THE CALCAREOUS FENS OF PARK COUNTY:
THEIR ENVIRONMENTAL FUNCTIONING AND
VEGETATIONAL RECOVERY AFTER DISTURBANCE
Submitted to:
THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
as part of the U S Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII
104(B)(3) grant to the State of Colorado
By
J Bradley Johnson
Department of Biology
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523
970/490-1388
-------
DATE DUE
£——
7Jtr~^
t
BROOART, CO
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Summary 1
Introduction . 0 2
I^nicairf'CN a
Background DenJ^"1 St^S%8?C< 2
Colorado Peatlands .... . . ®r, Co «A "® 500 ' ' ^
Peatland Functionality . 3
Vegetational Recovery . 4
Objectives ..... 5
Methods .... ... . .. 6
Site descriptions . . .... .6
Climate 6
High Creek Fen 8
Crooked Creek Fen .... ... .8
Michigan Creek Fen .9
Investigation of Peatland Function 9
Vegetation, Seed Bank, and Vegetational Recovery ... 13
Results and Discussion . .. .15
Hydrology 15
Water Chemistry 15
Soil Chemistry and Physics ... 15
Vegetation Recovery in Experimental Plots ... 44
Conclusion 54
Literature Cited .... ... ... 55
-------
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
Page
Figure 1
Map of South Park and Study Site Locations . .
7
Figure 2
Map of High Creek Fen
10
Figure 3
Map of Crooked Creek Fen
1 1
Figure 4
Map of Michigan Creek Fen
12
Figure 5
Well Hydrographs
16-18
Figure 6
Piezometer Hydrographs .
.. 19-21
Figure 7
Model Hydrographs
22
Table 1
Well Water Conductivity
23-25
Table 2
Piezometer Water Conductivity
26-28'
Table 3
Well Water pH
. 29-31
Table 4
Piezometer Water Conductivity
32-34
Table 5
Fen Soil Analyses ...
.... 36-40
Table 6
Physical Soil Characteristics
41-43
Table 7
High Creek Experimental Plot Vegetation Data
44-46
Table 8
Crooked Creek Fen Experimental Plot Vegetation Data
46-50
Table 9
Michigan Creek Fen Experimental Plot Vegetation Data
50-52
Table 10
Species List and Key to Species Abbreviations
53
-------
SUMMARY
Peatlands lend substantially to the biological diversity of the Rocky Mountain west In Colorado,
peatlands lying in the inter-mountain basin of South Park are perhaps the most floristically and
ecologically interesting, containing some 13 state rare or endemic species. Unfortunately, these
same peatlands are the most commonly mined for peat in the state These peatlands may also be
ditched to dry them for conversion to agriculture or to prevent grazing cattle from becoming
"bogged-down"
At present our knowledge of the ecology of these peatlands is rudimentary. As such, wise use
and management of these areas is not possible Knowledge of these systems is especially scant
in two areas. Firstly, we know little about the functions that these wetlands perform, so the
effects of management practices are equally obscure Secondly, should a catastrophic disturbance
such as mining take place, our ignorance of the ecology of these peatlands makes the creation of
sound restoration plans unlikely
This two year study is a comparative investigation of the environmental functioning of intact and
disturbed peatlands, and an investigation of vegetational recovery on these sites after disturbance
This study is designed to provide basic knowledge of these ecosystems, with the information
immediately applicable to present management concerns The overall objectives of this project
are to (1) increase our knowledge of this important but threatened ecosystem type; (2) provide
managers with the information necessary to produce informed management decisions; and (3)
develop a reference data set for this type of regional subclass of wetlands for incorporation in
State and Regional Hydrogeomorphic classification efforts
This report documents the results from the first year of this study. It is intended to provide
background on the type of fen ecosystem being studied, appraise agencies of the methods that
have been employed in data collection, and present the data collected Little synthesis of the data
will be provided in this report A complete synthesis and interpretation of the study's findings will
be provided in the 1998 report after all of the data has been collected and a complete picture can
be presented.
-------
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
COLORADO PEA TLANDS
Like all peatlands in the state, South Park's are fed by ground water as well as by precipitation,
therefore, these peatlands are referred to as fens (Gore 1983) This is in contrast to bogs which
receive water and nutrients only from precipitation and dust. Fens may further be classified by
the character of their water chemistry. The most common designations in this classification are
poor, moderate, rich and extremely-rich fens. Simplistically stated, these designations correspond
to an increasing concentration of nutrients, especially calcium, in the fen water (Du Rietz 1949,
Sjors 1950) This classification is useful, because the nutrient status of a fen, to a large degree,
determines species composition, which in turn influences many other ecosystem properties
According to this gradient, most of South Park's fens are classified as rich to extremely-rich fens
In the Rocky Mountains, these extremely-rich fens are found in inter-mountain parks with
calcareous or dolomitic parent material, in areas which are also sites of significant groundwater
discharge These conditions rarely co-occur, however, so these fens are quite uncommon In the
western United States extremely-rich fens are known from only three regions including Park
County, CO Globally they are also much less common than other peatland types The
extremely-rich fens in Park County, CO are the southern-most known occurrence of this fen type
In Colorado these peatlands stand in stark contrast to those found in granitic mountain basins
throughout the state. Cooper (1996) found there to be only an eighteen percent similarity
between the flora of an extremely-rich fen and a moderate fen located in Colorado at similar
elevations Because of their unusual environment, a number of rare, or regionally endemic, plant
species are found on these sites
While extremely-rich fens are one of the most uncommon peatland types in the United States,
they are some of the most frequently targeted for mining in Colorado. This seems to be the case
for two reasons First, they are usually more expansive than the typical montane fens, and
second, virtually all of these fens are situated very close to good roads and population centers
In 1989, 37% of all the peat mined in Colorado came from the fens of Park County (Stevens et
al 1990), and this percentage is thought to have increased. At present it is difficult for
government agencies to objectively evaluate permits for peat mining or other destructive
practices, because little specific information is available as to the environmental impacts which
result from such practices (T. Carey, pers commun). Additionally, few requirements for
vegetational restoration can be imposed on operators because the success of different restoration
practices has not been demonstrated (Stevens et al. 1990). Therefore, if any sort of restoration
is performed it tends to be the most cost effective rather than the one that is most environmentally
sound. The typical restoration strategy applied, if any, is to seed the affected area with a
commercial seed mix These mixes generally consist of species used for hay production and
contain few native species.
-------
PEA TLAND FUNCTIONALITY
Numerous important environmental functions have been ascribed to wetlands, and there has been
an recent increase of interest in studying these functions (Brinson 1993, Maltby 1994, Owen &
Otton 1995) Examples of functions that a wetland may perform are water quality improvement,
water storage, ground water recharge and/or discharge, species habitat, flood abatement, and
shoreline anchoring Not all wetlands perform all of these functions. The first four of these
functions have been found to occur frequently in South Park's peatlands and are of primary
importance to this study
Wetlands in general, and peatlands specifically, have been found to increase the quality of water
flowing through them This is done via three mechanisms sedimentation, bioaccumulation, and
adsorption of ions to organic matter (Hammer & Bastian 1989). This study considers the third
mechanism Adsorption of ions, especially heavy metals, by peat has been shown in several
studies (Kochenov et al 1965, Owen et al. 1992, Owen & Otton 1995, Owen & Breit 1995)
Adsorption takes place because of high cation exchange properties of peat, and the complexation
of metals with organic compounds, especially humic and fulvic acids (Lopatkina 1967, Borovec
et al 1979, Owen et al 1992) These ions tend to be immobile and so are sequestered and
concentrated in the peat over the centuries While this is generally good for the environment,
environmental concerns arise when then the peat, with its high concentration of ions, is disturbed
Sequestration of uranium in peat has been especially well studied in this regard and much of this
work has been performed in Colorado (Owen et al. 1992, Owen & Breit 1995, Owen & Otton
1995)
During the summer of 1995, Brad Johnson, in cooperation with Park County and other Federal
agencies, performed a preliminary study which investigated the environmental functioning of one
extremely-rich fen in South Park (Johnson 1995) In one aspect of this study the water and soil
characteristics in mined and un-mined portions of the fen was compared. Using uranium as an
example, its typical concentration in the surface and ground water of un-mined portion of the fen
was 0 8 ^g/1. In the mined section the highest reading was 1040 /zg/1. This exceeds water quality
standards by four orders of magnitude (Colorado Department of Health 1995) and is attributable
to the effects of mining Other water samples in the mined area were not as high, but still
approximately 100 //g/l Similar results were obtained when peat samples were analyzed for
uranium content, concentrations in the un-mined areas averaged 17.6 ppm, while in the mined
area the concentration was 105 5 ppm (The national average is 2.5 ± 1.45 ppm; Owen & Breit
1995). This study took place on only one fen though, so the generality of these results is as yet
unproven. These results raise significant health concerns because many of these fens drain into
reservoirs which supply the Denver, CO metropolitan and other urban areas.
Similar types of wetland generally perform the same environmental functions In an attempt to
categorize functionally equivalent wetlands, Brinson (1993) has devised a Hydrogeomorphic
(HGM) "classification". Unlike many other systems, such as Cowardin et al's (1979), HGM
does not key off of vegetation, nor does it place wetlands into discrete a priori groups Instead,
it applies the first principle that wetland functions are derived from the physical properties of the
-------
wetland As such, once those characteristics are evaluated so too will be the wetland's functions
The wetland attributes evaluated in HGM are: (1) the wetland's geomorphic setting, (2) its
source of water, and (3) its hydrodynamic characteristics.
While HGM provides a framework for classification, its primary application in the management
and regulatory arena is as a rapid assessment technique for evaluating wetland functions
Although, rapid assessment is the final implementation goal, detailed long-term scientific studies
are necessary to acquire basic information about wetland types and indicators of environmental
function. The detailed information necessary for practical application of HGM is obtained
through the study of reference wetlands for each class of wetland HGM is explicitly dependent
on reference wetlands (Brinson 1993, Brinson et al. 1995, Smith et al 1995, Brinson &
Rheinhardt 1996) and each subclass of wetland needs representation by at least one reference
wetland This study has begun the assembly of a reference data set for an important regional
subclass of wetland, the calcareous fen
VEGETA TIONAL RECOVERY
Because fens are basically organic ecosystems, the rejuvenation of peatland functioning after
catastrophic disturbance must depend on the re-establishment of native plant communities. Few
studies have examined fen restoration (Fojt 1995), or natural recovery of fen vegetation after
disturbance, and it is not at all clear that restoration can be successfully implemented given the
magnitude of disruption caused by mining or ditching. These questions must be addressed,
however, so that management decisions can be based on sound information Since we lack this
basic knowledge of the ecology of these fens, this study has been gathering information to address
some of the more critical gaps.
