Laserfiche WebLink
~~~ 0~~ <br />rnnrtmmrnral mrnniu anJ rng~nxrs <br />for the reclaimed azea, a lack of grazing pressure, and a better estimation of <br />vegetation cover and production by approximating the slope and aspect of the <br />reclaimed area. Several other areas were evaluated and rejected. The identified <br />sagebrush/grass reference area very well meets these criteria. Mountain big <br />sagebrush contributes only about 18 percent of the vegetation cover. The 3-acre <br />area lies between a fenced pasture and a steep embankment above a drainage <br />bottom. This position has appazently precluded livestock grazing over the past <br />several years as evidenced by the very good range condition. The only evidence of <br />grazing was a few observed elk pellet groups. Herbaceous production of this <br />reference area is more than 160 percent of the mountain brush reference area <br />production. IMS recommends that Sun Coal apply to the Division for approval to <br />use this new reference azea as a comparison standard for vegetation cover and <br />herbaceous production. <br />Woody plant density was not sampled in 1991. The revegetation success standard <br />for woody plant density is currently under review in an application for technical <br />revision. IMS believes it is unlikely the existing standazd of 500 plants per acre <br />could be achieved anytime soon without intervention. In time, however, with or <br />without livestock grazing woody plant density may be expected to show a long <br />term upward trend. Over time, this trend would be significantly influenced by <br />livestock grazing, drought, wildlife utilization, and perhaps fire. When the success <br />standard for woody plant density could be achieved under the existing management <br />regime is impossible to predict. <br />The reclaimed area is already capable of supporting livestock grazing and <br />significant utilization by wildlife. The area offers excellent forage and is <br />substantially more productive than surrounding areas. Limited grazing by <br />livestock would probably be beneficial. If grazing by livestock is allowed prior to <br />bond release, it should be carefully controlled to preclude over-utilization, <br />Allowance should also be made in livestock stocking rates for forage utilization by <br />elk. Future sampling for herbaceous production should be conducted before <br />seasonal livestock grazing, otherwise grazing exclosures should be erected to allow <br />for production sampling in ungrazed aeeas. <br />-4- <br />