My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2018-03-09_PERMIT FILE - M2017049 (29)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2017049
>
2018-03-09_PERMIT FILE - M2017049 (29)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/15/2021 11:47:59 PM
Creation date
3/9/2018 3:38:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2017049
IBM Index Class Name
PERMIT FILE
Doc Date
3/9/2018
Doc Name Note
PART 1 OF 3
Doc Name
Adequacy Review Response
From
Transit Mix Concrete Co.
To
DRMS
Permit Index Doc Type
Application Materials
Email Name
TC1
ERR
ECS
WHE
AME
PSH
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
170
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
UF <br /> f? <br /> Transit Mix Concrete Co. <br /> minority of these lands slope to the west or north, and these areas contain mixed conifer vegetation, <br /> similar to the quarry area. Shrubland provides winter habitat, while mixed conifer does not. The Aiken <br /> Canyon PCA conditions are better represented on the lower ranch than in the quarry area,and the only <br /> disturbances on the lower ranch are the access road and scale house. As discussed above, much of the <br /> quarry infrastructure follows existing ranch roads to limit new disturbances. Overall,the conditions at <br /> the Aiken Canyon Preserve and PCA do not reflect those at the quarry site, and the ecosystems with <br /> preservation goals in the PCA (tallgrass prairie, shrubland, pinyon-juniper) are not present in the quarry <br /> area.The Aiken Canyon PCA and Aiken Canyon Preserve and approximate hiking trails are shown on <br /> Figure 2. <br /> The objectors claim that Aiken Canyon is important to The Nature Conservancy(TNC); however, <br /> comments on TNC's website and other hiking trail websites indicate the site facilities and particularly the <br /> trail are in disrepair and actually dangerous in places. The apparent limited use and lack of attention <br /> suggest that the Aiken Canyon Preserve does not receive the same level of attention as TNC's other <br /> conservation areas thus brings the validity of the objectors' comments into question. <br /> The Beaver Creek Wilderness Study Area (WSA) contains habitat important to numerous species, but <br /> this habitat does not extend to the quarry area. Figure 3A shows the mapped habitat, concentration <br /> areas, nest sites,and all other data from CPW on 35 of 42 species. This figure contains a lot of <br /> information and is quite"busy" considering there are 120 layers of data, but this figure shows there is <br /> no habitat for these 35 species within the affected lands boundary. Data for the other 7 species are <br /> shown on Figures 3B through 3F. This series of figures shows that common wildlife and suitable habitat <br /> at the quarry site is limited to black bear,elk, mountain lion, mule deer, and wild turkey. In response to <br /> the objectors' comments,the Beaver Creek WSA is a "hotbed" of wildlife activity, but the HRR quarry <br /> area is not. <br /> In summary,the conditions at the Aiken Canyon Preserve and PCA are very different from those at the <br /> proposed quarry area, and the conservation value of the Hitch Rack Ranch is limited. Also,the <br /> ecosystems important to the Aiken Canyon PCA(i.e.grassland and shrubland)are preserved and actually <br /> expanded by the quarry operation. <br /> Objection: CPW recognizes Lower Turkey Creek as a migration corridor for elk that connects Fort Carson <br /> to Beaver Creek Wilderness Study Area, BLM and USFS lands. CPW has identified the area as a primary <br /> elk residence and migration area and is between a large concentration of elk to the west and winter <br /> range to the east. There will be a negative impact on elk survivability if migration to winter feeding <br /> grounds and spring calving grounds is disrupted. <br /> Response:CPW has reviewed and commented on the permit,and their concerns were limited to the <br /> need to perform wildlife surveys prior to disturbing new areas, and Transit Mix has committed to these <br /> surveys. Comments from CPW have not included any concerns regarding impacts to elk. No officially <br /> defined migration corridors have been identified on the Hitch Rack Ranch. <br /> The Elk Management Plan for Data Analysis Unit E-23 (Grigg, 2012) demonstrates,as shown below,that <br /> elk are overpopulated in the E-23 area (E-23 includes the project area) and that GMU 59 (the subunit in <br /> Hitch Rack Ranch Quarry Response to Comments <br /> March 9,2018 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.