Seed banks have frequently been found to strongly influence vegetational recovery, and
community dynamics in general, but few studies have examined seed bank ecology in peatlands
(Leek 1989), therefore the role that the soil seed bank plays in this ecosystem is obscure
Elucidation of these properties is important to peatland management because stockpiling and
reintroduction of the upper layer of peat after mining is a plausible method by which site
restoration may be initiated By doing this, a portion of the native fen substrate is preserved, and
a seed stock of native species is available for regrowth. Such a restoration strategy is already
required by the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Act for upland ore-mine restoration, but its
utility has not been sufficiently demonstrated in fens. Also, peat mines do not fall under the
jurisdiction of the act
Because sites are denuded by mining, permanent plots can be established on fens in disturbed and
intact areas and vegetational recovery can be monitored by comparing the two types of plots
Small areas within the fens may also be experimentally manipulated to simulate the effects of
mining and the recovery monitored. This study is employing both of these approaches as means
to investigate vegetational recovery.
-------
OBJECTIVES
The objectives of this study are to: (1) Designate reference sites representing both intact and
damaged calcareous fens for use in HGM classifications, (2) Establish a network of permanent
sampling stations within the reference wetlands, (3) Develop a quantitative data set on the
functions that Park County's calcareous fens perform, especially insofar as water quality
improvement, hydrology and plant species habitat are concerned; (4) Develop indicators of
functionality for use in HGM assessments of calcareous fens, (5) Investigate vegetational
recovery on fens and the factors which influence it; (6) Provide management recommendations
for these sites
The information provided by this study will aid several State and Federal agencies in the
development of sound management plans for the fens of South Park It will provide the U.S.
ACE information with which they can justify permitting actions and restoration requirements, and
aid them in their upcoming HGM classification of Rocky Mountain Slope wetlands (of which fens
are the dominant type). It will be especially valuable to the Colorado Department of Health,
Water Quality Control Division and Denver Water Board in furnishing them with information on
the ramifications of disturbing wetlands along, or up-stream of municipal water sources, and by
supplying data on the hydrologic properties of these wetlands This study will also significantly
contribute to efforts to preserve Colorado's natural heritage and beauty
-------
METHODS
SITE DESCRIPTIONS
Three fens were chosen for study sites High Creek Fen, Crooked Creek Fen, and Michigan Creek
Fen. The locations of these sites are shown in Fig 1 The three fens are situated in South Park,
a large inter-mountain valley bounded on the west by the Mosquito Range, and on the east by the
Front Range Although in a local area of low relief, South Park lies at an elevation of between
2735 m and 3040 m (9000 to 10,000 ft.), which places it within the subalpine vegetation province
(Marr 1961) Most of the park is characterized as relatively flat short-grass steppe; the fens which
occur on this otherwise arid landscape are anomalous. During the Quaternary, most of South
Park served as an outwash plain for glacial rivers originating in the Mosquito range (Tweto
1974) This accounts for the Park's relative flatness Most of the topographical relief in southern
South Park consists of Quaternary fluvial terraces.
Although all of the inter-mountain parks are unrepresentative of typical montane conditions,
South Park is exceptionally unique. Most of the parks are underlain with outwash primarily
composed of granitic material. In contrast, the till of South Park has a high proportion of
calcareous and dolomitic material (Tweto 1974, Appel 1995) The geology of this area is
complex and not precisely known, but following the description of Lozano (1965) and Valdes
(1967), this till was mainly derived from the Pennsylvanian Maroon Formation The till is
associated with the Pindaie and Bull Lake glacial intervals (Tweto 1974) The calcareous and
dolomitic nature of the these strata cause groundwater flowing through them to become quite
alkaline and pH can be as high as 11 (Appel 1995). In contrast, water flowing through granitic
outwash is of a nearly neutral or slightly acidic pH. The highly basic, minerally rich ground water
is a primary cause of the unique and rare species composition found in South Park's fens
CLIMATE
South Park is cool and semi-arid. Two weather stations are located in South Park — Antero
Reservoir and Fairplay The Antero Reservoir station data has been complied from 1961 to 1994.
The average annual temperature at Antero Reservoir is 1.92 °C The Fairplay station data starts
in 1954 and ends in 1966. Temperature data were not available from the Fairplay station,
although Appel (1995) presents data showing that Fairplay's average temperature is about 2 4
°C cooler than Antero Reservoir The source of this data is unknown.
Fairplay receives more precipitation than Antero Reservoir on average - 40.21 cm versus 25 81
cm, respectively - but the monthly distributions of precipitation are similar between the stations
-------
9'orr-
ECrARg
I^nntea from TOPO! © 1997 Wildflower Productions
WWW
Figure 1 Map of South Park showing study site locations.
-------
The times of highest precipitation are in April during the spring snows, and throughout July and
August during the frequent afternoon thunder showers
High Creek Fen
High Creek Fen is a Nature Conservancy Preserve located about 13 km (8 miles) south of
Fairplay, Colorado (Fig 1). It covers about 300 hectares (740 acres) (Appel 1995), but a
technical delineation has not been performed Although the whole wetland complex is regarded
as High Creek "Fen", it is important to note that not all of the wetland is truly fen, that is, it also
contains areas with mineral soils The actual extent of peat in the wetland is unknown
Typically, the fen is covered with a dense canopy of sedges and grasses Within this graminoid
matrix, slightly raised islands of willows exist, in even drier areas stands blue spruce (Picea
pimgetis) grow Dissecting the entire wetland is a maze of water- tracks. These water-tracks are
characterized as having flowing surface water and somewhat sparse vegetation comprised
primarily of spike-rushes (Eleocharis spp ) and sedges (Carex spp and A'obresia spp ). The
water-tracks may be underlain by relatively solid peat, but they are also frequently composed of
floating vegetation mats. These vegetation mat areas are frequently referred to as quagmires,
alluding to their tenuously soft nature The peat is fairly thin on the fen, ranging between 0 5 and
1 meter thick.
Portions of High Creek Fen were first purchased by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) in 1991
At present TNC owns about 480 hectares (1,185 acres) of land including High Creek Fen and the
surrounding short-grass steppe. The fen has had a grazing history dating back to the 1860's
(Appel 1995). During the 1970's and 1980's portions of the northern and western areas of the
fen were mined for peat. A portion of the peat extracted by miners was mishandled and devalued,
consequently, the miners abandoned it as spoils near the mine pit. After the acquisition of the fen
by TNC, the mine was regraded using the spoiled peat, and returned to roughly the same grade
as prior to mining (Allen Carpenter, TNC, 1995, pers comm.)
Crooked Creek Fen
Crooked Creek Fen is located in the Pike National Forest on the periphery of South Park (Fig
1) The fen is located on a fan-shaped slope at the foot of an extant beaver pond complex The
fen has a relatively steep slope at its head near the ponds, but the slope decreases towards the foot
as it opens out to the Park. Vegetation at the fen head is dominated by graminoids and tall to
medium willows This vegetation grades into open fen having only low scattered shrubs and a
carpet of sedges The areal extent of the fen is currently unknown.
Crooked Creek Fen is primarily intact and undisturbed by human activities The exception to this
is a single ditch that runs transversely across the fen near its foot. This ditch intercepts virtually
all ground water flow to a depth of about 1 5 m The vegetation beyond the ditch is comprised
of mesic grass and shrub species Although the vegetation of the ditch-impacted area is not
-------
typical of fens the soils of the area consist of deep peat remaining from when the fen hydrology
was intact
Michigan Creek fen
Michigan Creek Fen lies at the foot of the Mosquito Range and forms an expansive fen-meadow
complex. It is the largest and most heavily altered of the three fens studied The fen covers areas
which are owned both privately and by the Colorado Division of Wildlife The fen begins at a
colluvial fan and slopes shallowly to the east A series of drainage ditches cris-cross the fen and
an expansive peat mine covers much of the fen where the deepest peat deposits once were The
age of the mine is not known, nor is the date that it was abandoned
The vegetation of Michigan Creek Fen is dominated primarily by graminoids with a relatively low
shrub cover The whole wetland complex is still grazed by cattle
INVESTIGATION OF PEATLAND FUNCTION
The three fens chosen for study have a relatively undisturbed portion, and another portion which
has been impacted by mining or ditching. Within each fen a network of sampling stations, each
consisting of a ground water well and one or more piezometers, was installed at the beginning of
the study Stations are located along hydrological transects, in both the disturbed and undisturbed
areas. Figures 2, 3, and 4 show the sampling station locations on the three fens
Wells were constructed of 2.54 cm inside diameter (l.D ) polyvinalchloride (PVC) pipe. Well
bottoms were capped, and the lower 30 5 cm of the pipes perforated Wells were driven in to the
peat to approximately 1.5 m, or until they reached the mineral layer located below the peat Wells
were not driven into the impermeable layer, even at the risk of having them go dry, because water
samples extracted from the wells were intended to characterize the chemistry of water flowing
through the peat. Once installed, wells were allowed to fill and were drained several times to
ensure proper functioning
Piezometers were made of 2.54 cm I D PVC pipe. Piezometer bottoms were uncapped and the
pipe unperforated. Piezometers were installed into the mineral layer underlying the peat At
several stations more than one piezometer was installed to detect changes in vertical hydraulic
gradients with depth Piezometers were installed by placing a small diameter pipe, slightly longer
than the piezometer, inside of the piezometer and driving the two pipes into the ground with a
small sledge hammer. Once the piezometer was driven to its final depth, the inner pipe was
removed leaving the piezometer pipe clear.
At each station, water depth in the wells and piezometers was measured approximately every 10
to 14 days between June 15 and September 27 Electrical conductivity and pH of well and
piezometer water were measured once per month during this same period using Hach field
meters.
-------
, 21
1" = 400'
Figure 2 Map of High Creek Fen showing sample station locations. Experimental plots are
located just off the map to the east. Lightly shaded areas are water tracks and floating mats,
darkly shaded areas are treed, and the hatched area demarks an abandoned peat mine.
-------
¦18-EXP 1
»12
*20 16-EXP 2 17 .13-EXP4
24-EXP 5 DltC^
14-EXP^ •
,15 • .25-EXP6
26-EXP 7
/
27-EXP 8
,cc
Figure 3 Sketch map of Crooked Creek Fen showing the location of sampling stations and
experimental plots
-------
Figure 4 Sketch map of Michigan Creek Fen showing the location of sampling stations.
Experimental plots are located at stations 2, 3, 12, 13, 14, 19, 20.
