Conclusions
Current traditional best reclamation practices struggle to establish and
sustain a native landscape due to challenges often associated with soil
compaction and aggressive non-natives. Alleviating soil compaction due
to surface mining often times takes place years to decades after
reclamation had ceased and/or frequently emphasizes the establishment of
woody plant communities. We investigated how combinations of alternative
reclamation practices, applied during the process, affected native
grassland species composition, and influenced KBG establishment.
Generally, our findings indicate when G/F seed mixtures are combined
with TSR (plus mulch) intentionally planted native species will be well
represented and PR resistance will be lower compared to other
combinations of reclamation practices. Those treatments planted to G and
reclaimed with SSR (plus mulch) had higher PR at all depths and were not
as strongly associated with planted native species, but these treatments
had less KBG cover compared to other reclamation combinations.
These findings provide valuable insight into early stages of ecological
recovery for reclaimed grasslands as a function of these alternative
reclamation practices. However, it is important to note that PR values
for the reference site (i.e., standard practices), at all three depths,
were not different from any of the alternative reclamation practices.
Yet, ecological recovery of newly reclaimed landscapes takes time, and
as time progresses some of the beneficial conditions created by our
alternative practices could be enhanced or regress, changing the current
trajectory. Therefore, continued monitoring of these difference
reclamation combinations is important for understanding the effects soil
properties have on reclaimed grasslands plant communities to determine
if intermittent maintenance is necessary long-term.