My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL48026
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL48026
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:23:43 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 4:01:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981034
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
5/4/1991
From
CHARLES STEIN
To
DNR
Permit Index Doc Type
GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE
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.
Page 1 of 1
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
III III III IIIIIIIIII 19181es2075aDriveu Stein <br />999 Cedaredge, Colorado 81413 <br />April 29, 1981 <br />RKElVED <br />State of Colorado <br />Department of Natural Resources „~ <br />Mined Land Reclamation ~~ ~ ~ ~'~''~ <br />423 Centennial Building, 1313 Sherman Street ~ypp~p LgNp RECLAMelCNO t`r <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 ~~, ~i ~ Na y.4~ ~~ ~ K~ <br />Attention: Mr. Dan Mathews <br />Reclamation Specialist <br />Dear Mr. Mathews: <br />Your speedy reply to our letter was very much appreciated. <br />We feel the need to respond to the third paragraph, where you stated <br />"accusation", please understand that we did not accuse, what we did <br />was simply state the facts as they occurred. Evidence of this is <br />still visible in the three (3) instances. <br />Mine employees came on to our property to close an old air shaft. <br />We certainly could have been advised even if it were done after the <br />fact. <br />The fence that was torn down is not on a county road, it was on the <br />mine property as per agreement between past property owners. They <br />felt it necessary to move the fence, had the line surveyed and moved <br />the existing fence. After several months with the fence down, we had <br />to demand that they put it back, they did finally. The fence that was <br />put up originally was done with metal posts, the mine replaced the fence <br />with cedar posts, we assumed that the metal post would be given back to <br />us as they belonged to us, but they were not. <br />The irrigation ditch referred to is located on property that the mine <br />purchased from a private party. They cut a road into the property, <br />to core drill and in the process filled in our irrigation ditch with <br />brush and rocks, making it impossible to run water. <br />None of the above had anything to do with the upgrading of the county <br />road located below our property. When the county, just recently, started <br />to upgrade the road in front of our property, they came to us prior to <br />moving any fences and requested permission to do all that involved our <br />property. <br />We have no desire in any way to have the mine cited or fined, we just <br />want to see the private property owner get consideration when it comes <br />to the mining process throughout our valley. <br />Sincerely, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.