Revised Final Environmental Study Report (24 MB) - Gold Canyon ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Page 19 1. The corridor width stated in several places in the ESR (pages vii, viii, xii, 5, 31(item 4), and 44). The corridor length is not stated in the body of the ESR report. This was an oversight. 2. Area to be cleared for the entire 43 km corridor of the proposed Project is only 0.645 km2 NOT 645 km2, as stated by the TFTO. Number is based on incorrect calculation of the corridor. (43km x 0.015 km = 0.645 km). This includes 0.33 km 2 which is already approved for clearing in the 2009-2019 Trout Lake FMP, so only 0.315 km 2 is proposed for additional clearing as part of the GCU Project 3. The buffer zone used to analyze the impacts to large fur bearers and caribou was not 500 m, as stated in the TFTO Submission, it was 25 km on each side of both proposed corridors and the exploration area (ESR Appendix 4 - page 9 of the Biological Constraints Report) 4. As explained in the ESR Appendix 4 - page 9 of the Biological Constraints Report, the dimensions of the buffer zones are based on the area believed to be impacted by construction of the corridor on any given environmental component. These buffers were developed by an experienced wildlife biologist with first-hand knowledge of the area and through the review of other studies. These areas were also agreed upon by members of the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources prior to submission of the ESR. 5. The terrestrial baseline studies were not "intended to assess a limited area". The 2011 assessments were intended to be used in conjunction with successive years of data for eventual environmental permitting for the mine. Some of this information was used in addition to extensive terrestrial field data from 2012 which covered a much larger area, and does reflect true environmental conditions. 6. The abundance of wildlife documented in and around camp is actually quite high and includes many species of birds, as well as bats, caribou, bears, wolves, marten, fox, wolverine, rabbits, and small mammals, to name a few. It is our opinion that the GCU camp has had a negligible effect on the results of wildlife studies, as indicated by the fact that the 2012 studies conducted across a much larger area, yielded very similar results to those conducted in and around the camp. 7. All studies followed acceptable scientific methodologies, and these methodologies are referenced where applicable. Statistical analyses for many of the parameters studied are not necessary. Baseline data collection is not a research undertaking, it is completed to fulfill the permitting process. Again, the TFTO appears to be referencing only the 2011 baseline studies Gold Canyon Resources Inc. Response to TFTO Submission for Springpole Access Corridor Final ESR April 2013 Schedule 2/- 19-
(which were not intended to describe conditions at the proposed access corridor) instead of the material presented in Appendix 4 of the ESR. 8. The databases used were the most complete and up to date data sources available. The consultation of these databases is a mandatory and commonplace task undertaken with all baseline studies. Gold Canyon Resources Inc. Response to TFTO Submission for Springpole Access Corridor Final ESR April 2013 Schedule 2/- 20-
Page 1 and 2:
SPRINGPOLE GOLD ACCESS CORRIDOR PRO
Page 3 and 4:
Gold Canyon Resources Inc. Springpo
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 82:
APPENDIX 2 LETTERS FROM HORIZON ARC
Page 87 and 88:
Round 1 Consultation - Early pre-co
Page 89 and 90:
APPENDIX 4 BIOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS R
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 98:
Page 101:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
APPENDIX 5 FIELD REPORT FROM DST (D
Page 179:
Client Name DST Reference No.: Page
Page 182 and 183:
Equi-Knox Environmental Inc. Februa
Page 184 and 185:
APPENDIX 7 7A: WATER CROSSINGS ENGI
Page 186 and 187:
The 25-year flood (Q 25 ), determin
Page 188 and 189:
All of the culvert sizes recommende
Page 190 and 191:
2. At present, the planned winter i
Page 192 and 193:
Table 2 - Water Crossing Hydrology
Page 194 and 195:
Map 2 - Water Crossings in Northern
Page 196 and 197:
Photo 3 - Site #2 indicates propose
Page 198 and 199:
- 2 - 7. In the spring, when the fr
Page 200 and 201:
Photo 1: Facing North at original f
Page 202 and 203:
Photo 3: Facing East at Biologist
Page 204 and 205:
Photo 5: Facing West at Biologist
Page 206 and 207:
CROSSING 2 SPRINPOLE ROAD - SITE PI
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216:
CROSSING 7 - Birch River Crossing 1
Page 219 and 220:
Photo 3: Taken facing the West on t
Page 221 and 222:
Photo 5: Taken facing South of East
Page 223 and 224:
Photo 7: Taken facing the North app
Page 225 and 226:
CROSSING 8 SPRINPOLE ROAD ( EAST EN
Page 227 and 228:
CROSSING 9 SPRINPOLE ROAD ( EAST EN
Page 229 and 230:
CROSSING 10 SPRINPOLE ROAD - SITE P
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 240 and 241:
SENT BY E-MAIL ATTACHMENT Adamson C
Page 242:
BRIDGE SITE DATA FORM - EXISTING CO
Page 245 and 246:
Materials - 30' Deaddog Creek Bridg
Page 247 and 248:
Canada flow gauge on the Cat River,
Page 249 and 250:
Crown Land Bridge Management Guidel
Page 251:
Photo 3 - Site #2 indicates propose
Page 254 and 255:
Springpole_GenericSedInstall_______
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Comments Received at Open Houses co
Page 268 and 269:
Comments Received at Open Houses co
Page 270 and 271:
APPENDIX 9 9A: SUBMISSION FROM TROU
Page 272 and 273:
Gold Canyon Resources Inc: Final En
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286 and 287:
Page 288 and 289:
Page 290 and 291:
Page 292 and 293:
Page 294 and 295:
Page 296 and 297:
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300 and 301:
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304 and 305:
Page 306 and 307:
Page 308 and 309:
Page 310 and 311:
Page 312 and 313:
Page 314 and 315:
GOLD CANYON RESOURCES INC. GCU: TSX
Page 316:
Page 3 GCU’s mitigation measures
Page 319 and 320:
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 331 and 332: Gold Canyon Resources Inc: Final En
Page 361 and 362: GCU has hired qualified, independen
Page 363 and 364: The basic environmental protection
Page 365 and 366: 8. Like the Draft ESR, Notices were
Page 367 and 368: A full record of consultation is pr
Page 369 and 370: Page 7 1. Corridor alternatives pre
Page 371 and 372: 13. “Stakeholders” refers solel
Page 373 and 374: Page 10 1. Detailed comments on the
Page 375 and 376: Page 13 1. GCU is proposing to clea
Page 377 and 378: Page 15 1. GCU is open to developin
Page 379 and 380: Page 17 1. The economic information
Page 381: Page 18 1. This is not a requiremen
Page 385 and 386: Page 21 1. Note that the OLT develo
Page 387 and 388: Page 22 1. The statement that carib
Page 389 and 390: Page 24 1. General comment on 5.3.2
Page 391 and 392: Page 26 1. The background database
Page 393 and 394: Page 29 1. Comments on Table 3: The
Page 395 and 396: Page 31 1. Water quality at Springp
Page 397 and 398: 9. The aquatics baseline report doe
Page 399 and 400: assessed through toxicity testing a
Page 401 and 402: Page 34 1. Life of this Project is
Page 403 and 404: Page 36 1. These recommendations ar
Page 405 and 406: Page 38 1. Domtar has approval unde
Page 407 and 408: Page 39 1. This means simply that G
Page 409 and 410: Page 42 1. The recommendations from
Page 411 and 412: Supplemental Mitigation Measures fo
show all

Revised Final Environmental Study Report (24 MB) - Gold Canyon ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?