Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.0 PC Staff Report 01.08.1997PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS REQUEST: APPLICANT: LOCATION: SITE DATA: WATER: SEWER: ACCESS: EXISTING ZONING: ADJACENT ZONING: PC 1/8/97 Special Use Permit for the extraction of natural resources - timber. The Colorado Timber and Land Company. Tracts of land located in portions of Sections 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, T6S, R100W and portions of Sections 5, 7, 10, T7S, R100W of the 6th P.M.: located on Kimball Mountain, generally north of County Road 202. 7007.5 acres total; 3250 acres would be subject to logging. Will not be used Will not be used County Road 202 (Kimball Creek Road): other public and private access. R/L: Resource Lands - all categories. R/L, O/S 1. RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN In as much as the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan's Management Districts Map covers the area, the subject tracts are located in District C - Rural Areas/Minor Environmental Constraints and District F - Rural Areas/Severe Environmental Constraints. Only a very small portion of R 100W is depicted on the Map: however, given the consistency of the subject terrain, staff will infer the same designations as shown in R99W. See map, page II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL A. Site Description: The subject tract is located in a physiographic province known as the Colorado Plateau, typically a deeply dissected region of steep ridges capped by comparatively level mesas. The general area proposed for logging is very remote, located approximately 20 miles northwest of DeBeque, on Kimball Mountain. The bulk of the timber proposed for extraction is located on the north -facing slopes of Kimball Mountain, where slopes have been calculated to be between 50% and 75% (between 27 degrees and 37 degrees). There is another area proposed for logging, known as the Carbon Company tract, a box canyon located generally southwest of Kimball Mountain, which slopes at liter angles, yet in excess of 40% slope (22 degrees). See Harvest Map, page B. Adjacent Land Uses: The majority of the land uses, on private lands, are devoted to ranching and the oil and Ras industry. The Bureau of Land Management administers sizeable tracts adjacent to the applicant's property. See vicinity map, page /ej . C. Proposal: The applicant is proposing the logging of four (4) general parcels that vary in size between 40 acres and approximately 3000 acres, at an average production rate of 3500 board feet per acre. The operation would use a combination of logging techniques to include tractor and cable logging, occurring, 8 to 9 months per year, over a three (3) year period. yy M. REVIEW AGENCY/PUBLIC COMMENTS A. Colorado State Forest Service (CSFS): The CSFS essentially recommends that the applicant submit additional information that would include a more -detailed description of the proposed logging methods; submit a more -detailed description of the silvicultural method that would be employed; submit additional soils and road information, increase the buffer zone between logging operations and streams: consult with the Division of Wildlife, and amend some of the proposed performance standards. See letter, pages /1U ,4. B. Bureau of Land Management (BLM): The BLM suggests the County require a more - detailed Forest Management Plan/Loggina Operation Plan, detailing, exact road locations and transportation plan, the type of harvesting method(s), and a good rehabilitation plan; suggests that the proposed road construction occur on private land: calculates a total timber harvest of 1 1,765 board feet, per acre; notes concern for soil slumping and landslides; notes concern for the potential impact on wildlife and the loss of habitat; suggests slash dis osal be better defined, which would require a permit. See letter, pages 17 J. /i. C. USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service: States that any disturbance to the topography would result in erosion and off-site sedimentation; the operation would likely result in noxious weed infestation and makes recommendations on the type of reseeding and reclamation the area should receive: recommends that all operations be conducted consistent with CSFS guidelines. See letter, pagelpr Z via 2 4 D. Paul & Julia Mills: Adjacent landowners who have stated concerns regarding soil erosion, watershed protection, wildlife, reclamation, livestock grazing, hunting, and roads. See letter, pages + 2' IV. MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS A. Roads/Access: Access to the areas proposed for logging would be from County Road 202 (Kimball Creek Road), which would be utilized as the sole hauling route to Roan Creek Road (CR 204) and Interstate 70. The road has recently been asphalt -surfaced from its intersection with CR 204, to the bridge crossing Roan Creek, which grades to an improved dirt road west of Roan Creek. These access roads cross at least six (6) bridges/cattle guards that, in some cases, are more -narrow than the road itself, with some crossings limited to a single lane. There are no posted weight restrictions at any bridge, therefore weight capacities are unknown. The proposed logging operation would also require access easements across adjacent, public and private lands, which to staffs knowledge, have not been obtained by the applicant. Access across Sections 28. 29, 30 and 31 T6S, R100W, would require an easement from a private property owner, as would access through portions of the Dougherty Tract in Section 8. T7S, R100W. There is intervening BLM land between the Dougherty Tract and the Colorado Carbon Company tract, which would be subject to a BLM access easement that would require the development of an Environmental Assessment. prior to the access being approved. It would be inappropriate to approve this SUP request prior to all access easements being obtained. A haul route is proposed from the top of Kimball Mountain to access CR 202, and would be built on land owned by the applicant. However, it appears that access to this route would be across intervening BLM lands, which may be subject to BLM approval. The application also states that other haul roads and spurs would be constructed as required. Staff suggests these haul roads be conclusively shown and mapped and submitted for review. Additionally, Section 5.03.12 requires that all roads be designed and constructed for the proposed use and that the minimum design standards shall be the Garfield County Road Specifications, Section 9:30 thru Section 9:37, inclusive, of the Garfield County Subdivision Regulations of 1984, as amended. B. Logrg,ing Method/Timber Harvest: The timber would be harvested using two different methods, tractor and cable. Tractor logging involves dragging the felled timber behind a bulldozer, or similar piece of equipment, to the load -out point. Cable logging involves what staff will call a "ski lift" type of mechanism that would carry or partially drag felled timber to the top of the slope, which would then be loaded on trucks for hauling from the area. See logging diagrams, pages Z . There is a discrepancy in the amount of timber that would be harvested under the requested Special Use Permit. The application suggests that 3250 acres would be -3- timbered at an average rate of 3500 board feet per acre, equating to 11,375,000 board feet. Additionally, Addendum A to the Logging