Laserfiche WebLink
d) Measures which will be taken in future refuse area <br /> soil handling and revegetation operations to minimize <br /> cheatgrass competition. <br /> 11. In our review of the refuse cover depth study, we noted that <br /> perennial forbs and shrubs were largely absent from the <br /> revegetated stand, and also noted that the seeding rate <br /> specified for the Planting Treatment 2 seed mix which was used <br /> on RP-1 is rather low (only 20 PLS/square foot) . <br /> It is recommended that the seeding rate for the forbs and <br /> shrubs listed in the mix be doubled, and that consideration be <br /> given to seeding these species separately from the competitive <br /> introduced grasses ( intermediate and pubescent wheatgrass) . <br /> In addition, measures should be specified to ensure that very <br /> small seeded species such as sagebrush, sand dropseed, and <br /> alkali sacaton, and various forbs such as penstemon and globe <br /> mallow are broadcast or dribbled on the surface, and not <br /> planted too deeply. One or more additional adapted perennial <br /> forb species should be included in the mix, and rubber <br /> rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus nauseosus) , a native pioneer shrub - <br /> species could also be included in the mix at a low seeding <br /> rate. <br /> 12 . On page V-46 and V-59 of the application, annual evaluation of <br /> permanent revegetated sites, including consideration of the need <br /> for maintenance or augmentation is described. Documentation <br /> regarding such evaluations should be included in future annual <br /> reclamation reports. <br /> 13 . In several instances, narrative descriptions regarding <br /> determinations of revegetation success are somewhat unclear, and <br /> clarification is necessary. <br /> a) On page V-58, paragraph (f) states that "species <br /> diversity on revegetated sites must be comparable with <br /> appropriate reference areas at the 90% level of <br /> statistical confidence" . It is not clear how this <br /> demonstration would be made, but the statement appears to <br /> be superfluous, given the approach outlined in the <br /> remainder of the paragraph. The cited sentence should <br /> probably be deleted. - <br /> b) Paragraph (a) , under Section V.J. 3 , on page V-58 includes <br /> a reference to measuring herbaceous plant density in <br /> demonstrations of revegetation success. This measurement <br /> is not required and could be deleted. The same paragraph <br /> describes a method of herbaceous cover sampling which <br /> entails "intercept lines placed randomly in each quarter" <br /> of a sampling point. It is not clear whether sample <br /> observations would be made by a line intercept or point <br /> intercept technique, and the reasoning behind the <br />