Laserfiche WebLink
reduce big gameh~ehicle collisions, and even fewer that have actually evaluated these systems in terms of reduced <br />• incidence of road-kills. Mass transit systems were installed for the Tract C-a and Tract C-boil shale developments <br />in Piceance Basin. The effectiveness of the mass transit system in reducing mule deer road-kills was not analyzed <br />by Tract Ca (per. comm..lack Clark, Tract C-a), but some preliminary analysis has been done by Tract C-b (per. <br />comm. Tom Pysto, Occidental Oil Shale Company). Tract C-b has done some preliminary modeling using data <br />collected for several years on variables such as weather conditions, cumber of road-killed deer, and traffic levels. <br />The data collection period included the time span that their busing program was in operation. Their preliminary <br />findings have, interestingly, indicated Iha[ [he number of mule deer road-kills were relatively independent of <br />traffic levels and were more dependent on weather conditions and number of animals concentrated along [he road <br />(pers. comm. Tom Pysto, Occidental Oil Shale Company). In other words, they had a higher incidence of road- <br />killed deer when snow levels forced deer [o congregate along [he road, and this increase occurred independently of <br />traffic levels. These findings may apply only to [he Piceance Creek Road, but they do pose some questions <br />regarding the effectiveness of mass transit systems over other methods with respect to reducing big game road- <br />kills. <br />Information on cost/benefit analyses of mass transit systems used for reducing big game road-kills is virtually <br />nonexistent since data on their effectiveness are not readily available. Reed et al. (1982) used information on <br />vehicle repair costs, economic value of deer, the costs of establishment and maintenance of fencing, and incidence <br />of road-killed mule deer (before and after fencing) to compute acost-benefit ratio for deer-proof fencing installed <br />along Interstate 70. In their paper, Reed et al. stressed that this type of analysis can only be conducted if before- <br />and-after hig game mortality figures are available for [he mitigation technique in question. They also stressed that <br />the decision maker should be especially cognizant of pre-existing mortality figures before expensive mitigation <br />techniques are employed. <br />• In summary, factors such as posted speed limits and timing of peak traffic should considerably reduce the potential <br />for big game/vehicle collisions. TCC will employ these measures as part of its procedures to minimize road-kills. <br />Since data on baseline levels and projected increases for road-kills are generally lacking, there is a need to have <br />road-kill figures available in order [o identify problem areas or address the need or effectiveness of mitigation <br />measures. It is premature at this time to make a decision regarding the need for a mass transit system for the <br />Foidel Creek Mine. It may be advisable to monitor big game road-kills along the access and haul roads to <br />determine if [here is a need for a mass transit system or other mitigative measures. Details of a possible big game <br />road-kill monitoring program are provided in the response to Rule 2.05.6(2). <br />1 m pacts <br />Because the proposed expansion of the Foidel Creek mine will be entirely underground, impacts to wildlife in the <br />permit area are expected, for the most part, to be minimal. The only surface disturbance associated with the <br />proposed mine, in addition to [he portal area already disturbed, will be the development of the Fish Creek Borehole <br />/Shaft Area plus upgrading and construction of the access road to this location. <br />Placement of the access road will be primarily along existing dirt roads but there will be some upgrading and <br />widening of these roads. Habitats traversed by [he access road will be cropland, reclaimed pastureland, mountain <br />sagebrush, low sagebrush, and sagebrush/meadow. Most of [he disturbance will occur in cropland and reclaimed <br />pastureland. However, approximately 0.6, 0.8, 0.4 acres of mountain sagebrush, low sagebrush, and <br />sagebrush/meadow respectively, will be additionally disturbed by construction and upgrading of the access road. <br />Construction of the Fish Creek Borehole/Shaft Area will occur primarily in reclaimed areas. Since the principal <br />habits to be disturrbed are pastureland and reclaimed land, impacts to wildlife through habitat loss are expected to <br />be negligible. <br />MR 97-154 2.04-78 Revised 10/02/97 <br />