Laserfiche WebLink
Comment/Objection Narrative* <br /> As a 30 year resident of Fremont County,and retired physician, I'm concerned about the impact of this mine. It <br /> seems Zephyr seems unresponsive to the concerns of the local population,and a project which could have long <br /> term consequences on the local population seems to have very few upsides.We already are dealing with one <br /> Super Fund site,which has yet to be mitigated;we hardly need another. <br /> Water risks: <br /> We already are at risk for water shortages,and using a precious,limited resource that will be permanently <br /> poisoned seems insane.Though the company says the water will be"recycled",that is mis-labeled,as the <br /> water may never again be potable. <br /> The mine site at 6,500 feet elevation is 1,000 feet higher elevation than Grape Creek and the Arkansas river. It <br /> is upstream from the water plant intake for Fremont County.Any discharge from mining operations will find its <br /> way to the aquifers underground and/or the water flows.The mining operation would use approximately <br /> 65,000,000 gallons of water per year and an unspecified amount of chemicals.With the site just 1,000 feet <br /> above the Grape Creek and Arkansas River area,this creates the potential for pollution of the water for present <br /> and future generations. <br /> The demand on underground aquifers has been estimated in the permit as"insignificant"but there is no <br /> monitoring or measures to be sure that the demand is having an"insignificant"impact. <br /> Zephyr claims:"Not a single forest fire in the USA has been traced back to or been attributed to a modern <br /> mining operation."and"The mine operation will manage process water and storm water.The mill process water <br /> will flow through a closed recycling system with very little discharge if any."How many unexpected disasters <br /> have resulted from mining?It is certainly possible that the proposed Dawson Gold Mine could be yet another <br /> disaster in the making. <br /> Fire risks: <br /> The permit is non-specific in the amount of water reserved for fire mitigation. It states"sufficient."There is no <br /> Fire Protection plan associated with the current application. How could government entities approve the permit <br /> without an assurance of being able to mitigate a fire before it becomes a wild fire?The mine location is in a <br /> juniper forest,semi-arid climate which is essentially a tinder box. <br /> There would be"approximately 13,000 pounds of explosives onsite for up to a week of blasting activity... <br /> replenished weekly".Adding explosives to an area already a tinder box for a wild fire could create a wild fire <br /> that wipes out the entire region particularly without an established fire protection plan.Why incur this risk? <br /> Chemical risks: <br /> Chemicals that will be used in specified processing include: <br /> -Potassium Amyl Xanthate-2,250 Ibs onsite <br /> -Methyl IsoButyl Carbinol-900 Ibs <br /> -Generic anionic emulsion flocculent-450 Ibs <br /> That's 3,600 pounds of chemicals to be stored onsite and refreshed as needed. No one knows how these <br /> chemicals will interact with the ore taken from the mine and whether they will become toxic or not. Mix <br /> chemicals and ore of unknown reaction with 65,000,000 gallons of water annually and a potential disaster could <br /> occur. <br /> Permit Number* <br /> Enter valid letter and then numbers,for example M122112211 or C123456789. <br /> M2021046 <br /> Permitting Action Type <br /> Select revision type or leave blank if comment pertains to a new permit application or NOI <br />