GENERAL43132 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

b) Species Diversity i) The first couple paragraphs in this section on page 11 contain a couple references that are apparently retained from a Wyoming proposal, and should be withdrawn from the final draft proposal (e.g. references to "Chapter 1" and "Appendix A"). ii) The proposal includes 3 separate species density based tests. Diversity success would be demonstrated if success is demonstrated for 2 of the 3 tests. Alternative Test C (Presence of Native Species) includes three sub-alternatives. We agreed at the meeting that only one of these sub-alternatives (Alternative iii) would be retained in the final draft, for inclusion in the technical revision application. 9. Shrub Evaluation a) Presumably, the mapping of the various shrub density category areas will be conducted within each of the three bond release blocks, but this is not stated and should be clarified. b) It is not clear whether sampling at the intensity described will be applied within each of the bond release blocks, or whether the sampling intensity will be reduced in BRB-1, as described for cover and production sampling. This should be clarified. c) Our understanding of how the shrub density evaluation would be applied within BRB3 is described below. It will probably be the same within BRB-2, with the exception that hypothesis testing would not necessarily be employed to demonstrate success, but this will need to be clarified. As we understand the proposal, within an individual BRB, a type of stratified random woody plant density sampling will be conducted, with proportional allocation within each stratum based on size of individual shrub patches (larger patches will have a correspondingly larger number of transects than smaller patches). The defined strata will be the mapped shrub density category areas (high density, medium density, low density, and non shrub patch areas). Within each mapped stratum, a minimum of twenty belt transects will be run. The transects will be randomly located within each of the multiple patches that comprise a density category area (in the "no patch area", the transects would be presumably be randomly distributed throughout the stratum). Presumably, sample adequacy based on the formula given on page 15 would be achieved within each mapped stratum. Depending on "within stratum" variance of the mapped density category areas, a relatively large sample size might be required within each of the four strata, under this approach. Consideration of alternative sampling approaches that might allow for a smaller sample size may be warranted. An example of a possible alternative approach is described in the following paragraph. The high density category area could be sampled as one stratum, and the remaining density category areas lumped into a single, separate stratum for sampling purposes. Under this approach, it would make sense to specify two separate standards, one for the high density category (e.g. 1000 stems per acre) and one for the remainder of the BRB (e.g. 100 stems per acre). In this scenario, any of the various sample adequacy and testing approaches applicable to woody plant density evaluation in proposed Rules 4.15.11(2) and 4.15.11(3) could be applied separately to each of the two strata, as applicable, depending on the data. Please consider amending the plan to allow for the "two strata" approach, or other sample design and testing approaches that may be more efficient. d) In the narrative on page 14 and the top of page 15, the term "patch" seems to be used to described an individual shrub stand that can be observed, categorized as to relative density, and mapped accordingly, Multiple individual mapped patches (stands) that fall within the same relative density category, would constitute an individual category area (for example, "high density