My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP25262
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP25262
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:56:54 PM
Creation date
11/27/2007 4:09:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981021
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
9/18/1989
Doc Name
BOURG VEGETATION STUDY WALDEN COAL CO PN C-81-021
From
MLRD
To
CATHY BEGEJ
Permit Index Doc Type
ANNUAL RECLAMATION REPORT
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br /> <br />Memo to Cathy Begej <br /> <br />-2- <br />September 18, 1989 <br />TABLE 1. Baseline cover values from 1980 sampling at Walden Coal Company's <br />Bourg Mine <br />Total Total <br />Area Sampled Plant Cover Litter and Rock Ground Cover Bare Soil <br />Dry Grassland <br />Reference 25.9 8.7 34.6 65.5 <br />Affected 9.8 3.3 13.1 86.9 <br />Big Sagebrush <br />Reference 31.8 34.6 66.4 33.6 <br />Affected 31.4 39.8 71.2 28.8 <br />Keammerer report <br />TABLE 2. Revegetated area cover values from 1989 sampling at Walden Coal <br />Company's Bourg Mine <br />., <br />Total Total <br />Area Sampled Plant Cover Litter and Rock Ground Cover Bare Soil <br />Seeded in 1984 23.7 <br />Seeded in 1988 16.1 -~ <br />Combined 1984 & 18.4 <br />1989 <br />46.7 ~ 4 70.3 ~ ~ 29.7 ' °~ <br />57.4 3 3 73.6 26.4 -; s <br />54.2 72.6 27.4 <br />MLRD Sampling <br />Seeded in 1984 29.7 39.3 68.9 31.1 <br />If WCC wishes to use the Stoecker-Keammerer report to back up a request for <br />Phase II Bond Release, then several concerns with the report arise as follows: <br />1. There are no raw data with the submittal, Therefore, the Division cannot <br />verify results, tables, statistics or conclusions. <br />2. No sample adequacy calculations were performed. We would also need raw <br />data to independently verify these calculations. <br />3. No results are given for woody plant density. <br />4. There are no results from the reference areas for reclamation success <br />comparisons. <br />5. Vegetative production was not sampled. <br />6. Sample dates were not specified. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.