SEA TON SUBDIVISION GOMBIN£0 PR£LIMINARY PLAN & FINAL PLAT APPLICATION

EXHIBIT D

WILDLIFE CHECKLIST, VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN & CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDY Garfield Countv IT Department GIS Resources: Colorado Division of Wildlife WR/S Data Checklist for:

Rob Hykys, GIS Analyst, [email protected] 97()..945-1377 x1590, FAX; 970-384-3670 511012005 3:46:28 PM

Note: For additional information and interpretation of this data, contact Pam Schnurr, Wildlife Biologist, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Grand Junction, at 970-297-1192.

Species & Habitat Type:

Bald Eagle Active Nest Site Bald Eagle Communal Roost Bald Eagle Roost Site Bald Eagle Winter Range Bald Eagle Winter Concentration Area Bald Eagle Winter Foraging Area Black Bear Overall Range Black Bear Fall Concentration Area Black Bear Summer Concentration Area Black Bear-Human Conflict Brazilian Free-Tailed Bat Overall Range Bighorn Overall Range Big hom Winter Range Bigham Winter Concentration Area Bigham Summer Range Bighorn Production Area Canada Goose Brood Concentration Area Canada Goose Feeding Area Canada Goose Production Area Canada Goose Winter Range Canada Goose Winter Concentration Area Elk Winter Range Elk Winter Concentration Area Elk Severe Winter Range Elk Overall Range Elk Summer Range Elk Summer Concentration Area Elk Production Area Elk Highway Crossing Elk Limcred Use Area Great Blue Heron Nesting Area Great Blue Heron Foraging Area Lynx Overall Range Lynx Potential Habitat Mule Deer Winter Range Mule Deer Winter Concentration Area Mule Deer Severe Winter Range Mule Deer Overall Range Mule Deer Summer Range Mule Deer Resident Population Mule Deer Highway Crossing Osprey Active Nest Site This property lies: Species & Habitat Type: Entirely Partially Within Out In Area In Area 1 Mile of Area

Osprey Foraging Area / Peregrine Falcon Nesting Area ./ Peregrine Falcon Potential Nesting Area ..L Pronghorn Antelope Overall Range ./ Pronghorn Antelope Winter Range ..:L Pronghorn Antelope Winter Concentration Area ..L.. Razorback Sucker ./ River Otter Overall Range ./ Sage Grouse Brood Area ./ Sage Grouse Overall Range ..L Sage Grouse Production Area ./ Sage Grouse Winter Range ./ Sage Grouse Historic Habitat .L Wild Turkey Overall Range ./ Wild Turkey Production Area ./ Wild Turkey Winter Range ..:L Wild Turkey Winter Concentration Area ./ Wild Turkey Roosting Sites v Seaton Subdivision

Vegetation and Wildlife Assessment November 2009

e.m. ecological, LLC Natural Resource and Restoration Consulting Seaton SubdivisiOn Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Purpose ...... 2 Brief Description of the Property ...... 2 Soils and Table 1- Soil Types on the Proposed Seaton Subdivided Property ...... 2 Vegetation Resources and Noxious Weeds ...... 3 Distinct Plant Communities ...... 3 Narrowleaf Cottonwood-Willow Riparian Plant Community ...... 3 Gam bel Oak-Serviceberry Mountain Shrubland ...... 4 Open Meadows ...... 4 Noxious Weeds Present on the Seaton Proposed Subdivision ...... 4 Garfield County Weed List...... 4 State of Colorado Weed List...... 5 Extent of Garfield County Listed Weeds-Overview ...... 5 Extent of State of Colorado Listed Weeds-Overview ...... 5 Integrated Weed Management ...... 5 Garfield County Listed Noxious Weeds: Species Accounts and Management ...... 6 1. Canada Thistle ( Cirsium arvense, syn, Brea arvense) ...... 6 2. Common Burdock (Arctium minus) ...... 8 3. Houndstongue ( Cynoglossum officina/e)...... •...... 9 4. Oxeye Daisy (Chrysanthemum /eucanthemum) ...... 10 State of Colorado Listed Noxious Weeds: Brief Species Accounts and Some Management ...... 11 5. Absinth Wormwood (Artemisia absinthium), List B ...... 12 6. Bull Thistle (Cirsium vulgare), List B ...... 15 7. Common Mullein (Verbascum thapsis) List C ...... 16 8. Common Tansy (Tanacetum vulgare) List B ...... 17 9. Cheatgrass or Downy brome (Bromus tectorum, Syn. Anisantha tectorum), List C ...... 19 10. Poison Hemlock (Conium maculatum), List C ...... 21 Crownvetch (Securigera varia, syn. Coronilla varia) ...... 22 General Comments for all weeds on the property and a seed mix recommendation ...... 23 IWM Treatment Methods and the limitations of this document...... 24 Wildlife ...... 25 Mountain Lions ...... 25 American Elk ...... 25 Mule Deer ...... 25 Black Bears ...... 26 Beaver ...... 26 Fences and Dogs ...... 26 Literature Referenced-Seaton Proposed Subdivision, Vegetation and Wildlife ...... 27 Appenidix 1. Garfield County Noxious Weed List 2009 ...... 29 Appendix 2. Colorado Noxious Weed List 2009 ...... 30

Map 1. Seaton Proposed Subdivision, Weed Areas of Note Map 2. Soil Map for Seaton Proposed Subdivision Map 3. Mountain Lion Human Conflict Area and Overall Range for Mountain Lions Map 4. Overall Summer Range and Calving Areas for American Elk Map 5. Winter Range and Winter Concentration Areas for American Elk Map 6. Mule Deer Summer Range Map 7. Mule Deer Winter Range, Winter Concentration Areas and Severe Winter Range em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 1 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

Purpose

This document provides information and guidance regarding pertinent vegetation resources and wildlife on the portion of the Seaton Property proposed for a property split or subdivision. The Seaton property is located along Four Mile Road (CR117) roughly three and a quarter miles south of Glenwood Springs and up the Four Mile Creek watershed. This property lies just south of Chelyn Road off of Four Mile Road and includes a section of Four Mile Creek approximately two plus river miles upstream from the confluence of Four Mile Creek and the Roaring Fork River. The elevation is roughly 6,320 feet at the east edge of the Seaton property along Four Mile Creek Road dropping down slightly to the creek bottom to the west. This area extending from the road to the creek consists of the eastern half of the existing Seaton property and is now proposed as a separate lot (See Map 1, Seaton Proposed Subdivision, Weed areas of Note) .

Brief Description of the Property

The 4.448 acre piece of the Seaton property that is being proposed as a separate parcel is comprised mainly of a riparian plant community, an adjacent remnant of the original native upland Gambel oak/serviceberry community, and cleared meadow areas up on a higher terrace, now consisting of cultivated Eurasian pasture grasses. The other half of the property, 8.6 acres with the existing house, comprises the western half. It consists mainly of an un­ manipulated native, upland, mixed-mountain shrub plant community extending uphill above the existing home. Riparian and adjoining upland portions on the west parcel are now highly managed to be more open in and around the current creek-side residence.

The section proposed for the split flanks Four Mile Road and consists of the area of the property reviewed for this document (See Map 1 ). The lot split occurs more or less along Four Mile Creek giving the expectation that both properties, after the lot split, will have adequate access to the creek (see Map 1 for the split property line, although only approximate). Four Mile Creek drains the general vicinities of Sunlight Mountain and Baldy Mountain at its headwaters, land areas both exceeding 10,000 feet, and eventuall y flows into the lower Roaring Fork River two miles downstream from the reach at the Seaton Property. Here the creek is roughly 6,300 feet in elevation. The Roaring Fork River drains the larger Roaring Fork watershed, an area roughly the size of Rhode Island which includes Four Mile Creek, and then empties into the Colorado River at Glenwood Springs.

Soils

Soils are the foundations for ecosystem establishment and a brief review here completes a vegetation assessment. The millions of years of geologic history and subsequent soil development influences vegetation, water quality, and therefore wildlife. The majority of the soils on the Seaton property are derived from river born materials, namely alluvium. Many of the Tertiary igneous rocks present came mainly from Basalt lava flows as evidenced by the large Basalt boulders making up much of the creek bottom (see Figure 1) and unearthed elsewhere on the property, during past digging projects or perhaps from nearby road work on Four Mile Road . Below see Table 1 for a succinct summary table of the soils on the Seaton proposed parcel split. See Map 2 for the mapped locations of the soil types. Soil data is accessed through the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), an arm of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the map may be somewhat inaccurate at the small scales being used in Map 2, yet still informative. Soils are typically mapped at scales of 1: 24,000 feet. The map for this report is at a scale closer to 1:1,000 feet for easier viewing.

Table 1. Soil Types on the Proposed Seaton Subdivided Property.

Landscape Soli Typical Vegetation Soli name Origin Position Description Type Well drained, loam, Serviceberry, Gambel oak, Cochetopa-Antrobus Alluvium and/or colluvium Fans, mountains gravelly clay loam; mi. mahogany, antelope association (18) derived from Basalt very stony loam bitterbrush, wheatgrass Stratified gravelly Sedge, inland saltgrass, Fluvaquents (42) Mixed alluvium Flood plains, valley floors sand to clay to very western wheatgrass, willows, gravellysand cottonwoods Antelope bitterbrush, mt. Showater-Morval Alluvium derived from Alluvial fans, high Well drained cobbly mahogany, big sagebrush, complex (94,95) Basalt terraces, valley sides loam, clay loam mt. snowberry, cool season grasses (needle and thread) em ecologrcal, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 2 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

Vegetation Resources and Noxious Weeds

Distinct Plant Communities

A general assessment of the vegetation, including the presence of noxious weeds and other non-native weedy species, was done in October 2009. Pertinent information was gathered to better understand the current vegetation and intelligently inform future weed management decisions. The general extent of the weeds were noted but not mapped extensively as that was beyond the scope and need of this document. There were essentially three distinct plant communities or areas of distinctive vegetation cover from one site to another located on the proposed eastern lot and they are briefly described below. Further information regarding the noxious weeds follows.

Narrowleaf Cottonwood-Willow Riparian Plant Community

The areas along Four Mile Creek, where more soil moisture is available due to the presence of the creek, support a native riparian forest community dominated by narrowleaf cottonwoods and distinct from the surrounding landscape. Coyote willows, red twigged dogwood, river hawthorn, alder, and three leaved sumac were all native shrubs found within this riparian corridor associated with the creek and all are indicative of greater water availability for plants typical of a riparian area. Unfortunately, "the thin green line", as these riparian areas of the west are commonly referred, with their distinct vegetation associated with rivers and creeks, are also notorious for supporting many of our escaped ornamental plants and undesirable noxious weeds. This site is no exception.

em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 19901 carbondale, Colorado 81623 3 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

Gambel Oak-Serviceberry Mountain Shrubland

A second conspicuous vegetation area on the property is a small remnant of a plant community that once occurred on the upland sites towards the road prior to vegetation being cleared for ranching or development in the last hundred or so years. This community consists of the native Gambel oak and serviceberry shrubland. This shrub dominated area occurs along the steeper banks that rise up from the more or less forested lower elevation terraces along the creek. This band of native shrubs and plants along steeper banks rising up from the creek is not supporting the numbers of noxious weeds other sites are showing on the property. This is probably due to the historical lack of soil and vegetation disturbances on these banks and the subsequent intact nature of the native ground cover.

