My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP32084
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP32084
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 12:08:15 AM
Creation date
11/27/2007 6:07:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982057
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
3/28/2007
Doc Name
2006 Annual Revegetation Monitoring Report
From
Seneca Coal Company
To
DRMS
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.
/
164
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
the earliest monitoring (2004) at which time the total was 1392 stemsfac, most of which was big <br />sagebrush. In the intervening two years there has been a winnowing away of about half of the <br />sagebrush perhaps as a result of competition. <br />In the 2004 reclaimed area, the start for woody plant density is slow, with only 48 stems/ac. 2004 <br />was anear-average year for moisture and may have seen too much competition for young shrub <br />seedlings to tolerate. <br />SHRUB CONCENTRATION AREA DENSITIES <br />Tables 27 through 39 contain the data resulting from the sampling of shrub concentration areas at <br />the Seneca IIW Mine in 2006. Average shrub density values ranged from 49 stems per acre <br />(Block I) to 8984 stems per acre (Block J), but generally were below 90% of the current shrub <br />density standard (1800 stems per acre). <br />Species Diversity and Composition <br />The data illustrated in Figure 5 show that the 2004 reclamation (the youngest) has the greatest <br />amount ofannual/biennial plant cover and that the proportion of vegetation cover comprised of <br />these plants is distinctly less as reclamation age increases (i.e. 1999 reclamation has the least <br />annual/biennial cover of all the reclaimed areas). The 1999 annual/biennial cover (7-year old <br />vegetation) is about'/, that of the 2004 reclamation (2-year old vegetation). Using the Figure 5 <br />illustration as typical, cover by native perennial forbs makes a substantial increase in cover over <br />the period of maturation from two to seven years old. <br />The distribution of species density by lifeform (Figure 4) shows that the 1999, 2002 and 2004 <br />reclaimed areas are more similar to the reference areas than would appear to be the case from <br />the lifeform distribution of relative cover (Figure 5). This is important in that it shows that the <br />basic components of the original ecosystem have indeed been returned and that it is a matter of <br />relative proportions and successional status that separates the reclaimed from the native <br />vegetation. Perhaps the largest difference with regard to species density is in the native <br />perennial forbs category, where native areas (at least the most extensive native types of <br />Mountain Brush and Sagebrush) tend to have half again to twice as many species of native <br />perennial forbs per 100 sq.m. 2006 data for total native species density in the 1999 reclamation <br />areas was 22.8 species per 100 sq.m. in 2006, up more than 10 species per 100 sq.m. since year <br />2000 (12.1 species per 100 sq.m.; ESCO 2002). Average total species density on the reclaimed <br />areas exceeds that of all reference areas except aspen (Figure 4). <br />Sample Adequacy <br />A summary of sample adequacy calculations for the parameters of cover, herbaceous production, <br />and woody plant density is presented in Table 25 (Appendix 1). As can be seen in this table, the <br />18 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.