2013-04-10_PERMIT FILE - C1981019A (4)

Home Browse Search

RULE 2 PERMITS density of woody plant species; and 4) species composition. The potential presence or absence of threatened and /or endangered plant species was also assessed (see section 2.04.11(5). Qualitative information concerning minor vegetation types was also included. The inventory resulted in a comprehensive inventory of vegetation communities that exist in the Collom permit expansion area. Six major vegetation community types were identified within the Vegetation Study Area: 1) Aspen, 2) Bottomland, 3) Grassland, 4) Juniper Scrub, 5) Mountain Shrub, and 6) Sagebrush. Four minor vegetation community types /land uses were identified: 1) Improved Pasture, 2) Cultivated Land (Cropland), 3) Disturbed Areas, and 4) Wetlands. Within the six major types, descriptive sub -types (mesic or xeric) were also identified in the mountain shrub and sagebrush types. Methods — The identification and delineation of vegetation community types within the Collom permit expansion area was initiated through the use of 2002 true -color aerial imagery with approximately 1.5- meter resolution. Vegetation communities were mapped based on photographic signatures to a polygon size of approximately one acre using ArcGIS software. On- ground vegetation surveys conducted during the summer of 2005 used this preliminary delineation to ground- truth, correct, and refine community locations and boundaries. Field corrections were then used to re- delineate the vegetation communities within the Vegetation Study Area, as well as within a two -mile Wildlife Study Boundary external to the Vegetation Study Area, to a polygon size of approximately 0.25 acre. This post- sampling delineation was performed using 0.5 -meter resolution color- infrared remote sensing imagery exposed in September of 2005. Sample Layout — Fifty sample sites (or 15 to 30 for reference areas) were systematically selected (in an unbiased manner) within each vegetation community type. Sample locations were selected by placing a nested grid over each type on a computer generated map. Intersections throughout the grid representing sample points were utilized for the 2005 field effort. Modifications to sampling point were made in the field as necessary; as preliminary mapping efforts made prior to ground verification were used in the sample point selection process. Community identification was refined, and some original delineations were combined based upon observed field characteristics. Grassland and sage reduction areas were combined under the grassland category and riparian, wetland, and other bottomland types were combined under the bottomland category. The nested grid sampling design allowed the original grid dimension to be changed (100 x 100, 200 x 200, 300 x 300) if additional or fewer samples were needed for a particular vegetation type. If sample points landed within small, unmapped inclusions of another type (e.g. a patch of sagebrush within a mountain shrub designation), the sample point was utilized, but later labeled to reflect the actual community found to occur on the ground. Once sample locations were located in the field, the vegetation parameters of percent ground cover, production, and woody plant density were collected. Data collection techniques for each parameter are detailed below. A detailed description of the sample layout protocol applied during 2005 baseline vegetation evaluations is provided in Exhibit 10, Item 6. Sampling point locations are displayed on Map 4C (Sheets 1 -11). Ground Cover — Determination of ground cover was achieved by placing 10 -meter point- intercept transects at each sample location. At each one -meter interval along the transect, a "laser point bar" was situated parallel to, and approximately 1.5 meter vertically above the ground surface. This equipment was used to record a set of 10 readings as hits on vegetation (by species), litter, rock ( >2mm), or bare soil. This resulted in a total of 100 intercepts per transeci or one percent cover per intercept. Second hits, where strata overlap in the downward projection o'' the hit, were also recorded to complete species Collom — Rule 2, Page 58 Revision Date: 9/28/11 Revision No.: PR -03