My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE46519
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
500000
>
PERMFILE46519
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:48:40 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 12:48:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1988044
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
8/26/2003
Doc Name
Wetland Study
From
Schmidt Construction Company
To
DMG
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
92
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
respect to floristic dominance in the vegetation, species that tend to be dominate in the most <br />highly developed wetland units are also dominate or at least sub-dominate in the most poorly <br />developed wetland units. That is, the dominate species tend to occur practically everywhere <br />that wetland is present. <br />It is also very interesting to note that in Table 1 only one species tends to be a problem <br />species, Hordeum jubatum. But even that species is not abundant and is most commonly found <br />on the wetland side of broad transition zones from upland to wetland. Out in the wetlands <br />themselves this species is rarely found. No other problem species or noxious weeds were found <br />in any of the wetlands. That does not mean they are not there, but if they are there they have <br />a very low abundance. This is interesting because the surrounding lands contain a large <br />number of noxious weeds, some of which can invade wetlands. There has been sufficient time <br />for such invasion to occur, and yet it appears it has not occurred, at least to a level that makes <br />them noticeable in the vegetation. Canada Thistle, in particular, is fairly common in dense, <br />isolated patches throughout the valley and it can quite readily invade wetlands, even very wet <br />areas. Yet not a single plant was seen in any recovered or natural wetlands. It might actually <br />be there, hiding among the taller plants, but if that is the case it certainly is not a problem <br />species and is probably having a difficult time competing with other, better adapted species. <br />Over half of the species noted are obligate wetland (OBL) species and nearly all of the <br />rest are almost obligate (FACW). Only two species tend to sit on the fence between wetland <br />and upland (FAC) and one species is almost upland (FACT)). This tends to indicate the <br />wetlands are well developed and are maintained by a rather consistent moisture regime. <br />Wetlands that have highly fluctuating moisture levels tend to have fewer obligate wetland <br />species and more of the FACW and FAC species. <br />Natural vs. Recovered Wetlands <br />When natural wetlands that occur in the stream channel, particularly those found on <br />the south end of the study area near the county line, tend to be quite similar to the recovered <br />wetlands with regard to dominate species and the high proportion of obligate wetland species. <br />Scirpus and Juncus are the dominate species within these natural wetlands. Furthermore, the <br />natural wetlands are consistently found where the sand layer is thin or absent. In the <br />recovered wetlands as well as in the enclosures, this pattern is also consistently found to be <br />the case. In the herbaceous vegetation, it is difficult to see any differences between the <br />recovered wetlands and the natural wetlands. Where the environment is similar the wetlands <br />living there, whether recovered or natural, are essentially interchangeable. <br />This indicates that there is no real difference between natural wetlands and wetlands <br />that developed in areas where the sand layer was removed and the underlying clay left in <br />place. Furthermore, this development occurs quite rapidly taking only about three or four <br />Creek Wetlands and Wetland Mitigation DA Permit 198811488 August 2003 Page 13 of 23 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.