Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />6•d <br />rendered obsolete by NRCS, contained an error regarding phi limit's for Prime Farmlands. The. <br />7.4 itt the second sentence of the above excerpt should have teed SA instead. This has been <br />thoroughly explained by Mr. Dearstyne in a letter written Febroary'i 1, 2008 (attached). <br />Moreover, the full reference from the Colorado Important Farmland Inventory reads: "irrigated <br />soils with bedrock within 40 incites of the surface and. soil horizons thatha%re a pH higher than <br />7A are considered as leaving high conductivity and therefore not prime." Cuuiously, only the <br />latter half of this condition was used in the Order 1 Soil Survey interpretation cited above. Mr. <br />Stindt referenced the Colorado Important Farmland Inventory and the occurrence of pll higher <br />than 7.4 in his Prime 'Farmland determination conducted an property owned by Garvey Bros, in <br />1996. But he also stated: <br />"At both pit locations, the soil was moderately deep (bedrock within 40 inches of the <br />surface)., .Based on sty observations at these sites [two soil pits], this soil better fits the mapping. <br />unit description for Progresso loam than Barx fine sandy loam. Progresso loam does not even <br />quality as potentially prime," <br />The Batt soil has an average depth lo bexirock greater than or equal to 60 inches of the surface. <br />- Furthermore, the two determinations made by Mr. Stindt owed before the New Horizon .Aline <br />Permit Boundary wasogotpantiod to include die MorganProperty, which did contain Banc soil <br />prior to mining. <br />The next instance in which BRCS was requested to make a Prime Farmland determination within <br />the New Horizon Muni permit boundary occurred in February 2008, well after alining of the <br />Morgan property, and other surrounding lands had commenced, arotmd 2004. I've provide this <br />history to fully clarify theNRCS role as it relates to Prime Farmland determinations within the <br />New Horizon Mine permit boundary. <br />shave spent countless hours providing technical n ical assistance to Western Fuels, DRlviS, and the <br />Morgan family regarding mine sociamation issues within flew Horizon Mute, Ironically, nave- <br />participated in numerous meetings, site visits, and telephone conversations vviti► Western fuels <br />and/or DRMS in which the Morgan family was not present. <br />Lastly, l would like to address cooperation: theta have been many instances when Western Fuels <br />challenged my assessments and recommendations when they were "ince wenient" or did not <br />serve Cneir interests, necessitating further justification or explanation on my part. This was <br />particularly true with regard to My recommendations regarding post - mining irrigation pra.cticss. <br />Western Fuel's has been uncooperative and manipulative regarding some of these issues and i <br />believe that this letter is an example of that behavior. On November 16,1 was simply providing <br />objective, technical assistance, to the best of my ability, to a lanelowner who requested it <br />Respectfully Submitted, <br />. Jim Boyd, NRCS Resource Conservationist <br />- attachments <br />Z89L ieuanl ueloof <br />PLTF 001049 <br />