Laserfiche WebLink
2.0 Results <br />Data collected from the CSU shrub plots in 2011 were analyzed with the same procedures as were <br />instituted in 2010, providing for a greater statistical emphasis. Overall, data exhibited similar trends as <br />were seen in 2010 and so discussions are similar. All research plots (plots 1 -10) will be sampled in 2012 <br />and will provide the best opportunity to determine whether current data interpretations yield merit, and <br />will provide an opportunity to further evaluate the stability of the population. Current data still exhibit <br />elevated variability and it appears that equilibrium may not occur for another few years. As expected, <br />there are differences in variability between the populations inside versus outside the fence, with the plots <br />inside the fence generally exhibiting less variation over time. Charts B -1 and B -2 display some of the <br />variability found in these two populations. As demonstrated in Charts B -1 and B -2, the plots inside the <br />fence are more closely grouped compared to the plots outside the fence. The increase in variation can <br />most easily be explained by browsing pressure exerted by elk and deer and the resultant impact on <br />woody plant density and cover. The effects of controlling browsing in this experiment can be viewed <br />from two different angles. First, a focus on data from within the fence provides inferences about how <br />population dynamics would develop without pressure from ungulates. However, adequately controlling <br />browsing mine -wide is unrealistic and so it's important to understand how population dynamics react <br />under browsing pressure. Those plots outside the fence provide this second focus: a means to study the <br />impacts of ungulate browsing on mine -wide shrub population dynamics. <br />A closer look at Charts B -1 and B -2 indicate the relationships between woody plant density and <br />shrub cover and woody plant density and perennial herbaceous cover, respectively. Across all plots and <br />treatments there is fair correlation between woody plant density and shrub cover (Rz = 0.49, Chart 131) as <br />expected, with the overall trend being that as woody plant density increases so does shrub cover. A <br />statistical relationship between perennial herbaceous cover and woody plant density is almost non- <br />existent (R2 = 0.05, Chart 132) at this stage of population growth, with no strong trend displayed across <br />all plots and treatments. If this trend continues, it will indicate little relationship between these two <br />variables at this stage of the woody plant population. However, when individual plots are compared (in <br />most cases, but not all) there is an inverse relationship between shrub cover and perennial herbaceous <br />cover (Charts B -35 — B -54). In other words, if there is an increase in shrub cover there is usually a <br />decrease in perennial herbaceous cover, or vice versa, albeit the strength of this relationship varies <br />depending on the plot treatment and location regarding inside versus outside the fence. <br />Cedar Creek Associates, Inc. B - 3 Colowyo Mine <br />2011 Revegetation Monitoring Report <br />