Open Meadows

The third distinct areas of plant cover are the open meadows on the higher terrain above the river and extending to the edge of Four Mile Road. These areas are planted in Eurasian pasture grasses and a portion of them are currently mowed closer to the existing building and along the driveways leaving a fenced, unmowed field on the northeast section of the property. The predominant grass is smooth brome, a grass originating in China (USDA Plants Database 2009) and, in the recent past, planted extensively for forage and hay. Unfortunately, the mowed areas around the existing building as well as some un-mowed areas merging into the riparian area, are heavily colonized with a native-look-alike that is a Colorado State listed noxious weed. This plant is absinth wormwood, a silvery green plant that is commonly mistaken for one of our native sages and further discussed later in this document. The proposed building envelopes are in these open meadows where managing any weeds will be an easier and more manageable task than on the steeper banks or in the riparian area down by Four Mile Creek where there is also greater concern for harming non-target native plant species.

Noxious Weeds

Non-native, invasive weeds are plants of concern because they utilize and take resources our native plants and/or agricultural crops would otherwise be accessing. These aggressive plants then crowd out our native plant species that are the foundations of our native ecosystems and support our native pollinators and animals and a whole web of life that has evolved over hundreds of thousands of years. A "noxious" weed is further differentiated from other non-native weedy species. A noxious weed is by legal definition a "specific plant species which has been designated for mandatory control by branches of local, state, or federal governments in Colorado, the species must be non-native to the state ... " (State of Colorado website 2009). The Colorado state list of noxious weeds has gone through exhaustive review. In addition to the weed control goals of most property owners to preserve the natural and agricultural values of their property, the Colorado Noxious Weed Act and the Garfield County Weed Management Plan further compels landowners by law to manage State and County listed noxious weeds. Because of the aggressiveness of these plants and their economic impacts, a great deal of time and energy has gone into understanding these invasive, non-native plants in the scientific and agricultural communities and a wealth of information is now readily available.

Four of the weeds on the Seaton Subdivision property are on the Garfield County Noxious Weed List and six are on the State of Colorado Noxious Weed List. The state of Colorado has over seventy species on the state noxious weed list, while counties typically have much smaller lists with Garfield listing twenty one, Pitkin County listing thirty five, and Eagle with fifteen (2009). All species listed for a county must also be on the state list. This document fulfills a request by Garfield County and strives to provide information and guidance regarding the noxious weeds on the Seaton proposed lot split. The information is meant to provide a general understanding of the vegetation resources, any subsequent threats, and some potential strategies for management. The five Garfield County listed species will receive more focus, with the exception of absinth wormwood, currently only on the state list, which has a substantial population on the property.

Noxious Weeds Present on the Seaton Proposed Subdivision

(Garfield County Weed List)

Common Name: Scientific Name: Canada thistle Cirsium arvense (syn. Brea arvense) Common burdock Arctium minus em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 4 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

Houndstongue Cynoglossum officinale Oxeye daisy Chrysanthemum leucanthemum

(State of Colorado Weed List)

Common Name: Scientific Name: List A. B. or C Absinth wormwood Artemisia absinthium B Bull thistle Cirsium vulgare B Common mullein Verbascum thapsis c Common tansy Tanacetum vulgare B Downy brome/Cheatgrass Bromus tectorum c Poison hemlock Conium maculatum c

Extent of Noxious Weeds on the Eastern Half of the Seaton Lot Split:

Extent of Garfield County Listed Weeds-Overview

The riparian area, like many riparian areas in the West, supports some fairly dense populations of noxious weeds in spots. Canada thistle, a plant that is notorious for doing very well in wetter sites, is the most ubiquitous weed on the terraces along the creek. Oxeye daisy is another plant that is very adept at moving into wetter areas and populations have exploded along most waterways in the Roaring Fork Watershed. Oxeye daisy has created many headaches for land owners and managers aware of the problem. This seemingly innocuous daisy has formed a small dense patch on the Seaton Property near Chelyn Road in the riparian community (see Map 1 ). It can be found intermittently throughout the creek-side areas. Houndstongue and Common Burdock, the other two listed species in Garfield County, are found more intermittently mostly in the riparian area and each has distinctive fruits rendering them unavoidable as both are adept at clinging to pant legs and fur. These two weeds are found more often in bedding areas for mule deer near the creek on the property.

Extent of State of Colorado Listed Weeds-Overview

Six State of Colorado listed weeds were found (see Map 1 ). Absinth wormwood, already briefly mentioned in the plant community descriptions, presented the densest weed population and perhaps the most extensive on the property. There is approximately an eighth acre area where nothing but absinth appears to be growing (see Map 1- absinth high density area). This is probably the site where the plant got started. From this dense site and extending down into the riparian area, level with the creek elevations, is more absinth where the population is not as thick, but quite extensive. Other problem areas are around the red barn-like building, just downhill where the absinth is allowed to grow into its shrub form and to the east of the building, again where a patch is growing unimpeded, possibly because it is being mistaken for a native sagebrush. Much of the mowed area in this vicinity also has absinth wormwood growing throughout where due to mowing, it stays in a form close to the ground.

The other five listed State of Colorado noxious weeds are much less extensive on the property. Common mullein was only seen at one site near Chelyn Road (see Map 1, common mullein-trace). Poison hemlock wasn't seen that extensively, although the time of year was not ideal for seeing this plant, nor was it ideal for several other plants. Only a few bull thistle plants were discovered, again quite close to Chelyn Road. Common tansy was found intermittently and mostly creek-side. For most of these particular weeds, a search combing the entire property armed with tools to handle the plants would be the best strategy for eliminating them. Downy brome, sometimes better known as cheatgrass, was seen intermittently within the open meadow areas. This grass is typically found colonizing drier sites and this was mostly the case on the Seaton property. Cheatgrass is not extensive yet, but with any soil disturbances it can quickly become a larger problem.

Integrated Weed Management

Successful long-term control of noxious weeds typically requires a range of different control methods and strategies to be implemented in combination or sequentially. This is known as an Integrated Weed Management approach or more broadly referred to as an Integrated Pest Management approach. This philosophy is well accepted in the land management community. The goal is to prevent weed spread and establishment. Practices include: limiting weed seeds and their dispersal, minimizing soil disturbances, containing current infestations, detecting any weed em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 5 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

introductions early and eradicating them when they are small, actively establishing desirable vegetation, and using appropriate biological controls when suitable and appropriate grazing practices if and where applicable.

Garfield County Listed Noxious Weeds: Species Accounts and Management

1. Canada Thistle ( Cirsium arvense, syn, Brea arvense)

Canada thistle, a member of the Sunflower Family (Asteraceae) has been declared a noxious weed in at least 45 states and Colorado is no exception. It is an erect perennial (returning every year) with deep, extensive horizontal roots allowing it to form colonies. Stems are smooth and spineless relative to many other noxious thistles and the flowering heads are relatively small, perhaps Y2 to % of an inch in diameter. Flower color can range from lavender to pink or white. The flowers of Canada thistle cluster at the end of the flowering stems and there can be several branching flowering stalks, meaning several flowers at branch tips (see Figure 3). The leaves are alternate, lanceolate (long and narrow, broadest at the base) with tips that end in a spine and upper leaves are much smaller than lower leaves. As many as four different varieties of Canada thistle have been recognized and the depth of the leaf lobes and degree of "spiny-ness" on the leaves can vary with variety.

Biology

The key to Canada thistle management is understanding its biology. Canada thistle spreads mainly by vegetative growth, although seeds should always be kept from forming. The root system is extensive growing horizontally as much as 18 feet and vertically 6 to 15 feet in a season. Managers need to be aware that the root carbohydrates follow an annual cycle. Reserves are lowest just before flowering which is triggered by long days (14-16 hour days) in early summer. In fall, root reserves begin to increase as shoot growth declines. By January, over­ wintering roots are developing new shoots and roots. These shoots form rosettes when average weekly temperatures reach 41 degrees F (April to May). The flush of root-derived shoots in spring and fall is typical but can happen anytime during the growing season when moisture is adequate.

Root buds will form shoots when the main stem or shoot is removed. Until then, root buds remain inhibited by the presence of the main stem em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81 623 6 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009 and leaves because of competition for water between the root bud and shoot. Root buds are quickly released and new shoots emerge rapidly with main stem removal. Each meter of root averages 13 to 25 root buds, each capable of forming a new shoot.

Canada thistle flowers from July to October and is almost exclusively insect pollinated. Female flowers produce abundant nectar and a sweet odor described as vanilla-like. Flowers need only be open 8-10 days before seeds mature enough to be able to germinate. A single plant produces on average 1500-5300 seeds. Seeds are not the main mechanism for reproduction, but are considered important for long distance dispersal. Seed viability is related to depth of burial in the soil. Seeds can remain viable for greater than 20 years with deep burial.

Non-native vs. Native Thistles

Canada thistle has long been recognized as an agricultural pest but only in the last decade or so has it been given notable attention for its harmful impacts to natural ecosystems and native species. Estimates are in the tens of millions of dollars for losses related to direct crop losses annually and additional millions are spent for control. Unbeknownst to most land owners and managers, however, the majority of thistle species in the west are native, and largely go unnoticed, fulfill natural ecological niches and are important members of natural, early successional processes. Colorado has some 17 native species of thistle and Utah describes twenty four! But the introduced native of southeastern Europe, Canada thistle, when looking strictly at numbers, is possibly the most widespread of all thistle species at this point. The tenacious root systems are the reason this plant is able to effectively outcompete our native and agricultural plants and pose such a problem.

Management of Canada thistle

Because of the root system stores, Canada thistle has an incredible capacity for recovery and a management plan must be implemented over several years to typically achieve success. Priorities should be placed on killing established clones and at the very least preventing their expansion. Emphasis should be put on preventing new invasions in areas susceptible to new thistle establishment. It takes at least a couple growing seasons to determine if a particular control method is going to be effective. Many studies have reported a decline in Canada thistle the first year after treatment, followed by a return to previous densities the second growing season (Colorado State Parks 2005). Follow up treatments are essential for success whereby the weed is continually stressed exhausting nutrient stores in the root system which will eventually starve the plant.

Integrated Control: Most situations where Canada thistle has been effectively controlled have involved the use of herbicides (see below). In situations where root growth is restricted (e.g. high water tables or compacted soils), repeated mowing in addition to application of Milestone® (aminopyralid), Telar DF® (chlorsulfuron) or Redeem R&P® (chlopyralid + 2,4-D) herbicides may improve control. Cattle, sheep and goats will graze on Canada thistle when plants are very young and succulent and when the animals are concentrated on the infestation. This would be followed by a fall herbicide application. On the Seaton Property this is not practical as much of the desirable competition would also be negatively impacted and concentrating animals on disperse patches is impractical. Using selective herbicides that work only on the thistle and leave much of the surrounding vegetation intact is most desirable. Burning would not be practical in a subdivision situation.

