|
Revegetating
with native grasses, wildflowers, and fescues after
construction
By
David R. Chenoweth
When I was
a young environmental scientist, my superiors often
stressed the importance of using environmental baseline
studies to formulate revegetation plans. Their words
and training stay with me to this day and have played
a significant role in the success and quality of the
outcome at the new Village Lakes residential project
in Castle Pines, CO.
 |
|
Native
fescue blend that looks like bluegrass.
|
Located near
a famous Colorado plateau named Castle Rock, Castle
Pines is a developer'sand homeowner'sdream.
For a visual, all a person needs to do is think about
the name "Castle Pines." The area is thick
with towering pines, a true Colorado forest located
high on the mountain plains. Growing, nurturing, and
maintaining a landscape for a residential community
is a different story, and this presented a challenge
to the development team.
The developers
looked for a company to write soil preparation, seeding,
mulching, erosion control, and maintenance specifications
for the new residential community; Western States Reclamation
performed the work. As in the earliest days of my career,
my team and I first studied soil maps and mapping unit
descriptions from the US Department of Agriculture's
Natural Resources Conservation Service county soil survey.
We were able to glean general information about soils
of the project site. Next, we collected soil samples
onsite and sent them to a laboratory to evaluate several
physical and chemical parameters that might impact our
stripping of surface soils and using them for seedbed-quality
material (topsoil). The parameters that were tested
are listed in Table 1, along with a brief description
of what they indicate.
I strongly
believe that all development projects should include
an onsite soil survey to identify potential sources
of suitable topsoil. The use of quality topsoil will
provide faster, more successful revegetation results
and reduce the erosion potential of the disturbed site.
| Table
1. Physical ad Chemical Soil Test Parameters |
| Parameter |
Description |
| pH |
Measurement
o hydrogen iron activity in solution; pH < 6
indicates acid problem: pH > 8.0 indicates an
alkaline soil; pH > 8.5 indicates possible sodium
problems,; most nutrients are most available around
a pH of 6.5. |
| Soil
texture |
The
relative percentages of sand, silt, and clay in
the soil. There are 12 textural designations. |
| N-P-K |
The
amount of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium in
soil. |
| Organic
matter, % |
Can
be used to indicate health of the soil. |
| Saturation
percentage |
Amount
(percentage by weight) of water needed to saturate
a soil; high values may indicate high montmorillonite
clay content and/or high quantities of exchangeable
sodium; low values may indicate coarse soil materials
with a low water-holding capacity, such as sand
and low-water-holding clay. |
| Sodium
absorption ratio |
An
indirect measure of percent-exchangeable sodium
on the soil colloid. |
| Electrical
conductivity |
Measures
amount of free salt in soil; values > 4 mmhos/cm
indicate possible salt problems. |
The results
of the data collection indicated that the soils of the
site were generally sandy loams, meaning that the soils
were too coarse and low in organic material for use
alone as seedbed-quality material. Therefore, we specified
the proper soil amendments to provide a good soil medium
for successful revegetation.
The soil amendments of the revegetation plan consisted
of 4 cubic yards of good compost material and 1,000
to 1,200 lb/ac of organic fertilizer. The desired result
was to provide enough soil amendments in an attempt
to raise the soil organic matter content to 3%4%.
Research has indicated this is an optimum level for
successful revegetation.
 |
Soil organic
matter content is also important for long-term erosion
control of surface soils. Soil organic matter breaks
down into beneficial humic acids, which will create
soil aggregation and ultimately "soil peds."
Soil peds are much more erosion resistant than soil
clods, which break down from exposure to intense rains
and erode easily.
Often on
other projects I have seen fairly good seed mixtures
and mulching specifications prepared, but little if
any consideration is given to preserving good topsoil
or amending poor soil. In addition, poor erosion control
planning has resulted in many projects eroding or washing
out before vegetation could establish and provide better
overall erosion protection. Successful revegetation
cannot be achieved without a minimum depth of good seedbed-quality
material.
