My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP05349
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP05349
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:36:16 PM
Creation date
11/26/2007 11:03:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1994082
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
3/29/2002
Doc Name
2001 Annual Reclamation Report
From
Seneca Coal Company
To
DMG
Permit Index Doc Type
Annual Reclamation Report
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.
/
26
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
• seen during the survey. Six herds of mule deer (31 animals) were also observed. Additional <br />animals recorded included five sharp-tailed grouse and three coyotes (Canis Iatrans). Elk herds <br />ranged in size from I to 32 animals, and averaged 5.9. Elk were widely distributed throughout <br />the area, but were notably absent from the north-central portion. Elk were sparse in the <br />southwest, southeast, and extreme northwest corners of the area (Exhibit 1). The predominant <br />habitat types in those portions of the survey azea, except in the southwest, aze agricultural fields <br />and flat grasslands. <br />Ninety-four percent (627) of the elk observed were in mountain brush habitat. A few elk <br />were also observed in trembling aspen stands (22) and sagebrush grasslands (16). <br />TWC has surveyed the.expanded area eight times: December 1994, each January from <br />1995 through 1998, and each February from 1999 through 2001. The very [ow density recorded <br />during the December 1994 survey (Figure 1) was probably due to poor ground conditions (patchy <br />snow cover) and the use of a fixed-wing aircraft for t}re~ survey. Both of those.factors affected the <br />observers' ability to detect animals and resulted in under counting. Considerably more elk were <br />observed a month later, January 1995, when the azea was surveyed from a helicopter. Observed <br />• elk density in January 1996 was substantially higher.than the densities recorded during previous <br />surveys. Snowfall from the onset of winter through January 1996 was considerably greater than <br />in other years. Excessive snow probably pushed more animals out of the higher. elevations of the <br />Williams Fork Mountains and north.into the survey azea in January 1996. Both snowpack and <br />elk density were relatively low during surveys in 1997, 1999, 2000. Although snow fall was also <br />minimal during winter 1997-1998, the density of elk in the azea during January 1998 was the <br />second highest ever observed. Despite the abundance of snow on the ground during the 2001 <br />survey, elk density in the expanded azea was similar to that observed in the previous year. <br />Herds were widely distributed over the expanded area during each of the eight surveys. <br />However, herds were always conspicuously absent from the agricultural fields and grasslands in <br />the northwest, north-central, and southeast parts of the area. Because there are no tall grasses or <br />shrubs in those habitats, the vegetation is typically covered by snow in winter. Consequently, <br />there is little readily available winter forage for big game in those portions of the survey area. <br />• <br />2001 Yoast Mine Wildlife Monitoring Page 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.