Laserfiche WebLink
Answer: <br />Yes my answer entails more than the content of the second part. A single example where Mr. <br />Gorham is incorrectly trying to compare a 4% difference in total vegetation cover only. Total <br />plant cover had a standard error of 2, which indicates to me that there is no difference in the <br />averaged (two years and several areas) total cover values that were used for comparison. Even if <br />there were a significant difference in overall vegetation cover of 4%, the variability and <br />uncertainty of erosion modeling greatly exceeds any difference that is generated with a 4% <br />change in only total plant cover. Claiming results of the RUSLE model demonstrated less annual <br />sediment yield from reclaimed lands compared to non -mined lands was not demonstrated (based <br />only on the variability of the total cover data). Thus, the conclusion in the sediment analysis <br />report was not supported with this simple comparison of total cover. This single example is for <br />only the "incorrectly" part of my statement (not the "selective" part) and only for the measured <br />cover values. The paragraph paraphrased in statement 2 is a partial answer to the "selective" part <br />of my response, again, specifically for only total cover. <br />The method demonstrated in these "sediment analysis" reports where only one variable is <br />slightly changed to reflect site conditions represents the first step of model sensitivity analysis <br />rather than a sediment demonstration analysis. <br />Thank you. <br />Daryl E. Mergen <br />