Laserfiche WebLink
Wildlife Resources Assessment <br />Cemex "C" Pit and CKD Disposal Site <br />Page 13 <br />Drastic mitigation includes treatment of the water, removal of the water, or closing the <br />pit. Water treatment does not address the continued influx of water of water into the pit, <br />' and may be a hazardous operation of its own. Closing of the pit simply transfers the <br />problem, as CKD disposal will need to continue somewhere else near the cement plant. <br />No wildlife has been documented as being injured or killed by the water in the bottom of <br />' the pit. The potential for wildlife to be damaged in the future in any significant numbers <br />is low to very low. The matter therefore does not require immediate drastic attention, and <br />is most effectively approached as a risk management and diligence issue. Diligence <br />' efforts should focus on clearly understanding the problem (identifying and controlling the <br />source of the water), and developing a longer term and permanent solution. <br />' 6.7 Mitigation Recommendations <br />For the short term, no action or only minor mitigation efforts are recommended. There is <br />a low probability of wildlife contacting the water in the bottom of the pit, and any future <br />' loss of life would be minimal in a relative sense. For example, up to 230 deer have been <br />killed per year from automobile collisions on US Highway 36 between Boulder and <br />Lyons. Fortunately, this number has declined in recent years. By contrast, no deer have <br />' ever been documented in "C" Pit. The loss of an occasional rock dove that wanders or <br />falls into the water is not considered a significant impact deserving of major or drastic <br />mitigation options. <br />' If minor mitigation is required in the short term, then gating of the access road would <br />prevent access to the pit by deer or other large mammals. Movable fence, such as that <br />used around construction sites, could also be placed along the top of the leading edge of <br />the CKD bank. The rest of "C" Pit is blocked from access by high walls. All fencing and <br />gates should be 8' tall. Avian wildlife could still approach the water, but only those with <br />high flight trajectories. <br />It is considered far more effective for the protection of wildlife, as well as other issues <br />such as addressing water quality in "A" Pit, that an effective means to permanently <br />address the issue be developed and implemented, and that this effort not be diluted with <br />short term drastic mitigation options that provide nothing more than a "band aid" effect, <br />and do not significantly reduce what is already a relatively insignificant impact. In this <br />regard it is recommended that removal of the water, and prevention of further excess <br />' accumulation of water in the pit, be implemented as a long term solution, and that the <br />most viable option or options be pursued immediately and with diligence. This approach <br />will likely take some time to implement, perhaps two to three years. However, it should <br />be remembered that as the extent of the water is reduced in the bottom of the pit, the <br />likelihood of contact by wildlife of concern with the water will continue to be reduced, <br />particularly by avian wildlife such as waterfowl and shorebirds. Therefore, any long term <br />action that in the short term reduces the amount of water is of benefit. <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br /> <br />