Chemical Control: Milestone® (aminopyralid) is a relatively new and effective herbicide. In a backpack sprayer, the rate to use is 1 teaspoon per gallon of water plus 1/3 ounce of non-ionic surfactant like Activator 90®. One of the better times to apply Milestone® is in the fall after the first light frost, but before a killing frost. The other recommended timing is at pre-bud stage or early bud stage with the goal being that all plants have emerged. Rangestar® or Weed master® (2,4-D and dicamba combined in one product) are also available. For use in a backpack sprayer, use 1 ounce of Rangestar® or Weedmaster® per gallon of water plus 1/3 ounce of non-ionic surfactant. Application timing is from rosette to full bolt or bud stage and also in the fall after the first light frost, but before a killing frost.

Wet areas: In areas where the water table is close, a very targeted application of a systemic, less selective herbicide such as Rodeo® (gyphosate) or a more selective herbicide such as Renovate 3® (triclopyr), with aquatically approved 2,4-D amine which can be used closer to water unlike many other herbicides, may be most effective. The Renovate 3® and 2,4-D amine combination can be used in wetland areas and is effective when applied in the spring when Canada thistle is in the pre-bud to early bud stages (about 10-15 inches tall). A mixture of Garlon 3A® (triclopyr) at 2qts/acre and aquatic 2,4-D at 1.5 qts/acre in mid-summer to fall is a possibility when the area is too close to water for the use of Milestone®. Rodeo® can be applied after the reproductive stage with an aquatic surfactant. It is important to keep in

em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 7 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009 mind that an herbicide labeled for use near water is the only kind that can be used close to creeks, irrigation ditches and in areas with high water tables. Caution is recommended with the use of Rodeo® as it will kill desirable competitive vegetation as well, so very specific spot treating is imperative. Additionally, re-treating areas in the fall is needed to prevent regrowth of plants.

Biological Controls: To date there is no single biological organism that controls Canada thistle, which is common. Several agents have been reported to provide various degrees of very limited damage to individual plants but not to populations. This may be reflective of the fact that Canada thistle is reported to have few or no natural enemies in its native habitat where it is also a serious agricultural nuisance. More than 130 species, including diseases, insects, and even birds utilize Canada thistle in its native range, but generally cause little damage as their densities are usually low. At least 7 species have been either intentionally or unintentionally released for Canada thistle control in the U.S. but none have been effective to date. For more information, contact the Palisade Insectary of the Colorado Department of Agriculture at 970-464-7916.

Urophora cardui, a gall fly, has been reported to be available from the Division of Plant Industry's Biological Pest Control Section but has had very limited efficacy to date. Ceutorhyncus litura (a weevil) and Cassidia rubignosa (a leaf beetle) have also been available. A combination of biocontrol agents is thought to provide better control than any single agent. A biocontrol applied with other methods, such as herbicides or properly timed mowing may be even more effective. A combination of root- and shoot- feeding insects has been suggested to potentially be the best scenario, but to date no root feeders are known to cause extensive damage to Canada thistle.

2. Common Burdock (Arctium minus)

A member of the Aster or Sunflower family (Asteraceae), common burdock is an introduced biennial plant that reproduces only by seeds. During the first year of growth, the plant produces a rosette or a cluster of closely crowded radiating leaves at the ground level (see Figure 4). The second year the plant sends up erect stems and flowers. The stem is very rough, stout and grooved, grows up to 6 feet tall and forms multiple branches. The heart shaped leaves are whitish and woolly hairy beneath and soft to the touch while darker green on top and smooth. The flowers are purplish to white and in numerous heads. Each flowering head is actually a group of flowers forming a head enclosed in a prickly bur-like structure called an involucre (see Figure 5). The involucre is composed of little structures called bracts that can be smooth to wooly with tips of hooked spines. These spiny bracts are what catch in fur and the clothes of unsuspecting animals and other visitors, helping to dispense and spread the seeds.

Habitat and Biology

This native of Eurasia can be found in this country growing along roadsides, ditch banks, in waste areas and pastures. It appears to prefer riparian areas that have moist, fertile, often higher nitrogen laden soils. The bulk of seed germination occurs in early spring. Following a year in rosette form, the second year flowering and seed production occur from July to September. Seeds are mature by September and are shed continuously throughout the fall, winter, and following spring. One plant typically produces between 6,000 and 16,000 seeds

Management of Common Burdock

Mechanical Control: Biennial species are relatively easy to mechanically control by simply digging the entire fleshy tap root out during the plants first year in a rosette form. Common burdock does not reproduce by roots and is em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 8 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009 limited to reproduction by seeds only. Mowing or cutting the plant can be used in the second year to eliminate seed production. Mowing must occur after the plant has bolted but before it has flowered.

Chemical Control: Rangestar® or Weedmaster® (2,4-D and dicamba in one product) can be used at a rate of 1 ounce per gallon of water with a 1/3 ounce of non-ionic surfactant like Activator 90® when using a backpack sprayer. These herbicides should be applied to first year rosettes, which can be found in spring or fall. Common burdock can also be controlled with 2,4-0, picloram, dicamba, giyphosate, and aminopyralid or Milestone®.

Biological Control: None known. For more information, contact the Palisade Insectary of the Colorado Department of Agriculture at 970-464-7916.

Integrated Control: As with all plants that reproduce solely by seed, management efforts must include elimination of seed production and eventual depletion of the soil seed bank. Combining herbicide or tillage treatment of rosettes with collection and removal of seed heads, thereby preventing dispersal of burs is a good management strategy.

This poisonous plant is present predominantly in the riparian areas on the property. Houndstongue is a member of the Boraginaceae Family and is listed as a noxious, restricted, or prohibited weed in six states and two Canadian provinces. A native of the mountains of western Asia and Eastern Europe, it is thought to have been introduced as a crop seed contaminant from Europe. Toxic pyrroli-zidine alkaloids in Houndstongue stop liver cells from reproducing and animals can live six months even after ingesting a lethal dose. Unless it is dried and mixed with hay, animals rarely eat it. Cows and horses are more affected by houndstongue's toxicity than sheep. em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 9 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

Biology

Houndstongue is considered a biennial or a short-lived perennial. Like many biennial plants, it has a taproot and the Houndstongue taproot is thick, black and even branching and can reach 4 feet deep. It develops from a seedling to a rosette the first year and typically the second year, produces a flowering stalk eight to forty inches high. Flowering stems are sometimes produced later than two years if environmental conditions are stressful. Houndstongue inflorescences have up to 35 dull red to burgundy or blue flowers each and are in the axils of the leaves or short terminal branches. The leaves are said to resemble a hound's tongue and are soft due to numerous soft white hairs on both surfaces. The leaves are simple, oblong shaped with smooth edges. Leaves are alternate, 1 to 12 inches long and 1 to 4 inches wide. The tip of the leaf is sharply pointed but the leaf surfaces are soft. Leaves often appear dusty and tattered or insect ridden. Houndstongue is poisonous to all grazing animals with little over 2 lbs being a fatal dose.

Reproduction is solely by seeds. Flowers form May to June and later individual plants can produce from 300-2,000 seeds. Most seeds fall close to the parent plant, but the seeds can travel large distances as they are armed with barbs similar to Velcro. The hooked tips on the barbs cling to pant legs, animal fur, socks and machinery. Seed viability is 2 to 3 years. Soil disturbance provides ideal conditions for houndstongue seedling establishment. On Dutch coastal dunes, Houndstongue only occurred where horses and cows were allowed to graze. It is also better adapted to wetter sites, hence its propensity to favor the riparian area on the Seaton property.

Management of Houndstongue

Mechanical Control: When the plants are in the rosette stage, removing the entire root crown while cutting or pulling the plants is effective in killing the plant. Cut or mow to remove flowering stems before seed nutlets develop and if they have already developed, simply cutting them and placing them in a plastic bag in the trash is preferable. To stimulate the germination of desirable plants, removing the immediate litter layer (up to 4 inches) will help with the germination of native plants.

Chemical Control: When rosettes are present in the spring and fall, using Rangestar® or Weedmaster® (2,4-D and dicamba combined in one product) at a rate of 1 ounce per gallon of water in a backpack sprayer is recommended. The use of a surfactant is necessary with Rangestar® or Weedmaster® at a rate of 1/3 ounce of non-ionic surfactant per gallon (such as Activator 90®).

Integrated Control: Using a combination of control strategies may be a good strategy starting with maintaining a healthy vegetation community and minimizing disturbances to soils. This followed by measures to prevent seed production of houndstongue and then herbicide applications as needed after that is a good integrated program to slow the spread or even eliminate houndstongue.

Biological Control: No biological controls have been approved to date for use in Colorado. For more information, contact the Palisade Insectary of the Colorado Department of Agriculture at 970-464-7916.

4. Oxeye Daisy (Chrysanthemum /eucanthemum)

Oxeye daisy looks like a typical daisy and is a member of the Sunflower Family (Asteraceae). It has smooth stems growing from 1 to 3 feet tall and often branching at the top. The leaves are rather distinctive and very helpful in identification. Leaf size is rather small, but progressively increases as you go down the stem starting from the flowers at the top. Lower leaves are lance­ shaped with "toothed" margins and leaf stalks that may be as long as the leaves. The r leaves are and the stem. The 10 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

plant has branched rhizomes and reproduces well just by the root system. A bluegrass lawn has a rhizomatous root system. Oxeye daisy is a prolific seed producer whereby a healthy robust plant can produce up to 26,000 seeds. Seeds may be viable ten days after the flower blossoms and have been known to still be viable after almost 40 years.

Oxeye daisy is native to Europe and was introduced as an ornamental and as an accidental contaminant in seed. Its spread in pastures is exacerbated as most large herbivores avoid it. Because oxeye daisy is such a pretty, showy, recognizable daisy, proper management is often neglected. Therefore education and awareness are critical for future adequate management goals.

Management of Oxeye Daisy

Mechanical Control: Mowing can be used to reduce seed production for the current growing season, but is ineffective in harming the plant and may in fact stimulate shoot production and subsequent flowering. Oxeye daisy can be mowed as soon as flowers appear to remove flowering heads and reduce some seed production. The root systems are shallow and attempts can be made to dig the roots and remove the plant. However, the entire root system needs to be removed as remaining roots may produce new shoots. Hand digging for removal will have to be diligently continued for several years and perhaps several times in a season. Seeds also remain viable in the soils for many years and new plants may emerge even after parent plants have long been removed.

Chemical Control: Escort XP®, Telar®, Milestone® or Cimmaron® are all" labeled as effective on oxeye daisy. With Cimarron, use Y2 gram per gallon of water or 1.3 grams per 3 gallons of water when using a backpack sprayer and also be certain to add a surfactant such as 1/3 ounce of non-ionic surfactant per gallon like Activator 90®. For Escort XP and T elar, rates are set at 1 ounce/acre plus 0.25% v/v non-ionic surfactant. When using Milestone®, use at a rate of 1 teaspoon per gallon of water or one tablespoon per 3 gallons of water for a backpack sprayer plus a surfactant. This rate should work out to 4-7 ounces per acre for Milestone®. Milestone® should be applied at the prebud stage of development.

