Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />Page 5 <br />December 7, 1987 <br />M-87-171 Adequacy Responses <br />Steven Renner <br />There certainly is no easy answer to the problem. The environmental <br />matrix dictates that when one factor is changed significantly, most other <br />factors are also altered in some way. Mulch is highly useful in some <br />situations, but it can also cause some severe problems, the effects of <br />which can be as difficult to deal with as the problems produced by not <br />using mulch in the first place. In our experience, where the vegetation <br />is going to be highly managed, the use of mulch may be a wise investment. <br />But where minimal management is anticipated, it is probably better not to <br />throw the carbon/nitrogen ratio greatly out of balance through the use of <br />high carbon mulches (straw, wood chips, wood fiber, etc.) and simply deal <br />with the problems of a non-mulched condition as they occur. Fortunately, <br />the climatic patterns in this area are quite favorable to revegetation. <br />Prolonged drought periods during the growing season are not common. This <br />is unusual for the Front Range Corridor where summer drought is the rule. <br />The Colorado Springs area is one of a few isolated pockets along the <br />Front Range where the precipitation/evaporation balance is quite <br />favorable and more similar to what would be expected in the western <br />portions of the mid-grass prairies in eastern Colorado and western <br />Kansas. <br />In short, we would be extremely reluctant to agree to use straw mulch <br />on this site. However, when revegetation is started, it might be worth <br />while attempting an experiment by mulching one area and not mulching <br />another to determine whether the mulch really does much good or is worth <br />the extra expense of mulch and additional fertilizer. We would agree to <br />evaluate this matter in this way, but would not agree to use mulch <br />without conducting an experiment to determine whether it has a suitable <br />cost benefit ratio. <br />QUESTION 5: The Division suggests that the operator substitute cicer <br />milkvetch for yellow sweetclover in both the permanent and topsoil <br />stockpile seed mixes. Cicer Milkvetch will supply many of the positive <br />characteristics that yellow sweetclover does, but is not normally as <br />aggressive as yellow sweetclover. Species substitution may enhance the <br />long-term probability of establishing a diverse vegetative cover at the <br />site. <br />RESPONSE: We do not believe that Cicer Milkvetch is appropriate to this <br />site. First, the soil is a sandy material and will probably become more <br />coarse after replacement. This species does not do well on coarse soils. <br />Second, the species can be quite difficult to establish and in many <br />stands does not show good vigor for a considerable amount of time. <br />