Laserfiche WebLink
RULE 4 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS <br />To summarize, success evaluations involve either a direct or a statistical Mest comparison of <br />appropriate parameters for each variable of interest (cover, production, diversity, or woody plant density). <br />For monitoring efforts, comparisons shall be made directly with either the reference area parameters or <br />the permitted standards to facilitate a determination of the progress of revegetation. In the case of ground <br />cover and production, comparisons shall be made against reference area data of the same year. Diversity <br />and woody plant density variables shall be compared against the standards defined above. <br />For bond release efforts, direct comparisons are made when the revegetated area mean value for a <br />given variable is greater than either 90% of the standard or the reference area mean assuming that a <br />statistically adequate sample has been collected. If a statistically adequate sample cannot be obtained, a <br />"reverse- null" hypothesis test may be employed as detailed in C.R.S. Rule 4.15.11 (2) (c). If an adequate <br />sample is obtained for a particular variable, but the mean is less than 90% of the reference area mean or <br />standard, a "standard- null" hypothesis Mest may be employed as detailed in C.R.S. Rule 4.15.11 (2) (b). <br />For the typically problematic variable of woody plant density, Colorado has implemented three <br />alternate adequacy / success evaluation methods under C.R.S. Rule 4.15.11 (3) that may be utilized in lieu <br />of those detailed under 4.15.11 (2). Until experience dictates which procedure is best (because these are <br />relatively new metrics to the science), it would be prudent to collect a minimum of 75 belt transects (at <br />least 100 m in size) as indicated in 4.15.11 (3)(b)(i). These data can then be used for the various <br />analyses / comparisons. <br />4.16 POSTMINING LAND USE <br />4.16.1 General <br />Implementation of the detailed reclamation plan as presented in Section 2.05.4 will result in a landscape <br />and vegetative cover that is equal to or better than the pre- mining condition for Rangeland/Fish and <br />Wildlife use that currently exists in the area. <br />4.16.2 Determining Use of Land <br />The pre- mining land uses for the mine and adjacent areas are shown on Map 17. Map 17 serves to identify <br />both the pre and post -mine land use designations. Colowyo is focused on re- establishment of the joint <br />land use of Rangeland/Fish and Wildlife Habitat post- mining. The narrative describing the land use of <br />the Collom permit area is presented under Sections 2.04.3 and 2.05.5. The proposed post- mining land use <br />will involve restoration to the pre- mining land use of Rangeland/Fish and Wildlife Habitat (grazingland <br />and sagebrush steppe), as described in Section 2.05.5. The land management staff of Colowyo, the BLM <br />and the State Land Board fully support Colowyo's approach to the re- establishment and enhancement of <br />multiple -use Rangeland/Fish and Wildlife Habitat focused on improved range condition and the creation <br />of wildlife habitat specific to sagegrouse brood - rearing. Copies of the correspondence confirming these <br />views have been included in this package and are identified as Figures 2.05.5 -1, 2.05.5 -2 and 2.05.5 -3. <br />4.16.3 Alternative Land Uses <br />The joint land use of Rangeland/Fish and Wildlife Habitat will be restored in a timely manner as outlined <br />in Section 2.05.4. No alternative land uses will be implemented in the reclamation plan set forth under <br />Section 2.05.4. <br />0 4.17 AIR RESOURCES PROTECTION <br />Collom — Rule 4, Page 45 Revision Date: 1/23/09 <br />Revision No.: PR -03 <br />