GENERAL43153 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Division had contacted the Service on November 21, 1994, and ;subsequently received comments. The Division received comments from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife: Service (USFWS)on January 3 and Mazch 8, 1995. USFWS concerns regarding the proposed, mule operations included potential impacts to endangered species of fish due to W+ater depletion in the Colorado River basin, potential impacts to raptors on the mine site, the need 1.'or continued monitoring for the presence of a number of endangered species at. th.e mine site, and a number of recommendations regarding the operation and reclamation plans. Subsequent revisions to the permit application package by SCC addressed each of the concerns identified by the USFWS. On January 25, 1995, the Division received comments on the application from the U. S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The BLM found there were nog compliance problems with special lease stipulations or regulations of then agency, none a~f the lands within the federal leases were considered unsuitable for mining and reclamation, there were no conflicts between post-mining land uses and existing BLM land management plums, proposed measures to protect federal resources not covered by the rights granted by the: federal coal lease were adequate, and that the proposed operation would conform to the Mineral Leasing Act of February 20, 1920. On Mazch 10, 1995, the Division received comments regarding the application from the Colorado Division of Wildlife (DOW). DOW noted comments in the :application with which they disagreed. Specifically, it was DOW's contention that there may l:~e detrimental impacts to the sharp-tail grouse and sage grouse, due to lek loss, and that reclaumed azeas would not approximate original conditions of vegetative and animal community diversity, structure, composition, or biomass. DOW did not make any recommendations for mitigative measures, but requested they be included in any monitoring done ixi connection with the permit. The reclamation plan for the Yoast Mine will serve to mitiigate impacts to these bird populations as noted in Section A of this document. Additional wildlife monitoring proposed by SCC will help to verify the occurrence and mitigation o~f potential impacts to these bud populations. ', Description of the Environment The Yoast Mine plan azea is located approximately 8S miles southeast of the town of Hayden, and is positioned between three existing coal mining operations. The. Yoast Mine plan azea is approximately 4 miles southwest of the Seneca II Mine., 3.5 miles east of the Seneca II-W mine, and one mile west of the reclaimed Grassy Gap ]V[ine. 'See Figure 1 for further detail. The mining azea is located between Sage Creek and! Grassy ~'~reek and is found on USGS Mount Harris and Dunkley maps. Mining is proposed in two sepazate azeas, and in the neck pit connecting th.e two areas. During the first five year permit term, mining will develop in Section 17 of Township 5 Yost Mint 6 July fi, 1995