Laserfiche WebLink
-3- ~ <br />calculated for production, cover,~~and t• ody plan e ~ ty. It~p~ossible that <br />the sampling method was not appropriate for the vegetation types being sampled. <br />Specifically, it is stated that 45% of the plots sampled in the oak vegetation <br />type and 40Y of the plots in the riparian type had no herbaceous vegetation. <br />Quadrats larger than the .5 square meter size used in the study would reduce the <br />variability between plots, result in fetter 0 values and lower the calculated <br />minimum sample size for parameters of herbaceous cover and production, and woody <br />plant desity. <br />S~' Pc~fh~J ~'tUv ~url~ <br />4. Certain specifics of the sampling portion of the vegetation study need further <br />,qAy~ clarification. •It-i-swot-eiear~inw-the-point-frame-was~sed-iri-determining-cover-.- <br />5vI" ,~uno-~ ma^y ^^i~nts-represen~t -i1e-5~L lei?-_~ }ang-a-transect?- <br />~n~ifd Zf so ~ha#~len2tf~f transect-was-aced?-I e ~r ac~~us-sover~ <br />,yeas--estimated-for~each,5m2-quadr-at-.: Wha~h-~n#ermatr n>~was~sed--i~r-'sample-- <br />adequacy calculations, the point frame data or the quadrat data? L' ` <br />. ~'~ ~' <br />5. Quadrat and point frame data should be presented in tabular form to allow <br />the Division to revieo-+ the statistical analyses. <br />2.04.11 Fish and Wildlife Resources Information <br />1. Data collected by ARCO indicated that cutthroat trout are present in the <br />North Fork. It is also stated that no threatened or endangered species ,a re <br />present, though the Colorado River Cutthroat is listed as threatened, Are the <br />cutthroat in the North Fork the native Colorado River subspecies, or are they <br />an introduced strain? <br />2.04.12 Farmland Investigation <br />The applicant's request for a negative prime farmland determination is granted, <br />based on the required information submitted in section 2.04.12. <br />2.05.2 Operation Plan <br />No comment during the preliminary adequacy. <br />2.05.3 Operation Plan: Permit Area <br />No comment during the preliminary adequacy. <br />2.05.3 1) <br />No comment during the preliminary adequacy. <br />2,05.3(2) Operation Descri~tion_ <br />a <br />The revised calculations for the IJest. Fcrtal parking lot fill referred to by <br />Dan Rinehart in his letter of September 3, 1980 (Appendix XXII-2) should be in- <br />cluded in the application. <br />2.05.3(3) t9ine Facilities <br />2.05.3(3)(c)(i) The applicant has not provided any information, other than plan <br />vieo-+s of the east and o+est portal areas, on the existing system of roads in <br />the facilities areas. The applicant must provide specifications for each road <br />width, road gradient, road surface, road nit, fill nn,haulm^nt, nilvrrt., drain-xir <br />