Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />the existing lease area completely ignores the fact that this letter recommends <br />that mining be allowed "to include coal under the wildlife buffer zone...". No <br />restrictions are made stating that only coal within the wildlife buffer of the <br />existing lease could be mined. As evidence of this position, one must look no <br />further than the fact that the BLM entirely removed the wildlife buffer zone <br />from their planning process. It ~s our position that your reconstruction of the <br />"original intent" of this study ignores too many historical facts and was made <br />without the input of those wno were originally involved. CYCC believes very <br />strongly that the previous elk studies apply to all mining proposed to occur on <br />the Little Middle Creek Tract as will be submitted as wuch in our forthcoming <br />permit application. <br />It has been our intention throughout the consultation process of continuing <br />the elk study at a reduced level. We were under the impression that both CDOW <br />and USFWS had verbally agreed to this reduced level of study. Upon examination <br />of our data, we recognize that the radio-telemetry work should continue; <br />however, we do not believe the data demonstrates any need to continue the study <br />at "the same level of effort that has been put into elk studies in the past." <br />If acceptable to the CDOW, we intend on proposing a five year continuation of <br />the current study. We will propose to trap only mine elk, which utilize the <br />Little Middle Creek Tract during the calving period, to try and maintain ten <br />functional radios, and to continue with the monthly aerial flights and <br />helicopter cow-calf surveys. Results would be supplied in an annual report and <br />refinements to the study would be made as needed and as agreed upon by the CDOW. <br />10 <br />~~ <br />