Biological Controls: No biological controls have been discovered for oxeye daisy.

Integrated Controls: A combination of trying to dig plants and/or mow newly emerged flowering heads in addition to herbicide applications may give better results. Also, prevention of new infestations by minimizing disturbance to plants and thereby soils and maintaining healthy plant communities is a part of any weed control strategy. This allows existing desirable plants to remain robust and competitive. Strategic reseeding after any ground is laid bare is also a key to preventing new weed invasions.

State of Colorado Listed Noxious Weeds: Brief Species Accounts and Some Management

The State of Colorado has its seventy plus list of noxious weeds divided into an A, B, and C list. There are no List A species on the Seaton Property, but if there were, these are high priority species in the state and they would be designated for eradication. The goal for List B species is to stop their continued spread and if possible, do better than that. Landowners are expected to either eradicate, contain, or suppress List B species. Typically List C species are plants that are so prolific that requiring strict management is unrealistic, while any efforts towards em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 11 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

containment or management and education are encouraged. Individual counties create their own lists and sets of priorities from the state list. The following weeds are on either the List B or List C state list, but are not currently on the Garfield County weed list. Absinth wormwood will be one of the greater management challenges as it occurs in very high numbers on the Seaton Property while the other weeds, besides Canada thistle, are less extensive. The landowner should become familiar with these List B and C species and attempt to contain them or even eradicate them, but certainly attempt to keep them from spreading any further.

5. Absinth Wormwood (Artemisia absinthium), List B

Absinth wormwood is somewhat similar in its shrub-like appearance to our ecologically important, native big sagebrush species and consequently is commonly overlooked. Its leaves are similar sage, blue-green color and· the plant habit is comparable to our native big sages with heights reaching 16 to 48 inches. A distinguishing characteristic is the lower leaves as they are divided 2-3 times into deeply lobed leaflets. In contrast, our native big sagebrush has the characteristic simple leaves with (mostly) three very small lobes at their tips. Additionally, absinth wormwood is an herbaceous species dying back to the root crown, meaning the ground, each fall and regrowing from the soil level each spring. Our native sages are woody and have leaves that persist over the winter.

Biology Absinth wormwood is a prolific seed producer. This is its primary mode of reproduction and the small seeds are easily scattered by wind, water and animals and spread in hay. Seeds are viable for approximately 3-4 years and germinate under a wide range of temperatures between 41 and 104 degrees Fahrenheit. There is some evidence that absinth wormwood can vegetatively reproduce. If plowed under it may regenerate from shallow lateral roots. Flower stalks appear at the node of each upper leaf from late July through September on the Seaton Property. Absinth wormwood is a member of the Asteraceae (Compositae) family and in the same genera as many of our native sages.

History The introduction of absinth wormwood to North America was deliberate and related to its potential uses (Mitich 1975). Seeds for the plant can, unfortunately, still be easily obtained over the internet. Absinth wormwood is a native of Eurasia, the Middle East, and North Africa. It has been used medicinally to kill intestinal parasites, hence the name "wormwood". The seeds can be used in distilling alcohol and the plant is the principal ingredient in the liquor absinthe. Absinth sage is discussed as a cultivated plant in North America as soon as 1832 (Bridgeman 1832; Mitich 1975). It was reported as escaping cultivated gardens by 1841. The first herbarium specimen in North Dakota was from 1910 and by 1973 a state inventory reported 40,000 acres in 42 of 53 counties. Absinth was designated as a noxious weed in North Dakota by 1971 . In 63 years absinth went from a rarely seen plant to one em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 12 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009 designated as a noxious weed and present in the majority of the state of North Dakota. This plants potential for spread is extreme as it can out compete grasses and other desirable plants creating a problem in native plant communities, pastures and fields.

Management of absinth wormwood

Mechanical Control: Mowing is reported to be potentially effective in reducing seed production of absinth wormwood. However seed production can still occur on the low horizontal branches growing from the base of the plant. Growth habit has been reported to change and continue along the ground where flowering and seed set will still occur. Repeated mowings are occurring on the Seaton Property in some areas with absinth wormwood and the plants appear to simply stay low to the ground, but persist (Figure 14). No reported formal study has been done on the long term effects of mowing. Hand digging plants when the soil is moist and making certain to pull all the roots, including horizontal short roots, may be possible. Specimens must be carefully bagged so as not to spread seeds if plants are removed during or after flowering. In the case of large areas being cleared, seeding afterward to provide desirable competition is necessary.

Chemical Control: When using a backpack sprayer, Milestone® at a rate of 1 teaspoon per gallon of water or one tablespoon per 3 gallons of water plus the addition of a non­ ionic surfactant like Activator 90® is recommended by Garfield County. Rangestar® or Weedmaster® (2,4-D and dicamba combined in one product) at a rate of 1 ounce per gallon of water plus surfactant as above is also effective for backpack spraying, according to Garfield County (Steve Anthony, personal comm. 2009). The recommended timing for spraying plants is about the 12 inch growth stage. Other herbicides are also available and effective such as Tordon® (picloram), but Tordon® is a restricted use herbicide and cannot be used near trees, shrubs or water, making it problematic here.

Integrated Control: The best success in controlling absinth wormwood is probably by using a combination of methods listed here such as mechanical and chemical with the important goal of not allowing any seed production at the very least and then attempting to get rid of the parent plants.

Burning: Burning is probably not an option on the Seaton Property as it is very close to neighboring homes. The growth habit of the plant suggests it may be knocked back by burning with the potential to resprout depending on temperatures of the fire and the injury to the root crown. Burning may not be effective anyway.

Biological Control: No biological control is available at this time. Since biological control agents take years to research and finally release, no releases are expected in the near future.

13 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

6. Bull Thistle ( Cirsium vulgare), List B

Bull thistle is an accidentally introduced biennial, living only two years, which can reach 2-5 feet tall in its second year. The first year the plants are in rosette form closer to the ground and the second year they bolt, flower and set seeds ending their life cycle. The flowers are showy, pinkish to dark purple and 1 and% to 2 inches in diameter. A readily noticeable characteristic of Bull thistle is the thick and prickly hairiness on top of the leaves and cottony­ hairy layer on the undersides. Flower size, bract appearance and leaf surfaces can help distinguish bull thistle from other thistles which can appear quite similar. Bull thistle is a relatively shallow tap-rooted plant that reproduces only from seed. Preventing flowering and seed production is one of the first steps to take in stopping the spread of bull thistle or any biennial noxious weed.

Bull thistle grows in dry to moist sunny habitats and is known to thrive on nitrogen rich soils and do fine on gravelly to clay-textured soils. Disturbed areas, clear cuts or overgrazed pastures are ideal habitats for bull thistle. Maintaining healthy plant communities and pastures and minimizing soil disturbances will help keep bull thistle out.

Management of Bull Thistle

Mechanical Control: Severing the taproot just below the root crown before the plant sets seed will eliminate the current year's seed production, and if continued annually, eliminate an infestation. The best time to cut the root crown (1 or 2 inches below the top of the root crown) is when most of the plants have bolted, but before a significant number have flowered (FE IS 1996). Revisiting the plants a month after the first root cutting attempt will eliminate any late bolting plants and improve the effectiveness of the manual control efforts.

Chemical Control: If good growing conditions exist, apply Milestone® (aminopyralid), Transline® or Stinger® (clopyralid), Curtail (clopyralid + 2,4-D), or Banvel®, Vanquish®, or Clarity® (dicamba) to rosettes in the spring or fall. Also available to apply to rosettes in the spring is Rangestar® (2,4-D +dicamba). Milestone® can also be effective when plants are at the late bolt through early flowering, but 2,4-D should be tank mixed with Milestone® if plants are at the late bud stages. Telar® (chlorsulfuron) and Escort XP® (metasulfuron) mixed with a non-ionic surfactant are also effective and applications should be from spring bolting to flower bud stages. Tordon 22K® (picloram) is another available herbicide but it is a restricted use chemical and not very helpful on this property as it also kills shrubs and trees. For herbicide rates and more information contact the Garfield County Vegetation Manager and look up current fact sheets on the internet.

Integrated Control: Guarding against disturbance or overuse and maintaining healthy native plant communities or pastures are good preventive measures against bull thistle. Since bull thistle spreads only by seed, the key to control is preventing seed production. If an infestation is too large to handle by digging root crowns alone, another strategy is to apply appropriate herbicides in early spring to rosettes (May, June) and then mow any plants after they have still managed to bolt but before flowering (possibly late June to July). A second mowing or cutting is suggested a month later to pick up any late bolting plants. Combining reseeding immediately after an herbicide application can also be effective because it is highly desirable to attempt to provide desirable plant competition as soon as possible.

em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 15 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

Biological Control: The fly predator, Urophora stylata, has been used to help control this thistle. However, a large enough infestation of the plants is always necessary to sustain any biological controls. The female fly lays eggs in the seed head of the bull thistle and the emerging maggot then consumes the seeds in the flowering heads. Biological controls never eradicate a population, but can be helpful in containing and minimizing an infestation, especially larger infestations that are difficult to access. Care must be taken in using other methods of control if a biological control is added so as not to interfere with its presence. For more information, contact the Palisade Insectary of the Colorado Department of Agriculture at 970-464-7916.

7. Common Mullein (Verbascum thapsis) List C

Once a population of this wooly leaved plant gets established it can be extremely difficult to eradicate. Also known as wooly mullein, this prolific seed producer can overtake a disturbed site very quickly. It adapts readily to a wide variety of site conditions.

On the Seaton property, there are very few plants, but new soil disturbances will also favor the spread of this native of Europe. This plant was brought over by settlers to use as a medicinal herb. Because there are very few plants, a more cursory overview of this weed is provided.

Common mullein is a monocarpic perennial meaning it takes two or more years to set its yellow flowers and die. The first year mullein produces a tap root and a rosette of its felt-like leaves. If conditions are right, the second year plants bolt into maturity, flower, produce seed and then die. Flowers closer to the base of the stalk mature first sequentially followed by those further up the stalk. Longer stalks increase the blooming period and can continue to flower into October. Most notable, a single plant can produce 100,000-180,000 seeds that can remain viable for more than 100 years. Seeds tend to drop close to the parent plant during autumn and winter.

Management

Bare soils are necessary for common mullein seedling emergence. This is important information for creating management strategies. The rapid reduction of bare ground through colonization by other plants has been effective in decreasing infestations. Overall, annual removal of plants before flowering, the establishment of a dense vegetative cover, and minimizing the availability of bare soil are probably adequate to control mullein, although additional strategies are presented below.

Mechanical Control: Common mullein has a relatively shallow taproot allowing for relative ease in mechanically removing or even hand pulling the plant especially in loose soils. This method is extremely effective in reducing populations and seed production where practical. If blooms and seeds are present, the reproductive structures should be carefully removed and bagged for proper disposal in a sanitary landfill. Of utmost importance, is keeping soil disturbances during these activities to a minimum since loose, bare soil facilitates mullein seed germination.

