My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP19223
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP19223
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:47:58 PM
Creation date
11/27/2007 2:35:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1979221
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Name
APPENDIX 2 ENVIRONMENTAL INVENTORY
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
197
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Native primary species include Bouteloua gracilis, Bromus tectorum and Convolvulus,Wheatgrasses, <br />Aster, Helianthus. Kochia and Yucca. Shrubby species such as Chrysothamus, Oakbrush and Artemi- <br />sia are also scattered throughout the project zone making less than 20% of the plant life. Ribses <br />• aureum, Cerocarpus montana, symphoriocarpos, Ponderosa and Gambel Oak dominate a drainage on <br />the north end of the project area and is likely the least disturbed portion of the project zone. The latter <br />plant community tends to be the dominant species throughout the Douglas County area but is not a <br />strong community within the proposed project zone. <br />Threatened and Endangered ies <br />Field surveys and literature searches indicated no known threatened or endangered species. Past ground <br />disturbances, weed control programs as well as grazing have altered the environment to the extent that <br />the area is inhospitable to many fragile native, threatened and endangered species. <br />Species diversity <br />In addition to a complete plant and animal field survey, three intensive, 200m X 200m survey zones <br />were established according to aspect, altitude, plant density, topographic features and soil patterns, in <br />order to establish plant and animal species diversity. <br />Recreation <br />Due to the fact current land use does not include recreation and the proposed project zone is on private <br />land, there will be no impact on public recreational opportunities. <br />Floodplains and wetlands <br />Plum Creek, a drainage within the Platte River basin, is the closest river system to the project area. It is <br />• approximately 1.5 miles from the proposed facility. Stream flows of Plum Creek within the October <br />1999 - October 2000 water year ranged from a high of 96.0 cubic feet per second on May 9, 2000 to <br />a low of 1.2 cubic feet per second on September 10, 2000. Low flows during June, July and August are <br />due to limited precipitation and irrigation. Peak flows in (cubic feet per second -cfs) from 1991 -1999 <br />were as follows. <br />Date Flow <br />8 /4 / 1991 110 cfs <br />4 / 17/ 1992 203 cfs <br />4 /24/ 1993 60 cfs <br />4 /25! 1994 125 cfs <br />6 /28/ 1995 808 cfs <br />5 /26/ 1996 131 cfs <br />8 /18/ 1997 261 cfs <br />5 /5/ 1998 550 cfs <br />Because no floodplains exist within the project area, no potential of river floods is present in the azea. <br />The drainages included in the project area drain less than 500 acres. Water shed during heavy rains <br />could occur in the project zone. Proper erosion and runoff control based on federal and state regula- <br />tions and recommendations will aid in avoiding any problems due to runoff through the project site. <br />. A July 2000 field survey discovered no wetlands within the project zone. No spring or seeps in the area <br />were evident. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.