Gravel pit gets go-ahead; opponents mount appeal

Gravel pit gets go-ahead; opponents mount appeal

May 26, 2001

By Jim Mimiaga
Journal Staff Writer

Despite boisterous opposition, the Colorado Mined Land and Reclamation board gave the go-ahead Wednesday for operators to begin mining gravel from the Line Camp property north of Dolores.

"Our plan went through a lot of scrutiny, but the claims they were making just did not hold water," said Aryol Brumley, owner of Four States Aggregate, which obtained the permit.

"We honestly did try and mitigate as much as we can but the only answer those folks wanted was ‘no,’ and that did not happen."

The large-scale mining project by Four States Aggregate and landowner Val Truelson has brought heated protests from residents of the Dolores River Valley where the gravel will be mined in proximity to several nearby residences and other gravel-mine operations.

Homeowners, geologists and members of an activist group seeking to curtail the intense gravel mining in Dolores River Valley attended the hearing in Denver to testify against the permit. They argued that the 22-acre mine operation would heighten flash-flood dangers and could change the course of the river, threatening lives and private property.

Members of Citizens for Accountability and Responsibility (CFAR) made the case that mining regulators are obligated to consider the cumulative effects that multiple gravel pits have on the environment. They testified that gravel mining in that area lowers water tables, threatens groundwater wells with toxins and has the potential for silt loading into McPhee reservoir downstream.

But the board dismissed those claims, among others, and approved the mine, saying the submitted plan was reviewed and complies with all Colorado laws regulating mining and reclamation. In their "Rationale for Approval," the Division of Minerals and Geology justified the board’s decision, arguing that there was not enough evidence to support the claims of opponents.

According to the decision, objections such as more water quality data were "advisable" but were "not characteristically required for gravel operations." Concerns that increased dust would harm migratory birds were considered to be without substance, and while it is true that cumulative effects of pits has not been evaluated, "anecdotal evidence indicates that cumulative effects on water quality are not evidently adverse," according to the rationale.

"We anticipated this, but we move forward now in our efforts to protect that watershed," said CFAR President Pat Kantor. "We will push for a legislative mandate that requires the effects of multiple pits, and seek a special designation for the river valley in order to protect its pristine qualities."

"The board did not even deliberate, which was frustrating because we knew the facts were on our side," added CFAR researcher Marilyn Boynton.

Mining requires local government approval before going to state regulators. Last August, the Montezuma County Commission also approved a high-impact permit for the mine, allowing the request to proceed to the Division of Minerals and Geology. The commissioners cited development rights as justification but attached mitigation requirements limiting hours of operation to the normal work week. An oversight board of citizens was also created to monitor reclamation efforts.

Line Camp neighbor Carol Stepe filed suit against the county commission for approving the permit. The case was put on hold pending the outcome of the Mine and Reclamation hearing, but it will now go forward. Stepe said Friday that she and her attorney, Jim Preston, will appeal the mining boards decision.

"The did not listen to our witnesses and pooh-poohed our evidence," Stepe said. "I will take this all the way to the Supreme Court because lives are being threatened."

Brumley said Four States plans to begin work on the site this fall. Mining would start in earnest by 2002, and be completed along with reclamation by 2006.

The controversy has become a landmark case, as the county and state wrestle with growth pressures.

Construction-quality gravel used for cement is typically found in riverbeds, not just anywhere gravel resources exist as opponents claim, Brumley said.

"They say Haycamp Mesa is a good alternative but the gravel there is more for roadbase; it does not have the fine sands and washed gravels needed for construction cement."

Brumley said that choices to mine high-grade gravel in Montezuma County are limited by McPhee reservoir and the protected regions in the lower Dolores River Valley.

"So the upper is all we have left and even that is limited," he said. "Believe me, if we could do this somewhere else and not bother all these people, then we would not be here."

Bruce Humphries, minerals program supervisor for the Division of Mining, said Friday that opposition to mining operations has increased recently, but he asserted that it is up to the state legislature to change the laws that regulate mining if the concerns are to be dealt with.

"All I can say is that as the population has grown there have been more and more conflicts between opposing land uses that are not compatible," he said. "The level of interest from the general public in gravel mines has increased substantially."