Premium
Hardwood Tree Growth after Eight Years on Brown and Gray Mine Soils in West Virginia
Author(s) -
WilsonKokes L.,
Emerson P.,
DeLong C.,
Thomas C.,
Skousen J.
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
journal of environmental quality
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.888
H-Index - 171
eISSN - 1537-2537
pISSN - 0047-2425
DOI - 10.2134/jeq2013.04.0113
Subject(s) - hardwood , deciduous , environmental science , surface mining , soil water , land reclamation , topsoil , geology , hydrology (agriculture) , forestry , coal , coal mining , archaeology , soil science , ecology , geography , biology , geotechnical engineering
Surface coal mining in Appalachia disturbs hundreds of hectares of land every year with the removal of valuable and ecologically diverse eastern deciduous forests. After the passage of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act in 1977, coal mine operators began planting a variety of grasses and legumes as a fast and economical way to reestablish a permanent vegetative cover to meet erosion and site stabilization requirements. However, soil compaction and competitive forage species have arrested the recolonization of native hardwood tree species on these reclaimed sites. Three 2.8‐ha demonstration plots were established at Catenary Coal's Samples Mine in Kanawha County, West Virginia, of weathered brown sandstone and unweathered gray sandstone. Half of each plot was compacted. Each plot was hydroseeded with a low‐competition herbaceous cover and planted with 11 hardwood tree species. After eight growing seasons, average tree volume index was nearly 10 times greater for trees grown in the brown sandstone treatments, 3853 cm 3 , compared with 407 cm 3 in gray sandstone. Trees growing on compacted treatments had a lower mean volume index, 2281 cm 3 , than trees growing on uncompacted treatments, 3899 cm 3 . Average pH of brown sandstone was 5.2 to 5.7, while gray sandstone was 7.9. The gray sandstone had much lower fine soil fraction (<2‐mm) content (40%) than brown sandstone (70%), which influenced nutrient‐ and water‐holding capacity. Brown sandstone showed significantly greater tree growth and survival and at this stage is a more suitable topsoil substitute than gray sandstone on this site.