REP37625 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

treatments and re-seeding will be required. During 2005, weed control efforts have been expanded into less accessible portions of the reclamation, but significant infestations of Canada thistle and bull thistle have been observed on recent inspections in recently reclaimed portions of the "D" Pit and "B" Pit, that have not been treated. Please ensure that reclaimed areas are thoroughly surveyed and that infestations are properly treated in the fall of 2005. Certain amendments to the approved weed control plan and related aspects of the revegetation plan appear to be warranted. These items will be addressed in the Division's forthcoming permit renewal adequacy review letter. 14. Survey based sediment pond capacities were reported as required in the report. Report narrative and notation to Table 04.4 indicate that there was a survey error, which erroneously indicated that 2004 capacity for Sediment Pond 005 was slightly less than the minimum allowed water storage capacity. Please provide an amended table with the corrected capacity for Pond 005. Annual Wildlife Monitoring 15. The Fish and Wildlife Plan section of the approved permit (Tab 23) contains commitments to monitor three golden eagle nests in Hubberson Gulch annually, conduct a winter aerial deer and elk census annually (December through early February), and maintain a record of big game mortality related to mine activities. In addition, SCC has also initiated monitoring of sharp-tailed grouse leks in the mine vicinity, with lek activity documented on one native site adjacent to a haul road annually since 2002, and on two additional reclaimed sites in different years during that period. During 2004, lek activity was documented on the native site and one of the reclaimed sites. The monitoring and reporting appears to have been conducted in general compliance with permit requirements. However, we note that the aerial big game survey has been conducted in March of 2003 and 2004, while the permit specifies a December through early February time period for the survey. Please address the reason for the late date of the survey in the last two years, and please ensure that future surveys will be conducted within the prescribed time period. Annual Revegetation Monitoring 16. Tab 22 of the approved permit includes a commitment to conduct revegetation monitoring of reclaimed parcels the 2n° or 3rtl growing season, and every two to four years thereafter, with sample data and evaluation to be included in the Annual Reclamation Report. Additionally, the Division had requested that a supplemental report focusing on woody plant density establishment within concentrated shrub seeding/planting areas be submitted with the 2004 report. Both reports were submitted as required. The annual monitoring report required by the permit addressed 1997 and 2002 revegetated areas this year. The report was thorough, well documented, and clearly presented, as is typically the case. Notable this year was the dominance of alfalfa in the 1997 seeded area (and its significant increase since 2001), despite the low seeding rate of only 0.25 Ibs per acre lless than 2% of the mix on a PLS seed per sq. foot basis). Notable in the 2002 seeding area is the relatively high initial density of woody plants (1392 stems per acre), primarily big sagebrush. 10