Laserfiche WebLink
with 13.16 percent relative cover, Symphoricarpos rotundifolius with 8.42 percent <br />• relative cover, Prunus virginiana providing 7.47 percent relative cover, Mahonia <br />repens with 5.26 percent relative cover, and Poa pratensis with 3.47 percent relative <br />cover. <br />OAKBRUSH SAMPLING AT THE WEST ELK M11YE <br />In 1982 the oakbrush community at the West Elk Mine was quantitatively sampled. <br />One oakbrush stand was to remain undisturbed as a reference area. Other oakbrush <br />stands would be disturbed during mine facilities construction. In 1995, an oakbrush <br />community at the Refuse Pile Expansion area was sampled quantitatively (Savage and <br />Savage, 1996). Values from those studies and the values from the 1996 oakbrush <br />sampling aze provided below. <br />Oakbrush Location Mean Cover (%) Herb. Production <br />(g/m2) Woody Density <br />(Ill10(hn2) <br />1982 Affected 46.24 55.7 784.0 <br />1982 Reference 58.64 53.6 533.4 <br />1995 RPE area 82.00 17.4 213.2 <br />1996 S Ivester Gulch 80.67 84.4 387.38 <br />• <br />From the data above, some significant differences are noted in the characteristics of the <br />oakbrush communities sampled. Some variation is directly attributable to different <br />quantitative sampling methods and moisture and temperature regimes during the <br />respective growing seasons. Interestingly, the 1995 RPE azea oakbrush community <br />showed the greatest cover and lowest herbaceous production and woody plant density. <br />The 1996 sampling showed cover equivalent to the 1995 area, with significantly greater <br />herbaceous production and greater woody plant density. While the 1982 affected and <br />reference azea oakbrush communities showed significantly greater densities, <br />approximately 49 percent (MCC, 1996) were seedlings (0.25-0.75m tall). In the 1995 <br />and 1996 oakbrush sampling, few seedlings were noted. <br />Though these differences exist between the 1982, 1995 and 1996 parameter values, on- <br />site observation of the oakbrush communities confirms that they aze not significantly <br />different in terms of canopy and understory composition or dominant species makeup. <br />As noted (MCC, 1996), the oakbrush community is the most extensive plant <br />community of the permit and adjacent area, and as such, occupies a diversity of niches <br />in the landscape. <br /> <br />-11- <br />