My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE130842
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
400000
>
PERMFILE130842
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:31:44 PM
Creation date
11/25/2007 10:42:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980005A
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
8/20/2003
Section_Exhibit Name
Tab 13 Postmining Land Use
Media Type
D
Archive
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
73
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
nutrient levels that meet these increased needs for both livestock and <br />than woody dominated native ve <br />etation <br />Again <br />the large numbers of deer big <br />and game better <br />elk <br />resent <br /> . <br />, <br />g p <br /> on reclaimed areas at the Seneca 11 Mine appear to demonstrate the utility of a herbaceous <br /> forage resource to big game. <br />Early greening spring grasses contribute significantly to mule deer diets in the Rocky <br />Mountain and Intermountain regions (Willms and McLean, 1978). Yoakum and Dasmann (1971) <br />also reported pregnant does benefit directly from the availability of green forages during <br />the critical early spring period. If the winter has been severe, the need for succulent <br />and nutritious spring forage is even more critical. Big game select out those forages <br />highest in nutritive quality when available and also those that ere greening end succulent <br />(Mar es zczak et al., 1981 and Armstrong, 1975). 7o a lesser extent, these benefits will <br />benefit other wildlife species. <br />Various studies show mule deer end elk prefer succulent forages more than woody species <br />during various times of the year. Miller et al. (1981) found big game selected up to 52 <br />percent grasses in their diets during the period of March through June. Forbs accounted <br />for 38 percent. The big game in this study also tended to congregate in areas where <br />palatable forage occurred (again, similar to Seneca reclaimed areas). The study site was <br />in forested areas with brush understory and clear cut areas seeded with palatable <br />herbaceous forage. While these opened areas covered only 31 percent of the area, 66 <br />percent of the big game diet came from them. The value of forage plants available to deer <br />and elk is an important consideration in addition [o structural characteristics of a <br />habitat. Carpenter et el. (1979), in a study near Kremmling, Colorado, found mule deer <br />selected a large amount of grasses and forbs during the winter months of January and <br />February when snow cover was minimal. Over 50 percent of their diets consisted of grasses <br />and forbs in a 30-day grazing trial. In a study by uillms et al. (1979) on big sagebrush <br />range in British Columbia, it was found deer selected 68 percent of their early spring <br />diet as grasses and forbs. <br />While big game and livestock will benefit from the increase in herbaceous cover, various <br />bird species and small mammals will also benefit from the addition of this habitat <br />component. Food and nesting cover will be increased for small mammals and some birds. <br />Large statured herbaceous species such as basin wildrye have been included in the seed mix <br />• to enhance this cover component. Basin wildrye will also provide winter grazing and cover <br />when snoupack increases (Majerus 1992). Raptors and other predators will have increased <br />13-7 Revised 01/15/93 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.