2008Journal American Society of Mining and ReclamationRequires access

COAL MINE RECLAMATION IN THE SOUTHERN APPALACHAINS: COSTS OF FORESTRY VERSUS HAYLAND/PASTURE

K. Baker, Jay Sullivan, J. A. Burger, G.S. Amacher

Open publisher page 5 citations

Abstract

The two most common options for post-mining land uses in the southern Appalachians are hayland/pasture or forestry. Hayland/pasture has become the predominant reclamation type due to strict regulation standards requiring quick and dense erosion control by herbaceous cover. Recently, more landowners have become interested in returning mined land to an economically valuable post-mining land use. Current research has provided the biological and technical information needed to reclaim mine lands to productive forest stands and achieve bond release. Cost information though has been lacking or variable at best. The purpose of this study was to understand the processes of reclamation for both forestry and hayland/pasture, and calculate detailed cost estimates for both reclamation types. Total costs of reclamation were determined using a cost- engineering method in conjunction with Office of Surface Mining Regulation and Enforcement bond-calculation worksheets. In all states analyzed, pasture reclamation was more costly on a per acre basis. In Ohio, reclamation costs differed by only $50 per acre between pasture and forestry reclamation. On the high end, reclamation costs differed by nearly $500 per acre for pasture versus forestry in West Virginia. Grading costs have the greatest impact on the difference between forestry and pasture reclamation. Forestry reclamation should involve only grading the site with one dozer pass to prevent compaction of minesoils which inhibits tree growth. Pasture reclamation requires more grading passes to prepare the seedbed, requiring four passes. Herbaceous seeding costs were higher for pasture reclamation due to higher application rates, but differences were not as substantial as the cost of grading. Fertilizer and lime costs were not substantively different between forestry and pasture reclamation. These cost estimates provide useful tools for mine operators and landowners to determine the most economical and suitable post-mining land use for their individual property.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The two most common options for post-mining land uses in the southern Appalachians are hayland/pasture or forestry. Hayland/pasture has become the predominant reclamation type due to strict regulation standards requiring quick and dense erosion control by herbaceous cover. Recently, more landowners have become interested in returning mined land to an economically valuable post-mining land use. Current research has provided the biological and technical information needed to reclaim mine lands to productive forest stands and achieve bond release. Cost information though has been lacking or variable at best. The purpose of this study was to understand the processes of reclamation for both forestry and hayland/pasture, and calculate detailed cost estimates for both reclamation types. Total costs of reclamation were determined using a cost- engineering method in conjunction with Office of Surface Mining Regulation and Enforcement bond-calculation worksheets. In all states analyzed, pasture reclamation was more costly on a per acre basis. In Ohio, reclamation costs differed by only $50 per acre between pasture and forestry reclamation. On the high end, reclamation costs differed by nearly $500 per acre for pasture versus forestry in West Virginia. Grading costs have the greatest impact on the difference between forestry and pasture reclamation. Forestry reclamation should involve only grading the site with one dozer pass to prevent compaction of minesoils which inhibits tree growth. Pasture reclamation requires more grading passes to prepare the seedbed, requiring four passes. Herbaceous seeding costs were higher for pasture reclamation due to higher application rates, but differences were not as substantial as the cost of grading. Fertilizer and lime costs were not substantively different between forestry and pasture reclamation. These cost estimates provide useful tools for mine operators and landowners to determine the most economical and suitable post-mining land use for their individual property.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 5 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The two most common options for post-mining land uses in the southern Appalachians are hayland/pasture or forestry. Hayland/pasture has become the predominant reclamation type due to strict regulation standards requiring quick and dense erosion control by herbaceous cover. Recently, more landowners have become interested in returning mined land to an economically valuable post-mining land use. Current research has provided the biological and technical information needed to reclaim mine lands to productive forest stands and achieve bond release. Cost information though has been lacking or variable at best. The purpose of this study was to understand the processes of reclamation for both forestry and hayland/pasture, and calculate detailed cost estimates for both reclamation types. Total costs of reclamation were determined using a cost- engineering method in conjunction with Office of Surface Mining Regulation and Enforcement bond-calculation worksheets. In all states analyzed, pasture reclamation was more costly on a per acre basis. In Ohio, reclamation costs differed by only $50 per acre between pasture and forestry reclamation. On the high end, reclamation costs differed by nearly $500 per acre for pasture versus forestry in West Virginia. Grading costs have the greatest impact on the difference between forestry and pasture reclamation. Forestry reclamation should involve only grading the site with one dozer pass to prevent compaction of minesoils which inhibits tree growth. Pasture reclamation requires more grading passes to prepare the seedbed, requiring four passes. Herbaceous seeding costs were higher for pasture reclamation due to higher application rates, but differences were not as substantial as the cost of grading. Fertilizer and lime costs were not substantively different between forestry and pasture reclamation. These cost estimates provide useful tools for mine operators and landowners to determine the most economical and suitable post-mining land use for their individual property.

Key concepts: Land reclamation, Pasture, Forestry, Environmental science, Coal, Agroforestry, Geography, Archaeology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
COAL MINE RECLAMATION IN THE SOUTHERN APPALACHAINS: COSTS OF FORESTRY VERSUS HAYLAND/PASTURE — Research Paper | ScholarLens