Record Details
page 3-62
Digital Collections at BYU
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Title | page 3-62 Phase II summary report (final) : Utah Lake water quality, hydrology and aquatic biology impact analysis summary for the irrigation and drainage system--Bonneville Unit, Central Utah Project, page 3-62 |
| Coverage | Electronic reproduction; |
| Format | 3-62 text/PDF |
| Rights | Brigham Young University; http://lib.byu.edu/about/copyright/generic.php Public Domain Public |
| Language | English; eng; en |
| Relation | Central Utah Project; Western Waters Digital Library; however since no animal species are restricted to the goshen bay hardpan no species would be lost from the lake by the diking of this habitat RUBBLE HABITAT COMMUNITY A similar geographic pattern exists for rubble habitat small and large in utah lake as for the hardpan habitat provo bay does not contain rubble and so the diking of that bay would have little or no effect on this habitat type goshen bay on the other hand contains a significant amount of rubble construction of the dike in the proposed position DPR would eliminate 65.8 658 658 of rubble habitat type at compromise construction of the goshen bay dike in the A configuration would result in a loss of 28.5 285 of rubble habitat and construction of the dike in the B configuration as in plan IV would result in a loss of 19.1 191 igi in other words 37.3 373 of the rubble habitat would be saved with alternative A and 46.7 467 would be saved with the B location algal communities the rubble algal communities extant contain many of the same species as occur upon emergent vegetation and hardpan again the configuration of these communities is different than in the other habitat types table 3c ac 1 the spearman analysis of floras supports the conclusion that the rubble habitats support quite unique algal communities for the purpose of this analysis the rubble habitat was divided into large rubble and small rubble types from this analysis table 3c ac 2 it can be concluded that diatom communities occurring on large rubble habitat were not correlated with those of any other habitat type except small rubble the small rubble correlation was expected since large and small rubble habitats are essentially the same except for the variable of rock size the same pattern exists for small rubble as for large rubble no correlations between diatom communities on small rubble and other habitats occurred except for that already mentioned with large rubble 362 3 62 |
| Identifier | http://cdm15999.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/WesternWatersProject/id/9266 |
