Comments Needed by July 21, 2008
Crown/Kinross has proposed *six* (not four) new exploration sites on Buckhorn Mountain.

July 15, 2008

The Forest Service has withdrawn the "Request for Comments" of June 13th regarding new exploration on Buckhorn Mountain and replaced it with a July 3, 2008 with a "Request for Comments" which are due July 21, 2008. The notice states that the public comments for the first notice must be revised and resubmitted.

The new request is substantially the same as the previous request except that there would be 6 geophysical survey lines instead of 4. The request also proposes to approve the Kinross exploration proposal.

We feel it is unreasonable for the Forest Service to burden the public by requiring that previous comments be revised and resubmitted. It would be more reasonable to send a letter explaining the changes in the proposals and request additional comments with an extension of the comment deadline.

However, just to cover our bases we are asking you to modify your previous comments and resend them to:

Mark Morris, Tonasket District Ranger
1 West Winesap
Tonasket, WA 98855

or emailed to: comments-pacificnorthwest-okanogan-tonasket@fs.fed.us

Comments Needed by July 21, 2008

Kinross has proposed new exploration on Buckhorn Mountain.

The proposal includes 18 exploration drill holes on 14 sites and geophysical survey next to the Buckhorn Mine

Suggested comments:
I have been concerned about mining in Buckhorn Mountain area for many years.

• I am concerned that the cumulative impacts of the proposal along with past, present, and future projects in the area would be significant. This proposal should be fully analyzed. An Environmental Assessment must be conducted to determine the level of this proposal's significance.

• The Forest Service cannot ignore and must consider that the proposed exploration is part of Kinross mining activities in the area. Analysis of this proposal should include the other mining claims that it could be reasonably assumed would be developed in the near future and the cumulative impacts with the permitted Buckhorn Mine activities adjacent to the current proposal.

• The Forest Service should not allow the mining proponent to segment multiple proposals so that any one would not be considered significant but together they most certainly would.

• Most of the area where the exploration is proposed is prime wildlife habitat. The impacts of the proposed exploration drilling and geophysical survey on wildlife should be fully analyzed in conjunction with other activities in the area.

• The lights from at least 3 of the drill sites (5 holes) would be seen and the loud constant pounding of the core drill would be heard by residents in the Chesaw area. Operations for 24 hours a day 7 days a week would create an unreasonable disturbance to the aesthetic character of the area that residents and recreational users value.

• The analysis for this proposal should include information about where the water for the proposed activity would come from.

• The analysis should include the potential impacts of creating new preferential pathways by the drilling of additional exploration holes in the fractured bedrock that may cause the aquifer that feeds Bolster and Thorp Creeks to drain.

• The analysis should consider impacts of clearing and drilling on the function of aquatic and wildlife resources the proposal traverses. It should include the impacts of sedimentation in headwater streams and the facilitation of cattle trespass into those streams and wetlands.

• The area that the proposal would disturb should be completely surveyed for threatened and endangered plants and animals before any activity is permitted.

• The reclamation of the proposed activities may not be adequate to protect groundwater that would be intersected by exploration drilling. The impacts should be fully analyzed.

• The request for comments also states "interdisciplinary studies will be conducted as part of the analysis prior to issuing the go ahead on these projects". This exploration has the potential of impacting the quality of people's lives and wildlife in this area. The go ahead should NOT be issued until the public has had full and complete opportunity to review the studies and provide additional input as provided by NEPA.

Please keep me informed of any and all studies done for this proposal, opportunities to comment and decisions regarding this issue.