WEE KE ND
<br />ED ETL0 N
<br />CORTEZ
<br />9
<br />1, r si- up
<br />G5!ra:n_ra-1=m[,nsrr1g alayn ef
<br />a atorm-t aumicana neighaors
<br />Operation proposed for site
<br />on BLM land near Road 21
<br />BY GAM BINIELY
<br />A proposal to mine gravel
<br />from public land near the Cortez
<br />airport has raised the hackles of
<br />neighboring residents, leaving
<br />some of them angry with the
<br />state, angry with two Denver
<br />charities, and angry with the
<br />BIM.
<br />But Daren Stone's plan to
<br />begin gravel - mining operations
<br />on 158 acres of Bureau of Land
<br />Management property near
<br />county roads 21 and F has
<br />received a thumbs -up from the
<br />state Division of Minerals and
<br />Geology, which has recom-
<br />mended that the Colorado
<br />Mined Land Reclamation Board
<br />approve the project.
<br />A pre - hearing on the prop-
<br />osal is set for 1 p.m. Monday.
<br />Jan. 12, in Cortez at the county
<br />annex, while a formal hearing
<br />before the Mined Land Recla-
<br />mation Board will take place
<br />Jan. 28 or 29 in Denver.
<br />The unusual case spotlights
<br />the conflicts that can occur
<br />when different parties own dif-
<br />ferent rights to the same piece of
<br />land.
<br />In this case, while the BLM
<br />owns the surface rights, the
<br />mineral rights belong to Stone.
<br />The situation is quite rare.
<br />according -to. Kent .HofGnau..._
<br />associate area manager for the
<br />San Juan Resource Area of the
<br />BLM.
<br />The reverse, where federal
<br />agencies own the mineral rights
<br />and private persons own the
<br />surface rights to a tract, is fairly
<br />common. he said, "but this
<br />inversion is a fairly rare breed."
<br />BLM officials have decided
<br />that, because the agency does
<br />not own the mineral rights, It
<br />has no authority to conduct the
<br />environmental studies that
<br />would otherwise be required
<br />before a gravel - mining opera-
<br />tion began.
<br />But many of the neighbors
<br />strongly disagree, accusing the
<br />BLM of neglecting Its duties.
<br />Having purchased their
<br />property with the assumption
<br />that the adjacent public lands
<br />would remain undeveloped,
<br />they are outraged at the pros-
<br />pect of living next to a send -
<br />and- gravel operation, with its
<br />attendant dust, truck traffic
<br />and noise.
<br />They worry about the mine's
<br />effects on Anasazi resources on
<br />the tract and wildlife such as
<br />golden and bald eagles, hawks
<br />and peregrine falcons. They
<br />argue that a gravel pit will
<br />diminish the tract's value for
<br />recreation and cause their
<br />property values to plummet.
<br />BAD NEIGHBORS?
<br />"Strip mines are bad nelgh-
<br />bors," Bald pick Bell, who, along
<br />with his wife, strongly opposes
<br />the gravel plan. "I spent too
<br />many years In eastern Ken-
<br />tucky not to have seen It happen
<br />on a grand scale."
<br />The Bells, who live on Road
<br />21 a short distance from the
<br />proposed mining site, say they
<br />had no Idea the mineral rights to
<br />the 158 -acre tract were avail-
<br />able for $5,000. .
<br />"We would gladly have come
<br />up with that amount (to buy the
<br />rights) and we would have been
<br />glad to have given them to who-
<br />ever would have been appropri-
<br />ate, like the BLM," Bell said.
<br />Susie Hell agreed.
<br />"Most of us were under the
<br />impression that that land Is
<br />protected and for the public,"
<br />she said. 'That's one of the rea-
<br />sons we bought our property,
<br />thinking we were safe, but we
<br />weren't."
<br />Earl Trost, another nearby
<br />resident, agreed that he and his
<br />wife would have gladly chipped
<br />In to purchase the mineral
<br />rights to prevent the mine.
<br />"I'm really against it.* he said.
<br />"They're going to run trucks up
<br />and down our road and make
<br />the traffic a lot worse.
<br />"1 don't begrudge a man for
<br />trying to make money, but I
<br />never knew that somebody
<br />could go on BLM land and build
<br />there."
<br />But Stone, a longtime county
<br />resident who Is now running
<br />Turning up the
<br />RICK BELL CRADLES Anasazl potsherds found within a small area
<br />on public lands near county roads 21 and F. A gravel mine has been
<br />proposed for the 158 -acre BLM site and has gained preliminary
<br />approval. Bell and his wife are among the nearby landowners oppos-
<br />ing the mine proposal.
<br />Best Log Industry, said he Is
<br />going to do everything he can to
<br />minimize conflicts with nearby
<br />landowners.
<br />"I want to be conscious of the
<br />neighbors and be as cooperative
<br />as I can and still do my opera-
<br />tion," he said.
<br />NOT IN MINING BUSINESS'
<br />The split estate developed In
<br />1950, according to Hoffman,
<br />when the owners, Clifford and
<br />Essle Wright, reconveyed the
<br />surface rights on the once -
<br />patented land to the federal gov-
<br />ernment, while retaining the
<br />mineral rights.
<br />Those rights were then
<br />bequeathed to the American
<br />Cancer Society and American
<br />1§11911111 MT111
<br />Heart Association. .which
<br />acquired them Dec. 31, 1990,
<br />after Essle Wright's death,
<br />according to Deanna Dalpos.
<br />regional marketing director for
<br />the ACS In Denver.
<br />Early In 1997. Stone
<br />approached the two nonprofit
<br />organizations about purchas-
<br />ing those rights.
<br />Stone said he had been look-
<br />ing for a gravel site for several
<br />years.
<br />'They're hard to Md," he
<br />said. But then he remembered
<br />an existing gravel pit — no lon-
<br />ger In operation, but still under
<br />permit — that lies just next to
<br />Bee GRAVEL on Pegs 12A
<br />RECEIVED
<br />JAN 16 1993
<br />Division of Minerels & Ge*p
<br />DENVER OFFICE
<br />PUBLIC FILE COPY
<br />FILE:2 ��� ----
<br />SITE: t-dne (_rave( Pit
<br />i
<br />
|