Laserfiche WebLink
• K, CEC) by a contract soils testing laboratory using standardized methods and protocols <br />for those processes. Root zone soil samples were collected during the growing season for <br />gravimetric soil moisture determination. Soil samples were also submitted to the soils <br />testing laboratory for determination of other chemical constituents. <br />A large portion of the Seneca mines was covered with aspen, serviceberry, and other <br />native plants prior to mining. Aspen is unique in that it is a common species in the <br />western United States, but it has not been planted successfully in wildland environments. <br />Developing methods to do so and gaining a better understanding of factors that limit <br />planting success of aspen in high-altitude semi-arid environments will be of great benefit <br />to the mining industry in the West and Northern US and should aid State regulatory <br />authorities in permitting and enforcement of coal mine activities. This project was a <br />cooperative effort with contributions from U.S. Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research <br />Station (RMRS), the DOI OSM, Peabody Energy and Seneca Coal Company, and the <br />State of Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety. Findings will provide <br />information to Peabody Energy and the State of Colorado for reforestation and re- <br />0 vegetation of reclaimed lands. The methods tested in this study are all commercially <br />available and in use, and can be adapted to reclamation projects elsewhere if shown to be <br />successful here. The findings of this study are not limited to Colorado, and the planting <br />techniques tested can be used for reclamation throughout the U.S. Tractor mounted <br />planting equipment to replicate the techniques tested here are generally available in rural <br />forested areas throughout the U.S. <br />Results <br />Results of this study confirm our hypothesis that best survival and growth were <br />achieved with the use of landscape fabric for aspen. Irrigation of aspen also increased <br />some growth parameters, but the response was less from irrigation than that from <br />landscape fabric. Serviceberry did not respond to landscape fabric or to irrigation <br />treatment. It is likely that the aspen responded more to treatment since these plants were <br />larger and less subject to transplant shock than the smaller serviceberry. Very little <br />. growth was evident on the serviceberry plants, and it expected that first year response