2020-03-24_PERMIT FILE - C1981019A (39)

Home Browse Search

RULE 2 PERMITS •10414.44 .*.t.04j.....,..41 .s 44*.•`•�.v�ra., '40,4 a'an.w4..os•.>a-ON.4,tem acri..ae w.r+ra...r, >,r^-_.s+a#+1�Kt+v.AVYAO.v,-a.a ww. 4araa.•a3 The shrubs tended to shear or break off easily when the ground was frozen leaving the root systems undisturbed. During the following spring,vigorous new growth from root sprouting occurred, and easy access was provided for deer and elk. This technique has had the additional effect of allowing grasses and forbs to establish stands that will compete with the shrubs, thus prolonging heights useable by wildlife. Approximately 30 acres of overmature decadent shrubs, i.e., serviceberry, oak, and chokecherry was "brushed"on an annual basis through 1986. Although no specific data has been collected on these areas, general observations have shown that the areas are heavily utilized by both deer and elk. On all of the areas, any new shrub sprouting is kept down to a height of only a few inches. The one-acre plot that was cleared of vegetation and fenced in 1977 for testing by the Meeker Environmental Plant Center can be used as a good comparison of the differences between browsed and unbrowsed areas that have had similar treatments. Several of the unbrowsed shrubs that have grown up from root sprouting in the Plant Center plot have attained heights of up to four feet in just a few years. Over a five-year period, we feel the cumulative effects of improving 50-75 acres per year for deer and elk use has been increasingly successful in meeting the objectives of increasing available forage and drawing wildlife away from reclaimed areas. This wildlife mitigation program is considered a success and was discontinued at permit renewal as reclaimed areas are now attracting a large population of local wildlife populations.Also,suitable areas within the permit for this mitigation had been increasingly difficult to find. Much of the habitat suitable for improvement had already received treatment. Sagegrouse Mitigation In a preliminary findings document dated December 11, 1981, the Division requested additional information on sagegrouse use of the Colowyo permit area and a description of habitat mitigation measures. Colowyo submitted the following response, dated May 25, 1982, which satisfied the remaining concerns of the Division. Sagegrouse Mitigation I. Ongoing Mitigation Offsetting Current Loss of Sagegrouse Habitat Due to Mining. Prior to 1976 due to the prior landowners' grazing practices,the rangeland both within the permit area and surrounding areas was in an overgrazed condition. After 1976 the following changes in the management of the land, then owned by Colowyo, took place which indirectly increased the sagegrouse nesting and brood rearing capacity of the overall area. This increased carrying capacity of the sagegrouse habitat provides the mitigation for any displaced sagegrouse population during mining. Rule 2 Permits 2.05-44 Revision Date: 12/20/19 Revision No.: TR-135