My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE135501
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
400000
>
PERMFILE135501
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:36:13 PM
Creation date
11/26/2007 3:33:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1997089
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/26/1997
Doc Name
112 APPLICATION M-97-089 STONE GRAVEL PIT RESPONSE TO ADEQUACY ISSUES
From
STONE GRAVEL PIT
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.
/
13
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
• <br />Bureau of Land Management <br />San Sttart Resotuce Area <br />Federal Building 701 Camino Del Rio <br />Durango, CO 81301 <br />Attn: Clydelohnson <br />Dear Clyde: <br />• as-~ <br />EXHIBIT S <br />STONE CRUSHING <br />24600 County Road P <br />Dolores, CO 81323 RECEIVED <br />~~,ev ~ 2 1997 <br />BureDu a~ond ManaBemenr <br />Colorado <br />This letter is in response to the concerns that you had about the Stone gravel pit. After melting with <br />you and Kirk at the site on November 5, 1997 you asked me to put in a letter what we discussed. <br />1. You recomended Fencing ?5 acres of the pit & keeping all roads open to travel. Afler meeting with <br />you and Kirk it was agreed that I could insult a controlled acess gate on the South road <br />leading to the pit site, which would give me the security I need and still give access to rand k4520 for <br />the public to use. No other fencing should be needed until reclamation begins. <br />?. You recomended a plan far noxious weed control!. I also agree that weeds would need to be controlled <br />and I would agree to spray once or twice a year as needed. In talking with Kirk, he thought the BLM could <br />azsist me ittitally with this problem because of the weds that already e:dst on the site. <br />3. You recomended that the acess road leading to [he site be cons[tvaed to County specifications. In our <br />meeting at the site it waz agreed to all tha[ 1 could could use a "pit run" base to stabilize the road and <br />use smaller gravel for the driving wrface. <br />4. You •.vanted no top sail to be used in construction of roads or other site work. I would agree to this. <br />S. You recomended identiting and fencing the possible archaeological site in the Southwest corner of the <br />property. At our meeting at the site on November 5, 1997 Cristie with the BLLI flaged out the perimeter <br />of the area being studied and agreed to have it fenced as so as possible to protect it. I will protect that area <br />from any mining, but 1 have no control over public acess. I also would allow any acess to the BL`.f to the <br />site after mining begins. <br />If this ratifies your concerns please convect Mr. Thomas Gillis of the Division of Minerals & Geology and <br />inform him so. <br />C~u for your cooperation, <br />.~'. ~1~ <br />Daren Ston <br />Received <br />OEC 2 61997 <br />purango Field pftice <br />p'rriston of Mtnerals & Geoltrc~yl <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.