The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNoxious Weed, Revegetation PlanCAERUS OPERATING, LLC N23 CDP TO G35 496 PIPELINE RECLAMATION, REVEGETATION, AND NOXTOUS WEED MANAGEMENT PLAN Cover photo: View of the proposed pipeline alignment. Prepared for: Caerus Operating, LLC Parachute, CO Prepared by: WestWater Engineering, Inc. 2516 Foresight Cr. #1 Grand Junction, CO 81505 f*rtuy Amie Wilsey, Environmental Scientist/Proj ect Manager October 2021 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Project Description At the request of Caerus Operating, LLC (Caerus), WestWater Engineering (rWestrWater) has prepared this reclamation, revegetation, and noxious weed management plan for the proposed N23 CDP to C35 496 pipeline project that would be located on privately owned lands in Garfield County, Colorado. This document reports the results and analysis of the findings that are pertinent to Sections 9-L02-L and 9-102- M of the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code (as amended) as it applies to this project. Caerus proposes to construct a new pipeline in Sections 26 and,35, Township 4 South, Range 96 West (Figure 1). This reclamation, revegetation, and noxious weed management plan applies to the proposed pipeline project. The current land uses include rangeland and wildlife habitat. 1.2 General Survey Information Pedestrian surveys of the project area were conducted by WestWater biologists on October 7,2021 along the proposed pipeline alignment and within 30 meters of the proposed alignment (Figure 1). Surveys were conducted at the end of the growing season; however, plant species (including noxious weeds) were still identifiable at the time of the survey. Portions of the survey area had been surveyed previously for other projects by WestWater biologists during the spring of 202tJ and202l. Results of these surveys were included in this report. Identification of plant species was aided by using pertinent published field guides (Ackerfield 2015, Kershaw et al. 1998, Whitson et al. 2001, CWMA 2007, Weber and Wittmann 2012). Noxious weed locations were recorded with the aid of handheld global positioning system (GPS) receivers using NAD83 map datum, with all coordinate locations based on the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinate system inZone 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 2021). 2.0 LANDSCAPE SETTING 2.l Terrain The pipeline alignment is located along the rolling ridges of the Roan Plateau near the dividing ridge between Parachute Creek and Piceance Creek at an elevation range between approximately 8,200 feet and 8,400 feet. Several intermittent and ephemeral drainages are present in the project vicinity that drain south towards Parachute Creek and north towards Piceance Creek. 2.2 Soils Ttre pipeline alignment passes through 8 mapped soii types as described beiow in Table 1. Soils in the survey aÍea are typically well drained and occur along ridges, mountain flanks, and mountain sides (Table 1) (Natural Resources Conservation Service INRCS] 2021). All of the soils within the project areaare well-drained and with a high to very high runoff classification. WestWater Hngineering Page I of 14 October 2021 Table 1. Soil within the Project Area. 2.3 Vegetation The proposed pipeline alignment would be located adjacent to existing pipeline alignments and access roads that have been reclaimed with native and non-native grass species. The surrounding vegetation consists of sagebrush shrublands and mountain shrublands immediately adjacent to the pipeline alignment, while aspen woodlands are present along hillsides and draws in the general vicinity. Native forbs and grasses dominate the understory in all vegetation communities present. Common plants observed in the project area are described in Table 2. Table 2. Common plant species occurring in the project area. Description Soil Map Unit Symbol Soil Series Occurs on ridges and mountainsides from 7,800 to 8,700 feet. The parent material is marl and/or residuum weathered from sandstone. Not prime farmland. 36 Irigul channery loam, 9 to 50 percent slopes Irigul-Starman channery loams, 5 to 50 percent slopes Occurs on ridge crests and mountainsides from 7,800 to 9,000 feet; formed from residue from sandstone and marlstone. 38 Occurs on mountainsides from 7,600 to 8,400 feet; parent material is residuum weathered from sedimentary rock. Not prime farmland. 