_REVISION - M1981302 ‎(119)‎

• Permit No: M1981302
• IBM Index Class Name: Revision
• Doc Name: AFFIDAVIT OF WARREN R KEAMMERER PH D
• Type & Sequence: AM2
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

III IIIIIIIIIIIII III
999
AFFIDAVIT OF WARREN R KEAMMERER,Ph.D
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
CITY AND COUNTY OF BOULDER )
Warren R. Keammerer,Ph.D., being first duly sworn upon oath, does depose and state as
follows:
I. I am the principal of Keammerer Ecological Consultants,Inc.,at 5858
Woodboume Hollow Road,in Boulder, Colorado.
2. As a consultant in plant ecology over the last 24 years,I have designed
reclamation plans and have conducted more than 200 plant ecological studies including those
designed to evaluate the success of revegetation on mined lands.
3. As a consultant in plant ecology, I have conducted studies that have focused on
examining properties relative to the presence of Ute Ladies Tresses Orchid and have evaluated
properties relative to the presence of suitable habitat for this species.
4. Regarding the likelihood of the proposed amendment having an impact on
populations of Ute Ladies Tresses Orchid on adjacent properties,I have the following opinion.
o In order to understand the concern related to off site impact to Ute Ladies Tresses
Orchid,it is necessary to theorize how these impacts could occur. The City of
Boulder asserts that impacts could occur but does not explain the pathways of impact.
In general, impact could occur if the environmental conditions necessary for the
growth of this species change as a result of the acceptance of Amendment 002. The
following pathways are listed as theoretical ways in which impacts could result. In
all cases,there is no evidence to suggest that the change in the reclamation plan
would result in any of the following scenarios actually developing.
o The proposed project would have to cause adjacent lands to dry out and
thereby destroy the existing habitat.
Ute Ladies Tresses Orchid as a species, is dependent on moist soils and most
populations occur on sites that are subirrigated (ArR 1995). This type of
desiccation could be caused by mine dewatering which is not a component of
the proposed permit amendment. Dewatering took place during the initial
operating phase of the project,but is no longer occurring on the site. The
proposed change in the permit calls for a reduction from 38.1 acres to 4.2
acres of surface water exposed in lakes on reclaimed areas. This change
would reduce ground water losses and would therefore not impact this
species. The current condition of the site(relative to the abundance of open
water)is comparable to the conditions that would be created under the design
of the revised reclamation plan described in Amendment 002. To date,the
current conditions have had no impact on neighboring lands relative to
WMI
EXHIBIT NO.23