![]() |
||
| [ ACA Home Page ] | ||
|
Apperson Quarry Stop the Apperson Ridge Quarry
If you thought the Sunol gravel quarry expansion was bad news: In 1984, Alameda County approved the Apperson Ridge Quarry, a hard rock mine proposed east of the Sunol Valley, midway between Sunol Regional Wilderness and San Antonio Reservoir. Oliver de Silva, Inc. plans to destroy 680 acres of prime wildlife habitat in the heart of the home range of the San Antonio tule elk herd. The quarry will feature daily dynamite blasting that will be heard in Sunol Wilderness and the town of Sunol as well as up to 1,000 trucks per day on Calaveras Road. Read the April 2006 feature article in the East Bay Express on the devastation the quarry will cause Read the May 2007 update article in the Express, Mine All Mine! Apperson Quarry Update June 2007 SFPUC Offering Sunol Valley Mining Lease to De Silva - Link to Apperson Quarry
The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission last month voted to enter into exclusive negotiations with Oliver de Silva, Inc., for the lease to mine gravel under Surface Mining Permit (SMP) 30 on 325 acres of public land along Alameda Creek in the Sunol Valley. De Silva also owns a lease to mine Apperson Ridge (SMP-17) east of the Sunol Valley and south of San Antonio Reservoir, on private land adjacent to SFPUC watershed land and Sunol Regional Park. The Apperson Quarry, a hard rock mine, would destroy 680 acres of prime wildlife habitat in the heart of the home range for the San Antonio tule elk herd and would impact numerous endangered species.
SMP-30 is currently mined for sand and gravel by Cemex (formerly RMC Pacific Materials), which has a lease to mine to 140 feet. The SFPUC is offering de Silva a lease to expand mining operations at SMP-30 to a depth of at least 225 feet. More significantly, the SMP-30 lease would allow de Silva to build a conveyor belt from the Apperson Ridge Quarry to the Sunol Valley and use the SMP-30 site to process the rock and possibly dispose of spoils from the Apperson site.
The SFPUC will conduct an environmental review of the SMP-30 project under the California Environmental Quality Act it is not clear how much of the proposed activities at Apperson Ridge would be covered in this review. The Environmental Impact Report approved by Alameda County for Apperson Quarry is 23 years old and completely inadequate. Linking of the leases may re-open the environmental review for Apperson. The SFPUC intends to include some restoration projects for Alameda Creek in the SMP-30 lease; restoring portions of Alameda Creek in the Sunol Valley, installing a cut-off wall in the gravel pit to prevent water inflow from Alameda Creek, and helping to fund a fish passage project at the PG&E gas crossing in the Sunol Valley.
The SMP-30 lease may make the Apperson Quarry more financially viable for de Silva; it potentially could allow the SFPUC to impose additional conditions and mitigation measures. The ACA is currently evaluating the proposal and will come out with a position statement on the SMP-30 lease shortly. Wildlands will be destroyed, tule elk and other wildlife will be displaced
The quarry activity and blasting will drive the East Bay's only tule elk herd out of their rutting and calving area. The quarry and truck traffic will also disturb and likely evict nesting golden eagles and peregrine falcons, and damage habitat and disrupt migration for sensitive species such as the California red-legged frog, Alameda whipsnake, California tiger salamander and western burrowing owl. The quarry may also degrade habitat and impact water quality for landlocked steelhead trout in Indian Creek, above San Antonio Reservoir. Inadequate, outdated environmental review Alameda County conducted the Environmental Impact Report for the quarry in 1984. Since that time the whipsnake, red-legged frog, and tiger salamander have been listed under the Endangered Species Act. The quarry recently gained County approval for expansion of the ranch road that will provide truck access to the quarry. The County has proposed woefully inadequate mitigation for impacts to the red-legged frog and required absolutely no mitigation for impacts to other listed and sensitive species! The 1984 EIR proposed to relocate the tule elk herd to Ohlone