Laserfiche WebLink
t <br /> <br />62 <br />the expense of legumes. On Treatment 2 however, only phosphorus was added • <br />which has been shown to aid legumes while grasses, very nitrogen demanding, <br />remained small. With time the legumes became well established and began to <br />produce nitrogen in excess of their demands which proved advantageous to the <br />grasses. At the same time, on nitrogen amended treatments the nitrogen supply <br />was being taxed by seeded and invading species alike, as well as slowly being <br />lost by means of erosion and leaching. As nitrogen became limiting, grass <br />invaders dropped out freeing more room for native grasses and fortis to expand. <br />We are at a transitional stage on the nitrogen treated plots where legumes are <br />beginning to grow in community importance and competing invaders are on the <br />decline. With time these nitrogen treatments will probably reach a situation <br />similar to Treatment 2. For the next few years one might expect Treatment 2 <br />to prove superior in plant growth, but with the improved legume diversity on <br />Treatments 3-8 the production gaps between these treatments will close. -~ <br />Finally, the Control, which lacks phosphorus, will probably never reach the <br />standards of any of these other treatments. <br />Recommendations <br />1. Treatment 2 (phosphorus and potassium control), because of good <br />plant growth, community diversity, and economical considerations, appears to <br />be the best method to date for reclaiming level areas. <br />2. On sloping areas a grade of 3:1 or less should be created and <br />fertilizer plus mulch should be amended to the spoils to aid plant establish- <br />ment while reducing the impact of erosion. <br />3. If nitrogen is applied to any of the reclaimed areas, a high rate <br />does not appear necessary as 66 kg N/ha has shown equally good plant response. • <br />