5.2. SR 05-16-1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e e Stephen Rohlf April 4, 1994 Page 2 Reclamation The document generally construes reclamation to mean the stabilizing of slopes and the re- establishment of vegetation. As indicated in several places, various permits will require the mining companies to take these actions to prevent erosion. Reclamation, however, is a much broader concept than the re-establishment of vegetation. Reclamation in this sense, especially in the case of a gravel mining district covering such an extensive acreage, should be a planning exercise that is aimed at directing mining activities toward a well detailed and coordinated end use. The DEIS indicates that substantial acreage has already been reclaimed by a number of companies. The current reclamation status of these areas should be fully detailed. This analysis should be coupled with an assessment of how the existing reclamation conditions fit with an overall reclamation plan. The DEIS provides a projected schedule for progressive reclamation throughout the life of the mining activity, with some reclamation expected to occur as early as 1994 or 1995. A generalized reclamation plan should be in place to guide all progressive reclamation efforts. We recognize that it is not possible to predict the future in great detail, thus annual planning for reclamation as minin~ advances by means of a city permit is a practical way to deal with it. However, the diSCUSSIon throughout the DEIS suggests alack of a ''big picture" view of final reclamation and end use, and the document could be viewed to present an impression that reclamation will be handled piecemeal on an annual basis.with each individual company. We strongly recommend that long-term planning should.begin now so . that reclamation is a coordinated process among all the mining companies throughout the life of the mining district. A timetable for reclamation planning should parallel the time frame presented for the transportation plan. Tables 2.1-1,2.2-1,2.3-1 and 3.1-2, 3.1-3, 3.1-4 The tables depicting the changes in land use under each alternative are confusing as presented. Do the numbers in the "Trees Within CBS Site" column refer to County Biological Survey site-acres expected to be impacted by mining activities? It is also unclear whether or not the numbers in the tables are cumulative. For example, will 60 total units (acres?) in a CBS site be impacted under Alternative B or will 90 units be impacted, (which is the number reached by adding the Stage 0, Stage 1, and Stage 4 values provided?) Section 3.1 Land Use ,. The document indicates that there are 20 residences, 12 of which are occupied, located within the proposed gravel mining district. Those 12 residences may be the ones most affected by the mining operations. It is appropriate to address in limited fashion the special concerns these people may have and what the final disJ?osition of these properties will be (Le., is there interest on the part of the mining compames to purchase?). There is essentially no discussion in the document regarding mine waste. Is mine waste going to be produced, most likely in the form of overburden, undersize and oversize materials? If so, the EIS should indicate what volumes will be produced and how it will be used or disposed. For example, will mine waste be used in the creation of final landforms