My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV00511
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV00511
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 12:58:11 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 8:46:35 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980005
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
12/13/1993
Doc Name
SENECA II MINE C-80-005 TR 27 POSTMINING LAND USE PLAN
From
PEABODY WESTERN COAL CO
To
DOW
Type & Sequence
TR27
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.
/
4
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
<br />Jim Morris <br />December 9, 1993 <br />Page 3 <br />potential for more edge and greater heterogeneity in the <br />patternof shrub distribution. Again, please refer to the <br />enclosed Tables 19 to 26. The tables also show, with the <br />exception of Gambel oak, all major shrub species occur in <br />reclaimed areas. Over time, shrubs will expand into low density <br />areas, resulting in greater variation in age class of the shrub <br />stands. Wadge pasture sampling (Table 25) in 1992 showed 12 <br />percent of the plots had 0 shrubs, 60 percent had 40 to 400 <br />shrubs per acre, 16 percent had 400 to 800, 4 percent had 800 to <br />1000, and 8 percent had greater than 1000. Sampling for shrubs <br />in reclaimed areas has historically resulted in standard <br />deviations that equal or are greater than mean values. <br />Therefore, the greater challenge may be to determine through <br />adequate sampling what the true density and distribution of <br />shrubs is on reclaimed lands. <br />PWCC is also puzzled by CDOW's statement that they do not agree <br />that reclaimed areas are beneficial to wildlife. Ironically, <br />the attraction of reclaimed areas to deer and elk and in some <br />cases marmots, rabbits, and porcupines, has been detrimental to <br />shrub establishment programs. By CDOW's own admission, there is <br />no longer a concern about big game and mining (specific critical <br />habitat issues excepted). Contrast this to concerns in the late <br />1970's and early 1980's. Benefits of herbaceous dominated <br />reclaimed areas to big game have been discussed in Tab 13. <br />These areas provide good spring, summer, and fall range, <br />especially when nutritional requirements for large ungulates is <br />considered. As an example, alfalfa can provide similar <br />digestible protein and energy, phosphorous, and carotene levels <br />to Gambel oak at various times during the year. Many other <br />species of wildlife are observed in reclaimed areas on a daily <br />basis. Raptors, passerine birds, grouse, reptiles, and a <br />variety of mammals are present. Ferruginous hawks have been <br />sighted over reclaimed areas occasionally, while golden eagles <br />nest and are active in the mine vicinity. It is true that <br />species requiring tall shrub habitat or denser stands of shrubs <br />may be displaced or otherwise affected. Just as reclaimed <br />habitat cannot provide thermal cover or browse during winter <br />months, native shrublands may fall short in providing forage <br />benefits equal to reclaimed areas in spring and early summer. <br />However, on a regional scale, tall shrub and sagebrush habitat <br />is much greater in areal extent compared to reclaimed habitat. <br />This also raises questions as to whether reclaimed areas fulfill <br />a role in diversifying regional habitat? Fire as an <br />environmental factor has been controlled; however, it is <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.