My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2007-02-14_PERMIT FILE - C1981044A (4)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Coal
>
C1981044A
>
2007-02-14_PERMIT FILE - C1981044A (4)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:16:35 PM
Creation date
1/16/2008 1:28:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981044A
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
2/14/2007
Section_Exhibit Name
2.04 Information on Environmental Resources
Media Type
D
Archive
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
47
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
Parthenium li~,ulatum <br />Penstemon yamoaensis <br />According to the aforementioned publication none of the above mentioned species are reported to occur within the <br />vicinity of the EC Mine complex. The Federal Register (May 1980) lists three (3) threatened and endangered species <br />in Colorado. These are listed below: <br />Echinocercus u~lochidiatus var. inermis <br />Sclerocactus lancus <br />Selerocactus mesae-derde <br />The Forest Service publication reports that these vegetation species do not occur within the vicinity of the EC Mine <br />complex. <br />Since no new disturbance of undisturbed ]and is planned and no known raze or endangered species are listed in the <br />literature for the EC Mine area, it is apparent that the existing and planned mining operations will not adversely <br />impact any rare or endangered plant species. See information presented in Exhibit 15A. <br />The U. S, Fish and Wildlife Service, in their letter of April 8, 1998, advised that Suiranthus deluvialis may be present <br />in the azea. No new surface disturbance is anticipated, therefore, impacts [o the species is unlikely. <br />Range Inventories <br />The United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service completed range inventories of EC's mining <br />operations. Locations of vegetation inventories are presented on the Vegetation Map (Map 20). Property boundary <br />sections and a description of range aspects for EC's properties both natural and man- made are included on the <br />Vegetation Map (Map 20). <br />Range inventory information, recommendations from the Soil Conservation Service for reclamation of range effected <br />by mining, and range condition inventories conducted by Ecology Consultants, Inc. have been included in Exhibit 14, <br />Supplemental Vegetation Information. <br />Yana Proiect Environmental Analysis <br />Ecology Consultants, Inc. was contracted by Steams Roger, Inc. in 1978 to conduct an environmental resources <br />survey for the Yampa Project Environmental Analysis. The following narrative describes the methodology and results <br />of this environmental resources survey. <br />After a reconnaissance of the region, sites were selected for detailed studies of the structure and composition of <br />chazacteristic terrestrial communities. Care was taken to select locations which were representative of each <br />community-type as a whole. Because of the pemranent ecological instability, which chazacterizes cultivated lands, <br />only natural communities were samples. It should be emphasized, [hat the natural biotic community surrounding the <br />EC Mine site have been markedly effected by past and present agricultural and ranching practices. Vast areas of <br />natural vegetation have been replaced by an extensive dry land grain industry, especially in the lower portions of the <br />northern slope of the Williams Fork Mountains. All of the region sagebrush communities have been modified in <br />terms of species composition and coves by livestock grazing. Study sites were located where recent grazing had not <br />been heavy. <br />Four (4) vegetation communities representing the major ecosystems in the area were selected for the study. These <br />four (4) vegetation communities were as follows: <br />Permit Revision 04-34 2.04-35 Revised 7/2/04 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.