Ana səhifə

The Nature Trust of British Columbia


Yüklə 12.47 Mb.
səhifə1/5
tarix25.06.2016
ölçüsü12.47 Mb.
  1   2   3   4   5


CHERRY CREEK
WILDLIFE AREA
Hayfields
prepared for:

The Nature Trust of British Columbia


by:
T.J. Ross, P.Ag. 1

November, 2001

1 Ross Range and Reclamation Services

PO Box 283, Cranbrook, BC, V1C 4H8

Executive Summary
A reconnaissance level survey and intensive soil survey was completed in the Cherry Creek Wildlife Area in October, 2001. The purpose was to provide plant community and soil quality and fertility information to assist in the renovation of the hayfields.
The property was stratified into 5 hayfields based on landforms, soils and vegetation and past use. The nature of the soils, landform and vegetation are described for each hayfield.
The study area comprises approximately 90 ha on soils of fluvial origin on the floodplain of the Kootenay River. All but one of the hayfields requires renovation. Soils are typically alkaline with electrical conductivity less than 2 dS/m. Soils are usually deficient in nitrogen, potassium and boron, and occasionally in phosphorus. Sulphur is recommended for all fields. A seed mix of alfalfa, orchardgrass, timothy and pubescent wheatgrass is adapted to the site. These species are also readily eaten by cattle and wild ungulates.
There is no irrigation system, but water rights for sufficient water to irrigate the property are held on Cherry Creek.
Recommendations and cost estimates to renovate these hayfields are provided. Plant species lists, reconnaissance survey results, soil sample test results, representative photographs and a hayfield map were also produced.

Acknowledgements
Several people assisted in the preparation of this report. The author would like to thank the following:
Jim Hope – BC Conservation Land Manager, Nature Trust of British Columbia

Gary Tipper – BC Ministry of Environment

Bob Bjorn – Rancher, Bull River, BC

Glen Creelman – Rancher, Mayook, BC

Len Hunt – Rancher, Marysville, BC

Mike Doggert – Interior Reforestation, Cranbrook, BC

Carmen Purdy – Kootenay Wildlife Heritage Fund
Table of Contents
Executive Summary................................................................................. ii
Acknowledgements……………………………………………………… iii
Table of Contents..................................................................................... iv
List of Tables........................................................................................... v
List of Figures.......................................................................................... v
List of Appendices................................................................................... v
1.0 Introduction........................................................................................ 1

1.1 Objectives………………………………………………….. 1

1.2 Site Description..................................................................... 1

1.3 Landforms and Soils.............................................................. 1

1.4 Vegetation……..................................................................... 3

1.5 Wildlife.................................................................................. 5


2.0 Methods.............................................................................................. 5

2.1 Stratification.......................................................................... 5

2.2 Field Vegetation Assessment – Reconnaissance Survey….. 5

2.3 Soil Sampling……………………………………..………. 6


3.0 Results and Discussion....................................................................... 6

3.1 Reconnaissance Survey……………………………………. 6

3.1.1 Elevation, Slope and Aspect……………………... 6

3.1.2 Landforms and Soils……………………………… 6

3.1.3 Vegetation……………………………………….. 8

3.2 Soil Quality and Fertility.…...........................................…. 9

4.0 Discussion and Recommendations.………........................................ 10
5.0 Literature Cited................................................................................... 15
6.0 Appendices.......................................................................................... 16

List of Tables
Table 1. Soils of the Cherry Creek Wildlife Area……………........... 7
Table 2. Summary of seed, fertilizer and herbicide recommendations

at the Cherry Creek Wildlife Area .………………………… 13



List of Figures

Figure 1. Site Location……………………………………………… 2

Figure 2. Soils of the Cherry Creek Wildlife Area.....………………. 4



List of Appendices
Appendix 1. Plant Species………………………................................ 17
Appendix 2. Hayfields at the Cherry Creek Wildlife Area

in October, 2001……………………..……………….… 24


Appendix 3. Soil Sample Test Results……………………………… 29
Appendix 4. Photopoints…………………………………………….. 36
Appendix 5. Hayfields at the Cherry Creek Wildlife Area (1:20,000). 41
1.0 Introduction

The Cherry Creek Wildlife Area is situated on lands owned by the Nature Trust of BC. The property is located on the west side of the Kootenay River and is bisected by Cherry Creek. It consists of floodplains of the Kootenay River and benchlands located above. The benchlands area is composed of open grassland and open forest which are experiencing the effects of forest ingrowth and encroachment. The floodplains were utilized as hayfields when the property was an operational ranch. Some hayfields were cultivated and on some areas the native vegetation was harvested.


