Laserfiche WebLink
p.3 <br />By changing the laws around is not the answer. <br />bad by all of you. <br />The laws have been changed and altered terribly <br />The State has mentioned continuously that No objections were ever filed on Permit Revision 5. <br />Did you read the Public Notice? I have enclosed it. It states that permit revision 5 is just to <br />extend their permit area. There is NO map as the rules require. There is No clarification as the <br />rules require. There is No public availability at the Court house as the rules require. Most of the <br />public notices NEVER have the right information as required by the law, rules, and regulations. <br />.As you notice in the public notice, for permit renewal 5,the application was not and is still not at <br />the courthouse, this information is not even available HERE. It is in Denver or Grand Junction. <br />With the information that is provided in the Public notice, WHY WOULD WE OBJECT? How <br />could we even read it to object if we had an objection? Again, Illegal. Not what your Federal <br />and State laws state at a minimum must contain. <br />On Page 2,1 have included a letter from NRCS that specifically tells the state that Vegetation <br />types are not synonymous and in fact cannot be used interchangeably in this case as they have <br />done. By the way, this was the third letter that NRCS wrote to the State and told them that this <br />should not be done. Also, because of the size of the document, we need you here because we can <br />show where it was all documented for IRRIGATED CROPLAND, not as it states in their letter. <br />We had NO PASTURE on this place since Mr. Morgan sold the livestock off of this place and at <br />the public meeting and at all other meetings in ALL communications the State has been told that. <br />The State has been shown and told that we raise no livestock and have had no livestock on this <br />place for 30 years. We raise crops to sell and that has been the livelihood of this place 15 years <br />before the mine spoke to Mr. Morgan about leasing. Mr. Morgan requested that anything that <br />has to do with his property he wanted to be informed. He has written and requested this and <br />when Marcia, Dan and them all set at the meetings, he has told them this in PERSON. He is <br />blind and I think all of you are discriminating against him and taking advantage of him because <br />he has requested in writing also. Then they had another meeting discussing his property Just this <br />March and he was not informed. There is nothing NEW at the courthouse and we should not <br />have to read it there for him. <br />Another lie by the state. Third paragraph, page 2. We purchased the siderolls in 1996 and the <br />Western portion of the property did not have the road which is part of our field now and the <br />siderolls were on there since 1996. The Farming operations were totally interrupted on the <br />Eastern 50 acres TWO YEARS IN ADVANCE THEY HAD US SHUT OFF OUR WATER. <br />Where is the State getting this information. WE had to shut the water off that ENTIRE 50 acres <br />and this was a brand new field of AV 120 Alfalfa and we had just sold Weimer Ranches and <br />Smiths 360 to of Alfalfa of it. Lance and Ross both were in the field and commented that this <br />was the largest windrows of alfalfa that they had ever seen and asked us what we had planted. <br />We told them that it was a very thin stemmed alfalfa that was suppose to has exceptionally high <br />yields and they agreed, it did. WFC sent Mr. Morgan a letter requesting that all water be shut off. <br />2002 was the last year that we were able to farm that property. This was very detrimental to us. <br />When Marcia and Dan visited us, we asked them why we had to shut the water off like that? <br />Marcia said, that's the law. But, after reading the laws, we find that we are permitted to farm just