PERMFILE137665 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 2 • • James Lockhart May 25, 1999 Wildlife Corridors: Although there may be some argument regarding the effects of roadways on wildlife migration, in Castle's experience this is rarely a serious problem with mining, especially with relatively small operations such az this one. In fatt, on Castle's Colorado Springs quarries wildlife utilization is ofren rather heavy and the presence of the roads and mining does not impact the wildlife nearly as much az urbanization. One of Castle's quarries has been the home of one of the healthiest Bighorn Sheep herds in the state and is being reclaimed az habitat for those animals. Other quarries are heavily used by deer, and mountain lion are not uncommon. Many other species also occur within these areas. Although it is clear that a mine is not pristine habitat, it is not necessarily as destructive to habitat and wildlife utilization as many people are led to believe. The effects are based more on how the mine is managed than the mere presence of the mine. It is interesting [o note that in the Division of Wildlife review of the application they rated the wildlife impact of the Table Mountain quarry az "minor," although they noted that there could be impact along the roadways. Their primary objection was the conflict between mining and public use (hunting) under their lease. That has been solved by the Division altering their lease to create a more manageable use for hunting. New Access Route: Quite frankly, I am surprised that the Sierra Club would suggest finding a new route to the quarry. That would require building a new road. As an ecologist, I cannot follow the logic of how a new road would reduce the impact on wildlife, although it addresses the recreational use conflict, which is really not a problem now•. It seems to me that the best approach would be to concentrate the impact in existing disturbance areas rather than further fracturing the habitat with an additional road. In my reading of your letter, it seems that you are more concerned about public use than maintenance of habitat quality. I may be misunderstanding your letter. But Castle is more interested in the retention of large areas of unaltered, quality habitat than public utilization of land that the free use of which constitutes, in the opinion of the land owner, a trespazs. Caztle never even considered constructing a new access roadway because of both the additional cost and the additional land damage. You may not be aware of this, but gypsum mining, like quartzite mining, has been occurring at various times on Table Mountain for decades. Neither of these extractive activities are actually new uses. Public Safety: This is no longer an issue because the public will not be allowed to use the roadway they have inappropriately used in the past. Public Notice: The law and the rules and regulations regarding public notice are quite specific and every requirement has been met by Castle Concrete, to the letter. Publication was properly done in The Daily Record in Canon City. The sign w~az placed at the mine az required by the rules. The rules did not require chat the sign be placed at the highway, nearly three miles from the operation. Landowners on Barrett Road are not required to be notified az they are considerably further than 200 feet from the permit boundary and, furthermore, cannot even see the area to be mined, much less be affected by it. I am not sure what sort of public notice you are referring to on the mailboxes outside the Mountaindale Campground. [f there were such notices they were not put there by Castle Concrete and no such notices were required by the Division of Minerals and Geology or Fremont County. Ahhough I tend to agree in principle that, in this case, placing the sign at the mine might not be the very best place, that seems to be what the rules require. Furthermore, when Berhan Keffelew inspected the site on February 18, 1999, shortly afrer submittal of the application, he not only indicated the sign was "properly posted," according to his inspection report, but no mention was made that a voluntary posting at the highway might be a good idea. You should also be aware that the Fremont County Planning Commission required posting oI their sign at both the mine and the entrance gate by the highway. Yet, none of the objectors to the Reclamation Permit application filed with the state even appeared at the County Commissioner's