1.1 Objectives

Ross Range and Reclamation Services was contracted to evaluate the state and condition of the hayfields, and provide recommendations on the best course of action to restore them to productivity. It is anticipated that renovating the hayfields, in conjunction with habitat restoration treatments on the benchlands, will enhance the Cherry Creek Wildlife Area’s capability as ungulate winter range and habitat for Canada geese and upland nesting duck species.


The specific objectives of this project were:

1) Determine the current vegetation cover on the traditionally harvested areas.

2) Analyze soil properties and determine the nutrient status and soil quality.

3) Determine a suitable seed mix for each harvested area.

4) Determine the costs of renovating the hayfields to viable production standards.
1.2 Site Description

The Cherry Creek Wildlife Area is located in the East Kootenay region of British Columbia, northeast of the town of Kimberley and southeast of the village of TaTa Creek (Figure 1). The east boundary consists of the Kootenay River, while the north and west boundary is the Cherry-TaTa Range Unit. To the north the unit is also bounded by private land, while to the south the property is bounded by the St. Mary’s Indian Band IR#1.


The Cherry Creek Wildlife Area consists of 7 deeded lots. The hayfields are comprised primarily of Lots 654, 655, 656 and 708. The study area consists of approximately 90 ha.
1.3 Landforms and Soils

The Cherry Creek Wildlife Area lies within the Rocky Mountain Trench physiographic region (Holland 1976). Topography in the floodplain is defined as depressional to gently undulating (Lacelle 1990). Cherry Creek, which drains east to the Kootenay River, has a fluvial fan associated with it. Soils in the balance of the hayfield area originate as fluvial deposits associated with the Kootenay River. Although fluvial deposits predominate, there are extensive areas of organic deposits associated. Slopes are commonly between 0 and 2. Elevation ranges between 765 and 775 meters.



Fluvial soils are represented by the Lakit and Salishan soil associations (Figure 2). Lakit soils have developed in shallow, silty or sandy aeolian or fluvial veneers that overlie gravelly fluvial terraces derived from areas of non-calcareous bedrocks in the Purcell mountains (Lacelle 1990). They are mostly well-drained and moderately pervious. Texture in the upper soil ranges from silt loam to sand, while subsoil textures are usually between gravelly loam and very gravelly loamy sand. Coarse fragments are usually very low in the upper soil, but up to 70% in the subsoil and consist primarily of rounded gravels and cobbles. The usual classification is Orthic Eutric Brunisol, but on the lower portions of the floodplain were drainage is poor to very poor Rego Gleysols are found. Lakit soils are found in association with Cherry Creek.


Salishan soils have developed in silty clay to silty sand fluvial deposits associated with the floodplain of the Kootenay River (Lacelle 1990). These deposits are derived from areas of limestone, dolomite and phyllite. Salishan soils are mostly imperfectly to poorly drained and slowly to moderately pervious. Textures range from silty clay loam to fine sandy loam, with silt loam being the most common. Coarse fragments are usually not present. Thin layers and lenses of varying textures, often organic matter enriched, are common in the subsoil. Most Salishan soils have insignificant soil development due to periodic flooding or surface additions of new material. Water tables can be near the surface for significant lengths of time. The modal soil is a Gleyed Cumulic Regosol; calcareous phase. The most common phase classified at the Cherry Creek Wildlife Area is a Rego Gleysol; calcareous phase. These soils occupy the lowest portions of the floodplain, exhibit considerable gleying, and may also have deep organic surface deposits.
Olivia soils are commonly found associated with the Salishan soils. They are organic soils which have developed in accumulations composed of sedges and reeds (fen) found on the Kootenay River floodplain (Lacelle 1990). Olivia soils are very poorly drained with the water table at or near the surface for most of the year. These soils consist of a 10 to 40 cm thick, relatively undecomposed surface layer derived from sedges and reeds underlain by a 110 to 200+ cm thick zone of partially decomposed (mesic) organic material. They are usually classified as Typic Mesisols.
1.4 Vegetation

