Laserfiche WebLink
f <br />i <br />02/24/98 .17:24 F.~1C 81 76 3332 <br />Heidi M. Connor <br />8110-1 Central Drive <br />Fort Hood, Tezea 76544 <br />254554-8618 <br />February 25,1498 <br />C.~RRIER KTLLEEN• III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII <br />9ss <br />Mr. Tony Waldron, Environmental Protection Specialist <br />Division of Minerals and Geology <br />FAX #303-832-8106 <br />Dear Mr. Waldron, <br />i <br />First let me say THANK YOU for assisting the residents of Iced Creek Ranch with <br />the issue of the Permit for Use that has been subject to question with regard to Siloam <br />Stone's current use and application for expansion. You are probably wondering why I am <br />writing to you from Texas when I don't even reside on the land yet? Well, as a land owner <br />at Red Creek Ranch I have several concerns and am not ins £mancial position to be able to <br />just drive up there (almost a 20 hour drive from our Army post at Fort Hood) but I do <br />hope that you will enter this letter as evidence of my concerns and that of other land <br />owners who do reside on the ranch at the present time. Also, I plan to build on our land <br />within the next l0 years and future expansion of the mining site uphill from us could effect <br />our quality of water down to the lower elevations so it Is of great concern to us for that <br />reason as well as the other reasons that I am about to divulge. <br /> <br />As you know, Siloam Stone has been utilizing a lease to mine approzimately 160 <br />acres for Pabltc Land on Red Creek Ranch. It is our opinion that this land is adequate for <br />their operation but we have beard that Siloam Stone had gone beyond their permit to mine <br />or use other land that is located outside the constraints of their current permit area Th1s <br />is, to os, an outright flagrant violation of their present permit. So what we want to know is <br />how can the permit authorities eve consider rewarding Siloam Stone with any type of <br />extension when they know that Siloam Stone may be in violation of their present <br />contract/permit? Siloam Stone should not be given a reward of any type of contraM or <br />further permits never mind aloud to keep their present permit when they may have <br />violations that break their agreements of their first permit. <br />If the permit violation were not enough grounds for considering consequences for <br />Siloam Stone then we implore you to also consider the fact that there are many Native <br />Americao/Indian related reasons for not allowing further mining outside the @160 acres <br />on their first permit, including: Artifacts, Ruins, Ceremonial Grounds, and possible <br />unmarked burial grounds in this area. All of the Native American Artifacts, Ruins, <br />Ceremonial Sites, and possible burial grounds are of extreme religious and historical <br />importance for public education and Native American Cultural life. I am part Mohawk <br />and am very concerned for the retention and preservation of lands where Native <br />Americans have lived, worshiped, end been lay to rest. When my husband I hiked these <br />canyons and found the Petroglyphs and other evidence of Native American residence we <br />were humbled by the experience. There is peace and tranquility there and the main reason <br />that we chose to by property close in proximity to these sacred lands. <br />X002 <br />