-------
To examine physical and chemical soil properties, two sets of soil samples were taken at each
sampling station The first set of samples was taken from the upper 20 cm using a hand trowel
and was used in chemical analysis The second set was extracted using a piston-corer so sample
volume could be determined. These samples were used for the calculation of soil porosity and
bulk density The piston-corer was inserted into the soil as gently as possible to minimize soil
compaction When the sample was removed from the corer it was cut to form a uniform cylinder
and its length was measured Although every effort was taken not to compact soils, a small
amount of compaction was inevitable To compensate for this, measured soil volumes were
increased by 5 percent in the calculations. Once samples were obtained from the field, they were
kept chilled and transferred to Colorado State University. Samples for chemical analysis were
brought to the CSU Soil and Water Testing Lab and analyzed for pH, electrical conductivity,
percent organic matter, and concentration of nitrate, phosphorous, potassium, zinc, iron,
manganese, copper, sulfate, calcium, magnesium, sodium, strontium, lead, uranium, and calcium
carbonate.
Soil samples obtained using the piston-corer were placed in basket-shaped paper filters and
soaked in trays of water until fully saturated, in Dr David Steingraeber's lab at CSU The
samples were then weighed using a table top balance Next, the samples were placed in a drying
oven at 60° C and dried to a constant weight The samples were then reweighed Bulk density
was calculated by dividing the dry weight of the sample by its volume Porosity, which is a
measure of saturated volumetric water content, was calculated using the following formula
Sample Wet Weight - Sample Dry Weight
Porosi ty = :
Sample Volume
VEGETATION, SEED BANK, AND VEGETATIONAL RECOVERY
Vegetation, seed bank, and vegetational recovery are being evaluated using both a comparative
and an experimental approach Within each fen, permanent experimental plots were installed at
the beginning of June 1996. The locations of these plots are indicated in Figures 2 - 4. Plots
were treated to simulate many of the effects of peat mining. For comparative purposes, plots
were placed in both disturbed and undisturbed areas on the fens Plots were initially laid out as
2 m x 2 m squares This square was then divided into 1 m x 1 m quarters Within three of the
quarters the percent cover of each species was visually estimated. The upper 20 cm of one
quarter then had the upper 20 cm of peat removed using a shovel. This portion of the soil profile
is where the majority of the seed bank is located This treatment was applied to imitate the effects
of peat mining without any post-mining reclamation, a common occurrence, at least historically,
in Park County peat mines A second quarter of the large plot was tilled The tilling consisted
of cutting the peat to a depth of approximately 20 cm and then throughly chopping and mixing
it As much living vegetation was removed from the soil during the tilling as was possible This
-------
second treatment was intended to simulate peat mine restoration using the technique of replacing
the topsoil after the cessation of mining. Such a treatment supplies the recovering area with a
supply of native seeds and a source of native topsoil. The third quarter was left intact as a control
plot. The fourth quarter was unused except that a monitoring well was installed in it using the
methods described above
To monitor the recovery of vegetation and the effect that seed bank composition has on extant
vegetation composition, the percent cover of species was estimated and a seed bank sample was
obtained twice during 1996. The first sample was taken on July 11"1 and 12,h after seedling
germination had occurred The second sample was taken on September 15lh and 16th after plants
had set and released their seeds Seed bank samples were collected by extracting eight 10 cm
deep soil samples from each plot Once samples were obtained, they were placed in a cold room
at 0 - 1°C at CSU for stratification After an approximately 3 month stratification, replicate
samples from each plot were homogenized, and 1000 cm3 of the soil was placed in perforated
plastic trays over a bed of fine, washed sand Perforated trays were placed in shallow tubs so that
a shallow water table could be maintained
Trays were checked frequently to monitor the emergence of seedlings Seedlings were removed
as soon as their identity could be determined The identity of many individuals could not be
determined without flowers In these cases plants were grown until flowering occurred Many
individuals never flowered, so these plants were only identified to the genus or family level
-------
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
HYDROLOGY
Well and piezometer hydrographs are presented in Figures 5 a-c and 6 a-c. In general, within a
sampling station, well and piezometer water level behavior were similar during the 1996 growing
season, although differences between sample stations were common Upon examination of the
hydrographs, three primary patterns of water level behavior emerge The type I hydrograph is
illustrated, for example, by wells HC 20, HC27, FS 4, FS 14, FS 22, and MCI0 Wells HC 1, HC
2, FS 5, FS 12 and FS 16 possess a type II hydrograph, while examples of the type III hydrograph
are given by wells HC 7, FS 6, FS 24, FS 25, MC 13, and MC SCI Simplified models of these
three hydrographs are shown in Fig. 7.
WATER CHEMISTRY
Electrical Conductivity and pH were measured in wells and piezometers throughout the growing
season Measurements are presented in Tables 1 a-c, 2 a-c, 3 a-c, and 4 a-c Average
conductivity ranged from 0.16 mS to 2 20 mS and in general piezometer water conductivity was
lower than well water conductivity. Statistical test were not performed on these data, however,
so statements must remain broad and untested A full analysis will be provided in the final project
report
The pH of well water tended to be lower than that of piezometers This makes sense from a
geochemical standpoint, since the piezometers are often imbedded in the calcareous substrate, and
the wells are located in the peat itself Peat exchanges hydrogen ions for other ions carried in the
water This acidifies of the water, and so accounts for the lower well water pH Again, further
analyses will be provided in the final report.
SOIL CHEMISTRY AND PHYSICS
Results of soil chemistry analyses are presented in Table 5 a-c. Soil bulk density and porosity
measurements are given in Table 6 a-c Average porosity was similar on the three sites with
Crooked Creek Fen soils having a porosity of 0 76, High Creek Fen porosity of 0 73 and
Michigan Creek Fen a porosity of 0.81. Average bulk density was also similar with Crooked
Creek Fen, High Creek Fen and Michigan Creek Fen having soil bulk densities of 0 30, 0 28, and
0 39 respectively
-------
07/14/96 08/23^6 10/02/96 11/11/96
Sample Date
07/14/96 06/23/96 10/02/96 11/11
Sample Date
06/04/96 07/14/96 OS/23/96 10*32/96 11/11
Sample Date
07/14/96 08/23/96 10AJ2/96 11/11/96
Sample Date
12
10
•£ "
Q.
Q 6
_gj
¦° d
ro *
5 ^
ro i/'
§ 0 f1
-2
.\ //
V
, \
\ \
^SX-
-4
06AJ4/96 07/14/96 08/23^6 10/02/96 11/1 1
Sample Date
26
27
de
Figure 5a. Well hydrographs for High Creek Fen sampling stations
-------
Figure 5b. Well hydrographs for Crooked Creek Fen sampling stations.
-------
-200
06/04/96 07/14/96 08/23/96 10/02/96 11/11/96
Sample Date
50
0
£
Q.
0)
Q -50
_Q)
XI
CD
t -100
QJ
TO
-150
-200
06/04/96
-200
06/04/96
20
.c
SC1
Q.
-------
-200
06/04/96 07/14/96 08/23/96 10/02/96 11/11
Sample Date
8
9
10
11
12
13
07/14/96 08/23/96 10/02/96 11/11
Sample Date
-80
06/04/96
07/14/96 08/23/96 10/02/96 11/11
Sample Date
06/04/96 07/14/96 08/23/96 10/02/96 11/11/96 06/04/96 07/14/96 08(23/96 10/02/96 11/11/96
Sample Date Sample Date
Figure 6a. Piezometer hydrographs for High Creek Fen sampling stations
-------
.120 i - -
06/04/96 07/14/96 06/23/96 10/02/96
Sample Date
-80
06AM/96
07/14/96
OS/21/96 10/02/96
Sample Date
-35
06/04/96 07/14/96 08/23/96 10A)2/96
Sample Date
Sample Date
Figure 6b. Piezometer hydrographs for Crooked Creek Fen sampling stations.
-------
-200
06/04/96
07/14/96 08/23/96 10/02/96
Sample Date
11/11/96
Q.
Q
0J
XI
ro
a>
•*-»
cu
-150
-200
-100
06/04/96 07/14/96 08/23/96 10/02/96
Sample Date
11/11/96
Q.
d)
Q
0)
ro
Q)
ro
-100
-150
-200
06/04/96 07/14/96 08/23/96 10/02/96
Sample Date
11/11/96
-30
Figure 6c. Piezometer liydrographs for Michigan Creek Fen sampling stations.
06/04/96 07/14/96 08/23/96 10/02/96
Sample Date
20
11/11/96
-------
J A
Month
A
Month
Figure 7. Model hydrographs showing the three t\pes of fen water table behavior. Note that the
y-axis scale is only approximate.
-------
Table la. Well water conductivity at High Creek Fen.
Nnmhpr Oft/16/Q6 06/78/96 07/11/Qfi 08/0V96 09/97/96 MPan
HC 1
0.53
0.03
1.68
0.75
HC 2
0.55
0.03
1.59
0.72
HC 3
0.41
0.41
0.42
0.46
0.42
HC 4
0.5
0.47
0.46
0.46
0.47
HC 5
0.36
0.48
0.49
0.66
0.50
HC 6
HC 7
0.44
0.45
0.41
0.51
0.45
HC 8
0.43
0.65
0.66
0.63
0.59
HC 10
0.44
0.82
1.25
0.84
0.84
HC 11
0.51
0.54 0.56
0.75
0.59
HC 12
0.56
0.47
0.56
0.84
0.61
HC 13
0.23
0.46
0.51
0.54
0 43
HC 14
0.48
0.45
0.53
1.00
0.61
HC 15
0.26
0.55
0.64
0.75
0.55
HC 16
0.13
0.52
0.67
0.82
0.53
HC 17
0.69
0.48
0.54
0.59
0.57
HC 18
0.31
0.46
0.53
0.56
0.46
HC 19
0.02
0.60
0.59
0.67
0.47
HC 20
0.23
0.52
0.85
0.80
0.60
HC 21
1.15
0.46
0.59
0.76
0.74
HC 22
0.55
0.50
0.51
0.53
0.52
HC 23
0.52
0.56
0.53
0.62
0.56
HC 24
1 33
0.45
0.44
0.43
0.66
HC 25
0.52
0.43
0.46
0.50
0.48
HC 26
1.08
0.44
0.45
0.50
0.62
HC 27
0 62
0.57
0.51
0.61
0.58
HC 28
HC 29
HC 30
0 49
0.49
HC 32
0.70
0.81
1.16
0.89
HC 33
0.47
0.50
0.52
0.50
HC 34
0.58
0.57
0.83
0.66
HC 35
0.83
0.44
1.51
0.93
HP DF
0 79
0 47
0 46
0 60
-------
Table lb. Conductivity of well water at Crooked Creek Fen.