The Cherry Creek Wildlife Area is contained within the Ponderosa Pine (PP) and Interior Douglas-fir (IDF) biogeoclimatic zones (Braumandl and Curran 1992). The most common sub-zones are the PP dry, hot (PPdh2) and IDF dry, mild (IDFdm2). The ecosystem where the hayfields are situated can be classified primarily as PPdm2, series 03 and 04 (mesic to hygric). Forest cover is dominated by ponderosa pine 1, trembling aspen, black cottonwood and hybrid white spruce (Appendix 1).


1

Plant species names follow Hitchcock and Cronquist (1973).



Common shrubs within the area include snowberry, rose, saskatoon, chokecherry, red-osier dogwood, bog-birch and mountain alder (Appendix 1).


Grass and grasslike species present include bluebunch wheatgrass, Kentucky bluegrass, pinegrass, bearded wheatgrass and blue wildrye (Appendix 1). Northern bedstraw, common dandelion, star-flowered false soloman’s seal and field horsetail are common forbs (Appendix 1).
Riparian areas are characterized by sedges, rushes, redtop, foxtail barley, bluejoint, reed canarygrass and silverweed (Appendix 1).
Several red and blue-listed natural plant communities and plant species are found within the PPdh2 and IDFdm2 biogeoclimatic zones. They are listed in Appendix 1.
1.5 Wildlife

The Cherry Creek Wildlife Area is rated as having a moderate to high (Class 1, 1W, 2W and 3W on 1:250,000 maps) capability to support ungulates, in particular white-tailed deer, mule deer and elk (Canada Land Inventory 1976). Jamieson and Ohanjanian (1990) identified migration routes for elk as being from the Cherry Creek area, through the old Kimberley airport, and from that point upslope to summer range. They felt elk and deer numbers were lower than optimum due, in part, to forest ingrowth and encroachment.


Waterfowl commonly use the small sloughs and adjoining uplands in the floodplain area of the property, subject to water levels. A Ducks Unlimited project is also in place here.

2.0 Methods

A combination of reconnaissance vegetation surveys and intensive soil sampling was performed to characterize the state of the hayfields.


2.1 Stratification

The floodplain area was first stratified on 1:20,000 colour aerial photographs. For this initial stratification traditionally cultivated areas and those where native forage was harvested were separated from areas which are too wet and have not been hayed. Initial polygon boundaries were refined by examination of 1:100,000 soils maps (Lacelle 1990).


2.2 Field Vegetation Assessment - Reconnaissance Survey

Following the initial stratification, polygon boundaries were checked by means of a reconnaissance level survey. The areas were walked and the existing plant community was determined by ocular estimate of percent foliar cover of forbs and grass. Total cryptogram cover and estimates of percent bare soil were also recorded. Other plants, such as indicator species and poisonous plants were noted when observed during the reconnaissance survey.


Slope, aspect, elevation and landform type were recorded. The reconnaissance level survey was undertaken during October 15, 2001. Notes are found in Appendix 2.
2.3 Soil Sampling

Soil samples were collected from all hayfields on October 16, 2001. Representative soil samples were obtained by first establishing a 100 m grid within each hayfield. Individual samples were collected to a 15 cm depth at each point on the grid. All samples were then blended and a single sample representing each field was submitted for analysis. Samples were not collected within a 50 m buffer zone around the perimeter of the field. Soil test results are found in Appendix 3.


Representative photographs were taken in each hayfield. They are located in Appendix 4.

A hayfield map is included as Appendix 5.





  1. Results

3.1 Reconnaissance Survey

The size of the operational hayfield area is approximately 90 ha (220 acres). This estimate was based on aerial photo-interpretation (BCC00057 – 058, 156) of the area hayed in 2000 (Table 1).


