Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Page 1 <br />Issues the Division Believes Are Within the Jurisdiction of the Board <br />Blasting- causing landslides, rock slippage, reactivationof fault, building damage, well damage, <br />negative impact on wildlife, fish habitat and spawning. <br />2. No planned reclamation of the quarry highwall and benches. <br />3. Physical impacts; to the environment, river water quality, soils and vegetation. <br />4. Affected land boundazies and acreage are not well-defined. <br />5. Affect of grave] operations on groundwater. <br />6. Sedimentation and pollution of Tallahassee Creek and the Arkansas River, due to inadequate <br />erosion sedimentation control plans. <br />7. The plan to pump 30,000 g.p.d. from groundwatermay adversely affect residentwells and deplete <br />the water table. <br />8. Adverse affect of sedimentation/pollution on trout. <br />9. It is planned to be on shore lands of a publicly owned river and state pazk. <br />] 0. Severe impact on a significant wildlife habitat. <br />11. It is a hazard being on a mainstream flood plain. <br />12. There is no adequate plan to control the spread of leafy spurge to locations off the mine site. <br />13. The proposed project should give some consideration to the effects of the mine on riparian <br />habitat. <br />14. The operation will have a negative impact on Bighorn Sheep. <br />15. The sediment control plans are not adequate to prevent damage to wetlands and the Canon City <br />water supply. <br />16. The flood plain level of Tallahassee Creek was not addressed in the lay-out of the crusher and <br />mill sites. <br />17. There is no reclamation process available for bench-cut mining of the mountains -only scarring. <br />18. The operator is only proposing to use corrugated metal pipe culverts to construct road/railroad <br />crossings of Tallahassee Creek. <br />19. The proposed project should not be approved until the applicant has obtained a plan for <br />