Laserfiche WebLink
1) When WFC's hay was ready to be cut, most everyone else's hay in the area <br />was ready as well, including the Contract Farmer's. Guess what? The <br />Contract Farmer would cut their crop first and delay WFC by several days or <br />weeks. After the Contractor finished his fields, he generally was too tired to <br />start WFC's fields immediate and so there would be a few days more delay. <br />WFC tried different Contractors but the results were the same. <br />2) Weather played a big factor as well. Rain storm fronts would pass through the <br />area which in turn, would delay the harvest process. If it rained, then we had <br />to wait for the fields to dry so the tractors would not become stuck. If the crop <br />was cut but curing, then days would be lost because the crop would need <br />additional days to dry before baling. While all this was taking place, there <br />would be personal conflicts such as the ones I have mention in item 1. <br />3) Since most of our fields are being irrigated, the irrigation water would have to <br />be turned off three to four days in advance of the cutting of the grasses so the <br />ground would be firm for the tractors. WFC lost several days more because <br />of this and low and behold, item 1 and 2 above would appear to complicate <br />the issue further. We have experienced cases where irrigation water was off <br />the fields for up to two weeks because of the delays of harvesting the hay. <br />Two weeks without water puts a strain on new grasses so their growth is <br />stunted and production suffers. <br />4) It is not cost effective for WFC to purchase all the necessary farm equipment <br />AND hire and train personnel to do the farming of our reclamation. We are <br />forced to use local contractors. We have tried advertising further out but the <br />cost becomes extremely prohibitive because of the transportation cost, etc." <br />In conclusion, farm management practices in the Nucla area are generally lax and only two <br />cuttings are achieved each year. Flood irrigation and minimal fertilization rates are also the <br />normal procedures around here so optimum production is rarely achieve. <br />3a. No response is necessary per your July 31, 1998 letter <br />3b. No response is necessary per your July 31, 1998 letter <br />3c. No response is necessary per your July 31, 1998 letter. <br />4. No response is necessary per your July 31, 1998 letter <br />5. Your suggestion about suspending grazing activities before and during the sampling <br />year is good and I will change the permit text to reflect this, see page 2.05.4(2)(e)-23- <br />24. I will also modify the text for dryland sample timing to reflect your concern about <br />c:\data \wpda Ca\cevis ions\tr36. doc Page 3 <br />