Laserfiche WebLink
<br />CHRISTIAN PIT #2 ' <br />Page 2 <br />Nd record exists of what soil amendments were used on the seeding project. It can <br />only be assumed that some fertilizer was applied. However, none was called for in <br />the permitted plan or in the S.C.S. recommendations. It appears this will have to <br />remain an unknown until some definite information is acquired. <br />Rule 2.41(6): An appraisal of the success of reclamation efforts, and in the event <br />of failure o£ any efforts, a short narrative on the suspected or determined cause of <br />such failure. <br />This report is being written in March and therefore it is very difficult to determine <br />how successful the reclamation has been. We do not believe that Mr. Schmiedings <br />assessment in 1979 a few weeks after seeding is valid. The area will be examined <br />this May or June when the grasses have grown to the point where they can be identified <br />and examined for vigor and cover. This assessment will be made a part of the amendment. <br />Let it suffice for now to say that grass is growing on the area and appears to be of <br />similar cover to the surrounding areas which are rather sparse. <br />Rule 2.41(7): Estimates of the location and number of acres to be affected in the <br />coming year. <br />Although land has been stripped north of the 1976 permit boundary, the extraction <br />itself is well within the boundaries. All extraction will be kept inside the 1976 <br />permit boundary. No land will be further affected in the old mined land south of the <br />permit boundary. Future mining plans will be more precisely indicated in the amendment. <br /> <br />