Laserfiche WebLink
b)Approximately 3540 acrer of rpoil that had been graded in 2002 in the upper "tl"Pit in thegeneral area of the aspen <br />test plotr war not topsoikd and needed Additionally, approximately 15 acrer of the `B "pit that had been graded, or <br />graded and toproiled in 2002, war not needed in 2003. <br />Please address the masons for the failure to complete topsoiling and seeding of these auras <br />during 2003, as inquired under the inc/amation timelrames speci&ed m the approved permit. <br />Response: The scheduling and maps have been submitted in PR-04. The area is toproiled, seeded, and <br />topographic diversity (hummocks) introduced. This work will be deazly depicted in the 2005 t1RR. <br />5. We have a few guertionr regarding Table 03.2 `Seedmixer Ured in 2003 Permanent Seeding Operationr': <br />aJ The Seedmix referenced it Seedmix # 1, but no rhrrrb peaer are lirted Seedmix # 1 in the approvedpe~mit includes three <br />rhrub rpecier (mountain big ragebr:rrh, mountain rnawbe»y, and antelope bitterbrushJ. Please address this <br />discrepancy, and include appropriate documentation ingarding seeding rates and methods for <br />the three shrub species in Seedmix #1 seeding areas. <br />Response: These species were either hand seeded in the shrub establishment areas and/or hand mixed in the <br />hopper of the grass drill. These species are ordered as "shrub separates" so that more attention can be given to <br />their use. <br />b) The approved mix lirh "Sadar"rtreambank wheatgrarr and "Sear" bluebunch wheatgrarr. Neither of there it induded in <br />the Table 03.21irt in the A)3R, although beard/ers bluebunch wheatgrarr it listed and may have been included ar a <br />rubrtitution for "Secar"bluebunch. Also, in the approved Seedmix, the reeding rate for dupine it rpecifred ar 1 lb. PIS per <br />acre, which would be approximately f 0% of the herbaceous component of the mix, by weight. Table 03.2 indicates that <br />lupine war only 0.75% of the herbaceour component. Please address the masons for these apparent <br />discmpancies between the approved Seedrnix#1 and Ta61e Q3.2. <br />Response: 1 16 of Lupine per acre <br />Some of these species and varieties <br /> <br />error. The actual rate is 0.1 Ib/ac if <br />at the time of planting. <br />/ c) For tlx herbaceour component only, the reeding rote lirted in thepetmit for Seedmix # 1 it approximately lO lbr/acn PLS <br />(drill rate) and 201brlane PLS (broadcast rate). The rate indicated on Tabk 03.2 of thelll{R it approximately 15 <br />lbr/acre PLS, but there was no dirtinction indicated between drill and broadcast rates. Please clarify the rate used <br />I ~ in drill seeding and the rate used In broadcast seeding ofSeedmix 1. <br />~~ ! Response: The broadcast rate is actually greater, SCC estimates it is closer to c Broadcast seeding <br />rate an arm strength. <br />e drill rate is higher too, judging by the 2004 actual field experience. The rates may vary from the permitted <br />amounts, however the actual rate is generally higher. The final analysis of success in the diversity and vigor of <br />the species which grow. <br />d) On page 4 of the report, there it reference to ertablirhment of a shrub rite that was hand needed with the rhrub mix (Mix S <br />was rzferenced but we arrume this erroneour and that Mix 6 war intended). Please provide the species h'st and <br />seeding rate information for the seedmix applied to the shrub site in 2003, for inclusion in the <br />ARR, and please delineate the site on the reclamation map. <br /> <br />Response: Mix 5 is in the list used at Yoast. It was , in fact, Mix 6 that was used at II-W. These ate identical <br />mixes. <br />