Friday, August 31, 2012

VWC-DEIS, Page 2-46/47 - Employment Status

{updated 9/2/12}

It’s interesting when it comes to Climate Change already creating drought conditions with numerous government sponsored studies warning us to prepare for worse... the VWC-DEIS tells us: 
“{...}Conversely, while climate change has been projected to have incremental impacts on various aspects of human activities at some unknown point in the future, there are no methodologies available at this point to predict any impacts on the project being analyzed here.”
VWC-DEIS - Page 4-56   Chapter 4. 

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

But when they want to paint a rosy developer friendly impression, they can do it with confidence going out to the 2040s.  

That’s what has turned this whole VWC-DEIS drama into such a fascinating, though brutally depressing, exercise in watching willful self-delusion in action.  Does anyone who seriously studies Earth Sciences believe that our physical environment in 2040 will resemble the world we have come to love these past decades of our lives?  

Drive over Wolf Creek Pass for a taste of future shock. . .
And it’s not local!  Different, but similar, disruptions to age old eco-systems are occurring all over this nation and the planet. Why do Red McCombs, his employees and the DEIS writers pretend these cascading consequences aren't going to seriously impact all aspects of our lives and economy?

We are on the threshold of a tough brave new world but Republicans everywhere want to continue believing that the average between 1990 and 2010 is what we can count on from here to eternity.  So rather than facing the harsh reality professionals who study these things are warning us about, we chose to believe salesmen who get’s paid to promise us what we want the most:  jobs and money.  Promises come so easy, but delivery is so difficult!

And, what's the cost of a failed project? 
Why doesn't the Environmental Impact examine that potential?   The Rio Grande River needs Alberta Park to remain an unmolested key component of the Wolf Creek watershed.  Not a plowed up mess left by another developer with big pipedreams, but cash bust and gone home just the same.

VWC-DEIS, Page 2-46/47  -  Employment Status

Page 2-46/47 -  Chapter 2. Description of Alternatives
Draft Environmental Impact Statement - Village at Wolf Creek Access Project

Alternative 3 Maximum Density Development Concept
Employment Status.  As with the Alternative 2 Moderate Density Development Concept, it is apparent that the creation of a significant number of new FTEs under this development concept would offer new employment opportunities for unemployed Analysis Area residents.  During the nine-year phase in period, the Alternative 3 Moderate Density Development Concept would generate a cumulative total of 3,667 construction FTEs, or an average of 407 construction FTEs in each year.
Individual Prosperity.  As with the Alternative 2 Moderate Density Development Concept, the Alternative 3 Moderate Density Development Concept would generate significant labor income, both during the nine year construction period and on an ongoing/operations basis, both during the phase-up and following completion of the project.
Alternative 3 Maximum Density Development Concept  
Employment Status.  As with the Alternative 2 Maximum Density Development Concept, the longer term impact of this development concept would likely be a reduction in the ongoing unemployment rate, although this would depend on other cycles in the regional/national economy.  During the 30- year phase in period, the Maximum Density Development Concept of Alternative 3 would generate a cumulative total of over 9,723 construction FTEs, or an average of 324 construction related FTEs in each year.  Upon completion in year 2044, ongoing Village operations would generate a total of 2,271 annual FTEs – these FTEs would continue into the future for as long as the Village maintains operations.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

How can the VWC-DEIS authors make the above claims?  While at the same time ignoring what Earth Scientists are warning us to expect for the future.  Namely, less water and a very ugly massive forest die off to deal with.  How do the EIS authors manage to feel comfortable with that lapse?

How will facilitating the destruction of an integral part of a precious wetlands, you know source waters for the Rio Grande River Basin, help our kids who depend on a healthy Rio Grande River as much as we depend on jobs?  

Why not entertain how to get Mr. McCombs to consider returning that parcel back to RGNF or into a nature conservancy?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  

Dear Friends of Alberta Park and Wolf Creek, 
we have this one moment to tell the Rio Grande Forest Service and the US Department of Agriculture's powers-that-be what a destructive boondoggle this luxury Village at 10,500± elevation would be.

But, they'll never listen to you, if you don't contact them!
Here's where to do that, but you need to do it now, September:

Commenting on This Project
The Forest Service values public input. Comments received, including respondents’ names and addresses, will become part of the public record for this proposed action. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and considered; however, anonymous comments will not provide the agency with the ability to provide you with project updates. The Forest Service wishes to provide you with as many opportunities as possible to learn about our activities.

Official Deadline for comments: 9/30/2012. (or is that Friday the 28th, or Monday the 1st?)

No comments:

Post a Comment