Laserfiche WebLink
., <br />(m) The "cresent points" on either end of area 1 should be <br />graded level with the alluvial hay meadow to permit flood irrigation of this <br />portion of the hay meadow. <br />12. Exhibit G. <br />(a) Operator has obtained no right to use Landowner's water <br />rights. Landowner owns the Hall North Ditch right for 3.65 efs which is <br />decreed for irrigation. Landowner knows nothing of a 0.9 cfs water right <br />referred to by Operator. Operator should approach Landowner to discuss <br />acquisition of the right to use Landowner's water rights. <br />(b) The Landowner objects to the retention of ponds on his <br />land. No storage decree or well permit exists for any structures on the <br />property to Landowner's knowledge. <br />Cc) The Landowner concurs with the assessment of the State <br />Engineer's Office of October 7, 1983 and demands the Operator hold <br />Landowner harmless for any damage to his water rights. <br />13. Exhibits I and J. <br />(a) The Niwot soil should be returned to the hay meadow at a <br />depth of 14". This hay meadow is used to produce mown hay and it is <br />improper to refer to this area as pastureland. Further, areas near the <br />manager's house, and along the State Highway, are on Niwot soil and the soil <br />map appears to be in error in this regard. Colluvial land is properly called <br />pasture land and range land, depending upon the intensity of grazing which <br />the land will support. Generally, the north facing slopes, on the south side <br />of the river, retain more water and are, therefore, the better pastureland. <br />Where land is flat or sloped so that it can easily be traversed by cattle, the <br />pasture is of higher value. Unless rock outcrop is present, land should be <br />sloped, mulched and planted in grasses. <br />(b) The grass mixture listed on pages 22 and 23 is sufficient for <br />upland pastures. However, the hay meadow should be composed of clover, <br />timothy, red top grass and orchard grass. <br />14. Exhibit L. <br />(a) Landowner believes reclamation costs are woefully <br />understated, e.g., no irrigation costs are indicated, no seeding, mulching or <br />fertilizing is included for areas of major and moderate disturbance. <br />Sedimentation pond reclamation cost is not included. No road reclamation is <br />indicated. <br />(b) Landowner agrees with the analysis of the Division that more <br />information is required to analyze reclamation costs; however, Landowner <br />believes that a logical analysis would proceed on an area by area basis. That <br />is, what are costs for area 1, 2, 3 and 4 individually? <br />-4- <br />