Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />These values were compared to the pooled mean values for the reclaimed areas. For total <br />ground cover and total production, the values from the reclaimed areas were greater than the <br />success standards, thereby negating the need for any additional statistical evaluation. The <br />conclusion for these two parameters was that the revegetation was successful. The total vegetation <br />cover value for the reclaimed areas was slightly less than the standard. These two values were <br />statistically tested using the approach shown on page 23 of the guideline and were found to be not <br />statistically different. Therefore, the standazd for total vegetation cover was also attained. <br />' Shrub Density. The shrub density success standard that was stipulated in the permit was <br />that 2000 stems of woody plants would be established on the reclaimed areas. Woody plant <br />density was statistically adequately sampled and was found to be 13,933 individuals per acre in the <br />' 1984 reclaimed azea and 3026 individuals per acre in the 1988 reclaimed azea. Both aeeas met or <br />exceeded the stipulated requirement for mean total shrub density. <br />' Species Diversity. The species diversity standards established by stipulations in the <br />original site pemrit documents listed the following requirements for successful revegetation: <br />' 1 Two shrub species were to be established <br />2 Two cool season grasses were to be established <br />3 One fort species was to be estabhshed <br />' Noneone fo~the bovespecies was to account for more than 20 percent of <br />/~esb'S}e~~ the total cover by ~ species <br />5 None of the above species was to account for less than 3 percent of the <br />c ~ e °4~ ~ total cover by all species. <br />In the 1984 reclaimed area, four shrub species were encountered in the sampling. This <br />satisfies requirement No.l listed above, however one shrub species (big sagebrush) accounted for <br />63.6 percent of the cover by all species, and the other three species each accounted for less than <br />one percent of the cover by all species (Table 2). Three cool season peremial grasses (both native <br />' and introduced) were encountered in the sampling and each accounted for more than three percent <br />and less than 20 percent of the total cover by all species. This satisfies requvements 2, 4 and 5 for <br />cool season grass species. Ten forb species were enwuntered in the sampling. This satisfies <br />' requirement No.3, however none of the species accounted for as much as three percent of the cover <br />by alt species. <br />Tn the 1988 reclaimed azea, seven shrub species were encountered in the sampling and one <br />species (big sagebrush) had more than three percent relative cover and less than 20 percent relative <br />cover (Table 4). This satisfies requirement Nos.l, 4 and 5 listed above. Nine cool season <br />peremial grasses (both native and introduced) were encountered in the sampling. One of the <br />' species (thickspike wheatgrass) accounted for more than three percent and less than 20 percent of <br />the total cover by all species and a second species (Russian wildrye) accounted for more than 20 <br />percent of the cover by all species. This satisfies, in part, requirements 2, 4 and 5 for cool season <br />' grass species. Five forb species were encountered in the sampling. This satisfies requirement <br />No.3, however none of Ure species accounted for as much as three percent of the cover by all <br />species. <br />' A complete list of all species observed on the site is presented in Table 13. From these <br />results, it can be seen that numerous species occur throughout the reclaimed areas. <br />1 <br />' -S- <br />