2022-07-18_PERMIT FILE - M2022018

Home Browse Search

South Hinsdale Response to Objections 12 July 2022 operations, including logging companies, some agricultural operations, and possibly hunting guide companies must also have permits and pay fees. (2)Question:will gravel pit operators be paid to provide gravel for the damage they cause? The USFS and its contractors purchase gravel on the open market using a fair and competitive bid process in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). So if this pit is used to provide materials for USFS work, they will be paid for that material. Of course, the pit operators(and their haul trucks and contracbcustomer haul trucks) will also pay for the work and materials through permit fees. In addition, all vehicles on the roads pay federal fuel excise taxes (FET) on fuel, which funds Federal highway (and other) construction, maintenance, and repair. The operators of the pit and their haul trucks therefore pay in multiple ways, as discussed below, in order to pay for roadwork. Private vehicle owners/drivers and RVs generally pay just the FET and so are subsidized by the other sources based on their impact on the roads. (3) Question: how often will repair work be done? (At end of summer, months of driving on damaged surface?) That is entirely up to the US Forest Service. We do not know their schedules of maintenance or availability of funding. (4) Question: will Texers be present during the daily operations? Hear crushers? One or more of the Texers do expect to be on-site at least most of the time while excavation, crushing, and screening is being done (the few weeks per year that it is carried out), and at least part of the time while materials are hauled from the pit. So they will hear the noise and see the other impacts of operations, since their cabins are the closest dwellings to the affected area. (5) Question: will Texers experience negative effects to THEIR quality of life? Assuming that there truly are negative effects to anyone's quality of life, then Texers will experience them, both directly and by impact on their cabin rental business and other ranching activities. And since they are closest, they will experience more of that impact. They have made the decision that potential short-term negative impacts are worth it to accomplish their goals and provide badly needed materials to their community and provide a place to raise their young families as well as offsetting the costs to make improvements to their own property after the end of the mining operations. Claims: (1) Claim: "vast majority of the local residents were not in favor of[Toner Ranch Pit]" This is a doubtful claim, and while not germane to the South Hinsdale Pit (which is a very different project with very different goals), we wish to answer it. Although some local residents (both year-round and seasonal) were opposed, most of the objections made to the State and County were from persons who do NOT live in the South End. After the denial of the County permit for Cynthia Toner, she and associates were told by several residents of the South End that they were intimidated into not speaking up in favor of the operation and allowing Ms. Toner to use her land in a way which would not have been any harm or danger to her neighbors or the environment, and would have provided significant benefits to the South End's economy as well as that of Archuleta County, starting with the 2021 USFS road project. We wish to note that although the nearer neighbors of the Texers (east on Kleckner Lane) were contacted multiple times, asked to attend meetings to get information, and given multiple opportunities to comment and object on the project, only the Kleckner family (ranchers) have availed themselves of those opportunities and are in support of the 5182-22-003 WASTELIN£, INC. Page 37 of 107