Revegetation - OSM Technology Transfer - Office of Surface Mining

More documents

Recommendations

Info

eflecting both native vegetation and grazing interseeding. The reclaimed area was revegetated to a mix of cool season graminoids and forbs. The reclaimed area was seeded in the spring of 1984 and final bond release sought in late 1996. The information from two vegetation studies prepared in support of the final bond release application (Savage and Savage 1994, 1996) is found in Table 1. While total vegetation cover from each of the areas is equivalent in both years, the distribution of relative cover is widely different. Relative cover of woody shrubs in the sage-grass dominated reference area is significantly greater in both years. Within the reference area in 1995, a very wet year in the area, the response of ephemeral forbs (present but dormant in the seed bank) to the increased moisture is evident, with a doubling of relative cover. Herbaceous production in both areas varied significantly in response to the precipitation regime, however, relative contributions of graminoids and forbs remained relatively equivalent. The most significant difference between the reference area and the revegetated area in species numbers is the lack of woody species on the revegetated area. Bacon Mine The Bacon Mine is located in El Paso County, Colorado east of Colorado Springs. This mine was operated briefly in the early 1980's and reclaimed in 1989. Approximately 29 acres was reclaimed and revegetated at an elevation of 1860 meters (6100'). The predisturbance vegetation of the mine site was warm season short grass prairie, dominated by blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis). The reference area for the mine is a small (1.2 ha) enclosure of the native Bouteloua vegetation community. The reclaimed area was revegetated to a mix of warm and cool season graminoids, forbs, and woody shrubs. Reseeding was undertaken in the autumn of 1989. Information in Table 1 for the Bacon Mine is contained in the application for final bond release (Savage and Savage 1998, 1999). Total vegetation cover on both the reference area and revegetated area is equivalent. Significant differences exist in the distribution of the cover. The reference area exhibits dominance by graminoids, not unexpected for a short grass prairie community. The reference area also contains a small component of succulents and woody shrubs, predominantly cacti (Echinocereus and Opuntia polyacantha) and yucca (Yucca glauca) and well as the opportunistic broom snakeweed (Guterrezia sarothrae). In deference to the regulatory authority, and in order to meet woody plant density requirements, the reclaimed area was seeded with relatively aggressive woody shrubs (particularly Atriplex canescens), which now contribute significantly to relative cover, as well as creating a distinctly different community structure within the surrounding short grass prairie. To assuage concerns regarding the ability to successfully revegetate warm season grasses, a number of cool season grasses were seeded (Agropyron dasystachyum, Agropyron smithii, Agropyron trachycaulum, and Stipa viridula). As with the Atriplex canescens, these species have flourished and created a significantly different community structure.
Table 1. Comparision of Reference Areas and Revegetated Areas at Three Colorado Coal Mines Location Meadows No. 1 Mine 1994 Reference Area 1994 Revegetated Area 1995 Reference Area 1995 Revegetated Area Bacon Mine 1998 Reference Area 1998 Revegetated Area 1999 Reference Area 1999 Revegetated Area Keenesburg Mine 1998 Reference Area 1998 Revegetated Area (1985) 1998 Revegetated Area (1986) 1998 Revegetated Area (1987) 1998 Revegetated Area (1995) Total Cover 52.20 47.33 68.60 60.13 53.20 60.50 59.87 59.60 45.00 40.20 44.20 43.80 33.40 Relative Cover graminoid forb succulent shrub 46.63 15.03 38.34 68.71 30.78 0.51 41.35 32.01 26.64 62.81 37.19 75.97 22.26 0.65 1.13 59.15 31.83 0.12 8.90 78.59 19.68 1.15 0.57 70.11 25.06 4.83 36.77 2.91 0.53 59.79 86.64 9.75 3.25 0.36 86.25 7.50 2.50 2.50 60.84 25.89 2.27 11.00 55.66 44.34 notes: cover values in percent (%), hebaceous production values in grams/square meter Herbaceous Production total graminoid forb 114.78 98.03 16.75 135.75 107.19 28.57 406.19 317.42 88.77 342.32 269.28 73.04 155.37 240.01 140.09 187.70 109.65 101.55 8.10 165.45 153.29 12.16 152.67 141.93 10.73 179.84 154.99 24.85 108.71 79.87 28.84 Number of Species graminoid forb succulent shrub 5 9 4 11 6 1 4 15 3 15 9 0 5 12 3 1 11 6 1 3 5 13 3 1 14 11 3 5 3 1 1 8 5 2 1 10 5 1 1 13 7 1 1 10 9
Page 1 and 2: 2000 Billings Land Reclamation Symp
Page 3: ock layers, the topography of the r
Page 7 and 8: generally greater on the revegetate
Page 9 and 10: growing season. Low and high precip
Page 11 and 12: Table 2. Comparison of Vegetation P
Page 13 and 14: REFERENCES CEC. 1998. Coors Energy
Page 15 and 16: 2000 Billings Land Reclamation Symp
Page 17 and 18: METHODS Six mining companies submit
Page 19 and 20: NRCS derived standard. The NRCS der
