Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />Mr. Bill Agnew - 3 - May 20, 1991 <br />Section 7.2 - Proposal by Trapper Mine to Exclude Drill Seeding of Approved <br />Grass Species in Our 1991 Derringer Pit Topsoil Replacement Area <br />This proposal is an attempt to enhance woody plant establishment, by reducing <br />canpetitive grasses during initial establishment. Some variation of the <br />proposal could be allowable, and should not be considered as an experimental <br />practice as defined in Rule 2.Oti.2. Rather this may be a field trial as <br />described in Rule 4.15.6, since Trapper has committed to meet the requirements <br />of Rule 4.15, as previously approved in the existing permit. The proposal <br />follows the general format of the previously approved TR-46. Some questions <br />follow: <br />1. Why is only the seeding of forbs being proposed for range site C, while <br />both the seeding of forbs and woody perennial plants are proposed for <br />range sites A and B? <br />2. The Division recommends that the Dl an be modified to include the <br />following treatments within the general plot: <br />a. Seed shrubs and forbs only; <br />b. No seed; and, <br />c. Normal seeding procedures. <br />By attempting all three of these methods in the same parcel , beginning at <br />the same time, a more meaningful assessment and comparison of the <br />techniques might be provided. Please contact Larry Routten, of our <br />office, to discuss the specifics of the final p1 an. <br />3. Trapper should commit to re-seeding with proven establishment methods in <br />the event the trial fails. <br />4. Provide revised pages as needed. <br />Section 7.3 - Proposal to Reduce Allowable Topsoil Amounts on Reclaimed <br />Rangeland Areas <br />This proposal by Trapper is to reduce topsoil replaced on areas of less than <br />5 acres in size to a minimum of 6 inches. The basis of the proposal is a <br />study conducted by E. F. Re dente which reportedly demonstrated that plots with <br />six inches of topsoil displayed woody plant density and diversity greater than <br />plots with 12, 18 or 24 inches of topsoil. The data suggest that this did <br />occur to some degree; however, we would not support a change to their <br />reclamation plan based on this one study. Following are questions about the <br />plan, and reservations about aDProving it. <br />1. The basis of the proposal is to allow for greater diversity, yet no <br />information was provided which would suggest this is a problem. A <br />summary of their current reclaimed vegetation monitoring data which <br />clearly shows that diversity standards are not being met would help to <br />support a request of this nature. Our recollection of the area is that <br />diversity is not a major problem. <br />