Agreement estimates that between 10 million and 12 million board feet would be harvested. See the Agreement, pages 2i -,33 . However, the areas proposed for timbering and shown on the aerial photos total 1095 acres and, at a harvest rate of 3500 board feet per acre, this would equate to 3,558,750 board feet. The additional area surrounding the 15 identified logging areas is also being proposed for logging and according to the aerial photos (dated 9/30/78), largely appears to be sparsely vegetated. Staff suggests this area would be relatively unproductive, which would distort the average amount of timber harvested, per acre. The actual amount of acres to be harvested must be determined, as the Special Use Permit being sought would be specific to the lands proposed for harvest. C. Slope/Soils: The slope of the individual parcels proposed for logging varies, generally ranging between 40% and 70%, but in at least one instance, up to 75%. The soils on these slopes have been identified by the Natural Resources Conservation Service to be within the Utso-Rock Outcrop complex, a soil unit derived from the Green River shale. This soil is considered to have severe constraints due to the excessive slope, creating significant erosion hazards and limiting the use of certain types of mechanical logging equipment, especially when the soil is wet. The review agencies commenting on this proposal have recommended specific erosion/sedimentation procedures be followed: however, the applicant has not proposed specific reclamation plans, except to state that a "system of waterbarring and grass seeding [will] ensure that erosion does not occur." Staff suggests that it is certainly appropriate to discuss exactly what this "system" would entail. especially since Section 5.03.07(2)(A) of the Zoning Resolution requires that a site rehabilitation plan be approved by the County Commissioners before the issuance of a special use permit. Additionally, paragraph B of said section gives the County Commissioners the authority to require security for the execution of the required site rehabilitation plan, before the SUP is issued. Without a specific reclamation plan. staff cannot speculate on the adequacy of the proposed "system." Water Quality: The review agencies commenting on this proposal have all suggested that erosion and sedimentation will occur. Based on these competent analyses, staff contemplates that water quality in the surrounding creeks and drainages would be degraded. The only mitigation proposed for these impacts would be the waterbarring and seeding system earlier noted. The application further states that if it is necessary to cross a live stream, a culvert would be permanently installed and, in areas that demonstrate deep washing, temporary rail car bridges would be installed. No engineering on these proposals has been submitted, nor is there any discussion of the removal of temporary structures. Staff suggests that a drainage plan, developed by a professional engineer, be submitted to address these issues. Industrial Operations Classification: This type of Special Use Permit application falls under the Extraction classification as defined in Section 2.02.31(1) of -the County Zoning Resolution and is therefore required to meet certain Industrial Operation and Industrial Performance Standards, as further defined in Sections 5.03.07 and 5.03.08. These sections essentially require an impact statement address certain parameters affecting, or affected by, the proposal and shall address the following (from Section 5.03.07): 1. Existing lanf d itse of water through depletion or pollution of surface run-off stream flow or ground water. 2 The impact statement suggests a buffer zone of 50 feet of a year-round stream, the CSFS recommends a buffer of 75 feet; there is no discussion of the impacts that may be caused by pollution or sedimentation to watercourses, increased run-off or changes to stream flow rates that would be expected to occur. Impacts on adjacent land, from the generation of vapor, dust, smoke, noise, glare. or vibration or other emanations. The application states that no impact would occur except for the generation of dust, for which no mitigation is proposed. The slash remaining from the logging operation would be burned at a later date, which staff suggests, would create an additional impact on adjacent lands from the generation of smoke, also requiring permitting. Noise would certainly be generated by the operation, likely creating impacts to adjacent lands. Impacts on wildlife and domestic animals through the creation of hazardous attractions, alteration of existing native vegetation, blockade of migration routes, use of patterns or other distributions. The application suggests impacts to wildlife and domestic animals would be of short duration; however, would be mitigated by grass seeding and the release of native vegetation to increase the browse for these animals. The applicant has not consulted the Division of Wildlife (DOW), nor has the DOW provided review comments, as requested by staff therefore it is impossible to predict the amount of disturbance caused by the removal of the existing, native vegetation. The BLM has commented that there would be [adverse] impacts to deer and elk cover; the Flammulated Owl and the Goshawk would lose habitat. Affirmatively .'how the intpcicts of truck and automobile traffic to and from such uses and their impacts to areas in the County. The application predicts 12 highway legal, logging truck round -trips per day and three (3) pick-up round trips, per day. The impact statement is contradictory, suggesting that the operation will run on either a six day week, with a maximum of 12 truck round -trips per day, or Monday through Friday, with lesser activity on Saturday. This information must be conclusively stated. Staff certainly anticipates there will be damage to the county roads; however, the amount of damage is unquantified at this time. Safety is another concern, whereby the addition of the logging trucks to the roads may create hazards for other roadway users. There would be no affirmative road impacts resulting from this proposal. 5. That sufficient distances .shall separate such use from abutting property which might otherwise he daniaged by operations of the proposed use(s). The applicant has suggested obtaining access across adjacent lands prior to the start of operations. Staff suggests that without the access in place, prior to the issuance of the special use permit, there is no guarantee the access will be obtained, thus impacting the scope of the SUP. In short, the permit should not allow an operation to commence in anticipation of obtaining access that may not be forthcoming. 6. Mitigation measures proposed)(Or all of the foregoing impacts identified and for the standards identified in Section 5.03.08 of this Resolution (Industrial Performance Standards). This section requires that the proposed industrial operation comply with applicable County. State and Federal regulations concerning water, air and noise pollution, and shall not be conducted in a manner that would create a public hazard or nuisance. Operations shall be conducted in a way that minimizes the generation or emission of heat, dust, smoke, vibration, glare and odor and, most importantly, all other undesirable environmental effects beyond the boundaries of the property where the operation is proposed. Based on the expertise and reviews of the agencies that have commented on this proposal, and star analysis, the impacts that would be caused directly by or attributed to this proposal would not be adequately mitigated, therefore causing undesirable and negative. off-site impacts to public and private lands and holdings. See Impact and Performance Standards Statement pageslew V. SUGGESTED FINDINGS 1. That proper publication and public notice was provided as required by law for the hearing before the Garfield County Planning Commission. 