Laserfiche WebLink
CoulMethane Drainage Project- PaneLr 16-24 Wert E!k Mine • Page 3-10 <br />3.1.2.8 Public ATV Use Option <br />Under the Public ATV Option, continued long-term ATV access on the West Flatiron, West Bench, <br />and East Bench roads would result in continuing use and minor ongoing erosion and sedimentation <br />effects from these trails on adjacent drainages and particularly where the trails (West Flatiron) cross <br />drainages or riparian areas. <br />3.1.3 Cumulative Effects <br />The planned sequence for the drilling starts in panels 1G, 17, and 178 in 2002, progressing into panels <br />21 through 24 in years 2003 and 2004, and finishing in panels 18 through 20 in the years 2005 and <br />2006. Panel 178 is not currently scheduled to be mined until 2016. There is slight potential for this <br />panel to be mined in the next 5 years. No or negligible cumulative effects are anticipated relative to <br />geology and ground water, since direct and indirect effects are negligible. Cumulative impacts relative <br />to surface water and riparian resources would increase over the duration of the project due to <br />increases in total disturbance area, then reduce after 2008 as revegetation of disturbed areas reduces <br />sedimentation and erosion. Initially, the potential impacts would occur in the southern portion of the <br />area, progressing to the north. Since all of the azea drainages are tributary to the North Fork, <br />increasing surface disturbance would have the potential to incrementally increase sediment <br />contributions to the North Fork. As noted in Section 3.1.2.], however, proposed mitigation and <br />monitoring measures would generally be effective in preventing or limiting soil loss, erosion, and <br />sedimentation. Proposed progressive reclamation of surface disturbance azeas would also be effective <br />in minimizing the potential for cumulative impacts by limiting the overall dismrbance at any given <br />point in time. <br />Any large-scale future development activity (i.e.: coal exploration, leasing, future methane drainage, <br />future mining, future methane gas development) would be subject to the same or similaz <br />environmental analysis, permitting, and mitigation requirements as the project proposal. These <br />safeguazds would tend to prevent or limit potential cumulative effects. <br />3.2 WILDLIFE <br />For wildlife resources, the project impact azea is the project azea. The cumulative impact area is a <br />larger area of approximately 18,940 acres on the north flank of Mount Gunnison, which encompasses <br />big game ranges to the south and east of the project area. <br />3.2.1 Affected Environment <br />The azea on the north flank of Mount Gunnison includes a number of tributazies that drain north <br />into the North Fork of the Gunnison River and southwest into Minnesota Creek. There aze several <br />perennial streams (Ravens Gulch, Deep Creek, Box Canyon, Sylvester Gulch, Lone Pine Gulch, and <br />Horse Gulch) in the area, however, none aze known to support fisheries. Elevations in the <br />cumulative impact area range from 7,400 feet to 10,000 feet, and in the project azea, from 7,400 to <br />8,600 feet. Vegetative cover types from the flank of Mount Gunnison to the lower elevation areas <br />range from small stringers of spruce-fu and pure aspen forest, to large expansive azeas of Gambel oak <br />mixed with pockets of aspen- The upper mesas are dominated by grass meadows interspersed with <br />sagebrush. Forest communities associated with steep, incised drainages such as Deep Creek and <br />Ravens Gulch aze composed of Engelmann spruce-fu, Douglas fir and blue spruce. Ripazian habitat <br />in Sylvester Gulch and Box Canyon is composed of mixed woodland species, such as naaowleaf <br />cottonwood, aspen, box elder, Rocky Mountain maple, and mountain ash. Ripazian communities <br />assouated with intermittent or ephemeral drainages contain mountain meadow grass/forb and carer <br />species, and in some azeas, an aspen overstory. Succession in the oak habitat type is strongly <br />influenced by fue. This area burns on a 15-25 year cycle. Fire frequency has declined in the past 100 <br />yeazs, therefore, most of the oak is mature and dense. The majority of oak habitat within the analysis <br />Environmcntal.'L.rurment <br />reVP/Nwls'. CdG/EA/0..yri/a/0]EI UIFf <br />3/f/OI ~N <br />