07/26/2000 Env Bd Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

inventory and mapping process we will be doing for Hugo and Lino Lakes. Here is Meredith's latest version. It applies to both natural communities and restorations that are intended to mimic natural cover. Would any of vou interested /concerned about this please look it over & get Meredith your comments? We will be convening soon a special meeting on how we are going to proceed on the MLCCS part of this project. 33X — Modifiers that reflect natural quality of a site 331 - High quality natural community High quality examples of natural communities include a large portion of the species typical of the community (see the community descriptions section). Few weedy plants are present. (Weedy species can be native or non -native and are typical of disturbed areas. In forests weedy species include boxelder, buckthorn, prickly ash, and garlic mustard; in prairies they include red cedar, sumac, brome grass, and Kentucky blue- grass.) Most natural processes are occurring, including disturbances such as fire or flooding, if appropriate. There is little or no evidence of human disturbances, such as logging or livestock grazing. 332 - Medium quality natural community Medium quality examples of natural communities lack many of the species typical of the community. Weedy species may be abundant, but they are not dominant over the typical native species. (In communities with multiple layers of vegetation, weedy species are not dominant in any layer.) Natural processes may have changed and there may be evidence of human disturbance, but the nature of the community has not been altered beyond recognition. 333 - Low Quality In low quality examples of natural communities weedy species are dominant in any or all layers of vegetation. Natural processes are highly altered and there are extensive human disturbances. The community may not resemble any naturally- occurring community (i.e. one described by DNR Natural Heritage or USNVC). 5. Minutes of 4/20/00 Work Group Meeting Attached (LUG_minutes 4_20_00.wpd) are some minutes of the last meeting based on notes taken by me and Samantha Hayes. Obviously, they are selective and don't reflect all of the good discussion and ideas we had. Let me know if vou have corrections or additions. 6. Other Work Items * Hugo meeting - I'd like to set up a meeting with the new Hugo City Administrator that would preferably happen sometime this month. Who would like to Qo on that meeting? Interested DNR folks: is your groupwise calendar up -to -date so I can check your day /time availability? * MLCCS - We need to have a subgroup meeting on the MLCCS work. Who would like to be involved in that meeting? Interested DNR folks: is your groupwise calendar up-to -date so I can check your day /time availability? * GIS maps - Dale Homuth, Bill Penning, & I have been working with Jacque Stubbs who is doing a set of GIS natural resource maps of Hugo and Lino Lakes and with Dave Redelman who has the Lino Lakes NR Inventory data layers. A set of enlarged hard copies of the maps will be given to Joan Galli, Bill, etc for their wildlife field work in mid -May. We will have various forms of the maps for display and use at our next 5/25 work group meeting. Please let me or Jackie know if you have other suggestions etc on the maps we are doing at this phase of the project. Any other business? CC: Art Widerstrom; Bart Richardson; Brian Loeffelholz; Dave Zumeta; Dennis Martin; Hannah Dunevitz; Jacqueline Stubbs; John Saxhaug; Kathleen Wallace; Larry Westerberg; Olin •