Laserfiche WebLink
• 1. 6 inches (15 ctn) of stockpiled topsoil over spoil and native shrub transplants as tubelings. <br />Surface manipulation mcorporated to reduce run off This treatment is represented by one <br />unfenced 100- x 100.ft plot. <br />2. 20 inches (50 an) of stockpiled topsoil over spoil and native shrub transplants as mbelings. <br />Surface manipulation incorporated to reduce run off. This treatment is represented by one <br />fenced and one unfenced 100- x 100-ft plot. <br />3. 20 inches (50 an) of stockpiled topsoIl over spoil with strip seeding. The strip seeding <br />included a strip of native shrubs and native low-competitive forbs that alternated with a strip <br />of native grasses, forbs, and shrubs. The seed mixtures for this treatment aze presented in <br />Tables 4 and 5 of Appendix A. This treatment is represented by one fenced 100. x 100-ft <br />plot <br />4. Non-topsoiled spoil with native shrub transplants as tubelings. Surface manipulation <br />incorporated to reduce mn off. This treatment is represented by one fenced and one <br />unfenced 100- x 100-ft plot <br />5. 6 inches (15 cm) of stockpiled topsoil over spoil with strip seeding. The strip seeding <br />included a strip of native shrubs and native low-competitive forbs alternated with a strip of <br />native grasses, forbs, and shrubs. The seed mixtures for this treatment aze presented in <br />Tables 4 and 5 of Appendix A. This treatment is represented by one fenced and one <br />unfenced 100- x 100.ft plot. <br />6. Non-topsoiled spoil with strip seeding. The strip seeding included a strip of native shrubs <br />and native low-competitive forbs alternated with a strip of native grasses, forbs, and shrubs. <br />The seed mixtures for this treatment aze presented in Tables 4 and 5 of Appendix A. No <br />transplants. This treatment is represented by one unfenced ]00. x 200-fr plot. <br />Seeding and transplanting of the test plots was completed in November 2000. Transplants <br />(tubelings) were planted at a rate of one per 20 squaze ft or a 4 fr by 5 fr pattern. Transplanted <br />spedes included~4cernegxnda,Amelanclneralnifolia, Pnrnurvitginiana,Qxeszrugambelk; Symp/wncarpor <br />oercophilur, and Barn moaJrii. Not all of these spedes were planted in each plot and no records were <br />made for spedes planted or numbers for each plot <br />In order to establish the suitability of the demonstration sites and treatments for plant growth, <br />composite soil samples were collected from each demonstration plot on Apri125 and 26, 2001 and <br />analyzed at the Soil, Plant and Water Testing Iab at Colorado State University. <br />Overall, the soils (topsoil and spoil) have good physical and chemical properties, as shown on Table <br />8 in Attachment A. So$ pH ranges from 6.8 to 7.6. Macronutrients appeaz to be adequate for <br />sustained plant growth, except for phosphorus. Phosphorus concentrations range from 0.4 to 4.3 <br />mg/kg. Organic matter levels range from 3.2% to 3.9%. Salt concentrations aze low (EC ranges <br />from 0.3 to 0.9 tnmhos/cm and SAR ranges Exom 0.3 to 0.6) and CEC is in a normal range. Textures <br />are clay loam and loam. <br />Spoil material has lower pH than topsoil (6.8 compazed to an average of 7.5) and lower phosphorus <br />levels (0.4 compared to an average of 3.1 mg/kg). Ammonium-nitrogen levels ate similar between <br />topsoIl (4.1 to 5.1 mg/kg) and spoIl (4.6 mg/kg), as aze NO3-N levels (4.6 to 13.1 mg/kg in topsoil <br />• and 7.5 mg/kg in spoil). Orgarilc matter levels in topso$ range from 3.2 to 3.9% and the organic <br />matter level in spoil is 3.2%. Potassium levels, CEC, EC, and SAR aze all similar between topsoil and <br />MR-52 13-]1-3 July 2005 <br />