My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2018-11-05_PERMIT FILE - C1981044A (3)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Coal
>
C1981044
>
2018-11-05_PERMIT FILE - C1981044A (3)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/20/2018 11:58:57 AM
Creation date
12/20/2018 11:55:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981044A
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
11/5/2018
Section_Exhibit Name
2.04 Information on Environmental Resources
Media Type
D
Archive
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
48
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
Stream Bioloeic Resources Information <br />The following discussion on stream biologic resources was based on information gathered from the Colorado Division <br />of Wildlife, the United States Geological Survey, Ecology Consultants, Inc., and the Final Environmental Impact <br />Statement of Northwest Colorado Coal. <br />Two (2) streams of the upper Colorado River drainage pass through [he EC mining property. These are the Yampa <br />and the Williams Fork Rivers. <br />The Yampa River consists of alternating ripples and pools resulting in a variety of habitats for fish and bottom fauna. <br />The channel of the Yampa shifts throughout the year in response to changing discharge. Sand and mud bars are swept <br />away by rising waters and re-deposited as flow decreases. Lateral cutting of banks is extensive in some areas. <br />Ripples, large rocks, and boulders, with occasional deep pools, define the major aquatic habitat in [he upper region of <br />the Yampa River through the EC mining properties. <br />The Williams Fork River, a[ its confluence with the Yampa, is similar to the Yampa River having alternating ripples <br />and pools providing a variety of habitats for fish and bottom fauna. The channel of the Williams Fork, however, has a <br />steeper gradient than that of the Yampa, which results in a swifter current. <br />This section of the Wildlife report will describe the aquatic characteristics of the Yampa and Williams Fork Rivers. <br />Information gathered included fish species (including numbers), invertebrate fauna, water chemistry (including <br />sediment load), and impacts of mining. <br />Aouatic Bioloev of the Yampa River <br />Fish of the Yampa River. Ecology Consultants, Inc., in work performed for Stems-Rogers, collected nine (9) fish <br />species from the Yampa and Williams Fork Rivers in the vicinity of Craig in 1972 utilizing an electroshocker. The <br />results of this fish sampling study are summarized in Table 49, Fish Captured in Vicinity of Craig Power Station. <br />Another fish species distribution and abundance study was conducted in 1973 for the Colowyo Railroad impact <br />analysis. The results of this study, taken from the final environmental impact statement for Northwest Colorado Coal, <br />is presented in Table 50, Fish Species Distribution Abundance. <br />Mc William Roland, Wildlife Conservation Officer, at Craig, Colorado reports that the Department of Wildlife stocks <br />2,500 pounds of rainbow trout in the Yampa River each year. These fish are released adjacent to the Craig golf course <br />and downstream for approximately one (1) mile. This is approximately three (3) miles upstream from the EC <br />operations. The fishing pressure is greatest in late spring and fall. The Yampa River near Craig is considered <br />marginal trout water because water temperatures aze extremely warm in the summer months. <br />Invertebrates of the Yampa River <br />Bottom dwelling animals or benthic invertebrates were sampled by Ecology Consultants, Inc. with a Surber sampler <br />for a period of one year. This device has a frame encompassing one (1) square foot to which is attached a fine mesh <br />bag. The sampler is pressed firmly against a substrate, which is then vigorously stirred; dislodged organisms are <br />swept into the bag by the current. Fifty-eight samples were collected for the study period. The samples represented a <br />variety of habitats and substrate types in the river. The captured organisms were identified, dried, and weighed. The <br />fauna dwelling home in the substrate was dominated by species of Ephemeroptera (mayflies) and Trichoptera (caddis <br />flies), and lesser numbers and weights of Plecoptera (stone flies), Diptera (true flies), and Coluoptera (beetles). A <br />summary of the numbers and weights of this bottom fauna is given in Table 51, Average Numbers and Weights of <br />Bottom Fauna in Surber Samples. <br />Permit Revision 0434 2.04-45 Revised 7/2/04 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.