HomeMy WebLinkAbout13 Weed Mgmt PlanWEED MANAGEMENT PLAN
O\OLSSON
ASSOCIATES
URSA OPERATING COMPANY, LLC.
BATTLEMENT MESA PUD PHASE II
Integrated Vegetation and Noxious Weed Management Plan
Garfield County, Colorado
Cover photo: View of habitat conditions near the proposed BMC F location.
Prepared for:
Ursa Operating Company, LLC.
792 Buckhorn Drive
Rifle, Colorado 81650
Prepared by:
WestWater Engineering
2516 Foresight Circle #1
Grand Junction, CO 81505
Nicholas Jaramillo, Biologit/Environmental Scientist
April 2017
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Description
At the request of Ursa Operating Company, LLC. (Ursa), WestWater Engineering (WestWater) has
prepared an Integrated Vegetation and Noxious Weed Management Plan for the proposed Battlement
Mesa PUD Phase II project consisting of three well pads (BMC A, BMC F, BMC L) and associated
access roads and pipelines (Figure 1). The project would be located on private lands in Garfield County,
Colorado consisting of legal descriptions as follows:
BMC A: Section 13, Township 7 South, Range 96 West; Section 18, Township 7 South, Range
95 West.
BMC F: Sections 16 and 17, Township 7 South, Range 95 West.
BMC L: Section 8, Township 7 South, Range 95 West.
The current primary uses of the surrounding area include residential, agricultural, rangeland, natural gas
development, and wildlife habitat.
1.2 General Survey Information
Pedestrian surveys of the project area were conducted on September 12, 13, and 14, 2016. The survey
occurred within the active growth period for most plants in the region. Identification of plant species was
aided by using pertinent published field guides (Kershaw et al. 1998, Whitson et al. 2001, CWMA 2013,
Weber and Wittmann 2012). Noxious weed locations were recorded with the aid of handheld global
positioning system (GPS) receivers using NAD83 map datum, with all coordinate locations based on the
Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinate system in Zone 12. Mapped soil types, as published by
the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), were
reviewed to determine the soil types and vegetation characteristics at the project site (NRCS 2016).
2.0 LANDSCAPE SETTING
2.1 Terrain
The terrain near the project consists of gently sloping terrain surrounding the town of Battlement Mesa
that falls off to the Colorado River corridor. Elevation in the project area ranges from approximately
5,060 to 5,420 feet.
2.2 Vegetation
The affected area covers a variety of habitat types consisting of native and disturbed rangelands as well as
agricultural areas and a small amount of riparian or wetland communities. Common grasses include
annual wheatgrass (Eremopyrum triticeum), crested wheatgrass (Agropyron cristatum), indian ricegrass
(Achnatherum hymenoides), intermediate wheatgrass (Thinopyrum intermedium), orchardgrass (Dactylis
glomerata), smooth brome (Bromus inermis), timothy (Phleum subulatum), and western wheatgrass
(Pascopyrum smithii). Shrub and woodland communities in the area are dominated by a mixture of basin
and Wyoming big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata tridentata and A. t. wyomingensis ) and pinyon juniper
(Pinus edulis — Juniperus osteosperma) woodlands with areas of greasewood (Sarcobatus vermiculatus).
Areas of riparian and wetland vegetation are dominated by broadleaf cattail (Typha latifolia), narrowleaf
cottonwood (Populus angustifolia), reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), and three -leaf sumac (Rhus
trilobata).
WestWater Engineering
Page 1 of 13 April2017
3.0 NOXIOUS WEEDS
3.1 Introduction to Noxious Weeds
Most noxious weed species in Colorado were introduced from outside North America. These plants
compete aggressively with native vegetation and tend to spread quickly because the environmental factors
that normally control them are absent. Disturbed soils, altered native vegetation communities, and areas
with increased soil moisture often create prime conditions for weed infestations. The primary vectors that
spread noxious weeds include humans, animals, water, and wind.
