GENERAL35013 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• i The company indicates that both bald and golden eagles inhabit the permit area. In order tc protect these and other raptors from an electrocution, the applicant will install perch guards on the power Doles. The company has indicated that a Peregrine Falcon aerie vas discovered vi thin the per3lt area in Suly, 19 i7, but the specific location and present status of the nest vas not provided. Communications with the Colorado Division of Wildlife indicates the aerie is located to the north of the permit area along the Colorado River and that Che aerie vas inactive when flrst observed. A specific location could not be provided. Si ace there are no plans to disturb any additional area at the mine, the Peregrine Falcon aerie should not be impacted. Socioeconomics Mitigation The company is not currently participating in any formal mitigation programs; hovever, it does participate on the Mesa County Impact Team. The company Ss investigating the possibility of pre-paying its State reverence [axes under applicable Colorado law. The confirmed operation of the Roadside `Line and eventual re-opening of the Cameo +~1 Mine should have no adverse socioeconomic impacts on Mesa Couatp and surrounding communities. At present, the aloe provides steady employment sad revenue for the local area. It is anticipated, hovever, that of cumulative population grovth holds true and full production of the Roadside-Cameo Mines is achieved, Mesa County would experience continued strain on its ability to absorb grovth. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE N0. 2 OSM may disapprove the 5-year MRP and not issue the 5-year permit. (This alternative is the equivalent of the customary 'no-action" alternative.) If this alternative were adopted, mining would be precluded on most o_` the permit area, at least temporarily, until an approvable plan is submitted, since Si: of the coal is Federally owned. Since Roadside and Cameo Mines are existing mines with all known surface disturbing activities already done, most impacts in Alternative No 1" have already occurred except there would be less subsidence related damaged, less coal recovered, less damage to overlying control resources, and few jobs except for those needed to maintain the mine. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE N0. 3 OSM nay concur with the State documents, conclusions, and stipulations (see Attachment A to this Environmental Assessment) sad approve the operator's mining and reclamation plan (MRP), and the issurance of a 5-year permit. If this alternative were adopted nearly all impacts would be similar co Alternative rl1 except [hat critical concerns regarding rights-of-vay, cultural resources, and threatened and endangered species night not be considered resulti ng in possible right-oi-~aay encroachment of prior rights parties, unnecesary damage to cultural resources and unqualifiable damage to a threatened and endangered species. _1~_