Laserfiche WebLink
As previously stated in the process of weighting, a reliable estimate of variance is lost. Therefore a two - <br />sample t -test was completed against each of the two reference areas using the logic that if BRB -5 passes <br />against each reference area individually, then the reclaimed area would thus pass the weighted <br />herbaceous production performance standard. <br />A two - sample t -test of Reverse Null Hypothesis with Satterthwaite's Adjustment of the assertion that the <br />2011 BRB -5 allowable herbaceous production is indistinguishable from Mountain Brush Reference Area <br />allowable herbaceous production is as follows: <br />( 0,9 : s ! r <br />*r', <br />2195,0 — (0,9.3 55.1) <br />_ = 13,78 <br />i 11.4614.6 + (0.� .. • 309914.9) <br />30 50 <br />(09 5 , a <br />11 <br />- 1 <br />11119654,6 (0,31 . 309914.91 ) <br />30 + 50 <br />153.2 + + (7,9 • 117.:1.6) <br />= 41.33 c• <br />30- 1 30- 1 <br />Since critical t = 0.851 (one - tailed, alpha = 0.2, 41 dfsat) and t, (13.78) is greater than this critical value, <br />the hypothesis of no difference is rejected and reclamation success for Phase IN herbaceous production <br />relative to the 2011 Mountain Brush Reference area is demonstrated. <br />A two - sample t -test of Reverse Null Hypothesis with Satterthwaite's Adjustment of the assertion that the <br />2011 BRB -5 allowable herbaceous production is indistinguishable from Sagebrush Reference Area <br />allowable herbaceous production is as follows: <br />21 <br />