Laserfiche WebLink
CESPK-CCt-R Public Notice Number 199475260 <br />This definil.ion was rttodified to recognize that excavation activities generally result in at <br />least some incidental dischazge of dredged material. Excavation activities that require a <br />Department of the Army perrnit include incidental discharges of dredged material associated <br />with mechanized land clearing, ditching, and other excavation activities that destroy or <br />degrade waters of they United States. This includes sand, gravel, and placer mining <br />activities. <br />Overall, th~:se changes will promote national consistency, more clearly notify the public of <br />regulatory :requirements, ensure that the Section 404 regulatory program is more equitable to <br />the regulated public, enhance the protection of waters of the United States, and clarify which <br />areas in age-icultural crop production would not be regulated as waters of the United States. <br />As a result of this change, instream gravel mining operators are required to seek Section 404 <br />permit authorization for such excavation activities. <br />Six other active instnam sand and gravel mining operations are located downstream. These <br />operations vary in sip;e, mining methods, and quantities mined. These operations, like the <br />subject Thomas Pit, were extended under the excavation rule "grandfather provision" in <br />order to allow public notice review. Public notices are also being issued for these <br />operations as listed below: <br />199475345 - ]vlichael Francis (Hermosa Meadows Pit), downstream three miles <br />199475346 - :iANDCp (Dalton Pit), downstream four miles <br />199475347 - ,Animas 'Valley Sand & Gravel (AVSG Pit), downstream five miles <br />199475348 - SANDCO (Walker Pit), downstream seven miles <br />199475349 - SANDCO (Willow Bend Pit), downstream nine miles <br />199575400 -Burnett Construction (Bar D Pit), downstream two miles <br />In the past, several agencies and individuals have expressed concern regarding the direct, <br />indirect, acid cumulal.ive imp;icts of excavating the Animas River bottom. Some concerns <br />include increased siltation, accelerated erosion of the riverbanks upstream and downstream, <br />and the decrease or loss of fish and wildlife habitat. The impacts of river mining are <br />difficult to predict. .A river study by a licensed hydrologist would be required in order to <br />accurately assess the potential effects of a specified operation. Complicating the situation <br />are the varying natural forces which increase river bank erosion, such as high runoff seasons <br />and the tendency of :rivers to meander and braid (build and adding sand bars). Although a <br />comprehensive study of the Animas River mining operations was recommended by the Ia <br />Plata County Planntr~g Depaztment as early as 1987, rt has proven difficult to obtain full <br />participation and funding from Animas River mining operators. The Corps of Engineers <br />(Sacrameni.o Plannin; Department) did pursue the initiation of a study with the State of <br />Colorado in the late 1980s. The State, principally the Colorado Water Conservation Board, <br />opposed the study. since the Corps could not pursue a planning study unilaterally, the <br />proposal vas dropped. Therefore, a comprehensive hydrologic study of the Animas River <br />has not begin performed. <br />II • <br />