My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-06-02_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1980007
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1980007
>
2011-06-02_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1980007
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:34:07 PM
Creation date
6/6/2011 9:33:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
GENERAL DOCUMENTS
Doc Date
6/2/2011
Doc Name
Email Regarding 2011 Vegetation Sampling
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: Thursday, June 02, 2011 7:36 AM <br />To: Binns, Janet <br />Cc: KWelt@archcoal.com; RSweetwood@archcoal.com <br />Subject: West Elkt precipitation data <br />Hi Janet, <br />The data set for the Paonia 1SW is complete only through March 2011, the CSU Climate Center does not have the April <br />or May 2011 data yet. Through March 2011, the accumulation was 6.85" or 85% of normal precipitation (as defined by <br />their records). Here is the link to the 2011 Water Year precipitation records for Colorado reporting stations <br />(http://ccc.atmos.colostate.edu/water summaries//ccc.atmos.colostate.edu/water summaries/waterl1.orn). Unless there was a tremendous increase in ppt in April <br />and May (on the order of 35% above normal), it does not appear that a "wet" year is in the offing. <br />Have you had a chance to look at our proposed sampling plan? We are planning to start sampling June 8, in areas where <br />cattle will be turned in June 16, so we would like CDRMS concurrence as soon as possible. After reviewing the project <br />scope and distribution of the reclaimed areas, I propose to rank the eligible reclaimed areas by size and select random <br />points as I do for Keenesburg, ensuring proportional representation of sampling in the reclaimed areas. Selection will be <br />double random, with reclamation areas being selected randomly, and location within the reclaimed area randomly <br />selected through a grid (50'x50') of the reclaimed area. Orientation of the transects will also be randomly selected through <br />a compass bearing (randomly generated) as we always do. I will ensure that all reclamation years are represented in <br />each data set, a Phase III data set (meeting sample adequacy) and a Phase II data set (independently meeting sample <br />adequacy). As we discussed, the Phase III data will be included in the Phase II universe for sample adequacy, but not <br />vice versa. <br />Please let me know if you have any concerns, <br />Thanks <br />Mike Savage
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.