Laserfiche WebLink
and meetings with Division and SP staff. DOW was quite concerned with the disturbance <br />to aspen forest habitat proposed within PR -3, and they initially recommended that off-site <br />mitigation be considered within aspen stands adjacent to the disturbed area (either <br />controlled burning or mechanical treatments). Based on evaluation of aspen habitat in the <br />vicinity; however, it was ultimately determined that such treatments were not warranted. <br />DOW offered significant input regarding revegetation approaches to enhance native shrub <br />establishment success, and they were very involved in review of the aspen reestablishment <br />study proposal. The Division of Wildlife was also contacted by the Division in <br />association with TR -50, PR -4, PR -5, and RN -4. DOW made comments that were taken <br />into account with respect to revegetation plan changes associated with TR -50; they made <br />no official comments on PR -4, PR -5, RN -4, or RN -5. DOW concurred with the approved <br />woody plant density standard as discussed previously in this Findings document. <br />Pursuant to the finding required by Rule 2.07.6 (2) (n), and on the basis of information <br />set forth in the permit application and consultation with the Colorado Division of Wildlife <br />and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Division finds the proposed operation will not <br />affect the continued existence of endangered or threatened species or result in the <br />destruction or adverse modification of their critical habitat. <br />The application contains commitments to obtain specific revision approvals from the <br />Division prior to any use of persistent pesticides or herbicides on the permit area. <br />The operation is in compliance with the requirements of this section. <br />Fish and wildlife habitat is a planned post -mining land use. The Division finds that the <br />applicant selected appropriate plant species and distributions to benefit fish and wildlife <br />(4.18(5)(i)). <br />XIV. Protection of Underground Mining <br />No underground mine workings were identified in the vicinity of the Seneca II West <br />permit area. <br />XV. Subsidence Control <br />No underground mining was identified in the area, and only auger mining operations <br />were planned for the Seneca II -W Mine. As such, subsidence control planning and <br />mitigation efforts were incorporated into the permit for the area affected by auger mining. <br />The Division finds the operation in compliance with Rule 4.23.2. <br />XVI. Concurrent Surface and Underground Mining <br />This section does not apply to the Seneca II -W operation. <br />37 <br />