Advertisement

Environmental Management

, Volume 13, Issue 5, pp 631–638 | Cite as

Productivity equation for reclaiming surface mines

  • Jon Bryan Burley
  • Charles H. Thomsen
  • Norm Kenkel
Research

Abstract

This article addresses the development of an agricultural productivity equation for predicting new soil (neo-sol) plant growth potential in Clay County, Minnesota, USA. Soil factors examined in the study include percent organic matter, percent slope, percent rock fragments, hydraulic conductivity, electrical conductivity, pH, topographic position, available water-holding capacity, bulk density, and percent clay. Squared terms and two-factor interaction terms were also examined as possible regressors. A best equation was selected that had a multiple coefficient of determination of 0.7399 and has five significant regressors and intercept withP.0001. The regressors are hydraulic conductivity, percent slope squared, bulk density times percent rock fragments, electrical conductivity times percent rock fragments, and electrical conductivity times percent organic matter. The regressors predict soil suitability for a general crop model. The crops included in the model are wheat, oats, barley, soybeans, sugar beets, sunflowers, and grasses/legumes.

Key words

Landscape architecture Environmental planning Postmine land-use design 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature cited

  1. Bauer, A. M. 1982. Manipulating mining operations to create wildlife habitats: a pre-mining planning process. Pages 41–43in W. D. Svedarsky, and R. D. Crawford (eds.), Wildlife values of gravel pits. Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Minnesota, St. Paul. Miscellaneous Publication 17.Google Scholar
  2. Burley, J. B., and C. H. Thomsen. 1987. Multivariate techniques to develop vegetation productivity models for neo-soils. Pages 153–161in 1987 symposium on surface mining, hydrology, sedimentology and reclamation. University of Kentucky, Lexington.Google Scholar
  3. Doll, E. C. 1985. Use of soil parameters in evaluation of reclamation success. Pages 26–32in 1985 mine-land reclamation research review. Land Reclamation Research Center, North Dakota State University, and the Northern Great Plains Research Center USDA.Google Scholar
  4. Doll, E. C., and N. C. Wollenhaupt. 1985. Use of soil parameters in the evaluation of reclamation success in North Dakota. Pages 91–94in Bridging the gap between science, regulation, and the surface mining operation, ASSMR Second Annual Meeting. Denver, Colorado.Google Scholar
  5. Doll, E. C., N. C. Wollenhaupt, G. A. Halvorson, and S. A. Schroeder. 1984. Planning and evaluating cropland reclamation after stripmining in North Dakota.Minerals and the Environment 6:121–126.Google Scholar
  6. Espenshade, E. B., Jr. (ed.). 1974. Goode's World Atlas, 14th ed. Rand McNally and Company, Chicago.Google Scholar
  7. Jacobson, M. N. 1982. Soil survey of Clay County, Minnesota. USDA, SCS and Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station.Google Scholar
  8. Kendall, M. 1980. Multivariate analysis. Macmillan, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Lohse, J. S., P. Giordano, M. C. Williams, and F. A. Vogel. 1985. Illinois agricultural land productivity formula. Pages 24–39in Bridging the gap between science, regulation, and the surface mining operation, ASSMR Second Annual Meeting. Denver, Colorado.Google Scholar
  10. Neill, L. L. 1979. An evaluation of soil productivity based on root growth and water depletion. MS thesis. University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri.Google Scholar
  11. Pierce, F.J., W. E. Larson, R. H. Dowdy, and W. A. P. Graham. 1983. Productivity of soils: assessing long-term changes due to erosion.Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 38:39–44.Google Scholar
  12. Plotkin, S. E. 1986. Overseeing reclamation: from surface mine to cropland.Environment 28(1): 16–20, 40–44.Google Scholar
  13. Verbyla, D. 1986. Potential prediction bias in regression and discriminant analysis.Canadian Journal of Forest Research 16:1255–1257.Google Scholar
  14. Vories, K. C. 1985. Proof of vegetative productivity: research needs. Pages 145–149in 1985 symposium on surface mining, hydrology, sedimentology, and reclamation. University of Kentucky, Lexington.Google Scholar
  15. Walsh, J. P. 1985. Soil and overburden management in western surface coal mines reclamation—findings of a study conducted for the congress of the United StatesOffice of Technology Assessment. Pages 257–264in Bridging the gap between science, regulation, and the surface mining operation, ASSMR Second Annual Meeting. Denver, Colorado.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jon Bryan Burley
    • 1
  • Charles H. Thomsen
    • 2
  • Norm Kenkel
    • 2
  1. 1.Colorado State UniversityFort CollinsUSA
  2. 2.University of ManitobaWinnipegCanada

Personalised recommendations