2009-12-03_REVISION - M1998022 (4)

Home Browse Search

Gallegos Corporation will need to demonstrate compliance with all applicable state and county regulations." This statement requires compliance with the Colorado Noise Statute, an applicable state regulation. As part of this demonstration, the White River NF can require measurements of the noise generated from rock gathering activities to determine compliance with the noise statute: Noise was raised as a potential issue as part of scoping and was therefore thoroughly addressed in the EA particularly in the Design Criteria, Summary or Effects Analysis, and Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences sections (EA, Pages 7, 9, 12, and 28). The appellants go on to claim that current operations on privately held land exceed "70 db(a), well over the 55 db(a) limit." This allegation does not apply to the decision in question because the decision has not yet been implemented and therefore cannot be in violation of the statute. There is nothing in the record that indicates approval of rock harvesting activities on FS lands will lead to operations exceeding maximum permissible noise levels. Recommendation: Affirm the District Ranger's decision on this issue. Issue 2• The decision violates the Upper Crystal River Special Area Regulations (Gunnison Count Specific Allegation: "This project, if approved, would contravene the Upper Crystal River Special Area Regulations. One of the primary directives of the UCR Special Area, is to protect the environment by avoiding adverse impacts caused by land development" Discussion: The Upper Crystal River Special Area Regulations were considered during the project analysis (Project Record, Section 118, Design Criteria, Comment # 16). At the time of the analysis, the Upper Crystal River Special Area Regulations (July 11, 2008 Draft) were not adopted by the county. These regulations primarily relate to the size and location of buildings and other structures in the Upper Crystal River area. The Draft County Regulations are not applicable because the regulations were in draft status at the time of the analysis (i.e., not in effect). Further, these regulations principally address and pertain to buildings and structures. Finally, county regulations do not preempt the Federal authority underpinning this NEPA process and specific decision. Recommendation: Affirm the District Ranger's decision on this issue. Issue 3: Visual impacts will exceed allowable thresholds for a Class A area, the Crystal River Corridor (violates the Forest Plan) Specific allegation: The assumption that trees will offer sufficient shielding to reduce visual impacts is nullified by the die-off of spruce tress already occurring in the immediate area. Without the trees, the project will seriously compromise the Forest Plan position that states that "the Crystal River Corridor is a Class A area which provides unusual, unique or outstanding scenic quality." 2