My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP40584
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP40584
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 12:32:17 AM
Creation date
11/27/2007 8:46:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982057
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
11/22/2004
Doc Name
2003 ARR Response to Comments & Revised ARR Form
From
Seneca Coal Company
To
DMG
Permit Index Doc Type
Annual Reclamation Report
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.
/
7
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
3. The Weed Control narrative on page 4 doer not reference the wbitetop spraying of stockpiler along the Tie Across Haul Road <br />indicated in notations on the 2003 Weed Spray Map. There areas may need to be re-treated this spring. Also, the weed <br />control narrative doer not include results of the annual qualitative monitoring described in the permit to evaluate progress, <br />ident~ areas requiring retreatment, and to ident~ new areas of established weeds requiring control <br />Please include appropriate narrative evaluation and mapping to assess effectiveness of treatments <br />conducted prior to 2003, and to identify treatment areas, target species and methods to be <br />employed in 2004. Backpack orATVmounted sprayers may be needed to access patches of <br />Canada thistle and hotmdstongue along drainages, oldgullyrepair areas, and otherlocations in <br />the interior ofreclamation blocks. Table ZZ-8 ofthe permit should be amended to include Telat, if <br />it wi/1 continue to be used for wbitetop control. Potential usefulness ofcotnmetciallyovailable <br />insects thatkey on Canada thistle should be assessed. <br />Response: The new weed management plan, required by Routt Co. weed district, specifies a pre-treatment <br />walkover inspection prior to the treatment season. The 2004 walkover was a dismal failure since the person <br />SCC hired did not know the difference between Curly Cup gumweed and Dalmation toadfiax and other <br />problems. Therefore, the 2004 evaluation and map are not reliable information. The 2005 evaluation and <br />subsequent treatment will be better; SCC plans to hire ESCO Associates or a weed expert with a good <br />reputation. Telaz and/or Escort are used in conjunction with other treatments of Plateau, Banvel, Tordon, 2,4 <br />D. and additional chemicals labeled for use on rangeland species. The comprehensive weed management plan <br />fox all three (3) Seneca pemdts will be submitted before the 2005 spring control season. This plan addresses <br />the application of these chemicals along with other cultural controls. <br />4. We have the following questions regarding the 2003 Reclamation Map: <br />a) It war our understan~'ng that al! areas of topsoil rerpread at the `D"Pit area in 2003 were seeded but this is not clear <br />from the map. Bared on the color code, it would appear that the `%5.3 acre future shrub plot rite"war toproiled but not <br />seeded Our recollection is that it war drill seeded with upland Seedmix 1, while the somewhat steeper doper further Wert <br />wen extensively roughened and broadcast seeded with Seedmix 1. Permit map 22-1 appears to depict areas of concentrated <br />shrub reeding and concentrated seedling planting along drainages and leer steeply sloping areas within the `©"Pit area, but <br />not on the steep highroad! reduction slope. Narrative on page 4 indicates that a new shrub plot rite near the north ride of <br />`D"Pit war roughened and needed with the `shrub mix 5 ". <br />Please provide some additional narrative to clarify the type and extent ofrevegetadon activity <br />completed m the "D"Pit Area in 2003, including the location and extent ofany areas seeded <br />with the shrub mix (Miar bin the approved permit). Alsq please address why the proposed <br />shrub plat area on the map includes the steep south facing slopes that are not specified for <br />shmb planting areas on Map 22-1. The map cold be interpreted to indicate that the entire IS <br />acre area would be seeded/planted with shrubs only, but we assume that the intent is that <br />scattered smaller shmb areas ofan acre of so would be developed within the larger area, as <br />described in the approved permit If the entire area has already been seeded with Seedrnix 1, <br />what measures will be taken to suppressgrass competition within the areas ofconcentrated <br />shmb seeding/planung.~ <br />Response: The area was re-contoured, re-roughened, and re-planted during the 2004 season. This work will <br />be cleazly depicted in our 2005 ARR. Since this area was almost totally reseeded in 2004 the value of the actual <br />work done in 2003 is debatable. During 2004 SCC planted approximately 9000 tublings, regraded several lazge <br />rills, revegetated with the Shrub and mesic mix. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.