2013-07-11_REPORT - M1988044 (2)

Home Browse Search

was expended to create exclosures to protect cottonwood stands from cattle grazing so they could recover from the devastation inflicted as a result of essentially an open range policy allowed for Pancost and his grazing operation. Furthermore, such damage could be interpreted as possibly being contrary to the 404 permit issued under the Clean Water Act. Although, the Board is certainly free to make their own decisions regarding grazing on unmined as well as reclaimed and released mined land, the Mined Land Reclamation Board remains the primary body controlling use of mined land that has been reclaimed but not yet released. Schmidt must emphasize that grazing on the south end of the riparian corridor where mining has occurred and land has been reclaimed but not released could compromise the ability of Schmidt to obtain a bond release on that land. Full release of that land is very near. Therefore, Schmidt must insist that grazing, if done at all, on unreleased reclaimed land in the riparian corridor be kept to a bare minimum or prohibited entirely until release is provided. Once that land is released from bond then the Land Board would be free to do what they please, provided the 404 permit requirements are still complied with. MINING ACTIVITY IN THE LAST YEAR: Depth of mining - In the last year, mining depths were consistent and reached down to considerable depth. Overburden in the last year was less in some places than it has been in the past couple of years. This reduced the volume of overburden acquired for backfilling, but there is still enough to properly backfll the pit. The overburden is being stockpiled adjacent to the mining area so backfilling can be done easily and economically. All mining was in compliance with the depth requirements. Soil was salvaged as required. A small expansion to the north was also begun in June. 2. Backfilling - No significant backfilling of mined areas was done in the last year. A. Depth of backfilling - No significant backfilling occurred. B. Material used in backfilling - No significant backfilling occurred. C. Maximum, minimum, and average slopes - Finished slopes in all the backfilled, graded and topsoiled areas are rarely even close to the 5:1 limit. Most are in the 7:1 to 15:1 or less steep range. No significant backfilling occurred. D. Deviation from original elevation for new backfilled land - No significant backfilling occurred. 3. Processing facilities - Nothing has changed here. 4. Access corridors - No change in access corridors. Status report for 2013 due July 15, 2013 Page 5 of 16