Laserfiche WebLink
~ ~ TATE OF COLORADO <br />. <br />Rl <br />h <br />d D ~ <br />, <br />ar <br />s <br />. l~mm, Oer~mw ~~ <br />. <br />O <br />D <br />DEPARTMENT OF NATURAU RESOURCES L <br />~~ <br />O, <br />DIVISION OF WILDLIFE ~ ~ ~ <br />~ <br />Jock R. Orly b, Otrvctor . `~~ <br />~ ,r~ <br />N <br />'~ <br />6090 Broedwey OF W <br />Denver, Coloredo 80218 826-1182 <br />711 Independent Avenue <br />Grand Junction, Colorado 81501 <br />JT~ly 13, 1977 <br />Charles K. Curlee <br />Biologist <br />3R Corporation <br />1221 So. Clarkson Street __ <br />Suite 910 <br />Denver, Colorado 80210 <br />RE: Baseline Biological Inventory <br />Hayden Gulch [4. R. Grace t-line <br />Dear Mr. Curlee: <br />The baseline inventory appears to address the vegetation rather <br />extensively. The collection, measurement and identification of plants <br />is sometimes more simplified than is the collection, measurement and <br />identification of the fauna of an area. The information shows how <br />much cover there is in the area, and the variety of good to excellent <br />habitat that will be destroyed by the mining activity. habitat of <br />this type will be hard to replace in kind no matter how extensive <br />the reclamation is. Hundreds of years will be needed to re-establish <br />the ecosystems that will be gone. <br />There was evidence of very little field work for wildlife species. <br />A one month study in the field during early winter is inadequate to <br />study the wildlife species and the importance of this habitat to the <br />variety of species present. With no studies done this spring during <br />high biological activity periods, many important factors were missed. <br />There are many assumptions given with no biological information to <br />back them up. The review of literature seems to be very extensive but <br />literature review is no substitute for yoocl field wort: and observations. <br />The lack of field study is very evident on page 46 where informa- <br />tion is lacking on Che breeding and nesting activities of birds assumed <br />to be absent or maybe present on the site. Why weren't studies done <br />this spring? }low can 1.he importance of this hal;itat for wildlife be <br />adequately addressed with a one month field study done in October when <br />animals are migrating, hibernating, or already gone Erom the area- <br />Information on the Colorado Sr}uawfish is not correct as reference <br />is made on page 76. Whomever was responsible for the fisheries section <br />did not do an extensive enough literature review or contact enough <br />people to make the statement, "It is unlikely that either of these fish <br />are present in the Williams Fork or Yampa Rivers". The sc}uawfish has <br />been found in t}Te Yampa River in 1976 and almost every year of study <br />DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, Harris Sherman, Eeccutlve Director VJIL DLIFE COMMISSION, Vernon C. VJillia ms, Cheirma~ <br />Thomas Ferley„Vice CJ+av man Snm Caudill, Seu Otary Jeen K 7001, Member Roger Clerk, fA r•m ber <br />.~ r. i ~. .. ,~.....4... r.. .., ii..tl r. ,,:. ~.,.. r.., .., ..~.. i., r,•,. ,., h.,. <br />