REV12466 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mt. Mike Boulay Division of ~Liverals and Geology April 3Q, 2002 Page 4 would be for the purpose of rtimulating tuckering within the arear from Whuh lave toproil Would be ralvaged and/or live arpen rocker clumpr Would be obtained. • Where dater pushing is used to rtimulate tuckering, the recommendation (Schier, et. al., 1985) it to tip the tree trunk out of the ground, thur revering the matt at the bare of the tree. Cutting through the roil With the dozer blade it to be avoided during rite preparation treatment, due to damage to lateral roots which Would negatively affect tuckering. • Ldve trap planting Would be done during the dormant rearon, uring the procedurer as dereribed for live rhnrb clump zranplants. Live taproiling and live pad or clump tranplanting of open hat not proven to be very ruccertful, but movement ofyoung loner and roil, with propaguler from arear of active proofing would be appear to hold the potential far enhanced ruaerr. • Herbaceour competition (particularly from grarrer) can reriaurly impact growth and rurvival of young open, and other Woody panty. Canrideration rhould be given to withholdln8 reeding on relected live- handle open toproil rite to minimize herbaceour competition. Roto-clear preparation treatment would be adapted to this approach, due to the erorian protection provided by the quantity of incorporated Woody debrir. Suggerted references include Shepperd, Wayne D. 1996. `Reponre of Aspen Aoot Suckerr to Regeneration Methadt and Port-Harvest Protection': Res. Pap. RM-RP-324. Fort Collinr, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forert Service, Rocky Mountain Forert and Range Experiment Station. Shepperd, Wayne D. 200E `t`blanpulationr to RegenerateApen Ecoryrtemr". In Shepperd et. al., compilerr. 2001. Surtaining Apen in Western Lnndreapes: Symporiurn Proceedingr; 13-15 June 2000; Grand Junction, CO. Proceedings RMRS-P-18. Fort Collinr, CO: US. Department of Agriculture, Forert Service, Rocky Mountain Rereareb Station. 460 P. Schier, GeargeA., WD. Shepperd, and J.R Joner. 1985. `Regeneration': In DeByle, NV., and RP. Winokur, editors. Apen: Ecology and management in the wertern United Stater, USDA Forert Service General Technical Report RM-119, 283 p. Rocky Mountain Forert and Range Experiment Station, Fart Collinr, Colo. Response• 1. Proposed Method fot Establishment of Aspen at Seneca II-WS David Buckner (ESCO Arrociatet), revegetation rontultant for SCC, prepared the following dircurrion and addrerrer live open tranplanting, herbaceaur competition, and elk proofing of theyoung open. The following proposed method for establishment of aspen is directed toward the successful establishment of individual aspen trees in select reclamation locations fox the purpose of facilitating the eventual clonal spread of those aspen individuals and the return of that vegetation type to the reclaimed landscapes. Like many aspects of the return of woody plants to reclaimed areas in Routt and Moffat Counties, the reestablishment of aspen is a goal that, at best, will be achieved over the long term. Like certain of the other prominent woody species in the pre- mining landscapes (especially GambePs oak) the heart of the presence of aspen in apre-mining landscape is the immense bulk of the underground parts of the individual clones. The progression from time zero on a geologically "renewed" landscape to mature aspen clones has never been observed over its full course and so no one really knows what the conditions of establishment and the rates of growth toward the eventual mature clone are. All we can do is provide the setting in which we think the tree or shrub in question may eventually, given favorable climatic conditions, lead to expanding clonal growth. In the short tettrt, we need to give the "mother -plants" that we seek to establish, acost-effluent but effective boost and adequate protection from as many as possible of the environmental stresses that we know exist in reclaimed areas.