Laserfiche WebLink
a~~ o~~ <br />rmnonmrmal rnemurs and rnginrerr <br />determine moisture content. All green (field) weights were subsequently converted <br />to oven-dry weights. <br />Vegetation cover transects were located in conjunction with production quadrats. <br />Transects were 30 meters long. Azimuths from the point of beginning of each <br />transect were randomly determined. An "optical bar" was used to determine "hits" <br />at 20-centimeter intervals. The optical bar is a frame holding five specially <br />designed non-magnifying telescopes. The optical bar is mounted on a tripod and is <br />used essentially like a point frame. The telescopes are aimed vertically toward the <br />ground. The intersection of the cross-hairs in each telescope defines a "point" or <br />hit. Each hit is recorded as a vegetation species, rock, litter or bare ground. Each <br />transect comprised 50 hits. <br />Sample adequacy was calculated for the reference areas and for the reclaimed area <br />for vegetation cover and herbaceous production in accordance with the Division's <br />guideline. Sample adequacy was achieved for vegetation cover in all areas, and for <br />herbaceous production in the reference areas. Sample adequacy was not achieved <br />for production in the reclaimed azea. Sampling for production was discontinued at <br />SO quadrats. <br />A t-test was used to compare vegetation cover of the reclaimed area to the cover of <br />both reference areas. Because the mean for herbaceous production for the <br />reclaimed azea was higher than for the reference areas, no statistical test was <br />necessary for herbaceous production. <br />Results <br />Summary statistics and revegetation success criteria are shown in Table 1. <br />Vegetation cover data are summarized in Table 2. Table 2 shows absolute and <br />relative vegetation cover averaged over all transects for each sampled area. Raw <br />data for herbaceous production and total vegetation cover are shown in Tables 3 <br />and 4, respectively. <br />Variances relative to the means were larger for production than for cover, as is <br />typically the case with this type of sampling. As a result, additional production <br />quadrats were sampled in the reclaimed area. (Initial adequacy calculations were <br />based on wet weights; drying tends to reduce variance.) Production sampling in <br />the reclaimed area was discontinued after 50 quadrats without achieving sample <br />adequacy. <br />The reclaimed area had herbaceous production greater than both reference areas. <br />Utilization of the reclaimed area by elk was quite evident. It was estimated that <br />forage utilization was between 10 and 15 percent. Because the utilization was <br />uniformly light, no adjustments to the production data were made. Because of the <br />late time of year, annuals were not segregated for production sampling. IMS <br />estimates that annual fortis would comprise less than two percent of total forb <br />production. No significant occurrences of annual grasses were observed anywhere <br />within the reclaimed area. <br />-2- <br />