My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2005-04-22_REVISION - M1977526
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1977526
>
2005-04-22_REVISION - M1977526
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 2:45:22 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 11:45:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977526
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
4/22/2005
Doc Name
Application
From
Albert Frei & Sons Inc.
To
DMG
Type & Sequence
AM1
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.
/
120
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
Exhibit H- <br />mentioned above, many of the burrows have been filled in. This area also contains disturbance <br />from intense livestock grazing, which limits the habitat quality. <br />The owls are only present in Colorado from about March 1 through October 31. They migrate out <br />of state during the winter. CDOW suggests checking prairie dog towns for burrowing owl <br />presence if any disturbance is planned within the Expansion Area South between March ]and <br />October 31 (CDOW 2005a). If burrowing owls are confirmed to be present in the prairie dog <br />town, there are two options: <br />1. Wait until November I or until it can be confirmed that owls have left the area before <br />moving forward with the project; or <br />2. Carefully monitor the activities of the owls, noting and marking which holes they are <br />using. When al] the burrowing owl holes have been located and marked, prairie dog holes <br />more than 150 feet away from the owl holes can be disturbed. <br />Effects During and After the Proposed Operation on Existing Wildlife <br />The potential effects on wildlife during and after the proposed operation were assessed, including <br />temporary effects, interference with migratory routes, permanent loss of forage and habitat, and <br />the genera] effects on wildlife from increased human activity, including noise. Because the <br />quality of wildlife habitat is so poor at the site, it is unlikely that the proposed operation would <br />negatively affect wildlife. The quality of wildlife habitat west of the site across the river is much <br />better. Additionally, the highest quality habitat is located along the river and there will be a 100- <br />foot buffer from the river that will not be disturbed by the proposed operations. <br />Because the quality of the browse for deer and other wildlife is so poor, there would not be a <br />significant temporary or permanent loss of food and habitat. After the mine is reclaimed, it will <br />likely provide better habitat and more food for wildlife. <br />Migratory routes would not likely be affected because the habitat west of the Expansion Area, on <br />the other side of the South Platte River, currently provides better overall and migration corridor <br />habitat. <br />There has been, and continues to be, signiftcant activity and noise at and near this site that has not <br />seemed to disturb roosting eagles and other raptors. Noise in the area would not likely increase to <br />a level that is greater than the current noise level and would therefore not affect wildlife. <br />Effects to the prairie dog and burrowing owl may include a loss of habitat. However, mitigation <br />measures suggested by CDOW will limit direct disturbance (CDOW 2005a). In addition, better <br />quality prairie dog and burrowing owl habitat exists to the south and southwest of the Expansion <br />Area South. <br />1898-Frei I l2 Eahibi[s_(4.20.05).doc I-I-( <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.