My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2001-12-11_PERMIT FILE - C1982057A
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Coal
>
C1982057
>
2001-12-11_PERMIT FILE - C1982057A
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/2/2021 11:41:22 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 12:22:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982057A
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Doc Name
POTENTIAL AND OBSERVED SPECIES LISTS
Section_Exhibit Name
TAB 11 APPENDIX 11-1
Media Type
D
Archive
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Gulch. The only area where a concentration of several frogs was heard was a tiny stockpond <br />• in NE'/a NW'/a Section 27, that by June had become little more than a trampled mudhole. <br />No reptiles or fish were observed during the surveys. During the nocturnal survey, a <br />raccoon (Procyon [otor) was seen foraging along the edge of a beaver pond on Hubberson <br />Gulch, and a pair of beaver were observed working and feeding in a pond along the tributary <br />drainage in NE'/a SE'/a Section 27. <br />CONCLUSIONS <br />While the boreal toad has been found in mountain ranges to the north and south, the <br />character of the Williams Fork Mountains is quite different than either of those two ranges. <br />The highest elevations in the Williams Forks are less than 8500 feet ASL, and most of the area <br />is lower than 8000 feet ASL. In contrast, elevations throughout the Elkhead Mountains and <br />Flattops are generally over 8200 feet ASL. The Williams Fork Mountains also differ from <br />those others in principal habitat type. As noted above, coniferous habitat is virtually absent <br />from most of the Williams Fork Mountains, which are dominated by mountain brush. <br />• Aquatic habitat on the Seneca II-W South Expansion is relatively limited, and of <br />moderate quality. Some aquatic habitat is ephemeral, and some elements sustain moderate to <br />heavy use by grazing animals. Three thorough surveys, plus a nocturnal search, yielded no <br />evidence of boreal toad presence on the Seneca II-W expansion area. Although it is impossible <br />to prove that the species is not present, the survey results indicate that the toads either do not <br />exist on the area, or exist in numbers too low to detect. In conclusion, mine development on <br />the expansion area will not impact any known population of boreal toads. <br />REFERENCES <br />Baxter, G. T. and M. D. Stone. 1980. Amphibians and reptiles of Wyoming. Wyoming <br />Game and Fish Dept. Bull. No. 16. 136pp. <br />Loeffler, C. (ed.), 1998. Conservation plan and agreement for the management and recovery <br />of the southern Rocky Mountain population of the boreal toad (Bufo boreas boreas). <br />Boreal Toad Recovery Team, October 1998. 66pp + Appendices. <br />• Stebbins, R. C. 1985. Afield guide to western reptiles and amphibians. Houghton Mifflin <br />Co., Boston. 336pp. <br />Seneca II-W South Expansion <br />1999 Boreal Toad Survey Page 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.