HomeMy WebLinkAbout01.03 Baseline dataBASELINE DATA
watch, w� �d � e b oils ,
vegetation, c ..mate •
EXHIBIT G
WATER RESOURCES thicknesses
Lands in the Roaring Fork Valley are underlain by
of sand and gravel averaging in excess of 150 feet.
The mining pro-
d land will excavate 35 to 70 feet of material
ject on the acted
to a point 8 to 10 feet above the river level. It is not exp
that any significant amount of water will be encountered during the
excavation of this mine. of the affected
The Roaring Fork River is the east boundary
land. The Robertson Ditch diverts from the Roaring Fork about
half -way up
the east side of the property and becomes the boundary
of the affected land on the northeast and north sides h many small
throng
The Kaiser -- Sievers ditch serves the property ,..
laterals and sub - laterals that have been built on the property arty sery es
(see
map
Exhibit C-1). Waste water in the Kaiser Sievers ditc
the mining operation with the small amount of water needed. interest
Sieve' Ranch & Development Company owns an undivided inter
of approximately 90% of the water in the Kaiser -- Sievers ditch.
Priorities are listed below.
iPr
- °rlty_
136
166
217AA
577
Priority Date
Nov. 2, 1885
Oct. 12, 1886
Apr. 15, 1902
Apr. 1, 1948
C.. SeC. Adjudicated Date
May 11, 1889
May 11, 1889
Apr.26, 1910
0ct.24, 1952
4.0
3.6
2.0
12.8
at an
One spring exists at the far north end of the property
roximately 3 feet lower than the future level of the
elevat ion a pp
- 20
XHIBIT G (Cont'd)
grazing land. It is not expected that this spring will be affected
by excavation.
There are no other seeps, springs, stock ponds, wells or
tributary water courses on the affected land.
Drainage from the property will be unchanged. Thus, surround-
ing landowners will not be affected.
The operator does not expect to disturb the prevailing hydro-
logic balance of the affected land or of the surrounding area either
during or after mining or during reclamation. Sievers Ranch &
Development Company believes it is in compliance with federal and
state laws and regulations governing water and water rights.
There is no application of the river dredge law or siltation
structure removal requirement.
The ongoing operations are not expected to cause measurable,
material injury to senior water rights.
STATE OF COLORADO
Richard D. Lamm, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WILDLIFE
Jack R. Grist, Director
6060 Broadway
Denver, Colorado 60216 (825- 1192)
711 Independent Avenue
Grand Junction, CO 81501
Stevan O'Brian
9989 W. 60th Ave.
Arvada, Colorado 80004
Dear Mr. O'Brian
:BIT H
June 19, 1979
Enclosed is a copy of a wildlife statement for your Mined
Land Reclamation Permit Application. The Division of Wildlife is
anxious to work with your company throughout the operation and
reclamation phases to solve problems of mutual concern. If we can
be of any assistance in discussing wildlife or wildlife habitat,
please contact me or your local District Wildlife Manager.
I can be contacted at Colorado Division of Wildlife, 711
Independent Avenue, Grand Junction, Colorado 81501.
WDC :jg
ENC
William D. Clark
Wildlife Biologist
22
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, Harris Sherman, Executive Director • WILDLIFE COMMISSION, .Sam Caudill, Chairman
Michael Higbee, Vice Chairman • Jay K. Childress, Secretary • Jean K. Tool, Member • Vernon C. Williams, Member
Thomas Farley, Member • Roger Clark, Member • Wilbur Redden, Member
E)L. BIT H (Cont `d)
WILDLIFE STATEMENT
The following information pertaining to wildlife is provided for
use by the Mined Land Reclamation. Board in their consideration of
a mining permit for Sievers Pit, Sievers Ranch and Development CO.,
: • r w • e — • •
Colorado 80120
The Colorado Division of Wildlife does hereby find, to the best of
our knowledge, that the impact of the proposed mining operation on
wildlife will be
xxx minor
moderate
major
Mine Location:
E1/2 SW4, SW4 NE4, SE 1/4 NW 1/4 Sec. 18, T7S, R88W
Ez NE4, NE4 SE4, Sec. 13, T7S, R89W, 6th P.M.
