Laserfiche WebLink
III. COMMENTS -COMPLIANCE <br />Below are comments on the inspection. The comments include discussion of observations <br />made during the inspection. Comments also describe any enforcement actions taken during <br />the inspection and the facts or evidence supporting the enforcement action. <br />This was a partial inspection of the mine site. Chuck Florian and Corey O'Brien of Greystone <br />Development Consultants, Inc. were on site to conduct Phase III vegetation sampling for final bond <br />release. The purpose of the inspection was to document the vegetation sampling techniques and <br />methodology. Ground conditions were dry during the inspection, there has been little recent moisture. <br />Skies were cleaz and it was warm. <br />Mel Martinez, the landowner, was on-site at the beginning of the inspection. Chuck explained the final <br />bond release process to him. Mc Martinez plans to attend the final bond release inspection. <br />After talking to Mr. Martinez, we walked through the reclamation on the East Pit. From a distance it <br />appears to have very little plant growth, however there is a diverse collection of species growing. <br />Visually dominant species included Argentina rose, western wheatgrass, Indian ricegrass, hairy golden <br />aster, several annual forbs including red stem fillary. Also present were blue grama grass, sideoats <br />grama, green needlegrass, squirrel tail, and globemallow. Weedy species observed included annual <br />brome grasses, and field bindweed. Scattered musk thistle plants were observed on the East Pit <br />reclamation. A patch of musk thistle was observed on the other side of the creek at the base of the <br />reclaimed permit revision 1 area. The permit revision 1 area was observed from the base of the <br />hillside. Big sagebrush has become well established in this part of the permit area. <br />The dry land reference area was being sampled. This reference area is located on an undisturbed <br />hillside in a juniper shrubland with very little herbaceous growth. The consultants had determined <br />random sampling locations in the office which were approved in a minor revision to the permit. <br />Vegetation cover data was collected along the 50 meter transects at 1 meter intervals. Two cover <br />observations were recorded at each meter on both sides of the transect tape. A total of 100 <br />points/transect were recorded. Data was recorded according to plant species, bare soil, litter or rock. <br />Initial observations from four transect showed approximately six percent cover. Production data was <br />collected by clipping herbaceous vegetation in a % meterz plot at the 8, 18 and 44 meter marks. <br />Clippings were bagged from each plot by vegetation type into annual grasses, annual forbs, perennial <br />forbs, perennial grasses, biennial forbs, alfalfa and undesirable perennial forbs. The consultants weigh <br />the bags each evening to determine sample adequacy. <br />Based on my field observations, the vegetation sampling effort is being conducted as approved in the <br />permit and the recent minor revision. <br />Prior to the final bond release inspection, I recommend that the patch of musk thistle and individual <br />plants be treated to discourage further spread of this species. Treatment methods should be discussed <br />with the local government noxious weed expert. <br />