2. That the hearing before the Planning Commission was extensive and complete; however, not all pertinent facts, matters and issues were adequately discussed within the Special Use Permit application or the applicant's portion of the public hearing. .c_ 3. That the application is not in compliance with the Garfield County Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended. 4. For the above stated reasons, the proposed land use is not in the best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County. VI. RECOMMENDATION The owner of the property has associated private property rights, whereby, he may do as he wishes with his property, as long as any negative impacts caused by or associated with this proposal are contained to the applicant's property. If there are any impacts to surrounding private or public property owners or if impacts from this proposal will cause an undue burden on the County as a whole, then the applicant is required to analyze these impacts and, to the extent this project would cause the negative impacts, would be required to mitigate them. The agencies reviewing this proposal have stated there will be negative impacts caused by this proposal, which would not be solely contained to the applicant's land, nor has the applicant proposed mitigation adequate to negate these effects. Therefore, staff recommends DENIAL of the Special Use Permit for the logging operation, as proposed. i J . • (1 •, • 1) , \ ; • , • . P.M „,-.-.. ; c, 0 • i `. ..„ • t 1 , , 1 ,. ) I ! ' ,, 1.. ..., —1--\—\__ . , i — ' i' - '1 i ) '1.1 ' ',, - • + ' c. '‘'''./ 1-'' i , • 7-111 -) •••-••• - •.,•• „ ••,...,•.• ..1...h ) /,,, .1 ; \--, ! li...,1..,.,...,„.,,.. , ..../1..1,,,,,,,, 1.‘"...1,,..L I (., i ” 1 I • ,•,,) \ " AluAgEmetir Dmrstifer:i MAP 0 , 1 .094 s 301 (32,31_"fY .91`c1 ij: Jo14'1s31 t1 "11' a3suezi8 �.�. by Ganef -14.14o s x311{ N! V I N f1 0 b+l 1030 /Be 4 -71 (- iN-6b1 c f66o,c _\ ed k i`• L At H 0212, 66Po \"- Cedar Bench 27 6, HE. 025 7 x•00 7 02-2 Z DO H.C. OZS 4Z? if !! m 4 cox, s1„ -z K ct • l!llII7 s B2G • / IU ,Nc' 4j6�} e4 m 6 .6344 V3 51 _ 617 0 7 y Yonn \I(csIy 04.140 igT December 10, 1996 Eric McCafferty Garfield County Planning Department 109 8th Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601-3303 Eric, DEC 1 2 i99& FOREST 4 i SERVICE C-Ot ``d i YState Services Building 222 S. 6th Street. Room 416 Grand .function. Colorado 31501 Telephone: (970) 248-7325 1 have reviewed the Special Use Application for a Logging Operation submitted to Garfield County by Colorado Timber and Land Company and Meridian Trading International, Inc., and have the following comments. The plan as written does not cover many of the items the Colorado State Forest Service usually addresses in a logging plan.( See the attached list of "typical items to include in a logging plan", as suggested to Garfield County Planning by CSFS several years ago). However, from the permit application and the attached Sale Agreement, I can figure out pretty much what is proposed. 1 suggest requiring the following additional information as a minimum: 1. The proposal lacks any real description of the property's terrain or the timber involved. I am assuming from the maps and my general knowledge of the area that this proposal involves very steep, north -facing slopes with Douglas -fir timber. Although there have been a few recent proposals to cable log areas like this in western Colorado. I have yet to see it actually done on a large scale. Most loggers consider the steep slopes and marginal quality of this timber to be un -economical. I would require a more detailed description of the logging method proposed. 2. I am somewhat concerned about the amount of timber to be removed under this proposal. The amount mentioned is 4 million board feet by cat logging and 6-8 million board feet by cable. I estimate about 1,200 acres within the proposed cut areas, which would mean they propose to cut between 8,000 and 10,000 board feet per acre. My experience in cruising this type of timber is that it averages about 8,000 board feet per acre total volume. So, the only way they could get the kind of volume they anticipate would be to clearcut. 1 certainly do not recommend clearcutting on these slopes, at least not in areas as large as proposed. It is my feeling that large (more than 20 acre) clearcuts on these types of slopes and soils would probably lead to heavy erosion. There should be some minimum stocking level stated for the residual stand, and more detail on regeneration requirements. I would require a more detailed description of the silvicultural method proposed here. 3. This brings me to my third concern, which is road construction. Improper road construction is probably the leading cause of erosion from timber sale activity..New road construction is proposed on several sections of steep ground. There is no soils description for the area involved, and no mention of erosion potential_ It's hard to know if the mitigation measures listed are adequate, without more detail on soils. I would also want more detail on all proposed road locations and standards of construction. 4. We require a buffer strip of at least 75 feet from any live streams, instead of the 50 feet suggested in this proposal. 5. Since I am not a wildlife biologist, I generally consult with the Colorado Division of Wildlife to get their input on potential impacts to wildlife on a proposed timber sale. There is no mention of possible T&E species, restrictions for elk calving seasons, or possible limitations on logging activity during hunting seasons. 6. The only impact on adjacent lands mentioned is dust from log trucks. Log trucks making twelve round trips per day will undoubtedly raise safety concerns, along with unusual wear on the roads. How will these road impacts be mitigated? 7. In addition, some of the performance standards listed are less than our standard specifications. We require a maximum stump height of 8", instead of 12". There is also no listed slash requirement other than to pile landing slash. We typically require slash within cutting units to be lopped and scattered to less than 18" in height. I hope these comments are of some help in reviewing this application. Please feel free to call me with any questions or comments. Sincerely, Kelly Rogers Assistant District Forester •/2- TYPICAL ITEMS TO INCLUDE IN A "LOGGING PLAN" 1. Description of area to be logged: - Terrain - Slope -Aspect - Soils, Geologic hazards (i.e. slippage) - Streams, ponds - Wildlife (T&E species) -Property boundaries, monuments - Current access, roads - Timber types -per acre volumes - species composition - average dbh, ht, and stocking level -Other vegetation (T&E species) 2. Proposed silvicultural prescriptions by timber type: -Long term silvicultural objectives - Silvicultural system proposed (clearcuts, ITM's, etc) - Location of proposed harvest areas, how marked -Size of proposed cutting units - Protection of residual stands - Regeneration requirements (natural or planted) - Slash treatment (lop & scatter, piled, max height) - Utilization standards (1/8 sound, 8' long) - Stump height standards (8" uphill side) - Streamside buffers (min. width [200' each side], locations on map) - Wildlife impacts - Post harvest conditions defined -Map of above 3. Proposed Logging Systems: - Systems used (conventional, cable, helicopter, etc.) - Cutting system (saw, shear, etc.) - Limbing and bucking in the woods or whole tree skidding - Proposed haul system - road locations, both existing and planned -road specifications (grade, width, surface, etc,) - (USFS spec.: 14' wide, 6-8%< grade, base= 6-8" gravel) - expected number of loads per day - maintenance requirements (dust abatement, shut down criteria) - stream crossings (#, type, locations on map) - public access and safety considerations 4. Proposed Rehabilitation Guidelines: -Closure of skid trails and haul roads? - Revegetation of roads, skid trails, landings, etc. - Reseeding (for erosion and noxious weed invasion) - Replanting requirements 5. Schedule of Operations: - Approximate annual cut - Start and stop dates - Seasons of operation (wildlife impacts?) 6. Potential Impacts and Planned Mitigation: - Soil and water resources -Fish and Wildlife Habitat - endangered plant/animal species? - hunting season impacts - Fire protection (fire district?, stop logging criteria?) - reimbursement to county for cost of fire suppression due to logging activity? - Neighboring landowners and communities -Recreation and aesthetics - County/State infrastructure impacts (roads, bridges) - Ton/mile fees? 7. Enforcement of Logging Plan: - Who will enforce approved plan? -Bonding requirement? - Violation notification and remediation requirements - Appeal procedure (arbitration requirements) RF.['LY REFER TO. 5400 (C0-076) United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Grand Junction Resource Arca 2815 H Load Grand Junction, Colorado 81506 Eric McCafferty Building & Planning Dept. 109 8th St., Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Dear Mr. McCafferty: rT iy M TAKE ommazio 1122 PR7 C 1 N AMERICA mmommummummmum • Ream Our office has reviewed the proposal of the Colorado Timber and Land Co. for a logging operation on Dale Albertson's Ranch. Enclosed are comments: 1- A more detailed Forest Management Plan/Logging Operation Plan should be required. This is to detail exact road locations and specifications (transportation clan), the type of harvesting prescriptions used, and a good rehabilitation plan. 2. Throuah the transoortat_on plan a detailed layout of the spur roads and haul roads will probably show that some crossing of public lands will be necessary and a right-of-way will be needed from the Bureau of Land Manacement. 3. On page 7 of 8 in the "Agreement there is mention_ of building a road through Sections 1, 2, and 3, T. 7 S R. 99 W., but on the map it is highlighted in Sections 3 and _0, T. 7 S., R. 100 W. which is en`'rc.'y on public land. Any new road on public land will require an environmental assessment (Public involvement), cultural clearance, and be engineered to Bureau standards. The best course of action would be to build it on private land. 4. Ey quick calculations, 14 million board fees in 17 units cover.nc 1,190 acres translates into an average .arrest of 11,765 board feet per ♦ acre_ At these __cures, it seems Likely that -hese units will be crearv_t • We bring this up as this area is prone to soil ..lumping and landslides. _hese units are very steep and some measure of erosion control should be stipulated here. That is why the harvest prescription .s important and a good rehab plan is needed. 5. This brincs uP anot_____n_, .___s _ w 13 a_e located on 'u.. __- Land. There is no plan at this time 7:n to harvest timber on Public Lands due to the steepness of the area and to provide wildlife habitat. 6. Clearcuttng these areas will have an impact on deer and elk cover. The Flarrmu=aced Owl and the Goshawk will also lose habitat. 7. Slash disposal should be better defined and any burning will need a smoke dispersal/burning permit. -/5 The proponents should be coordinating with the SLM on any activities that may cross/involve public lands and have not done so to date. Should they require permits/approvals from us, they will most likely be delayed pending our analysis of their proposal. cc: Colorado Timber and Land Co. % Shirley Chavez Remington Square Rifle, CO 81650 Sincerely, 040f-41 Catherine Robertson Area Manager UNITED STATES NATURAL RESOURCES 2754 Compass Drive, Suite 170 EpARTMENT OF CONSERVATION Grand Junction, CO. 81506 AGRICULTURE SERVICE .(970) 242-4511 December 20,1996 Eric McCafferty Garfield Co. Planning Dept. 109 8th Street, Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Special Use Permit for a Logging/Timbering Operation Colorado Timber and Land Company This invitation to review and comment on the above proposal was forwarded to our field office from the Glenwood Springs field office. We have reviewed this proposal and offer the following comments: - Please refer to the attached soil description. This subject area consists of extremely steep and highly erosive soil units. Therefore, any disturbance will cause erosion and sedimentation off—site. This can be minimized to a certain extent by traditional erosion control practices such as water bars on roads and trails, reseeding, etc. However, on this terrain, it is very difficult. - Access roads and cat trails will be subject to erosion and sedimentation, and will require properly spaced water bars, and continual maintenance to minimize erasion hazards. - Areas in the site that will be disturbed during construction and logging operations will encourage weed growth. Of particular concern in this area are possible infestations of noxious weeds such as Leafy Spurge, Russian Knapweed, Canada Thistle and ether thistle species, Whitetop, and Houndstongue (Beggar's Tick). Therefore, disturbed areas should be kept to a minimum. All disturbed areas should be constantly policed. Weeds should be sprayed as they appear. Roads and other disturbed areas should be reseeded. We have provided seeding recommendations for your information. Areas should be protected from any activity for two seasons after establishment. -- We would recommend that logging activities take place as per Colorado State Forest Sevice guidelines. They will consult with landowners and operators on a fee basis to develop a logging plan which will address the forest resource in a comprehensive manner. We appreciate the opportunity to review this project. If you desire any additional information, please call. Sincerely, L, E. James Currier Resource Conservationist T i i ]C1N 1"11- iT hJH :JCl I-JCE 11 I.Iit :JJ C.7 : 11. 717 ^1 a fi NONTECHNICAL SOILS DESCRIPTION REPORT Kimball Mountain Map Symbol 77 Soil name ond description utso-Rock Outcrop complex, 40 to 90 percent slopes This map unit is on side Slopes. This unit is 60 percent U^.so channery loam, and 25 percent Rock outcrop. The Utso soil is deep and Drell -drained. It formed in colluvium derived dominantly from Green River shale. The upper part of the surface layer is channery loam about 4 inches thick. The lower part is very channery Loam about 7 inches thick. The underlying material to a depth of 60 inches is very channery loam. Permeability is moderately rapid. Available water capacity is tau. Effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Runoff is rapid, and the hazard of nater erosion is very high. Rock Outcrop occurS on very steep slopes, canyon slopes, cliffs, and steep mesa edges. 