My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP44174
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP44174
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 12:46:32 AM
Creation date
11/27/2007 10:10:14 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980005
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
4/15/1998
Doc Name
1997 REVEGETATION MONITORING REPORT
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.
/
41
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
• compared to 1997 Mountain Brush and Sagebrush reference area values of 33.9 and 35.4 <br />native species per 100 m2; 1996 values of 27.2 and 35.4 native species per 100 m2, 1995 <br />values of 40.4 and 37.3 species/ 100 mZ; 1994 values of 31.3 and 28.3 species per 100 m2, <br />respectively; 1993 values of 28.6 and 29.0 species per 100 m2, respectively; 1992 values of <br />33.9 and 24.6 species per 100 m2 ,respectively; 1991 values of 28.7 and 27.7 species per 100 <br />mz ,respectively; and 1990 values of 22.9 and 25.9 species per 100 mZ ,respectively. <br />Prior to 1995 it had been noted that the lowest reclaimed area values (usually the older areas) <br />had steadily increased since 1990, suggesting that invasion of the reclaimed areas by native <br />species was slowly but measurably observable. It had also been noted that the highest <br />reclaimed area values (usually the younger reclaimed areas with more diverse seed mixes, <br />more direct-haul topsoil areas, and more annual species, many of which are native) had <br />climbed slowly since 1990 and that, even though they did not yet equal the levels of native <br />species density found in the reference areas, there was a suggestion that plant succession was <br />proceeding in these reclaimed area plant communities and that equality with native areas might <br />eventually develop. In 1995, extraordinarily favorable growing conditions accompanied a rise <br />• in native species density in reference areas but a decline in reclaimed area species density, <br />probably due to the intense competitive effects of very vigorous growth of introduced grasses <br />and alfalfa in the reclaimed areas. In reference areas, the dominant species do not respond so <br />dramatically to improvements in growing conditions as do the introduced forage species in <br />reclaimed areas. These introduced species have been bred for hundreds of years in the <br />service of agriculture to respond with abundant herbaceous production it given sufficient <br />moisture. In 1996 and 1997, the native species density of the reclaimed areas has risen again <br />to approach the peak observed in 1994 sampling. <br />1997 sampling revealed 15.5 native species/ 100 mZ in the 1990 reclamation which, when last <br />measured (1994), species density of native plants was 18.3 native species per 100 m2. This <br />duplicates almost exactly the pattern observed in 1989 reclamation in 1993 and 1996, showing <br />a slight decline in initial native species density values. <br />Examination of Figure 4 reveals that, as observed in recent years, reclaimed areas approximate <br />reference areas in the prominence of native perennial (orbs and grasses. However, reclaimed <br />• areas also have more non-native species than the reference areas. <br />20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.