My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV12754
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV12754
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 1:23:43 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 10:36:01 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981025
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
3/25/1994
Doc Name
NORTH THOMPSON CREEK MINE SPECIES DIVERSITY STANDARD TR
From
HAYES ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INC
To
J E STOVER & ASSOCIATES
Type & Sequence
TR16
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.
/
7
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 /> <br />North Thompson Creek Mine: <br />-Justification for changing the species diversity success standard <br />Present standard: <br />The present standard, as stated on p. 4-64 of the permit document is as follows: "Species <br />diversity in the Mountain Shrubland Dry Phase will be considered acceptable if sampling <br />demonstrates that three species of cool season grasses, two species of (orbs and three species of <br />shrubs and/or trees have been established. In addition, no one species shall comprise less than 3% <br />of the total cover or more than 40% of the total cover. This standard will be acceptable for all <br />areas (i.e., refuse pile, truck dump, etc.)." Thus a total of 8 species are required to be found on <br />site having a relative importance (cover) of between 3 and 40%. <br />Technical Revision 14 -Relevant History <br />7'he present species diversity standard was developed for the entire mine site at a time <br />when three communities were considered to exist on the site. Each of these communities had its <br />own applicable standards with the exception that the species diversity standard was comprehensive <br />to the enure site. Prior to the submittal of TR-14, it was determined that the requirement of <br />separate success standards for two of the three communities was unreasonable in light of how <br />small they were. The two communities in question were represented on site by 0.6 and 1.3 acres. <br />Because both communities represented less than 10 acres and less than 5% of the disturbed area, <br />both were considered to be minor communities in congruence with page 3 of the Division's <br />Vegetation Guidelines ( ui lines for Compliance with Land Use and Vegetation Requiremenu of <br />approved the removal of specific cover, production, and woody plant density standards applying to <br />these communities. What was overlooked, however, was that the species diversity standard was <br />designed to take into account these two minor communities as major ones. Thus, consistent with <br />the changes made in 1992, the species diversity should be changed as well to reflect that only one <br />major community exists on the mine site and that only one reference area applies toward the <br />determination of success. <br />Formulating a new species diversity standard: <br />The actual process of arriving at a suitable diversity standard is outlined on pages 13 and <br />14 of the Division's Vegetation Guidelines. Using the recommended method, the standard should <br />be based on the pre-mine or affected community cover data. As per p. 7 of the Guidelines, <br />"Species composition is based on all hits on vegetation" rather than on first-hit data. Thus, the <br />relative cover that should be used to draw up a diversity standard is that based on multiple hit <br />data. <br />Chart 3.2.2-1 on page 27 of the baseline survey contains the cover data collected for the <br />affected Mountain Shrubland Dry Phase community. The cover summarized at right in the chart <br />is the absolute cover based only on one-hit data. The chart does include (in parentheses) multiple <br />hits beyond the first hit. However, the baseline survey does not include any calculated relative <br />cover percentages. Enclosed as Table 1 are the relative cover percentages based on the multiple <br />hit data listed in the baseline report. <br />As Chart 1 shows, species in 1980 that had a relative cover greater than 3% in the affected <br />area included Amelanchier a[nifolia, Cercocarpus montanus, Purshia tridentata, Quercus <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.