Laserfiche WebLink
JoEllen Turner <br />970 - 864 -7682 p.7 <br />13 years and 1 am the one who put the property back and reclaimed those areas East of <br />2700 Road and I guarantee you they have provided nothing but falsehoods to the State <br />from day one. Second, OSM did not require that WFC form their own conclusions. If <br />they did, then we were provided FALSE information , again , in the REVISION that <br />allowed for them to do this samplingTR -61. This was a DATA gathering process and to <br />try and change a prime farmland determination that has been made since 1960, 1973, <br />1988, and 1998 is inappropriate and totally violates the rules and regulations and the <br />ACT. <br />These SO- CALLED experts, were biased and have never SEEN the Morgan property <br />prior to mining. RE- MAPPING NRCS maps that we have had with property since 1960 <br />working then with SCS which is now NRCS and working with the USDA for over 50 <br />years and was documented working with them ,is illegal. ALL of these things had to be <br />done PRIOR to ever entering this property. NOT 10 YEARS LATER. The lease was <br />signed in 1998 and at that time, it was documented by their own soil scientist that <br />"ACCORDING TO THE NATIONAL SOIL SURVEY HANDBOOK" WHICH IS THE <br />ONLY CRITERIA that can be used for determining prime farmland, that all of the <br />Morgan property was prime. And, before the fabricated version of the soil survey that <br />was done by WFC, the Morgan property was NOT considered as NOT being <br />primefarmland, again a conclusion made TWO times that all of this property was prime <br />farmland. AND there was NO consultation with NRCS, and still documented as being <br />prime farmland. But, it's really interesting here. NOT ONE time during all the permitting <br />did WFC ever mention the JIM IRVINE soils survey in their permits as not making this <br />property non - primefarmland. In fact, it was documented in 2000 that all of this property <br />contained a majority of Barx soils or BARX/Darvey soils which are considered as prime <br />farmland, but the 1992 letter from USDA Dean Stindt disqualified BARX soils. Again <br />ALL lies. Dean Stindt testified under oath at the court that his conclusions were "SITE <br />SPECIFIC" and this letter that he wrote to WFC in 1992 had NOTHING to do with our <br />property nor anyone elses property. IT was "SITE SPECIFIC" and should have never <br />been applied to any other piece of property. <br />In Pr -07, WFC submits that the 1996 soil survey which was done on the <br />BurbridgelGarvey property also disqualified BARX soils. This again is not true. The <br />determination was for PROGRESSO soils because of the depth to bedrock and had <br />nothing to do with disqualifying BARX soils and again nothing to do with the MORGAN <br />properties. In fact, the STATE writes "there has been no prime farmland investigation for <br />15 years." The law states that if there is a SOIL SURVEY map available from NRCS <br />determining prime farmland soils for the areas being mined, that NO NEW soils survey <br />is required. The NRCS surveys are to be used and if an independent soil scientist is <br />used, they must be in full consultation with NRCS and NRCS is the ONLY one that can <br />make the prime farmland determination. None of this last part has been done by WFC <br />which in itself makes pr -07 illegal. NRCS was here for ONE DAY for the soil sampling. <br />AND STEVE PARKS told everyone one of us that it was BARX soils, with almost no <br />rock fragments. AND that what he witnessed was TYPICAL of our ENTIRE <br />PROPERTY. <br />These so callled soil experts testified under oath that ROCK FRAGMENTS did not <br />matter and were only important in the TOP 6 INCHESIII! I'll get you a copy of the <br />transcript where they did not acknowledge OSM's analysis or NRCS analysis. <br />7lPage <br />