Wildlife Species List: (may be attached)
Mule Deer Coyote Mountain Whitefish
Raccoon Cott_ntail Rabbit
Badger Rainbow Trout
Mourning Dove Brown Trout
Endangered Species Impacted:
Bald Eagle could be impacted if riparian vegetation is disturbed.
Assessment of Impact on Wildlife: (may be attached)
The project as proposed is located on a bench above the Roaring Fork
River primarily in hay meadow and grass pasture. if—the project is
developed as proposed, impacts on any of the above species will be
negligible.
Reclamation Recommendations: (may be attached)
1. Strip topsoil and reclaim previously mined areas in as small a
section as possible, i.e. strip 2 acres of topsoil, remove gravel
deposits, and reclaim in a sequential manner.
2. Prevent or control erosion on the site to prevent ci:;charge to
the Roaring Fork River during or following a storm or snowmelt.
Prepared by William D. Clark
Date June 19, 1979
xc: Goodyear, M. Smith, File
-- 23 -
Title Wildlife Biologist
Mark A. Heifner
37 E. Colorado Ave.
Denver, CO 80210
September 5, 1979
Larry O'Brian
Environment, Inc.
9989 West 60 Avenue
Arvada, Colorado 80004
Dear Mr. O'Brian:
EXHIBIT I/J
environix..ental consulting
303 -744 -1137
You asked that I visit the Sievers Ranch pit area
south of Glenwood Springs owned by Sievers Ranch & Develop-
ment Company and prepare a report on the current soils
and vegetation conditions. You also asked that we make
a recommendation for the seed mixture, fertilizer and mulch
to be used in the revegetation of the area.
Attached is that report.
We have marked on the map that you supplied us the
distribution of four basic vegetation communities. It is
our opinion that these four communities represent current
soil and vegetation conditions.
Attachment
Very truly yours,
Mark Heifner
- 24 -
reclamation planning
photographic surveys
botanical studies
EXHIBIT I/J (Cont'd)
CURRENT SOILS AND VEGETATION
WITH
REVEGETATION RECOMMENDATION
Prepared For
SIEVERS RANCH & DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
By
Mark Heifner
Environmental Consultant
EXHIBIT I (Cont'd)
SOILS INFORMATION
The soils found at the Sievers Pit proposed expansion area
are generally of only two types. The major soil is a moderately
deep silty or sometimes sandy clay loam and probably belongs to the
Atencio soil of the Atencio - Azeltine Complex that occurs all along
the Roaring Fork Valley. This soil tends to compact under heavy
use, but is also quite productive when supplied with sufficient
water. The soil is deep, being about 12 to 48 inches in depth
(average is about 15 to 18 inches). There is a very clear boundary
between the soil and the bedrock which is a very deep gravel
deposit. Generally these soils are found on the terraces and in
the concave low areas formed by the long abandoned stream channels.
The other soil is a very rocky silt or even sand with a small
quantity of clay sized particles. It has a fair fit for the Azeltine
soil, but is even more gravelly in many places. Its surface is
covered with about 50 to 75 percent rock in the form of cobbles and
boulders up to 4 to 5 feet in diameter. Basically it is not unlike
the bedrock under the deep soils described above and, therefore,
appears to represent an exposure of the bedrock at the terrace
crests. Because most of the rock will be crushed in the mining
process, these terraces will be removed and replaced with a deeper
more favorable soil which, if given sufficient water, will make
good pasture.
It is recommended that all available topsoil be saved,
irrespective of type. This includes the soil layer to the bedrock,
but would not include any soils less than 4 to 6 inches deep. These
shallow soils tend to be very rocky and would not make good topsoil.
This should allow sufficient soil material to cover the area to be
reclaimed to pasture with a minimum of 10 to 12 inches of soil.
In places the soil depth could be increased to 18 inches, but any
greater depth than that would not result in a significant benefit.
The backslopes should be covered with about 6 inches of soil and
vegetated with the dryland mixture recommended for reclamation.
Sagebrush will no doubt invade the terraces as well as Rabbitbrush,
and this will aid in giving the site a natural terrace appearance.
No evidence of hazardous soils could be found except for a few
small saline areas that appear to be more the result of intensive
use by cattle with the deposits resulting from their urine than
the nature of the soil itself. There is no evident reason why
the soils are not adequate for reclamation, and with the removal
of the rock the soils should provide a good growth medium.
