Laserfiche WebLink
Rule 6.3.SExhibitE-M <br />Existing Disturbance: Please outline and label existing disturbances within and/or <br />adjacent to the permit boundary (e.g., previously mined areas, roads or excavations <br />resulting from utility construction) (Rule 6.3.5(2)0). What is the extent and nature of the <br />existing disturbances? While the application includes reference to the previously <br />disturbed areas, knowing the full extent of the pre~ermit disturbance is useful in <br />determining what the post mining landscape would need to be. Including labeled <br />pictures of the disturbed sites could be useful in this regarcL <br />I have redone my maps to include some additional azeas of disturbance of which I am <br />aware. These are indicated in the key. All existing roads are pre-existing disturbances <br />and some cross through the permit sites. <br />As stated in Exhibit B, most of the currem disturbances exist on azeas I have submitted <br />for permitting in this application. Some of these areas are previously disturbed, by hand <br />digging in particular, upwards of 80 percent. <br />As is true for all of the Crystal Creek mining district, approximately 3 square miles, much <br />of the land is previously disturbed. Hand and mechanized digging has occurred <br />throughout the entire region for a period of over 100 yeazs. It has been acceptable to the <br />Forest Service that hand-dug pits do not need to be reclaimed. They do not fall under the <br />definition of mining. Based on this, I have not attempted to list or indicate where these <br />previous disturbances are. I do not expect to be held responsible for reclamation of these <br />pits. <br />You will note my application does state we will attempt to reclaim as many of these <br />hand-dug areas as possible, but only where the additional impact from the track hoe will <br />not be significant, and only where it is practical to do so. <br />I did not include these azeas as additional disturbance areas, but intended to reclaim them <br />as a courtesy and in an attempt to abide by our goal of being the best steward of the land <br />as we can. This is why our actual reclaimed areas in current operations are larger than <br />the requested disturbance area. <br />I hope to continue operating under this spirit. However, I do not wish to be held <br />responsible for pre-existing disturbances or on-going disturbances from hand digging. I <br />cannot control access and prevent this type of disturbance. This is largely recreational <br />digging and as stated, is allowed by the Forest Service. <br />On the other hand, you will note that I have included all pre-existing mechanized <br />disturbances under our permit application. T intend to do a better job of reclaiming these <br />areas than the state in which they currently exist (as can be seen from attached photos and <br />your site visit). The reason they aze permitted, in some cases, for example, Site M, where <br />I do not expect to find crystals, is so I can reclaim these areas adequately. <br />I have further photographed other disturbances which I may not have the opportunity to <br />reclaim. <br />