The Colorado Noxious Weed Act (State of Colorado 2005) requires local governing bodies to develop
noxious weed management plans. Both the State of Colorado and Garfield County maintain a list of
plants that are considered to be noxious weeds. The State of Colorado noxious weed list segregates
noxious weed species based on priority for control:
1. List A species must be eradicated whenever detected.
2. List B species' spread should be halted; may be designated for eradication in some counties.
3. List C species are widespread and the State will assist local jurisdictions which choose to manage
those weeds.
The Garfield County Weed Advisory Board has compiled a list of 21 plants from the State list considered
to be noxious weeds within the county (Garfield County 2013) (Appendix A). The Garfield County Weed
Advisory Board has duties to:
1. Develop a noxious weed list;
2. Develop a weed management plan for designated noxious weeds; and,
3. Recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that identified landowners submit an
integrated weed management plan for their properties (Garfield County 2002).
3.2 Observations
Noxious weed species listed by the State of Colorado (2005) detected in or near the project area included
bulbous bluegrass (Poa bulbosa), bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare), Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense),
cheatgrass (downy brome - Bromus tectorum), chicory (Cichorium intybus), common burdock (Arctium
minus), common mullein (Verbascum thapsus), common teasel (Dipsacus fullonum), field bindweed
(Convolvulus arvensis), houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale), musk thistle (Carduus nutans), redstem
filaree (Erodium cicutarium), Russian knapweed (Acroptilon repens), Russian olive (Elaeagnus
angustifolia), Salt cedar (tamarisk — Tamarix ramosissima), Scotch thistle (Onopordum acanthanium).
Noxious weed locations, except widespread State C List species, are provided in Figures 1 through 4. An
ARCGIS shapefile of noxious weed locations is available from WestWater upon request.
Several unlisted nuisance weed species that are present in disturbed areas include flixweed (Descurania
sophia), kochia (Bassia scoparia), Russian thistle (Salsola spp.), tall tumble mustard (Sisymbrium
altissimum), and yellow sweet clover (Melilotus officinalis). These plants can negatively influence
revegetation efforts and cause financial losses due to decreased seeding success and associated costs of
replanting. The presence of these plants creates increased competition for resources and can reduce the
success of desirable native plant species.
3.3 Integrated Weed Management
Control of invasive species is a difficult task and requires intensive on-going control measures. Care must
be taken to avoid negatively impacting desirable plant communities and inviting infestation by other
pioneer invaders. Weed management is best achieved by employing varied methods over several growing
seasons, including inventory (surveys), direct treatments, prevention through best management practices,
WestWater Engineering Page 2 of 13 April 2017
monitoring of treatment efficacy, and subsequent detection efforts. Weed management is often limited to
controlling existing infestations and prevention of further infestations, rather than eradication, but through
effective weed management practices eradication can be possible in small to medium sized weed
populations.
Assessment of the existence and extent of noxious weeds in an area is essential for the development of an
integrated weed management plan. This report provides an initial assessment of the occurrence of noxious
weeds for the project area. In order to continue effective management of noxious weeds, further inventory
and analysis is necessary to determine the effectiveness of the past treatment strategies, modify the
treatment plan as necessary, and detect new infestations early. This would result in more economical and
effective treatments.
3.4 Prevention of Noxious Weed Infestations
Weed management can be costly, and heavy infestations may exceed the economic threshold for practical
treatment. Prevention is an especially valuable and economical strategy for noxious weed management.
Several simple practices should be employed to prevent weed infestations. The following practices will
prevent infestation and thereby reduce costs associated with noxious weed control:
• Prior to delivery to the site, all equipment and vehicles, including maintenance vehicles, should
be thoroughly cleaned of soils from previous sites which may be contaminated with noxious
weeds.
• If working in sites with weed -seed contaminated soil, equipment should be cleaned of potentially
seed -bearing soils and vegetative debris at the infested area prior to moving to uncontaminated
terrain.
• Avoid driving vehicles through areas where weed infestations exist.
• Use of weed free materials such as mulch and seed.
3.5 Treatment and Control of Noxious Weed Infestations
Bare -ground weed management should be used on proposed developments with recurring vehicle use
such as well pads, and selective weed control used within 100 feet around the pads and on linear features
such as roadways and pipeline corridors in coordination with the landowner. Treatment methods and
timing should be determined by the company and their contracted licensed pesticide applicators. The
recommendations provided in this report should be considered when developing treatment plans.
