My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
APPCOR13290
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Application Correspondence
>
3000
>
APPCOR13290
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:33:31 PM
Creation date
11/19/2007 2:40:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982057
IBM Index Class Name
Application Correspondence
Doc Date
3/26/1985
Doc Name
REVIEW OF SENECA II WEST PERMIT APPLICATION
From
USFWS
To
OSM
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />IN RZPl.Y R6PtR 7'o- <br />~~~'I~~~~!~~I~~~ ~I~ <br />United States Department of the Interior <br />FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE <br />COLORADO FIELD OFFICE <br />7J0 SIMMS STREET <br />ROOM zez <br />GOLDEN, COLORADO eoaoi <br />a" <br />March 26, 1985 <br />'- i~ ~: <br />MEMORANDUM <br />T0: Mr. Bill Rovacic, Office of Surface Mining, Denver <br />FROM: Ronel Finley, Senior Staff Specialist, USFWS, Golden <br />SUBJECT: Review of Seneca II West Permit Application <br />~~~ <br />In accordance with 30 CFR Section 786.16, I am writing to provide <br />comments on Peabody's Seneca II W mine permit application. <br />Although we have found no irreconcilable wildlife issues associated <br />with this proposed mining operation, there are a few major concerns <br />that we believe must be resolved either prior to or as a condition <br />of permit issuance. These concerns are as follows: <br />Raptor Impacts: As required in Section 780.16(b)(2), the <br />applicant has not provided adequate assurance that a pair of <br />golden eagles nesting near the Hubberson Gulch access corridor <br />will be protected. Mitigation measure 12 (Page 14-12) of the <br />Seneca II W permit application states that Peabody will contact <br />USFWS and CDOW in the event that any disturbance to these <br />eaa_les is observed. This measure in itself is not sufficient. <br />It should be noted that a letter detailing our agency's <br />recommendations for mitigation of potential impacts to this <br />nest site was sent to Peabody on November 7, 1984 (copy <br />attached). In that letter, we informed Peabody of the need to <br />acquire an exception to allow disturbances within an <br />established, protective buffer zone. We have recently learned, <br />however, that the original buffer zone for the Hubberson Gulch <br />nests has been modified so that only public surface/mineral <br />properties are included. We further understand that Peabody <br />has petitioned BLM for an exception or re-delineation of the <br />current buffer zone to exclude a portion of their proposed <br />permit area which overlaps with a small, relatively removed <br />portion of the current buffer zone. <br />Although we agree that proposed mine disturbance to the <br />currently defined buffer zone will not likely impact golden <br />eagles, development of the Hubberson Gulch access road within <br />Section 16 could. As you are aware, disturbances that affect <br />golden eagle nest use or nesting success are illegal (Eagle <br />Protection Act, 16 USC 668-668d). Therefore, to avoid any <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.