My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE108808
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
100000
>
PERMFILE108808
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:01:17 PM
Creation date
11/24/2007 5:19:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2001046
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
3/20/2002
Doc Name
Status of Wetland Protection
From
Cynthia Parker
To
DMG
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.
/
2
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
SRGE }i'ILL FRX N0. :970 785 6034 Mar. 20 2002 11:48RM P1 <br />20 March 2002 <br />Mr.~Ar~thonyJ. Waldron <br />Division of Minerals and Geology <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 21S <br />Denver, CO 80203-2273 <br />RE: M-2001-046; .Nix Sand & Grave! Mine; Owens Brothers Concrete Company <br />Dear Tony: <br />Th Inks for forwarding me a copy of your February 26, 2002 letter to Tug Msrtin of <br />$artks & Qressv. I really appreciate being kept informed. <br />warrted to give you a brief update regarding the status of protecting the wetland on <br />rm from being impacted by the proposed Owens mining operation. <br />receive a wetland proposal from Wright Water Engineers (W WJr) on behalf of <br />ns titled "Evaluation of potential Impacts to Wetlands on the Sage Hill Farm from <br />roposed Sand and Gravel Operation" dated November 2001. This proposal <br />ested mitigation procedures to protect my wetland. However, on looking into the <br />:r further, it turned out that the main premise of the proposal was not doable. <br />The proposal had suggested creating a "wall of water" between my farm and the Nix <br />farm. However, W WE's whole plan was based upon using the county barrow pit for this <br />purpose. Not surprisingly, the county rejected this plan. <br />Thl secondary feature ofthe W WE pian was to run water into my wetland from the Last <br />Chance Ditch. However, no headgate exists at the point where WWE planned to divert <br />water from the ditch. As you know, a farmer cannot add another diversion point to a <br />community owned ditch at his own whim. As far ac I know, as of this date Owens has <br />not gained permission from the Last Chance Ditch Company for an additional headgate. <br />Tfierefore, neither of the twa main mitigation features of WWE's report are able to <br />be implemented. <br />As of this date, i have not received any further written propoaah from Owens <br />regarding a new mitigation plan. Needless to say, I am very concerned about this. I <br />know the DMG staff decision date is only a few days or weeks away. I wanted to make <br />certain that you knew that no mitigation plan for my wetland is currently under <br />discussion. Also, Owens has not presented me with any kind of legal agreement <br />regarding my wetland. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.