The next
step in the Castle Pines project was to design multiple
native grass seed mixtures that would reflect site soil
types, slope aspect, and species common to the local
ecosystems. The landscape architects were also interested
in textures, colors, and heights of grasses and wildflowers
that would blend with various landforms and landscape
features within the project. Therefore, we decided to
use a mixture of predominately native grasses, including
both warm-season and cool-season species. While native
grasses are all various shades of green for most of
the growing season, cool-season grasses tend to turn
a straw color in the fall and warm-season grasses turn
a prominent orange to reddish color. The two species
and colors provide a great color pattern in the fall
and complement other landscape features of the project.
The problem
is that warm-season grasses are very difficult to establish
at times with cool-season grasses. Therefore, careful
consideration must be given to the ideal season for
planting and the percentage of warm-season seed that
is needed to help offset the more aggressive nature
of cool-season grasses. Cool-season grasses tend to
green up in April and go dormant in late September or
early October. Warm-season grasses tend to green up
in late May and go dormant in mid-September. Warm-season
grasses are generally much more drought tolerant than
cool-season grasses. The best planting period to allow
warm-season grasses to compete with cool-season grasses
is probably from mid-May to late June.
Table 2 lists
the warm-season and cool-season grasses that were used
in various native grass seed mixtures. The native fescue
turfgrass blend is included in Table 3. Because the
construction of the project has spanned over three years
to date, observations could be made every growing season
as to what species were doing the best and what species
the client seemed to prefer. Thus, the native grass
seed mixtures were adjusted several times during 20002003
to accommodate these observations. Table 4 reflects
wildflowers used in various mixes and percentages throughout
the native grass seeded areas.
| Table
2. Native Grasses |
| Species |
Season
of Growth |
Height |
| Bluebunch
wheatgrass |
Cool |
(M)
1324 in |
| Bottlebrush
squirreltail |
Cool |
(M)
1324 in |
| Green
needlegrass |
Cool |
(M)
1324 in |
| Needle
and thread |
Cool |
(T)
25 in or taller |
| Prairie
Junegrass |
Cool |
(M)
1324 in |
| Pubescent
wheatgrass |
Cool |
(M)
1324 in |
| Slender
wheatgrass |
Cool |
(M)
1324 in |
| Streambank
wheatgrass |
Cool |
(S)
112 in to (M) 1324 in |
| Thickspike
wheatgrass |
Cool |
(M)
1324 in |
| Western
wheatgrass |
Cool |
(M)
1324 in |
| Alkali
sacaton |
Warm |
(M)
1324 in |
| Blue
grama |
Warm |
(S)
112 in to (M) 1324 in |
| Little
bluestem v. Aldous |
Warm |
(M)
1324 in |
| Sand
bluestem |
Warm |
(S) 112 in to (M) 1324 in |
| Sand
dropseed |
Warm |
(M)
1324 in |
| Sand
lovegrass |
Warm |
(T)
25 in or taller |
| Sideoats
grama v. Vaughn |
Warm |
(M)
1324 in |
| Table
3. Native Fescue Manicaure Turf Blend |
| Species |
Season
of Growth |
Height |
| Blue
fescue |
Cool |
(M)
1324 in |
| Hard
fescue |
Cool |
(M)
1324 in |
| Sheep
fescue |
Cool |
(M)
1324 in |
| Table
4. Wildflowers |
| Species |
Height |
| Blanket
flower |
1824
in |
| Blue
fax |
24
in |
| Conefower,
purple |
2426
in |
| Scarlet
globemallow |
612
in |
| Mexican
hat, red |
1224
in |
| Palmer's
penstemon |
48
in |
| Plains
coreopsis |
2448
in |
| Wite
yarrow |
1224
in |
Mulching
was specified to help control erosion and to cut down
on the loss of soil moisture. Initially, hydromulch
was specified to keep from contaminating the seed mixtures
with undesired native and introduced grass species as
well as cheat grasses that would result from using native
hay or straw mulch.
