2010-06-22_REVISION - M1994108 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

winter. They may use cottonwoods and other tall trees for perches. The value of these habitats for hawks should not be affected by the activities proposed. American peregrine falcons use cliffs and forested areas for breeding habitat. They also use riparian forested areas, grasslands, and agricultural fields in the area for foraging. This site has no cliffs and most forested areas will be protected in buffer zones. Mining progressively in small areas, and post-mining reclamation to irrigated agricultural fields should not change the availability of prey species taken by falcons. The end result is that falcon habitat will be maintained or improved with the project. Northern river otters use riparian habitats where fish and crustaceans are found. These habitats are not found on the site, and activities should not affect those either upstream or downstream. Gunnison's prairie dog is discussed above. Cultivated and previously disturbed land is not considered suitable habitat. Although this area has not been cultivated recently, areas to the east have, and so space for prairie dog towns is limited. 3. Assessment of mining impact on wildlife: Due to the past use of the land for cultivated, irrigated cropland, past mining on site, and the planned sequence of mining on the site, mining has had and will continue to have little or no negative impact on wildlife. As discussed with CDOW and USFWS at the time of initial permitting (in 1994-95), protection of forested slopes and low, streamside areas provides benefits for wildlife. However, even short-term impact on wildlife has been beneficial, since the site provides better quality water sources than Mud Creek, and reclaimed areas are protected from overgrazing by livestock. In the long term, reclamation should improve the capability of the area to sustain wildlife, although this is not the intent of reclamation. The siting and operation of the project will allow for continued migration of wildlife both up and down Mud Creek and across the valley, and therefore should have no reasonable potential for adverse impact on migration patterns. While claims are often made regarding the negative effect on wildlife from increased human activities, and from side effects such as noise, we have found that wildlife tend to be very common around operations such as quarries and sand and gravel pits, and even around operations which have a greater impact, such as landfills. This has been demonstrated at this site within the past four-five years, during periods with extensive activity on the site. Elk and deer, and various birds, are often seen while mining and crushing activities are underway, and do not appear to be chased off or significantly disturbed by heavy equipment and noise. Elk are increasingly seen even in built-up areas around towns and cities, as are deer and other wildlife. At this location, deer are attacted by the good water and fresh browse due to reclamation and removal of livestock for safety reasons. Based on the relatively small area impacted, and plans to allow water to infiltrate rather than flow on the surface or pond up, there should be no significant water depletion which would impact wildlife or their habitat and therefore require consultation. See Exhibit G. 4. Proposed mitigation measures, including reclamation, for wildlife habitat: Since there is no reasonable potential of significant impact, no mitigation measures are planned for the sake of wildlife habitat mitigation, beyond those inherent in the proposed mining and reclamation plan. Exhibits for 112(c) AM-02 Application -M-1994-108-2010- Page 46