EXHIBIT J ( :Cont'd)
VEGETATION INFORMATION
The site for the proposed Sievers Pit expansion is a very
interesting mixture of very disturbed rangeland and old cultivated
fields that have been subsequently disturbed by grazing after having
been seeded with range species.
There are four basic communities represented at the site not
including the scattered tree growth along the Robertson Ditch.
Each community shows a relationship to the existing soils, not
because of the soil itself but the fact that the deeper soils were
able to be cultivated to some extent and the upland, shallow soils
were too rocky for cultivation. The four communities are as follows:
1. Irrigated Poa- Phleum- Trifolium Community - This is by
far the lushest and least common community on the site.
It occurs on wet, deep, fairly heavy soils near where
irrigation water is abundant enough to keep the soil
damp. Topographically, it is favored by low spots and
shallow hollows, but only where drainage does not readily
occur. The primary species include Poa sp., Bromus inermis,
Phleum pratense, Trifolium repens, and some Taraxacum
officionale. It is apparent the community is composed
of introduced, seeded species. This community, more than
the others, demonstrates quite well what can be done with
the land if sufficient water is supplied. Cover in the
community is 100 + %, and the height is generally 18 to
24 inches.
A variant of this community occurs on the slightly more
sandy and xeric sites. The variant still exhibits about
100% cover, but the Trifolium becomes less common and the
Taraxacum exhibits dramatic increases. In all other
respects the variant is identical to the primary community.
2. Dryland Alfalfa - Taraxacum Pasture - This community consti-
tutes approximately 95% of the area on the southeast end
of the proposed mine area. It is characterized by Beverly
compacted soils and a nearly uniform but very sparse and
unproductive vegetation. The degraded condition is
primarily due to the use of the area for cattle feeding
during the winter.
Much loose hay lies about the area and serves as an
excellent demonstration of the need for mulch on these
porous soils. Although there is little vegetation growing
in and around the mulched areas due to the intensive
EXHIBIT J (Cont'd)
trampling by cattle, the soils under thephay are moist
and soft. Soils without the mulch are very dry and hard
to turn over with a spade. In places Bromus inermis is
coming into the areas very vigorously and attests to
what the mulch can do if used properly.
Cover in this community is from 20% to 40% in a few
places. The vegetation height is generally from 8 to 14
inches.
3. Dry Agropyron- Bromus- Chrysothamnus Community - This
community is without a doubt the most diverse and common
of the four. It has many small sub - variants and often
composes both upland and bottomland sites. The factor
controlling this community appears to be primarily an
impact from highly intermittent irrigation and a gradual
return to the natural condition through a rather complex
successional sequence. Upland rocky areas that were
originally probably sagebrush seem to be returning to
sagebrush while the bottomland areas are currently moving
toward a strange mixture of Bromus inermis, Phleum pratense,
and dense growths of the weed Erodium cicutarium. The
Chrysothamnus is found as an initial, but presently common,
stage of return to Artemisia domination. Cover in this
community varies from about 15% on the dry, rocky upland
sites to about 80% on the bottomland sites. The height
ranges from less than 6 inches to more than 24 inches
where an unidentified mustard is common, but far from
dominant or ecologically important.
4. Artemisia- Bromus tectorum - Festuca Community - This community
inhabits large areas where the rocky Azeltine soils occur.
Generally previous disturbances have been restricted to
intense grazing, but in a few places where this community
is found on the Atensio soils some cultivation apparently
attempted a long time ago. The Artemisia found on these
sites is quite old although not particularly large. It
ranges from about 18 to 36 inches with an average of
between 24 and 30 inches. The understory is primarily
Bromus tectorum, Festuca arizonica, Tragopogon sp., and
in places small patches of Opuntia. Cover is about 20 to
30 percent and productivity is fairly high but with a low
utility. Deer and elk might use the sites in the winter
to a small extent, but currently the only evidence of use
is by a few sparrows, meadowlarks and jack rabbits.
