My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE72403
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
800000
>
PERMFILE72403
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:21:59 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 12:17:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982057
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Doc Name
Letter Pertaining to Vegetation Baseline
Section_Exhibit Name
TAB 10 APPENDIX 10-1
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.
/
6
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
• Rule 2.05.4(2)(e) -Reclamation Plan <br />Sample adequacy was not met for production in mine area sagebrush, mixed brush, or <br />aspen types. A relatively low number of m sample plots (15 in sagebrush study area, 10 <br />in mixed brush refernce area, and 15 in fhe aspen study area) were clipped. Resampling <br />will be required. An estimate of tree density for the aspen Type is not included in the <br />application. <br />It is not clear in the application whether baseline vegetation data was derived soley from <br />areas to be disturbed by mining. "Mine Ared', "Permit Area", "Study Ared', and "areas <br />to be disturbed by mining" are all referred to in the vegetation sampling section of the <br />permit. From Exhibit 10-I, it appears that sampling points were located in areas which <br />will be disturbed within the permit area, but sampling points were also located within <br />aspen and mixed brush types approximately I mile south of the permit area in the <br />southern portion of the study area. Apparently, no sampling was done within aspen types <br />that will be disturbed. Please clarify this. <br />RESPONSE: Per agreement with CMLRD (D. Matthews, April 1983), herbaceous <br />production was resampled in 1983 in the aspen, mixed brush, and sagebrush mine site and <br />reference areas. A maximum number of production samples, as agreed with CMLRD, <br />were collected as follows: aspen mine area and reference areas - 30; sagebrush and <br />mixed brush on the mine area - 50; sagebrush and mixed brush on the reference areas - <br />• 30. See Tab 10 Methodologies and Table 10-3. <br />Tree densities for the aspen type were inadvertently omitted from earlier studies. Thus, <br />as a part of the 1983 field work, which included sampling the aspen type from The mine <br />area for cover, herbaceous production, and woody plant densities, tree densities were <br />measured. See Table 10-3 and Appendix 10-2. <br />The evolution of the Seneca II-W Mine Plan since initial vegetation studies were <br />conducted in 1974, resulfed in vegetation baseline data which was collected from areas <br />outside the mine area as iT is currently proposed. As presented in the current permit <br />application, the 1983 field work consolidated efforts so that the data presented is almost <br />exclusively from the current mine area. The exceptions to this are the reference areas. <br />Per agreement with CMLRD, the sagebrush and mixed brush reference areas established <br />during the 1979 field season were maintained. See Exhibit 10-I for locations. After a <br />considerable search, the 1979 location for the aspen reference area could not be found. <br />Thus, because the aspen type was being resampled for all parameters, it was decided That <br />. anew aspen reference area would be located and sampled in 1983. The aspen reference <br />area is located outside and immediately adjacent to the permit boundary as proposed in <br />this application. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.