PERMFILE132989 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

:°FRDM :SRGE HILL FRX N0. :970 785 6034 Rpr. 22 2002 03:52PM P2 Mr. Anthony J. Waldron 23 Apri12002 Page 2 Although the slough is fairly flat, it does slope to the north. Water entering the slough at the north end will flow downhill (north) right~back out of the slough again. Stop logs can be used to back the water up to some degree, but this use of stop logs is limited by the fact that water must still be allowed to overflow into the barrow pit in order to provide proper drainage for neighboring farms. In past years i have observed the distribution of the water from the Mayer-;Pyeatt sprinkler pond (which tics adjacent to the northeast corner of my wetland). The water from this sprinkler pond enters the slough near where the Mine Area 1. water might be brought in, The water from the sprinkler pond stays in the lower (north) end of the slough. While it can he backed up to some degree by adding stop logs to the water control structure, the water does not spread very far south, usually less than halfway up the length of the slough. In my opinion, it would be much more to the poirrt to bring the Mine Area 1 water into the slough at the SOUTH end of the slough. This would require pumping the water, rather than using gravity feed. Water brought into the south end of the slough would have more time to seep into the ground and spread aut through the wetland, before exiting the wetland through the water control structure. Both W WE and i agree that the water under my wetland probably flows to the northwest. This being the case, if you think of the slough as one side of a triangle, you can see that the more of the slough which is filled with water, the more of the wetland will be recharged by the slough. (Please see Attachments 1 and 2.} Therefore, i ask that as a condition of any mining Qermit being issgec(, Owena Brothers be renuired to supply water from Mine Area 1 to the SOUTFT end of the wetland sloualL rat}~er~h o the north end. B. Section 6.2.1 • of the WWE reports states: "Ijmonitoring show's larger than anticipated reductions in water levels in the wetland, then water should be delivered from Area 1 in the pipe/ditch to the wetland. " No specific information is provided as to what constitutes "larger than anticipated reductions" or who decides this important issue, i think it is necessary to specify clearly at what stage in the dehydration of the wetland would Owens Brothers be willing to provide this augmentation water to the wetland. Otherwise, Owens Brothers could postpone providing augmentation water indefinitely, using the argument that any reductions in water levels fell within the range of the reductions they had anticipated. Therefore, T ask that as a condition,~f any mining ~erm_jt being issued. Owens $rothers tte r~qured.,to state clearly in gyantitative terms exae_tRv what level of drop in the groundwater beneath the wetland would trigger the start-up of the augmentation program nit~that~said terms be agreed to by mxgelf under the advice of a water engineer and/or wetland specialist 2f tny_own choosing, the eos~• of su'c'h cQp~ulSlttlOn~o_b.,e i for b Owens Broths„rs.