My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE48635
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
500000
>
PERMFILE48635
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:50:35 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 1:42:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980001
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Doc Name
Revegetation Studies
Section_Exhibit Name
4.4 Appendix 4.4-C, 4.4-D & 4.4-E
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.
/
13
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
• COMPARISON OF REVEGETATION ON TOPSOIL AND SPOIL MATERIALS <br />This paper evaluates past revegetation at the Edna Mine as the OSM <br />requested. It shows equivalence in cover between topsoiled and non- <br />topsoiled areas and a dominance of grasses. These conclusions are not <br />surprising since the overburden quality data dhow no toxic material and <br />these areas were seeded with a mixture that included only grasses. Since <br />the reclamation done ae part of this pernit uses a much more varied seed <br />mixture with entirely different goals, it is inappropriate to assess this <br />plan on the basis of past reclamation. This report briefly presents the <br />results of a study to evaluate the success of reclamation efforts in two <br />locations at the Edna Mine. Vegetationally, the mine is located in the <br />mountain brush zone, bordering the aspen zone, at approximately 7,500 feet. <br />Cover, production and species diversity data were obtained from two <br />study locations, one in vegetation planted on spoil material and the other <br />in vegetation planted in topsoil over spoil material. The two study <br />locations were two acres in size. Within each site, cover datn were <br />• obtained at 15 quadrats, two by one half meter in size, by visually <br />estimating the canopy cover of each species to the nearest percent. Rock <br />cover (greater than two centimeters square in size) and litter (both <br />standing and ground) were estimated as well. <br />Production data were also obtained at each quadrat by harvesting the <br />above ground living biomass of each species and placing it in labeled paper <br />bags. Baqs were returned to the laboratory where they were oven dried at <br />105 Centigrade in excess of 24 hours. Samples were weighted on a triple <br />beam balnnce to the nearest tenth of a gram. <br />Diversity of species at each site was determined by counting the <br />number of different species in each cover data quadrat. Mean and standard <br />deviation values were determined for cover and production of species. <br />Cover values were expressed as a percentage while production was expressed <br />in grams per square meter and pounds per acre. <br />Table 4.4-F-1 presents the information gathered at the two sites. <br />Covez of vegetation was somewhat higher on spoil material, being at 31 <br />percent, than on topsoil, (30 percent). Grasses made up the majority of the <br />• vegetative cover with forb species comprising a minor portion of the cover. <br />Mid-term '94 4.4-D-1 September 15, 1994 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.