Laserfiche WebLink
Revised: 07/06/97 Minutes-June 26-27, 1997 Page 35 <br /> Gregg Squire began by discussing the specific changes to the Reclamation Plan which will reduce <br /> the number and size of the ponds and some revisions to the drainage as proposed when modified by <br /> the condition. The proposed condition is regarding the soil situation. The original Application was <br /> calling for six to eight inches of top soil. After reviewing the Amendment, the change is going to <br /> reduce that top soil down to five and one half inches. The Division has imposed an addition that <br /> will require soil testing and demonstration that the five and one half inches will do the job. Without <br /> the demonstration there's a possibility it may not have adequate vegetation which then would effect <br /> the fish and wildlife situation. As part of the process, the Division contacted the Colorado <br /> Department of Wildlife (CDW). The CDW has not contacted the Division with any concerns <br /> regarding any wildlife species. Reduction in the water surface acreage would tend to enhance <br /> general agricultural uses and increase usage for terrestrial wildlife. <br /> Mr. Sorenson stated that the objectors are concerned whether the proposed changes in the Deepe <br /> Farm Pit Reclamation Plan will result in a lowered water table on adjacent land, potentially <br /> rrt�I�1Z'� <br /> damaging habitat (i.e.;-TA arebelis?and--preboltz? jumping mice). An overview for the those <br /> species was noted. The Division's position is that the proposed Reclamation Plan will not result in <br /> a lowering of the groundwater table. Their findings are based on four central points: 1. Ground <br /> water depletion occurs as a result of evaporation caused by exposure to the atmosphere (63 acre feet <br /> annually less under the proposed plan); 2. The pattern of drainage for the Deepe Farm Pit is <br /> D C �. <br /> essentially the same under both plans; 3. South Botijder Creek and i ry ¢reek ditch number two run <br /> rQ. I r + �z <br /> through areas where the- colonies are located; and 4. Lowering the groundwater table <br /> in the area will not affect the.�plrarebeW. oronies�r h e s <br /> �` �' `s ' {re Ss ;6, ! �) <br /> 5p . r- .itlLLs <br /> Mr. Ernst asked if there was a provision for the wetlands area because of a decrease in the area of <br /> ponds. In the agricultural arena, he knows that if a wetland is drained or filled, they have to provide <br /> water someplace else. Mr. Sorenson responded that that is in the coreje gineers area of regulation, <br /> but the way the federal statutes read (as they relate to gravel mining), wetlands created incidental to <br /> gravel mining are not jurisdictional until a few years after reclamation. They are considered <br /> temporary wetlands that are not subject to the jurisdiction. <br /> Dick Wolfe, representative for the State Engineers Office (SEO), introduced himself to the Board <br /> and reviewed the compliance of the site with the requirements of the SEO regarding augmentation <br /> requirements. This site had entered into an agreement with the District Six Water Users <br />