Colorada-Pay ul'Ecacjitu Car$ otd and Pitkin
Counties; Version 5, Jun 9 2008; Web Soil Survey
Map 2. Location of Soil Types -Seaton Property and Vicinity
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
Map 3. Mountain Lion Overall Range and Mountain Lion Human Conflict Area and the Seaton Proposed Subdivision
r.
16,
It.% ,SLW Vo., leOrTIC 1 . _..
December 19th, 2009 07:13 pm DISCLAIMER: This map is for display purposes only and is not intended for any legal representations
http:/lndis.nrel.colostate.edulrnaps Approximate MapScale 1:111,046
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
Legend
▪ Mountain Lion Overall Range
CJ - Mountain Lion human Conflict A
L County Boundary
Cities
• Cities
11,1' Streams 100K
Highways
4010. Interstate
4.ye U5 Highway
"or State Highway
rv' Major Roads
Forest Roads
Paved
/4/ Gravel
Bladed
r ' 4WD
City Boundaries
Lakes
Perennial
Q Intermittent
1:100K DRG Image
Approx, location
of the Seaton
Property
Map 4. Overall Summer Range and Production Areas for Elk and the Seaton Proposed Subdivision.
December 19th, 2009 06:59 pm DISCLAIMER: This map is for display purposes only and is not intended for any legal representations.
http:llndis_nrel.colostate.edu/maps Approximate MapScale 1:129,790
em ecological, LLC 1).0, Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
Legend
American Elk Production Areas
American Elk Summer Range
L County Boundary
Cities
a Cities
Streams 100K
Highways
• Interstate
4...,,err US Highway
ff State Highway
fv. Major Roads
Forest Roads
• Paved
/41 Gravel
f ' Bladed
l' 4WD
City Boundaries
Lakes
Perennial
Intermittent
1:100K DRG image
Approx. location
of the Seaton
Property
Map 5. American Elk Severe Winter Range, Winter Concentration Areas, and Overall Winter Range and the Seaton Proposed Subdivision
December 19th, 2009 06-54 pm DISCLAIMER: This map is for display purposes only and is not intended for any regal representations.
rittp:llndis.nrelcolostate.edufmaps Approximate MapScale 1:108.512
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
Legend
CEP American Elk Severe Winter Rant
El American Elk Winter Concentrate.
El American Elk Winter Range
L County Boundary
Cities
a Cities
Streams 100K
Highways
• Interstate
US Highway
Iv State Highway
Major Roads
Forest Roads
f,/ Paved
• Gravel
J Bladed
f `
4WD
City Boundaries
Lakes
Perennial
El Intermittent
1:100K DRG Image
Approx. location
of the Seaton
Property
Map 6. Mule Deer Summer Range and the Seaton Proposed Subdivision
LY 1
•t
••1
- \.
