Laserfiche WebLink
• Do not want to see occupancy associated with the mining operations <br />• Threats to public safety <br />• Do not feel the mine is of economic benefit, as there are other similar operations within the <br />area <br />• Desire to use the 80 -acre BLM parcel for local community and general public purposes <br />• Feel that the EA process is not adequate and an EIS is warranted at this time <br />• Public resistance to the proposal will negatively impact the mining industry <br />• Actions to foreclose access to scarce mineral reserves could hinder industry economic <br />benefits, as minerals are only where the deposits exist <br />• Do not want to see the beginning of a bigger mining effort in this area <br />• Negative impact to tourism in the area <br />The local interest has been documented in newspaper reports in the Fairplay Flume, the Colorado <br />Springs Gazette and a television report by Fox 31 news. In addition, the public has provided signed <br />petitions and personal letters in both opposition to the mine, as well as support. <br />A report titled, "Report on the Environmental Setting and Potential Impacts of the Proposed <br />Destiny Gold Mine Located on 80 Acres of BLM Land Near Fairplay, Colorado" was also <br />submitted to the BLM by the recognized No Fairplay Mine Coalition during the public scoping <br />meeting. Although this report provided a general overview of the public's concerns regarding the <br />mining proposal, the findings could only be considered in the context of public comments and <br />nothing beyond that scope. <br />2. All issues identified were brought forward for analysis. <br />INTRODUCTIONBACKGROUND: <br />A mining proposal was submitted on July 21, 2009 to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the <br />CDRMS for 4.84 acres that is currently under claim by multiple parties in Fairplay, CO. The proposed <br />mining consists of a gold placer operation, as well as sand and gravel. Prior to the mining proposal <br />submittal, an onsite visit was conducted on June 17, 2009. Since the onsite visit, multiple phone <br />conversations and a public scoping meeting have taken place. In addition, the RGFO has established a <br />webpage to better handle communications to and from the public. <br />The proposed placer and gravel mine is relatively small, by modern standards. The applicant intends to <br />mitigate local concerns to the maximum extent possible during operation and conduct reclamation <br />activities to return the mine area to ranchland and wildlife habitat upon conclusion of mining <br />operations. <br />BLMs PURPOSE AND NEED: <br />The proposed action consists of an analysis of a combination placer gold operation with the removal <br />and sale of sand and gravel. The proposed mine area is within an isolated 80 acres of public land <br />(Figures 1 and 2) that has been located under the 1872 Mining Law since late 1993 (placer claim <br />CMC245048). Per these regulations, any mining proposal (plan of operations) submitted is required to <br />be reviewed through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. The proposed gold <br />placer operation involves the processing of sand and gravel to remove detrital minerals (such as gold in <br />this case). Due to the nature of this type of mining, the date of the claim locations and the fact that this <br />sand and gravel is not identified as being a valuable mineral deposit, the processed sand and gravel are <br />2 <br />