My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE63598
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
700000
>
PERMFILE63598
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:09:43 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 8:05:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1989065
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
8/15/1989
Doc Name
APPLICATION FOR WINKLER LIGHT AGGREGATE QUARRY
To
MLRD
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.
/
5
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
• <br />Department of Natural Resources: <br />MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION <br />215 Centennial Bidg., 1313 Sherman St. . <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />August 12, 1989 <br />T0: Mined Land Board Members <br />RE: Application for Winkler Light Aggregate Quarry <br />~iiiiiiiuiiiiiuiii <br />999 <br />~~~~ tl ~~ <br />MINEq 1„AND <br />REGy.gMATION gIVIS10N <br />We wish to advise the board of our intent to protest the Winkler-Hallett <br />application for a quarry, and we wish personally to address the board at its <br />August 23, 1989, meeting. <br />I . <br />Some of us attended the August 8, 1989, meeting held in the Colorado <br />Springs City Council chambers to address issues surrounding Colorado <br />Springs quarries. Many of the statements and admissions made 1n the course <br />of that meeting apply as well to the proposed Winkler quarry in Douglas <br />County, and comments such as those which we enumerate below indicate <br />that your approval of the Winkler Light Ouarry would be premature and <br />damaging to the public welfare. <br />1) Both citizens and Reclamation Board representatives made clear that <br />"reclamation" merely means providing for some "beneficial" end use for the <br />land mined. Reclamation does ~t mean restoring land to either its pre- <br />mining appearance or to any appearance that a lay person would consider <br />aesthetically or practically acceptable. <br />2) According to Chips Berry, Director of Natural Resources, whereas <br />current reclamation law "works" with respect to alluvial gravel pits, it has <br />not been satisfactory with respect to quarries. At this time, standards for <br />quarry reclamation are either insufficiently addressed by statute or rule-- <br />or not in existence. <br />A scarred, stair-stepped, and excoriated terrain may be entirely <br />consistent with a "final land use" envisioned by the current Reclamation <br />Act, but not with expectations and needs of the public and local <br />governments. <br />3) Under current law, mines regulate themselves. Operators have no <br />required timetable for completion of reclamation. Furthermore, what will <br />constitute "reasonable" reclamation--that is, what a "reclaimed" site <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.