My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
INSPEC37683
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Inspection
>
INSPEC37683
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 9:43:06 PM
Creation date
11/18/2007 11:02:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977205
IBM Index Class Name
Inspection
Doc Date
1/25/1995
Doc Name
MINERALS PROGRAM INSPECTION REPORT
Inspection Date
1/12/1985
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
NINE ID f OA PROSPECTING <br />INSPECTION DATH 95 <br />(Page 2) <br />ID ~ M-77-205 <br />OBSERVATIONS <br /> <br />INSPECTOR`S INITIALS R(~ <br />This inspection was performed by the Division as a follow up to a prior inspection (dated <br />4/21/94) ae a result of which certain topics were found to be problems and subsequent actions <br />were required of the operator. The operator was contacted about the inspection and was <br />present for it. <br />The topics of "records" and "signs and markers" were problems from the 4/21/94 inspection, <br />and were found to have been corrected. An adequate map of the permit area is now part of the <br />file. The permit area lien on a portion of the total landholdings of this operater. <br />Extensive areas of the land eurroundinq the permit area ie in industrial use, and even <br />somewhat involved with this permitted operation. However, these eurroundinq lands and <br />facilities are also used for materials and activities apart from the operation, and are not <br />regarded ae part of this operation. <br />adequate markers and fe~tires were observed delineating the permit area. There is a permit <br />sign at the entrance to the operator's property. <br />The permit area is now defined ae two parcels, one to the north and one to the south of the <br />railroad bridge. There ie a 300-foot setback from the bridge to the permit boundary. The <br />permit area consists of, and lies wholly within, the channel of the North Fork of the <br />Gunnison River, ae it exists currently. The ooerator should be reminded that the vermit <br />boundaries do not chanoe automatically to conform to chances in the river banks. <br />The river ie wandering back and forth across a broad flood plain, sometimes depositing <br />gravel, sometimes taking out gravel bare, mature trees, bottomland pastures and fences. A <br />steep rocky cliff and short length of irrigation ditch border the river on the north, <br />restricting its movement, and necessitating prevention of its movement, in that direction. <br />Periodic high flows have changed the river's course, indicated to this inspector during the <br />inspection. The operator indicated that recently purchased ~_ bottomland upstream of the <br />permit area and bottomland presently in the permit area are all in danger of being lost if <br />the river meanders to the south. <br />Recent activity is restricted to the north (upstream) portion of the permit area, partly to <br />not endanger the RR bridge footings in the river. Shallow excavation and movement of gravel <br />material ie,accompliehed by truck and loader, during low water times, to encourage the main <br />flows to stay in the center of the channel. The land not in the river channel ie valuable <br />in its use ae commercial land or pasture land. The operator therefore only wishes to mine <br />in the channel. This would not require the typical reclamation of grading, topsoil <br />replacement or seeding. This acts to kee operating and bond costa low. <br />ReFerence For Q¢c/arcttor~ Brder <br />$he operator indicated that if the channel moved to the south, onto hie pasture land, he <br />would be interested in m.lnine there too. Discussion followed zegardinq the reasons for <br />defining the location of a permit boundary. If future expansion ie anticipated, even if only <br />after the river mouse, the boundaries should not be placed at the current edge of the <br />channel, unless a future amendment to the permit ie desired. There ie a fee for amendments. <br />The operator also indicated the adjacent portions upstream (off the permit area) where mining <br />would be considered, both for the sale of material and to protect the bottomland by <br />channelling the water. If such mining ie desired before the coming spring runoff, the <br />operator ie encouraged to apply soon for an amendment to extend the existing 112 permit. The <br />operator stated that he would be interested in seeking a "Declaratory Order" from the Board, <br />based on extraction purely for the purposes of controlling the river and protecting the land. <br />If such order ie to be sought, the operator should state that in writing to the Nined Land <br />Reclamation Board, for it to be considered at a monthly Board meeting. <br />There were no problems noted during this partial inspection. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.