Nnmhfir
FS 1
0.39
0.39
0.39
0.38
0.39
FS 2
0.87
0.38
0.62
FS 3
0.25
0.36
0.34
0.41
0.34
FS 4
0.67
0.4
0.39
0.44
0.47
FS 5
1.35
0.68
1.01
FS 6
1.06
0.57
0.81
FS 7
0.92
0.38
0.35
0.27
0.48
FS 8
1.39
0.44
0.42
0.46
0.68
FS 9
1.01
0.48
0.64
0.59
0.68
FS 10
1.00
0.45
0.45
0.50
0.60
FS 11
1.10
0.37
0.45
0.47
0.60
FS 12
0.74
0.60
0.67
FS 13
1.25
0.55
0.61
0.77
0.79
FS 14
1.27
0.60
0.58
0.8267
FS 15
1.29
0.59
0.51
0.69
0.77
FS 16
1.08
0.58
0.87
0.84
FS 17
1.33
0.50
0.63
0.81
0.82
FS 18
1.34
0.48
0.43
0.57
0 70
FS 19
1.31
0.55
0.59
0.58
0.76
FS 20
1.16
0.64
0.66
0.90
0.84
FS 21
0.95
0.66
0.80
FS 22
0.78
0.56
0.64
0.66
FS 71
1 6ft
0 83
1 ?l
-------
Table lc. Electrical conductivity of well water at Michigan Creek.
Nnmhpr 06/1 S/Q6 06/78/Q6 07/17/06 ftR/m/Ofi 0Q/77/Q6 Mm,
MC 1
0.76
0.83
0.76
0.78
MC 2
1.69
1.69
MC 3
2.2
2.20
MC 4
0.37
0.37
MC 5
MC 6
0.61
0.1
0.35
MC 7
0.47
0.75
0.52
0.58
MC 8
0.8
1.15
0.03
0.6
0.64
MC 9
0.12
0.27
0.28 0.39
0.46
0.30
MC 10
0.25
0.22
0.29 0.26
0.15
0.23
MC 11
1.9
0.36
0.39
0.41
0.76
MC 12
MC 13
MC 14
MC 15
0.32
0.37
0.34
MC 16
MC 17
0.21
0.67
0.44
MC 19
0.59
0.44
0.88
0.64
MC 20
0.39
0.26 0.44
0.54
0.41
MC-SC15
0.87
0.47
0.67
MC-SC1
0.26
0.28
0.27
MC-SC2
TR-R7-1 6
n u
n IS
0 lfi
-------
Table 2a. Piezometer water conductivity at High Creek Fen.
Nnmhpr 06/78/06 07/1 1/Q6 Qg/OVQfi 0Q/77/Q6 Mm n
HC 1
0.42
0.44
0.73
0.65
0.56
HC 2
0.33
0.26
0.75
0.45
HC 3
0.15
0.16
0.16
0.13
0.15
HC 4
0.34
0.34
0.36
0.40
0.36
HC 5
0.26
0.26
0.27
0.43
0.30
HC 7
HC 8
0.21
0.19
0.27
0.29
0.24
HC 9
0.05
0.18
0.21
0.33
0.19
HC 10
0.25
0.29
0.35
0.54
0.36
HC 11
0.80
0.3 0.31
0.31
0.43
HC 12
0.35
0.32
0.33
0.40
0.35
HC 13
0.09
0.22
0.24
0.30
0.21
HC 14
0.16
0.20
0.23
0.32
0.23
HC 15
0.01
0.19
0.22
0.29
0.18
HC 16
0.17
0.38
0.38
0.44
0.34
HC 17
1.05
0.21
0.23
0.35
0.46
HC 18
0.49
0.26
0.30
0.45
0.37
HC 19
0.44
0.17
0.20
0.35
0.29
HC 20
0.60
0.28
0.33
0.48
0.42
HC 21
1.30
0.25
0.26
0.38
0.55
HC 22
0.85
0.19
0.23
0.37
0.41
HC 23
0.89
0.24
0.26
0.34
0.43
HC 24
1.32
0.36
0.45
0.35
0.62
HC 25
0.89
0.18
0.17
0.23
0.37
HC 26
1.40
0.19
0.21
0.26
0.51
HC 27
1.00
0.21
0.20
0.39
0.45
HfT>F
o?s
n 70
071
0 78
0 71
-------
Table 2b. Piezometer water conductivity at Crooked Creek Fen.
Nnmhpr D6/1S/Q6 07/11/06 0S/07/Q6 nQ/97/Q6 Mpan
FS1
0.43
0.38
0.38
0.09
0.32
FS 2
0.74
0.37
0.44
0.51
0.51
FS 3
0.34
0.39
0.34
0.41
0.37
FS 4
0.96
0.38
0.36
0.50
0.55
FS4P2
0.50
0.50
FS 5
1.35
0.53
0.94
FS 6
1.09
0.50
0.79
FS 7
0.89
0.37
0.34
0.46
0.51
FS7P2
0.43
0.43
FS 8
1.02
0.38
0.37
0.46
0.56
FS 9
0.79
0.35
0.36
0.50
0.50
FS 10
0.93
0.45
0.43
0.41
0.55
FS 11
0.94
0.45
0.38
0.40
0.54
FS 12
0.95
0.44
0.69
FS 13
1.33
0.49
0.44
0.54
0 70
FS 14
1.15
0.58
0.43
0.63
0.70
FS 15
1.17
0.55
0.54
0.53
0.70
FS 16
FS 17
FS 18
1.41
0.52
0.66
0.56
0.79
FS 19
1.23
0.51
0.43
0.45
0 65
FS 20
1.10
0.53
0.71
0.92
0.81
FS 21
0.93
0.5
0.71
FS 22
FS 23
-------
Table 2c. Electrical conductivity of piezometer water at Michigan Creek.
Nnmhpir M/isflK 06/78/96 m/nnf, mvw 09/77/96 MPan
MC 1
0.57
0.52
0.41
1.25
0.69
MC 2
0.71
0.71
MC 3
1.38
1.81
1.59
MC 4
0.98
2.16
3.45
2.20
MC 5
MC 6
0 43
0.55
0.61
0.53
MC 7
0.38
0.39
0.35
0.25
0.34
MC 8
04
0.45
0.4
0.42
MC 9
0.11
0.3
0.3
0.32
0.1
0.23
MC 10
0.19
0.21
0.3
0.27
0.28
0.25
MC 11
1.75
0.3
0.4
0.32
0.36
0.63
MC 12
0.64
0.64
MC 13
MC 14
MC 15
0.61
0.38
0.42
0.36
0.44
MC 16
MC 17
MC 19
0.5
0.51
0.84
0.62
MC 20
0.34
0.46
0.42
0.51
0.43
MC-SC15
MC-SC1
MC-SC2
tr-87-16
-------
Table 3a. Well water pH at High Creek Fen.
Nnmhpr Oft/lft/Qft 07/11/Oft 08/09/Qft 09/77/Qft MPan
HC 1
8.60
7.33
6.57
7.50
HC 2
8.50
7.52
7.38
7.80
HC 3
8.00
8.03
8.20
9.00
8.31
HC 4
7.40
7.47
7.62
7.92
7.60
HC 5
7.10
7.29
7.28
6.95
7.15
HC 6
HC 7
7.40
7.32
7.80
7.21
7.43
HC 8
7.70
7.56
7.62
7.61
7.62
HC 10
6.50
7.43
7.51
7.12
7.14
HC 11
8.20
7.94
8.44
8.19
HC 12
7.60
7.92
7.95
6.90
7.59
HC 13
7.90
7.91
7.90
7.60
7.83
HC 14
8.30
7.83
8.05
7.01
7.80
HC 15
7.30
7.35
7.48
7.10
7.31
HC 16
7.60
8.10
7.75
7.12
7.64
HC 17
8.00
8.30
8.19
7.77
8.06
HC 18
7.80
7.56
7.87
7.30
7.63
HC 19
7.60
7.29
7.74
7.30
7.48
HC 20
7.60
7.47
7.77
7.30
7.53
HC 21
8.50
7.78
8.48
7.89
8.16
HC 22
7.80
7.41
7.88
7.17
7.56
HC 23
7.60
7.43
7.78
7.28
7.52
HC 24
7.90
7.26
7.65
7.62
7.61
HC 25
8.30
8.53
8.43
7.66
8.23
HC 26
8.10
7.94
8.39
7.89
8.08
HC 27
8.00
7.85
7.94
7.79
7.89
HC 28
HC 29
HC 30
8.20
8.20
HC 32
7.69
8.47
7.43
7.86
HC 33
7.44
8.22
7.33
7.66
HC 34
7.00
8.45
7.32
7.59
HC 35
7.15
8.72
7.35
7.74
HP DF
R 10
"7 90
8 97
8 09
-------
Table 3b. Well water pH at Crooked Creek.
Nnmhpr Oft/1 S/Q6 (V7/11/Q6 n»/m/Qfi 09/97/Q6
FS1
8.40
8.79
9.38
7.81
8.59
FS 2
7.80
8.11
7.85
7.92
FS 3
8.00
8.23
7.39
7.41
7.76
FS 4
8.30
8.84
8.76
8.23
8.53
FS 5
8.00
7.49
7.74
FS 6
7.40
8.27
7.83
FS 7
8.10
8.75
9.05
8.61
8.63
FS 8
8.30
8.36
8.92
8.21
8.45
FS 9
8.30
8.25
8.68
8.43
841
FS 10
8.30
7.46
9.08
8.31
8.29
FS 11
8.30
8.55
9.8
8.6
8.81
FS 12
7.50
8.14
7.82
FS 13
7.30
8.33
8.87
7.83
8.08
FS 14
7.60
8.19
9.1
8.31
FS 15
7.20
7.74
8.2
8.52
7.91
FS 16
7.60
7.87
8.36
7.94
FS 17
8.10
8.4
9.06
7.99
8.39
FS 18
8.20
8.2
8.79
8.75
8.48
FS 19
7 00
8.68
8.38
8.64
8.17
FS 20
6.80
7.72
7.93
7.91
7.59
FS 21
7.00
8.31
7.65
FS 22
7.90
8.27
8.19
8.12
FS?3
7 SO
7RR
7 M
-------
Table 3c. Well water pH at Michigan Creek.
Nnmhrr Oft/1 S/Qfi 07/1 ?/
-------
Table 4a. Piezometer water pH at High Creek Fen.