EXHIBIT J (Cont'd)
5. Tree areas along the Robertson Ditch - The trees found on
these areas include primarily tall growths of Scrub Oak
(Quercus gambelii) mixed with individuals of Juniper and
Pinon Pine. Cottonwoods do occur on the downslope side
of the ditch, but not in the immediate vicinity. Cotton-
woods seem to prefer the much wetter lands along the bank
and terraces of the present river.
6. Relationship to adjacent areas -- Surrounding the site is
quite a mixture of land types and uses including Sagebrush
rangeland to the north, bottomland meadows and forests
between the ditch and the river, and cultivated fields to
the west and southwest.
REVEGETATION RECOMMENDATION
Although the revegetation plans are more properly part of the
reclamation plan, they are derived primarily from the soil and
vegetation information as modified by eventual land use and final
topography. Therefore, seeding recommendations are included here.
Because the final land use will actually be composed of two portions
that are ecologically very different then two seed mixtures are
appropriate. Most of the reclaimed area will be composed of
irrigated grazing land, but the backslopes which will face more or
less in an easterly direction will not be irrigated and, therefore,
are very different with respect to revegetation requirements.
For level, irrigated areas (calculated on the basis of
drilling 25 live seeds per square foot):
Species Lbs. PLS /Acre*
Western Wheatgrass 5
Fairway Wheatgrass 1
Kentucky Bluegrass 0.1
Smooth Brame 1.5
Timothy 0.2
Red Clover 0.2
*Double rates if broadcast
EXHIBIT J (Cont'd)
For backslopes and other non - irrigated, dry areas (calculated
on the basis of broadcasting 50 live seeds per square foot):
Species Lbs. PLS /Acre*
Steambank Wheatgrass 11
Pubescent Wheatgrass 11
Smooth Brome 2
Sand Dropseed 0.1
*Divide by 1.6 if drilled
Fertilizers - Fertilization may well be needed on these often
barren soils. Fertilizer needs should be determined upon topsoiling
by means of testing the soil and, if possible, growth tests and
analysis. If fertilizer is needed, it should be incorporated into
the soil prior to seeding and at the beginning of the second growing
season if needed.
Mulches - It is recommended that after seeding 1500 to 2000
pounds of straw mulch should be crimped into the soil. This will
aid in keeping the soil moist and temperature lower until the
seedlings no longer need this condition.
Seeding Time - It is recommended the seeding occur between
September 15 and October 10.
Management - No grazing should occur until the vegetation is
well established. The earliest grazing should be no sooner than
the third growing season, and even then it should be limited to
short intervals.
EXHIBIT K
CLIMATE
Data compiled at Glenwood Springs, the weather station
closest to the mining site, by the Colorado Climatology office,
Colorado State University, appears below. Annual mean temp-
eratures at the location are 62.6 degrees maximum and 31.3
degrees minimum. The annual precipitation mean is 16.00 in.
FEB
APR
5i?
GLENWOOD SPGS IN
05 3359 2
COLORADO CLIMATOLOGY OFFICE
'COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY
FT. COLLINS, CO. 90523
TEMPERATURE (
F1
PRECIPITATION (INCHES)
!E.s
EXIRE.c5
F£A1: NO OF OA Y5
5 ?:Ckl, Sat t 1-EM
: NO OF CA T$
14 r fJ 3 W >-
> Ca 0
4 S; .'1."' x
cc- a - mi.-
1Jx W:.' 14-
4 - ro
..I r 4 x -Cr
0 0.
CC W IX In
ox K o44 aC
0 4 r w= 4 s
W-- 14 4 Loa 44 4
IY S r o X J r 0
MAX
M113
N-
W
1,-
x '4 W
4 44r -r r
14 n'-t ',;*2 4
0 0 0
x
W
00
¢
2 .0 m
.4 >C .4 r
1.1 ..e ry Id 4
r X 0 r 0
is
er IX fa
4 0
44 44 ow
ofX Q om
-0 1210
•r •r .- is
uC X
01.1 Or
- o
0 .4
0 NW
0 4 0 0
32 OR
BELOW
0 OR
BELOW
36.3
42.0
40.5
61.3
72.6
92.9
99.3
96.:
77.0
66.5
47.2
37.4
12.2
16.3
22.5
31.:
38.9
44.7
51.4
44.6
41.2
31.6
21.9
13.5
24.3
29.2
56.0
46.2
55.7
63.8
7'1.4
67.9
56.6
44.1
35.5
25.5
56.
