My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP31644
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP31644
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 12:07:50 AM
Creation date
11/27/2007 5:59:06 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981029
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
11/7/1988
Doc Name
1988 REVEGETATION MONITORING MEADOWS 1 MINE SUN COAL CO
Permit Index Doc Type
REVEG MONITORING 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.
/
11
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
METHODS <br />Sampling methods used at the reclaimed mine site were based on those outlined in the Meadows <br />No. 1 Mine revegetation plan (Sun Coal Company 1986). These methods are fully described in Cook and <br />Bonham (1977) and Chambers and Brown (1953). Therefore, only details specific to this study are repotted <br />here. <br />Sampling points were located within the revegetated area using distances and compass bearings <br />selected from a random numbers table. Although four slightly different seed mixtures were used to revegetate <br />the mine site (swale, bench, upland, and steep upland), no attempt was made to stratify sampling according <br />to the four seed mixtures because the revegetation plan stipulates that the entire revegetated area is to be <br />treated as one site (Sun Coal Company 1956, p. 334). Hence, the revegetated area was assumed to bc, and <br />sampled as iC it was, a homogeneous vegetation community. <br />Vegetative cover was estimated using 100-foot long, point-intercept transects. To prevent overlap <br />of transecu, a random compass bearing (174°) was selected and used for orienting each transect. Ground <br />wver at 1-foot intervals was classified b}' plant species, lichens, litter, soil, or rock and recorded on da[a <br />forms. Absolute and relative vegetative cover was determined for each species encountered. <br />Herbaceous production was estimated using the harvest method. A 1-square-meter quadrat was <br />established midway along each point-intercept transect. To ensure consistency in the collection of production <br />data, the use of transecu to locate harvest quadrats was continued after cover data collection had ceased. <br />All vegetation within each quadrat was clipped as close to ground level as practical, bagged by species, and <br />weighed in the field with a spring scale (for estimating sample adequacy). Gusty winds made weighing of all <br />samples in the field impractical, so Cinal weights were obtained by air-drying the samples and reweighing. <br />The per-acre herbaceous productivity for the revegetated area was estimated from the final dry sample <br />weighu. <br />Woody plant density was determined by counting all woody plant stems observed within 50 foot by <br />50 Foot quadrau. Each quadrat Was located midway along the point-intercept transect on the side opposite <br />the production quadrat. The quadrat was searched and all individual woody plant stems were recorded by <br />species. The total per-acre number of stems for the revegetated area was estimated from [he stem count <br />data. <br />The number of samples taken for each parameter had to be sufficient to ensure confidence in the <br />data. Using the SO percent confidence level defined in the revegetation plan, the following equations were <br />used to determine sample adequacy for each estimated parameter: <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.