Laserfiche WebLink
2.0 RESULTS <br />2.1 Overall Summary <br />Overall, a total of 92 plant species were observed w+thm the ]3 areas (I1 revegeta[ed units and 2 <br />reference areas) evaluated m 2006. These consisted of 35 grass taxa, •}3 forts, and 14 shrubs (sec <br />Table A6.1 in Apf>rnd~. AB}. Table AB~1 indicates all [axa observed during heldwortr and is the only table <br />that indicates IJ rommon names, 2) historic scienbhc nomenclature, and 3) most current taxonomic <br />nomenclature. Remaining rabies do not ind(cate this latter category. On average, 32 unique plant <br />species are observable in any given revegetatibn unit and 22 m the references areas. Among these taxa <br />are an occasional noxious or mvaswe weed such as musk thistle or Japanese biome, with the latter <br />occasionally existing as more notable patches. Pue to the decreased springtime moisture; both annual <br />and perennial plant vigor antl growth nail noticeably decreased from 2005 levels. For example, <br />production in the Reference Areas m 200E was less than hal(that exhibited in 2005. <br />An analysis of the ground cover variable (Chairs 3 and 4j indicated that 4 of the 5 areas of older <br />~ecramation (7 years of aae) substantially exceed the success criterion based on 200E reference area <br />values. The one unit that fads +s by a narrow margin. Similarly, Table 1 and Chart 5 indicate even <br />greater success with regard to production on the revegetated units that are 7 years of age. With regard <br />to ground cover on areas exhibiting fora years of growth, 20nio have exceeded the reference area based <br />sw:cess criterion. There were no year two reclamation units to be evaluated in 2000. Production data <br />are oat collected from younger areas, but eventual success Is readily expected. <br />Wdh regard to diversity, Colowyo's revege[abon efforts dppear to be redsonabte as indicated on <br />Table 3 and Charts 8 and 9. As observanle on these exhibits, diversity tends to Increase with the age of <br />redamabon and to most cases should be 5uffluent for frond release testing by [he time they are of <br />stiff+oent age for such t~5bng (years 9 and lU of the bond responsibility period), As md+cated an Chart <br />9. 40°Ja of areas revegetated .n 1999 would pass such tesbng; and 4U% of 2002 revegetahon efforts <br />would currently pass diversity testing. Failures are mainly a result of reclamation not exhlbibng a <br />dominant perennial fort. However, Such failures may Simply be due to random error (t,e, sample <br />plarnment). The faihtres may be also due to low precipdanon in the early 2006 growing season at <br />i;;!uwyr,. This analysis wggests that Colowyo Is m a reasonable posdion wRh regard to the diversity <br />Vdr'ar+lE <br />Rio Onto Enorgy Amonu C Coiilwyo Mini Page 5 Ravepntatlon Munllarin8 - 2008 <br />