Laserfiche WebLink
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 />