General control methods for the species detected in the project area are provided for reference in Table 2.
Table 2. General noxious weed control methods for species in the nroiect area.
Common Name
Scientific Name
State Listing Status
Type*
Control Methods
Prevent seed production; deplete energy reserves in
Bulbous bluegrass
underground bulbs. Apply herbicide from fall to spring
Poa bulbosa
P
to plants not more than 6" tall. Some herbicides can be
State C List
applied as a pre -emergent treatment in the fall. Tillage in
the spring can be effective in some areas. Seed with
competitive grasses.
WestWater Engineering Page 3 of 13
April 2017
Table 2. General noxious weed control methods for species in the nroiect area.
Common Name
Scientific Name
State Listing Status
Type*
Control Methods
Bull thistle
Cirsium vulgare
State B List
B
Prevent seed production. Herbicide application or
mechanical removal whenever plants are in the rosette
stage. Before spraying, remove and bag flower or seed
heads from plants that have bolted. Sever root at least 2"
below soil level
Canada thistle
Cirsium arvense
State B List
P
Prevent seed production; deplete energy reserves in
roots. Small infestations should be treated
aggressively with herbicides that translocate to the
root system. In large infestations, mow three times
per growing season, followed by herbicide treatment
in the fall. Biological control agents are available but
ineffective in populations less than 5 acres in size or
in wet areas. Tillage is not effective and will result in
denser populations.
Cheatgrass
Bromus tectorum
State C List
A
Prevent seed production. Apply herbicides in fall and
spring in large monocultures where there are few if any
desirable grasses. Till when plants are in the seedling
stage followed by seeding with native cool -season
grasses. Avoid overgrazing. Best management practices
are most effective in preventing and controlling
infestations.
Chicory
Cichorium intybus
State C List
B
Prevent seed production. Herbicide application or
mechanical removal when plants are in the rosette
stage, spring or summer. Sever root at least 2" below
soil level. Remove seed or flower heads from plants
that have bolted.
Common burdock
Arctium minus
State C List
B
Prevent seed production. Herbicide application or
mechanical removal when plants are in the rosette
stage, spring or summer. Before spraying, remove
and bag flower or seed heads from plants that have
bolted. Sever root at least 2" below soil level.
Common mullein
Verbascum thapsus
State C List
B
Prevent seed production. Herbicide application or
mechanical removal when plants are in the rosette stage,
spring or summer Before spraying, remove and bag
flower or seed heads from plants that have bolted. Sever
root at least 2" below soil level.
Common teasel
Dipsacus fullonum
State B List
B, P
Prevent seed production. Hand dig and remove entire
root during rosette and bolting stages. Plants near
flowering can be cut at ground level and bagged. Apply
herbicide in rosette to bolting stages.
Field bindweed
Convolvulus arvensis
State B List
P
Deplete energy reserves in roots. Herbicide treatment
when plants are beginning to flower. Biological controls
are available and fairly effective for large populations
growing in sunny dry conditions. Tillage is not effective
and will result in denser populations.
WestWater Engineering
Page 4 of 13
April 2017
Table 2. General noxious weed control methods for species in the nroiect area.
Common Name
Scientific Name
State Listing Status
Type*
Control Methods
Houndstongue
Cynoglossum officinale
State B List
B
Prevent seed production. Herbicide application or
mechanical removal when plants are in the rosette
stage, spring or summer. Before spraying, remove
and bag flower or seed heads from plants that have
bolted. Sever root at least 2" below soil level.
Musk thistle
Carduus nutans
State B List
B
Prevent seed production. Herbicide application or
mechanical removal when plants are in the rosette
stage, spring or summer. Before spraying, remove
and bag flower or seed heads from plants that have
bolted. Sever root at least 2" below soil level.
Biological control agents are available but ineffective
in populations less than 5 acres in size.
Redstem filaree
Erodium cicutarium
State C List
A
Prevent seed production. Apply herbicides in the fall or
spring when plants are in rosette stage. Hand digging in
the rosette stage when soil is moist can be effective for
small, isolated populations. Preventing introduction of
seeds through clean vehicles and careful management of
soil stocks can help reduce introductions. Seeding with
competitive grasses and avoiding creation of open, bare
areas aids in control.