3.1.1 Elevation, Slope and Aspect

Elevation in the hayfield area ranged between 765 m and 775 m. Slopes were generally less than 2º. Aspect ranged between 090º and 350º.


3.1.2 Landforms and Soils

The hayfield area of the Cherry Creek Wildlife Area consists of three distinct soil parent types (Table 1). H1, H2a and H2b are predominantly composed of Lakit soils. These soils were deposited as a fluvial fan by Cherry Creek; overlying older fluvial deposits laid down by the Kootenay River. As a result the soils on these hayfields have a slightly more complex terrain and greater slope than the other fields. Gravelly bars were noted throughout H1 and H2. Topsoil was shallow on these bars, while it was generally deeper in the swales between them.


H3 represents a mixture of Salishan soils with minor amounts of Olivia. H4 is composed of a complex mixture of Salishan and Olivia soils. In contrast, H5 is a single river terrace composed entirely of Salishan soils. Deep, relatively stone-free, silty clay topsoil
characterizes most of H3 and H5. A deep organic matter layer overlies the topsoil on areas in H3 and H4 where Olivia soils predominate.
Table 1. Soils of the Cherry Creek Wildlife Area.


Hayfield

Lot

Soil

Association

Area

(ha)

1

655

656


Lakit

28.3

2a

655

Lakit

4.3

2b

654

655


Lakit

Salishan


20.2

3

654

Salishan

Olivia


4.9

4

654


Olivia

Salishan


15.0

5

708

Salishan

16.2

Total







88.9

There has been no recent forage harvest on H1, H2b or H5 other than grazing. H4 was hayed in 2000 and 2001. The area hayed in H4 likely varies annually with the amount of precipitation. In dry years an expanded area is available for hay-cutting. H2a and H3 were recently cultivated and seeded. Little production was evident, as they had been grazed heavily all year. However, there appears to have been some establishment of domestic forages.
3.1.2 Vegetation

H1 and H2b have very similar soils and the condition of the stands is also similar. They are very low in alfalfa cover and populations of most domestic grasses are also very low (Appendix 2). This resulted in very low forage production in 2001. While the cover of timothy and orchardgrass is as high as 10% on the north end of H2b, and smooth bromegrass cover was as high as 35% on the north end of H1, these areas are not representative of the stands. Additionally, both fields have weed problems. Quackgrass is established, mainly in swales. Annual weeds such as ball mustard, pennycress and field peppergrass are the most common, but perennial weeds such as Canada thistle and common burdock were also noted. Spotted knapweed was found on the main road bordering H1 and H2b. This weed is considered to be more of a problem in waste areas and rangeland than in hayfields, but it should be controlled here to prevent its spread. Bare soil was estimated at up to 50% in localized areas of these hayfields.


H2a and H3 are relatively small areas which have been recently seeded. Alfalfa was estimated to provide up to 10% cover in one area of H3 (Appendix 2). However, in the majority of the stands the drill rows are clearly visible and the alfalfa plants have been grazed literally to the dirt in both of these hayfields. Barley provided cover on about one-half of H3. Reed canarygrass was present, but these plants are native. Smooth bromegrass, pubescent wheatgrass and meadow foxtail were the only other grass or grasslike species on H3. H2a had sparse populations of timothy, crested wheatgrass and orchardgrass. Cheatgrass and Canada bluegrass were the most prevalent here. Both fields are weedy with mustards, pennycress, dandelion and lamb’s quarters. Bare soil was as high as 95% in some areas of H3.
H4 is a natural meadow where the cover is dominated by reed canarygrass with small amounts of redtop. Slight rises, which are drier, and historically have had more grazing, usually have populations of Kentucky bluegrass, timothy and smooth bromegrass. H4 is slightly higher than the meadows and wetlands which surround it, so it has been hayed when soil moisture conditions permit. Localized areas of bare soil did not exceed 25%.
H5 is in the best condition of the cultivated hayfields. It has good cover of smooth bromegrass, Kentucky bluegrass and orchardgrass in most of the field. Quackgrass is found in some low spots. However, alfalfa populations vary considerably from as high as 15% to 0%. Production would be higher with a larger component of alfalfa in the stand. A root-restricting layer at 10 cm to 15 cm depth has impeded the vigour of this stand and likely contributes to making it a droughty site. This site has good cover, as bare soil was generally less than 10%.
Meadows (M) and wetlands adjoining the hayfields share many of the same soil characteristics as the hayfields. M1 adjoins H4, but has been mainly used as pasture. Kentucky bluegrass is the dominant species, but timothy, reed canarygrass, redtop, slender wheatgrass, quackgrass and smooth bromegrass are also common. Native forbs include northern bedstraw, western yarrow, silverweed and tufted white prairie aster. Canada thistle and dandelion were also noted. M2 is a meadow/wetland complex located between H3, H4 and H5. The fringe of the unit is slightly higher and supports a population of reed canarygrass with minor amounts of redtop. The central portion is lower and beaked sedge dominates the community with inclusions of tufted clubrush and rush species. Beaked sedge prefers perennially wet areas (Parish et al 1996), so it is unlikely that this site has been hayed. It has probably been used only as winter grazing.
3.2 Soil Quality and Fertility

