My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE46725
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
500000
>
PERMFILE46725
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:48:50 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 12:54:23 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1981148
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
8/26/1983
Doc Name
REGULAR 112 PERMIT APPLICATION
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
60
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
' EXHIBIT J <br />VEGETATION <br />The following is a report prepared by Mark A. Heffner of Oikos <br />Environmental Services. <br />At first glance, the vegetational differentiation of the Chieftain Mine affected <br />area and surrounding related areas appears to be of low diversity. The topography is <br />' fairly uniform and color differences slight from area to area. On this basis, one <br />would expect there to be very little vegetational differentiation. However, closer <br />' examination reveals an amazingly large amount of differentiation for such a seemingly <br />uniform area. <br />Most of the area is, in fact, occupied by one community, but slight variations <br />in topography and soil produce rather large changes in the vegetation, especially <br />xhen the mined areas are included in the analysis. There is, as xould be expected, <br />t a high degree of overlap and ecotonal blending between the communities, but <br />distinctiveness is sufficient to xarrant classification into several communities. <br />The survey results includes a presence list of all the major species found on <br />the site, irrespective of community lines. Then the species are placed into their <br />' separate communities. As a result, six different communities can be identified <br />on the site. The survey results presented here concludes xith a discussion of the <br />phytosociological relationships and ecological factors controlling and <br />' delineating each community. <br />' PRESENCE LIST - As the first step in any vegetational study, a listing of the species <br />found on the area under question must be made. This is accomplished by xalking the <br />entire area and noting the most important species as well as any others that may <br />' not be important but are identifiable. Some species will necessarily be missed as <br />they may only be apparent at a time of the year different from that at xhich the <br />' survey is conducted. No cryptogams are included as they are exceedingly difficult <br />to identify and are of little importance to reclaiming the site. <br />' In total 40 plant species were found on the site. They are listed in Table 1. <br />Table 1 probably includes xell in excess of 79~ of the most common species found on <br />' the site and certainly all of the dominant species. <br />TABLE 1 <br />' SPECIES PRESENCE LIST <br />GRAMINEAE (POACEAE~: <br />Sti a comata <br />Muhlenbereia spp. <br />Bouteloua ~racilis <br />Festuca arizonica <br />A~*rornron smithii <br />A. cristatum <br />37 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.