My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP12439
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP12439
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:43:10 PM
Creation date
11/27/2007 12:53:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981014
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
5/28/1992
Doc Name
1991 ANNUAL RECLAMATION REPORT SOUTHFIELD MINE COLO COAL MINING & RECLAMATION PN C-81-014
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.
/
25
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
RECOMMENDATIONS <br />Monitoring of the revegetation status of the 1983 and 1987 reclaimed sites <br />at the Southfield Mine site suggests that while both sites appear to satisfy the <br />apparent revegetation success standards with respect to total plant cover and <br />forage production, two potential deficiencies with respect to the revegetation <br />success are associated with these sites. These are in the areas of shrub density <br />and species diversity. Unfortunately, both deficiencies might be more a result <br />of changing regulatory polices than anything else. <br />With respect to woody plant densities, evidence suggests that both <br />reclaimed sites are deficient to the apparent standard. However, there has been <br />a great deal of regulatory evolution associated with this standard. As pointed out <br />previously, the definition of woody plants has changed since this mine and the <br />original reclamation plan were prepared. Considerable confusion has been <br />associated with what constitutes a woody plant. Half shrubs were originally <br />considered to be woody plants and now are not considered as such. <br />Unfortunately, the Division's present and past Vegetation Guidelines, while they <br />have attempted to address this confusion, have not totally claritied the issue. <br />They contain several examples of half shrubs which they state should not be <br />included in "density sampling." Following the recommendations found in these <br />Guidelines, the shrub density standard for the Grassland Reference Area is 4.20 <br />plants per 50 square meters. This value includes Plains Prickly pear a species <br />apparently considered by the Division as a shrub but by many botanists as a <br />half shrub. Excluding this species from the counts, the shrub density standard <br />would become 1.50 plants per 50 square meters. This question needs to be <br />resolved by the Division before it can be adequately determined exactly what <br />needs to be done with respect to addressing these apparent deficiencies with <br />respect to revegetation at the Southfield Mine with respect to shrub density. <br />14 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.