Laserfiche WebLink
Exhibit 5 <br />Appendix A <br />Vegetation Methodology <br />Community Type Mapping <br />The various associations of plants (communities) extant within the study area were stratified <br />following athree-step process of 1) use of existing baseline mapping, 2) ground verification efforts, and <br />3) final boundary delineation. Original baseline mapping was obtained by Cedar Creek from Bowie <br />Resources, LLC. Ground-truthing, correction, and redefinition of these preliminary delineations was <br />completed during Summer vegetation surveys with all corrections noted on field maps. As necessary, <br />corrections to preliminary sample site designations occurred concurrently with these ground verification <br />efforts. <br />Following ground-truthing activities and verification of actual on-the-ground resources at over 100 <br />locations, the vegetation study area was re-delineated to a minimum polygon size of approximately 0.25 <br />acres (10m x 10m resolution), taking into account the various field corrections. There were occasional <br />discrepancies between existing baseline mapping and ground verification by Cedar Creek biologists, <br />however, these discrepancies were corrected during final mapping. During this entire process, only two <br />major plant associations or communities were documented. These two communities were: 1) Mountain <br />Shrub and 2) Juniper Woodland. A third minor community (Wetland) was also documented during field <br />work but was far too small to facilitate formal quantitative sampling. <br />Sample Lavout <br />The sample layout protocol for the 2006 vegetation evaluations is a procedure designed to better <br />account for the heterogeneous expression of vegetation cover within the various community types while <br />precluding bias in the sample site selection process. By design, the procedure is initiated randomly, and <br />thereafter, samples are located in a systematic manner, along grid coordinates spaced at fixed intervals, <br />e.g. 50 ft. (see Figure A-1, lower left corner and Map E5-1). In this manner, "representation" from across <br />each community type is "forced" rather than risking the chance that significant pockets are entirely <br />missed, or overemphasized as often happens with simple random sampling. <br />c~~~ ¢~~~ ~~s®c~a~~ irrc. Page A-1 Exhibit 5 - Appendix A -Vegetation Methods <br />