48 Northwater loam, 15 to 65 percent slopes Occurs on mountain slopes at an elevation of 7,600 to 8,600 feet. Parent material is colluvium over residuum weathered from sandstone and shale. 53 Parachute-Rhone loams, 5 to 30 percent slopes Rhone loam, 30 to 70 percent slopes Occurs on ridges and mountainsides from 7,600 to 8,600 feet in elevation; parent material is Marl and/or residuum weathered from sandstone. Not prime farmland 6l Common Name Scíentific Name Abundance*Habitat Type Grasses and Grass-like plants Bluebunch wheatgrass Ps eudoroegneria spicata XX Reclaimed/disturbed area, sagebrush shrublands, mountain shrub Indian ricegrass Achnatherum hymenoides X Reclaimed/di sturbed area, sagebrush shrublands Intermediate wheatgrass T hí n opyrum ìnt erm e di um xx Reclaimed/disturbed area WestWater Engineering Page 2 of 14 October 2021 Tnblo 2. Common plnnt spccice occurring in tho project nren. CommonName Sctentttlc Namø Abundance*Habltat Type Kentucþ bluegrass Pou pralensis xx Sagebrush shrublands, mountain shrub Muttongrass Poafendleriana XX Sagebrush shrublands, mountain shrub Prairie Junegrass Koeleria macrantha XX Sagebrush shrublands Sandberg bluegrass Poa secunda XXX Sagebrush shrublands, mountain shrub Forbs Arrowleaf balsamroot Balsqmorhizø sagittatø xxx Sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrub Blue-eyed Mary Collinsia parviflorø xxx Sagebrush shrubland Brittle pricklypear Opuntiafragilis xx Sagebrush shrubland Common dandelion Taraxacum fficinale X Sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrub Common yarrow Achillea milleþlium XX Reclaimed/di sturbed area, sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrub I)esert madwort Alyssum desertorum xxx Reclaimed/disturbed area sagebrush shrubland Fineleaf hvmenouaoous Hym enop appus .lilifo lius XX Sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrub Hollyleaf clover Triþlium gymnocarporu x Sagebrush shrubland Lesser rushy milkvetch Astragalus convallarius x Sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrub Lewis flax Linum lewisii xx Reclaimed/disturbed area, sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrub Longleafphlox Phlox longifolia XX Sagebrush shrubland Louisiana sagewort Artemisia ludoviciana XX Sagebrush shrubland T.unine- '-r --- -Luninu.c.cn---r -'-"- -r'XX Sasebrush- mountain shmb-.'Ò'- - ----'1 Mountain deathcamas Zigødenus elegøns X Sagebrush shrubland Northwestern lndian paintbrush Castilleja chromosa XX Sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrub Prickly Russian thistle Sulsols trøgus xx Reclaimed/disturbed area Plains pricklypear Opuntiø polyacantha X Sagebnrsh shrubland Rocky Mountain snring¡arslev Cymopterus planasus XX Sagebrush shrubland Rosy pussytoes A n.f. e.n.na r ia. r o s e. o.XXX Sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrub WestWater Engineering Page 3 of 14 October 2021 CommonName Sclentìfic Nane Abundancel Habitat Type Sagebrush buttercup Ranun culus gl ab errim o s xxx Sagebrush shrubland Shortstyle bluebells Mertensiø brevistyla XXX Sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrub Spearleaf buckwheat Eriogonum lonchophyllum xxx Sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrub Spiny phlox Phlox hoodü XXX Sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrub Stinging nettle Urtica dioica XX Sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrub Sulphur flower buckwheat Eriogonum umbellatum XXX Sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrub Woods'Rose Rosq woodsii x Mountain shrub Wyoming Indian paintbrush C as tillei a linariifoli a x Sagebrush shrubland Shrubs/Trees Antelope bitterbrush Purshia tridentata XX Sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrub Chokecherry Prunus virginiana x Mountain shrub Gambel's oak Quercus gømbelii XX Mountain shrub Mountain mahogany Cercocarpus montanus XX Mountain shrub Mountain snowberry Symphoricarpos oreophilus xxx Sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrub Quaking aspen Populus tremuloides x Mountain shrub Utah serviceberry Amelanchier utahensis XXX Mountain shrub Wyoming sagebrush Artemisa tridentata ssp. wyomingensis xxx Sagebrush shrubland Yellow rabbitbrush Chrysothamnus viscidllorus x Sagebrush shrubland, mountain shrub x x: uncommon in project area. xx: moderate frequency throughout project area. xxx : coflrmon frequency throughout project area