Russian knapweed
Acroptilon repens
State B List
P
Prevent seed production, deplete energy reserves in
roots. Use an herbicide that translocates to the root
system. Apply herbicides in the fall for best results;
spring treatment when flowers just start to open is
also effective. Repeated mowing to stress plants
followed by herbicide treatment in fall may be
effective in some areas. Seed with competitive grasses
and avoid overgrazing.
Russian Olive
Elaeagnus angustifolia
State B List
P
Deplete energy reserves in roots. Cut mature trees
and treat cut stump immediately with herbicide.
Treat stump sprouts for at least 2 years. Mowing of
large infestations can be effective; remove all cut
material.
Salt cedar (Tamarisk)
Tamarix ramosissima
State B List
P
Deplete energy reserves in roots. Cut mature trees
and treat cut stump immediately with herbicide.
Spray bark of smooth -barked immature trees with
herbicide. Treat resprouts for at least 2 years.
Biological agents available for large infestations
Scotch thistle
Onopordum acanthanium
State B List
B
Prevent seed production. Herbicide application or
mechanical removal when plants are in the rosette
stage, spring or summer. Before spraying, remove
and bag flower or seed heads from plants that have
bolted. Sever root at least 3" below soil level.
* Type: A = annual; B = biennial; P = perennial; Bold = Garfield County List
WestWater Engineering
Page 5of13
April 2017
3.6 Recommended Treatment Strategies
The following treatment strategies are presented for reference. It is important to know whether the weed
species being managed is an annual, biennial, or perennial to select strategies that effectively control and
eliminate the target. Treatment strategies vary depending on plant type, which are summarized in Tables 3
and 4. Herbicides should not always be the first treatment of choice when other methods can be
effectively employed.
Table 3. Treatment Strategies for Annual and Biennial Noxious Weeds
Target: Prevent Seed Production
1. Hand grub (pull), hoe, till, cultivate in rosette stage and before flowering or seed maturity. If flowers
or seeds develop, cut and bag seed heads.
2. Cut roots with a spade 2"-3" below soil level.
3. Treat with herbicide in seedling, rosette or bolting stage, before flowering.
4. Mow biennials after bolting stage but before seed set. Mowing annuals will not prevent flowering but
can reduce total seed production.
(Sirota 2004)
Table 4. Treatment Strategies for Perennials
Target: Deplete nutrient reserves in root system, prevent seed production
1. Allow plants to expend as much energy from root system as possible. Do not treat when first
emerging in spring but allow growth to bud/bloom stage. If seeds develop cut and bag if possible.
2. Herbicide treatment at bud to bloom stage or in the fall (recommended after August 15 when natural
precipitation is present). In the fall plants draw nutrients into the roots for winter storage. Herbicides
will be drawn down to the roots more efficiently at this time due to translocation of nutrients to roots
rather than leaves. If the weed patch has been present for a long period of time another season of seed
production is not as important as getting the herbicide into the root system. Spraying in fall (after
middle August) will kill the following year's shoots, which are being formed on the roots at this time.
3. Mowing usually is not recommended because the plants will flower anyway, rather, seed production
should be reduced. Many studies have shown that mowing perennials and spraying the regrowth is not
as effective as spraying without mowing. Effect of mowing is species dependent therefore it is
imperative to know the species and its basic biology. Timing of application must be done when
biologically appropriate, which is not necessarily convenient.
4. Tillage may or may not be effective or practical. Most perennial roots can sprout from pieces only 0.5
inch — 1.0 inch long. Clean machinery thoroughly before leaving the weed patch.
5. Hand pulling is generally not recommended for perennial species unless you know the plants are
seedlings and not established plants. Hand pulling can be effective on small patches but is very labor
intensive because it must be done repeatedly.
(Sirota 2004)
Some weeds, particularly annuals and biennials, can develop resistance to herbicides. The ability to
quickly develop immunity to herbicides, especially when they are used incorrectly, makes it imperative to
use the proper chemicals at the correct time in the specified concentration according to the product label.