Nnmhpr 06/16/Q6 07/11/96 n8/m/Q6 nQ/77/06 Mpan
HC 1
8.60
7.89
7.35
6.89
7.68
HC 2
8.60
8.14
7.61
8.12
HC 3
8.50
8.43
8.57
9.24
8.68
HC 4
8.10
8.45
8.57
8.31
6.43
HC 5
8.10
8.43
8.50
7.24
8.07
HC 7
7.80
7.86
8.44
7.47
7.89
HC 8
8.70
8.29
8.30
7.95
8.31
HC 10
7.30
7.86
8.98
7.50
7.91
HC 11
8.50
8.44
7.98
8.31
HC 12
8.40
8.47
8.54
7.23
8.16
HC 13
8.60
8.49
8.50
7.88
8.37
HC 14
8.70
8.35
8.39
7.52
8.24
HC 15
8.50
8.02
8.16
7.62
8.07
HC 16
8.30
844
8.22
7.43
8.10
HC 17
8.30
851
8.59
7.92
8.33
HC 18
8.60
8.18
8.51
7.46
8.19
HC 19
8.30
8.05
8.43
7.64
8.10
HC 20
8.70
8.53
8.68
7.60
8.38
HC 21
8.70
8.54
8.80
8.02
8.51
HC 22
8.50
8.09
8.39
7.47
8.11
HC 23
8.60
8.21
8.53
7.67
8.25
HC 24
8.50
8.51
8.29
8.02
8.33
HC 25
8.60
8.77
8.78
7.95
8.52
HC 26
8.70
8.45
8.83
8.06
8.51
HC 27
8.50
8.50
8.51
8.06
8.39
HP r>F
8 SO
X ">9
9 4T
8 74
-------
Table 4b. Piezometer water pH at Crooked Creek Fen.
Mumhpr Oft/1 S/Q6 m/ll/Ofi nR/07/Qfi 0Q/77/Q6 Mfan
FS1
8.40
8.77
9.44
8.81
8.85
FS 2
7.50
7.73
8.59
8.63
8.11
FS 3
7.90
8.28
7.87
7.53
7.89
FS 4
8.30
8 80
9.12
8.09
8.58
FS4P2
8.07
8.07
FS 5
7.50
7.58
7.54
FS6
8.00
8.70
8.35
FS 7
8.20
8.84
9.13
8.26
8.61
FS7P2
8.21
8.21
FS 8
7.60
8.39
8.54
8.25
8.19
FS 9
7.30
8.35
8.99
8.51
8.29
FS 10
8.40
8.13
8.15
8.31
8.25
FS 11
8.20
8.57
9.03
8.65
8.61
FS 12
7.20
7.54
7.37
FS 13
7.10
8.34
9.02
7.95
8.10
FS 14
6.80
8.35
9.06
8.69
8.22
FS 15
7.10
7.34
7.63
8.38
7.61
FS 16
FS 17
FS 18
7.60
8.40
8.71
8.85
8.39
FS 19
7.10
7.52
8.49
8.74
7.96
FS 20
6.80
7.70
8.38
7.86
7.68
FS 21
6.90
7.99
7.44
FS 22
FS 23
-------
Table 4c. Piezometer water pH at Michigan Creek.
NJnmhpr Oft/1 S/Qft 07/17/Qft 08/0 VQ6 0Q/77/Q6 Wan
1
7.30
7.59
7.94
7.61
2
6.80
6.8
3
6.40
6.4
4
6.40
7.6
7.0
5
6
7.20
7.96
7.58
7
7.30
8.06
7.8
7.72
8
7.0
8.29
7.64
9
7.80
8.30
7.52
8.71
8.08
10
8.30
8.68
8.57
8.73
8.57
11
7.50
8.49
7.79
8.34
8.03
12
7.41
7.41
13
14
15
7.92
8.22
8.63
8.26
16
17
19
7.55
7.52
7.53
20
7.67
7.50
7.95
7.70
SC15
SCI
SC2
TR-87-16
-------
Table 5a. Chemical analysis of soils at High Creek Fen.
ID#
pH
EC
mmhiw/rm
Estimate
OM
N03-N
P
K
Zn
HC 1
7.3
2.2
High
44.7
20
3.0
172
14.3
HC 2
7.4
1.4
High
41.5
15
6.0
151
15.0
HC 3
6.7
1.4
Low
78.1
10
12.5
302
14.6
HC 4
6.7
3.0
Low
47.2
10
<0.2
94.5
9.70
HC 5
7.3
1.9
Low
71.2
10
<0.2
95.5
9.15
HC 7
7.7
1.5
High
23.4
18
3.1
75.5
4.09
HC 8
7.5
1.1
High
34.4
8
<0.2
188
4.24
HC 9
7.0
2.3
High
41.5
8
<0.2
88.4
3.08
HC 10
7.4
0.7
Medium
62.0
16
<0.2
80.0
7.36
HC 11
7.0
2.4
High
63.8
12
10
77.2
7.36
HC 12
7.0
2.7
Medium
75.5
8
10
231
8.84
HC 13
7.2
3.0
High
39.6
12
7.2
99.2
4.56
HC 14
7.4
1.5
High
66.6
12
17.2
188
8.2
HC 15
7.1
2.9
High
60.9
12
<0.2
150
8.16
HC 16
7.6
2.6
High
44.2
4
12.4
81.2
7.52
HC 17
7.0
2.6
High
35.5
8
7.2
77.6
4.08
HC 18
7.5
1.4
High
59.8
12
25
115
9.96
HC 19
7.6
1.2
High
38.9
16
4.8
117
7.12
HC 20
7.4
2.7
High
37.4
4
<0.2
76.8
4.76
HC 21
7.3
2.3
High
35.8
4
<0.2
155
18.2
HC 22
7.2
2.0
High
75.0
2
25
243
12.6
HC 23
7.5
1.1
High
51.7
4
31
218
10.2
HC 24
7.1
2.0
High
79.3
12
17
246
12.7
HC 25
7.0
1.2
Low
71.5
8.0
7.2
230
10.1
HC 26
6.7
1.5
High
72.6
12
27
225
4.92
HC 27
7.1
1.6
High
36.0
8.0
<0.2
294
16.5
HC 28
7.1
1.2
High
43.8
12
<0.2
132
11.6
HC 29
7.6
1.0
High
47.5
12
2.4
130
4.88
HC 30
7.9
1.2
High
50.8
4.0
22
144
13.6
HC 32
7.2
0.4
Low
13.3
0.38
10
284
4.56
HC 33
7.7
1.0
High
28.0
4.0
<0.2
53.6
5.36
HC 34
7.8
1.1
High
28.9
8.0
<0.2
97.2
10.6
HC 35
7.9
1.1
Medium
29.8
12
<0.2
81.2
14.3
HC DE
7.3
2.4
Low
81.4
1.0
<0.2
77.2
9.64
STA 28
8.0
1.0
High
24.1
12
<0.2
49.6
4.64
MTNE
Mf.»n 7 177 4.Q SQ Q 44 7 4S 146 9R Q fU
-------
Table 5a. Con't
ID#
Fe
Mn
Cu
S04-S
Ca
Mg
Na
Sr
Pb
CaC03
HC 1
525
19.5
4.90
1300
10678
1653
137
426
39.3
36.5
HC 2
402
37.6
4.03
680
9913
827
19.6
424
38.4
48.1
HC 3
145
14.0
7.75
V.O.S **
10624
1899
95.7
NES *
NES*
1.20
HC 4
464
15.3
5.10
2160
10209
1311
4.20
57.0
9.9
2.10
HC 5
294
6.65
5.60
V.O.S **
10871
1700
73.2
NES *
NES*
1.00
HC 7
46.2
12.6
3.14
300
6765
1247
37.6
469
33.3
59.0
HC 8
524
26.6
3.67
410
8880
683
41.9
408
23.9
51.3
HC 9
201
10.8
2.68
1110
10070
836
36.0
172
16.4
32.6
HC 10
361
1.81
3.72
300
12601
2141
42.9
98.2
7.02
2.10
HC 11
788
17.6
3.32
NES*
14080
1516
45.0
123
9.13
8.50
HC 12
464
16.5
4.28
NES*
NES *
NES*
NES *
NES *
NES*
3.90
HC 13
164
17.7
1.91
1530
10918
1379
27.3
300
27.1
47.7
HC 14
277
20.6
8.24
NES *
10916
1894
107
143
34.2
15.2
HC 15
404
23.4
4.40
V.O.S **
11486
1322
95.2
184
28.8
15.9
HC 16
213
23.0
2.69
NES*
12993
1598
81.2
NES *
NES*
35.8
HC 17
148
11.1
2.42
1130
8552
1282
2.80
421
29.2
55.4
HC 18
60.8
12.7
5.12
NES*
10078
1547
51.4
164
52.6
27.5
HC 19
99.6
21.4
4.08
780
8817
1290
35.3
284
27.3
55.4
HC 20
307
40.4
2.03
NES*
10136
1123
47.1
202
19.6
34.7
HC 21
253
40.4
4.88
NES *
8974
1147
89.4
164
45.3
30.6
HC 22
861
23.9
4 72
NES *
10995
1874
127
105
61.2
6.20
HC 23
553
31.9
5.88
NES *
NES *
NES*
NES *
NES *
NES*
34.2
HC 24
192
12.1
3.38
NES *
12265
1601
207
83.5
36.1
5.50
HC 25
452
7.2
3.11
NES *
NES *
NES*
NES *
NES *
NES*
1.00
HC 26
77.2
5.52
1.55
NES *
11277
1439
128
87.4
95.9
6 00
HC 27
15.6
8.0
4.40
NES *
8993
797
53.2
231
64.7
39.2
HC 28
345
23.8
4.88
<10
10906
990
109
252
25.9
29.3
HC 29
307
7.68
3.98
NES *
10925
1601
159
407
45.8
32 4
HC 30
172
46
4.68
NES*
9829
2908
157
284
38.2
16.2
HC 32
24.9
35.1
4.36
<10
4570
824
2.50
51.1
19.9
<0 05
HC 33
78.8
1.07
6.16
<10
7615
1232
20.2
99.6
23.9
5.30
HC 34
352
10.5
7 48
<10
7897
1516
144
84.3
32.2
3 00
HC 35
360
7.0
6.36
<10
8272
1550
167
86.6
24.3
2 60
HC DE
319
6.04
6.52
NES*
11784
1842
99.1
NES *
NES*
0 80
ST A 28
MTNF.
263
2.61
1.82
125
7728
1084
36.5
233
30.5
24 1
Mpan
100
Pfifi
4 18
->sn 7t
91 fiO 49
I-UMT7
7ft SO
177
-------
Table 5b. Chemical analysis of soils at Crooked Creek Fen.