As the majority of soils on the Cherry Creek Wildlife Area are either Lakit or Salishan, soils of fluvial origin, some generalities in soil characteristics were observed among the hayfields:



  1. Soils in all hayfields, except for H2a, are in the alkaline range with pH ranging from 7.9 to 8.6 (Appendix 3).

  2. The % Base Saturation is greater than or equal to 100% for all fields. Calcium generally contributes between 66% and 87%, with magnesium being the second most important contributor to the % Base Saturation. This is desirable because it ensures that other more troublesome cations, such as sodium, are present at low levels. However, calcium and magnesium are present at levels in excess of the optimum in all hayfields.

  3. Electrical conductivity, which is a measure of soil salinity, is less than 2.0 deciSiemens/meter (dS/m) for all fields except H3. This is important, as 2.0 dS/m is considered to be the threshold above which yields decrease for important forage species such as alfalfa and orchardgrass.

  4. Organic matter (% OM) was found to be in the normal range (approximately 2% to 7%) for all fields but H2a and H4. The % OM was 17% at H2a. This was likely a feeding site at one time. H4 has a component of organic soils so it was expected that its % OM (7.5%) would be higher also. Soils derived from fluvial parent material are often low in organic matter, which results in poor structure, and thus less aeration and slower percolation.

H1 and H2b, which are composed of Lakit soils, posted very similar results (Appendix 3). Both hayfields are deficient in nitrogen, potassium and boron. H2a, likely due to its past use, is at the optimum levels for all nutrients. The remaining hayfields are found on Salishan soils, with some inclusions of Olivia. H3, H4 and H5 are deficient in nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium and boron (Appendix 3).


4.0 Discussion and Recommendations

The Cherry Creek Wildlife Area was operated as a ranching operation until approximately 1993 (Jamieson and Ohanjanian 1990). However, the property had been sold to the Nature Trust previous to that and management of the property as a beef cattle operation was gradually phased out. Portions of the traditional hayfield areas have been harvested in the past several years on a barter basis. This arrangement exchanges hay for labour to complete projects such as tearing down old buildings and cleaning up the site (L. Hunt, C. Purdy, pers. comm.). The current arrangement calls for the removal of one cut of hay. The aftermath and subsequent re-growth are reserved for wintering ungulates.


In 1990 three hayfields were actively managed and the remaining hayfields were used solely for grazing. Several seeding attempts have been recommended or attempted since.

Remnant species from other seedings noted in the reconnaissance survey include; meadow foxtail and tall wheatgrass. Both species were selected for their adaptation to soil conditions. Meadow foxtail tolerates periodic flooding and saturated soils, while tall wheatgrass is adapted to alkaline soil conditions.


The cultivated hayfields were most recently planted in 1995 (B. McKersie, pers. comm.). Fields H1, H2a, H2b, H3 and H5 were ploughed once and disked twice. Oats were seeded with a grain drill to provide a cover crop. Forage seeds were then planted in a second pass with a Brillion seeder.
Alfalfa was re-seeded into the smooth bromegrass stand in H1 in 2001, but the seeding failed to emerge due to low precipitation in spring (L. Hunt, pers. comm.).

