2011-02-15_REVISION - C1980004 (2)

Home Browse Search

Corey Heaps McClane Canyon Mining, LLC February 15, 20I1 Page 9 information presented in this survey was obtained from a cooperative project involving the CDOW and BLM in East Salt Creek. No threatened or endangered species were found during the biological survey and it is unlikely any will be impacted by the project. 32. The following questions pertain to Appendix V. a. 1. 1.2 — Third paragraph, third sentence — The text reads: "Plating the west - facing slope of the disposal area with cover material..." Please fix the typo `plating' to say `planting.' b. 4. 1.1 — Impact Assessment, Mule Deer and Elk, page 33, first paragraph, second sentence — The text indicates the presence of a gas plant. Please clarify the area where the gas plant is located on the permit site. c. 5. 1.1 — Mitigation, Mule Deer and Elk, page 38, Fence Removal, fifth sentence — The text refers to "barbed wire fencing under the access road should also be handled in a similar manner." Please clarify the meaning of "fencing under the access road." d. 5. 1.1 — Mitigation, Mule Deer and Elk, page 39, Noxious Weeds, second sentence — The text says the "noxious weed control should be expanded to areas outside the main project area and along selected, important movement corridors." Please describe how far `outside the main project area' and the location of the `selected, important movement corridors.' A map showing these boundaries and corridors is requested by the Division. e. 7.4 -- Recommended Seeding for Reclamation, Table 17, page 46 — The table lists the BLM's recommended seed mix for Pinyon - Juniper and/or Mountain/Wyoming Big Sagebrush Shrubland which is different (ex. does not include forbs and shrubs) than the approved seed mix in Tables 3.4 -la -c of the McClane Canyon. Mine permit. The Division believes the currently approved seed mix will provide more diversity. Is BLM in agreement with the approved seed mix? £ 7.4 — Recommended Seeding for Reclamation, page 46 — More explanation is needed from the CDOW as to the details of the final plant community that will support suitable habitat for wildlife. Include a letter from the CDOW stating desired species, shrub densities and planting arrangements as required in rule 4.15.8(7) and 4.18(5)(i). 33. The Applicant met with the CDOW and DRMS on April 15, 2010 to determine what fish and wildlife resources will be required. Please include the results of this meeting and reference it in the text. 34. The narrative incorrectly states that the Applicant has not received any guidance from the DRMS regarding the level of detail and the areas for the wildlife studies. See 2.04.11(2) above.