ID#
pH
EC
mmhnt/rm
Estimate
OM *
N03-N
P
K
Zn
FS 1
7.2
0.7
Low
60.5
20
59
333
11.9
FS 2
7.8
0.4
Low
42.8
4
3.6
128
3.92
FS 3
6.5
0.5
Low
70.0
10
13
195
6.05
FS 4
7.7
0.4
Medium
86.7
20
2.0
264
6.35
FS 5
8.2
0.5
High
59.4
18
1.8
65.4
2.98
FS 6
8.3
0.4
High
57.0
20
10
117
6.32
FS 7
8.1
0.3
Low
83.0
10
14
150
5.95
FS 8
8.1
0.4
Low
80.7
20
3.0
296
12.3
FS 9
8.1
0.8
High
46.5
5
<0.2
78.5
5.95
FS 10
6.5
1.2
High
40.7
16
<0.2
48.6
6.88
FS 11
8.2
0.8
High
31.5
5
<0.2
85.5
4.17
FS 12
8.2
0.5
High
21.1
6
<0.2
52.8
2.46
FS 13
7.8
0.7
High
19.5
6
<0.2
28.2
1.2
FS 14
7.9
0.5
High
36.4
10
0.6
133
7.7
FS 15
8.0
0.8
High
23.6
6
1.8
40.8
3.08
FS 16
7.9
0.7
High
36.8
15
<0.2
91.0
5.8
FS 17
7.9
0.5
High
14.6
15
<0.2
121
8.0
FS 18
7.6
0.4
High
54.8
15
<0.2
82.5
5.35
FS 19
7.7
0.4
High
45.6
85
3.6
110
13.1
FS 20
7.7
0.5
High
39.2
6
1.0
85.5
6.95
FS 21
7.7
0.5
High
38.5
20
1.0
104
10.8
FS 22
7.8
0.8
High
40.0
30
0.6
67.5
5.35
FS 23
8.0
0.4
High
21.5
6
2.1
247
20.7
FS 24
7.3
1.8
Low
77.7
248
23.6
118
17.3
FS 25
7.6
5.0
High
30.5
1502
13.6
111
14.6
FS 26
80
1.4
High
45.4
0.5
<0.2
34.7
14.8
FS 27
8.1
0 7
Hieh
64 4
66
16.2
92 6
40 8
Mpfln
7 77
ns
SI a
80 9
63
171 S
Q7
-------
Table 5b. Con't
ID#
Fe
Mn
Cu
Estimate
S04-S
Ca
Mg
Na
Sr
Pb
CaC03
FS 1
1020
118
5.21
Org.
NES *
11646
793
95.8
70.4
26.8
<0.05
FS 2
270
33.6
4.76
Org.
<10
10857
564
33.3
50.9
39.2
0.1
FS 3
535
194
4.64
Org
NES *
14364
801
100
65.5
45.6
0.1
FS 4
304
48.8
2.90
Org.
NES *
13282
785
120
NES *
NES *
4.1
FS 5
175
30.2
9.66
Org./Loara
<10
15347
1536
78.3
145
<2.5
12.3
FS 6
138
36.5
24.4
Org./Loam
NES *
10920
861
97.5
184
14.0
29
FS 7
378
140
4.49
Org.
NES *
11681
713
117
NES *
NES*
1.5
FS 8
497
60.7
12.6
Org.
NES *
7082
375
62.8
NES *
NES *
2.8
FS 9
930
388
4.46
Org./Loam
490
11085
317
62.2
138
38.5
45.1
FS 10
458
158
4.24
Org./Loam
NES *
10324
357
60.4
178
36.3
48.1
FS 11
505
174
3.11
Org./Loam
400
8218
268
32.2
189
31.3
60.3
FS 12
238
37.6
3.92
Org./Loam
<10
7455
271
1.20
341
36.4
47.2
FS 13
316
31.2
1.12
Org./Loam
135
6495
140
6.50
315
8.92
75.2
FS 14
251
127
4.44
Org./Loam
145
8434
403
43.9
227
35.3
54 4
FS 15
262
52.6
2.74
Org./Loam
355
8129
562
36.9
336
<2.5
57.6
FS 16
213
69.5
3.25
Org./Loam
400
8362
606
68.2
196
25.3
56.7
FS 17
208
43.8
2.62
Org./Loam
NES *
10657
560
47.3
160
8.50
39.9
FS 18
378
39.4
4.71
Org./Loam
190
10615
512
35.3
181
6.53
42.2
FS 19
278
52.8
4.28
Org./Loam
NES *
10561
372
39.6
170
28.4
37.4
FS 20
159
39.3
2.99
Org./Loam
V O.S **
8068
685
27.2
228
10.5
61.2
FS 21
266
113
8.85
Org./Loam
NES *
8890
568
180
266
30.1
56.2
FS 22
368
38.8
2.86
Org./Loam
<10
8920
409
66.2
259
15.4
54.9
FS 23
285
103
6.10
Org./Sand
Loam
115
7357
411
32.7
58.3
11.7
12.8
FS 24
420
77.6
2 82
Org.
500
17554
1588
73.2
110
<2.5
8.2
FS 25
154
58.2
1.74
Org./Sand
Loam
435
10707
758
130
NES *
NES *
56.7
FS 26
335
57.2
3.95
Org.
NES *
12484
799
220
128
17.8
150
FS 27
458
100
-V?
Ore.
NES *
14472
1155
136
147
17 0
194
Mean
36? 8
89 fi
S 9
¦07 ^
10517?
f>35 9
74 ¦)
180 1
71 18
33 77
* NES = Not enough sample for analysis.
**VOS = Very organic soil and analysis could not be performed
-------
Table 5c. Chemical analysis of soils at Michigan Creek Fen.
ID#
pH
EC
mmhni/rm
Estimate
OM*
N03-N
P
K
Zn
MC 1
6.2
1.2
Low
75.6
25
6.0
138
34.6
MC 2
6.8
3.0
Low
62.4
228
7.4
172
28.8
MC 3
7.4
3.0
High
58.3
26
2.4
77.8
13.4
MC 4
3.8
3.0
Low
63.7
16
2.4
71.8
6.8
MC 5
7.7
6.0
High
34.7
8.0
0.6
158
4.12
MC 6
7.4
3.1
Low
53.0
16
6.2
94.6
28.4
MC 7
6.7
1.0
Low
59.9
24
7.4
59.0
2.96
MC 8
6.0
2.0
Medium
76.1
30
<0.2
181
70.0
MC 9
6.8
1.0
Low
42.9
16
5.0
42.4
4.84
MC 10
5.9
0.5
Low
59.1
5.0
10.5
80.5
5.60
MC 11
6.7
1.0
Low
55.6
10
<0.2
68.0
17.1
MC 12
7.0
0.8
Low
14.1
5.0
<0.2
59.0
2.79
MC 13
5.9
1.1
Low
36.9
6.0
<0.2
52.8
7.52
MC 14
3.7
3.1
Low
47.9
8.0
<0.2
19.9
9.88
MC 15
5.2
2.4
Low
74.6
10
6.0
63.5
28.7
MC 16
7.6
1.2
Low
58.0
16
3.6
33.4
13.0
MC 17
5.9
0.4
Low
79.3
15
9.0
147
73.0
MC 19
6.2
0.7
Low
78.0
20
12.5
147
10.4
MC 20
6.8
0.8
Low
82.7
15
12.5
250
20.6
MC-SC1
6.1
0.7
Low
78.2
10
21.5
435
21.3
MC-SC15
7.5
2.7
High
60.2
90
7.40
122
18.4
TR8716
6.8
0.5
Low
79.3
10
7.50
312
28.6
MCXX
4 4
2.7
Low
37.3
6
<0.2
48 6
9 20
Mpnn
6 78
1 8?
59 4"?
7* 74
5 %
1?1 n
19 99
-------
Table 5c. Con't
TT>#
Fp
Mn
r.,
r,
Ma
Sr
Ph
rarm
MC 1
705
26.1
3.06
NES*
12829
463
103
136
41.3
1.00
MC2
520
21.0
5.05
2400
16249
1858
303
230
28.8
3.70
MC 3
438
22.4
2.36
NES*
13392
1751
372
NES*
NES *
12.5
MC 4
510
8.12
2.6
NES*
19615
386
159
168
11.3
2.10
MC 5
199
3.75
5.85
2240
10061
2134
1871
422
<2.5
10.7
MC 6
512
24.8
2.76
1775
15385
1098
501
309
17.8
1.20
MC 7
622
9.96
1.25
370
12397
832
92
166
12.2
<0.05
MC 8
1235
31.2
4.41
V.O.S **
10561
943
539
134
53.0
3.90
MC 9
478
18.0
1.75
140
8707
788
647
141
12.8
1.20
MC 10
975
381
2.54
NES *
7702
904
121
146
12.8
0.80
MC 11
1185
31.2
30.8
V.O.S **
9437
654
281
110
13.5
2.80
MC 12
233
8.73
8.23
<10
5869
607
153
79.7
12.0
1.00
MC 13
558
12.6
2.88
270
6005
668
384
34.7
<2.5
0.30
MC 14
430
62.8
4.56
2975
22021
487
240
273
4.82
1.20
MC 15
945
16.0
2.60
V.O.S **
10164
856
147
125
7.42
0.30
MC 16
242
4.88
4.36
660
12470
729
179
139
38.0
0.10
MC 17
1240
53.0
7.60
V.O.S **
9317
546
193
113
54.4
0.80
MC 19
1095
74.5
4.68
NES *
8866
990
188
126
36.5
1.00
MC 20
1230
60.5
2.88
NES *
9587
1074
171
121
46.1
1.90
MC-SC1
960
53.5
2.69
NES*
10857
1271
247
NES *
NES*
<0.05
MC-SC15
362
38.0
3.12
NES *
19695
956
268
325
32.2
6.40
TR8716
980
70.0
4.80
NES*
9387
803
113
112
44.4
1.90
MCXX
524
47.8
4.50
1870
5099
872
31.7
^0
00
NJ
14 3
1.20
Mrnn
im 41
4fi 9?
sm
17
11SSO 81
Q4? l?
717 Si
is? s?
?1 4*
? 41
* NES = Not enough sample for analysis.
**VOS = Very organic soil and analysis could not be performed
-------
Table 6a. Physical characteristics of High Creek Fen
soils.
