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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Page 20 1. See previous comments in regard to page 16 of the TFTO Submission stating the importance of 2011 work being viewed in conjunction with 2012 work. Amphibian call counts were conducted in 2012. 2. This statement is incorrect. Please review ESR Appendix 5. In addition to conducting two aerial surveys in two years, a very detailed habitat analysis was completed using the Ontario Landscape Tool (OLT) developed by the OMNR. This is significantly more work than that undertaken by the OMNR to develop moose management guidelines for wildlife management units. The OMNR conducts moose aerial inventories every 3 years (sometimes as infrequently as 5 or 7 years in northern units) and flies only a small, representative portion of the wildlife management unit. They currently do not use the OLT to assist in setting management guidelines. Gold Canyon Resources Inc. Response to TFTO Submission for Springpole Access Corridor Final ESR April 2013 Schedule 2/- 21-
Page 21 1. Note that the OLT developed PREDICTED moose densities over large spatial scales. "Low densities" is a subjective term and represents moose densities of between 0 and 0.17/km2, compared to more southern areas of the boreal forest with "high" moose densities in the 0.22 to >0.30 range. The terms associated with these densities are a default density set by the OLT. 2. Our approach to developing estimates and inferences regarding moose densities was not flawed and involved a more holistic approach than the provincial government uses to determine tag allocations for wildlife management units throughout Ontario. 3. The study was discussed many times with the OMNR in order to ensure that data collection efforts were relevant. GCU also conducted open house sessions with FN groups (See Section 3-1- 4, ESR) to discuss the planned studies and to receive feedback on every aspect of our baseline data collection efforts. 4. Moose densities for the area were determined through OLT modeling (predicted moose densities) as well as through the mapping of late winter moose habitat (Figure 2.15, pg. 39 of ESR appendix 4 Biological Constraints Report) 5. Multiple aerial surveys were conducted over the area (2011, 2012). Aerial surveys for ungulates are not conducted outside of winter because they are very difficult to see with no snow cover and with leaves on the trees. 6. Calving and feeding area data was obtained from the Red Lake OMNR. Caribou calving surveys were completed throughout the study area and on potential lakes adjacent to the eastern corridor (ESR, appendix 4, Biological Constraints Report, pg. 72) 7. It is beyond the scope of a Class C EA to determine moose populations. We presented moose densities in a 900 km2 study area and modeled predicted moose densities for the regional study area. 8. The concept of range can be interpreted in many ways. It can mean the amount and arrangement of summer and winter habitat, and it can relate to seasonal food abundance, calving areas, mineral licks, and aquatic feeding areas, as well as other aspects. The ESR, Appendix 4 Biological Constraints Report touched on the more important aspects of moose range including later winter habitat (considered one of the most limiting factors to moose populations) and identified known aquatic feeding areas and calving areas. The ESR also addressed what the impacts (if any) would be to those resources through the construction of the road (pages 37, 39, 43, and 58-60). Gold Canyon Resources Inc. Response to TFTO Submission for Springpole Access Corridor Final ESR April 2013 Schedule 2/- 22-
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:
Page 333 and 334: 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 and 382: Page 18 1. This is not a requiremen
Page 383: (which were not intended to describ
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?