Page 21 and 22: SUMMARY Production, diversity and s
Page 23 and 24: SUCCESSFUL RECLAMATION TECHNIQUES A
Page 25 and 26: May, 24, 1975 (LQD Rules and Regula
Page 27 and 28: Bond release requirements for the R
Page 29 and 30: The bond release area blended well
Page 31 and 32: y the planting of the native seed m
Page 33 and 34: References Final bond release crite
Page 35 and 36: It is familiar that many succession
Page 37: soils of the NA and PCT areas (Tabl
Page 40: In the SMT and NA areas, the correl
Page 43 and 44: All the grasses performed better on
Page 45 and 46: We believe that our findings relati
Page 47 and 48: for the life spans of the dominant
Page 49 and 50: INTRODUCTION Concern about the envi
Page 51 and 52: Following agreement on the systems
Page 53 and 54: land with respect to whether it is
Page 55 and 56:
Environmental Concerns in Rights-of
Page 57 and 58:
INTRODUCTION North Dakota enacted i
Page 59 and 60:
eality by lessening the impact of a
Page 61 and 62:
compared to show the relationship o
Page 63 and 64:
the last quarter of the 19 th Centu
Page 65 and 66:
DISCUSSION The PDSI has several adv
Page 67 and 68:
Mock, C. J. 1991. Drought and preci
Page 69 and 70:
2000 Billings Land Reclamation Symp
Page 71 and 72:
size delineation is approximately t
Page 73 and 74:
Table 1. Comparison of Williams & B
Page 75 and 76:
least 2 of the 3 years that product
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
This reclaimed mineland study was d
Page 81 and 82:
surface traffic which followed the
Page 83 and 84:
Another factor that may have contri
Page 85 and 86:
since the plots were only fertilize
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
successive pit is then placed on to
Page 91 and 92:
gave the trees moisture retaining s
Page 93 and 94:
INTRODUCTION While numerous studies
Page 95 and 96:
In desert ecosystems of North Ameri
Page 97 and 98:
Physically, the reconstructed soil
Page 99 and 100:
small percentage of inhibitory soil
Page 101 and 102:
INTRODUCTION In order to address co
Page 103 and 104:
areas by soil depth were also gathe
Page 105:
T52N Powder River Coal- Rawhide T50
Page 108 and 109:
Table 2. Study Area Compared to Bre
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
STUDY AREA The study area is Seneca
Page 114 and 115:
Plant competition did not significa
Page 116 and 117:
Tilman, D. and D. Wedin. 1991. “D
Page 118 and 119:
INTRODUCTION The Montana Strip and
Page 120 and 121:
livestock. The environmental charac
Page 122 and 123:
In Montana, as well as much of the
Page 124 and 125:
REFERENCES Econ, Inc. 1983. Vegetat
Page 126 and 127:
INTRODUCTION In 1996, owners of a s
Page 128 and 129:
Table 1. Physical and chemical char
Page 130 and 131:
surface soils collected from both b
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
The Book Cliffs lie within the Pric
Page 136 and 137:
Rock Outcrop Rubbleland Topsoil Sto
Page 138 and 139:
pinyon/juniper, Douglas fir/Rocky M
Page 140 and 141:
Construction and Reclamation Sequen
Page 142 and 143:
LEGEND: Cap Layer Material Excess I
Page 144 and 145:
Step 7: LEGEND: Cap Layer Material
Page 146 and 147:
A North Slope Rock, rubble Sideslop
Page 148 and 149:
Approximate Original Contour Restor
Page 150 and 151:
Regulatory Concerns with the Experi
Page 152 and 153:
Nyenhuis, J. H. 1997. Soil resource
Page 154 and 155:
INTRODUCTION Management of soils on
Page 156 and 157:
Soil samples were collected from th
Page 159 and 160:
situ soil. Data from the Irigaray R
Page 162 and 163:
The data on soil microbial biomass
Page 164 and 165:
Page 167 and 168:
Coal Basin is characterized by uniq
Page 169 and 170:
A problem developed the summer foll
Page 171 and 172:
delivered to the DMG over one thous
Page 173 and 174:
A variety of containerized shrubs (
Page 175 and 176:
TABLE 3. OUTSLOPE SEED MIXTURE SPEC
Page 177 and 178:
INTRODUCTION Hard rock mines in the
Page 179 and 180:
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Coversoil an
Page 181 and 182:
Table 2. Effect of coversoil thickn
Page 183 and 184:
Brady, Nyle C. and R.R. Weil. 1996.
Page 185 and 186:
2000 Billings Land Symposium SUCCES
Page 187 and 188:
Traditional approaches to revegetat
Page 189 and 190:
Table 1. Survival and mean vigor ra
Page 191 and 192:
Survival (%) 100 80 60 40 20 0 �
Page 193 and 194:
Seven planting sites were evaluated
Page 195 and 196:
Table 5. Summary survival and parti
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
SPECIES SELECTION Once the NPS made
Page 201 and 202:
There is some question as to how mu
Page 203 and 204:
Restoration within Yellowstone and
Page 205 and 206:
Altitude Revegetation Workshop, No.
Page 207 and 208:
INTRODUCTION The legacy of Montana
Page 209 and 210:
METHODS AND MATERIALS The project d
Page 211 and 212:
elt seeder based on a seeding rate
Page 213 and 214:
Table 2. Anaconda Initial Evaluatio
Page 215 and 216:
Planting begins with seedbed prepar
Page 217 and 218:
REFERENCES Bradshaw, A.D.; McNeilly
show all

Revegetation - OSM Technology Transfer - Office of Surface Mining

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?