Excessive application, either in frequency or concentration, can result in top kill without significantly
affecting the root system. Repeated excessive applications may result in resistant phenotypes.
WestWater Engineering
Page 6 of 13 April2017
3.7 Noxious Weed Management — Best Management Practices
Construction: The following practices should be adopted for any construction project to reduce the costs
of noxious weed control and aid in prevention efforts. The following practices will help prevent spread of
noxious weeds:
• Prior to delivery to the site, equipment should be cleaned of soils remaining from previous
construction sites which may be contaminated with noxious weeds.
• Equipment and material handling should be done on established sites to reduce the area and
extent of soil compaction.
• In all cases, temporary disturbance should be kept to an absolute minimum.
• Top soil, where present, should be segregated from deeper soils and replaced as top soil on the
final grade, a process known as live topsoil handling.
• If stored longer than one growing season, topsoil stockpiles should be seeded with non-invasive
sterile hybrid grasses.
• If working in weed infested sites, equipment should be cleaned of potentially seed -bearing soils
and vegetative debris prior to moving to uncontaminated terrain.
• After construction, disturbed areas outside the footprint of the development should be
immediately reseeded with an appropriate seed mix.
Herbicides: Many of the listed noxious weed species in Colorado can be controlled with commercially
available herbicides. Annual and biennial weeds are best controlled at the pre -bud stage after germination
or in the spring of the second year. Selective herbicides are recommended to minimize damage to
desirable grass species.
It is important that applicators adhere to concentrations specified on herbicide containers. Herbicides
generally do not work better at higher concentrations. Herbicide failures are frequently related to high
concentrations that result in top kill before the active ingredient can be transported to the roots through
the nutrient translocation process. If directed on the herbicide label, a surfactant or other adjuvant should
be added to the tank.
Grazing: In the event grazing is allowed in the project area, it should be deferred in reclaimed areas until
revegetation of desirable species has been successfully established and seeded plants have had the
opportunity to reproduce.
Monitoring: Areas where noxious weed infestations are identified and treated should be inspected over
time to ensure that control methods are working to reduce and suppress the identified infestation. The
sites should be monitored until the infestations are eliminated. These inspections can then be used to
prioritize future weed control efforts.
3.8 Commercial Applicator Recommendations
A certified commercial pesticide applicator licensed in rangeland and/or right-of-way/industrial weed
control (depending on site characteristics) is a necessary choice for herbicide control efforts. An
applicator has the full range of knowledge, skills, equipment, and experience desired when dealing with
tough noxious weeds. In addition, the purchase and use of restricted use herbicides requires a Colorado
pesticide applicator license.
WestWater Engineering
Page 7 of 13 April2017
4.0 REVEGETATION — RECLAMATION
Soil Preparation
Special soil preparation techniques may be needed as soil compaction may be an issue on the area of the
proposed pads that will require interim reclamation. Compaction can reduce water infiltration and also
hinder the penetration of the sprouting seed. Practices that will reduce compaction and prepare the
seedbed include scarification, tillage, or harrowing (Colorado Natural Areas Program et al. 1998).
Soil Amendments
The addition of soil amendments in rangeland reclamation projects can sometimes create more optimal
growing conditions for non-native or invasive plant species, with which native plants compete poorly
(Perry et al. 2010). With proper topsoil handling, the project area soils should revegetate well. If the
company determines the use of soil amendments to be beneficial, the type and rate should be based on lab
analyses from soil samples collected near the individual reclamation sites. A generic starting point for
choosing a fertilizer amendment for this area would be Sustane 4-6-4 which has been used successfully on
reclaimed areas nearby.
A potentially beneficial alternative method to enhance reclamation success, particularly where there is
poor or destroyed topsoil, is the application of vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF). These
fungi, mostly of the genus Glomus, are symbiotic with about 80 percent of all vegetation. Endo-
mycorrhizal fungi are associated mostly with grasses and forbs and could be helpful in reclamation. In
symbiosis, the fungi can increase water and nutrient transfer capacity of the host root system (Barrow and
McCaslin 1995). Over-the-counter commercial products are available, and the best products should
contain more than one fungi species.
