2013-05-23_PERMIT FILE - M2013031

• Permit No: M2013031
• IBM Index Class Name: PERMIT FILE
• Doc Date: 5/23/2013
• Doc Name: 112c APPLICATION
• From: OPERATOR
• To: DRMS
• Email Name: KAP
• Email Name: GRM
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

Exhibit Page 27
animal accidents. No livestock grazing in mining and work area is proposed during operations or reclamation, until
release is granted.
3. Assessment of mining impact on wildlife:
Mining will improve browse and grass availability on the site. While reducing trees (which have limited suitability for
many species) the browse vegetation will increase and supplement the existing extensive areas of browse
vegetation on site, in ravines and other areas which will not be disturbed by mining. Wildlife will continue to use
areas not actually in production, including areas from which trees and brush have been cleared but grass and
smaller browsing plants are still present, and reclaimed areas. In the long term, reclamation should improve the
capability of the area to sustain wildlife, although this is not the intent of reclamation. The total mining operation will
be only 0.5 miles from east to west, and the entire width will not be disturbed at the same time, so adequate
alternative routes for migrating wildlife will remain, and therefore the operation 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. At the existing Hay Camp Pits to the north and east, elk and deer 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. Since this operation will generally be seasonal in nature, any possible impacts will be greatly reduced.
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 that requested by CDOW and obtained due to actions which would be performed
for other purposes. The major mitigation will be reclamation of disturbed areas, both during and following the
operation of the mine. Planting of suitable native grasses and forage in stockpiles provides for poorer quality areas
taken out of production. Seed mixes take wildlife into account, although intended for livestock. This is NOT
designated as an elk summer concentration area.
5. Name, Title, Address and Phone of Person preparing wildlife statement:
Nathan A. Barton, P.E., D.E.E., Environmental Engineer
P.O. Box 3471, Rapid City, SD 57709 -3471 Phone: [phone]
P.O. Box 88, Cortez, CO 81321 -0088 Phone: [phone]
Prepared for McStone Aggregates, LLC
6. References:
a. Colorado Mammal Distribution Latilong Study, Colorado Division of Wildlife and
Denver Museum of Natural History, OCT 1990
b. Colorado Bird Distribution Latilong Study, Colorado Division of Wildlife and
Colorado Field Ornithologists, DEC 1987
C. Colorado Reptile & Amphibian Distribution Latilong Study, Colorado Division of
Wildlife, MAY 1981
d. Montezuma County Colorado Listing of Species, web site (CDWR)
e. US Fish and Wildlife Service, various websites, visited 20 APR 2013.