Colorado
Editorial: Threat of uranium mine in gated Colorado neighborhood drives home risk of split estates
South T Bar Ranch is a cautionary tale for Coloradans. Beware the split estate.
Colorado law allows for surface rights of land to be split from sub-surface mineral rights. Most commonly, conflict arises in Colorado’s natural gas-rich Denver-Julesburg Basin, where the Front Range sprawl north of Denver has landed subdivisions above mineral rights owned by major corporations planning or already using hydraulic fracturing to extract the gas.
South T Bar Ranch, located northwest of Cañon City, could become a nightmare situation for homeowners compared to the problems presented with hydraulic fracturing. Even modern uranium mining — known as ablation — causes a significant disruption to surface land, although companies claim it is safer and less problematic than pit mining.
Global Uranium and Enrichment, which owns the mineral rights below the 5,200-acre gated community, has received the necessary permits to begin exploratory drilling for uranium. If the company plans to proceed and extract deposits of uranium, landowners are legally required to provide the surface access necessary for the operation.
The blame for this scenario is twofold: a lack of due diligence by land buyers and a lack of disclosure from sellers, Realtors, and title companies.
The possibility of uranium mining on this land should have significantly reduced the value of these parcels from the outset. In other words, the land should have sold for a reduced price compared to other parcels in Fremont County where homeowners owned their mineral rights.
In this instance, it was homeowners in 2008 who gathered together their mineral rights and sold them to a company that was later purchased by Global Uranium and Enrichment. Subsequent landowners missed out on the windfall from that sale.
A simple disclosure could have avoided all this heartache. We’re not saying homeowners wouldn’t have still purchased the land, but at least they would feel less blindsided or would have had the knowledge needed to negotiate a better price on the land.
Colorado’s Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate does include IN ALL CAPS an oil, gas, water and mineral disclosure. However, the disclosure only informs people about the risk of split estates; it doesn’t include specific information about whether the land being purchased is split from mineral rights. The clause merely encourages the buyer to “seek additional information.” Most buyers get the contract to buy and sell just before closing.
Title companies also do not trace the mineral rights separately, which really is an astounding lapse in the expensive services the title companies perform. Homeowners are on their own to research the ownership of mineral rights using county records or to hire an attorney to research the title and deed for them.
Where should the onus of due diligence fall?
The current system places too much of a burden on potential buyers. Colorado law already has strict rules for the disclosure of water rights and water sources, and the law should be updated so that disclosure of mineral rights is treated the same. Potential land buyers should be able to quickly see in the real estate listing whether land comes with water and minerals. The point of sale is too late to warn a potential buyer that the estate may or may not be split.
The website for the South T Bar Ranch now includes a disclosure about the split estate and the possibility of uranium mining. More homeowner’s associations, metropolitan districts and other entities should take similar steps to help potential buyers make informed decisions.
Unfortunately, it’s too late for the owners of South T Bar Ranch, who bought after the mineral rights deal in 2008 and failed to learn of the split estate through their Realtor, title company, or other investigations.
People who profited off selling the mineral rights feel vastly different about the potential for mining operations than those who purchased their property later and will not see a windfall from the operations. Some may have failed to negotiate for a reduced price, given the potential for mining.
Global Uranium and Enrichment is only seeking permits to drill wells exploring uranium deposits at this time. The possibility of an actual mining operation is still years away and will require a separate permitting process. It’s possible nothing will come of this exploration, and homeowners will be spared from having mining operations in their backyard (or nearby).
Coloradans can learn from this lesson, and those who learn they are already on a split estate, can make an offer to buy the mineral rights back before market conditions lead to exploration and extraction near their home.
Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.
Colorado
Denver shelter working to end homelessness for at risk youth, funding at risk
Colorado
GUEST COLUMN: Principles for Guiding River Water Negotiations – Calexico Chronicle
Next week is the annual gathering of “water buffaloes” in Las Vegas. It’s the Colorado River Water Users Association convention. About 1700 people will attend, but probably around 100 of them are the key people—the government regulators, tribal leaders, and the directors and managers of the contracting agencies that receive Colorado River water.
Anyone who is paying attention knows that we are in critical times on the river. Temporary agreements on how to distribute water during times of shortage are expiring. Negotiators have been talking for several years but haven’t been able to agree on anything concrete.
I’m just an observer, but I’ve been observing fairly closely. Within the limits on how much information I can get as an outsider, I’d like to propose some principles or guidelines that I think are important for the negotiation process.
See also

- When Hoover Dam was proposed, the main debate was over whether the federal government or private concerns would operate it. Because the federal option prevailed, water is delivered free to contractors. Colorado River water contractors do not pay the actual cost of water being delivered to them. It is subsidized by the U.S. government. As a public resource, Colorado River water should not be seen as a commodity.
- The Lower Basin states of Arizona, California, and Nevada should accept that the Upper Basin states of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming are at the mercy of Mother Nature for much of their annual water supply. While the 1922 Colorado River Compact allocates them 7.5 million acre-feet annually, in wet years, they have been able to use a maximum of 4.7 maf. During the long, ongoing drought, their annual use has been 3.5 maf. They shouldn’t have to make more cuts.
- However, neither should the Upper Basin states be able to develop their full allocation. It should be capped at a feasible number, perhaps 4.2 maf. As compensation, Upper Basin agencies and farmers can invest available federal funds in projects to use water more efficiently and to reuse it so that they can develop more water.
