Laserfiche WebLink
III. COMMENTS -COMPLIANCE <br />Below are comments on the inspection. The comments include discussion of observations made <br />during the inspection. Comments also describe any enforcement actions taken during the inspection <br />and the facts or evidence supporting the enforcement action. <br />same, and due to the early stage of vegetative growth. Attempt will be made to <br />more closely repeat the original September 2003 photos (ih particular 752 and 753) <br />in a September 2004 inspection. April 2004 Photos 1014, 1015, and 1016 depict <br />the nickpoint described, and match up well with September 2003 Photos 754 and <br />755. There does not appear to have been additional headword erosion at the <br />nickpoint, and gully dimensions do not appear to have changed appreciably in the <br />immediate vicinity: <br />Photos 752 through 761 are progressively upstream from the lower end of the <br />segment, up to the point along the lower channel segment where the channel is <br />crossed by a four strand barbed wire fence...Photos 732 through 743 are <br />progressive/y upstream from the fence along the main channel and its south fork. <br />Just downstream from the fence is a significant nickpoint, and a segment of channel <br />that appears to have experienced downcutting and bank sloughing many years <br />previously. This segment is depicted on September 2003 Photos 757, 759, 760 <br />(from downstream of fence looking upstreaml, 732 lot fence looking downstream, <br />and on April 2004 photos 1010 (upstream of fencel, 1011 and 1012 (downstream <br />of fence). No changes are evident along this reach. From comparison of Photos <br />732 and 760 with Photo 1012, the head-cut does not appear to have extended any <br />further upstream toward the fence or the adjacent towpath. <br />Photos 744 through 750 are of the north fork of the channel and the adjacent <br />hillslope. Of note is a nickpoint just above the junction with the south fork. There <br />is an old headcut f0 to 12 feet high that has healed over with grasses and shrubs, <br />but with evidence of recent cutting along one side of the original headcut, with a <br />non-vegetated vertical scarp 3 to 4 feet high. Photo 748 shows the head-cut, and <br />Photo 749 is the channel segment just above. There would appear to be high <br />potential for further headword erosion at Phis location. <br />This feature is depicted on April 2004 Photos 995 and 997. There does not appear <br />to have been additional headword erosion or other evident change based on the <br />photographic comparison. <br />In summary, it does not appear that significant channel erosion or bank sloughing was <br />initiated due to snowmelt runoff in 2004. This, is based primarily on re-inspection and re- <br />photographing of specific channel locations that appeared to have high potential for further <br />erasion. These same locations will be inspected and photographed again in September <br />2004, with an attempt to repeat the September 2003 photo points as closely as possible. <br />Availability of Records <br />Required records were on fife in the mine office, up to date through the first quarter of <br />2004. Certain road and pond certifications are included within revision actions currently <br />