My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017 (240)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1981017
>
_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017 (240)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/2/2020 10:27:31 AM
Creation date
6/20/2012 11:20:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981017
IBM Index Class Name
GENERAL DOCUMENTS
Doc Name
Bid Documents (IMP) 1993 Permit Renewal
Permit Index Doc Type
General Correspondence
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
131
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
.0C•co-0 <br /> N� of DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES <br /> O *j David H.Getches,Executive Director <br /> MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION <br /> D"ID C. SHELTON, Director <br /> Richard D.Lamm <br /> Governor <br /> DATE: March 27, 1985 -- ` <br /> TO: Candace Thomp on <br /> FROM: Jim Herron <br /> RE: Mid-Continent ig Use Road Technical Revision <br /> I have finally completed a review of the above referenced technical revision. <br /> The issue that remained following my transfer to AML was whether woody plant <br /> density was adequately sampled. <br /> The vegetation analysis conducted, by Intermountain Soils met sampling <br /> adequacy for herbaceous cover and production, but did not for woody plant <br /> density. They stated that they felt the vegetation analysis conducted by <br /> Western Resource Development (WRD) in the same vegetation type on the opposite <br /> side of Huntsman Ridge should have been adequate. At that point I asked them <br /> for a demonstration that the two areas were similar. I never got a reply on <br /> this. Subsequently, I have taken a look at the two studies. I conclude that <br /> the two areas sampled are similar as far as woody plant density except that <br /> the WRD study encountered numerous Rubus paruiflorous shrubs while the <br /> Intermountain Soils Study found none. If this shrub is eliminated, the two <br /> study areas are statistically similar. <br /> Given that the areas are similar with the exception of the one shrub and the <br /> fact that the Division will set the woody plant density standard at a lower <br /> number than baseline, I recommend approval of this technical revision with the <br /> stipulation that the revegetation standard below be accepted by Mid-Continent <br /> or Mid-Continent submit an alternate standard for approval within 60 days. <br /> The Division's standard would be: <br /> Herbaceous Cover - 79% <br /> Herbaceous Production - 49 grams/m2 <br /> Woody Plant Density - 100 trees, 500 shurbs <br /> Species Diversity - 2 coal season grasses, 7 forbs, and 1 shrub, <br /> must make up at least 3 percent of the relative <br /> cover of the reclaimed surface <br /> If you have any questions, please see me. <br /> /fw <br /> Doc. No. 8892 <br /> 423 Centennial Building, 1313 Sherman Street Denver, Colorado 80203 Tel. (303) 866-3567 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.