Laserfiche WebLink
protective measures described in the section on the 404 permit at least some reduction <br />will be provided. Schmidt continues to support a position that if essentially open <br />range grazing is going to be allowed on this property then full recovery of the riparian <br />corridor will probably not occur. Grazing should only be allowed in the riparian <br />corridor in accordance with good management practices for that kind of vegetation. <br />These management practices are well known and have repeatedly shown to be <br />effective in allowing both utilization and recovery. Otherwise, the cattle should be <br />completely removed from the property for a period of at least 10 years to allow <br />recovery of the riparian corridor as well as the uplands. The impact on the <br />revegetation can be severe, but it is usually still successful. That cannot be said about <br />the riparian corridor in general, particularly the tree and shrub recovery. <br />WEED STATUS: <br />1. General overview of weed status on site: <br />A. Status of species that have been present in the past: Due to the severe drought of <br />2006, most of the weed growth that was so intense in the past has declined. Of course, <br />that is just a temporary condition, assuming the drought ends or declines. Like the <br />Terminator, they'll be back. Unfortunately, with the weak growth control becomes <br />difficult. Most herbicides aze only effective when the weeds are most actively <br />growing. If they aze growing only enough to bazely stay alive treatments often have <br />little effect. On the plus side though, it is not likely there wifl be a great deal of <br />expansion of weed populations or seed production. But, once again, that is only <br />temporary. <br />B. CRITICAL ISSUE - A New Invasive Species Found: In Section 25, Tamarix was <br />discovered in June 2006 while doing initial work on the 404 fencing azea location. <br />Currently, the population has been defined as inhabiting only a small azea <br />immediately north of the road crossing. Inspection of the stream corridor south of the <br />road crossing (upstream) almost as far as the county line did not find a single plant. It <br />is therefore concluded that this new entry was introduced most likely by vehicles <br />using the road crossing. The infestation is young enough that it is even evident where <br />the invasion most likely began which was at the location where the old culvert crosses <br />under the road. Three stands, two small and one moderate sized, have been identified <br />in this azea. Based on the size of the plants, it appears the Tamarix was most likely <br />introduced in 2003. It is remotely possible it arrived prior to 2003, but that appears to <br />be very unlikely. Two of the three populations contain a considerable number of <br />second year plants and a few seedlings were also noted in late June 2006. It is not <br />known who was responsible for the introduction and there is little hope that anyone <br />would ever be identified as the vector. It is highly unlikely this introduction had <br />anything to do with the cattle, although the cattle could be a minor vector for <br />spreading this serious pest if the density of the Tamarix increases. It is possible it was <br />introduced by birds, but the location is counter indicative of bird introduction. On <br />July 7, 2006, inspection of suitable habitats downstream showed no evidence of <br />Tamarix downstream from this site. It is possible that any plants downstream are <br />Status report for 2006 (July 15, 2006) Page 11 of 13 <br />