My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2010-03-08_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1980007
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1980007
>
2010-03-08_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1980007
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:00:50 PM
Creation date
3/9/2010 9:42:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
GENERAL DOCUMENTS
Doc Date
3/8/2010
Doc Name
Vegetation Sampling for Potential Bond Release Application
From
Savage & Savage
To
DRMS
Permit Index Doc Type
Vegetation
Email Name
JHB
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.
Page 1 of 1
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
Binns, Janet <br />From: savageandsavage@earthlink.net <br />Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 11:58 AM <br />To: Binns, Janet <br />Subject: Re: meeting regarding Phase II vegetation sampling <br />Hi Janet, <br />I agree with the content of your memo. <br />There is one point regarding the historic records approach that might require some further elaboration by me. My <br />understanding is that the "modified" historic records approach as approved in the mid-1990's for the mine required that a <br />"dry", "normal", and "wet" year be quantitatively sampled and predictive equations (ala Keenesburg) be developed for total <br />cover and herbaceous production. A species composition criterion would be developed from the species specific cover <br />data. There would be a woody density criterion based on the census data from the historic record area sampled. The <br />historic record sample area was selected as an area representative of the vegetation community that would be reasonably <br />expected to return for the mine site. Ultimately, the reference areas would be deleted from use. As of 1999, we were <br />awaiting a "wet" year to sample. <br />Time Passed <br />Last year Kathy Welt asked whether we had a "wet" year to sample (2009), and the precipitation record indicated that it <br />was not a wet year. <br />So, as a possible soultion to the conundrum of waiting for a "wet" year, I was wondering whether the Division would be <br />amenable to sampling two additional years at the historic record area, yielding a total of five years of quantitative data for <br />cover, production, species composition, and woody density, to complete a "regular" approach to estabblishing a historic <br />record for revegetation success criteria (regardless of whether one of the years was "wet" or not)? <br />The question is hypothetical for now, as I am wont to do, it just popped into my head as something to discuss. <br />Thanks for the summary, I have not heard back from West Elk on their plans. I will let you know if any of this comes to <br />fruition. <br />Mike Savage <br />-----Original Message----- <br />From: "Binns, Janet" <br />Sent: Mar 8, 2010 11:07 AM <br />To: savageandsavage(a)-earthlink.net <br />Cc: "Kaldenbach, Tom", "Hernandez, Daniel" <br />Subject: meeting regarding Phase 11 vegetation sampling
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.