Laserfiche WebLink
<br />9 <br />1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />-, <br />- 6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />• 13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />which is entirely on their judgment. <br />In looking over the operation and so on and <br />so forth, it's quite clear to me, if there were gravel to <br />sell, Mr. Bingham would not be involved in this until the <br />landowner was paying him for flood control. In a sense, <br />it is a gravel-mining operation as any other that I dealt <br />with. So, I did not feel it was necessary to reduce it. <br />Quite frankly, we are getting into an area <br />that I didn't consider, that is the fact that this particular <br />operation at this location is not terribly long term. The <br />generic operation of this kind of removal in the North Fork <br />is long term. In a sense we are talking about two different <br />operations, and I had not separated them in my mind in setting <br />this particular amount. <br />MRS. WINTER: I just want to editorialize a <br />minute. I hate for us to make commerciality the sole criteria <br />for whether something is mining or not. Because what that <br />means is that if someone who--like a county, who is not selling <br />the material but uses it, that that doesn't count, I can't <br />make that di:~tinction in my mind on that exact same operation, <br />because it is being used in competition and one is not, that <br />that separates between mining. <br />So, I think it might be helpful to review some <br />of these things. Whether the reclamation problem is created <br />is one of the criterias that was mentioned. The type of <br />E/I EF:\ CARPE,\'TER F i.S.S'(1CU TE.S. /,\'C <br />Crn4irJ .Shnn hon.l Hrp••nrn <br />LrnO (hrrn ~ Jlr RnuJ <br />1. vrlrrrrn. Cul•rrmh• .YO! `I <br />i(I.h JAI-g'F,V <br />