Laserfiche WebLink
John Doerfer - 2 - September 11 , 1989 <br /> attempting to establish willow growth along relocated Arkansas River <br /> channel . . .. The use of shrub seed on disturbed sites is an area which <br /> Climax may research. " It is disappointing to see Climax wanting to move <br /> away from a commitment to include trees and shrubs in reclamation. I <br /> think it would be good to continue to have commitment as to where trees <br /> and shrubs will be included in the reclamation plan. The decision by <br /> Climax to essentially eliminate reforestation from the reclamation plan, <br /> based in part, on very slow reforestation of historically logged areas on <br /> mine property, is not necessarily a good one. I think reforestation <br /> should remain a part of the plan and these areas should be delineated in <br /> the plan. The historic areas that have not reforested successfully may <br /> not have had the benefit of modern technology. <br /> 6. The amendment states that "areas designated for topsoil application may <br /> change depending on variables and that these changes will be noted <br /> through annual reports." I have no doubt that the present managers of <br /> the Climax property will use available topsoil to the best advantage, but <br /> I think that changes in the use of this very precious resource should be <br /> made through technical revisions not annual reports. <br /> 7. The original permit states that rock material will be placed on dam faces <br /> and tailing surfaces at a depth of 18" - 3 feet for stabilization. I <br /> think this change is o.k. , but is there some reason the 3 foot depth was <br /> specified in the original permit? <br /> 8. The borrow area for material to be placed on dam face No. 5 and beach <br /> areas of the Mayflower tailing pond needs to be addressed in the <br /> reclamation plan and mine plan as well as any other borrow areas which <br /> may be considered for dam No: 3. This material appears to be a better <br /> plant growth medium than the original proposed mine waste rock. Nearby <br /> successful revege tation on Hgy. 91 road cuts point this out. However <br /> those areas may have benefited from topsoil replacement. <br /> 9. The amendment states that"topsoil ultimately may be placed over the <br /> No. 5 dam face and reseeded." Will this rea be immediately reseeded <br /> after initial placement of the borrow material? All portions of dam face <br /> No. 5 and any other area on whi-cT—p7ant growth medium has been placed <br /> should be seeded before the end of the snow free season. <br /> 10. The amendment states that dam No. 3 will be reseeded "based on results of <br /> trials on No. l dam. " Is this true even if quarried borrow materials are <br /> used as a stabilization/plant growth medium as suggested elsewhere in the <br /> plan, rather than pit waste rock? If quarried materials are used, the <br /> dam face should be seeded the same season regardless of trials on dam No. <br /> 1 . <br /> 11 . It was stated during the inspection that records pertaining to the test <br /> plots have been wrongly reported or are otherwise not readily available. <br /> If the original reclamation plan was approved based on test plot <br /> information, I feel that an effort should be made to correctly recompile <br /> test plot data and protect the plots that have been established so that <br /> the years of effort and results can be used in final reclamation. <br />