- Despite the drought, we know there will be some wet years. To compensate the Lower Basin states for taking all the cuts in dry years, the Upper Basin should release more water beyond the Compact commitments during wet years. This means that Lake Mead and Lower Basin reservoirs would benefit from wet years and Lake Powell would not. In short, the Lower Basin takes cuts in dry years; the Upper Basin takes cuts in wet years.
- Evaporation losses (water for the angels) can be better managed by keeping more of the Lower Basin’s water in Upper Basin reservoirs instead of in Lake Mead, where the warmer weather means higher evaporation losses. New agreements should include provisions to move that water in the Lower Basin account down to Lake Mead quickly. Timing is of the essence.
- In the Lower Basin states, shortages should be shared along the same lines as specified in the 2007 Interim Guidelines, with California being last to take cuts as Lake Mead water level drops.
- On the home front, IID policy makers should make a long-term plan to re-set water rates in accord with original water district policy. Because IID is a public, non-profit utility, water rates were set so that farmers paid only the cost to deliver water. Farmers currently pay $20 per acre foot, but the actual cost of delivering water is $60 per acre foot. That subsidy of $60 million comes from the water transfer revenues.
- The SDCWA transfer revenues now pay farmers $430 per acre-foot of conserved water, mostly for drip or sprinkler systems. Akin to a grant program, this very successful program generated almost 200,000 acre-feet of conserved water last year. Like any grant program, it should be regularly audited for effectiveness.
- Some of those transfer revenues should be invested in innovative cropping patterns, advanced technologies, and marketing to help the farming community adapt to a changing world. The IID should use its resources to help all farmers be more successful, not just a select group.
- Currently, federal subsidies pay farmers not to use water via the Deficit Irrigation Program. We can lobby for those subsidies to continue, but we should plan for when they dry up. Any arrangement that rewards farmers but penalizes farm services such as seed, fertilizer, pesticide, land leveling, equipment, and other work should be avoided.
- Though the IID has considerable funding from the QSA water transfers, it may need to consider issuing general obligation bonds as it did in its foundational days for larger water efficiency projects such as more local storage or a water treatment plant to re-use ag drain water.
Much progress has been made in using water more efficiently, especially in the Lower Basin states, but there’s a lot more water to be saved, and I believe collectively that we can do it.
Colorado
Colorado mother says Lakewood crash killed son, left 2 of her children critically injured as driver is arrested
A mother is grieving after a crash in the Denver metro area last weekend left her son brain-dead and two of her other children fighting for their lives.
Lakewood police say 22-year-old Andrew Logan Miller has been arrested in connection with the crash, which happened Dec. 6 around 7:30 p.m. near Kipling Parkway and West 6th Avenue.
Police say Miller was driving an SUV southbound on Kipling Parkway at a high rate of speed when it collided with a bus carrying a wrestling team from Central High School, which is located in Grand Junction in Mesa County.
Sixteen people were taken to hospitals.
Among the injured were three siblings who were riding inside the SUV.
On Friday, their mother, Suleyma Gonzalez, identified them as Julio Gonzalez, 18, Analelly Gonzalez, 17, and Christopher Gonzalez, 14.
Analelly and Christopher remain in critical condition. Julio will never wake up.
“I didn’t want to believe it, until they had to do the second testing where they didn’t find blood going through his brain,” she said. “My other two are in comas.”
Gonzalez said doctors ultimately declared Julio brain-dead.
She describes her children as disciplined students and ROTC members with plans for the future.
“Two of my kids were going to graduate this year,” she said. “No drugs. No alcohol. They were good kids.”
Gonzalez confirmed that Miller, who was driving the SUV at the time of the crash, was her daughter’s boyfriend.
“I know he loved my daughter,” she said. “I don’t think he did this on purpose or intentionally. It was an accident.”
Police say the investigation is ongoing, but believe speed played a major role in the crash.
Miller was arrested Wednesday night and is facing multiple charges, including:
• Vehicular assault (7 counts)
• Speeding 40 mph or more over the limit
• Reckless driving
• Child abuse (2 counts)
• Reckless endangerment
“My kids know when you get in somebody’s car, there’s always a risk. Always,” she said.
Julio’s organs will be donated. He’s on life support, while the hospital searches for matches.
“He wanted to give to the world,” she said. “Now that I can’t get him back, we want to give life to somebody else.”
Miller is currently being held in the Denver County Jail and is awaiting transfer to the Jefferson County Jail. His bond and court appearance have not yet been announced.
Lakewood police say the investigation remains active.
Gonzalez, a single mother of five, says her focus now is on her surviving children and getting clarity.
“I just want answers.”
-
Alaska1 week agoHowling Mat-Su winds leave thousands without power
-
Texas1 week agoTexas Tech football vs BYU live updates, start time, TV channel for Big 12 title
-
Washington5 days agoLIVE UPDATES: Mudslide, road closures across Western Washington
-
Iowa1 week agoMatt Campbell reportedly bringing longtime Iowa State staffer to Penn State as 1st hire
-
Miami, FL1 week agoUrban Meyer, Brady Quinn get in heated exchange during Alabama, Notre Dame, Miami CFP discussion
-
Cleveland, OH7 days agoMan shot, killed at downtown Cleveland nightclub: EMS
-
World7 days ago
Chiefs’ offensive line woes deepen as Wanya Morris exits with knee injury against Texans
-
Iowa1 day agoHow much snow did Iowa get? See Iowa’s latest snowfall totals