Sample
Porosity
Bulk density
StRtinn
(vlcm3\
HC1
0.77
0.32
HC2
0.76
0.29
HC3
0.66
0.15
HC4
0.70
0.22
HC5
0.69
0.13
HC7
0.71
0.64
HC8
0.71
0.20
HC9
0.71
0.33
HC10
0.58
0.21
HC11
0.72
0.23
HC12
0.69
0.11
HC13
0.68
0.22
HC14
0.77
0.15
HC15
0.70
0.16
HC16
0.83
0.14
HC17
0.81
0.24
HC18
0.62
0.15
HC19
0.99
0.19
HC20
0.77
0.15
HC21
0.92
0.23
HC22
0.83
0.11
HC23
0.68
0.12
HC24
0.77
0.14
HC25
0.69
0.18
HC26
0.85
0.13
HC27
0.66
0.21
HC28
0.93
0.31
HC29
0.72
0.31
HC30
0.82
0.38
HC32
0.53
0.89
HC33
0.59
0.59
HC34
0.59
0.68
HC35
0.71
0.64
HCDE
0.74
0.16
HC-MINE
0.80
0.62
Mran
0 7-!
n?s
-------
Table 6b. Physical characteristics of Crooked Creek Fen
soils.
Sample
Porosity
Bulk density
^taHnn
Co/cm?).. _ ...
FS1
0.82
0.16
FS2
0.66
0.59
FS3
0.81
0.17
FS4
0.61
0.07
FS5
0.89
0.36
FS6
0.97
0.27
FS7
0.64
0.18
FS8
0.69
0.07
FS9
0.74
0.28
FS10
0.61
0.20
FS11
0.81
0.23
FS12
0.81
0.39
FS13
0.78
0.39
FS14
0.81
0.22
FS15
0.55
0.72
FS16
0.92
0.30
FS17
0.89
0.24
FS18
0.79
0.27
FS19
0.78
0.30
FS20
0.76
0.30
FS21
0.79
0.25
FS22
0.78
0.27
FS23
0.88
0.25
FS24
0.73
0.22
FS25
0.63
0.54
FS26
0.62
0.57
FS27
0 69
0.43
Mean
0 7 ft
0 10
-------
Table 6c. Physical characteristics of Michigan Creek Fen
soils.
Sample Station
Porosity
Bulk density
fa/rm*)
MCI
0.84
0.22
MC2
0.72
0.32
MC3
0.95
0.48
MC4
0.74
0.47
MC5
0.50
0.47
MC6
0.71
0.43
MC7
0.86
0.34
MC8
0.97
0.25
MC9
0.89
0.49
MC10
0.56
0.71
MCI 1
0.79
0.38
MC12
0.61
0.85
MC13
0.91
0.69
MC14
0.95
0.29
MC15
1.07
0.19
MC16
0.69
0.44
MC17
0.78
0.25
MC19
1.00
0.20
MCXX
0.74
0.50
MC SCI
0.78
0.16
MC SC15
0.78
0.34
TR8716
0.95
0.21
Mean
081
mo
-------
VEGETATION RECOVERY IN EXPERIMENTAL PLOTS
Sequential vegetation measurements have been made and seed bank samples collected in the 19
experimental plots installed on the three fens. Two measurements have thus far been made —
one on July 9, 1996 and the other on September 15, 1996. These samples periods were chosen
to capture the vegetation characteristics after essentially all new seeds had germinated and plant
growth had peaked. The second sampling was timed to coincide with the cessation flowering and
the shedding of seeds. By collecting samples at these times, temporal patterns in seed bank
composition can be tracked and with them the patterns of vegetation recovery.
Vegetation composition of the experimental plots is presented in Table 7 a-c, Table 8 a-h, and
Table 9 a-g. The key to the species abbreviations is located in Table 10. Data reduction in the
form of multivariate analyses will be contained in the final report. Although tablature summary
is cumbersome, general patterns can be seen in the data. The two patterns which appear evident
are; first, between treatments, the more extreme manipulations generally have a lower percentage
vegetation cover. This is not a surprising outcome of the treatments. Second, among all of the
treatments, the October measurement usually documented a higher cover for individual species.
This increase was also seen in the control plots, so the interpretation is unclear. It is likely that
the October vegetation cover would naturally be higher because the plants had had more time to
grow, but a significant portion of the increase in the disturbed plots could also be due to
establishment of new individuals. The contribution of each of these factors will be teased out in
the final analysis.
Table 7a. High Creek experimental plot 1 vegetation data.
P nntrnl Tillpri NSB
Species
07/09/96
09/15/96
07/10/96
09/15/96
07/10/96 09/15/96
Des ces
1
+
Ely tra
1
3
Jun alp
+
+
-
Jun bal
+
Pot ans
1
5
2
6
+ +
Puc air
6
Ran cvm
+
Tri Pla
5
18
2
6
+ 3
Tri mar
Rar Cirri
9?
96
99 97
-------
Table 7b. High Creek experimental plot 2 vegetation data.
Pnntrnl TillpH N5R
Species
07/09/96
09/15/96
07/09/96 09/15/96
07/09/96
09/15/96
Aster spp.
+
1
+ +
Cal str
+
+
Des ces
2
5
+
Ely tra
3
1
Fes ida
+
Poa com
+
Pot ans
93
80
20 35
+
Ran cym
+
Tri mar
+ 2
+
Tn pla
+
+
Bar Gro
2
75 60
99
Cobbles
1
1
Sta Wat
8
5
Table 7c. High Creek experimental plot 3 vegetation data.
r nntrnl
TillpH
Species
07/10/96
09/15/96
07/10/96 09/15/96
07/10/96
09/15/96
Agr sea
+
+
Aster spp.
+
+
Car spp.
+
+
Cir arv
+
+
+
+
+
Des ces
5
+
3
Horjub
+
Jun alp
+
Pot ans
98
95
65 94
+
5
Tn pal
+
Bar Gro
+
33 5
98
92
Cobbles
+
1
-------
Table 7d. High Creek experimental plot 4 vegetation data.
Tnntrnl
Tillprf
NSR
Species
07/10/96
09/15/96
07/10/96 09/15/96
07/10/96 09/15/96
Pot ans
80
45
25 94
1 2
Des ces
18
40
Cir arv
+
2
+
Aster spp.
+
+
Fes ida
5
+
Astocc
2
Pun dis
+
Ely tra
2
+
Cal str
+
1
Jim Bal
+
Bar gro
75 6
96 97
Cobbles
+
3
Table 8a. Crooked Creek experimental plot 1 vegetation data.
r nntrnl Tillpri NSR
Species
07/11/96
09/16/97
07/11/96 09/16/97
07/11/96 09/16/97
Car aqu
17
35
+ 1
Car sim
10
35
Ele pal
3
Pen Flo
+
2
Sal bra
3
Sal can
1
Sal myr
4
Sal pla
7
Tri mar
+
Tri pum
+
2
moss
15
Bar gro
3
20
99 99
5 100
Litter
9
Sta Wat
39
95
-------
Table 8b. Crooked Creek experimental plot 2 vegetation data.
r nntrnl
C nntrnl
Tillprf
NSR
Species
07/11/96
09/16/97
07/11/96 09/16/97
07/11/96 09/16/97
Pol bis
+
+
Car sci
+
Car aqu
29
40
1 4
Car hal
+
Car sim
33
15
Des ces
1
Ele pau
1
Eqi var
+
Kob sim
30
Moss
14
3
Muh ric
+
Pen flo
1
2
Sal bra
+
+
Sal pla
+
2
Bare gro
8
99 96
100 100
Litter
24
30
Table 8c.
Crooked Creek experimental plot 3 vegetation data.
fnntrnl
C nntrnl
Tillprl
NSR
Species
07/11/96
09/16/97
07/11/96 09/16/97
07/11/96 09/16/97
Car aqu
45
35
+ -r
Car sim
20
35
Ele pau
+
Kob myo
1
Pol V1V
+
Sal pla
1
+
Tha alp
+
Tri pum
+
Moss
9
18
Bar gro
5
20
75 100
100
Litter
30
Sta vvat
15
5
25
100
-------
Table 8d. Crooked Creek experimental plot 4 vegetation data.
rnntrnl Tillpri KSR
Species
07/11/96
09/16/97
07/11/96 09/16/97
07/11/96 09/16/97
Car aqu
15
40
+
Car sim
5
25
Kob myo
8
30
Kob sim
10
Pen flo
+
Sal bra
+
Sal can
2
2
Sal pla
1
+
Tri mar
1
+
Bar gro
10
15
75 100
100
Litter
20
Sta wat
30
25
100
Table 8e.
Crooked Creek experimental plot 5 vegetation data.
r nntrnl
r nntrnl
TillpH
NCR
Species
07/11/96
09/16/96
07/11/96 09/15/96
07/11/96 09/15/96
Art fng
1
3
Che red
+ 2
Ely tra
10
5
Hor bra
1
Horjub
30
Lap red
1
+ 15
+ 5
Lep ram
+
Mustard
2
20
Pas smi
+
Poa pra
50
20
7
Pot sub
+
S5
+ 1
Car7
10
Tar off
+
Bar gro
10
6
99 83
99 96
Litter
20
20
-------
Table 8f. Crooked Creek experimental plot 6 vegetation data.
r nntrnl
T nntrnl
Tillprf
NSR
Species
07/11/96
09/16/97
07/11/96
09/16/97
07/11/96 09/16/97
Cal str
5
Cir arv
2
Ely tra
20
+
Hor bra
5
5
Hor jub
5
Lap red
+
+
Poa pra
73
70
+
3
Potans
5
2
5
3
+ +
Pot sub
2
+
+
S5
+
Tar off
+
Bar gro
94
92
99
Litter
15
20
Table 8g. Crooked Creek experimental plot 7 vegetation data.
r nntrnl
r nntrnl
THIPri
NSR
Species
07/11/96
09/16/97
07/11/96 09/16/97
07/11/96 09/16/97
An frig
+
Car spp
5 ¦
Cir arv
2
+
Cir col
2
1
Hor bra
30
Horjub
10
Jun bal
30
30
Poa pra
8
10
+
+
+
Pot ans
30
15
5
30
2 15
Pot sub
3
+
Bar gro
95
70
98 85
Litter
20
25
-------
Table 8h. Crooked Creek experimental plot 8 vegetation data.
r nntrnl C nntrnl Tillpri NSR
Species
07/11/96
09/16/97
07/11/96 09/16/97
07/11/96
09/16/97
Cal str
60
Car spp.
2
Cir arv
+
Poa pra
75
40
+ +
+
Pot ans
20
3
+ 5
+
2
Pot sub
+
2
+
Tar off
+
Bar gro
99 95
100
98
Litter
5
10
Table 9a. Michigan
Creek experimental plot 1 vegetation data.