Non-native species in bold Table 2. Common plant species occurring in the project area. 3.0 REVEGETATTON, RECLAMATTON, & SOILS RECOMMENDATTONS Successful reclamation ofthe project area is dependent upon soil type and texture, slope gradient and aspect, proper weed control, available water, and revegetation with suitable plant species. Reclamation services using multiple seed bin range drills and specialized equipment are available and should be used for reclamation seeding projects. WestWater Engineering Page 4 of 14 October 2021 3.1 Soil Prcparation 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. In areas with slope greater than three percent or where laminar flows from runoff could affect reseeding success, imprinting of the seed bed is recommended. Imprinting can be in the form of dozer tracks or furrows perpendicular to the direction of slope. When utilizing hydro-seeding followed by mulching, imprinting should be done prior to seeding unless the mulch is to be crimped into the soil surface. If broadcast seeding and harrowing, imprinting should be done as part of the harrowing. Furrowing can be done by several methods, the simplest of which is to drill seed perpendicular to the direction of slope in a prepared bed. Other simple imprinting methods include deep hand raking and harrowing, always perpenilicular to the direction of slope. 3.2 Soil Amendments The addition of soil amendments in rangeland reclamation projects can create more optimal growing conditions for non-native or invasive plant species, with which native plants compete poorly. There is potential that the use of soil amendmcnts (fcrtilizcr) containing nitrogcn will disproportionatcly bcncfit undesirable annual plants (Perry et al. 2010). If the company determines the use of soil amendments to be beneficial, the type and rate should be based on results from lab analysis ofsoil samples collected at the site. A potentially beneficial altemative 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 transf'er capacity of the host root system (tsarrow and McCaslin 1995). Over-the-counter commercial products are available, and the best products should contain more than one fungus species. Compacted soils respond well to fossilized humic substances and by-products called humates. These humates, including humic and fulvic acids and humin were formed from pre-historic plant and animal cleposits and can benefit reclamation efforts on compacted soils when applied as directed. 3.3 Seed Mixture The primary vegetation communities that would be disturbed by the pipeline alignment include reclaimed areas, sagebrush shrublands, and mountain shrublands. The recommended seed mix below (Table 3) is a<iapted from the Bureau of Lan<i Management's Coioracio River Vaiiey Fieid Oifice seed menu recommendations (BLM 201'1). The seed mix is well suited for the vegetation communities present along the pipeline alignment. The mix includes perennial native grasses and forbs that should establish well, protect topsoil, and provide a basis for rehabilitation of the site upon reclamation. Portions of the project area that are privately owned may he suhject to landowner-reqnested modifications tn the seed mixture. Table 3. Recommended seed menu for mixed mountnin shnr onkbrush. Common Name Scientiñc Name Varletv Season Form PLS lbs/acre* Plant Both of the Following (20yo Each, 40o/o Total) Bottlebrush Squineltail Elymus el1,mo¡¿rt, Sitanion hvstrix \TNS Cool Bunch 2.7 WestWater Engineering Page 5 of 14 October 2021 Table 3. Recommended seed menu for mixed mountain oakbrush. Scientific Name Variefv Season F'orm PLS lbs/acre*Common Name Secar, P-7, Anatone, Goldar Cool Bunch 3.7Bluebunch Wheatgrass Pseudoroegneria spicøta, Agropyron spicatum and Two of the Followins.65o/o Each,30% Total) Sod- forming 2.5Thickspike Wheatgrass Elymus lanceolatus ssp. lanceolatus, A gropyron dqsystqchyum Critana, Bannock, Schwendimar Cool Elymus trachycaulus, Agropyron trechvcaulum San Luis Cool Bunch 2.5Slender Wheatgrass 3.6Western Wheatsrass Pascopyrum fAproovronl smithii Arriba, Rosana Cool Sod- forming and One of the Followine (10% Total) Poa ampla Sherman Cool Bunch 0.3Big Bluegrass Canbar Cool Bunch 0.3Canby Bluegrass Poa canbyi, P. secunda \TNS Cool Bunch 0.3MuttongrassPoa fendleriana and One of the Followins(l0o/o Total) Achnatherum fstipa| lettermanü \TNS Cool Bunch 1.7Letterman Needlegrass VNS Cool Bunch 1.7Colurnbia Needlegrass Achnatherum [StipaJ nelsonii, Stipø columbiana Nassella [StipaJ viridula Lodorm, Cucharas Cool Bunch 1.4Green Needlegrass and One of the Followins.