Laserfiche WebLink
species combined shall co~rrbute at least 4% relative cover. In addition, no <br />single species shall contribute greater than 50% relative cover" <br />3. The 11 acre ltimrock Rine was revised in 1997 and has the following species diversity <br />standard: <br />"Using relative rover for each species, the reclaimed areas will have at least three <br />perennial grass species each with relative importance equal to or greater than 3%. <br />No individual species which provides in excess of 60% relative cover can be <br />counted toward the diversity standard. At least one of the grasses will be a warn <br />season species and at least one will be a cool season grass." <br />Additionally, it is appropriate that as the number of species is dropped from four <br />to three that the maximum relative cover value be adjusted upward from 40%. This is <br />consistent with the above examples, which allow for a maximum wntribution of ti0%, <br />50% and 60% respectively. I would recommend that the maximum value allowable be set <br />at the intermediate value of 55%. Similarly, the maximum combined relative cover of the <br />three species should be nosed from 75% to 80%, consistent with the Bear example (or <br />eliminated as in the O.C. Mme and Itimrock examples). The resulting species diversity <br />standard which I would recommend to replace the present one is as follows: <br />Using rdative cover or pr+oductiou values for each species, the <br />reclaimed areas will have at (east 3 perwnial species with relative <br />importance equal to or greater than 3%, but with all species combined not <br />to a=ued 8070 iu relative importance. Any one of the 3 species cannot <br />ezceed 55% in rtlative importance. <br />If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. <br />Sincerely, <br />Matth . xay <br />President <br /> <br />Rey ~ l ~o l ~~ ~ gy- as c~c ~ ~ lssa <br />