My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL32010
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL32010
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:54:49 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 7:09:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981071
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
12/6/1985
Doc Name
NOMINATION OF COLO YAMPA COAL CO FOR SPECIAL PROJECTS AWARD
From
COLO YAMPA COAL CO
To
COLO MINING ASSOCIATION
Permit Index Doc Type
GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE
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.
/
2
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
~ _' <br />MR. DAVID COLE <br />DECEMBER 6, 1985 <br />PAGE TWO <br />pits and 70% are within 1/2 mile. Also, it appears that daily blasting does <br />not impact the elk. Statistical analysis of cow:calf data obtained over the <br />past four years indicates no significant differences between elk using mine <br />and control areas. Elk reproduction remained high on mine sites during this <br />period. The data indicates that mining and its associated forms of surface <br />disturbance (at CYCC and the surrounding surface coal mines) within documented <br />elk calving. home ranges appears to have no measurable negative impact upon the <br />local elk-population. <br />Habitat utilization and selection reveals that elk are selecting aspen vegeta- <br />tion types during the calving period. As mining proceeds in aspen areas these <br />habitats, are. temporarily lost. As aspen habitats are changed to newly <br />reclaimed .lands, this changes the way elk utilize these areas. Mined lands <br />are quickly reclaimed and although newly reclaimed lands provide less cover <br />for elk, they do provide excellent forage in greater abundance than found in <br />aspen habitats. These newly reclaimed lands, although not selected for during <br />calving, are being used in proportion to their availability during this <br />period. In addition, reclaimed areas are being selected for during the fall <br />months. Th is .probably results from the quality and abundance of forage on <br />reclaimed sites and the reduced thermal cover requirements of elk during this <br />time of year. <br />This information serves to benefit the mining community not only in the better <br />management of elk populations and habitats, but also shows the adaptability of <br />these species. This study was conducted as mitigation for an area that was <br />originally declared unsuitable for mining because of elk calving areas. It <br />shows that with proper knowledge of wildlife. many areas can be successfully <br />mined and wildlife populations maintained. It shows that unsuitability desig- <br />nations are often not necessary to protect wildlife. <br />A copy of the text from the 1984 annual report is attached for your review. <br />The 1985 report will be coming out shortly, and as soon as a copy is avail- <br />able, it will be forwarded to you. <br />In the interim, if there are questions, please contact me at your convenience. <br />Sincerely, <br />C. Gene Consalus <br />Vice President. and General Manager <br />TKJ:kmk <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.