PERMFILE49643

• Permit No: C1982057A
• IBM Index Class Name: Permit File
• Doc Date: 10/4/2004
• Section_Exhibit Name: Tab 22 Revegetation Plan
• Media Type: D
• Archive: Yes

Vegetation Type
Aspen Woodland
Mountain Brush
Steep Mountain Brush
of
Affected Area*
21
28
10
Sagebrush/Snowberry 14
WW/Alkali Sagebrush 27
TOTAL WEIGHTED HERBACEOUS COVER
Total "All-hit
Herbaceous Cover
;olute* *
90.1
67.1
44.1
52.8
61 .4
Weighted
Contribution
18.9
18.8
4.4
7.4
16.6
66.1
The performance standard for cover in the sampling year 1997 would thus have been 59.4
percent 166.1 x 0.91 The reclaimed area number to be compared to this would be the "all-hit"
total herbaceous cover number. Note that for purposes of assessing the efficacy of ground
cover for erosion control, a different number-the total ground cover based on the sum of "first-
hit" vegetation plus litter plus rock plus standing dead-would be appropriate.
The nature of plant communities dominated by large woody plants is in fact that there is ample
opppourtunity to encounter, during vertical projection from above, more than one and even
several species before reacjomg the ground. In consideration of the difference in the degree to
which stratification allows for the accumulation of multiple "hits" during point projections
during sampling, a correctionis needed to adjust for the differing structure of reclaimed and
reference communities. Thus, for a given set of ERA data, a weighted average of total hits per
sample will be calculated as above and compared to the average total hits per sample for the
reclaimed area being tested. The weighted "all-hit" herbaceous cover from the ERA's will be
adjusted by that ratio.
Average vegetation cover (as opposed to only herbaceous cover) is to be used for the
revegetation areas because monitoring data at the Seneca II Mine shows that vegetation cover
in reclaimed areas is, for all practical purposes, comprised of herbaceous species. This is true
even in reclaimed areas with the highest shrub densities. The above method allows for the
effects of climatic variability to enter into comparisons. An example of a projected cover
comparison value is presented here. Using the vegetation cover data collected in 1990
baseline studies at Seneca II-W, a weighted herbaceous cover value was estimated. This value
multiplied by two resulted in an example cover comparison value of approximately 55 percent.
This example illustrates that when the standard is met, a sufficient level of cover will be
present to control erosion and stabilize the surface, particularly when one considers that little
40a Revised 1/99