Laserfiche WebLink
Southwestern <br />Ecological <br />Services <br />Vegetation Analysis <br />Wetland Ecology <br />Land Rehabilitation Planning <br />Photodocumentation <br />37 East Colorado Avenue • Denver, Colorado 80210-3105 • (303) 722-9067 <br />December 31, 2008 <br />Margaret Langworthy <br />U.S. Army Corps of Engineers <br />9307 South Wadsworth <br />Littleton, CO 80128 <br />RE: 2007 Annual Report for Permit DA 198811488 - Coal Creek Wetland Mitigation - Schmidt Construction Co. <br />Dear Margaret: <br />Here is the annual report for 2008. The format is similar to previous annual reports, but this year the emphasis is on <br />comparing the results of the last three years. The last year was quite dry and as a result growth advances were not as <br />dramatic as they were in 2007 which was a wet year. Nevertheless, significant progress was made by the plants and <br />on the whole things are looking very good. <br />In the conclusion I mention that Exclosures 3 and 5 might be considered successful in meeting the requirements. I <br />don't see a lot of additional changes occurring in these two exclosures other than just normal growth. The vegetation <br />is stable, well established, and appears to meet the requirements. There is still some weed control to do in and <br />around these exclosures, but weeds are not a serious problem in either exclosure. I propose that these two be <br />considered successful and dropped from the quantiative analysis on an annual basis. However, they should remain in <br />the program for photographic monitoring and for weed control. <br />Clearly, the other three exclosures are not ready for dropping from the quantitative analysis. In those there are still <br />some volatile vegetation dynamics occurring that needs to be watched. I am not worried about a failure in any of <br />them, but there are still changes occurring at a rate and in a form that is continuing to shift developmental pathways. <br />Exclosure 1, the youngest vegetation, is definitely still in a high rate of flux, but some slight evidence of stabilization <br />is evident in Exclosure 2. Exclosure 4 is certainly the closest to joining the status of Exclosures 3 and 5, but it too <br />still shows some dynamic changes in some areas that deserve monitoring. After you read the report, give some <br />consideration to whether it is still meaningful to sample in Exclosures 3 and 5. I seriously doubt future sampling <br />there is going to provide any new information. <br />I plan on retiring by summer, but will continue to provide services on this project. In 30 years, it is my favorite <br />project. <br />If you have any questions, please call. <br />Sincerely, <br />C) <br />M%aii f ner <br />V <br />cc. Scott Davis, Schmidt Construction <br />Mark Davis, Colorado State Land Board <br />Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (for Reclamation Permit inclusion only)