Laserfiche WebLink
aid in the protection of wildlife and aquatic resources[.]"). The Board denied the <br /> Application because it did not sufficiently take into account the safety and <br /> protection of wildlife and therefore did not comply with 2 Colo. Code Regs. § 407- <br /> 4, Rule 3.1.8. 2 Colo. Code Regs. § 407-4, Rule 3.1.8 provides: <br /> 3.1.8 Wildlife <br /> (1) All aspects of the mining and reclamation plan shall take into <br /> account the safety and protection of wildlife on the mine site, at <br /> processing sites, and along all access roads to the mine site with <br /> special attention given to the critical periods in the life cycle of those <br /> species which require special consideration (e.g., elk calving, <br /> migration routes, peregrine falcon nesting, grouse strutting grounds). <br /> (2) Habitat management and creation, if part of the Reclamation Plan, <br /> shall be directed toward encouraging the diversity of both game and <br /> non-game species, and shall provide protection, rehabilitation, or <br /> improvement of wildlife habitat. Operators are encouraged to contact <br /> the Colorado Division of Wildlife and/or federal agencies with <br /> wildlife responsibilities to see if any unique opportunities are <br /> available to enhance habitat and/or benefit wildlife which could be <br /> accomplished within the framework of the Reclamation Plan and <br /> costs. <br /> Under C.R.S. § 34-32.5-115(c), the Board may deny a permit if"[a]ny part of the <br /> operation, reclamation program, or the proposed future use is contrary to the laws <br /> or regulations of this article." Because the Board found that the Application did <br /> not comply with the regulation regarding the protection of wildlife, the Board <br /> properly denied the permit application. <br /> There is substantial evidence supporting the Board's conclusion that Transit <br /> Mix did not sufficiently account for the safety and protection of wildlife. <br /> 18 <br />