Laserfiche WebLink
Page 3 of 3 <br />Item #5. In the June 6 response, there is no discussion of the haying of the reclaimed land, yet <br />that was an integral part of the reclaimed area management. As requested above, please map each field <br />included in the SL12 application that was hayed. Please provide the dates when each field(s) was <br />hayed and if available, the field production. <br />The term `stubble' was defined in the adequacy response but not incorporated into SL12 text. Please <br />include the definition of stubble in the SL12 text. <br />This concludes the review of the June 6, 2011 response provided by GLA for the SL12 application. It <br />appears as though the required information to document similar management practices between the <br />reclaimed irrigated pasture and the irrigated pasture reference area either are not available or are not <br />understood. The Division suggests that a professional range management specialist be consulted to <br />ensure the proper documentation is collected and presented to make this demonstration in future <br />correspondence. <br />Please contact Brock Bowles at 303 - 866 -3567 x8142 or myself if you have questions regarding this <br />letter. <br />Sincerely, <br />h) comparison of plant species composition between reference and reclaimed areas, <br />i) weed management, <br />j) fertilizer applications, <br />k) a comparison of the effectiveness of flood and side roll irrigation systems. <br />Sandra L. Brown <br />Sr. Environmental Protection Specialist <br />cc. Brock Bowles <br />Ben Langenfeld, Greg Lewicki and Associates <br />