My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV09407
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV09407
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 1:09:54 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 10:03:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982057
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
1/29/2004
Doc Name
Adequacy Response
From
DMG
To
Seneca Coal Company
Type & Sequence
TR47
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
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
properties in the vicinity. The amended plan indicates that the first preference for <br />trarisplant stock would be "saplings from aspen stands located on the mine site or <br />lands owned by SCC". Should sapling "harvest" be anticipated from sites within the <br />Seneca II-W, Yoast, or Seneca II permit areas that are not currently designated as <br />"disturbed areas", we would make an additional request. <br />Please commit to submittal of a minor revision application to the appropriate permit <br />to designate the potential sapling harvest locations, and describe measures that will <br />be taken to minimize and repair associated disturbance. The commitment should <br />specify that any such revision applications would be submitted by August 1, 2004. <br />4. The Division requested information regarding continued irrigation of the aspen during <br />the 2006 growing season, and the plan was properly amended to address this <br />request. Item Resolved. <br />The Division requested certain modifications to the "mother plant" approach for <br />aspen establishment. The requested modifications were provided in amended <br />Section 8.0 of Appendix 22-3. Item Resolved. <br />(New Item). We believe the aspen "sapling farm" described in Section 8.0 of the. <br />study plan is a promising approach. One suggestion we would make is that SCC <br />consider fencing of the area, since the concentrated sapling sprouting that would be <br />anticipated would be very attractive to elk. Due to. the relatively small area, heavy <br />browsing would be likely to significantly impact regeneration. <br />Please contact me if you have any questions. Note that we received a comment letter from <br />the Division of Wildlife on January 26, 2004. A -copy of that letter is enclosed. <br />~~ <br />Sincerely, <br />Daniel T. Math ws <br />Environmental Protection pecialist <br />enclosure <br />C: Denver File, w/o enclosure . <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.