Chemical Control: Where hand pulling is not safe or practical or would cause significant soil disturbance, herbicide control is an effective option. Apply Escort® (metasulfuron) at a rate of 1 oz/acre early in the growing season (April em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 16 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

or May) with a suriactant that is a mixture of both a non­ ionic suriactant and a silicone suriactant. The suriactant is necessary for help in penetrating the thick layer of suriace hairs on common mullein leaves. Also a 2% solution of glyphosate (e.g. Roundup®) or Garlon® (triclopyr) and water plus a non-ionic suriactant, using a tank or backpack sprayer to thoroughly cover all leaves has also been found to be successful (Johnson 2005). Use caution as Roundup® (glyphosate) is a non­ selective herbicide that may kill desirable plants even if they are partially sprayed. If native or other desirable grasses are present, Garlon® (triclopyr) is selective to broadleaf plants and is a better choice than Roundup®. Using Roundup® (glyphosate) in early spring applications is recommended as most other non-target vegetation may be dormant and less susceptible to accidental herbicide contact. Milestone® (aminopyralid) at a rate of 7 fluid ounces per acre applied in the rosette stage with the use of a suriactant is another choice for control.

Biological Control: There are insects that have possible biological control implications for common mullein. Because the population is so limited on the Seaton property, it is probable that biological controls will not be very effective. The use of mechanical and/or chemical strategies make more sense with such a small infestation. For more information regarding the European curculionid weevil ( Gymnaetron tetrum) or the mullein moth ( Cucullia verbasc1) , contact the Palisade Insectary of the Colorado Department of Agriculture at 970-464-7916.

8. Common Tansy (Tanacetum vulgare) List 8

This weed is scattered in low densities mainly along Fourmile Creek on the Seaton property. There is a larger patch near Chelyn Road in the riparian corridor. This yellow member of the Asteraceae or Sunflower Family was originally introduced to North America for use in folk remedies and as an ornamental plant. The mature common tansy plants are easily recognized by the flat­ topped, button-like yellow clusters of flowers they produce in the summer. Leaves are finely divided into leaflets giving the rosettes a fern­ like appearance.

Common tansy emits a very strong odor when crushed. It has a long history of medicinal use but has now become a potential threat to the ecological health of areas it is invading. Common tansy spreads mainly by seeds, and less often from creeping rhizomes to form dense clumps. The plants contain alkaloids that are toxic to humans and livestock in large doses. Plants are unpalatable to livestock and wildlife and therefore increase in overgrazed areas as reduction in desirable species allows em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 17 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009 for the spread of common tansy. It appears to be most aggressive in its spread in areas with greater moisture availability and nutrient rich soils such as along irrigation ditches and in riparian areas like that of the Seaton property.

Management

Mechanical Control: On the Seaton property, the key to effective control of common tansy is to stop the plants spread and seed production. Hand digging, pulling or cutting before plants go to seed will assist with limiting seed production and set plants back, but will not eradicate the existing plants. Doing this diligently over several years may, however, give good results. Part of the control strategies for controlling rhizomatous plants is to deplete the storage of carbohydrates within the root system. This is tricky with a plant like common tansy since it can regenerate from root fragments. Either hand pulling, mowing, or digging should be done during the bud stage as this is reported to prevent the growth of flowering stalks (LeCain and Sheley 2002), at least for that year. Common tansy is considered toxic so use of protective equipment, especially gloves, is highly recommended when mechanically controlling the plant. Revegetating or seeding after any extensive soil disturbances is important for providing competition to any other non­ desirable plants that may move in including common tansy.

Chemical Control: Because common tansy is a plant that spreads through rhizomes, or underground stems that root at the nodes and send up new shoots, herbicides can be an effective choice. Escort XP® (metasulfuron) is reported to give effective control at very low rates. However it is limited to areas where ground water contamination is not an issue and the water table is not less than 20 feet, which poses a problem in the riparian area of the Seaton property where the majority of the plants are found. The recommended timing for applying Escort XP® is when plants are in bolting to bud growth stages, or in late spring to mid-summer. Use 1 oz. of Escort XP® per acre plus a 0.25% v/v of non­ ionic surfactant, a rate based on equipment with an output of 30 gallons per acre. Glyphosate (Rodeo®) and 2,4-D are alternative herbicides for use near water but are apparently not very effective on common tansy. As always, contact the Garfield County Vegetation Manager and/or an experienced, licensed herbicide applicator as well as the herbicide labels for assistance.

Integrated Control: Use a combination of mechanical, chemical and cultural controls mentioned above.

Biological Control: None are available.

USE HERBCIDES WISELY: Always read the entire herbicide label carefully, follow all mixing and application instructions and wear all recommended personal protective gear and clothing. Contact your county or state department of agriculture or herbicide professional for any herbicide use requirements, restrictions or recommendations.

NOTICE: mention of herbicide products in this document does not constitute endorsement of any material.

em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 18 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

9. Cheatgrass or Downy brome (Bromus tectorum, Syn. Anisantha tectorum), List C

Cheatgrass is a noxious annual weed plaguing many land managers across the more arid ecosystems of the western U. S., Canada and northern Mexico. Here in the Roaring Fork Valley, cheatgrass has made large inroads in the last ten years (pers. obs.). The habitats with the most infamous infestations, the shrub-steppe communities, have ecological similarities to those on the western Seaton property parcel, above the existing house looking up the hillsides. On the eastern side of the property split, the focus of this document, there are small patches of cheatgrass, mostly in the area of the drier open meadows. Cheatgrass is something to keep careful watch over in the event of any future disturbances to soils (such as construction projects). Proper and timely seeding and/or revegetation of disturbed soils are some of the keys to preventing cheatgrass invasions.

Cheatgrass is an annual or winter annual and a member of the Grass Family (Poaceae). The slender stems, hairy leaves and very long-awned spikelets on twisted branches help to distinguish Bromus tectorum (see Figure 26) from other similar annual (8. japonicus, B. secalinus) and perennial (8. inermis) Bromus species. Also, cheatgrass matures 1 to 2 weeks earlier than other annual bromes and many other species in general (MSU Extension Weed Management 2001 ). In our area, the majority of cheatgrass seeds germinate in the early fall with the first good rains. Plants then resume growth the following spring and depending on conditions, can reach 2 inches to 1 Y2 feet tall during their single-season life cycle. Plants are very green and soft in early spring, a condition quickly forgotten when plants become purple then brown, dry out and become a true nuisance when walking through. The flowers are grass-like in what is called a panicle arrangement with each spikelet consisting of 5 to 8 florets which later contain the seeds. These nodding panicles are very distinctive as are their moderately awned spikelets. The spikelets are what are the annoying feature of the plant when it is mature as they penetrate socks, pants, fur, even soft mouth tissue, and the seeds are therefore widely dispersed.

Biology of Cheatgrass

Cheatgrass or downy brome is a prolific seed producer. Even in extremely dry conditions, cheat grass will produce viable seeds even though it may only reach 1-2 inches in height. The plants are mostly self­ pollinated and seeds can germinate very soon after they mature. Viable seeds exist even before the plant turns its characteristic purple color on the fruits. After the first fall rain in infested areas, cheatgrass seeds can germinate quickly and at very high rates, as high as 95%. The fall germinated seedlings grow little and over-winter in a semi­ dormant state, completing their lifecycle the next spring. Roots reportedly can grow in almost freezing soil temperatures and continue to grow throughout the winter until soils drop to less than 37 degrees F. Plants head out in late April to early May and seeds mature in June (CNAP 2000), ready to start the cycle all over again in the fall. If conditions are dry, environmentally induced dormancy can occur in seeds, last several years and break down at erratic intervals allowing seeds to remain in the soil bank for extensive periods.

One of the principal ways cheatgrass successfully competes with desirable, perennial grasses, especially seedlings, is through early, soil moisture depletion. Additionally, thick mulch in dense cheatgrass stands favors downy brome seedling establishment and inhibits germination of perennial bunchgrasses (CNAP 2000). Cover of lichens and mosses on the surface is also inhibited by thick mulch and results in less competition for resources for cheatgrass seedlings. em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 19 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

The seeds of cheatgrass are so ubiquitous that the potential for invasion is almost unlimited. Populations of cheatgrass are genetically very similar but highly plastic which allows them to thrive in an extensive array of site conditions. It is found in salt desert shrub communities with 6 inches of average annual precipitation to high elevation conifer forests with greater than 25 inches precipitation per year. One of the most critical points of expansion is when populations of cheatgrass become so vast that they then influence the wildfire regime, such as rapidly accelerating the fire return intervals on huge acreages.

Management of Cheatgrass

Mechanical Control: Mowing or cutting plants is not really recommended. Cheatgrass cut before seeds ripen will produce new stems and seeds at the height of the cut. Repeated mowings may be more successful and one study showed mowing every three weeks provided some control (Ponzetti 1997). This was very labor intensive. If plants are cut after the seeds ripen, they will die but by this time seeds are already viable and any accidental spreading of seeds is a possibility.

Hand pulling would eliminate the seed production and could be used in small infestations, but it would not eliminate the population. Seeds would still be left in the seedbank. The pulling program would have to continue diligently for several years or until the seed bank was exhausted. Care must be taken in being certain to get all of the roots so the plant cannot simply regrow and produce new seeds.

Some of the literature states that cheatgrass has been considered a valuable forage in the spring (Emmerich et al. 1993, Weld County Fact Sheet 2009). However, grazing is not a recommended method of control for cheatgrass (Carpenter and Murray 1998). If the plants are grazed in the spring, they will grow new stems and produce seeds. When grazed in the summer or fall the plants will not regenerate, but by then viable seeds have already been produced. Therefore seed production is not curtailed. Also, the long awns of the seeds on the mature plants may damage the mouths and intestinal tracts of the livestock and any other unsuspecting animals.

Chemical Control: In our area, the best success with herbicides has been from fall applications (Steve Anthony, Garfield County Vegetation Manager, pers. comm. 2007). Spring applications are another method as many non-target species are still dormant, the best scenario for herbicide application. There are numerous types of herbicides described in the literature that can be used alone or combined to provide effective control of cheatgrass. For best results, contact the Garfield County Vegetation Manager for the latest results from current research and test plots. A backpack sprayer is good for small infestations like the ones on the Seaton property as danger to non-target plants is minimized.

Of the myriad of herbicides available, three are mentioned here. Plateau® (imazapic) is recommended at a rate of 4 to 6 ounces per acre. The addition of a methylated seed oil surfactant (MSO) at 0.32 oz/gal of water is necessary. Optimal results locally with Plateau® have occurred from fall applications after a light freeze, but prior to a hard frost (Steve Anthony, pers. comm.). If applying during very early spring growth, applications are best while other desirable plants are hopefully still dormant. Panoramic 2SL® (imazapic) at a rate of 6-12 oz/acre is to be applied as a pre- or post emergent in late summer or early fall. Again, the additional use of a MSO surfactant at 0.32 oz/gal of water or 1 qt/1 00 gallons of water is necessary. The 12 oz rate of either Plateau® or Panoramic 2SL® can cause injury to some cool season grasses, but both can safely be used under trees.

