PERMFILE45788 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Section 8I6.1i2 (b) Continued. • As concluded in the above cited reports, the best stabilization for reseeded plants is produced by introduced species. These species control erosion better because they are better able to establish themselves under adverse conditions, provide more rapid growth and provide a more dependable early plant cover than the slower developing native species. These same reports also document that, unlil:e some of the recormuended native species, these introduced species have a longer life span, are able to reproduce more efficiently, and are better able to provide permanent vegetation than others. Once the introduced species have established themselves the native species will have a more stable environment in which to grow. (c) The species are compatible with the plant and animal species of the region; The proposed introduced species, as mentioned, are currently • encountered in Routt County. All are deemed desirable from a range _' seeding and wild-life management standpoint. Their nutritional value for and compatibility with livestock and wildlife are taell documented. P1ule deer preferences for intermediate wheatgrass, desert wheatgrass, orchardgrass, timothy, brome grass, alfalfa, and milkvetch are documented by Kufeld, et. al. (1973). Elk preferences are reported by Kufeld (1973) to include desert wheatgrass, timothy, brome, alfalfa, milkvetch, and small burnet. Plummer, et. al. (1968) report that studies in Utah have shown big-game prefer alfalfa, small burnet, desert cheatgrass, intermediate wheatgrass, pubescent wheatgrass, smooth brome, and orchardgrass. Livestock forage preference for the proposed introduced species has been documented by Piarquiss, et. al. (1974). Palatability ratings in order of descending preferences were: smooth brome, inter- mediate wheatgrass, pubescent wheatgrass, desert wheatgrass, western wheatgrass, and beardless wheatgrass. 816-146