Laserfiche WebLink
Attachment 3 <br />Narrative Evaluation <br />Four Systematic cover transacts were run within the small reclaimed area. <br />Areas disturbed earlier this summer by drainage construction were avoided, but <br />hillslope gully repair areas were traversed by the transects. Straw mulch had <br />been spread over significant portions of the area when the gully repair was <br />conducted, and this is reflected in the cover data. Seedlings from this <br />recent seeding effort were not observed. <br />The estimated mean cover of established vegetation <br />was met at the 807. level but not at the 907, level. <br />dominated by one species, titer milkvetch (P.straga <br />is not a component of the approved seedmix, and in <br />blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis) occurs both in the <br />data. Blue grama is a very minor component of the <br />that a seedmix different than that listed on Table <br />was 36.8:. Sampie adequacy <br />The vegetation is heavily <br />lus titer). Cicer milkvetch <br />fact only one species, <br />seedmix and the cover <br />stand. It would appear <br />2.05-10 was actually used. <br />Mean vegetation cover of the reclaimed area is lower than reference area cover <br />(41.77), but is not statistically less than the cover standard (907. of <br />reference mean). Due to the recent gully repair and re-seeding, it is.tco <br />early to judge whether the vegetation cover is sufficient to control erosion. <br />