7.17111 ' r1H l=i( chm Fg 1'7:vT c,'ti. A7 1�i1 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE PAGE 1 OF 3 NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE 12/20/96 WOODLAND MANAGEMENT AND PROi1UCTIV:TY Kimbell Mountain (only the soils suitable for production of comrmerciat trees are listed) Map Symbol Jordi - and soil name lnation Isymb.4 7i- UtSO Rock Ovt_rop. I-7 I71 H,J Management concerns Erosion hazard Equip- I trent (Seedling Limits-Imortal- Cion I ity SLIGHT ;SEVERE Wind- throw hazard SLIGHT Plant competi- tion Potential productivity common trees MDDERATEIRocky Mountain Douglas -fir Site index 65 Volume of wood fiber 4 Suggested trees to plant l^'i' 1.719 -II'-H LtO i'^:rT qc. 27 '_)]a U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NATURAL REsoURCES CONVEPUATION SERVICE wOODLAND MANAGEMENT AND PRODUCTIVITY Endnote -- WOODLAND MANAGEMENT AND PRODUCTIVITY PAGE 2 OF 3 12/20/P6 This report can be used by woodland owners or forest managers in planning the use of soils for wood crops. Only those soils suitable for wood crops are listed. The report lists the ordination symbol for each soil. Soils assigned the same ordination symbol require the same general management and have about the same potential productivity. The first part of the ORDINATION SYMBOL, a number, indicates the potential productivity of the soils for an indicator tree species_ The first species listed under common trees for a soil isthe indicator species for that soil. It is the dominant Species on the soil and the one that determines the ordination ctasss. The number indicates the volume, in cubic meters per hectare per year, which the indicator species can produce. The second part of the symbol, a Letter, indicates the major kind of soil limitation_ The Letter "Rn" indicates steep slopes; "X", stoniness or rockiness; "u", excess water in or on the soil; "T", toxic substances in the soil; "D", restricted rooting depth; "C", clay in the upper part of the soil; "S", sandy texture; "F", a high content of rock ersgments in the soil; and "N", snowo,w k. The Letter "An" indicates that limitations Or restrictions are insignificant. If a soil has more than one limitation, the priority is as follows: R, X, w, T, D, C, S, F, and N. In this report, "Slight", "Moderate", and "Severe" indicate the degree of the major soil limitation to be considered in management. EROSION HAZARD is the probability That damage will occur as 2 result of site preparation and cutting where the soil is expcsed along roads, skid trails, fire lanes, and log -handling areas. Woodlands that have beer. burned or overgrazed are also subject to eroson. Ratings of the erosion hazard are based on the percent of the slope. A rating of "Slight" indicates that no particular prevention measures ere needed under ordinary conditions. A rating of "Mode ate" ineicates that erosion -control measures are needed in certain Sily cultural activities- A rsting of "Severe" indicates that special precautions are needed to control erosion in most silvicultural activities. SeuiPmEeT LIMITATION reflects the characteri5ties and conditions of the soil that restrict use of the equipment generally needed in woodland managemenr er harvesting. The chief characteristics and conditions considered in the ratings are slope, stones on the surface, rock outcrops, soil wetness, and texture of the surface layer. A rating of "slight" indicaree that under normal conditions the kind of equipment or season of use is not significantly restricted by soil factors. Soil wetness can restrict equipment use, but the wet period does not exceed 1 month. A racing of "Macerate" indicates that equipment use is moderately restricted because of one or more soil factors. If the soil is ret, the wetness restricts equipment use for a period of 1 to 3 months. A raring of "Severe" indicates that equipment use tis severely restricted either as to the kind o4 equipment that can he used or the season of use. If the soil is wet, the wetness restricts equipment use for more than 3 months. SEEDLING MORTALITY refers to the death of naturally occurring or planted tree seedlings, as influenced by the kinds of soil, soil wetness, or t000ar3phic conditions. The factors used in rating the soils for seedling mortality are texture of the surface layer, depth to a seasonal high water table and the length of the period when the water table iS high, rock fragments in the surface Layer, effective rooting depth, and slope aspect. A rating of "Slight" indicates that seedling mortality is not likely to be a problem under normal conditions. Expected mortality is less than 25 percent. A rating of "Moderate" indicates that some problems from seedling mortality can be expected. Extra precautions are advisable. Expected mortality is 25 to 50 percent. A rating of "Severe" indicates that seedling mortality is a serious problem. Extra precautions are important. Replartine may be necessary. Expected mortality is more than 50 percent. „:NOTHR051 HAZARD is the likelihood that trees will be uprooted by the wind because the soil is not deep enough for adequate root anchorage. The main restrictions that affect rooting are a seasonal high water table and the depth to bedrock, a fragipan, or other limiting layers. A ratting of "Slight" indicates that under normal conditions no trees are tCi17.1 ' 3tOHd deZo iI'C',�d 53:17T PR. t3 :311 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NAIURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE WOODLAND MANAGEMENT AND PRC1i71JCTIVITY Endnote -- W(OLAND MANAGcMENT AND PRODUCTIVITY --Continued PAGE 3 OF 3 12/20f96 blown down by the wind. Strong winds may damage trees, but they do not uproot them. A raring of "Moderate" indicates that Some trees can be blown down during periods when the Soil is wet and winds are moderate or strong. A rating of "severe" indicates that many trees can be blown down during these periods. PLANT COMPETITION ratings indicate the degree to which undesirable species are expected to invade and grow when openings are made in the tree canopy. The main factors that affect plant competition are the depth to the water table and the available water capacity. A rating of "Slight" indicates that competition from undesirable plants is not likely to prevent natural regeneration or suppress the more desirable species. Planted seedlings can become established without undue competition. A rating of "Moderate" indicates that competition may delay the establishment of desirable species. Competition may hamper stand development, but it will not prevent the eventual development of fully stocked stands. A raring of "Severe" indicates that competition can be expected Io prevent regeneration unless precautionary measures are applied. The potential productivity of merchantable cr COMMON TREES on a soil is enpres ed as a site index and as a volume number. The SITE INDEx is the average height, in feet, that dominant and codominant trees of a given species attain in a specified number of years- Tr,e site index applies to fully stocked, even -aged, unmanaged stands. Commonly grown trees are those that woodland msna;ars generally favor in intermediate or improvement cuttings. They are selected on the basis of growth rate, Quality, value, and marketability. The VOLUME OF WOcD :ISER, a number, is the yie?d likely to be produced by the most important trees. This number is expressed as cubic meters per hectare per year, indicates the amount of wood fiber produced in a fully stocked, even - aged stand. Cubic meters per hectare converts to cubic feet per acre per year as follows: (1 m3/ha = 14.3 ft3/ac). The 14.3 number i;; rounded up from 14.2999. -hc TREES COMMONLY MANAGED FOR to plant are those that are suitable for commercial wood production. ± i aHiL��1 17!i7' II 96, 02 1=.Q + . 