My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2012-01-09_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981014
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1981014
>
2012-01-09_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981014
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:47:17 PM
Creation date
8/16/2012 10:36:02 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981014
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
1/9/2012
Doc Name
Responses to Concerns from the Vento Group
From
Janet Binns
To
File
Permit Index Doc Type
General Correspondence
Email Name
JHB
DIH
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.
/
10
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
Answer: Specific species cover results from year 3 and year 7 interim monitoring of the vegetation are <br />not specific to TR39. This question applies to review of the 2006 and 2010 Vegetation Monitoring <br />Reports. <br />During 2006 sampling (year 3 after seeding) rabbitbrush accounted for 0.93% cover (2.19% relative <br />cover). Most perennial species measured three years after seeding are relatively small. Rabbitbrush is a <br />woody species and would have been relatively small at the 2006 sampling event. Rabbitbrush accounted <br />for 7.33/100 M plants per acre on the Vento reclamation area during the 2006 sampling event. <br />The 2010 sampling (year 7) event measured 4.20% cover attributed to Rabbitbrush (6.97% relative <br />cover). One would expect a part of this increase is due to the increase in size of the rabbitbrush plants. <br />One expects a seven year old shrub to be larger in size than a three year old shrub. The 2010 sample <br />date reports 5.70/100 M plants on the Vento reclamation area. This reflects a decrease of 1.63/100 M <br />rabbitbrush plants on the Vento area. A t -test is an acceptable statistical analysis tool (Rule 4.15.11(2)). <br />The interim monitoring sampling was not sampled to adequacy, nor was it required to be. An adequate <br />sample of woody plants may present a considerable different result. <br />23. "Also the increase in sagebrush was greater from 2006 to 2010 than rabbitbrush. The entire west side of <br />the refuse pile is covered with it." <br />Response: The Division is not sure if this is a question or just an observation. This comment is not <br />specific to TR39. The west side of the refuse pile also has a good stand of four -wing saltbrush. The <br />Division does not have concerns with sagebrush on reclaimed areas. <br />24. "We have one grass species - Western Wheatgrass" <br />Response: The Division is not sure if this is a question or just an observation. This comment is not <br />specific to TR39. Referring to the 2010 Vegetation monitoring report, thirteen (13) perennial grasses <br />were sampled. Three of these species had greater that 3% relative cover; Western wheatgrass, Side -oats <br />grama, and Blue grama. All three of these species are native to the area. Side -oats grama and blue <br />grama are warm season species <br />25. "We have one tree species- Juniper" <br />Response: The Division is not sure if this is a question orjust an observation. This comment is not <br />specific to TR39. <br />26. "We have two "noxious" shrub species- sagebrush and rabbitbrush." <br />Response: The Division is not sure if this is a question or just an observation. This comment is not <br />specific to TR39. The Division verified with the State Department of Agriculture and Fremont County <br />Weed Control Department. Neither, rabbitbrush or sagebrush is considered noxious weeds by either <br />agency. <br />27. "Erosion control -The area where the rilling needs to be identified so we can keep track of it better. <br />George cannot see it" <br />Response: This concern is not specific to TR39. <br />The Division has noted minor rills on the refuse pile during regular inspection. The Division inspectors <br />note the condition of rills they encounter and note if it appears if the rills are active or healing, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.