GENERAL55971 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Table 7.-EE1l~tive races of retu n re su lttng !n 11 [e• protect net pre ser.c value (:'pY) cows Ear va rv the ccmoaris on area p cog re ms [ha[ are eculvalenc to [he tiPV casts for s historic re [o rd program. Huber of ce¢pa rison Years of Effec[Lve ra .e oft areas per plan[ baseline data return to result cae=ur1 [y coliecrlon to equivalent NPY toe[ 1 1 1.85 2 1 5.45 2 2 ).8Z ]Assumes se ve^ years base ll ne data collection for [he historic record program 2Compounded per annum; rounded [o the nearest one-[e nth lends 1o northwest Colorado. They considered land use on ch ree different plan[ comauni [fes on pre mi nl ng areas. Based on [he coot ribu[ton of eech alts [o critical ha bita[ needs of Sap octant wildlife species, they [Doti uded that one commun- ity should be reclaimed with [he sole intent of providing rangeland For sheep and ce tile. It vas tecognl red that Snctden[a1 wildlife use uou ld ell ll occur, buc all ree la mac ion eEfores would be df rested to serve only 1l ve stock. The remaining two range sites ve re dete rai ned co provide inpor- tent habtta[ for deer and elk. On these two sites, a shrub clump standard vas proposed. The s[anda rd requires a shrub clump of app roxf ma tely 1 2/3 acres in sire on every 46 acres of reclaimed land. This approach is now accepted by [he Colorado Hlned Land Reclamation Division. This kf nd of planning to serve the prf ma ry land use avoids conflicts in reclamation that tesu It when an opera [or is expe cced to reclaim any one area to serve both wildlife end live- stock. Its use, however, is dependent upon arriving a[ an acceptable re ve gecation success cr1 [e rla by means of a Ce chnl cal gul dance docu- men[. 7echnl eel guidance st ondards can, therefore, be very use (ul and Sn many cases essential. Obvl Due ly, neither the comps rl son area nor the historic record concept is applicable whe to the lend use is to be changed or where [he premine vegetation can be iap roved by changing the tompo- sitlon. these is [he use of site Index curves. Site index curves were developed as a forestry tool [n predict [ree stands, end [heir appllca [fon [o re ve gelation success standards 15 mosC likely limited [o forested areas (Avery, 1975; Ruf to r, 1582 ). Use of this concept depends on having graphed tree heights by spe tl es for varying ages. At a given age, even [hough a [ree may no[ be va to re, is could be coepared against the sice index curve to de[e rmine Sf St has ac hleved [he expected grouch. Lf the required bond liability period is comple [n and Che expected growth achieved, then bond release could be wa rran[ed. Carrying Capacity Carrying capacity as a s[anda rd is similar to using plan[ biomass, since it is calculated from S[. Hoveve r, i[ could incorporate a consid- eration for the proper use of each plant species. Carrying capacity tow id provide a cocoon denomi- nator for comparing areas reclaimed [o a composi- tion of vegetation su bs tan[ially di ffere n[ from the premine condittons. Sele c[!ng [he actual value [onside red aces pcable, and tes [ing agal nst St. though, you ld ore sent problems similar [o those encountered ~.ih Che comparison area or historic record concepts. State of the Ar[ The state of [he art concept Lmpl les [hat an operator dece rm Snes [he re vegetation success standard over [1¢e b.ised on what is possible to Aire me[1 va Con cep[a Site Index Curves Though no[ currently in use, [here are several other concepts [ha[ could be used [o seta bllsh re vegetation 6JC[PBa standards. One of 9Ru1[e r, T.L. 1982. SS[e Index curve ae a measure oC reclam.~:lon success. Unpu blfshed paper presen [cd a: :'.2 ~estcrn Recla ma [1 on Group workshop. ~DCnve r, C;lo., April 28-29, I982~. ~y.