Laserfiche WebLink
2.0 SAMPLING METHODS <br />2.1 Sample Layout <br />The sample layout protocol for the revegetation evaluation is a procedure designed to better <br />account for the heterogeneous expression of the multiple seedings within the various reclaimed areas <br />while precluding bias in the sample site selection process. By design, the procedure is initiated randomly, <br />and thereafter, samples are identified in a systematic manner, along grid coordinates spaced at fixed <br />intervals, e.g. 100 ft. (see Figure 1 and Maps 2 through 13). In this manner, "representation" from <br />across the entire reclaimed area is "forced" rather than risking the chance that significant pockets (or <br />seedings) are entirely missed, or overemphasized as often occurs with simple random sampling. Sample <br />site selection within the reference area occurred in a similar manner, although the grid dimensions were <br />altered accordingly to accommodate the different size. To maximize the probability of representation <br />from the smaller units as well as to address the extreme variation (due to the influence of cheatgrass and <br />shrub domination), an elevated number of samples (approximately 100 sample points in the Greasewood <br />Comparison Revegetation Areas and 120 in the Shadscale Comparison Revegetation Areas) were <br />systematically collected from each of the two combined reclamation units. This also provides <br />proportional distribution across all reclaimed areas thereby providing a "weighted" representation as well <br />as a better capture of variation. Each of the revegetation units were systematically sampled with <br />ground cover transects, co-located with an herbaceous production sample, and sampled for woody plant <br />density with a belt transect. Furthermore, the Shadscale and Greasewood Reference Areas each received <br />20 ground cover transects and a co- located production sample to facilitate collection of a more robust <br />sample. <br />The actual procedure for sample site location occurred as follows. First, a fixed point of reference <br />locatable from year to year was selected. Second, a systematic grid of appropriate dimensions (e.g., 100 <br />ft. X 100 ft.) was selected to provide at least one sample within the smallest disturbance footprint of each <br />of the combined units. This resulted in 96 and 100 sample points in the Greasewood Comparison Areas <br />and 119 and 125 sample points in the Shadscale Comparison Areas (15 or 20 sample points for reference <br />areas). Third, a scaled, computer generated representation of the selected grid was overlain on a <br />computer generated map of the area utilizing north -south and east -west compass points which could be <br />easily established in the field. Initial placement of the grid was controlled by the fourth step, selection of <br />a pair of random numbers (between 0 and 100) used to facilitate location of the initial coordinate point <br />from the fixed reference location. Fifth, using a hand held surveying compass (or GPS) and hip -chain (or <br />pacing techniques) all sample points were located in the field. The locations of all 2011 and 2012 <br />sampling sites are indicated on Maps 2 - 13. <br />CEDAR CREEK ASSOCIATES, Inc. Page 10 Snowcap - Phase III Bond Release <br />Evaluation - 2012 <br />