00:3E d 10101 ** U.S. D: PRRT ENT OF AGRICULTURE E SOIL. CONSERVATION SERVICE COLORADO PAS:: ]. - G?.ASS SEEDING PLANNED CO -ECS -5 (150-12--11) Rev. 4/92 Pr cer: Colo. Timber & Land Co. ?lenn r: DDG/EJC Date: 12-20-96 Cont -act or Agreement w Cc:ntract item Nc. rild IVj. Kl ball M n. Irac�ice Name & No. Critical Area Ac. Irricated Drylend X Land P.e c..urce Area 48A Ranc Site DP Woodland ads= ?r ^3_"a o 1 . Method .- =Cxirr a e Gam a s July or SeDt. Coar_ Litter Coves: resi:5::e neeeed ClPen till, Firm 5eedce.t, int rsc...'d, Other Disturbed Areas 5 et:..ng G ra . on. J,: -'- �F:-r1 3rc.icca5-. 1: Cate Aug. or Oct. Trac:kP ck-up down slopintinc Where possible. Fv;- =c=ds act =1 a''--` -- .-__".: ,_ 'oer P.Of iccc d. rd _roger: (:;2) }', _= :-.crus (P205) P=tues__::1 (-A) x111 Spacing - Wee:: .0 nzrcl. Cr e:rH.ca1, .,-,,:1 a _..._,...� SRFAv ,?nch ._t^:LC:a 1' _____ las : ora;: _ng ____ _ ::',,,'7.=, , as requited Erosion .:&r .:i.:::c..-:: ..__-.0 Grass hay or ... _....:_ LO00 15)/::,c. Hand _-iri--, .:-0c7.c.rcrl c: -__ S:.'ec: _s Mtn. Bromearass Bromar western Whtgrass Arriba daho Fescue Rocky Mt:'. Penstemon 3anders 3roadcast 75 PLS per Sod or 3cn c� 3 (3) seeding rate species/Ac. (1)x(2) 11.4 9.6 4.8 1.2 (1) Ler acre (100 v) 19 16 3 (2) of specia 30 (4) (5) Ictal ?Ls '-`_•/ Planned species -planned _.ores (3)x(4) 30 30 10 SCS cost shad programs such as creat Plains, Watershed activities, T�CFD measures and' any other orocramz-cuires the u2 -o of Certified Seed (Blue Tag) is available. remarks IP 13r CH!=. i sd',ri : t s 9= 05 J3U December 26, 1996 Planning Department Garfield County Courthouse 109 8th Street Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 RE: Protest and Objections to Request for Special Use Permit Dear Commissioners: We are in receipt of your certified letter advising us regarding a request by the Colorado Timber and Land Company for a special use permit to allow a logging operation on Kimball Mountain and adjacent lands in western Garfield County. As owners of land adjacent to the proposed logging operation, we must protest the granting of said permit and request the permit be denied. Our 818 acre property, Elkhorn Ranch, 19190 - 204 Road, Debeque, CO 81630, stretches along the Roan Creek drainage and County Road 204 for approximately 3.5 miles. Along this distance are living areas, barns, and haying and grazing operations in close proximity to or immediately adjacent to County Road 204 and Roan Creek. The ranch vistas include the areas of potential logging. We wish to lodge with the Planning Commission the following objections and concerns: In March, 1996, we were contacted by Joe Pace, an agent representing Mr. Dale Albertson, who inquired on Mr. Albertson's behalf, as to our interest in either 1) granting an easement across our ranch, 2) selling approximately sixty (60) acres, or 3) decline to provide access of any kind. Mr. Pace explained that the request was expressly for the purpose of conducting a logging operation in the timbered area above the ranch and parallel to BLM ground. We explained that we were not interested in either option, declined any access, and expressed concerns regarding any logging operations in the area. The environmental impact of the proposed logging operation raises extensive, and as yet unsatisfactorily answered, questions: What will be the heavy soil erosion impact of this potential "clear-cut" operation? (Reference letter from Kelly Rogers, Assistant District Forester, Colorado State Forest Service dated 12-10-96). What specific provisions are planned to protect the Roan j3. Creek watershed and protect against heavy soil erosion? What will be the specific potential impact on water resources and drainage in the Roan Creek area? What will be the impact on the loss of wildlife and fishery habitat and what will be done to protect said habitat? What clear plans exist for protecting residual stands of timber and for reforestation, reseeding, and replanting and how extensive and satisfactory are these plans (sustainability of the resource)? What specific plans exist for mitigating any catastrophe and/or disaster which might occur during the logging operation OR could occur following the conclusion of said operation? What will be the impact of livestock grazing on BLM ground immediately adjacent to the proposed logging operation? What will be the impact on hunting seasons? What will be the impact of road construction on the environment? What will be the impact on the existing road system and how would such impact affect those along the existing roads? Additionally, the proposed logging operation will negatively impact ranching operations at Elkhorn Ranch. The ranch has an exclusive BLM grazing permit for BLM ground contiguous to the western ranch boundary. The proposed logging operation is on land immediately adjacent to the BLM boundary. We are concerned about the incompatibility of these two activities. Finally, the rim rock and timbered North slope areas above Elkhorn Ranch are particularly beautiful. Given what has been described as the "uneconomical" aspect of logging these slopes, the aesthetics of the area would be damaged or destroyed not only for property owners but the general public as well. We respectfully request that you reject the applicant's request for a special use permit. Please advise us relative to any next steps in the process should there be any. cerely yours, auH. Milts Property Owner Elkhorn Ranch • 24 • Julia L. Mills Property Owner Elkhorn Ranch 01010 ._! NI in f i f"! '11, l! ` N 1 e I N n O W 7 J. fu c\ PI jtyviii)(1( 1.41i94 Fvf.rflc )ff.Il • 0' r J -"pre 98 W East- Flay Vis. . l7 6, T' 3 rrO" 0 (`-'1y���fre imbalj.,Mou n Sb rrrrP JPrrng - • ^— J\ i P4.Lrf 16 6 I 1 1 f'C�C'�A`i iii I i {� I J\ K! �6al1 My _ 1 l Oil Shale W: Ri.ge 4" • • ,I.li II_�vF_171 9r� ; Oil Shaleithdraw : • • • / 1I 1 \'' <---- T—,/ ,,,_______\_ - =a = astle Rock tip:°Cow / • • 7. 1 i tr %/, 1 I,ice' ,,/} %% 1 • r - / ! • . • Horse ountain� } ' �%a I,�� ` Oi1 Shie hthdrawal �'y�� Jr • ) i tilcXau II „.......--:,--.-.------4-------- � l �' - -1-_-:-.:-.-- '4. � C/ ! 