Laserfiche WebLink
• RESPONSE <br />Introduction <br />On November 16, 1983, the Applicant's personnel me[ with representatives from the Colorado Division of <br />Wildlife (CDOW), US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to <br />determine [he level of detail of wildlife information and studies necessary ro satisfy the requirements of <br />CMLRD Rules Section 2.04.1 I for Twentymile Coal Company's (TCC) Foidel Creek Mine Life-of--Mine <br />permit revision application. TCC is a subsidiary of Cyprus Western. Based on discussions at this meeting, <br />six items of wildlife concern were identified along with the level of detail required by [he agencies for <br />each item of concern. It was also concluded [hat if these items were studied and addressed to the <br />identified levels in the application, the basic requirements of Section 2.04.1 I would be satisfied. The <br />topics of study or concern which were identified are as follows: <br />I . Continued monitoring and protection of sage grouse leks. <br />2. Conduct field vegetation studies in conjunction with snow depth analysis on sagebrush to <br />determine where critical winter range for sage grouse exists. <br />3. Conduct a spring nesting survey of sandhill cranes. <br />4. Check permit boundary and potential areas of disturbance against CDOW maps to determine if <br />any critical big game winter range may be irnpacted. <br />~. Investigate benefits of a mass transit system for transport of workers from main portal to shafts. <br />6. Monitor and record big game road-kills on county haulroad from main portal to tipple during first <br />year of mine operation. If road-kills become excessive, then meet with CDOW to decide on <br />mitigation measures. <br />• Following the consultation meeting, the Applicant submitted a letter to the CMLRD, CDOW, and Office of <br />Surface Mining (OSM) outlining the results of this meeting and the general level of wildlife information requested. <br />This letter and letters of response and concurrence from the CMLRD, CDOW, and OSM are contained in Exhibit <br />17, Letters of Regulatory Concurrence on Level of Detail of Required Wildlife Information. <br />In the spring of 1984 the Applicant contracted the services of Cedar Creek Associates (CCA) in Fort Collins, <br />Colorado, to conduct wildlife studies and prepare wildlife permit sections far TCC's Foidel Creek Mine. Field <br />studies were initiated in April, 1984, and completed in July, 1984. <br />The following section describes the methodologies employed by CCA and also lists other pertinent studies and <br />documents that were reviewed for use in compiling species lists and describing the general faunal and habitat <br />characteristics of [he permit area. <br />Methodoloey <br />Numerous fish and wildlife resource investigations have been conducted in the vicinity of the Twentymile Park <br />permit area. In 1975 a Dames and Moore study (Exhibit 18, Baseline Environmental Report for Proposed Coal <br />Mine Expansion) examined terrestrial fauna in Sections L 12, 13, and portions of Sections ?, I I and 14, TSN, <br />R86W; Sections 5, 6, 7, 8, 17 and 18, TSN, R85W; Sections 25, 36 and portions of Sections 26 and 35, T6N <br />R86W; and Sections 30, 31 and 32, T6N, R85W. Additional wildlife inventories were conducted in the vicinity of <br />the permit area by ERT/Ecology Consultants, Inc. in 1979 (Exhibit 19, Fish and Wildlife Resources Information, <br />Eckman Park Permit Area). Aquatic monitoring studies have been conducted on Fish Creek, Foidel Creek and <br />Middle Creek (Exhibit 20, Aquatic Biological Survey of Middle Creek and Fish Creek Area, Exhibit 21, Aquatic <br />• Biology Survey of Foidel Creek and its Unnamed Tributary, and Exhibit 22. Aquatic Biology Monitoring Survey <br />of Foidel Creek). This yearly monitoring of macrophytes, fish and benthic invertebrates was terminated on <br />December 6, 1982 when the CMLRD approved a request by the Applicant to curtail the aquatic monitoring <br />program because the Applicant and the CDOW felt that existing data was sufficient and additional monitoring was <br />MR 97-1~4 2.04-62 Revised 10/02/97 <br />