Laserfiche WebLink
11/10/2005 14:24 9709295595 WEST ELK <br />nov 10 2005 14:10 PgOfVIq Rq(iGER DI6TRICT <br />PAGE 05 <br />970 527 4151 p.4 <br />dfsturbeace (2 acres) these will be n0 measurable Or sil~caat change in elk or deer <br />populations u a result of this pzojeot. <br />Lewis's woodpecker - Ia Colorado Lewie's woodpeckers are common np to 7,000 feet <br />and rarer at higher elevatioaa (Andrews and Righter 1992): The lower elevation azeas of <br />the GMUG?~tationai Forest ere within the range of this species. In Colorado, Lewis's <br />woodpeckers were formetYy reported breeding prialan'ly is ponderosa piss habitat, but <br />since the 1950's they have expanded their nesting range m cottonwoods asaottiatod with <br />stream bottoms and more open plains habiWta (Knox 1959). 'l'Ite Colorado Breeding <br />Bird Atlas (Kingery 1998) confirmed breeding in riparian habitats (typically wlthia eight <br />of pinyoa/juaiper woodlar3ds or ponderosa pine stands) and nests were found in dead or <br />dacayiag cottonwoods. <br />The proposed project ties within shrub, and oakbrush habitat above 7,000 feet in <br />elevation. 'l'i're proposed drilling project will not iatpact suitable breeding habimta <br />(pondes~oaa pine, or cottonwood riparian areas) therefor,. the project will have no eflbct oa <br />Forest-wide populations df Izwis's woodpeckers, <br />Colorado River Ctttrhroas 2Y~out -Colorado River Cutthroat trout do not occur within <br />ally of the perennial streatlss that exist within the projei:t area or region of influence. <br />Land Use: The project proposal iacludas no new road coastntation: The project proposal <br />lies within the West Elk Inventoried Roadlose Area, ]it accordaltee with Forest 3etvice <br />Interim Directive ID-192(]db04-l, The GM[IG completed a Forest-wide Roads Aaalysfa <br />Prooess in Juno, 2005, ellowirt$ approver of this proposal by the District Bagger. <br />pUBLIC INVOI.vEM$NT. Due to the critical temporal need to protect health and <br />human safety by monitotiirg and extinguishing a thermal overt in the Wcst 81k Mine, <br />extensive public involvertient wag not feasible. <br />RECLAMATION BON~?IN4: Colorado Division of Minerals and Geology may <br />roquir+o additional surface:rcciamation beading fbr the surface disturbing aetfvities in this <br />proposal. <br />The' (SMUG hsa required a Perfaruieltce Bond ae part of the required Road Use Permit <br />far West Elk Mine' a uac cif existing Forest roads. As the proposal Includes only the use <br />of roads curseatly under pettait for MCC's use, this ammtnt does sot need to be ro- <br />calculated, <br />v. ta'INnuvG <br />After review of the original EA and considorigg the changed circtlmstarrces in Sectfoa II <br />of this document, I find flier impacts of the pmpoeod dtalliug are the same es previously <br />documented, and tberef?ore no additional environmental analysis is seeded in order to <br />