Although
we knew that weed invasion should not be as bad on an
irrigated native grass area as on a non-irrigated area,
weed control was going to be very important and had
to be carefully planned to avoid damage to newly germinating
grasses. Therefore, a combination of mowing and herbicide
applications was specified.
Mowing was
used initially to help cut off weed seed heads and keep
the canopy of the weeds down so native grasses would
not be shaded out. Mowing was specified at a 4-inch
or greater height. Shorter mowing can impact the reproductive
parts of native grasses, especially warm-season grasses.
Also, shorter mowing can cause sunscald and dieback
of native grasses during the hot summer months. Spot
treatment of weeds with a wick applicator was also specified
to help reduce local areas of noxious weeds such as
Canada thistle. Broad band applications of herbicides
were only specified after native grasses had reached
mowing height, which is felt to be the stage during
which damage from herbicides will not occur.
During 2000,
Castle Pines and DHM Design personnel requested bids
for the initial phases of the project. It was determined
that the project should be split between Valley Crest
completing all irrigation and landscape plantings and
Western States completing all soil preparation and mulching.
The first
two years of installation of seeding had its own problems,
as on most projects. The project construction schedules
consisting of road construction, infrastructure placement,
backfilling, and grading simply would not allow seeding
to occur each year within a six- to eight-week schedule,
which was the best for establishment of warm-season
and cool-season species together.
The seeding
of the first phase of the project was pushed from midsummer
to late summer and early fall. We were running out of
time to get the grasses established before soil temperatures
would be too cool for seed germination. Generally, it
is too cool to germinate warm-season grasses by the
second week of September and too late for cool-season
grasses by the third to last week of September.
Another challenge
was that the temporary water supply from the metro district
was restricted for new landscape use. We did have some
winterkill of cool-season grasses, and little or no
warm-season grasses germinated. Therefore, the problem
of giving the warm-season grasses a chance to establish
was partially overcome by two means. We would either
increase the seeding rate of the warm-season grasses
or seed the warm-season grasses the first season and
interseed the cool-season grasses the following growing
season.
Because the
construction of the project has spanned over three years,
we adjusted the native grass seed mixtures several times
to better establish the blend of grasses desired. The
wildflowers were not seeded initially, because weed
controlconsisting of mowing and herbicide applicationswould
have killed them. Wildflowers were planted only after
it was felt the grasses were established and weed control
would not be needed.
Douglas County
has a specification that does not allow hydromulch to
be used on native grass areas; it can only be used on
turfgrass areas on relatively flat surfaces. For this
reason, we switched to straw mulch, which ultimately
created problems. Viable wheat seed always exists to
some degree in wheat stalks. Therefore, volunteer wheat
being introduced into the seeded area can create a competitive
problem with the native grasses that were seeded. This
is exactly what happened on a portion of the Castle
Pines project. The volunteer wheat proliferated to the
point that it shaded out and robbed soil moisture from
the native grasses, creating a seeding failure.
Temporary
erosion control measures such as erosion bales, silt
fence, and touch-up mulching were important, because
the seed mixtures consisted predominantly of grass species
that were difficult to establish yet long-lived and
very drought tolerant.
The general
manager of the Castle Pines project hired me halfway
through the project to complete a monthly walk-through
to educate him on how the project was advancing and
whether any corrective measures needed to be taken.
This level of involvement by Castle Pines has now resulted
in a showcase project of how beautiful native grasses,
wildflowers, and native fescues used as a turfgrass
alternative can look. In fact, many visitors mistake
the native fescue manicured turf mixture for bluegrass.
Water-meter readings have proved that after the first
year of grow-in, we have cut water consumption in approximately
half of what would be required for bluegrass turf.
Today, the
Village Lakes development in Castle Pines is a sparkle
in one of Colorado's true gems of a community.
The landscaping, a result of the revegetation studies
that were completed early on, has truly enhanced the
beauty of the natural surroundings and helped make Village
Lakes one of Colorado's most desirable places to
live.
David
Chenoweth is president of Western States Reclamation
Inc. in Broomfield, CO.
EC
- March/April 2005
|