PERMFILE72863

• Permit No: M2000077
• IBM Index Class Name: Permit File
• Doc Name: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT MULE CREEK GRAVEL PIT
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

Mule Creek Gravel environmental Assessment • Page 21
' H. Signs and Markers:
i) A sign will be posted at the entrance ofhe gravel mine site and
' will be visible from the access road, showing the operator's name;
a statement that a permit has been issued for the operation by the
' Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Boazd; and the permit number.
ii) The boundaries of the affected land will be cleazly delineated by
placement of monuments or other mazkers.
6. The site will be monitored monthly during the growing season to measure and
plant growth and density and to evaluate the success of reclamation efforts.
' Monitoring activities will take place until performance standards are reached.
' 2.4 Alternative C: Reduced Mine Size
This altemative would involve the same site preparation, gravel production and
t reclamation process as described above under Alternative B. Under Alternative C, the
size of the expanded quarry and production would be scaled back to approximately 58
percent of the mining area under Alternative B. The reduced size mining operation
' would occupy a total of 18 acres, 14 acres on National Forest System Land and 4 acres on
private land. It would remove approximately 500,000 tons of gravel from the federal
land and reclaim the site within a period of 5 to 7 yeazs. The mine production rate, based
' upon estimated gravel demands, would be approximately the same as under the proposed
action (Alternative B) averaging about 100,000 tons per year. An interpretative photo of
' the mine under Alternative C is shown in Figure 2.4.
The mining operation would start at the top of the existing cut bank, and would proceed
to the east, north, and south (see Figure 2.5. at the end of this report). The mine
expansion area would cover only the northern part (58%) of the area impacted by the
previous quarry. Thus, under this altemative, only the northern part of the previously
impacted area would be reclaimed (see Figure 2.6. at the end of this report).
The reclamation process would be similar to that described for Alternative B. However,
' the northern part of the gravel pit has smoother slopes and finer material than the
southern part. Thus, lower slopes and fewer rock outcrops aze expected after the
completion of the reclamation process. The existing and projected topography of 4 cross
' sections of Mule Creek gravel pit are presented in Figures 2.7.a) to 2.7.e), at the end of
this re
ort
p
.
' Under Alternative C, the areas covered with topsoil would be seeded following surface
prepazation with a spring tooth harrow. Early-mid seral stage plants associated to the
climax forest in the project azea would be identiFed. Those native plants would evolve in
natural progression to maintain the integrity of plant association. In order to identify the
1
' Hydrosphere Resource ConsullanLS, 1002 Walnut Suite 200, Boulder, CO 80302