Seed Mixture
On sites currently being used for agriculture, the landowner may request a specific seed mixture. The
recommended seed mix presented in Table 5 is adapted from the Bureau of Land Management's Colorado
River Valley Field Office seed menu recommendations (BLM 2012). This seed mix is well suited for
pinyon and juniper woodlands and Wyoming big sagebrush shrublands typical of the foothill region of the
Colorado River corridor and includes perennial native grasses and forbs that should establish well, protect
topsoil, and provide a basis for rehabilitation for the site upon reclamation.
Table 5. Pin yon- iuniner woodland and/or Wyoming big sagebrush shrubland.
Common Name
Scientific Name orm
PLS
lbs/acre*
Plant Both of the Following (15% Each, 30% Total)
Bottlebrush
Squirreltail
Elymus elymoides, Sitanion
hystrix
VNS
Cool
Bunch
2.0
Bluebunch
Wheatgrass
Pseudoroegneria
spicata, Agropyron
spicatum
Secar, P-7,
Anatone,
Goldar
Cool
Bunch
2.8
and Two of the Following (20% Each, 40% Total)
Thickspike
Wheatgrass
Elymus lanceolatus ssp.
lanceolatus,
Agropyron
dasystachyum
Critana,
Bannock,
Schwendimar
Cool
Sod-
forming
3.4
Slender Wheatgrass
Elymus trachycaulus,
Agropyron trachycaulum
Revenue,
Pryor
Cool
Bunch
3.3
Western Wheatgrass
Pascopyrum [Agropyron]
smithii
Rosana,
Arriba
Cool
Sod -
forming
4.8
WestWater Engineering
Page 8 of 13
April 2017
Table 5. Pin yon- iuniuer woodland and/or Wvominbig sagebrush shrubland.
Common Name
Scientific Name
Variety
Season
Form
PLS
lbs/acre*
and Three of the Following (10% Each, 30% Total)
Indian Ricegrass
Achnatherum [Oryzopsis]
hymenoides
Paloma,
Rimrock
Cool
Bunch
1.9
Arizona Fescue
Festuca arizonica
Redondo
Cool
Bunch
0.5
Galleta
Pleuraphis [Hilaria] jamesii
Viva florets
Warm
Bunch/Sod-
forming
1.7
Muttongrass
Poa fendleriana
VNS
Cool
Bunch
0.3
Sandberg Bluegrass
Poa sandbergii, Poa
secunda
VNS
Cool
Bunch
0.3
Sand Dropseed
Sporobolus cryptandrus
VNS
Warm
Bunch
0.1
OPTIONAL: Any combination from the following species may be substituted for up to 10% of the
above grasses.
Rocky Mountain
Beeplant
Cleome serrulata
VNS
Annual Sunflower
Helianthus annuus
VNS
Arrowleaf
Balsamroot
Balsamorhiza sagittata
VNS
Sulfur Flower
Eriogonum umbellatum
VNS
Utah sweetvetch
Hedysarum boreale
VNS
Scarlet
Globemallow
Sphaeralcea coccinea
VNS
Four -Wing Saltbush
Atriplex canescens
VNS
White Sagebrush
Artemisia ludoviciana
VNS
*Based on 60 pure live seeds (PLS) per square foot, drill -seeded. Double this rate (120 PLS per square foot) if
broadcast or hydroseeded.
Seeding Methods
Drill seeding would be the most appropriate and economical method for seeding the majority of the
project area. Hydroseeding or hand -broadcast seeding at twice the recommended drill seed rate is
recommended for steep slopes or for smaller areas where drill seeding would be impractical or dangerous.
Mulching
Crimped straw mulch would be the most cost effective and practical method of mulching areas prone to
erosion after drill seeding this site. No mulching is recommended for areas that are hydroseeded. Potential
detrimental effects of mulching include the introduction of weed species and the establishment of non-
native cereal grains. Use of a certified weed -free sterile wheat hybrid would limit these effects.
