My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017 (280)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1981017
>
_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017 (280)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/2/2020 11:38:24 AM
Creation date
6/25/2012 1:45:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981017
IBM Index Class Name
GENERAL DOCUMENTS
Doc Name
Bid Documents (IMP)
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.
/
197
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
l 2 . 04 . 10 Vegetation Information <br /> l 1. Comment A one-tailed T-value was used by Western <br /> Resource Development to determine sampling adequacy. <br /> A one-tailed t-value is inadequate because it does not <br /> assure that sampling adequacy has been met. The Division <br /> recalculated sampling adequacy using a two-tailed t value <br /> and found that all affected and reference areas do not <br /> meet sampling adequacy for production and shrub density <br /> except the aspen woodland reference area. The applicant <br /> must supply justification that sampling adequacy has <br /> been met. Otherwise, additional sampling will have to be <br /> done until sampling adequacy is met. <br /> 2. Comment Vegetative cover and woody plant data were <br /> collected on the reference areas in 1979, and from the <br /> affected area in 1980 . The applicant must justify <br /> the comparison of the vegetative cover data from two <br /> different years . If double sampling was done, the support- <br /> ing data should be provided. <br /> 3 . Comment The applicant must supply a table showing an <br /> estimate of the number of acres of each vegetation type <br /> disturbed by surface operations . The estimate should <br /> be based on the physiognomy of the disturbed area <br /> compared to the surrounding area. <br /> t4 . Comment Sampling adequacy for vegetative cover was <br /> done on total cover rather than herbaceous cover. The <br /> applicant must recalculate sampling adequacy using <br /> herbaceous cover. If sampling adequacy is not met after <br /> recalculating, the applicant must justify that the <br /> amount of sampling is adequate or additional sampling <br /> will have to be done. <br /> 5. Comment The applicant must state what the sizes of <br /> the reference areas are. The Spruce Fir reference area <br /> is said to be three acres but no size is given for the <br /> other two reference areas. <br /> 6. Comment The aspen shrubland reference area is mapped <br /> as being partially oak shrubland. Please clarify. <br /> 7. Comment The applicant infers that the cover, production, <br /> and woody plant density of the reference areas will be <br /> used as the success standard for determining revegetation <br /> success . The applicant should submit a discussion clarify- <br /> ing how it plans to use data from the reference areas to <br /> judge plans to use woody plant density from the affected <br /> areas as the revegetation success standard since in <br /> most cases, the woody plant density is lower on the <br /> reference areas . <br /> C_ 8 . Comment The applicant should clarify how cover was <br /> determined for trees using the point-centered quarter <br /> method. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.