Hayfields H2a and H3 were seeded more recently to a mixture of alfalfa, timothy, orchardgrass and pubescent wheatgrass, with a cover crop of barley. Good emergence was reported here, but with the dry spring and summer, production was limited. Part or all of H2b was seeded to the same mixture, but this seeding has only persisted in a small area in the north of H2b. It is likely that more plants will emerge with next spring’s moisture. Establishment has also been hampered by persistent wild ungulate grazing.


Fertilizer was applied on hayfields H1, H2b and H5 in spring, 2001 (M. Doggert, pers. comm.). Applications were as per soil tests collected then. However, limited effect was observed likely due to the low precipitation received in the East Kootenay area in 2001. The long-term normal is approximately 36 cm. Precipitation received at the Cranbrook Airport to the end of October, 2001 (19.4 cm) is approximately 64% of the long-term normal for this period (30.5 cm). In the previous two years, total annual precipitation was at the normal in 1999 and only 25.4 cm in 2000. Soil moisture is lacking in all fields except H4, a portion of which is sub-irrigated.
Hay crops were taken off H4 only in 2001 (L. Hunt, pers. comm.). This field was the only one with sufficient production to make harvest economically viable.
Hayfields H1 and H2b were still irrigated as recently as 1990. However, upon the final transfer of the property to the Nature Trust, irrigation activity ceased. This has had a detrimental effect on forage production, particularly when precipitation has been below normal. Water rights on Cherry Creek are still held for the property so irrigation is an option. Unfortunately, the irrigation equipment was sold when the property was transferred and the power transformer has been removed, but the power line to the main building site is still in place. However, a Water License for 325 acre-feet is still held on Cherry Creek (G. Tipper, source: Water License Information System).

Some different practices are recommended when producing forage on fluvial soils associated with the Kootenay River. Producers have found that working the soil when it is damp was preferable as these fluvial soils are hard and cemented when dry. One producer suggested one irrigation pass of approximately 7.5 cm of water was sufficient. Ploughing to about 15 cm depth, and ensuring the furrows are flipped, worked well for seedbed preparation and also assisted in controlling sod-grasses such as Kentucky bluegrass and quackgrass. Two passes of blading to level the surface and break up clods was thought to be the best operation to follow ploughing by one producer (G. Creelman, pers. comm.). A second producer recommended fall ploughing, followed by two passes with a disk in the spring (B. Bjorn, pers. comm.). Regardless of the order and timing of tillage operations, a seedbed of consistent firmness is required for good seedling emergence, particularly with small seeded species such as timothy and alfalfa.


Producers operating on similar soils also reported that irrigation was critical, both for forage production and for alkalinity management. They would typically apply 30 cm to 40 cm per season (1.0 to 1.25 acre-feet).
Cations such as calcium and magnesium are readily water-soluble and are therefore easily leached from the soil profile when precipitation exceeds evapo-transpiration (Bohn et al 1979). Calcium carbonates in particular can form an indurate layer (caliche) which can restrict root penetration. In soils which are sub-irrigated, the opposite effect takes place as salts move toward the soil surface by means of capillary action. Additionally, surplus calcium has the negative effect of fixing phosphorus as calcium phosphate, making it unavailable for plant growth.
Hay producers on similar soil types expected yields in the order of 4.0 to 4.5 t/ha in an average year, providing 30 cm to 40 cm of irrigation water was applied. These producers typically renovated fields after 6 to 7 years.
While the property was originally purchased as wildlife winter/spring range, forage use by elk and deer can be detrimental when establishing a forage seeding. Examples can be found in H2a and H3 (Appendix 2). Perhaps the best solution is an extensive hayfield renovation project, so smaller areas will not receive excessive forage use during the establishment period.
Haying/cattle grazing are management options recommended in previous plans to improve the quality of winter/spring forage for wintering ungulates (Jamieson and Ohanjanian 1990). These authors felt that forage for ungulates was not limiting so “extensive plantings are not required at this time”. They did recommend that hayfields without a good grass stand, these included the north field and the sedge field, be planted. These hayfields correspond to H3 and H5.

  1   2   3   4   5


Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©atelim.com 2016
rəhbərliyinə müraciət