Laserfiche WebLink
• transects (especially samples 4 and 12) extended into an area intensively sown with shrub seed <br />(Direct Shrub Seeding area, see sampling results from 1995 in ESCO 1996) where very high <br />densities exist (more than 24,000 stems per acre in sample 4). Even without those two very <br />high values, the mean was over 800 stems per acre. <br />The most abundant species were bitterbush, prickly rose, and snowberry. Serviceberry, <br />Woods' rose, and big sagebrush were also prominent. The abundant and diverse presence of <br />shrubs in this area bodes well for the future if perennial herbaceous competition does not <br />become overwhelming. The abundant presence of native perennial herbaceous species likewise <br />is also a good sign for the liklihood of woody species' establishment since they are generally less <br />competitive than introduced perennial herbaceous species are. Several years' monitoring data <br />in this area indicate that the perennial plant communities are developing slowly, perhaps at a <br />rate similar to successional patterns in native communities of the area. <br />Species Diversity and Composition <br />Species density reflects the total number of species present (richness) in 100 square meters <br />one meter to either side of the 50m cover sample transects. Species density data are <br />summarized in Table 4 . Mean species density of 32.5 species/ 100 m2 was similar to the <br />1992 reclamation sampled at the Seneca II mine (35.4 species/ 100 m2, see ESCO 1997) and <br />like that area, exceeded the value of 29.8 species/ 100 m2 observed in the Seneca II Sagebrush <br />reference area. Mean native species density actually slightly exceeded that of the Seneca II <br />1992 reclaimed area. <br />Sample Adequacy <br />A summary of sample adequacy calculations for the parameters of cover and woody plant stem <br />density is presented in Table 6 (Appendix 1). Although there was no attempt to achieve sample <br />adequacy during this monitoring study, minimum sample size was calculated fo general <br />information. As can be seen in Table 6, sample adquacy was not achieved for either cover or <br />shrub density. <br /> <br />7 <br />