63.
79.
87.
90.
102.
701.
100.
95.
85.
71.
54.
1956
1962
1466
1059
1456
1454
1964
€458
1455
1457
1952
1465
9
11
29
25
31
23
6
12
S
1
I
27
-26.
-25.
-10.
2.
19.
27.
36,
32.
24.
10.
-9.
-15.
J
1963
1951
1966
€965
1967
1454
1469
1464
1471
1070
1452
1467
12
1
6
5
4
2
1
21
26
29
27
31
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.7
16.9
4.3
.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.9
3.5
1.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.4
8.1
30.7
27.2
28.3
16.9
4.0
.3
0.0
0.0
2.0
€6.4
27.4
30.6
4.8
2.2
.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
.4
3.1
1.67
1..17
1.13
1.58
1.15
1.22
1.13
1.67
1.46
1.45
1.10
1.31
1.30
1.30
.75
.88
.90
3.20
.93
1.45
1.03
.46
.84
1.47
1952
1967
1461
1950
1457
1960
€956
1970
1461
1969
1470
1451
19
7
3
27
14
24
2
21
22
19
26
30
18.5
11.7
8.5
2.6
0.0
0.0'
0.0
0.0
0.0
.1
4.1
17.9
27.
15.
10.
2.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
3.
8.
14.
1457
1469
1960
1955
0
0
0
0
0
1464
1054
1451
24
4
2
9
0
0
0
0
0
16
30
31
3.7
3.6.
3.8
5.1
3.9
2.4
3.3
4.8
4.1
3.8
4.0
3.9
.6
.5
.3
.8
.5
.4
.4
.4
.9
.0
.4
.4
.
.1
0.0
O.C.
0.0
.1
0.0
.1
.1
0.0
0.0
.1
62.6
31.5
4,..
33.
23.
18.1.
11,
16.0
63.
47.
6.
1.
PREC1P1TAT30N w3TH PR004?ILITY EQUAL OR LESS THAN
PROH,
LEVEL JON FER 1149 809 HAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ANNUAL
.035 .20 .25 :!I .49 ,36 .19 .39 .65 .07 0.0010 0.80 ,'36 9.58 .35
.64 .47 .2D .57 .53 . ?5 .86 .53 ,e6 ,44 1.15 .32 .39 .55 .69 12.21 .29
,30 .81 .69 .01 1.05 .77 .63 .59 1.21 .52 ,61 .11 .85 13,38
.40 1.55 .84 ,613 1.24 .40 81
.75. 1.39 ,74 .85 ,85 1.01 14.43
.50 1.33 1.01 .47 1.43 1.04 .06 .93 0.5h 1.01
1.11 1.0 3,18 1 .47
.60 1.65 .20 1.10 1,64 1.19 1 7? 13 1.75 1.34 1.41 3.1 3..36 16,59
.70 2.05 1.43 )1.333 1.69 1.37 31.50 1.38 1.96 1.76 1.7IV 1.36 1t.59 17.75
,9n 3.4? 7.20 2.42 2,70 1.47 ?.k6
1,71 ?S 2.24 7 7,36 3.17 3.90 2.30 71.45
.95 6,32 2,65 3.01 3.16 2.30 3.03 2.77 3,05 4.40 4.01 2.34 9,71 73.39
ALPHA 1.54 2.34 1.35 3,52 3,54 1.76 1.81 4.99 .99 1.40 3.35 3,39 14,01
1sf.IA 1,09 .50 .96 ,45 .32 69 .62 33 3.48 1.04 .35 ,e3 1.I3
0 0.00 0.00 0,00 O,nO 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ,OS .05 0.00 0.00
MIxEO 6AMMA 1}T'.TP1#SJTION FlTTo:L TO O4TA
ALP" -Le S- >to YGRGr�P T10 '3;T4. 5f,.01.3 psRAa.ETrR
of N0. nv W1.,rwV NAV1'.f 7ER0 pL,7C181Tr.T3r13 /TnT0.t NO, OF HONTrS
MED1A4 PPECTi•1TATIUN A- .OW4T5 A.1E 1N„3C4I311 AT 1.11 .50 FRO4 01LITY
-- 31 -
LEVEL