Roundup Ultra® (glyphosate), a non-selective herbicide can be used for deliberate targeted spot spraying of cheatgrass. Good results have been occurred with use of Roundup Ultra® as a post emergent just after the cheatgrass has sprouted from seed. In a backpack, the rate is 4-5 oz/gal of water and for larger applications, the rate is 4-5 qts/acre. Add a non-ionic surfactant at a rate of 0.32 oz/gal of water for a backpack or hand sprayer and use 1 qt/1 00 gallons of water for larger applications. Since Roundup Ultra® is a non-selective herbicide, caution must be exercised as it will kill most surrounding vegetation greatly needed to compete with the cheatgrass. em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 20 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

Biological Control: None known to date.

Garfield County Past Cost-Share Program for Cheatgrass.

The occurrence of cheatgrass on the Seaton property is very minimal. However, there is a cost share program that has been offered by Garfield County in recent years. The herbicide Plateau® has also been available in smaller amounts and at a reduced rate as well. Financial assistance may again be available for 20 10. Contact Garfield County Vegetation Manager Steve Anthony for further details at (970)625-3969 and check on the county website for details.

10. Poison Hemlock (Conium maculatum), List C

Poison hemlock, a member of the Parsley Family, was not found to be very prolific, but there were some plants down in the riparian area of the Seaton parcel. Also, because of the late time of year, other plants may have been overlooked. This is a very poisonous plant from Europe with all parts of the plant exhibiting toxicity. It is commonly found along streams, ditch banks and pasture borders similar to the areas on the Seaton property. It seems to do very well in areas with extra moisture available, although that is not imperative. Poison hemlock is a biennial forb. Leaves are found at the ground level the first year that look very similar to carrot tops, a mistaken identity resulting in a surprising number of accidental deaths. The second year a white umbrella-like cluster of white flowers forms between April and July and the plant can reach 6 to 10 feet high. The leaves are shiny, green and finely divided, like parsley or carrot leaves, with a musty odor (don't get too close or handle the plant!). Purple spots cover the smooth and hollow stems, other helpful identifying characteristics.

Poison hemlock reproduces strictly from seeds, which are also the most toxic part of the plant (Pitcher 1989). Seeds can be carried by animal fur, mud, clothing, water, wind, vehicles, farm machinery, and other means and may remain viable for up to three years.

Management of Poison Hemlock

Mechanical Control: While mechanical control of poison hemlock is relatively easy, great care should be taken to keep from being exposed to the plants, especially after cutting or chopping them. Also dug plants should be responsibly disposed of as they remain poisonous for several years and it is unwise to leave dead plants where they might be eaten by wildlife or ch ildren (Pitcher 1989). Hand pulling works best when soils are wet and when working on small infestations. Seeds may still rem ain in the soil and pulling will probably have to be repeated for several years. Once much of the root is pulled, the plant is killed, making this a potentially practical technique.

Chemical Control: Several herbicides are effective in controlling poison hemlock. Roundup® or Rodeo® (glyphosate) is effective on newly emerged sprouts, but care must be taken as it is a non-selective herbicide and can harm desirable surrounding vegetation. In early spring, the most effective post-emergent herbicides are phenoxy herbicides such as 2,4-D (amine and ester formulations), 2,40-B and MCPA (all at 1.0 to 2.0 lb active ingredient per acre). A wetting agent should be combined with 2,4-D when applied. In the amine form it can be applied up to the water's edge, but without direct contact to the water). The Rodeo® formulation of glyphosate can be applied with direct contact to water (Pokorny and Sheley 2000). Chemical control or poison hemlock may require repeat applications to deplete the soil seedbank. Once poison hemlock is gone, it is important to implement proper management techniques to promote the growth of desired species and reduce the risk of reinfestation, as with any noxious weed. em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 21 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

Biological Control: The hemlock moth or the European palearctic moth (Agonopterix alstroemeriana) is widely dispersed. It is unknown how the moth was introduced to the United States, but its only known host in Europe and the U.S. at this time is poison hemlock. The larvae feed on the foliage, buds, immature seeds, stems, and flowers in spring and early summer. Several hundred larvae can defoliate most of a poison hemlock plant. However, these moths appear to have difficulty reproduci ng from year to year at higher altitudes (Crystal Yates-White, pers. comm.). For further information regarding the hemlock moth contact the Palisade Insectary of the Colorado Department of Agriculture at 970-464-7916.

Integrated Control: Few integrated programs have been implemented and are therefore largely unknown. However, Figure 29. First year poison hemlock on as with most weed infestations, integration of techniques Seaton Propert~. such as biological control and herbicides may be more effective because the plant is being attacked in more than one site. Timely broadcast seeding with native plants on any bare soils after manual or chemical control to increase competitive pressure may be another helpful action.

Crownvetch (Securigera varia, syn. Coronilla varia)

Crownvetch is not a Colorado state listed noxious weed, but it has impressive tendencies to be very aggressive and choke out all other vegetation in its path. It is listed as a noxious weed in other states and can be found on the internet on several sites with lengthy discussions and strategies of how to attempt to get rid of it. There is an impressively thick area of crownvetch on the south side of Fourmile Creek and just off Chelyn Road in the riparian area of the Seaton property (see Map 1 for the mapped location of this site). It is highly recommended that this vine-like plant be controlled or even removed from the property. Crownvetch is capable of growing over all vegetation and suffocating any competition in this location where it is growing. This is probably largely due to the availability of more than adequate soil moisture because of its proximity to Fourmile Creek. Removing the crownvetch and replanting the area with native seeds or plants would be a better scenario and more supportive of the local flora and fauna. The possibility of this plant continuing to spread is motivation enough to contain it.

em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 22 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

General Comments for all weeds on the property and a seed mix recommendation

The reality is that there are no silver bullets to weed control and "occasional" weed management rarely provides long-term success. The key to success is found in developing an integrated weed management or IWM program. IWM includes many facets of good land management. These include implementation of good landscape and pasture management strategies, inventory to know what weeds are present and where they are located, prevention of new weed introductions, early detection and rapid response to new infestations, containment of existing weed problems, large scale control where possible, and revegetation if necessary. For success, these components require assessment, flexibility, and potential adjustment over time (Dewey, Steven A. et al 2007.).

As has already been stressed, the most effective method of managing weeds is to prevent their spread and subsequent establishment. One effective strategy for construction sites is pressure washing of all heavy equipment prior to leaving the site and requiring any equipment arriving to have been cleaned prior. These activities are very effective in stopping the spread of any noxious or aggressive unwanted weeds. Many weeds have been spread by the soils caked on heavy equipment moving from site to site. Additionally, fencing the periphery of your area of disturbance greatly reduces the chances of heavy equipment operators disturbing more soils outside of your construction zone. Wherever possible, great care should be used to keep soil disturbances, especially shallow disturbances on the periphery of project sites, to an absolute minimum. Proper and thoughtful handling of weed infested soils from the site will greatly improve prospects for future weed infestations. Aggressive and timely revegetation of disturbed soils after construction is helpful in providing competition and closing weed infestation opportunities on soils laid bare due to project activities.

The recommended species mix for reseeding would include: slender wheatgrass (Eiymus trachycaulus), bluebunch wheatgrass (Agropyron spicatum, syn. Pseudoroegneria spicata), western wheatgrass (Pascopyrum smithil), Indian ricegrass (Oryzopsis hymenoides), green needlegrass (Stipa viridula), Idaho fescue (Festuca em ecological, LLC P. O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 23 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009 idahoensis), needle and thread grass (Stipa comata, Hesperostipa comata) and Sandberg bluegrass (Poa secunda, syn. Poa sandbergil) all readily available from several sources within Colorado.

Any soils or fill materials brought in from outside the property should be avoided unless the seller can guarantee weed free materials. Any soils transported off the property should be avoided from areas where weeds now reside.

IWM Treatment Methods and the limitations of this document. It is the intent of this document to list some of the more apparent noxious weed problems on the Seaton property and to report some of the facts and methods currently used and discussed in the weed literature and given by professional weed managers. The information here is not meant to be complete, but to be used as an initial reference and starting point and treated as an evolving, growing document, one that is to change with the changes in available science as well as the changes in herbicide labeling. In regards to herbicides, herbicide use must be consistent with the herbicide label information.

The herbicide label is the LAW. It is a legal, binding document and all uses of an herbicide must be done in a manner consistent with the most current label to avoid any unwanted or injurious circumstances. Before using any herbicide product, thoroughly read the entire label and follow all label directions. Complete labels and MSDS information for the products listed in this document can be viewed on the web at: http://www.greenbook.net

Follow chemical recommendations with the understanding that no discrimination or endorsement is intended or implied for any particular product by E.M. Ecological, LLC and that information may have changed. Other herbicides are available in addition to the ones mentioned within this document and newer products are being developed and may be better suited to your situation than any products listed in this document. The changes in herbicide labels and registrations occur constantly. Read and follow the latest label directions carefully. Trade names are given only to give the reader that much more information for potentially recognizing an herbicide. Before embarking on any application of herbicides contact the Garfield County Vegetation Manager at 970-625- 3969 and/or a weed professional with excellent plant identification skills and an herbicide applicators license. Also taking time to refer to the Colorado Department of Agriculture website and the information given on individual listed noxious weeds, especially regarding herbicide recommendations, is another important step to take before embarking on weed control efforts. http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/Agriculture-Main/CDAG/1174084048733 or just Google "Colorado State Weed List".

Biological Controls- Release of biological controls into natural environments is always experimental and should be entered into only after full and careful consideration of potential non-target species impacts. Once released into nature, biological control agents are difficult if not impossible to control.

em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 24 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

Wildlife

The proposed split of the Seaton property creating a lot with a buildable site adjacent to Four Mile Road is discussed here with regards to potential impacts mostly to elk and deer. The placement of the lot and subsequent building envelope will not affect the elk and deer in the area much more than they have already been impacted by the surrounding subdivision and adjacent development. Because the building envelope location is up out of the riparian corridor and flanking Four Mile Road, it is precisely this placement that minimizes impacts and groups the potential new residence in with existing impacts, like Four Mile Road itself and nearby houses across the road and across the creek in the other direction. While there is still an impressive array of wildlife in this area because of its setting near large areas of intact, native, plant communities and refugia, like the shrubs and trees along the creek and the nearby shrub covered hillsides and varied mountainous terrain, and understanding any development has a level of impact to wildlife here, due to this parcel's placement impacts are highly minimized. Impacts are really grouped in with existing wildlife impacts and therefore not highly additive. If noxious weed control and careful stewardship of the property, especially the riparian area, meaning retaining and even planting or encouraging the native vegetation in all forms (trees, shrubs, and herbaceous vegetation), is undertaken, then the property could actually be improved for numerous wildlife and birds. Mowing or removal of riparian vegetation would degrade the riparian corridor and should be prohibited unless part of an interim stage of weed control.

