Pocahontas commentator plus6/1/2023 ![]() Appellee Waco appealed that denial to the Board. For purposes of the instant appeal, it is undisputed and a matter of fact that the appellee's proposed quarrying activities would have caused substantial damage to the present and future well-being of the county, and specifically to local businesses, residents, and visitors.Īfter an exhaustive administrative review process, the DEP denied the permit application. In summary, the facts are that beginning in 2000, appellee Waco sought from the DEP a permit to operate a sandstone quarry in a quiet, *466 unspoiled, remote, and beautiful geographic area of Pocahontas County an area where tourism, second homes, and outdoor recreation are a growing and now crucial part of the local economy. The circuit court order at issue in the instant case did not challenge the Board's findings of fact nor does the appellee now contend that the Board's findings were not supported by substantial evidence. Because the Board's order presents a thorough recitation of the underlying facts that led to the instant appeal, we will omit restating those facts in detail. (The full text of the Board's Januorder is appended to this opinion at Appendix A). ("Waco"), to operate a rock quarry in Pocahontas County, West Virginia. ![]() That order reversed and vacated a Janudecision of the West Virginia Surface Mine Board ("Board") that upheld the DEP's denial of a permit to the appellee, Waco Oil and Gas Co., Inc. The appellant, the West Virginia Division of Environmental Protection ("DEP"), appeals from a Maorder of the Circuit Court of Kanawha County. In the instant case we reinstate an order of the West Virginia Surface Mine Board that upheld the denial of a quarry mine permit. Tokarz, Esq., Bowles Rice McDavid Graff & Love, Charleston, for Appellant. Clarke, Esq., Office of Legal Services, WV Department of Environmental Protection, Charleston, for Appellee. Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. CRUM, Director, Division of Mining and Reclamation, and West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Appellees Below, Appellants. 8.5/10.671 S.E.2d 464(2008) WACO OIL AND GAS COMPANY, INC., Appellant Below, Appellee ![]() ![]() In conclusion, one of the least memorable of the Disney movies, is so worth watching. The ending was actually quite effective and poignant. Some of the imagery is fantastic in the songs of war and animosity, and the film has a great love story and message. But Meeko and Flit are great fun, and Grandmother Willow was good too. Mel Gibson has a singing voice, but his speaking voice is too monotonous to my liking, and Ratcliffe isn't a very likable or memorable villain at all(one of Disney's blandest villains actually), despite enthusiastic voice work from David Ogden Stiers. The protagonist, voiced by Irene Bedard, is very well done, but most of the other characters are not as effective. The weakest element of the film, is actually the character development. The incidental music is also definitely the most lyrical of the Alan Menken scores. When I was 12, I tried to sound like her. Pocahontas's singing voice is none other than the Broadway singer, Judy Kuhn, who was absolutely terrific. "Colours of the Wind" is one of the most beautiful songs I've heard, and I've sung it before. Here it is the main reason why this movie is so memorable. The songs are sometimes the weakest element of an animation. America looked so rich in colour, and the colours were so bright. It is historically inaccurate, but why should that be an issue? All I want is a visually stunning film with great music, and that's what I got. Why on earth is this movie rated so low? It's even rated lower than some of the DTV sequels.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |