Laserfiche WebLink
It does not matter what WFC sees as significant or not on saturation or snow fall. It is <br />what the rules state and prime top soil cannot be removed and stockpiled in saturated <br />conditions. It also states that it is very hard on these soils anyway and the Tess <br />compaction, and disturbance and contamination, the better these soils will remain_ They <br />will never be quite as good because it is hard on them. What WFC thinks is not <br />important, the law, and what it says they HAVE to do, is what is important !!s <br />All lies about our property. About the acreages under cultivation, and about what they <br />"ASSUME" Their assumptions are not worth a pile of beans. This farms has always <br />been historically irrigated and cropped and the entire 107.9 acres was under cultivation <br />and irrigation LONG BEFORE THE MINE WAS HERE. HIS SAP REPORT CAN BE <br />THROWN IN THE TRASH BECAUSE IT IS NOTHING BUT LIES. He has not a clue as <br />to what he is talking about. And 1.04 is very very clear as to how these properties <br />should have been classified. Just because WFC did not classify them correctly, just as <br />that JUDGE said, it was up to WFC to make sure the information was correct, not the <br />consultants or the ones preparing the reports, but it was up tp WFC to provided <br />accurate and correct information. Let's discuss these rules CROPLAND IS <br />HISTORICALLY USED AS CROPLAND FOR 5 OUT OF 10 years. IF THEY ARE <br />GOING TO READ AND QUOTE RULES, THEN HAVE THEM LEARN THEM ALL <br />BECAUSE ALL, AND I MEAN ALL, THE RULES WORK HAND IN HAND, SO DON'T <br />JUST STOP AT WHAT YOU THINK IT SAYS, READ ALL OF THEM. It did not matter if <br />a farmer let his property go fallow for a couple of years, which we did not, if he produced <br />crops which was anything being harvested for production, IT WAS AND STILL IS <br />CROPLAND. CROPLAND NOT PASTURELANDS. And they have No rights changing <br />the terminologies to suit themselves. Any one, anywhere, if they are reading these <br />rules and regulations should be reading EXACTLY what you are reading, not these <br />made up definitions and interpretations. I have leased and farmed this place since 1993 <br />as Mr. Morgan testified to and I have continuously irrigated and cropped this place since <br />then putting up 1500 plus ton per year and 700 tons of corn silage. LONG BEFORE <br />THE MINE SIGNED THE LEASEll!!!!! These "We BELIEVE" and WE ASSUME" is for <br />the birds. Why did he not talk to the farmer or we would have gotten all these big <br />ranchers around here that buy 100's of tons of hay every year from us and the GOOD <br />PORTION OF IT IS OFF THE SUNSHINE PLACE THAT DEJOIA IS CALLING <br />PASTURELANDS AND HE'S FULL OF CRAP!!!! I want an informal hearing to be held <br />here in Nucla and I will show these people just how dishonest and how crooked WFC is <br />and the lies that they write in these permits!!! AND THE STATE GOING RIGHT A <br />ALONG WITH THEM. Please let me know as soon as possible when that scheduled <br />meeting is. I will make arrangements to attend and I want put on the Aganda and I will <br />show the Board this FABRICATED bunch of lies that has been presented to underhand <br />a DIRECT BOARD ORDER. We had a pond, some beehives, homestead, and a swell <br />and as Michael testified in court, we always cut even the swell. It wasn't deep like WFC <br />has made the San Miguel Power Property. We had gated pipe, siderolls, traveling big <br />gun, and as you have seen in the photos, our furrows were over as quarter mile long <br />also documented by WFC and it was flat and according to NRCS was one of the most <br />EFFICICENTLY irrigated properties in this area which it can never be again. We also <br />had siderolls that we purchased in 1996 as all the receipts in discovery showed and we <br />purchased our first center pivot in 1994 and our second one prior to the mine entering <br />191 Page <br />JoEllen Turner <br />970 - 864 -7682 p.9 <br />