Laserfiche WebLink
ES <br />e 17,D <br />ri;R ri <br />To W. Berry and W. Walker: :)r,;, . <br />Mining & FS� <br />Regarding a letter from Marcia Talvitie dated May 10 to Ross Gubka. A minor revision cannot <br />be used to make any changes to anyones property. A minor revision cannot be used to change <br />anything that is significant or to make any changes as to the reclamation of a piece of property <br />nor can &technical revision: This.was -done with MR 51- and 57 and tremendously hurt the <br />Morgan property as well as being illegal, as well as TR57 and TR49 to mention a few. <br />Pr -06 is under appeal and has not yet had a Judicial review. You are allowing the mine to <br />operate on all things in Pr-06 and this has not been accepted , it is under appeal. PR -06 is not <br />legal nor does it contain correct information. <br />Johnsons property and the Lloyd were all historically irrigated and cropped prior to <br />mtiniztg. X got at least 319 ton of hay off of the Johnson property each and every year prior to <br />mining. Pr-06 allows WFC to REMOVE the water from the permit and then claim it as dryland. <br />It specifically states that. Land use is what the land was used for prior to mining. 10 years prior <br />to a lease or purchase, or purchases and must be returned to how it was prior to mining. All of <br />these properties were historically irrigated and cropped. 1 share will do 2 acres of land and <br />always have. Crop land does NOT have to be prune farmland. Prime farmland must be <br />cropland, but cropland does not have to be prime. <br />As to the topsoil. The rules and regulations state that all ,not inches, but all topsoil MUST be <br />salvaged and is stated so in each and every permit as well as the rules. It also states that all <br />topsoil must be segregated in two separate lifts "General topsoil removal 4,06. Marcia states that <br />no violations are being committed, yet all of the Lloyd and Johnsons properties are being done <br />everyday in. a ONE lift operation which is an ON Ground violation as well as breaking all rules <br />and regulations-making PR-06 illegal again. This is something that PR -06 allows for them to do <br />and is against all rules and regualtions. It also states that all of this must be returned to like it <br />was in the natural existence. WFC putting spoil on top of bench one is not like it was. <br />A permit revision is required to make ANYchanges to the reclamation of property.. PR -06 <br />states that most of these properties are being returned to dryland. A violation of the rules and <br />regulations and the ACT, that is why it is under appeal. You do not have the true and accurate <br />facts that will be presented showing these things as a violation. You have been told over and <br />over, but no one listens. These properties have all been historically irrigated and cropped prior to <br />mining and will be proven in court. They must be returned to as good as or better than they were <br />prior to mining even if they were purchased. If an owner wants to change that, it must be done <br />with a variance and this variance must show that it is for a better use to ALL including the <br />community and all citizens. Irrigated pasture which it was not and dryland is not better than what <br />it was and I have the pictures of those places prior to ding. According to PR -06, NO <br />Variances have ever been issued to WFC. <br />Marcia and PE. keep stating inches or feet. There is NOTHING in the rules and regualtions <br />that give them the right to decide inches or feet. The thicknesses are what were there in the <br />natural existence and how the layers of soil were prior to mining All topsoils must be salvaged <br />