Laserfiche WebLink
Don Macdonald; CEC Page 3 of 6 <br />2011; ARR Review <br />April 3, 2012 <br />subtracted out the percent cover contributions of Cheatgrass and the percent cover contributions of annual plants <br />in excess of allowed amount for the total mean vegetation cover measures. <br />The vegetation monitoring data does not report the production measured by life form (perennial grasses, annual <br />grasses, perennial forb ... etc.). Given this, the Division could not determine if noxious weeds contributed to the <br />reported production amount for each of the reclaimed areas. Similar to total vegetation cover, the allowable <br />production contribution of annual and biennial species should not exceed 10 %. Annualibiennial production in <br />excess of this amount should not be counted toward production success. For future bond release applications, <br />production should be listed by life form. <br />The results of the Divisions analysis is discussed below and the differences between the submitted 2011 <br />vegetation monitoring report and the Division's finding are highlighted. <br />Area 29 <br />Vegetation Cover <br />The monitoring report indicates the total mean vegetative cover for RA 29 was measured to be 52 %. This <br />includes 40.8% cover contributed by graminoid species and 11.2% cover contributed by forb species. The <br />relative cover percentages reported on Table 2. of the vegetation monitoring report do not appear to be correct. <br />The Division re- created Table 2. and calculated a different relative cover percentage for all of the species. The <br />vegetation monitoring report indicated graminoids accounted for 80.52% relative cover and forbs account for <br />19.48% relative cover. Based on the Divisions analysis, graminoids accounted for 78.46% relative cover and <br />forbs accounted for 21.54% relative cover. It is unclear how the reported relative cover percentage was <br />determined. <br />The reported total mean vegetative cover of 52% included contributions of Cheatgrass and several annual species. <br />According to the monitoring report, Cheatgrass accounted for 5.6% of the total mean vegetative cover (Table 2.). <br />Based on the Divisions analysis, 21.54% of the relative cover is contributed by annual species (not including <br />Cheatgrass). The Division subtracted out the percent cover contributions of Cheatgrass and the percent cover <br />contributions of annual plants in excess of allowed amount. Based off this, the Division determined the total <br />mean vegetative cover to be 39.84 %. <br />The dominant species reported at the site are Prairie Sandreed (Calamovilfa longifolia), Blue Grama (Bouteloua <br />gracilis), Cheatgrass, and Sunflower (Helianthus annuus). <br />CEC determined the 2011 success standard for cover to be 35.41% based on the precipitation measured for that <br />growing season in accordance with their approved permit. By a direct comparison, it would appear RA 29 <br />exceeds the reclamation success standard. Statistical adequacy was not considered in this review. <br />Production <br />The vegetation monitoring report indicated the total herbaceous production for RA 29 was 163.679/m ^2. The <br />production success standards for 2011 was reported to be 127.65g/m ^2 based on the approved predictive <br />equation. It is unclear if the success standard has been met for 2011 because the amount of production <br />contributed by noxious weeds or annual/biennial species was not reported. <br />Species composition <br />As indicated above, it is unclear how the relative cover percentage was determined in the vegetation monitoring <br />report. Based on the reported values, only one perennial warm season grass and one perennial cool season grass <br />