Laserfiche WebLink
I_ ' <br />Chapter 3 <br />shade out understory species, thus limiting <br />species and structural. diversity. In some cases <br />removal. of mature Gambel. oak would increase <br />stand diversity, and is consistent with the 1991 <br />GMUG Forest Plan which sets standards for <br />forest diversity. Removal of mature Gambel <br />oak also stimulates additional forage plant <br />growth for wildlife and livestock, enhancing <br />wildlife habitat, as well as improving animal <br />inoveinent through the area. <br />Disturbance would also occur in upland shrub, <br />willow, pinyon-juniper, and spruce-fir cover <br />types under the proposed action on public anal <br />private lands (T'able 3-6). These disturbances <br />would be on a small scale and are a small <br />portion of the cover types in the project area. <br />Potential impacts exist in willow communities <br />which are often adjacent to springs or streams <br />and would require implementation of design <br />criteria such as silt fencing and sediment traps <br />to protect water quality. Disturbance could also <br />occur in E,ngelmann spruce (Picea <br />engebnannii) or subalpine fir (Abies <br />lasiocaipa) communities that contain <br />merchantable timber. Design criteria stipulate <br />that the Forest Service would be compensated <br />for removal of any merchantable timber. <br />Disturbance in :herbaceous and upland shrub <br />communities would not require mitigation in <br />addition to the proposed seeding and weed <br />control. <br />Construction of the Deer Creek Shaft and <br />stockpiling sub-soil material on site would <br />disturb four acres (Table 3-6). Vegetation in <br />this area is dominated by quaking aspen stands <br />in the uplands and willow species in the bot- <br />toms. Disturbance estimates indicate 90 percent <br />of the impact would occur in the quaking aspen <br />type. Shaft construction in these cover types <br />would reduce ground cover, alter community <br />vertical structure, and may increase erosion and <br />surface water sedimentation. <br />Road construction and upgrades would impact <br />predominately Gambel oak and quaking aspen <br />community types (Table 3-6). Affects on <br />vegetation community types would be similar <br />Table 3-7 <br />Approved Mountain Shrub Habitat Seed Mix <br />Common Naanet Scientific Name <br />Mountain bromegrass Brrornus marginatus <br />Prairie junegrass Koeleria nzacrarztha <br />Western wheatgrass Pascopyrum snzitlzii <br />Indian ricegrass Achnatlzerzrnz <br />Izyrnenoides <br />Sandberg bluegrass Poa secunda <br />Bluebunch wheatgrass Pseudoroegneria <br />spicata <br />Aspen fleabane Erigeron speciosus <br />Lanceleaf tickseed Coreopsis lanceolata <br />Slender goldenbanner Thermopsis morztarza <br />' Names are based on the USDA Plants database. <br />to those for MDW development. However, <br />continued light disturbance would occur as <br />MCC personnel access MDW sites for routine <br />maintenance. Continued road use increases the <br />risk of weed invasion into native plant commu- <br />nities and would require implementation of the <br />proposed noxious weed treatment program. <br />Interim reclamation would occur in the form of <br />seeding and mulching out-slopes and cut-slopes <br />as well as temporary mud pits. Final reclama- <br />tion would include sealing and capping all <br />wells and the ventilation shaft, as well as oblit- <br />erating new access roads and decommissioning <br />existing roads. These areas would be seeded <br />and contoured, creating grassland areas inter- <br />spersed among other vegetation types. The <br />proposed seed infix would include five native <br />graminoid and three native forb species and be <br />broadcast seeded at a rate of 20 lbs/acre follow- <br />ing fertilization of the site. Weed-free mulch <br />would be applied following seeding. Fencing <br />around MDW sites would allow some protec- <br />tion from wildlife and livestock disturbance for <br />vegetation establishment following well clo- <br />sure. <br />The proposed reclamation methods adhere to <br />Forest Plan directives which require using site <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />86 Deer Creek Ventilation Shaft and E Seam Methane Drainage Wells FEIS <br />