(ú0"/o Total) Cool Bunch 1.9Indian Ricegrass Achnatherum IOryzopsis] hymenoides Nezpar, Paloma, Rimrock Junegrass Koeleria macrantha, K. cristata VNS (North American oriein) Cool Bunch 0.1 OPTIONAL: Any combination from the following species may be substituted for up to 10olo of the above grasses. Silverv Lupine Lupinus argenteus \TNS Arrowleaf Balsamroot Bals amorhize sagittata \TNS Sulfur Flower Eriosonum umbellatum \TNS Yarrow Achillea millifolium VNS Hedvsarum boreale \TNSUtah Sweetvetch Rocky Mountain Beeolant Cleome serrulatq \TNS Amelanchior utahensis \TNSUtah Serviceberry Mountain Snowberry Symphoricarpus oreophilus \¡NS Rosa woodsii \TNSWood's Rose Artemisia ludoviciana \TNSrü/hite Saee WestWater Engineering Page 6 of 14 October 2021 Table 3. Recommended seed menu for mixed mountain shru oakbrush. *Based on 60 pure live seeds (PLS) per square foot, drill-seeded. Double this rate (120 PLS per square foot) if broadcast or hydroseeded For best results and success, reseeding should be done in late autumn. The seed application rate should be doubled for broadcast applications such as hydroseeding or hand broadcasting ofseed (CNHP 1998). Seeding Methods Typically, the prefened seeding method would be with a multiple-seed-bin rangc drill with no soil preparation other than sirnple grading to slope and imprinting and water bars where applicable. This method would likely be the most economical method. Hydroseeding or hand-broadcast seeding at twice the recommended drill seed rate will be required for steep slopes or for smaller areas where drill seeding would be impractical or dangerous. Altemative seeding methods include, but are not limited to: harrow with just enough soil moisture to create a rough surface, broadcast seed and re-harrow, preferably at a 90-degree angle to the first harrow; ¡ hydroseeding; and ¡ hand raking and broadcast followed by re-raking at a 9O-degree angle to the first raking. These are not the only means of replanting the site. However, these methods have been observed to be effective in similar landscapes. After desired grasses are established and control of target weed species is successful, then shrubs, forbs, and trees can be planted without concern for herbicide damage. Few native forb seeds are available commercially as cultivars. Most are collected from natural populations. Native sh¡ubs and forbs often do not establish well from seed, particularly when mixed with grasses. Past experience has shown that stabilizing the soil with grasses, accomplishing weed control, and then coming back to plant live, containerized woody species in copses has been the most cost-effective method for establishing the woody species cornponent of the plant comnrunity. For sites where soil disturbance will be temporary, grasses should be seeded after construction activities cease and the equipment is removed from the site. After two years of controlling weeds (with herbicides) and allowing the grasses to become established, forbs and woody species should be inter-seeded or hand- planted to increase the diversity and value of the reclamation plantings. 3.4 Mulching Crimped straw mulch is 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 hyclroseedecl. Potential detrimental effects of mulching include the introduction of weed species and the establishment of non- native cereal grains. Use of ¿ certified weed-free sterile wheat hybrid straw mulch would limit these effects. On steeper slopes where crimping is impractical. wood straw mulch would be an alternative to crimped straw mulch that might stand up better to wind and rain that could blow or wash uncrimped straw mulch otlof seeded areas. a WestWater Engineering PageT of14 October 2021 4.0 NOXIOUSWEEDS 4.1 Introduction to Noxious Weeds Most noxious weed species in Colorado were introduced, mostly from Eurasia, either unintentionally or as omamentals that established wild populations. These plants compete aggressively with native vegetation and tend to spread quickly because the environmental factors that normally control them are absent. Disturbed soils, altered native vegetation communities, and areas with increased soil moisture often create prime conditions for weed infestations. The primary vectots 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 (Garfield County 2021). The State of Colorado noxious weed list segÍegates 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 40 plants considered to be noxious weeds within the county. The Garfield County Weed Advisory Board has duties to: l. 