FLOOD05850 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I \ I I ~ I - , I I , , I I , , , I Page lof2 , Lundahl, Brad From: Mark Larson [marklarson@qwest.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 10,20014:29 PM To: James E. Preston Subject: Re: Gravel Pits in Dolores Hello James, Good questions all. I will forward them to our legislative liaison in the Dept. of Natural Resources for dissemination and a better understanding of what has transpired in our co=unity. I do not have answers for you. However, I will work to assure that a similar occunence does not happen. If, indeed, all of your information is accurate, I can only assert that I do not live by those same standards and will rail against such behavior any time that I encounter it. Thanks for the reply, It has given me a better understanding of why your original email smacked of indignation. I will let you know what I find out, if and when I receive a reply. I believe that we share the same goals oflong term human safety with pragmatic environmental responsibility. Thanks again, ' Mark "James E. Preston" wrote: Hello'Mr. Larson: Thank you for responding to my emaiJ, Please allow me to answer, "forthrightly," some of your questions. I also have a few rhetorical questions of my own for you. The governor's office ,started an investigation of bias by the Division of Mining and Geology [OMG1. The OMG "hearing officers" brag at hearings, in public, on the , record, that they have ALWAYS granted every single gravel pit application and have NEVER denied a gravel pit application. The "investigation" started with a neutral agency - the Colorado Geologic SUlvey. Once the Investigation was three-weeks underway the Geologic Survey was finding reasons to uphold citizen conern of bias on the part of the DMG. At that p'oint political "pressure" was put on the Geologic Survey to hand the "investigation' over to the Executive Director of DMG. This is the proverbial "fox guarding the henhouse," What do you think the head of the OMG will find when he ' Investigates his own agency? If any "Investigation" is done at all, it will be a "white wash" and a "cover-up" and everyone knows it. In the meantime, the lives of people are endangered in the Dolores River Valley frOm catastrphlc floods and high levels of contaminants. The Colorado DOW has Just posted new signs warning people of toxic levels of mercury In fish found.in McPhee Reservoir. The EPA knows that the probable source of mercury is excavation by gravel pits which "remobilizes" mercury from century old mines in RICO, The DMG admits it knows of the mercury problem. They ignore it and the MLRB grants the applications for gravel pits anyway. Two Independent Ph.D.'s in geomorphology (each with over 30 years of field experience In additiOn to their acaemic credentials) have reviewed the gravel pit situation in the Dolores River Valley. Both of these Ph.D's conclude that "pit capture", which would result in the loss of lives under the right f)oodlng circumstances, is inevitable as a result of the last fifteen years of gravel pit mining in the Dolores River Valley. The DMG (MLRB) ignores it. In fact, they have never even allowed any evidence to come before it, You are going to bring In a new agency to study it? How long before that agency succumbs to the same "pressure" that removed the Investigation of the MLRB and put It in the hands of the head of the agency that tells the MLRB what to do? There is nothing In the statutes which prohibits the MLRB from considering the "cumulative effects" of gravel pit minIng. . . In tact, the legislature's express intent was to focus on the safety and welfare of the citizenry in giving the MLRB the authority to regulate the issuance of gravel pit permits. Focusing on the safety and welfare of the citizenry, instead of "rubber-stamping" gravel pit permit applications demands that the agency study the "cumulative effects" of gravel pits, especially, in the 07/11/2001