BMPs
Excelsior wattles or straw bales at the toe of steep slopes and water discharge points are appropriate to
help control water velocity during storm runoff. Terracing slopes exceeding 3:1 will reduce erosion,
benefitting topsoil and seed retention and thereby improving revegetation success.
WestWater Engineering
Page 9 of 13 April2017
5.0 REFERENCES
Barrow, J. R., and B. D. McCaslin. 1995. Role of microbes in resource management in arid ecosystems.
In: Barrow, J. R., E. D. McArthur, R. E. Sosebee, and Tausch, R. J., comps. 1996. Proceedings:
shrubland ecosystem dynamics in a changing environment. General Technical Report, INT -
GTR -338, Ogden, Utah: U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service, Intermountain
Resource Station, 275 pp.
BLM. 2012. Revised Revegetation Seed Mix Menus, CRVFO Energy Team. U.S. Bureau of Land
Management, Colorado River Valley Field Office. Silt, Colorado.
Colorado Natural Areas Program, Colorado State Parks, Colorado Department of Natural Resources.
1998. Native Plant Revegetation Guide for Colorado. Available online:
http: //www.parks.state. co.us/SiteCollectionImages/parks/Programs/CNAP/CNAPPublications/Re
vegetationGuide/revegetation.pdf. Accessed February 4, 2014
CWMA. 2013. S. Anthony, T. D'Amato, A. Doran, S. Elzinga, J. Powell, I. Schonle, K. Uhing. Noxious
Weeds of Colorado, 11th Ed.. Colorado Weed Management Association, Centennial.
Garfield County. 2002. Garfield County Vegetation Management and Garfield County Weed Advisory
Board. Garfield County Noxious Weed Management Plan, Resolution #2002-94, October 21.
Garfield County. 2013. Vegetation Management Section — Noxious Weed List. Available online:
http://www.garfield-county.com/vegetation-management/noxious-weed-list.aspx. Accessed
Feburary 4, 2014
Kershaw, L., A. MacKinnon, and J. Pojar. 1998. Plants of the Rocky Mountains. Lone Pine Publishing,
Auburn, Washington.
NRCS. 2016. Web Soil Survey, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service,
URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov
Perry, L.G., D.M. Blumenthal, T.A. Monaco, M.W. Paschke, and E.F. Redente. 2010. Immobilizing
nitrogen to control plan invasion. Oecologia: 163:12-24.
Sirota, J. M. 2004. Best management practices for noxious weeds of Mesa County. Colorado State
University, Cooperative Extension Tri River Area, Grand Junction, Colorado. URL:
http://www.coopext.colostate.edu/TRA/Weeds/weedmgmt.html
State of Colorado. 2005. Rules pertaining to the administration and enforcement of the Colorado Noxious
Weed Act, 35-5-1-119, C.R.S. 2003. Department of Agriculture, Plant Industry Division,
Denver, 78 pp.
Weber, W.A., and R.C. Wittmann. 2012. Colorado Flora, Western Slope. Fourth Edition, University Press
of Colorado, Boulder.
Whitson, T. D. (editor), L. C. Burrill, S. A. Dewey, D. W. Cudney, B. E. Nelson, R. D. Lee and R.
Parker. 2001. Weeds of the West — 9th edition. Western Society of Weed Science in cooperation
with Cooperative Extension Services, University of Wyoming, Laramie.
