Laserfiche WebLink
vegetation when they see them being a problem. Mature vegetation eventually will <br />blow into the ditch in the fall and spring growth season. <br />Division Response <br />The questions raised by the above comments are related to Rule 3.1.10(6) which states <br />methods of weed control shall be employed for all noxious weed species, and whenever <br />invasion of a reclaimed area by other weed species seriously threatens the continued <br />development of the desired vegetation. Weed control methods shall also be used whenever <br />the inhabitation of the reclaimed area by weeds threatens further spread of serious weed <br />pests to nearby areas. Furthermore, it is the policy of the Division to inspect for noxious <br />weed species during routine monitoring inspections. <br />The applicant has committed to controlling noxious weeds through mechanical means and <br />chemical application methods. The Division is satisfied that the information provided by <br />the Applicant meets the requirements of Rule 3.1.10(6) <br />3. Rule 6.4.7 Exhibit G - Water Information <br />The following objectors raised concerns on how the operation may impact the <br />hydrologic balance in the area: <br />• James and Betsy Klein - My main concern, since I am a direct property owner, is <br />that the bentonite bowl from this proposal and the current bentonite bowl (lake) on <br />the opposite side of my property may form a "Venturi Situation" that will be forced <br />upon my property. This could greatly effect my surface condition and have grave <br />effects on my property. <br />• Ron Baker - If a bentonite wall is constructed, I am concerned with the "shadow" <br />effect of such a wall in regards to ground water changes on my property. <br />• Ron Baker - Two water table monitoring wells were placed this past summer near <br />the North/East and North/West corners of the proposed site. I do not believe this is <br />sufficient to truly understand historic water flows in this area. There are no <br />monitoring wells near the North center of the site which might demonstrate <br />downstream "shadow" affect. <br />• Ron Baker - When I mentioned my concern of "shadow" affect to JC York, he said <br />IF a bentonite wall is constructed a perforated drain pipe would be installed on the <br />downstream side of the mine site. The last I knew, water will take the path of least <br />resistance which would mean water would always flow near the center depending <br />on current ground water fluctuations. This would mean more water concentration <br />just downstream of the entrance points. I also have the same concerns even if a <br />bentonite wall is not constructed. <br />• Ron Baker - I believe that part of the conditions Journey Ventures should be <br />required to meet would be a study by a water engineering firm agreed to by both <br />Journey Ventures and myself to determine future changes to historic ground water <br />patterns, and the amount of damage that I may have based on what they are <br />proposing. <br />• The Lower Latham Reservoir Company - The Reservoir Company has reviewed <br />the mining plan of the Applicant and the warm water slough area on the Gravel <br />3