Laserfiche WebLink
T <br />3 <br /> <br />2. If Hayes' data from the refuse area is deleted and only data <br />from the areas sampled by DMG is considered, Hayes data has a mean <br />of 59.5$. A test of that data compared to DMG's also indicates <br />that the two means are the same, with a p value between .10 and <br />.20. <br />3. The portion of the Northern No. 1 Mine east of the access road <br />which was sampled by DMG (and not sampled by Hayes) had less cover <br />than the area west of the road, probably because it is a south- <br />facing slope. This would partially account for the lower mean <br />value derived by DMG. <br />4. DMG's data is based on 8 cover transects while Hayes's data is <br />based on 17 transects. Therefore, Hayes' data should be more <br />accurate. <br />If the data is broken into three groups corresponding to the three <br />reclaimed areas, the following results are seen: <br /> Hayes DMG <br />Northern Mean Cover 62.2$ 52.0$ <br />Std. Deviation 9.94 15.92 <br />No. Samples 8 4 <br />Reinau Mean Cover 55.2$ 55.0$ <br />Std. Deviation 11.19 8.72 <br />No. Samples 5 4 <br />Refuse Area Mean Cover 66.5$ No Data <br />Std. Deviation 5.74 <br />No. Samples 4 <br />Viewing the data in this manner, it appears that the only area with <br />questionable cover (in regard to the success standard) is the <br />Reinau Mine. However, there were only five transects sampled on <br />the area. During the Division's vegetation sampling in July, it <br />was apparent that a successful perennial stand of vegetation is <br />established on the site. Despite the steep reclaimed slope, no <br />significant erosion has been observed on the site since it was <br />reclaimed. <br />The apparent discrepancy between the two data sets at the Northern <br />Mine is probably due to the fact that the DMG data was collected on <br />both sides of the road while Hayes' data was only collected on the <br />side of the road with more cover. <br />cc: Janet Binns <br />c:\wp51\1x1113 <br />