Laserfiche WebLink
<br />8. Irrigation or innundation of saline streamside soils as part of wildlife <br />management or riparian rehabilitation programs may reduce salinity due to <br />channel erosi on, but may increase salt 1 eachi ng from those soil s. <br /> <br />w <br />w <br />CJ1 <br />o <br /> <br />~. There is little opportunity to affect salt runoff on highly saline soils <br />on Mancos shale lowlands through either grazing management or vegetation <br />manipulation. This is because good (or even fair) hydrologic condition <br />cannot be achieved even at maximum potential cover. On less saline sites <br />with higher cover potentials, grazing management may result in improved <br />cover and reduced runoff and erosion. However, the lower soil salt <br />content of these sites limits the potential for large reductions in salt <br />yield on a unit area basis. <br /> <br />10. Watershed treatments and structural controls can result in multiple <br />benefits for salinity control, sediment control, forage production, <br />wildlife, water supply and downstream flood control. Salinity benefits <br />will generally be greatest using water retention techniques on highly <br />saline soils. Benefits to forage production (range) will generally be <br />greatest using land treatments e.g. contour furrows on non- to slight1y- <br />saline soils. Most retention structures have limited lives and require <br />periodic maintenance to maintain their effectiveness. Land treatments <br />are most effective when they result in improvements in vegetation cover <br />which persist after the effective life of the treatment. <br /> <br />11. Because of the close association between erosion and salinity, ~ood man- <br />agement for forage production, range, and watershed condition (lnc1uding <br />management for soil loss) will generally provide salinity benefits. <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />. "- .;""" ~-',".. <br /> <br />