Laserfiche WebLink
<br />vas about one half grass and one half forbs with a rather wide <br />variety of species in each forage class (Table 4). Grasses in the <br />mountain brush type furnished about twice the cover that was <br />furnished by forbs, and grasses in the sagebrush type had about four <br />times the cover compared to forbs (Table 4). <br />Data for calculating statistical reliability are shown in <br />Table 5 and the analysis of variance of these data is shown in <br />Table Sa. <br />Both scientific and common names of the plant species found in <br />the study areas is shown in the Appendix Table 1. <br />Biomass of Herbaceous Material <br />• The productivity of grasses and forbs for the three vegetation <br />types present in the lease area is found in Table 4. Biomass of <br />herbaceous species was least for aspen types, and most for sage- <br />brush types. This difference however was only slight in most cases. <br />Grass biomass in all three types was considerably greater than forb <br />biomass. Productivity of individual plot samples and the analysis <br />of variance for statistical reliability are shown in Table 5 and <br />Table Sa respectively. <br />Density of Woody Species <br />In all three vegetation types there vas a diversity of woody <br />plant species (Table 4). If several shoots were derived from an <br />apparent clump or the parent plant they were counted as one. Woody <br />stems of chokecherry, serviceberry and oak were counted as one plant. <br />.• Snowberry, where sprouts or s~ .its were rather thick and there were <br /> <br />12/87 II.J-9 <br />