Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: RightWhale

No question about it. The land we mined and reclaimed produced a better crop, had better drainage, was terraced with ponds at the low corners (not last cut impoundments which are awful) and was worth more per acre. The land owner received a royalty on his coal and got his land back in superior condition. The federal surface mine law overreached in many areas but was generally beneficial.


41 posted on 08/18/2007 9:13:17 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (BTUs are my Beat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]


To: Eric in the Ozarks

The big thing here is permafrost. Buildable land without permafrost is scarce. A subdivision down the road with typical ranch style houses is looking kind of uninhabitable here and there while subdivisions in Fox (totally mined out and mostly gravel now) will be permanent. Simply excavating forty feet down and backfilling as they did on the 1994 road project clearly doesn’t get the job done. Got to mine it down to bedrock.


43 posted on 08/18/2007 9:19:11 AM PDT by RightWhale (It's Brecht's donkey, not mine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson