Laserfiche WebLink
• Two reference areas have been established for the vegetation types because at <br />the time the vegetation inventory was conducted it was uncertain where mining <br />disturbances would be taking place. We nave endeavored to demonstrate the <br />comparability of each references area individually to the inventoried areas, <br />so that eicner o~ie or both reference areas for any type could be used for <br />sampling in determining revegetation success. <br />Since the vegetation survey was taken in the summer of 1980, additional coal <br />reserves and surface have been added to Pit 4. As a result, reference area 19 <br />shown on the Vegetation Map will be destroyed. However, reference area 13 <br />(also in the Mountain Brush vegetation type) will not be destroyed and will be <br />representative of mountain brush community types. <br />The ftockcastle Company is proposing to base revegetation success on only the <br />sagebrush reference area. In lieu of using some kind of weighted averages <br />based on relative acreages or whatever, The Rockcastle Company proposes to <br />• base revegetation success on a comparison between reclaimed areas and the <br />sagebrush references area (area 17). Nationale for this type of comparison <br />includes: <br />(a) The reclaimed "community will not resemble the pre-mining sagebrush com- <br />munity in terms of herbaceous species composition and production. <br />(b) The sagebrush reference area (area 17) has the highest values for cover <br />ai~u proauction, and will therefore provide the most stringent test for <br />determining revegetation success. <br />(c) The mountain brush and aspen revegetation types are not particularly well <br />suited for the post-mining land use. <br />As requested by the Division, the sagebrush reference area number 17 will be <br />used for success comparison. Therefore, it is not necessary to define types <br />of vegetation by acreage within each disturbed area. <br />• <br />II.J-lla <br />12/87 <br />