Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />61 <br />made all that information erroneous. They've made <br />it for historical purposes only, and you just can't <br />do that. <br />The DRMS themselves has given us <br />documentation that there was not a prime farmland <br />investigation done for 15 years, from 1992 to 2008. <br />And I was the one that called in 2007 and said, <br />They're taking our soils. How can they do this? <br />Prior to that there was a letter from <br />NRCS here that was given to Ross Gubka of Western <br />Fuels, and on page 2 of that document it says, "In <br />the San Miguel soil survey the United States <br />Department of Agriculture has identified soils that <br />meet certain criteria for prime farmland. The <br />following soil units from the San Miguel soil survey <br />are considered prime farmland if irrigated." Those <br />examples are Barx. <br />On the next couple pages down the way <br />it says, "I have never questioned the standard as it <br />relates to the better soils on the west side of the <br />mine, particularly the Barx sandy looms which are <br />considered prime farmland," and that was before they <br />ever removed those soils off of our property. <br />And those soils should remain there. <br />They are prime farmland soils, and they cannot be <br />