1 1 �=�~ y/ t-:' 3'r1 36 • f d$a • E er 't Co • "1 I tf ro P. 0 C_ 0 9 110 G 0 0 0 171V en tio 16,T2 l,llf;i7 [N1: AGREEMENT This Agreement, dated effective this / su y of `1-,7E) , 1996, is by and between the COLORADO TI1MBER AND LAND COl\1PANY, IULLP, A Registered Limited Liability Partnership and MERIDIAN TRADING INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, an Oregon Corporation, (CTLC AND MERIDIAN) AND ALBERTSON RANCH CO A Colorado Limited Partnership and KIMBALL MOUNTAIN OUTFITTERS A Colorado Limited Liability Company (ALBERTSON ANT} KIMBALL MT.) RECITALS A) CTLC and Nfcridian arc interested in buying standing timber. B) Albertson and Kimball are interested in selling standine timber. AGREEMENT For good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows' 1) Albertson and Kimball have title to timber in the following parcels: See Exhibit "A" Attached Hereto and Made a Part Hereof 2) Albertson will acquire a u.rirter agreement from Harold Dougherty for commercial access across Dougherty lands for removal of timber from Colorado Carbon Company Tract, If there should be any expense to acquire this RAV, Albertsoa/Kirrlball as to be responsible for that expense. Seller warrants marketable title to all timber to be cut or removed pursuant to this contract, and covenants and agrees that he has full right, title, and authority to grant Buyer the right and privilege of entering into and upon the read property bcreiu described for the purpose of cutting and removing the timber thereon, that the legal description is accurate and correct, and that he has full right, title and autl3ority to sell the timber to the Buyer free and clear of any claims and demands of any third party whomsoever Buyer shall have the right of ingress and egress over roads which presently eti'.ist on Seller's property as necessary for the harvesting and removal of timber. 3) CTLC and Meridian agree to obtain all necessary permits and grants of right of v,,av to use ally goverrmtentaJ rights of way for the removal of the aforementioned timber, CTLC and Meridian will pay aJlVgoverrlrnentai use fees in conjunction with any removal of the timber by CTLC and Mendian. Albertson arzrees to assist in Iocarinrr known corners necessary for CTLC and Meridian to identify property lines 4) CTLC and Meridian agree to pay a fee of $54,000.00 (fifty thousand) as :an advance deposit prior to start of logging operations, These monies will be placed in an interest bearing account with any accumulating interest to be credited to Albertson. This fee will be covered by the granting of a timber decd which will be in effect for a period of three yevs frout rite date of this Agreement. The expiration date of this contract shall' be nbe,t JS,, /9.95; provided, however, that if said timber cannot be removed from Seller's laird due to a cause beyond the reasonable control of the Buyer, Seller agrees to extend the period of this contract for a period at least equal to the time lost from said cause. This fee will act as a peifotmance bond to cover payments, all contractual logging requirements and other mutually agreed upon contracting agreements. A minimum of S 15,000 of this performance bond will be left in place until all obligations have been completed Albettsutr/Kirnball can have access to the remaining 535,000 00 once logging operations have commenced. If all or part of the S35,000.00 is drawn by Albertson Kimball. payments of $1,750.00 per pay period will he withheld earth pay period from Albertson/Kimball proceeds until the amount drawn down has been repaid. 5) An escalating clause will be made part of the contract stipulating that if the price of logs to Louisiana .Pacific, Satatogga. Wyoming, has an increase, SO% of that increase will be passed on to AiBERTSON/KIMBALL and 20:o will be passed on to Cl"LCI ERJDIAN. Escalating price shall be determined on a quarterly basis, with exceptions being during major market changes within the quarter. Major change is initiated when the market has risen 52.00/ton or more. The escalating clause applies regardless of the final destination of the logs when sold, but will still use as the Kase price the original Louisiana Pacific price of logs that was established at the time this contract was sinned. 6) Addendums "A" and "B" attached and made a part of this A_reement derails the terrns of payment, stumpage amount, logging, slash disposal and other pertinent contract items. 7) CTLC7 tER1DIAN and ALBERTSON/KLMBALL shall each be responsible for their own income tax. use taxes or any other tax due gc vernmental enrities S) This _agreement shall be governed by and 'construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. The parties agree that if problems develop that cannot be resolved by mutual agreement, then each party shall pick independent representatives to attempt to reach aireement prior to titin_ formal legal action. 9) The prevailing, party in any suit to enforce this Agreement and all appeals therefrom shall be entitled to recover its reasonable costs and expenses. including attorneys' fees occurred in such action. The parties agree that under this Agreement, consideration flows from each party to the outer, 10) ,Access to tirnher which fles in Sections 2S, 29, 30 and 31 of T6S R 100 W will require access through property presently owned by John I_.anaicq. 6:5 19 l.'2 Road, Grand ]unction, Colorado. AIbertson agrees to negotiate t'.ith Lanucq to obtain right-of-way across his property; but, if unable to successfully obtain permission, Albertson aerees to the costs of any access road through the Bureau of Land Management lands adjacent to Lamicq lands to be paid out of stumpage. ADDENDUM "A" CAT LOGGTNG a) Loi=inn to commence 1996, or as soon thereafter as Governmental permits and R/W's are in place. Cat logging will include harvesting of up to approximately 4 miilibn board feet. b) Cat log_ing will be the preferred method of timber removal whenever and wherever feasible on all parcels. c) Stumpage to be paid according to the following: Payments to Albertson/Kimball will be pard hi -monthly on the 15th and 30th of each month in which operations are being conducted. Operations are to be continuous once started, with the exception of months when inelimate weather, unsafe conditions or potential road damage may result. Carbon Ground logging (both cat and high line) to be as short a duration as possible THIGH LINE LOGGFNG b) High line logging will include harvesting of approximately 6 to S mullion board feet Stumpage to be paid according to the following: Payments to :slbertson/IKimball will be paid bi-monthly on the I5tn arta Sutn or each month in which.operations are being conducted. Operations are to be continuous once started, with the exception of months when inclimate weather, unsafe conditions or potential road damane may result. 41. ADDENDUM "B" Certain trees marked by the Seller shall be left standing. 3 Any notice or demand required or permitted to be given or made under the terms of this contract shall be deemed to have b,'?n duly given or made if deposited in the United States Mail in a sealed envelope, pos!aoe pre -paid, respectively addressed as follows: To Se11er7 Albertson and Kunbail Mt CIO Dale B, Albertson 4166 County Road 202 De Beque, CO 81630 To Buyer. Colorado Timber and Land Company, RLLP P. O. Box 431 — Ritle, Colorado 51650 3 The following conditions are incorporated into this contract: a) Stumps will be Left 12 inches or less in height. b) Buyer shall repair any damages from log ioe operations to fences, gates and structures. c) Seller aerees to notify Bu. r prior to any sale of any portion of the property described in Exhibit "A" and said sale is subject to this a greement. d) This contract may not be ,ssiened by either Seller or Buyer without prior written approval of the other parry. ei Contractors will carry Workman Compensation insurance, and General Liability insurance. A copy of which will be provided to Seller, t) Buyer will pile all landing !'lash_ slash piles will be burned when suitable, about one year after piling. ^_) Ail roads and landings corn.structed by Buyer will be sprayed for weed control and reseeded with grass mixture approved by Albertson and/or the Soil Conservation District. lt) Log trucks and other traffic associated with this contract will observe all posted speed limits signs on Kimball Creek and Roan Creek roads. 