PERMFILE47151 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Section 779.20 (c) Continued. • According to the proposed mine plan, middle Foidel Creek anu lower Foidel Creek will be the stations most likely effected by the proposed action. No effect is expected at the upper Foide] Creek station due to its protection from the area of disturbance by an intervening ridge and tributary drainage. Drainages that become tributary to Foidel Creek downstream could be impacted if runoff measures to control sediment are either inadequate or fail. The affected tributary which runs northeasterly through Sections 24 and 13 of Township 4 North, Range 87 West and Sections 18 and 7 of Township 4 Nortli, Range 86 West, drains into Foidel Creek just above the middle Foidel Creek Station. If sediment control proves to be inadequate, then Foidel Creek below this p:,int could suffer aquatic habitat damage due to sedimentation between this point and the proposed sediment ponds located near Pinnacle Peak. If surface mining disturbance and loss of beaver habitat is suffi- cient to drive a~:ay the beaver in the tributary to Foidel Creek, • subsequent deterioration of the beaver ponds will result causing the dams to eventually break. This occurrence will add increased amounts of sediment to the lower reach of tl~e tributary stream and Foidel Creek. Impact of Existing Mining Operations on Fish and [dildlife Resources Within the Proposed Mine Plan Area Since mining has been a continuous operation on the mine plan area since September of 1962, some definite conclusions can be made relative to the existing impact of mining. Examination of the site specific investigations at the Energy Fuels site span back some 7 years. As supported by the data previously described, no evidence is available that indicates mining ham significantly affected the wildlife resources of the mine plan area.. Big game populations are healthy and give no signs of migrating out of the area or of even • avoiding the area. The obeervations on elk adjustment to mining 779-247