My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2010-08-30_REVISION - C1981008 (4)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981008
>
2010-08-30_REVISION - C1981008 (4)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:20:28 PM
Creation date
8/31/2010 7:43:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981008
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
8/30/2010
Doc Name
Revised Bond Release Application Part 2
From
Greg Lewicki and Associates, PLLC
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
SL12
Email Name
MLT
SB1
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.
/
72
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
www.bio-geo.com <br />Table 7. Summary and comparison of vegetation cover data measured at Dryland Pasture reclaimed <br />area and Dryland Pasture reference area, 2008. <br />Cover is mean absolute % cover unless <br />otherwise noted. Dryland Pasture <br />Reclaimed Area 2008 Dryland Pasture <br />Reference Area 2008 <br />Nonve etated* 78.2 81.7 <br />Noxious weeds* 0 0 <br />Annual grasses 4.4 0.7 <br />Annual forbs 2.4 8.9 <br />Total annual plants absolute cover 6.8 9.6 <br />Total annual plants (relative cover, = <br />absolute cover of annuals / absolute cover of <br />all vegetation excluding noxious weeds 31.1 52.5 <br />Shrubs 0 5.1 <br />Perennial grasses 14.1 0.6 <br />Perennial forbs 1.0 2.9 <br />Total mean cover of desirable plants 21.9 18.3 <br />Standard deviation of z 6.5 4.4 <br />Q =90% of the standard 16.5 <br />Number of samples 20 15 <br />Sample adequacy demonstrated Yes Yes <br />*Not counted toward total cover of desirable plants <br />As in 2007, the amount of nonvegetated cover (mostly bare ground) was similar for the 2 areas, <br />and total mean cover and the variance of the means were also similar. However, differences <br />exist between the 2 areas in plant species composition. Shrubs, mostly snakeweed, comprised <br />about 31 % relative cover in the reference area, but no shrubs were measured in the reclaimed <br />area. Total cover of perennial herbaceous vegetation was much greater in the reclaimed area <br />than in the reference area, unlike 2007 when total cover of perennial herbaceous vegetation <br />was similar between the 2 areas. The largest difference in 2008 was the much lower cover of <br />the perennial forb groundsel, apparently due to climatic conditions in spring 2008. Annuals <br />contributed substantially to cover in both areas, but unlike the previous year, in 2008 the relative <br />cover of annuals in the reference area exceeded the relative cover of annuals in the reclaimed <br />area. Therefore, all of the annuals were included in the 2008 total cover of desirable plants in <br />the reclaimed area, and no adjustment to total cover was necessary. <br />Comparison to standard. Sample adequacy was demonstrated in the reclaimed area and the <br />reference area. Mean cover in the reclaimed area (21.9%) exceeds Q (16.5%). Therefore, no <br />statistical comparison is necessary and revegetation is deemed successful for cover in the <br />Dryland Pasture reclaimed area for 2008. <br />Production, Dryland Pasture 2008 <br />2008 data for each production plot are shown in the following tables in Appendix A: <br />Table A15: Production, Dryland Pasture reference area, 2008 <br />Table A16: Production, Dryland Pasture reclaimed area, 2008 <br />18
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.