|
re vz sa a[!^.n ;ec:+sa et w.!!-.+ ire to r^.c~ ..r^_a
<br />values). ~urre r.c iv, in Cn In r.: :uw •'~°:co and
<br />LTCa h, whe ra chu cnncroc is u~ the ra cla i..-ed
<br />areas on Ly ha ~~e cn 4: <nn par co ?::": of :hz
<br />^[a nda rd. 3eec nt iv nrona sad :eru!atlon Sv the
<br />Federal U;fis of Su rf_i.u ri'inr, hn~~r va;, vnu ll
<br />require Casein: u:.acnsc IhU: of :he scanda rd
<br />(U.B. Ocpa:t-a.^.e of chu inee:fur, 1?8.1• `:ure-
<br />over, our da:a :roa on Ls' enreu vzu:s of sa-a ding
<br />s how [hoc [hu:e Ls su bst~n; ia1 inhe rant ~•a rLacion
<br />[toe year Co ye x 4tcer r, the •:a Lars ubcaLced
<br />f tom ehe pm-:-e and ce fc re nee ars,is. "his
<br />dl rec cly cun:rroa;rs the basic precisu of the
<br />refe can ce are.: pan cave, i.e. the ~+a gc ca cion
<br />produ<tion ar. chc ref. ran ce and praol ne areas
<br />are equivalent ch rough tine.
<br />Be5ldes [he concern Lor [he val Ldi[y of the
<br />ref erznce area concept, there are also Haw ;a-
<br />men[ problc ns vi th its use. L[ is di: iiculC [o
<br />be ce rta(n [hat sites sale aced during baseline
<br />data eo Llec[ion vi!1 re c.ain out of the •:a•: of all
<br />£u[u re mi aing ac[iv![ies for the life of a pro-
<br />~ect. Fur[hc-, 1[ 15n'[ al va ys possible [o Fl ad
<br />aui[a ble sires [he opt razor has le ¢al ri;,h[s co
<br />ton[ro 1. 4'hzn the use o° [he reference areas can
<br />be eon [ro Lled, the condition of precious lv nis-
<br />managed sites can be improved. This nay result
<br />in a more st rtngen[ success standard.
<br />Control Areas
<br />The sane data used to te5[ the re fe rz nee
<br />area approach ::e rz used [o evaluate [he control
<br />area apprnac h. This approach assunes the same
<br />ratio of the values fron the pre mine area
<br />(affected area) to [he con, ari son area (control
<br />area) should occur between [he reclaimed area and
<br />•Che control area. To assess this assumption,
<br />data fron [he affected areas were [a bu lateds x
<br />percent of the p-oJ action fron [he control a,.-eas
<br />(Sable 2). The data were then evaluated usin¢
<br />the statistical procedures defined by the h'cening
<br />Depa rt me n[ of En vi rovental Qua1i [y (GEO) (1981).
<br />This evaluation is summarized Sn Table 3.
<br />If the baseline data were obtained fron the
<br />sage-g ra cs con..-.unity, in years similar [o richer
<br />1980 or 1982, [hen [he values iron [he premine
<br />area itself would fall to satisfy the standard in
<br />Table 2.--Total production of herbaceous soecles
<br />on [he of ratted (pre:aine) areas as a :, of
<br />the total Droduct ion of [he herbaceous
<br />spc ales on [he eon part ison areas, 19`0-1982.
<br />The data are fru~a two plan[ conmunitics at a
<br />coal surface mine in note hwcs[ Colorado.
<br />Plan[ cu~:ann lilts
<br />Year -________________________________________.
<br />Sage-grass Mountain shrub
<br />l9tlU 95.45 tl8.7S
<br />IY81 71.d5 8U.4X
<br />1982 1U:.4". 91.1:
<br />,r wear ;ncn a. 'nv'. °or c`e rn uncain ,eras ,.. ~_
<br />,Hunt:v, ;hz arc t area oiled co achieve Lrv
<br />p re dieted s[.~rd~vhen the pia ca Cron f7F1 ve re
<br />cunstde rod ba s.~!!ae and [he 1951 wife c[cd area
<br />data wc:a c.~s cad for success (Table 3). :Jhi1e
<br />chranoLuClc :ily this did ^oc aeear, !t Ls ter
<br />uanab Le to cone Lace coat the base!Inz Coca maid
<br />be co!Iz Iced is a ?ear slai lur :o 1981 and tas:-
<br />iag dould occur in a year similar co 1941. The
<br />is ca anal;+z,:d indicate the conc:ol area approaun
<br />Ls also tnva ild :ac t,z scudv area.
<br />The sane n~nagerial concerns discussed for refzr-
<br />ence areas are also appll tab ie co control .a tea s.
<br />Historic Record
<br />She wall dt [y of the historic record approach
<br />is more difFl cu l[ [o conclusively evaluate. `!any
<br />coal mines have oroj acted Il vas of 3U or mare
<br />years. Allowing time For baszllne data collection
<br />before mi nine, and adding in the LO years s[a[u mry
<br />liability pc ri od following seeding before vegeta-
<br />tion success can be concindud, it is evident chat
<br />standards will be used for 40 [0 50 yea rs.y
<br />There Ss suf flcienc 11 [e ra CUre discussing
<br />Changes in vzge cation over similar time pc ri ods
<br />to suggest ca u[ion in using [he historic re cn rd
<br />concept. (Osborn, 1950; £,o bc:rson and Kennedy,
<br />1954; Paulsen and Ares, 1961; Hastings and
<br />Turner, 1965.) Tho vegetation potential may
<br />change over tine in response to climate, plan[
<br />and animal Cycles or other factors. I[ is pos-
<br />sible Clia[ measures obtained now will no[ be
<br />appropriate s[a ado rds to compare against 1.n 40
<br />[o ~0 years.
<br />If there Ss no sf gniflcan[ change in [he
<br />ve geta [1 on potential over time, however, the
<br />historic teen rd concept nay be eco Logically more
<br />val[d than [he ccn pa rison area concept. Because
<br />the data arc toile c[ed from [he anti re area [o br.
<br />dls[ur bed, they should reflect [he eco Lagicai
<br />va rla[ion fron [hc full ra rge of soils, [o po~raphy
<br />and microcl[mates. £u r[he r, [he data represent
<br />the area actually co be disturbed rather [lion sane
<br />such smal Ler and theoretically rep re sc r.tatlve area
<br />as vi th [he con pa rison area concept.
<br />The his [oric record also does no[ requt re a
<br />s [e[is[ical analysis For comparison between pro-
<br />posed comparison areas and the premtne areas.
<br />Further, land mono ;c Hen[ and sampling for revagc-
<br />[ation success arc only necess.a rv on the reclaimed
<br />areas. It does, however, ten ui re multiple yznr
<br />baseline sampling of [he •+ePe[acion conmun icy in
<br />New :Icxtco and Colorado and con pa rison with
<br />"normal" pro ci pi[a[Lon Ln I/[a b.
<br />ST he lla6i Lt [y pc rind nay vary de pcndl r. {;
<br />on preclplcaclnn and land use. Jhe re [f:e aver-
<br />age annual precipl[atinn C 16", a [en year
<br />liabl ll[y period Ls lmposu d. (U.B. Cnng r.:ss,
<br />l97]).
<br />_./_
<br />.. _ j,
<br />
|