Mountain Lions

The Seaton property and the immediate surrounding developed area, including Chelyn Acres subdivision, is located within a Colorado Department of Wildlife (CDOW) mapped Mountain Lion Human Conflict Area (see Map 3) . These are areas where mountain lions have potentially been involved in conflicts with humans. This mapped site reflects that reports may have been made of incidents that could include predation on domestic pets, or predation on livestock held in close proximity to human habitation, or even a direct human mountain lion incident. This is simply a precautionary disclosure to encourage property owners take important safety measures to avoid such incidents. The primary food source for mountain lions is deer and with the abundance of mule deer in the area, mountain lions are to be expected. Also note on Map 3 the entire map is shaded as Overall Range for mountain lions.

American Elk

The CDOW has maps of the summer, winter, severe winter ranges and the winter concentration areas for both elk and deer in the area. The Seaton property resides within CDOW mapped elk summer range, mapped elk winter range, and elk overall range. It does not lie within severe winter range nor does it lie within a winter range concentration area, both areas of great concern with regards to development by CDOW officials. See Map 4 for the overall summer range and calving areas for elk in the area and see Map 5 for winter range, severe winter range and winter concentration areas for elk in the Four Mile Creek area. The Seaton property does lie within overall elk habitats, but again, because the location of this proposed parcel lies within an area already developed and near an increasingly busy road, the added impacts to elk should be minimal.

Mule Deer

Just walking through the Chelyn Acres subdivision area, one should expect to see mule deer most of the time and during much of the year. The area is em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 25 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009 mapped as summer (see Map 6) and winter range with winter concentration areas and severe winter ranges less than a mile away (see Map 7). Mule deer were seen on the property during the field work for this document and mule deer scat is common. Numerous bedding areas existed in the riparian corridor along the river on the east side. The deer encountered were habituated to fairly close, but quiet human presence.

Black Bears

Bear scat was found on the Seaton property in the riparian corridor. With the abundance of acorn and berry producing shrubs as well as human food sources in the area, bears are to be expected. Contacting the Department of Wildlife for literature on how to live with bears is helpful and an abundance of information on the subject is readily available. Securing trash and compost piles are essential in helping to avoid encounters. Locking windows and doors and securing residences in the spring, summer and fall are other essential precautionary measures to adopt when living amongst bears. Protecting any agricultural activities such as raising chickens, if allowed by law, is also imperative and many of these activities should probably be avoided in the first place unless extensive, secure fencing and caging is built.

Beavers

Old signs of beaver activity on Four Mile Creek were photographed on the Seaton property. Beaver appear to be in the area and have built impressive dams on the property on Four Mile Creek in the past. Beaver are a keystone species and their dams and subsequent pools of water provide numerous functions within riparian corridors like water filtering and water storage helping creek flows in late summer and providing refugia for fish. The dams inspected appear to have been dismantled. Investigating whether impacts are truly unmanageable or simply just perceived to be and looking at the possibility of how to live with beavers is highly recommended. Flow alterations are extreme at times on Fourmile Creek due to diversions and may also influence the abilityof beaver to remain in the immediate area.

Fences and Dogs

Briefly, contacting the Division of Wildlife for advice on fences that are less impact on local wildlife before any new fencing is considered is recommended in this area where wildlife are still abundant. Additionally, dogs should never be allowed out unaccompanied by their owners and leashes are highly recommended at all times. In order to protect pets, enclosed kennels are a sensible idea since, as mentioned, the area resides in a CDOW Mountain Lion Human Conflict Area. Additionally, kennels are very helpful in protecting wildlife from dog encounters near homes.

em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 26 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

Literature Referenced-Seaton Proposed Subdivision, Vegetation and Wildlife

Anthony, Steve. 2009. Personal communication with Steve Anthony. Garfield County Vegetation Manager and weed specialist, Garfield County, P.O. Box 426, Rifle, Colorado. Phone: 970-625-8601.

Bridgeman, T. 1832. The Young Gardners's Assistant. George Robertson, New Your. 164 pp.

Carpenter, Alan T. and Thomas A. Murray. 1998. Element Stewardship Abstract for Bromus tectorum, cheatgrass, downy brome. Land Stewardship Consulting, the Nature Conservancy. Boulder, CO. http://tncweeds. ucdavis. edu/esadocslbromtect. html

Dewey, Steven A. et al. 2007. Weed Management Handbook for Montana, Utah and Wyoming Cooperative Extension Services. The Bulletin rooms of Montana State University (406-994-3273), Utah State University (435-797-2251) and the University of Wyoming (307-766-2115).

Colorado Department of Agriculture, Conservation Services Division. 2008. Absinth Wormwood Identification and Management. http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/Agriculture-Main/CDAG/1174084048733

Colorado Department of Agriculture, Conservation Services Division. 2008. Bull Thistle Identification and Management. http://www .colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/Agricultu re-Main/C DAG/117 4084048733

Colorado Department of Agriculture, Conservation Services Division. 2008. Canada Thistle Identification and Management. http://www .colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/Agricultu re-Main/C DAG/117 4084048733

Colorado Department of Agriculture, Conservation Services Division. 2008. Common Tansy Identification and Management. http://www .colorado.gov/cs/Sate llite/Agricu ltu re-Main/C DAG/117 4084048733

Colorado Department of Agriculture, Conservation Services Division. 2008. Houndstongue Identification and Management. http://www .colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/Agricultu re-Main/CDAG/117 4084048733

Colorado Department of Agriculture, Conservation Services Division. 2008. Oxeye Daisy Identification and Management. http://www .colorado. gov/cs/Satellite/Ag riculture-Main/CDAG/117 4084048733

CDOW. 2009. Colorado Species Distribution Maps Metadata. Available online at http://ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/. Natural Diversity Information Source, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO.

Colorado Natural Areas Program (CNAP). 2000. Creating an Integrated Weed Management Plant, Caring for the Land Series IV. Colorado Department of Natural Resources, Denver, CO.

Colorado State Parks. 2005. Best Management Practices, Weed Profile, Canada Thistle, Cirsium aNense, Brea aNensis. Colorado State Parks Website 2009.

Colorado Weed Management Association (CWMA). 2007. Noxious Weeds of Colorado, Ninth Edition.

Emmerich, F.L., F.H. Tipton, and J.A. Young. 1993. Cheatgrass: Changing perspectives and management strategies. Rangelands 15:37-39.

FEIS - Fire Effects Information System . 1996. Prescribed Fire and Fire Effects Research Work Unit, Rocky Mountain Research Station (producer), US Forest Service. http://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/ [Version 12 DEC 09].

Fitzgerald, J. P., C. A. Meaney, and D. M. Armstrong 1994. Mammals of Colorado. Denver Museum of Natural History; University Press of Colorado, Niwot, Colo.

La Plata County. 2009. La Plata County Weed Management and Enforcement Plan Pursuant to Article II of Chapter 58 of the La Plata County Code and the Colorado Noxious Weed Act, La Plata County, CO. em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 27 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

Literature Referenced -Seaton Proposed Subdivision, Vegetation and Wildlife (continued)

LeCain, R. and R. Sheley. 2002. Common tansy (Tanacetum vulgare). Montana State University Extension Service Montguide MT 199911 AG. Bozeman, MT.

Milich, L.W. 1975. Absinth wormwood-a problem weed? Proc. NC Weed Cont. Cont. 30:41-42.

MSU Extension Weed Management, Land Resources and Environmental Sciences Department. 2001. Bozeman, MT. www.weeds.montana.edu

NatureServe: Explorer. An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. 2007. Version 1.6. Arlington (VA): Association for Biodiversity Information. Available: http://www.natureserve.org/.

Pitkin County Land Management. 2009. Poison hemlock, Conium maculatum. Website information sheet. http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Public-Works/Land-Management/Noxious-Weed-List/

Pokorny, MonicaL. 2007. Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum). Montana State University Extension Weed Management.http://www.ipm.montana.edu/cropweeds/Extension/weed%20species%20not%20every%2 Olile%20is%20here-/Downy%20brome.htm Bozeman, MT

Pokorny, Monica L. and Roger L. Sheley. 2000. Poison hemlock. Montana State University Extension Service Montguide MT 2000-13. Bozeman, MT.

Swearingen, Jil M. 2005. Fact Sheet: Common Mullein. Plant Conservation Alliance's Alien Plant Working Group and the National Park Service, Washington, D.C. http://www.nps.gov/plantslalien

University of Wyoming, College of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service. 2009. Weed Management Handbook. Laramie, WY. http://ces.uwyo.edu/WeedManagementHandbook.asp

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service, 1992. Soil Survey of Aspen-Gypsum Area, Colorado, Parts of Eagle, Garfield, and Pitkin Counties.

USDA, NRCS. 2009. The PLANTS Database (http://plants.usda.gov). National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA 7087 4-4490 USA.

Whitson, T.D.(ed.), L.C. Burrill, S.A. Dewey, D.W. Cudney, B.E. Nelson, R.D. Lee, R. Parker. 2006. Weeds of the West. Western Society of Weed Science, in cooperation with the Western United States Land Grant Universities Cooperative Extension Services and the University of Wyoming, Jackson, WY.

Weld County Fact Sheet. 2009. Cheatgrass Identification and Management, Rangeland Pasture Recommendations. http://www.co.weld.co.usldepartmentslweed_pest/pdl/factSheetslcheatgrass_2.pdl

Weber, W.A. and R. C. Whitman 2001. Colorado Flora: West Slope. Third Edition. University Press Colorado. Boulder, CO.

Yates-White, Crystal. 2009. Personal communication with Crystal Yates-White. Pitkin County Land Manager, 26 Service Center Road, Aspen, Colorado, 81611. Phone: 970-920-5214.

em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 28 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

Appendix I. Garfield Count Noxious Weed List 2009 Noxious Weed Program

Garfield County

County Weed Supervisor: Steve Anthony

MailingAddress: P.O.Box426 Rifle, CO 81650

Phone Number: 970-625-3969

GARFIELD COUNTY NOXIOUS WEED LIST Common name Scientific name Leafy spurge Euphorbia esula Russian knapweed Acroptilon repens Yellow starthistle Centaurea solstitalis Plumeless thistle Carduus acanthoides Houndstongue Cynog/ossum officinale Common burdock Arctium minus Scotch thistle Onopordum acanthium Canada thistle Cirsium arvense Spotted knapweed Centaurea maculosa Diffuse knapweed Centaurea diffusa Dalmation toadflax Linaria dalmatica Yellow toadflax Linaria vulgaris Hoary cress Cardaria draba Saltcedar Tamarix parviflora Saltcedar Tamarix ramosissima Oxeye Daisy Chrysanthemum leucantheum Jointed Goatgrass Aegilops cylindrica Chicory Cichorium intybus Musk thistle Carduus nutans Purple loosestrife Lythrum salicaria Russian olive Elaeagnus angustifolia

*Absinth wormwood Artemisia absinthium *note this is a Colorado listed noxious weed, but not on the Garfield County List. em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 29 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife Novemtier 2009

