I deleted my previous message because it was counter-productive

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Brian Combs,

I have been deleting the forum update email due to the ongoing Rapanos discussion so I didn't see your earlier post.

I use the percent aerial cover for the canopy and its fairly quick when using a spherical densiometer although still slightly subjective.

Interesting. Can you explain how the instrument is used in terms of plot size and what it samples. And. how does it differ in winter?
Thanks

WTF?! Does Mr. Combs' little deception qualify as "cross-posting"? Isn't there a rule against that?

Yeah, that Rapanos discussion has just been lighting-up the board. You gotta be kidding us! I've been logging-on occasionally just to check for a pulse. If not for Johnny Stevens, you could put a toe-tag on this forum.

OK, guess i touched a nerve. What I meant was that the last Rapanos post had over 9,000 views and 80 something replies, while I in the meantime couldn't get a response to a legitimate vegetation sampling question. Of course, Rapanos is important stuff but come on folks, there are lots of things we could be discussing. Matt has a point - this forum is runnin' near dead. My apologies if I broke the rules....
Still hoping for some good discussion on veg. plots

Brian Combs explained:

“…OK, guess I touched a nerve. What I meant was that the last Rapanos post had over 9,000 views and 80 something replies, while I in the meantime couldn't get a response to a legitimate vegetation sampling question…”


Dear Brian,

It could be that your statement touched a big nerve in the world of wetlands science. It would appear that the jurisdictional issue has chased all the scientists away. Perhaps we should be asking how vegetation sampling relates to Rapanos?

As stipulated under the 50/20 rule - dominant species are chosen independently from each stratum, and generally dominants are the most abundant species that individually or collectively account for more than 50 percent of the total coverage of vegetation in the stratum, plus any other species that accounts for at least 20 percent of the total.

If the subject wetlands directly abut relatively permanent waters then they are jurisdictional and the 50/20 rule may apply. If the wetlands are non-abutting and a significant nexus is required to establish jurisdiction, then a good canopy may help. If the wetlands are non-jurisdictional then vegetation sampling is not required.

Under the recent Rapanos Guidance, the 50/20 rule could be used as tool to formulate a theoretical significant nexus between wetlands and traditional navigable waters. Since the area under the canopy is greater than the basal area, the canopy is more “significant.” So from a regulatory perspective, it makes sense to use the canopy - but only if the subject wetlands are jurisdictional.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Johnny Stevens,

Thanks for your input Johnny. Really, though, I am trying NOT to think about this in terms of Rapanos. I am trying to see what sampling method other biologists are using and to get some feedback on the efficacy of the different methods. Rapanos and CWA issues only apply to federal regulations. There are 100's of projects in my state (WA) that don't even fall under ACOE JD but that do fall under local and state JD. So, let's look at the sampling question from a science perspective first and foremost. My assertion is that the canopy cover will change with the seasons and that simple visual estimates are not a consistent way to sample. Therefore, a more objective, repeatable method is needed. Amy ideas?