The topographic features for all routes are similar. Routes 2 and 3 (3,830
feet) are the shortes
route 5 (4,670 feet) is the longest. The area of wetlands disturbed by the
various alternatives i
approximately the same with the exception of route 5, where there would be
no wetland distuor
The maximum area of wetland affected would be 0.6 acre. The wetland crossing
for routes 2 a
would be in an area of wetland previously filled for drill pad access.

Route 1 would be adjacent to Skunk Lake for several hundred feet, while routes
2, 3, 4 and 5 wi
sufficiently separated from Skunk Lake to minimize lake disturbance. Wildlife
impacts associa
with the alternate corridors would be similar except for potential effects
of route 1 on waterfo
of Skunk Lake. Route 4 would be adjacent to Sand Lake Road for approximately
125 feet whilE
5 would require relocation of approximately 1,000 feet of Sand Lake Road.
Relocation of the i
Lake Road segment would require approval by the Town of Nashville and, might
disturb or pasw
adjacent to a wetland contiguous with Little Sand Lake. The exact placement
of the relocated
Lake Road segment would depend upon the buffer distance needed between the
road and routeA
potential for increased noise levels and fugitive dust emissions to Little
Sand Lake would be gnr
for route 5.

Railroad Spur
The railroad spur would be used to ship concentrates and receive equipment
and bulk supplies.
tramways and belt conveyors were considered as alternatives but rejected
as less suitable. Th4
alternatives required additional land disturbance, duplication of facilities,
and greater energy
consumption than the proposed railroad spur.

Six alternative corridors were studied between the Soo Line (three miles
to the northeast) and
mine/mill site (Figure 4-3). The proposed alternative (corridor D) would
result in the fewest
from environmental, construction, and operational standpoints. Locational
criteria included
minimizing wetland and stream crossings, total route length, and encroachment
on sensitive X
environmental areas. In addition, the railroad spur must have gradual curves
and a grade of o
percent or less. Table 4-3 summarizes characteristics of the alternative
rail corridors. Corr:
lengths range from 2.2 to 2.9 miles. Alternatives A and F would have the
greatest potential i
on major streams because more bridges or culverts would be required. With
additional bridge
construction, more soil disturbance, erosion, and siltation in streams would
be expected. Alto
A, B, and E would intrude on an environmentally sensitive wetland. Alternative
C would pass
an environmentally sensitive spring pond and a wetland. Alternative C also
would require a la
earthen cut in the steep-sided drumlin west of Hemlock Creek to meet the
required grade.

Distances to osprey and eagle nests are considered acceptable except for
corridor A (0.13 mild
osprey nest). An eagle nest 0.4 miles north of corridor C blew down in 1984
and it is not knot
whether the eagles will rebuild in the same location. In severe winters with
deep snow, deer
congregate in the wetlands along Swamp Creek. Alternatives A, B, and E would
encroach on4
the Swamp Creek deeryard than the other corridors. None of the corridors
however, are exp
have significant adverse impacts on deer yarding. Other wildlife impacts
(such as to upland h
and impacts on forest resources and air quality would be similar among the
various alternative

No human residences would need to be removed along any of the corridors.
Corridors D and F
closest to a residence (0.1 mile); corridor C is the farthest (approximately
1 mile). Approxim
mile of each corridor, except C, would be visible from Keith Siding Road.
Planting a buffer
trees between the road and railroad spur might be desirable to mitigate noise
and visual impal
About six recreational cabins are located between 0.1 and 0.5 miles from
the proposed rail c
D. All corridors have similar overall potential for noise disturbance of
cottage users except
is approximately one mile from the nearest cottage.

The corridors would cover approximately five acres of agricultural land except
corridor C w
would not cross agricultural land. Corridors B, C, and D would intersect
Berry Lane, a town'
while corridors A, E, and F would cross no public roads.



- 224 -