Laserfiche WebLink
<br />cover in reclaimed areas generally runs 1 5' percent or greater ~Isee 1987, 1988, 1 989 Seneca II I <br />' ~ ~ ~ ~ Revegetation Monitoring Reportal; The cover standard detailed above also solves the problem ~ • ~ ' <br />,. of'a.cover standardderivedfrom only the herbaceous component of a. reference .area heavily <br />' .dominated by woodyvegetation which is too low, or a standard derived from the'sartie ~ ' <br />reference area:using~herbaceous and woody vegetation cover, combined, ~which.is unreasonably <br />. ~; ~ ~ high. ~ ~. .. .. <br />•Revegetation success for cover in the reclaimed portions of Dry Creek will be evaluated by ~ ~ ~ <br />comparing the premining baseline vegetation cover value for 'the Dry Creek-mesic drainage <br />,type to the cover, in the revegetated areas along. Dry Creek. Designated mesic drainage. i <br />reclamation areas `in ~ the II-W -South Extension' area will be evaluated ~ by' 'comparing 'the <br />.~ premining baseline vegetation cover values for these~areas~to the cover in the revegetated ~ ~ . <br />mesic drainage .portion in the II-W South Extension area."~ . The ~ revegetated area' shall be <br />considered acceptable if they are not less than 90 percent of the baseline cover value within <br />the applicable reference area with 90 percent .statistical confidence.. This method. of <br />comparison will'be used because of thesmall,premining acreage of mesic drainage along Dry <br />' ~ .Creek 'and the. limited area of reclaimed drainage' within the II-W,South Extension area. ~ '. ' <br />'. <br />,,. <br /> <br />- 40b - Revised 7/99 . . <br />