GENERAL34599 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

underlying topsoil and then when it is layed down his is put on top This keeps more of the small aspen roots with the greatest potential for sprouting close to the surface. The third treatment consists of treating and moving topsoil during the summer (aspen growing) verses the fall (aspen dormant). The final treatment consisted of putting up elk proof fence around 1/2 of the study area. Methods All topsoil was live-handled (non-stockpiled) and no amendments were made to the topsoil. Topsoil was moved with scrapers. Topsoil was treated and layed down in 6 approximately one acre blocks (100 by 450 feet) and then half of each block was fenced (Figure 1), which resulted in 12 treatments. Prior to topsoil movement, trees were dozed off with a D-9 Cat or were knocked down with the Cat and chopped and mixed with the topsoil using the Madge-rotoclear. Summer treatments occurred between September 18 and 27, 1985. Fall treatments occurred between October 21 and 28, 1985. All summer treated topsoil was moved in 2 lifts. Half of the fall treated topsoil was moved in 1 lift and half in ~ lifts. Tree and shrub density by species was determined from 14 2 x 25 meter belt transects per treatment. Data was collected between August 7 and il, 1986. As can be seen in figure 1 lift treatments are nested in the fall treatment. As a result, 2 separate analysis of variance and Duncan's multiple range tests were conducted. The first consist of all fall treatments and the second of all 2 lift treatments. Results The result are summarized in Table 1. The statistical analysis are summarized in Tables 2 and 3. As can be seen the most significant t eatment was fall versus summer. Summer shrub densities (2418/acre) were ~nor~ double fall densities (848/acre). The Summer treatment appears superihr for all five species. Differences were significant at the .05 level for 4 of the species (aspen, chokecherry, rose, snowberry). Although differences were not significant for serviceberry, the trend was the same. Difference~s~ between rotoclearing and dozing (wa~ also significant. Shrub density orY rotocleared sites, was 25% and 30%--higher on summer and fall treatments respectively over dozer treatments. However, this was not consistent for all species. All species were higher on rotoclear sites for fall treatment. However, for summer treatment the reverse trend was seen far chokecherry and rose. There were no overall significant differences in shrub densities between 1 and 2 lift treatments. However, rose responded to 1 lift and snowberry to 2 lifts. No real significant differences were -seen between fenced and unfenced treatments. Although on summer treatments, serviceberry shows a positive response to fencing and snowberry a negative response to fencing. It should be remembered that some of the differences observed may be due to the density of understory shrubs on the pre-treatment topsoil. Although aspen density was similar on all sites, understory densities of serviceberry, chokecherry, rose, and snowberry could have varied significantly from treatment to treatment. ~ ~~ .r' .r ~o~'