Laserfiche WebLink
BRB-1 BRB-2 BRB-3 <br />Woody Plant <br />Density Sampling ??? ??? X (Sample Adq. <br /> For each defined <br /> Density category) <br />Success <br />Demonstration <br />Approach Narrative Narrative Hyp. Testing for cover, <br /> Supported supported production, and woody <br /> ey data by data plant density. <br />"2 of 3" specified tests <br />for species diversity. <br />3. We are somewhat confused by the discussion in the Shrub Evaluation section. It is not <br />clear whether the quantitative sampling, sample adequacy, and "formal judgement of adequate <br />stocking" approaches proposed in that section of the proposal would be applied to each of the <br />bond release blocks, or only to BRB-3. It would seem logical that intensity of woody plant density <br />sampling would be lower in BRB-1, and that formal testing for woody plant density would be <br />applied only in BRB-3 (as proposed for the other criteria). However this is not apparent from <br />the narrative, and should be clarified in the revision application. <br />4. Logical Land Management Units <br />Based on our discussions at the meeting, it sounded likely that the land ownership situation at <br />Seneca II would fit well with the bond release blocks as proposed. This issue was not addressed <br />in detail in the draft document. Please ensure that the revision application and bond release <br />application include such narrative and mapping as appropriate to delineate and describe <br />logical land management units, including practicable consideration of land ownership, in <br />accordance with Part 2, "Bond Release Area Delineation", of the Division's April 18, 1995, <br />GUIDELINE REGARDING SELECTED COAL MINE BOND RELEASE ISSUES. <br />5. Mapping <br />The text under this section of the draft document on page 3 indicates that "... no separate map <br />indication of plant community identity will be made." This statement would seem to conflict <br />somewhat with the proposed shrub evaluation approach described on pages 14-16. <br />Our understanding of the shrub evaluation procedure is as follows. Within each bond release <br />block, revegetated areas would be categorized as either "high density patch" (greater than 1000 <br />stems per acre), "medium density patch", or "low density patch". We assume that each of these <br />categories would be separately delineated on the vegetation sampling maps. We further assume <br />that the remainder of the reclaimed area, which does not show "a distinctly higher presence of <br />shrubs", would in effect constitute a 4'" mapped category ("non shrub patch"). <br />These assumptions may or may not be exactly what was intended, and clarification is <br />warranted, both with respect to the Mapping section on page 3, and the Shrub Evaluation <br />section beginning on page 14. <br />6. Sampling Design <br />a) The first sentence under BRB-2 and 3 subheading is misleading. It should be revised to <br />state that One (1) sample point will be randomly placed within each of thirty approximately <br />equal-sized subdivisions of each BRB. <br />b) It appears that the sample points referenced in this section relate to transect locations for <br />cover, production, and species density sampling (but not woody plant density sampling). It is <br />