My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP44983
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP44983
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 12:47:35 AM
Creation date
11/27/2007 10:28:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982057
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
3/27/1997
Doc Name
1996 Revegetation Monitoring Report (APP 1, 2, 4, & 5)
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.
/
36
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
Noxious Weeds <br />• Of plant species observed during 1996 sampling, none are listed state-wide as a noxious weed <br />(Thornton et al., 1974). Pennycress (Thlasoi arvense) is a restricted noxious weed in <br />Colorado (Thornton et al., 1974). Pennycress is a common species in the youngest reclaimed <br />areas, and disappears within a few years. <br />Climatic Conditions <br />Precipitation data by month from the nearby Seneca II Mine for 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, <br />1995, and 1996, as well as the 10-year average for the mine are shown in Figures is and tb. <br />As can be seen in those graphs, 1996 precipitation declined from above normal conditions of <br />1995 to closer to normal. January and February were above average with below average <br />amounts in March and July of 1996. <br />When examined from the standpoint of what climatic indices seemed to have correlated most <br />closely with vegetation response at the nearby Seneca II Mine, it has appeared that the Total <br />Precipitation for the Previous 6 months (Figure 3) or the Total Precipitation for the Previous <br />4 Months (Figure 4) were better predictors than the Total Precipitation for the Previous 12 <br />Months (Figure 2). Both Figures 3 and 4 showed that 1995 was greatly superior to other years <br />• in suggested moisture availability and this corresponds to the extremely high levels of <br />vegetation growth that were observed in 1995. 1996 shows up as somewhat less favorable <br />(previous 6 months, Figure 3) or considerably less favorable (previous 4 months, Figure 4). <br />Figure 5 indicates that 1996 was a warmer year than 1995, with total degree days about as <br />much above average as 1995 was below average. This additional warmth would have tended to <br />exaggerate any deficiency in moisture. <br /> <br />8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.