REV97930 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

June 8, 1990 Page 3 DIVISION OF WILDLIFE CONCERNS 1. On May 21, 1990 Division of Wildlife representatives Bruce Goforth and Jim Jones met at the Alma Placer with Jo n Schmuck and Herb Hendrix, representatives of Reclamation esources, Inc. Measurements were made and methods were di cussed to mitigate potential erosion from two areas of the and No. 1 berm and sedimentation to the Middle Fork of the So th Platte River. The two areas were (1) where the berm is a jacent to the Middle Fork of the South Platte River and (2) where the berm is adjacent to wetlands area vegetation in both directions from area (1). The DOW is satisfied with the plan jointly arrived t for area No. (1). The simple diagram of this plan that you tated was included with your last response could not be found. You made reference to detailed plans yet to be submitted. Please include the detailed plan and diagram with your r sponse by June 8, 1990. The DOW is also concerned about area No. (2) and w nts to be assured that erosion and sedimentation will not oc ur there. RRI has not committed to protecting this portion o the berm. Prior to this time the MLRD was not as concerned ab t erosion and sedimentation from this area. We felt that the egetation between the berm and the stream would trap eroded m erial and prevent most of it from reaching the stream. Howev r, the DOW feels that the wetlands vegetation could be damage and that sediment could reach the stream. Since this would onstitute off site damage and could constitute a violation the MLRD agrees that this area should also be protected. An cceptable compromise would be to provide mechanical protect on of all areas outside of the areas to be rip-rapped r ther than completely revegetatinq these outslopes. This echanical control could be accomplished with jute erosi n control blanket, excelsior mat or a similar method hat would stabilize the slope for the 2-3 year period befo a grading occurs. Please state clearly what commitments RRI will make to stabilize the berm. Pursuant to your request, the configuration of "area No. 1" is provided in the attached report. For "area No. 2", RRI points out that in a letter from he MLRD to the DOW dated April 18, 1990, the MLRD concluded that additional erosion control is not necessary because of the "buffer of shrubs, grasses, and forbes on the gentle slopes between the b rm and the stream". RRI agreed with that conclusion.