Supplementalreportwithaddons 2

against the total number of plots sampled (n) and when the resulting curve levels off, the collection of additional data produces insignificant variation and thus no further sampling is necessary (p. 77). Following the “minimal” sampling area necessary to capture the number of individuals per unit area in temperate forest plots, only five 100m2 plots would be necessary to achieve a 500m2 minimal sampling area. This would only represent 0.49 percent of the overall Site; therefore, to ensure an adequate sampling area, ASGECI planned to sample five percent of the Site while concurrently estimating the running mean to evaluate that the sampling size had appropriately captured the diversity at the Site. Five percent sampling intensity on 25 acres would result in sampling of 1.25 acres or 5,059m2 of the Site. This could be captured in 51, 10m x 10m plots. To determine the location of the 51 potential sampling plots, a Geographic Information Systems (GIS) professional randomly selected 51, somewhat evenly spaced points on the aerial mapping that spanned the limit of disturbance (LOD). In the field, approximately half of these points (evenly and appropriately spaced to cover the full LOD) were chosen as a subset. After this subset was sampled, the running mean was calculated to determine if further sampling was required or if variation across the Site was appropriately captured. A shapefile of the points was loaded onto a Trimble GeoHX Geographic Positioning System (GPS) unit so that plots could be located at sub-meter precision. When the location of the random point was identified, the sample plot was arranged so that the established point was placed in the northeast corner of the plot, and from this point meter tape was laid out 10 meters south and 10 meters west to frame the 100m2 plot. Within each plot, the diameter at breast height (DBH) was recorded for all trees four inches DBH or greater. Additionally, tree species and condition were noted. The overall number of trees less than four inches DBH were also noted. Basic statistical analyses (evaluation of normal distribution, mean, standard deviation and confidence intervals) were performed. Results Twenty-two plots were surveyed throughout the LOD (Figure 1) and tree density appeared consistent across the Site. This was further confirmed upon calculation of the running mean, where it was determined that

wo plots were surveyed throughout the LOD (Figure 1) and tree density appeared consistent across the Site. This was further confirmed upon calculation of the running mean, where it was determined that insignificant variation in plot tree density and DBH occurred after the collection of approximately five plots/500m2 (Charts 1 and 2, respectively). Therefore, no additional plots were collected beyond the subset of 22 that were initially selected. Of the 115 live trees observed that were greater than four-inches DBH, species included red maple (Acer rubrum), black birch (Betula lenta), pignut hickory (Carya glabra), shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), mockernut hickory (Carya tomentosa), American beech (Fagus grandifolia), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), tulip-tree (Liriodendron tulipifera), black gum (Nyssa sylvatica), white oak (Quercus alba), chestnut oak (Quercus prinus), red oak (Quercus rubra), black oak (Quercus velutina), and sassafras (Sassafras albidum). Seventysix percent of these trees had a DBH of 12 inches or less (Chart 3) and only eight trees had a DBH greater than 20 inches. 4 Walter E. Foran Blvd. Suite 209■Flemington, NJ 08822■908.788.9676■fax 908.788.6788■mail@amygreene.com■www.amygreene.com Pennsylvania Office: P.O. Box 551, New Cumberland, PA 17070 ■ 717.525.8162