WestWater Engineering
Page 10 of 13 April2017
4
:1*
•
I •
•
Legend
img Russian knapweed
• Bull thistle
E Canada thistle
Common burdock
Common mullein
# Common teasel
Q Field bindweed
▪ Houndstongue
Musk thistle
* Russian knapweed
Scotch thistle
• Tamarisk
Q Weeds Survey Area
® Weeds Not Surveyed
Access Road
- Pipeline
- Phase 2 Pipeline
n Pad
County Road
^M— Streams
Figure 1
Ursa Operating Company
Battlement Mesa PUD Phase II
BMC A Pad
Integrated Vegetation and Noxious Weeds
Management Plan
AWestWater Engineering
Consulting Engineers & Scientists
0 190 380 570
Feet
April 2017
aneous EnvironmentailUrsa Operattng CompanylBattkment Mesa PUD Phase 11\20171GIS\IVN WMP Figure 1 4-4-17.r d 4/4/2017 rbb
• :{
tlif°
,t
171
C
16
BMC F Pad
C
Legend
K Russian knapweed Q Weeds Survey Area
■ Bull thistle ® Weeds Not Surveyed
• Canada thistle Access Road
Common burdock Pipeline
0 Common mullein Phase 2 Pipeline
+ Common teasel n Pad
Field bindweed County Road
• Houndstongue ^"uStreams
0 Musk thistle
* Russian knapweed
❑ Scotch thistle
Tamarisk
21
•
Figure 2
Ursa Operating Company
Battlement Mesa PUD Phase II
BMC F Pad
Integrated Vegetation and Noxious Weeds
Management Plan
AWestWater Engineering
Consulting Engineers & Scientists
0 290 490
600
Feet
April 2017
Map 0 urce, Z: Miscellaneous EnvironmentaillLrsa Operating Company5sattiemenl Mesa PUD Phase Mal 71GIS\IVN WMP Figure 2 4-4-17.mxd 4/42017 rbb
F -
PARACHUTE
A
Detail Area
w
Qo_n ar.ekce
viird
c?
.:
ir i,.
.- -•
rY' Trr1 ..1%
," 4:�'+(,•
Legend
0 Common mullein
❑ Musk thistle
Q Wteeds Survey Area
® Weeds Not Surveyed
Access Road
Pipeline
Phase 2 Pipeline
Pad
County Road
Streams
Figure 3
Ursa Operating Company
Battlement Mesa PUD Phase II
BMC L Pad
Integrated Vegetation and Noxious Weeds
Management Plan
AWestWater Engineering
Consulting Engineers & Scientists
0 500 1000
Feet
April 2017
Map Source, Z_ Miscellaneous Envi onmentahUrsa Operating Cempany5Ba0tement Mesa PUD Phase EI'20171GIS\IVN WMP Figure 3 4-4-17.mxd 4/42017 rbb
Appendix A
Garfield County Noxious Weed List
Species
Common name
Species
Code
Growth Form
Life History
State
Listing
Acroptilon re ens
p p
Russian
knapweed
ACRE3
Forb
Perennial
B
Aegilops
cylindrica
Jointed goatgrass
AECY
Grass
Annual
B
Arctium minus
Common (Lesser)
burdock
ARMI2
Forb
Biennial
C
Cardaria draba
Hoary cress,
Whitetop
CADR
Forb
Perennial
B
Carduus
acanthoides
Spiny plumeless
thistle
CAAC
Forb
Biennial / Winter Annual
B
Carduus nutans
Musk (Nodding
plumeless) thistle
CANU4
Forb
Biennial
B
Centaurea diffusa
Diffuse knapweed
CEDI3
Forb
Perennial
B
Centaurea
maculosa
Spotted
knapweed
CEMA4
Forb
Perennial
B
Centaurea
solstitialis
Yellow starthistle
CESO3
Forb
Annual
A
Chrysanthemum
leucanthemum
Oxeye daisy
CHLE80
Forb
Perennial
B
Cichorium intybus
Chicory
CIIN
Forb
Perennial
C
Cirsium arvense
Canada thistle
CIAR4
Forb
Perennial
B
Cynoglossum
officinale
Houndstongue,
Gypsyflower
CYOF
Forb
Biennial
B
Elaeagnus
angustifolia
Russian olive
ELAN
Tree
Perennial
B
Euphorbia esula
Leafy spurge
EUES
Forb
Perennial
B
Linaria dalmatica
Dalmatian
toadflax, broad-
leaved
LIDA
Forb
Perennial
B
Linaria vulgaris
Yellow toadflax
LIVU2
Forb
Perennial
B
Lythrum salicaria
Purple loosestrife
LYSA2
Forb
Perennial
A
Onopordum
acanthium
Scotch thistle
ONAC
Forb
Biennial
B
Tamarix
parviflora
Smallflower
tamarisk
TAPA4
Tree
Perennial
B
Tamarix
ramosissima
Salt cedar,
Tamarisk
TARA
Tree
Perennial
B
WestWater Engineering
Appendix A
October 2016