Appendix II. State of Colorado Noxious Weed List 2009 Colorado Noxious Weed List

List A species in Colorado that are designated by the Commissioner for eradication: African rue (Peganum harmala) Camelthom (Aihagi pseudalhagi) Common crupina (Crupina vulgaris) Cypress spurge (Euphorbia cyparissias) Dyer's woad (lsatis tinctorial Giant salvinia (Salvinia molesta) Hydrilla (Hydrilla verticillata) Meadow knapweed (Centaurea pratensis) Mediterranean sage (Salvia aethiopis) Medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae) Myrtle spurge (Euphorbia myrsin~es) Orange hawkweed (Hieracium aurantiacum) Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) Rush skeletonweed (Chondrilla juncea) Sericea lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata) Squarrose knapweed (Centaurea virgata) Tansy ragwort (Senecio jacobaea) Yellow starthistle (Centaurea solstitialis)

List B weed species are species for which the Commissioner, in consultation with the state noxious weed advisory committee, local governments, and other interested parties, develops and implements state noxious weed management plans designed to stop the continued spread of these species: Absinth wormwood (Artemisia absinthium) Black henbane (Hyoscyamus niger) Bouncingbet (Saponaria officinalis) Bull thisde (Cirsium vulgare) Canada thisde (Cirsium arvense) Chinese clematis (Clematis orientalis) Common tansy (Tan acetum vulgare) Common teasel (Dipsacus fullonum) Com chamomile (Anthemis arvensis) Cudeaf teasel (Dipsacus laciniatus) Dalmatian toadflax, broad-leaved (Linaria dalmatica) Dalmatian toadflax, narrow-leaved (Linaria genistifolia) Dame's rocket (Hesperis matronalis) Diffuse knapweed (Centaurea diffusa) Eurasian watermiifoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) Hoary cress (Cardaria draba) Houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale) Jointed goatgrass (Aegilops cylindrica) Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) Mayweed chamomile (Anthemis cotula) Moth mullein (Verbascum blattaria) Musk thistle (Carduus nutans) Oxeye daisy (Chrysanthemum leucanthemum) Perennial pepperweed (Lepidium latifolium) Plumeless thistle (Carduus acanthoides) Quackgrass (Elytrigia repens) Russian knapweed (Acroptilon repens) Russian-olive (Eiaeagnus angustifolia) Salt cedar ITamarix chinensis. T.oarviflora. and T. ramosissima\

em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 30 Seaton Subdivision Vegetation and Wildlife November 2009

Scentless chamomile (Matricaria perforata) Scotch thistle (Onopordum acanthium) Scotch thistle (Onopordum tauricum) Spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa) Spurred anoda (Anoda crista Ia) Sulfur cinquefoil (Potentilla recta) Venice mallow (Hibiscus trionum) Wild caraway (Carum carvi) Yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) Yellow toadflax (Linaria vulgaris)

List C weed species are species for which the Commissioner, in consultation with the state noxious weed advisory committee, local governments, and other interested parties, will develop and implement state noxious weed management plans designed to support the efforts of local governing bodies to facilitate more effective integrated weed management on private and public lands. The goal of such plans will not be to stop the continued spread of these species but to provide additional education, research, and biological control resources to jurisdictions that choose to require management of List C species. Chicory (Cichorium intybus) Common burdock (Arctium minus) Common mullein (Verbascum thapsus) Common St. Johnswort (Hypericum perforatum) Downy brome (Bromus tectorum) Field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) Halogeton (Halogeton glomeratus) Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) Perennial sowthistle (Sonchus arvensis) Poison hemlock (Conium maculatum) Puncturevine (Tribulus terrestris) Redstem filaree (Erodium cicutarium) Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) Wild proso millet (Panicum miliaceum)

em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 31 General Area-County and State Listed Weeds Garfield: Canada thistle Common burdock Houndstongue Oxeye daisy Colorado: Absinth wormwood Bull thistle Common mullein Common tansy Downy brome Poison hemlock Absinth wormwood • Higher Density Areas Oxeye Daisy • High Density Area Common Mullein 0 Trace

Crown Vetch Isolated Area

Building Envelope

Seaton Property .

Approx. Proposed Property Split Legend Soil Map - Seaton Proposed Subdivision Approx. Seaton Property Lines

Soils on the Seaton Property 18 Cochetopa-Antrobus association 42 Fluvaquents 94 Showalter-Morval complex 95 Showalter-Morval complex,. steeper slopes

Map 2. Location of Soil Types-Seaton Property and Vicinity

k::. ~ I em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 Map 3. Mountain Lion Overall Range and Mountain Lion Human Conflict Area and the Seaton Proposed Subdivision

l egend 0 Mou ntain Lion Overall Range 0 Mo u ntain Lion Human Confl ict A L.:' County B o u ndary C ltl~

0 C ities ..rv Streams 100K High ways N Interstate ,;:fit US H ighway ft' State Highway /'/ Major Roads Forest Roads ,tV Paved ""' C ravel .1 • B laded ; ., 4WD 0 City Bo u ndaries l akes • Perennial EJ In term ittent 1: 100K DRC Image

* Approx. location of the Seaton Property

December 19th. 2009 07:13pm DISCLAIMER: This map is for display purposes only and is not intended for any legal representa~ons . http://ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/maps Approximate MapScale 1:111 .046

It i Iem ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 Map 4. Overall Summer Range and Production Areas for Elk and the Seaton Proposed Subdivision.

Legend B A me-rlca.n EJk Production Area~ 0 A merican El k Summer Range L.:' County Boundary Cttle~

0 Citle~

,/\/ Stream-s lOOK Highways lntersta.te ,;:;; US Highway *.# State Highway /'./ M ajor Ro ad~ Forest Roads ,tV P.ave

La ke~ • Perennial B Intermittent 1:100K ORG lm.age

* Approx. location of the Seaton Property

December ·J9th. 2009 06:59 pm DISCLAIMER: This map is for display purposes only and is not intended for any legal representations. http://ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/maps Approximate MapScale 1:129.790

j(; I em ecological, llC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 Map 5. American Elk Severe Winter Range, Winter Concentration Areas, and Overall Winter Range and the Seaton Proposed Subdivision

Le g e n{j

(l] A merle<~n Elk ~ver e W inter Ran ~ B Amerle<~n Elk W inter C on«ntratl· 0 A merican Elk W inter Range t..:' County Boundary Citl~

D Citie-s

1-..1 Streams 100K Highways N Interstate 4;7 US H ighway # State Highway ;v Major Roads

For~t Roads /V' Paved # Gravel 1 • B laded J .- 4WD 0 City Boundaries Lake-s • Perennial B Intermittent 1:100K D RG Image

Approx. location of the Seaton Property

December "19th. 2009 06:54pm DISCLAIMER: TI1is map is for display purposes only and is not intended for any legal representations. http://ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/maps Approximate MapScale 1:1 08.512

I( i I em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 Map 6. Mule Deer Summer Range and the Seaton Proposed Subdivision

0 l.llule Deer Summe-r Range L.:' County Boundary Citie-s a Cities /'./ Streams 100K Highways .II Inters tate ,;:Y U S Highway K State H ighway ;Y l.llajor Roads Fore-st Roa

* Approx. location of the Seaton Property

December '19th. 2009 07:08pm DISCLAIMER: This map is for display purposes only and is not intended for any legal representations. http://ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/maps Approximate MapScale l :77.620

!1~ i I em ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 Map 7. Mule Deer Sever Winter Range, Winter Concentration Areas and Overall Winter Range and the Seaton Proposed Subdivision

OJl Mule Dei!-r ~vere W inter Range B Mule Dei!-r W i nter C o n oentration D Mule Deer Winter Ra nge L.:' Co u nty Bo u nd ary C ities a Cities ,.,/ St reams 100K l H ighways Interstate US Hig hway Stat e H ighway Major Roads forest Roa-ds ;V Paved ~ Gravel /' Bladed J " 4WD 0 City Bo u ndaries Lakes • Perennial B Intermittent 1:100K DRG Ima-ge

Approx. location of the Seaton Property

December 19U1. 2009 07:03 pm DISCLAIMER: This map is for display purposes only and is not intended for any legal representations. http:l/ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/maps Approximate MapScale 1:77,620

k~ i Iem ecological, LLC P.O. Box 1990, Carbondale, Colorado 81623 FLATTOPS ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS P.O. BOX 864 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 (970) 379-2846

October 19, 2009

Mr. Don Seaton 4151 County Road 117 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601

CC: Fred Jarman Garfield County, Building & Planning 108 8'" Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601

RE: Letter Report of Findings-Class I Cultural Resources Study for the Proposed Seaton Subdivision, Parcel #2395-033-00-031, Garfield County, Colorado

Dear Mr. Seaton,

This letter report of findings serves as documentation for the completion of a Class I Cultural Resources Study of the proposed Seaton Subdivision (Parcel #2395-033-00-031) in Garfield County, Colorado. The project occupies a portion of Section 3, Township 7 South, Range 89 West. Cultural resource files for the entire Section 3 were reviewed for this study. This study satisfies the Garfield County Unified Land Use Resolution, Article IV Section 4-502E part 8b: A determination of the effect on significant archaeological, cultural, paleontological, historic resources prior to the development of private property. The proposed project area is along County Road 117, approximately four miles south of Glenwood Springs, Colorado.

The file search was conducted on October 19, 2009, by reviewing the Colorado Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation's COMPASS database. One previous cultural resource inventory project has taken place within Section 3, T7S, R89W (Table 1), and there are two known cultural resources that have been recorded in this section (Table 2). One of the resources is a segment of the Jerome Park Branch of the Colorado Midland Railroad grade (5GF469), and the other resource is a prehistoric isolated find (5GF1751). The Jerome Park (Coal) Branch of the Colorado Midland Railroad played a significant role in the early economy of the Roaring Fork Valley by transporting coal from the outlying mines to fuel the silver smelter in Aspen, and to the coke Ovens at Cardiff (Johnson and Yajko 1983; Urquhart 1971:37, 74). 5GF469 is officially eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places; it is recommended that this site be avoided by the current project.

Kae McDonald Principal Investigator f/[email protected] SGF1751 is a midsection of a projectile point. Isolated finds are not eligible for inclusion on the NRHP; no further work is recommended.

Thus, based on the results of this Class I inventory, Flattops Archaeological Consultants recommends that if SGF469 can be avoided, a finding of no historic properties affected can be recommended. In addition, should other cultural resources be unearthed during ground-disturbing activities, a qualified archaeologist should be notified.

Table 1: Cultural Resource Projects in Section 17, T7S, R87W. Project No. Project Type Client Company Year Sites Recorded MC.LM.R85 BLM Portions of Bureau of Land Grand River 1993 None the Proposed Management Institute Rifle-to-Avon Pipeline

Table 2: Cultural Resource Sites located in Section 17, T7S, R87W. Smithsonian Site Type Site National Register Class I No. Description Eligibility Recommendation 5GF469 Historic Railroad Grade Eligible Avoid SGF1751 Prehistoric Projectile Point Not Eligible No further work fragment

If you have questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me at your convenience.

REFERENCES CITED

Johnson, Anna and Kathleen Yajko 1983 The Elusive Dream. Gran Farnum Printing, Glenwood Springs, Colorado.

Urquhart, Lena M. 1971 Glenwood Springs: Spa in the Mountains. Frontier Historical Society, Glenwood Springs, Colorado.