Sign Comment Letter-3D Seismic USFS Draft COA - Citizens for a Healthy Community

Please check the box below if you agree to the following comments. A check in the box is required in order to submit the form to the US Forest Service. *

Dear Mr. Broyles,

I am writing to you today regarding the Trail Gulch and Iron Point 3D seismic mapping projects, the use of a categorical exclusion to analyze them, and the draft Conditions of Approval the Forest Service has made available for public review. While the draft Conditions of Approval are appreciated, it is not clear how they were devised, and if they were drafted in response to environmental review or to avoid conducting a more rigorous environmental review. What the COAs do make explicitly clear is that these projects have the capacity to have serious impacts on our watershed and beyond.

It is clear that these projects must be considered jointly, in an environmental assessment. They are being proposed in the same watershed, at the same time, by the same operators. They are now apparently going to be subject to the same Conditions of Approval. Independently analyzing these projects under separate categorical exclusions is simply unacceptable – an EA is the only real way to ensure the cumulative impacts of these projects are fully considered.

In addition, the draft Conditions of Approval are inadequate to prevent adverse impacts to our watershed and our way of life. Specifically, the setback distances are absolutely unacceptable. A setback of less than 300’ from “High Risk Earthen Dams” is egregious. They also completely fail to address potential for groundwater contamination and landslide risk. The USFS has based its proposed setbacks on an arbitrary and 5-year old source that does not take the specific topography of the project area into account, and what appears to be biased research from industry representatives. There are numerous examples of far more protective setbacks from BLM and USFS seismic projects, including a set of BLM best practices from 2017 that requires at least ¼ of a mile between shot holes and spring sources.

For those reasons, I request that you analyze these projects in an EA, and that you adopt more protective setback requirements that can actually protect water infrastructure and other vital resources.

Sincerely,

Date

Name *

Email Address *

Phone Number *

City *

State *

Zip *

I am: *

Check all that apply

Additional Comments

Signature. Please sign using the cursor below to write your name. This digital signature is legally binding and confirms your agreement with the comment letter above. Thank you. *

Clear

reCAPTCHA

SIGN THIS LETTER TO SAVE THE NORTH FORK VALLEY WATERSHED FROM A MASSIVE SEISMIC TESTING PROJECT

Your Voice Is Needed To Tell The US Forest Service That Its Draft Conditions of Approval Are Inadequate to Protect The North Fork Valley Watershed and Requires Requires An Environmental Assessment.

SUBSCRIBE

SIGN THIS LETTER TO SAVE THE NORTH FORK VALLEY WATERSHED FROM A MASSIVE SEISMIC TESTING PROJECT

Your Voice Is Needed To Tell The US Forest Service That Its Draft Conditions of Approval Are Inadequate to Protect The North Fork Valley Watershed and Requires Requires An Environmental Assessment.

Share this:

SUBSCRIBE

Subscribe To Our Newsletter