Laserfiche WebLink
• area itself is underlain by the Williams Fork Formation. The emnani.c <br />importance of the roal found in these formations has certainly made- <br />and is making-a profound impact upon the mnmunities in the region. <br />The bedrock geology and climatic conditions combine to deteanine the <br />nature aixi rate of local soil development. <br />SOILS <br />As is the case for a major percentage of the immediately adjacent land <br />area, site SKL'139 is underlain by looms and sandy looms of the Splitro <br />or Winevada Series (Paxton and Olsen, 1979). These well-drained soils <br />are found on rolling uplands and hills with slopes varying from 3 to 65 <br />percent and foamed upon material weathered from sandstone. Depths to <br />the sandstone bedrock vary from S to 40 inches, the Splitro Series being <br />shallower than the Winevada Series. The colors of these soils are typi- <br />• tally a grayish brown (lOYR 5/2) to a very dark grayish brawn (lOYR 3/2 <br />moist). Organic materials such as roots are cacc[rui through the various <br />soil horizons in both series, and each series characteristically contains <br />many sandstone chips in the lacer horizons. On the average, the Winevada- <br />Splitro looms contain approximately 40~ sand, 30~ silt, and 20$ clay; the <br />ranaining lOB is caTg~osed of sandstone fragments. These soils typically <br />support a native vegetation of Gambel's oak, sagebrush, grasses, and <br />forts. <br />F iL)RA <br />Three major vegetation types have been identified in the general vicinity <br />of SKP139: mountain shrub (mixed brush), upland sagebrush, and aspen <br />(Mariah Associates; 1979; see Figure 2). Although not identified to <br />specific vegetation type, certain native grasses have been re~gnized as <br />characteristic of the Splitro soil series (Soil Conservation Service, <br />1975) and were, therefore, potentially present. Plants asmnn to each <br />• vegetation type and the native grasses, as well as the suitability of <br />each for human and mule deer ronsumption, are displayed in Table 3. A <br />9 <br />