Laserfiche WebLink
This intensity of sampling is 1.56 times Trapper Mines's 1980 sampling <br />requirements. In fact, this is an optimistic estimate, since two pits at Trap- <br />per Mine include both cropland and rangeland, which would further increase tot- <br />al sampling requirements. <br />�^�T!..-�-rw�^^Ti^.�-�rn--�..T�� �.r'T^�.1T �!R•��l. i�"6.Tr^>T. .... _____l.. <br />Species diversity is another parameter for evaluating revegetation success <br />which needs reconsideration. Species diversity is considered by most plant <br />ecologists to be the number of plant species in a particular area and the <br />manner in which the individuals are distributed. Unfortunately, precise <br />definitions of these concepts and how they should be measured and evaluated are <br />not well agreed on. Species diversity has, in fact, been the subject of <br />intense debate amongst plant ecologists for many years and there is currently <br />no concensus on exactly what it is. Many different concepts of the components <br />of diversity andhow they should be considered have been discussed in the <br />literature (Whittaker, 1960; Pielou, 196.6; McIntosh, 1967; Whittaker, 1970; <br />Hill, 1973; Bonham, 1974; Peet, 1974; Whittaker', 1975). <br />• <br />The Shannon -Weiner (sometimes called Shannon -Weaver) index, as discussed <br />by Larson (1980) for the Office of Surface Mining, was addressed by Peet (1974) <br />who stated that the index is believed to hold some bias. In fact, all <br />diversity indices are designed to bias or weight the measured values to reflect <br />various theories of the components of diversity and their significances. The <br />danger in the use of any such theoretical index is the way the weighting is <br />done and its technical validity for the applied situation. Each researcher who <br />' <br />advances a new diversity index- professes to have developed the best and most <br />i <br />ecologically sound index. What must be remembered is that all such indices are <br />as yet theoretical, unproven, and not well accepted by ecologists. This point <br />is made by Hill (1973) who stated: "Unfortunately, when we look for a suitable <br />numerical definition, we find that no particular formula has a pre-eminent <br />advantage, and that different authors have plausibly proposed different <br />indicies." It is therefore inappropriate to apply a diversity index by <br />I <br />regulation. Controversial scientific issues cannot be resolved by regulation. <br />I <br />Further, the dimensionless number calculated by a diversity index has little <br />�^�T!..-�-rw�^^Ti^.�-�rn--�..T�� �.r'T^�.1T �!R•��l. i�"6.Tr^>T. .... _____l.. <br />