C nntrnl
r nntrnl
Ti
Species
07/12/96
09/14/96
07/12/96 09/14/96
07/12/96
09/14/96
Car aqu
+
Rar orn
100
Q9
ion inn
inn
100
Table 9b. Michigan Creek experimental plot 2 vegetation data
r nntrnl
r nntrnl
Tillpri
NSR
Species
07/12/96
09/14/96
07/12/96 09/14/96
07/12/96
09/14/96
Agr sea
+
Ant mic
+
Car aqu
50
70
+ +
+
+
Lep ram
+
Poa pra
1
1
Pol avi
+
+
Pot ans
2
+
+ 2
+
1
Tra off
+
2
+
+
Tn mar
+
Bar gro
6
10
99 97
99
98
Litter
40
20
Table 9c. Michigan Creek ex
perimental plot 3 vegetation data
r nntrnl
r nntrnl
Tillprf
VSR
Species
07/12/96
09/14/96
07/12/96 09/14/96
07/12/96
09/14/96
Tri pla
1
+
+ +
+
+
Rar prn
99
99
99 99
99
99
-------
Table 9d.
Michigan Creek ex
perimental plot 4 vegetation data.
r nntrnl
r nntrnl
Tillprl
NSR
Species
07/12/96
09/14/96
07/12/96 09/14/96
07/12/96 09/14/96
Pol cae
4
+
+ +
+ +
Ach lan
3
+
Car spp
15
Des ces
35
+
1
Ely tra
4
+
+
Fes ida
4
Gal bor
+
Jun bal
65
25
1
Poa pra
3
2
+
Sed Rho
+
Ste Ion
+
Tha alp
5
+
+ +
Tri mar
+
+
Tar off
+
+
+
Bar gro
99 99
99 98
Litter
30
25
Table 9e. Michigan Creek experimental plot 5 vegetation data.
P nntrnl
P nntrnl
Tillprt
N
-------
Table 9f. Michigan Creek experimental plot 6 vegetation data.
C nntrnl
P nntrnl
Tilled
NSR
Species
07/12/96
09/14/96
07/12/96 09/14/96
07/12/96 09/14/96
Pot ans
18
10
1
+ 1
Cir col
5
3
+
Cre run
5
2
+ +
Tar off
1
+
Pot par
+
2
Cir arv
+
Car aqu
40
+
Ely tra
10
Ast occ
4
+
+
Fes ida
20
+
Tha alp
2
Carex spp
35
Des ces
+
Bar gro
5
99 98
99 98
Litter
35
25
Table 9g. Michigan Creek experimental plot 7 vegetation data.
rnntrnl
rnntrnl
Tilli»it
NSR
Species
07/12/96
09/14/96
07/12/96 09/14/96
07/12/96 09/14/96
Ant rruc
+
Ast occ
2
Car spp.
15
+
Car utr
+
+
+ +
Cir col
3
3
+
Cre run
1
+
Des ces
30
27
Fes ida
2
15
Hor jub
4
Poa pra
10
5
Pot ans
5
8
+ +
+ +
Pot par
1
Tar off
2
+
Tha alp
+
Bar gro
20
4
99 99
99 99
Litter
20
18
-------
Table 10. Species list for experimental plots and key to species' abreviations.
Ahhrpviatinn Snprip*. Name Ahhrcviatinn Snpripc Namp
Ach lan
Achillea lanulosa
Pun air
Punccinella airoides
Agr sto
Agrostis stolonifera
Pun dis
Punccinella distans
Agr sea
Agrostis scabra
Ran cym
Ranunculus cymbalaria
Ant mic
Antennaria microphylla
Ran hyp
Ranunculus hyperboreus
Art fri
Artemisia frigida
Sal bra
Salix brachycarpa
Ast occ
Aster occidentalis
Sal can
Salix Candida
Ast spp.
Aster species
Sal myr
Salix myrtillifoha
Cal str
Calamagrostis stricta
Sal pla
Salix planifolia
Car spp.
Carex species
Sed rho
Sedum rhodanthum
Car aqu
Carex aquatilis
Stel Ion
Stellaria longipes
Car hal
Carex hallii
Tha alp
Thalictrum alpinum
Car sim
Carex simulata
Tra off
Taraxacum officinale
Cir arv
Cirsium arvense
Tri pla
Triglochm palustre
Cir col
Cirsium coloradertse
Tri mar
Triglochin maritimum
Che rub
Chenopodium rubrum
Tri pum
Trichophorum pumilum
Cre run
Crepis runcmata
Des ces
Deschampsia cespitosa
Unknowns
Ele pal
Eleocharis quinquejlora
car ?
Ely tra
Elymus trachycaulus
S5
Eqi var
Eqisetum vanegatum
Mustard
Fes ida
Festuca idahoensis
Gal bor
Galium boreale
Hor bra
Hordeum brachvantherum
Hor jub
Hordeum jubalum
Jun alp
Juncus alpmoarticulaius
Jun bal
Juncus arcticus
Kob sim
Kobresia simphciuluscula
Kob myo
Kobresia mvosuroides
Lap red
Lappula redowskn
Lep ram
Lepidium ramosissimum
mosses
Moss species
Muh nc
Muhlenbergia richardsonis
Pas smi
Pascopyrum smithii
Pen flo
Peniaphylloides floribunda
Poa com
Poa compressa
Pol bis
Polygonum bistortioides
Pol avi
Polygonum a\:icu!are
Pol cae
Polemomum caeruleum
Pot ans
Potentilla anserma
Pot par
Potenlilla plattensis
Pot sub
Potentilla subjuga
-------
CONCLUSION
A matrix of environmental monitoring stations was set up on three fens in South Park, Colorado.
Aspects of water quality and hydrology were measured at these stations through out the 1996
growing season. Additionally, soil samples were obtained from these sites to asses the chemical
and physical character of the fen soils.
Superimposed on the environmental sampling stations was a network of experimental plots in
which the fen vegetation and peat were manipulated in ways that simulate peat mining. The
vegetation and seed bank composition were measured on these plots twice during the 1996
season.
This report has presented the data collected during the 1996 season. It must be kept in mind that
while these data are valuable and useable in their own right, this project is a work in progress.
Environmental and vegetational sampling of this project has been continued thru the 1997
growing season. These data will be added to the 1996 database to give a two-year record of
environmental behavior and the data will be analyzed and presented in detail.
-------
LITERATURE CITED
Appel, J. L. 1995. Hydrogeologic Framework of the High Creek Calcareous Fen, South Park,
Park County, Colorado. M.S. Thesis, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, N.M.
Borovec, Z., Kribek, B. & Tolar, V. 1979. Sorption of Uranyl by humic acids. Chemical
Geology 27:39-46.
Brinson, M. 1993. A hydrogeomorphic classification for wetlands. Tech. Rpt. WRP-DE-4. U.S.
Army Engineering Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Brinson, M. and Rheinhardt, R. 1996. The role of reference wetlands in functional assessment
and mitigation. Ecological Applications 6:69-76.
Brinson, M., Hauer, R., Lee, L., Nutter, W., Rheinhardt, R., Smith, D., and Whigham, D. 1995.
A guidebook for application of hydrogeomorphic assessments to riverine wetlands. Tech. Rpt.
WRP-DE-11, U.S. Army Engineering Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Colorado Dept. of Health. 1995. Basic Standards for Ground Water. Water Quality Control,
Denver.
Cooper, D.J. 1996. Water and soil chemistry, floristics and phytosociology of the extreme rich
High Creek fen, in South Park, Colorado, U.S.A. Can. J Bot. 74 1801-1811.
Cowardin, L., Gilmer, D, Golet, F., and LaRoe, E. 1979. Classification of wetlands and
deepwater habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Pub. FWS/OBS-79/31.
Du Rietz, G.E. 1949. Huvudenheter och huvudranser i svensk myrvegetation (English summary)
Svensk bot. tidskr. 48:274-309.
Fojt, W 1995 The nature conservation importance of fens and bogs and the role of restoration
In: Restoration of Temperate Wetlands. B. Wheeler, S. Shaw, W Fojt, and A Robertson (eds.)
John Wiley, New York.
Gore, A.J.P. 1983. Introduction. In: Mires: Swamp, Bog, Fen and Moor. A.J.P. Gore (ed ).
Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Hammer, D and R. Bastian. 1989. Wetland ecosystems: Natural water purifiers? In.
Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment. Municipal, Industrial and Agricultural. D.
Hammer ed.
-------
Johnson, J.B. 1995. A Functional assessment of a calcareous fen in Park County, Colorado.
Unpublished report. Submitted to Park Co. Dept. of Environmental Health and The U.S. E.P.A.
Region VIII.
Kochenov, A., Zinev'yev, & Lovaleva, S. 1965. Some features of the accumulation of uranium
in peat bogs. Geochemistry International 2:65-70.
Leek, M. A. 1989. Wetland seed banks. In. The Ecology of Soil Seed Banks. M. Leek, V.T.
Parker, and R.L. Simpson (eds ). Academic Press, Inc., San Diego, CA, USA
Lopatkina, A. 1967. Conditions of the accumulation of uranium in peat. Geochemistry
International 4:577-588.
Lozono, E. 1965. Geology of the southwestern Garo area, South Park, Park County, Colorado.
M.S. thesis, Colorado School of Mines, Golden.
Maltby, E. 1994. Building a new approach to the investigation and assessment of wetland
ecosystem functioning. In Global Wetlands: Old World and New (W.J. Mitsch ed.). Elsevier,
Amsterdam.
Marr, J W. 1961. Ecosystems of the Front Range in Colorado. University of Colorado's Studies
in Biology 8.
Owen, D. & Otton, J. 1995. Mountain wetlands: efficient uranium filters- potential impacts.
Ecological Engineering 5.77-93.
Owen, D. Otton. J., Hills, A., & Schumann. R. 1992. Uranium and other elements in Colorado
Rocky Mountain wetlands- A reconnaissance study. U.S.G.S. Bulletin 1992.
Owen, D. & Breit, G 1995 Geochemical reconnaissance study of Vassar Meadow (Adams Rib)
wetlands and vicinity, Eagle County, Colorado. U.S.G.S. Circular 1122.
Smith, D., Ammann, A., Bartoldus, C. and Brinson, M. 1995. An approach for assessing
wetland functions using hydrogeomorphic classification reference wetlands, and functional
indices. Tech. Rpt WRP-DE-9, U.S. Army Engineering Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, MS.
Stevens, J.E , J.T. Doerfer, and B. Humphries. 1990. A characterization of the status and
impacts of peat excavation in the state of Colorado. Unpublished Colorado Mined Land
Reclamation Report.
Tweto, 0. 1974 Reconnaissance geologic map of the Fairplay West, Mount Sherman, South
Peak, and Jones Hill 7 Vi minute Quadrangles U S G S Scale 1 62,500
------- |