My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE128668
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
300000
>
PERMFILE128668
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:25:47 PM
Creation date
11/25/2007 6:28:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980006
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Doc Name
REHABILITATION POTENTIAN AND PRACTICES OF COLORADO OIL SHALE LANDS
Section_Exhibit Name
EXHIBIT 57
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.
/
40
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
101 <br />density values to exhibit any significant effects caused by the different <br />• levels of fertilization. <br />Effect of Fertilization on the Biomass of Grasses, Forbs, and Shrubs <br />The only significant response of the biomass of grasses, forhs, and <br />shrubs to fertilization occurred in the case of forbs in the seed <br />mixtures. Seeded forbs showed a significant interaction between fertili- <br />zation and panel with respect to biomass (Figure 37). On Panel 6 the <br />plots fertilized with 28 kg P/ha had a significantly greater biomass of <br />seeded forhs than those fertilized with 56 kg P/ha. Biomass response of <br />seeded forbs was significantly higher within the nonfertilized treatment <br />than within the highly fertilized treatment on Panel 3. The data sug- <br />gests that higher fertilization levels of phosphorus may have a detri- <br />mental effect on seed forb biomass, especially in the deeper soil-shale <br />• profiles. <br />Effect of Fertilization on the Cover of Grasses, Forbs, and Shrubs <br />The cover of grasses, forbs, and shrubs showed no significant <br />interactions or differences among fertilization treatments. The high <br />amount of variability in cover values on the subplots caused the failure <br />to see any significant cover response from the fertilization treatments. <br />Conclusions <br />1. Paraho retorted shale, without large inputs of resources and <br />management, cannot be directly revegetated within an environ- <br />mentally acceptable time period. <br />2. The data suggests that deeper soil coverings of 61 and 91.5 cm <br /> <br />• may be necessary over retorted share to establish diverse and <br />1 productive ecosystems. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.