2010-01-06_REVISION - C1981008 (2)

Home Browse Search

I replied to Western Fuels but the Fogs. refused to print it. My petitions were all stolen, so anyone wishing to re-sign or would like me, to bring the Permit -Revision. by for you to react, please call me at 433-5437. We are trying to save our livelihood andjust have all the property taut back the way it was. We have plenty of water and all of that was false information giver: by WFC in the paper. We do not raise wattle or any livestock, we raise Hay and that is our only means of support. If all of this land is put. Nick into sagebr€zsh, it will. be of no use to anyone. Please send objections to DRAtIS A"17 Sandy 1313 She,rn an Street Room2l _5 Denver Co 80203 This was to WFC: Have you even read the 139 page Perri-fit-Revision? This i$ not a Revision by D MS. NRCS, EPA, MSHA, or any other regulatory agency. This is a Permit-Ruvision by WFCs' Chief Engineer. This is a Permit -Revision pant out solely by WFC to charge irrigated farrnlards, haylands, pastures, and prime cropland to DRY LAND, consisting msostly, of sagebrush and on page 24 of the Revision and I quote" Although attempted in the past, Irrigation will not be employed or. Dry band Pasture." This affects East of 27 Roadd, also. Properties designated for Irrigated pasture %ill also be converted to I RYLAND. I'm not the one misrepresenting facts. No one has questioned WFC as being a respected member of the community and so am 1, but I only have ONE face to do it with. TI;e law states and l quote page 348 " All areas a#tected by surface coal mining operations shall. be restored in a timely manner: (1) To conditions that are capable of supporting the Uses which they were CAPABLE of supporting Mere ANY MINING. (2) To a HIGHER or BET`rq ER use achievable under criteria and procedures. So, putting farms and crop land into dry land is a higher or Better use? Page 349 of the lave. This is the law that WFC has used and changed to suit themselves. Proposals to C HANIGE( this is a trey word Change)pre-mining land use of Range, fish and wildlife habitat, forest land, hayland, or pasture to a post mining cropland, would require sufficient water and topsoil duality We already had plenty of water and prime soil. We are not trying to CHANGE anything. Put it back like it was! It was irrigated alfalfa and corn fields before you entered the property, put it back like it was and 'Like 'AFC agreed. WFC took Prime crop land and got FCs' coal and we want it put back in the well-irrigated prime fields that they, were before you entered the property. 360 tons of alfalfa and 643 tons of corn had been produced off this property where Patty Morgan made her home and it was very beautiful and had NO Lary land, put it back like it was! All of that property has plenty of water and it has been proven. `There are absolutely NO facts, NO documentation, NO decisions from the I?RMS, NRC.S or any other agency that proves we have insufficient water. We have been told and so has WFC by NRCS many times, ASK the Farmer, he's the one that has been irrigating; for 50 years, ask the farmer how much water he uses to irrigate his property. The farmer is the one who would actually know. WFC has an unscientific weather station. mounted on a metal building with a metal roof. concrete side walks, r=ext to other buildings in. an unscientific setting and ?VFC %vants to dispute all scientific data by CSU and others to prove we do not have enough water. WFC asked Mr. Morgan how many shams it took to, irrigate the piece of property WFC was going to mine and. MR..Morg,an said 50 shares. Now, it°s being taken out of context as to that's all WFC could have and in fact WFC told. MR. Morgan that this was in there to protect hire so WFC could not take more than 50 shares without consulting hirer or discussing it with hire:, but there was