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 2016). 4.2 Observations Several weed species listed by the State of Colorado (2005) were detected during surveys including: common mullein (Verbascum th.apsus), houndstongue (Cynoglossum fficinale), musk thistle (Carduus nutans), and Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense). Noxious weeds were observed in scattered infestations primarily along previously disturbed areas (Figure 2). Other non-native weedy species, not listed by the State of Colorado, were also observed which included: Russian thistle (Sølsola tragus), knotweed (Polygonum arenøstrum), and herb sophia (Descurainø sophia). 4.3 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, 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 l) determine the effectiveness of the past treatment strategies; 2) WestWater Engineering Page 8 of 14 October 2021 modify the treatment plan, if necessary; and 3) detect new infestations early, which would result in more economicol and effective treatments. 4.4 Prevention of Noxious Weed Infestations Weed management can be costly, and heavy int-estations 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: o 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. o Avoid driving vehicles through areas where weed infestations exist. ¡ Use of weed-seed-free reclamation materials such as mulch and seed. 4.5 Treatment and Control of Noxious Weed Infestations The treatment method and timing will be determined by the project proponent and their contracted licensed pesticide applicators. The recommendations provided in this report will be considered when developing annual treatment plans. General control mçthods for the species detected in the project area are provided for reference in Table 4. Table 4. General noxious weed control methods for ecies in the ect area. Bold: Garheld County List, *State List A, B, or C 4.6 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 summarizedin Tables WestWal"er Engineering Page 9 of 14 October 2021 lype Control MethodsCommon Name* Scientific Name Canada thistle B Círsíum ørvense Perennial Cutting and mowÍng prior to seed set, continuously and annually indefinitely; cutting and mowing combined with herbicide; cutting, herbicide, and biological (recommended). Common mulleinc Verbascum thapsus Biennial Tillage, mowing, cutting, hand grubbing prior to bolting. Herbicide treatment during rosette stage or bolting stage before flowering. HoundstongueB Cynoglo ssum otlícinale Bicnnial Early Spring tillage before weed emergence in the existing corridor to a depth of 2 ß 4 inches. Herbicide application in SprÍng while plants are small and it the late fall, bagging the seed heads. Musk thistleB Cørduus nutøns Biennial Tillage or hand grubbing in the rosette to pre-flowering stages. Repeated mowing at bolting or early flowering. Seed head and rosette weevils, leaf feeding beetles. Herbicides in rosette stage. 1. Hand grub þull), hoe, till, cultivate in rosette stage and before flowering or seed maturity. If flowers or seeds develop, cut and bag seed heads. 2. Cutroots 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. 5 and 6. Herbicides should not always be the first treatment of choice when other methods can be effectively employed. Table 5. Treatment Strategies for Annual and Biennial Noxious Weeds Prevent Seed Productíon (Sirota 2004) Table 6. Treatment Strategies for Perennials nutríent reserves in root seed (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. 4.7 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 practices include: ¡ 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. l. 