Laserfiche WebLink
24. :a ce:,ities of some forms of wildlife as quoted from Glovers <br /> work do not relate `o hacz`at type and also do not consider <br /> Z.�,asonal use. <br /> 25. In the plan, the remzsrk was ,made that summer was the season of -reatest <br /> resource use. , This depends upon habitat and wildlife species Ives. <br /> •nis is an area t::at needs expansion. <br /> 26. Tne impacts of ope ation and disturbance as well as rec1Q_mttion are <br /> not assessed for particular sieci" �s, ri'maril,-J birds and non-game <br /> 27. ::othin- in t e plan refers to the success or failure of present <br /> reclamation effort., - <br /> 28. :7e suggest a piece=,-meal approach to rer.,oval of willow habitat in the <br /> Mile.; In this Hazy, all the habitat would not be destroyed at <br /> once. fi Perhaps the willow could be moved to another site <br /> (tailings ponds) to mitigate losses. <br /> 20. believe that tee caption on the photo of the elk in the open <br /> pit is misleading, La that it inaicates that deer and elk "frequent" . <br /> the area. P.ecom,mend inclusion of the words "have been seen on one <br /> occasion in the area <br /> 30. We would feel better if the denities quoted from Glover related to <br /> habitat �ype. = <br /> 31. , We would like' to know ':ow, the 111000 acres of project land was <br /> aquired. �Hou much;was"purchased fee sir..ple", how' much from exchange' <br /> and w-'muds from public domain under the 1872 mining laws <br /> ho - ' k` • <br /> 32. Upon completion of the mining project and subsequent reclamat_ ion,' does✓, . <br /> Climax plan-to retain 'ownership, who will be responsible for -land'mgt. - . <br /> in the future and what will the primary use 'of the'land be ? <br /> 33. :de suggest attempting to re-establish willow on a reclaimed area of . <br /> the Robinson or one of the other tailings ponds. _ <br /> 34. Tie recognize the positive impacts of develouTent of Clinton Gulch <br /> and the aggregate area alonla the Arkansas. How will the plan deal <br /> with negative spin off impacts such as increase in b3c'c country use, <br /> both s m—,,ar and winter, snd the increase in hL-aan use of the r_•ram <br /> total area via new and/or ir:proved access routes. Since the direction <br /> of the plan seers to be to entrance the area for wildlife, we think that <br /> the com?any should ce _::are of t.ae negative impacts on wildlife from <br /> creation of recreation areas. <br /> 35. We felt that the .:ildiifa section of the plan was totally inadequate <br /> and it is difficult to respond to, except in a very negative way. _ " , <br />