INSPEC11548 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

v Pyeatt Farms Ritchie and Linda Pyeatt 9826 Hwy 66 Platteville, CO 80651 970.785.6203 August 1, 2002 Mr. Cazl Mount Division of Minerals and Geology 1313 Sherman Street Room 215 Denver, CO 80203 RE: July 13, 2002 Letter of Concern and Subsequent Inspection on'June 2Ts of Sand Land, Inc. Sec 28, 3N, R67W, Weld County, CO M-1999-006 Dear Mr. Mount, RECEIVED AUG 19 2001 Division of Minerals and GeoloBY With due respect we request a re-inspection of the Sand Land Inc. (Varta Companies) and we request that we be made part of the inspection process. We feel that the inspection done on June 27, 2002, by Kate Pickford falls considerably short of a genuine effort on the part of the DMG to address ow concerns of well draw down possibly caused by Sand Land. It is not ow intention to stop Sand Land from mining gravel, but to protect ow farms and our livelihood. First, we must note that the inspection report was not forwarded directly to us from the DMG. The first we knew of the inspection was July 31 ai a Board of Commissioners hearing in Weld County regarding a Use By Special Review Request from Aggregate Industries for a gavel mine to be permitted directly north of Sand Land. Paul Banks of Banks and Gesso, LLC referenced the inspection report in his presentation to the Commissioners and submitted a copy of the report to Planner Robert Anderson for inclusion into the record of the Aggregate proceedings. Mr. Banks intention in making note of the inspection report appeared to be to somehow conclude that Sand Land, according to the report filed by Ms. Pickford, was not damaging groundwater by their dewatering operations and therefore, Aggregate Industries would not damage the ground water either. Phil Martin of Martin and Wood Water Engineers went even further in quoting Ms. Pickfords observations in a rebuttal letter to a report from Forrest Leaf, P.E., a water engineer retained by the neighborhood group (GRIP) in the Aggregate USR proceedings. With this history, you will understand why we aze copying the WC Commissioners on this letter. Thore was not an attempt by the DMG or Sand Land to contact us regarding our concerns. Neither Ms. Pickford nor anyone from the DMG called/wrote to inquire what the basis of our concern was. Understand that we do not take this matter lightly. There has been a significant drawdown in the water table in ow azea and it quite possibly could be as a result of the Sand Land Pit. Our letter of concem was intended to either eliminate Sand Land as a sowce or to affirm that the draw down is a result of excessive dewatering by Sand Land. Since our recourse is with the permitting entities our concerns were addressed to those offices. In regazd to Ms. Pickfords report, we feel that we have been cheated. If the inspection process is to ask,the operator if the operation is in compliance and to do a drive- by inspection of our fazms then we have no recourse at all. No, when Mr. Vats, Mr. Janes and Ms. Pickford drove by our farm directly south of Sand Land on WCR 28, our crops were not dead. Our pivot that irrigates the 160 acres on WCR 28 is operated with I50 shares of Lupton Meadows Ditch water that is contained in a holding pond and is supplemented by an augmented irrigation well permitted to pump 1000 GPM. At the beginning of the irrigation season the well was surging and we have since had to install a flow restrictor to protect ow pump. There is a flow meter on the well and it now pumps less than 400 GPM. With six imgation wells on our farms it is noteworthy to mention that the only well that is swging is the one on