Wilderness, a plan that has since been rejected by the Department of Fish and Game. Alameda County has indicated they will allow the quarry to go forward with no further environmental review and with full knowledge the quarrying will evict and likely destroy the San Antonio elk herd. Upcoming events: Apperson Quarry hike -TBA Apperson Quarry strategy meeting - coming late summer or early fall of 2006 What you can do: Write or call the Alameda County Planning Department and insist they conduct a new Environmental Impact Report for the quarry. The County's EIR is 21 years old and does not adequately address impacts to endangered and threatened species. Tell the County it is unacceptable and illegal to displace the San Antonio elk herd and destroy endangered species habitat. Write to: Chris Bazar, Director cc to: Supervisor Scott Haggerty Write or call the California Department of Fish and Game and insist they not give the quarry a Streambed Alteration Permit without a new EIR. Write to: Janice Gan, Biologist Print a petition to protect the wildlife of Apperson Ridge. Have your friends and neighbors sign and send us the completed petition. We will send it to the County and state and federal regulatory agencies. Download a color flyer or a black and white flyer about Apperson Quarry Aerial photo of Apperson Ridge, Tule elk home range and San Antonio reservoir, from the south Photo of Apperson Ridge from the south, with the proposed quarry site outlined Photo of Apperson Ridge and San Antonio Reservoir from the southwest Photo showing the proximity of quarry site to the town of Sunol Photo of Apperson Ridge - most of this ridge would be destroyed Photo of the home range of the San Antonio tule elk herd - rutting and calving grounds are south and southwest of San Antonio Reservoir Photo of the quarry access road through the elk home range - the road in the center of the photo would be enlarged to accomodate up to 1,000 gravel trucks per day APPERSON RIDGE QUARRY DOCUMENTS Alameda County Planning Dept. Memo on Apperson Quarry Alameda Creek Alliance response to Memo 1984 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT prepared by Alameda County Table of Contents Summary Chapter 1 - Introduction Chapter 2 - Project Location and Setting Chapter 3 - Project Description Chapter 4 - Environmantal Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Chapter 5 - Public Plans and Policies Chapter 6 - Alternatives to the Project Chapter 7 - Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Chapter 8 - Growth Inducing Impacts Chapter 9 - Orgaznizations and Individuals Consulted Chapter 10 - Other Orgaznizations and Individuals Referred Chapter 11 - References/Bibliography Graphics and Appendices Chapter 1 - Planning Staff Comments on Responses Chapter 2 - Graphics Chapter 3 - Project Relation to Alameda County General Plan (Revised) Chapter 4 - Applicant's Position on Mitigation Measures Chapter 5 - Biotic Discussions Chapter 6 - Public Letters and Testimony Received on Draft EIR Appendix A - Historical Background of Apperson Ridge Appendix B - Plant List for Apperson Quarry Appendix C - Animal List for Apperson Quarry Appendix D - Report on Tule Elk in California Appendix E - Noise Terminolgy and Instrumentation Appendix F - Emmission Factors and Estimates Appendix G - Classification of Aggregate Resource Areas (Executive Summary) Appendix H - Letter from Department of Forestry Appendix I - Letter from East Bay Regional Park District Photos and simulations of visual impacts THE COUNTY'S SO-CALLED MITIGATIONS Mitigation #26 - Habitat Enhancement - May 2003 Mitigation #44 - Woodland Replacement - May 2003 Mitigation #45 - Revised Tule Elk - April 1995 Mitigation #45 - Tule Elk - May 2003 Mitigation #50 - California Red-Legged Frog Avoidance - May 2003 If you cannot download these mitigation documents, e-mail alamedacreek@hotmail.com and the ACA will e-mail the documents to you. OTHER DOCUMENTS Quarry "Needs" Analysis - Bissell & Karn - March 1984 County Staff Analysis - July 1984 County Staff Discussion - August 1984 Conditions of Approval - Adopted by the County Board of Supervisors -August 1984 San Antonio Tule Elk Herd Monitoring Project - Harvey & Stanley Associates Report - 1987 County
5 Year Review - December 1990 |
Last updated June 12, 2007