APPCOR11350 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

After a short recess, a motion was made to approve the Lorencito proposal with the stipulation that constant communication be established with school officials. The motion did not pass due to a 2-2 vote. Therefore, due to the tie vote, the planning commission passed the issue to the County Commissioners with "No recommendation". On April 16, 1997, Kent Gorham(CDMG) and Jerry Koblitz (Greystone, representing LCC) met Division of Wildlife (DOW) officials for a Lorencito site tour. In attendance for the DOW were Kris Kloster, Habitat Biologist; Bob Holder, Wildlife Officier; Al Trujillo, Area Wildlife Manager; John Melby, Habitiat Biologist; and Bob Davies, Habitat Biologist. The meeting began at the Trinidad State Park office. There Mr. Koblitz discussed the mine plan with the aid of the Mine Plan map from the permit application. Mr Holder stated that many years Lorencito drainage had perennial flows. Mr. Melby explained their concerns about the Flathead Chub being listed as a T & E species. Colorado has healthy populations but Kansas and Oklahoma have experienced severe declines in this fish species. Flathead chubs were found at the upstream Lorencito site were flows aze normally perennial. DOW does not want the chub to be listed in Colorado and definitely want the mining operation to have no impact to the chub or it's habitat. We discusses the confusion on the loss of the stream channel being from culvert installation , where right now logging trucks and vehicle traffic pass through the stream itself due to the general lack of culverts. Mr. Kloster expressed some concern about haulroad-produced sediment. Gorham indicated that sediment from haulroads still must be treated using alternative sediment control methods. A concern about acid mine drainage was brought up by one of the DOW people. Gorham explained that due to the low-sulfur nature of Colorado coal, pH is rarely a problem and acid conditions aze unlikely due to the great neutralization potential in the overburden. Seeps aze also not likely from the surface mine. Holder and Davies discuss the elk damage problem that is presently occurring immediately north of the mine area on the Purgatoire river. They feel that the mining will make this problem worse due to temporary relocation and the sportsmen dollars should not have to pay for this damage. John Woodling of the DOW (not present) appazently has some concerns about water quality sampling and detection limits. We also discussed the required water monitoring and how pond discharges are monitored through [he point source discharge program through CDPH&E. We proceeded to the site, arriving at about 11:30. The first stop was at the coal loadout site. We [hen stopped at a number of locations along Lorencito canyon to observe the stream for flow. The stream was flowing in the lower section but was dry neaz sampling point LC-2. further upstream, below the P1/P2 portal azea the stream was again flowing and small fish were observed. Turkey were observed below site LC-4 and the stream was flowing at this site. We proceeded to the Rl/R2 portal area via Puertecito Canyon. The DOW concern with bears is mainly keeping human/beaz interaction to a minimum rather than habitat loss. Bear proof containers were mentioned. Gorham indicated that if there were other things the operator should do or commit to that these could be incorporated into the permit a lication. We then proceeded to the surface mine area. DOW does feel strongly that shruj hould be established on the reclamation. DOW expressed that they were not reclamation specialists, so which shrubs would be the best, etc. was not clear. Gorham explained that where, how, and what type of shrub could be discussed with DMG. Gorham also stated that having a requirement to have shrubs scattered throughout the area by seeding with grasses was unfavorable. Clumps and mature transplants were also discussed. Mr. Koblitz said LCC was leaning towards proposing to have shrubs in the