Laserfiche WebLink
South Hinsdale Response to Objections <br /> 12 July 2022 <br /> c. Additional notes: At present, the configuration of the original alignment of Piedra Road <br /> (FSR-631) just southeast of the present bridge both allows and encourages <br /> trespassing on the Texer land by anyone using that old roadbed as a parking area, in <br /> order to gain access to the river (which is NOT on Texer land or within the affected <br /> area boundary). This is done despite posting of the Texer land. Part of mining and <br /> reclamation will include changes to the topography (on a minimal scale)to discourage <br /> this type of trespassing. <br /> 1.11 Water Permits. <br /> As discussed in Section 1.6 above, stated in Exhibit F and discussed in Exhibits B, C, and <br /> D, these permits or registrations MAY be required IF certain anticipated conditions are not <br /> met: that is, IF there is no way to avoid surface storm water discharge (for storm water <br /> which has come in contact with land affected by mining operations) or IF water is needed <br /> beyond that available from normal precipitation and water must be obtained from return <br /> flows from irrigation water which also is used for commercial activities. Normally CDPHE <br /> and CDNR agencies (other than DRMS) are not asked because in the past they have not <br /> provided documentation that a particular permit is NOT needed. If such permits are <br /> needed in the future, the operator commits to applying for and obtaining those permits, <br /> and if necessary, will cease operations under the conditions which dictate such permits. <br /> A CDPS/NPDES permit is NOT required to change the point of discharge of water (such <br /> as irrigation return flows)which is not associated with construction or industrial activities. <br /> 1.12 Irrigation Ditches. <br /> Return Flow Channels <br /> As stated in Section 1.2 above, the owner of the various irrigation "structures" and flow <br /> paths is recognized by neighbors and the USFS as belonging to the Texers as owners of <br /> Dancing Winds Ranch and South Hinsdale Sand & Gravel. They do not deem them to be <br /> permanent and are only partially manmade. <br /> a. However, these structures are included in the right-to-enter documentation. <br /> b. If necessary, and likely under protest, a signed structures agreement addressing them, <br /> both current, during mining, and post-mining, can be executed between the Texers as <br /> owners of Dancing Winds Ranch and as owners of the South Hinsdale Sand & Gravel <br /> Company. Please advise if this is necessary. <br /> c. We do not plan to reroute the return flow channels along the edges of a rerouted <br /> Kleckner Lane for several reasons: <br /> i. The rerouting as proposed will mostly consist of a raised roadbed, with no bar <br /> ditches. <br /> ii. The best and most efficient way to convey the return flows to the river is to <br /> divert all water to the southeast corner of the affected area (where much of the <br /> flow now goes through a natural drainage)and to the north edge and northwest <br /> corner of the affected area (which also already carries some of that flow) at <br /> gradients and with proper armoring to end the century of erosion that has <br /> created the return flow ditches along Kleckner Lane. <br /> iii. Coordination with the USFS (the adjacent landowner on those three sides) <br /> indicates this is a preferred option for them. <br /> 5182-22-003 WAST£LIN£, INC. Page 9 of 107 <br />