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 storuge. Herbicides will be drawn down to the roots more effrciently 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 anpvay, 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. WestWater Engineering Page 10 of 14 October 2021 ¡ ln all cases, temporary disturbance should be kept to an absolutc minimum. . Top soil, where present, should be segregated from deeper soils and replaced as top soil on the final gradc, a proccss known as livc topsoil handling. ¡ If stored longer than one growing seasùn, topsoil stockpiles should be seeded with non-invasive sterile hybrid grasses. ¡ Wetland vegetation, if encountered, should be live handled like sod, temporarily watered if necessary, and placed over excavated sub-soil relative to the position from which the wetland sod was removed. ¡ Cut-off collars should be placed on all wetland and stream crossings to prevent back washing (seed vector) and to ensure that soil moisture conditions are not impacted after construction so that native plants can re-establish from the existing seed bank. o 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 opportunity to reproduce. Monitorlng: 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. 4.8 Commercial Applicator Recommendations A certified commercial pesticide applicator licensed in rangeland and/or right-of-way/industrial weed control (depending on site characteristics) is a necessary choice for herbicide control efforts. An applicator has the full range of knowledge, skills, equipment, and experience desired when dealing with tough noxious weeds. In addition, the purchase and use of restricted use herbicides requires a Colorado pesticide applicator license. 4.0 REFERENCES Ackerfield, J. 2015. Flora of Colorado. Botanical Research lnstitute of Texas, !'ort Worth, 'l'exas. Barrow, J. R., and Bobby 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. WestWater Engincering Page l l of 14 October 2021 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.20|7. Revised Revegetation Seed Mix Menus, CRVFO Energy Team. U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Colorado River Valley Field Office. Silt, Colorado. CWMA. 2007. S. Anthony, T. D'Amato, A. Doran, S. Elzinga, J. Powell, L Schonle, K. Uhing. Noxious Weeds of Colorado, Ninth Edition. Colorado Weed Management Association, Centennial. Garfreld County. 2016. Garfield County Vegetation Management and Garfield County Weed Advisory Board. Garfield County Noxious Weed Management Plan, Adopted by Board of County Commissioners Feb. 16, 2016. Garfield County. 2021. Yegetation Management Section - Noxious Weed List. Available online: htp://www.garfield-county.com/vegetation-management/noxious-weedJist.aspx. Rifle, CO. Kershaw, L., A. MacKinnon, and J. Pojar. 1998. Plants of the Rocþ Mountains. Lone Pine Publishing, Auburn, Washingfon. NRCS. 2021. 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 plant invasion. Oecologia: 763:12-24. Sirota, Judith 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. eduÆRA"/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, William 4., and Ronald 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 lleeds of the West - 9th edition. lVestern Society of lWeed Science in cooperation with Cooperative Extension S ervices, University of Wyoming, Laramie. WestWater Engineering Page 12 of 14 October 2021 Locsllon .i !..1. PAD L.gönd l]] 30 mcor ttoxroua ttlbods s$ßty Arlr æ Pfrpo.åd P¡p.lhåa - Rold jr g*rams Ii ¡tr* Ê¡€ !1þrttr10 Pd gürtlcr Mrr¡îsm Þ¡ltubrnct Flguro I Caeru¡ Olll G¡¡ N23 CDP to G3t 408 Piprllnr Fælamåtlon, Rcveqttåüon rnd l,loxlouÊ Wåeds Man¡gemrnt Plan Locrüon fÏil€¡tl4'tlerEnqinlrf¡ngfl çe¡¡¡sa rtrx; ¡ k¡rnoil-¡ 0Ésfæ k Octobcr 2021 8,[,{?î{0tc0PpAo Location t{Pi¡l g3ð-atô FÀD ¡{ntqË.$C FñAC sIJ?FOñTFAD F¡gurô 2 Caerue Oll& Gae tì¡23 CDP to G3t 496 Plpellne Reclam¡tion, Revogetalion and Noxiou¡ Ttleed¡ lúanagamenl Plan l{oxious wledt ôV,¡crtl,l"åþr En gi nr¡ri n9 f Cørutttag lngmcrñ ¿ 9.crl¡t-¡ { rmo ¡.ffi -- Ftt octobcr 2021 Lcgcnd I Crnrdrlhl*tL ù Coffmon mullê!ì a Houfldúlongee f: ldusk lhls¡t ff 30 Mctcr ttoxlor:i VlåÉdÈ Suruáy Arrt S eree rruvloualy SùilèyÈd - Pmpo¡rd Pipålhc¡ E= worr¡ng Pûd Surfrco lEiìMrximum Ðlstûrbâncâ - Rmd .Þ Sl¡såms l" . 8LM Caerus Oil and Gas M33 and G35 Locations Recommended Seed Mixes for Reclamation. 0.5Poo secundq ssp. sondbergiiUP Plateau Sandberg bluegrass 3Bluebunch Wheatgrass Pseudoroegnerio spicoto ssp. inermisWhitmar Poq secunda ssp. amplo TShermanBig Bluegrass 3Poscopyrum smith¡iArribaWestern Wheatgrass 2Bromus marginatusBromarMountain Brome LLewis Flax Linum lewisiiMaple Grove 0.5Achilleq milleþlium Western Yarrow 0.5Rocky Mountain Penstemon Penstemon strictusBandera r¡,1,jli,r.i{ì"1rr iì;ii, ill"1,ì " I I . : il : | , I ri : ) ; rl¡riiir,',r:l'¡l ,¡.1¡111¡¡.¡1 l¡ii,11 1..r i,ji,trllii¡iL,' ril.l;,rf :