My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1990-10-03_REPORT - C1980005
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Report
>
Coal
>
C1980005
>
1990-10-03_REPORT - C1980005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/14/2021 2:45:13 PM
Creation date
11/27/2007 7:03:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980005
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
10/3/1990
Doc Name
REVEGETATION MONITORING REPORT
Annual Report Year
1989
Permit Index Doc Type
REVEG MONITORING REPORT
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
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
• examined 1987 Wolf Creek (Area F) and 1987 Wadge (Area H) also had low litter cover with <br /> 28.5 and 22.2 percent cover, respectively. Litter in the Mountain Brush Reference Area was <br /> very low at 18.1 percent, but litter in the Sagebrush Reference Area at 33.2 percent was <br /> comparable to that in most of the ungrazed, older reclaimed areas. <br /> The lowest bare soil abundance in reclaimed areas was observed in the 1980 and 1982 Wadge <br /> reclamation (Area C, 6.9 percent cover) and the Wadge Pasture (Area D, 7.4 percent cover). <br /> Note, however, that Area C had relatively high litter cover, while Area D had very low litter <br /> cover. Other reclaimed areas ranged from 9.6 to 17.5 percent bare soil cover, except the <br /> youngest where bare soil occupied 26.3 percent (1987 Wolf Creek, Area F) and 32.6 percent <br /> (1987 Wadge, Area H). Bare soil cover in the Mountain Brush and Sagebrush Reference Areas <br /> was very low at 1.7 and 3.6 percent, respectively. <br /> Rock cover was generally very low, except in the pre-law areas (Area A. 8.8 percent rock <br /> cover) and in the 1987 Wolf Creek (Area F, 6.2 percent rock cover). In all other reclaimed <br /> areas, there was no measurable rock cover. <br /> In the older reclaimed areas (Areas A,B,C, and D), introduced perennial grasses and(orbs, <br /> especially alfalfa, are the most prominent contributors to total vegetational cover. This trend is <br /> notceable but less developed in newer reclaimed areas(Areas E,F,G, and H). <br /> Cover in the Mountain Brush Reference Area was dominated by Gambel's oak (41.7 percent <br /> cover) and serviceberry (15.2 percent cover). Less abundant were the shrubs chokecherry <br /> (2.9 percent cover) and mountain snowberry (4.7 percent cover). The only herbaceous species <br /> making substantial individual contributions to cover were elk sedge (3.3 percent cover) and <br /> Agassiz bluegrass (2.4 percent cover). Litter comprised 18.1 percent cover,while bare soil <br /> was only 1.7 percent cover. <br /> In the Sagebrush Reference Area, cover was dominated by the shrubs basin big sagebrush (11.1 <br /> percent cover) and mountain snowberry (9.3 percent cover), the grasses sheep fescue (12.4 <br /> percent cover) and Agassiz bluegrass (4.8 percent cover), and the forb timber milkvetch (6.0 <br /> percent cover). Litter was abundant at 33.2 percent cover, and bare soil comprised 3.6 percent <br /> • cover. <br /> 8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.