36
-
11.1.111,413.0.-.14 1
(
December 19th. 2009 07:08 pm DISCLAIMER: This map is for display purposes only and is not intended for any legal representations
http:Andis-nrel.colostate.edulmaps Approximate MapScale 1.77,620
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
Legend
Q Mule Deer Summer Range
12 County Boundary
Cities
Cities
r./ Streams 100K
highways
interstate
0 US highway
Ar State highway
fes; Major Roads
Forest Roads
Paved
,.,,r Gravel
r ' Bladed
4WD
City Boundaries
Lakes
Perennial
Intermittent
1:100K DRG image
Approx. location
of the Seaton
Property
Map 7. Mule Deer Sever Winter Range, Winter Concentration Areas and Overall Winter Range and the Seaton Proposed Subdivision
December 19th. 2009 07:03 pm DISCLAIMER: Tills map is for display purposes only and is not intended for any legal representations_
http:!lndis.nrel.colostate.edufmaps Approximate MapScale 1:77.620
em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623
Q
Legend
03 Mule Deer Severe Winter Range
El Mule Deer Winter Concentration
n Mule Deer Winter Range
L: County Boundary
Cities
Cities
Streams 1OOK
Highways
Interstate
lel` US hlgnway
jiir State 1-ilahway
N Major Roads
Forest Roads
Paved
fy/ Gravel
Bladed
I' 4WD
City Boundaries
Lakes
Perennial
Intermittent
1:100K DRG image
Approx. location
of the Seaton
Property
FLATTOPS ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS
P.O. BOX 864
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602
(970) 379-2846
October 19, 2009
Mr. Don Seaton
4151 County Road 117
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
CC: Fred Jarman
Garfield County, Building & Planning
108 8th Street, Suite 401
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
RE: Letter Report of Findings—Class I Cultural Resources Study for the Proposed Seaton Subdivision,
Parcel #2395-033-00-031, Garfield County, Colorado
Dear Mr. Seaton,
This letter report of findings serves as documentation for the completion of a Class !Cultural
Resources Study of the proposed Seaton Subdivision (Parcel #2395-033-00-031) in Garfield County,
Colorado. The project occupies a portion of Section 3, Township 7 South, Range 89 West. Cultural
resource files for the entire Section 3 were reviewed for this study. This study satisfies the Garfield
County Unified Land Use Resolution, Article IV Section 4-502E part 8b: A determination of the effect on
significant archaeological, cultural, paleontological, historic resources prior to the development of private
property. The proposed project area is along County Road 117, approximately four miles south of
Glenwood Springs, Colorado.
The file search was conducted on October 19, 2009, by reviewing the Colorado Office of
Archaeology and Historic Preservation's COMPASS database. One previous cultural resource inventory
project has taken place within Section 3, 775, R89W (Table 1), and there are two known cultural
resources that have been recorded in this section (Table 2). One of the resources is a segment of the
Jerome Park Branch of the Colorado Midland Railroad grade (5GF469), and the other resource is a
prehistoric isolated find (5GF1751). The Jerome Park (Coal) Branch of the Colorado Midland Railroad
played a significant role in the early economy of the Roaring Fork Valley by transporting coal from the
outlying mines to fuel the silver smelter in Aspen, and to the coke Ovens at Cardiff (Johnson and Yajko
1983; Urquhart 1971:37, 74). 5GF469 is officially eligible for inclusion on the National Register of
Historic Places; it is recommended that this site be avoided by the current project.
Kae McDonald
Principal Investigator
flattopsarchaeological99 @ comcast.net
5GF1751 is a midsection of a projectile point. Isolated finds are not eligible for inclusion on the
NRHP; no further work is recommended.
Thus, based on the results of this Class I inventory, Flattops Archaeological Consultants
recommends that if 5GF469 can be avoided, a finding of no historic properties affected can be
recommended. In addition, should other cultural resources be unearthed during ground -disturbing
activities, a qualified archaeologist should be notified.
Table 1: Cultural Resource Projects in Section 17, T75, R87W.
Project No.
Project Type
Client
Company
Year
Sites Recorded
MC.LM.R85
BLM Portions of
the Proposed
Rifle -to -Avon
Pipeline
Bureau of Land
Management
Grand River
Institute
1993
None
Table 2: Cultural Resource Sites located in Section 17, T7S, R87W.
Smithsonian
No.
Site Type
Site 1
Description
National Register
Eligibility
Class
Recommendation
5GF469
Historic
Railroad Grade
Eligible
Avoid
5GF1751
Prehistoric
Projectile Point
fragment
Not Eligible
No further work
Sin -r-
If you have questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me at your convenience.
V
ae McDonald, Ph.D.,
Principal Investigator
REFERENCES CITED
Johnson, Anna and Kathleen Yajko
1983 The Elusive Dream. Gran Farnum Printing, Glenwood Springs, Colorado.
Urquhart, Lena M.
1971 Glenwood Springs: Spa in the Mountains. Frontier Historical Society, Glenwood Springs,
Colorado.