Laserfiche WebLink
1) All seed must comply with BLM and Colorado weed seed guidelines. There should <br />be no prohibited species seed, and no more than allowable levels of restricted species <br />seed. In addition, there should be no more that 0.5% total weed seed, less than 2% <br />other seed, and no trash larger than 0.25 inches in length. Seed shall not be stored in <br />burlap bags. <br />2) The UFO places additional local restrictions on seed to minimize cheatgrass spread. <br />If seed tests show any Bromus tectorum or Bromus japonicus, the BLM should be <br />consulted with for approval. No mix placed on BLM shall contain more than 150 <br />Bromus tectorum and/or Bromus japonicus seeds per pound. <br />3) BLM requires additional seed tests on seeding projects that are greater than 20 acres <br />and/or require over 200 lbs of seed. For these seeding projects, the project proponent <br />should have the seed supply company store the purchased seed prior to mixing, and <br />pull samples to be sent to a certified laboratory, preferably Colorado State Laboratory <br />at the following address. Seed test results must comply with the criteria listed above <br />before seed is mixed, shipped and applied to the project area: <br />Wyoming State Seed Lab <br />University of Wyoming <br />749 Road 9 <br />Powell, WY 82435 <br />4) Copies of seed tags and test results shall be submitted to BLM for all seed applied <br />• regardless of project size. <br />5) Only State certified weed free mulch shall be used. <br />No Action Alternative: The no-action alternative would deny authorization of the CEL. No <br />further knowledge concerning the coal resource would be obtained. Some question would <br />remain about the quantity and quality of federal coal reserves. The likelihood of a lease <br />application would diminish, thereby reducing the potential for mining operations generating <br />revenue from royalties for Federal coal and depleting coal reserves. <br />SCOPING AND ISSUES: On March 12, 2010, ninety-eight letters requesting comments on the <br />proposed action were mailed to individuals, government agencies, and other organizations. A <br />single comment letter was received April 9, 2010. The primary areas of concern were water <br />quality and quantity, as well as soil erosion. Those comments are summarized and responses <br />shown below: <br />• Avoid damage to Terror Creek and its tributaries. Addressed in: Primarily addressed <br />in the 2005 Spruce Stomp EA. The Endangered species section of this document, the <br />2009 BA and the 2010 BA also address this issue. <br />• Avoid altering the timing, quantity, and quality of water within the Terror Creek <br />drainage system. Addressed in: the Proposed Action, Endangered Species, Aquatic <br />abitat, Water Quality and mitigation sections of this document. <br />• Do not alter the watershed's ability to capture, store water, and release water. <br />. Addressed in: the Water Quality and Quantity sections of this document, especially <br />DOI-BLM-CO-S050-2010- 0017 EA Page 13 of 43 May 2010