My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE58849
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
600000
>
PERMFILE58849
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:01:07 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 6:02:42 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982057
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Doc Name
1990 VEGETATION BASELINE REPORT SENECA II-W MINE & EXPANSION AREAS
Section_Exhibit Name
TAB 10 APPENDIX 10-9
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
99
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />ESCO Associates Inc. was contracted by Peabody Coal Company in July 1990 to conduct baseline <br />vegetation studies in areas surrounding Peabody's existing Seneca II-W Mine, hereinafter refered to as <br />the Expansion Area, as well as limited studies for the purpose of comparison within the existing Seneca <br />II-W Mine Permit Area. The area is located about eight miles south of Hayden, in Roult County, <br />Colorado. The purpose of these studies was collection of vegetation baseline data to support a permit <br />revision document needed to expand mining and support facilities into several adjacent areas. Field <br />studies were initiated on July 12, 1990 and were concluded on August 4, 1990; supplemental (field <br />studies around Pond 009 were concluded by September 29, 1990. <br />Iur~i:Qr~ <br />Study Areas and Sampling Locations <br />The study area and sampling units are shown on Exhibit 10-1, Pre-Mining Vegetation Types and Sample <br />Location Map. These study area included the five parcels shown and numbered on Exhibit 10-1; of <br />these, numbers 1, 3, and 5 were subject to quantitative sampling, as specified by Peabody in their <br />Scope of Work. Areas number 2 and 4 were mapped and qualitatively examined for similarity of <br />composition to Areas 1, 3, and 5, and evaluated for the presence of threatened or endangered plants. <br />Subsequent to the initiation of quantitative sampling in the expansion area, it became apparent that <br />additional lands in area number 2 (Exhibit 10-1) could be disturbed in conjunction with the construction <br />and operation of Pond 009. Consequently, the Aspen Woodland, Mesic Drainage, and Mixed Brush types <br />potentially to be affected in this area were sampled for cover until statistical adequacy was achieved. <br />Within each of sampling units 1, 3, and 5, the Peabody-specified number of samples were located <br />randomly using numbered grid cells and random numbers taken from a random numbers table. These <br />locations were placed as closely as possible in the field. Final location of production quadrats was <br />accomplished by a blind throw; cover and density sample transacts were located and oriented using a <br />blind throw of a meter stick. <br />Cover Semolina <br />Cover data were collected using a point intercept method in which data are tabulated as interceptions of <br />a point (optically projected using aCover-point Model 3) with plant species, soil, litter, or rock. The <br />• <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.