4, "Merchantable limber' as used in this contract shall mean that timber which is 8' 10" in length or more, S" in diameter on the small end, and 50% or more sound, either livinct or dead, failing or down, which at the time of conversion into a wood product in the woods is, in the opinion of the Buyer, economically loggahle. 5. The expiration date of this contract shall be t-1 hile.jz /s", /99 provided, however, that if said timber cannot be r7moved from Seller's land due to a cause beyond the reasonable control of the Buyer, Seller agrees to extend the period of this contract for a period at least equal to the time lost from said cause. 6. The road to be constructed for access to Kimball Mtn. from Kimball Creek throuch Secrinns 1, 2' and 3, T 7 S, R 99 W, shall have a nominal grade of 10% with short occasional pitches of,up to 15%. These expenses are to be paid by CLTC/KERLDIA%r with a cap of $50,000. Any additional ex-pense incurred as a result' of this road will be pairl out of the sr.iimpage. Page 32. CO 'd 117.4101 7. Logginu operations will be in an orderly and progressive manner, exercising alI reason:}ble protection to young growth and the surrounding envisotarnent. S, No hooting by CLTCAZRIDIAN employees, subcontractors or service personnel will be petntirted, 9 Trees'will he hauled and welcht taken promptly after cutting. 10. lr is further expressly understood and agreed that all the covenants and agreements in this contract contained shall extend to and be binding upon, the heirs, eecurors, legal reprrtsentatives and assigns of the respective parties hereto. 11 FTf7T.i] HARMLESS The Buyer shall indemnify and save harmless the Seller against all suits or actions of every kind and nature brought a^_ainst the Seller for or on account of any it/juries or damages received or sustained by any person, firm, or corporation in connection with, or on account of the performance of the work under this contract or by any consequence of any negligence in connection with We same or on account of any net or omission or commission of the Buyer or his subcontractors, agents, servants, or employees, relating to this contract. The Seller shall indemnify and save hannless the Buyer against all suits or actions or -every kind and nature brought against the Buyer for or on account of any injury or damage received or sustained by any person, firm, or corporation in connection with. or on account of the performance of the Seller's obligations under this contract, or by any consequence of any negii_ence in connection with the same, or on account of any act or omission, or commission of the seller or his subcontractors, anents, servants, or employees, or for any cause arising out of the performance of the subcontractors, agents,. servants, or employees relating to this contract. PateS33 INDUSTRIAL OPERATIONS PLAN LOGGING A COMBLNATION OF THE 1 RACTOR AND HIGHLEAD (CABLE) LOGGING METHODS WILL BE USED TO HARVEST TI-± KIMBALL MOUNTAIN TIMBER ON THE DALE ALBERTSON RANCH. THE EXACT AREAS TO BE LOGGED AND THE METHODS TO BE USED IS OUTLINED IN APPENDIX "A' MAP AND APPENDIX "B" AERIAL PHOTOS OF THIS PLAN. THIS WILL BE A THREE YEAR PROTECT AND BE ACTIVE FOR 8-9 MONTHS PER YEAR. THE AC I IVTTY WILL BE LIVIITED TO THOSE MON IHS OF THE YEAR WTILN THE OPERATION CAN BE EHICIEti-iY LOG -GED. TEES EFFICIENCY WILL BE DETERMLNED BY TWO FACTORS, NAMELY, (1) SOIL COMPACTION IN THE LOCKING AREA AND (2) DEGREDATION TO THE EXISTING ROAD SYS 1 EM. WHEN EITIIER OF THE AFOREMENTIONED FACTORS ARE EXGSTANT THE OPERATION WILL BE SUSPENDED UNTIL THE CONDITIONS WARRANT TH RESUMPTION OF OPERATIONS. ROAD CONSTRUCTION THE ROAD CONS 1 RUCTION ON THE LOGGING PROJECT WELL CONSIST OF THREE TYPES: (1) OPENING OF EXISTING ROADS. (2) CONS 1 RUCTION OF MINIMAL IMPACT LOGGII G SPURS. AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW ROAD AS OUTLINED IN EXHIBIT "C". ALL LOGGING SPURS, FRESH MA 1 ERIAL DISPLACEMENT ON THE OPENING OF EXISTING ROADS. LOGGING LANDINGS WILL BE PUT TO "BED" UPON THE COMPLETION OF THEIR RESPECTIVE USAGE. THIS WILL BE ACCOMPLISIILD THROUGH A SYS I E,M OF WA I ERBARRING AND GRASS SEEDING TO ENSURE THAT EROSION DOES NOT OCCUR DURING THE PROCESS OF CON [RUCTION. IF IT BECOMES NECESSARY TO CROSS A LIVE STREAM. A CULVERT WILL BE PERMANENTLY INSTALLED IN A MANNER WHICH IS CONSISTANT WITH MINIMAL SOIL DISTURBANCE TO THE BANKS OF THE STREAM AT THL POINT OF INGRESS AND EGRESS. IN AREAS THAT ALREADY SHOW INDICATIONS OF DEEP WASHING OR A -3J CONDITION OF EXISTING EROSION, A 1 LMPORARY"R4TLCAR" BRIDGE SYSTEM WILL BE USED AT EACH INDICATED CROSSING. THIS SYS 1 LM WILL MINIMIZE ANY FURTHER IMPACT ON THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT AND CURRENT STREAM CONFIGURATION. IMPACTS STREAM PROTECTION: IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE OUTLINED ROAD AND LOGGING PROCEDURES. NO TIMBER WILL BE REMOVED WITHIN 50 F1=.ET EITHER SIDE OF A LIVE (YEAR ROUND) STREAM. IN THOSE STREAMS WITH INTERMITANT FLOW OR EROSION CAPABILITIES . THE LOGGING WILL BE LIMI 1 ED TO A FORTY PERCENT BASAL AREA REMOVAL INCLUDING BASAL AREA REMOVED DURENG ROAD CONS '"RUCTION. IN THESE CASES TIMBER TO BE REMOVED WILL BE MARKED AT BREAST HEIGHT AND ON THE S I UMP PRIOR TO HARVEST. ADJACENT LANDS: THERE WILL BE NO IMPACT ON ADJACENT LANDS BY THE GENERATION OF VAPOR, NOISE, GLARE. VThRATION. OR OTHER EMINATIONS, THE ONLY FORSEEN IMPACT WILL BE OF DUST FROM LOGGING "RUCKS ON THE ?LALV HAUL ROI' I hS. Ti -IE MA.: VfUM IMPACT FOR TRAVEL WOULD BE 12 ROUND TRIPS PER DAY ON A SD< DAY WEEK. WH_DLIFE AND DOMESTIC ANLMALS ALTHOUGH THERE WILL SOME SHORT DURATION DISRUPTION Lei i SMALL AREAS, THE OVERALL EFFECT WILL BE MITIGAI ED BY THE GRASS SEEDING AND RELEASE OF NATIVE VEGETATION TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF "BROUSE" FOR WILDLIFE. AND GRASS FOR DOMESTIC ANIMALS. TRAI~H-IC: A MAXIMUM OF 12 ROUND TRIPS PER DAY OF HIGHWAY LEGAL LOG TRUCKS PLUS THREE PICKUP 'RUCKS PER DAY. THIS WILL BE MAINLY MONDAY -THROUGH FRIDAY, WITH SOME LESSOR ACTIVITY ON SATURDAY. ABUTTING PROPERTY: ALL LINES WILL BE ESTABLISHED PRIOR TO WORK IN ANY GIVEN AREA OF _ OPERATIONS. ALL USE OF ROADS ON ADJACENT LANDOWNERS WILL BE L\I WITLNG AND OBT ALNED PRIOR TO THE START OF OPERATIONS AFFECTING "MAT PARTICULAR ROAD SYSTEM. •3�- INDUSTRIAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS THE OPERATIONS WILL BE CONDUCTED IN A MANNER THAT WILL BE CONSISTANT WITH ALL COUNTY, STATE AND FEDERAL STATUTES IN FORCE DURING THE IERM OF THIS OPERATION. TILE CONTRACTORS ON THE AREA AND USING ANY GOVERNMENTAL ROAD WILL BE. REQUIRED TO CARRY CONVENTIAL LOGGERS BROADFORM INSURANCE TO COVER ALL LIABILITY THAT COULD DERIVE FROM THIS OPERATION. A COPY OF THIS WILL BE FURNISHED THE APPROPRIATE AGENCIES PRIOR TO TIIE COMMENCEMENT OF THE OPERATION. THE BURNING OF LOGGING SLASH ON THE LAND3NGS OF THE OPERATIONS AREA IS THE ONLY EMMISION OR PARTICULA I E MAT 1 ER THAT IS ENVISIONED ON THE OPERATION. BURNING WILL OCCUR PERIODICALLY WHEN WEATHER CONDITIONS ALLOW THE MINIMAL AMOUNT OF SMOKE AND INSURE A SAFE CONDITION FOR THE SURROUNDING FOREST RESOL'RSE. FUEL STORAGE WILL BE LIMITED ON THE OPERATION AREA TO 300 GALLONS AT ANY ONE TIME. THE AREA DESIGNA 1 E.D FOR FUEL STORAGE WILL BE A LLN'ED PIT S 1 RUCTURE CAPABLE OF ELIMINATING SOIL C ON TA_MNATION. ALL REFUSE THAT IS A RESLLT OF THE OPERATION AND IS GENERA LED FROM TIE OPERATION WILL BE PICKED UP AND DISPOSED OF OFF THE OPERATIONS AREA IN AN APPROPRIA.1L EXISTING SANITARY DISPOSAL SI11:.