REP42775 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I Bluestone and Section 16 Wildfire Issues Report western Aggregates, Inc. I early 1800's until recently. Their numbers are now starting to rebound and they are apparently returning to their original range (Samuel and Nelson 1982). I The project area lies on the western edge of historic swift fox habitat, and specimens have I been collected from counties surrounding Jefferson County (Armstrong 1972). Bissell and Dillon (1.982) consider the species to be present (breeding) in the latilong block overlapping the projf:ct area. However, it is unknown if this species is present on either proposed mining I area. Swift fox have apparently not been detected within the RFP buffer zone (USDOE 1994a). Because of the suitable habitat and refugia provided within the buffer zone, it is likely th;it if any swift fox were present in this general area, they would occur within the I buffer zone. It is, therefore, unlikely that swift fox are now present in the vicinity of either mining area. However, if present, the loss of habitat associated with mining would represent I a relatively small loss of hunting habitat for any swift fox whose home range overlapped either oI both mining areas. 4.2.3 TI~REATENED, ENDANGERED, AND CANDIDATE SPECIES SUMMARY I With the exception of the ferruginous hawk, loggerhead shrike, and Preble's meadow jumping mouse, none of the threatened, endangered, or candidate species potentially present ' in the vicinity of the 2 mining areas are known or suspected of using habitats present within either proposed permit area. With the implementation of measures to avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts, none of these 3 candidate species would be adversely affected by the I mining proposals. Therefore, mining proposed at the Bluestone and Section 16 sites would be in cornpliance with the Endangered Species Act, as amended, and it would not contribute I to the future listing of any candidate species. I 4.3 MIGRATORY BIRDS I The migratory bird issue, raised by the USFWS (B. Garza, pers. comm. Oct. 12, 1994) focuses on avoiding "take" per the provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. In the I present tnining context, "take" focuses on mining activities during the breeding season. Of the 425 acres in the proposed Bluestone expansion area, less than one-half of that I acreage would be mined. The high quality vegetative communities within the Rock Creek Habitat Preservation Area, which support a relatively high diversity of breeding birds, would I be avoided by mining and protected from mine-related surface disturbance for the life of the mine. Thus, the highest quality breeding bird habitats on-site would be avoided. However, based on breeding bird surveys of similar adjacent City of Boulder Open Space (Thompson I and Strauch 1984, 1985, 1986), several ground nesting bird species can be expected to nest in the upland grassland habitat proposed to be mined. These species include, but may not I Western Eoa:ystems, Inc. 20 December, 1994