Laserfiche WebLink
suit themselves again. It still has to be all approved by the LANDOWNER. Dave Dearstyne nor <br />WFC nor the STATE is the one SST I3farming ROTECTED BY FEDERAL ANDS THE <br />LAWS. <br />LANDOWNER HIS RIGHTS <br />2.04.9 -25 Soil, Survey 1988 SOIL SURVEY IS VALUABLE BECAUSE IT SHOWS THE <br />BARX DARVEY SOIL. Now, in 1992, Barx soils were told to WFC as being prime soils. Now, <br />you see how far back they have known this information!! "The 1988 survey confirms that the <br />soil 98 E, which is prime farmland on the Morgan property <br />14. Soil Survey 1.996 "Most of this area was studied in the 1998 survey, but was re -done in 1.996 <br />to higher standards" They are jerking our chain all of the time. Because they know no one really <br />reads all of this. I don't know what they are saying. They can't do a survey in 1998 and then re- <br />do it in, 1996 two years before the survey took place. <br />15, Soil Survey -1998 "This soil test location and descriptions are typical and consistent for soil <br />in the area. Again, they knew the Barx was prune soils. <br />- Some areas may have soil deeper than 72 inches and yield a greater amount of salvage material. <br />This unit is considered prime farmland soil as of the 2008 NRCS determination. Again, you <br />need to make then acknowledge the 1992 determination and the 1.998 determination. Prime <br />Soils, Barx Darvey had already been determined as PRIME SOILS< SOILS.... <br />2.04.9 -27 "in attachment 2.049 -6 is a letter from ].Montrose County NRCS stating that Barx <br />Darvey soil IN THE ORIGINAL PERMIT AREA DOES NOT HAVE A DEPENDABLE AND <br />ADEQUATE WATER SUPPLY AND IS NOT CONSIDERED PRIME FARMLAND. First <br />off, this is the ORIGINAL PERMIT AREA IN 1992 WHICH ENCOMPASSES JUST A FEW DRAW WATER WHICH WAS <br />ACRES ALONG CALAMITX DRAW AND CALAT SUPPLY AND HAD NOTHING TO <br />NOT AN ADEQUATE AND DEPENDABLE WATER <br />DO WITH ANY OTHER ACRES OR PIECES AND THEY ARE JUST DOWN RIGHT <br />DIS14ONEST AND SCHEMING AND EVERYTHING THAT IS WRONG WITH THE <br />WORLD TODAY, THEY FIT. The State needs to put an end to this. Surely by now you can see <br />for yourself how they are tieing and trying to cover all of their deceitfulness! ! i When they <br />renewed their permit in 5 years later and they knew their were many areas with BARX SOILS as <br />did the STATE because I have 23 documentations, mostly by Marcia that disqualified ALL <br />BARX soils because of DEAN STINDTS LETTER and the law states s there and the <br />OPERATOR must PROVE beyond ANY doubt that it is not prime and NRCS says <br />NEVER any calls to them, asking about ANY other piece of property having Barx soils within <br />the permit area and I will have them forced into court if I have to prove that. The permit area in <br />1992, d,id not contain any of the properties north of BB road or west of 2700 road. and the Federal <br />and State laws are again VERY EXPLICIT ON PRIME SOTLS AND THE REQUIREMENTS <br />OF GETTING A NEGATIVE DETERMINATION.!!!! They cannot ever be allowed to use dean <br />stindts letter because it was for a very small piece that I have a letter from him and the neap <br />enclosed! 1! Also, all of the other properties had CC ditch water which was a designated <br />dependable water supply unlike Dean Stindts piece. When they began mining in 1994 and they <br />enlarged the permit area, the State should have MADE them get a NEW document from NRCS <br />