Think before digging!
reprinted with permission from The Durango Telegraph
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
Showing posts with label Nature Conservancy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nature Conservancy. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Wetlands and ‘old-growth’ fens heat up Wolf Creek debate. by Adam Howell
Here is an article that details a few of the reasons why people fear for the Alberta Park watershed area. Any massive development in Alberta Park at 10,300 will cause unavoidable damage followed by cascading consequences that will impact the interstate, international Rio Grande River !
The fact that McCombs is suggesting moving his project a few hundred yards and slightly uphill, and closer to the highway will not mitigate that unavoidable destruction.
Think before digging!
Think before digging!
Saturday, March 3, 2012
The proposed Village at Wolf Creek revisited
March, 2012
The proposed Village at Wolf Creek revisited
Given that the Rio Grande National Forest will be releasing their preliminary draft EIS for the Red McCombs Land Swap Offer in another couple months - and considering people will have a short moment of opportunity when sharing their thoughts will actually matter - an update is called for.
The proposed Village at Wolf Creek revisited
Given that the Rio Grande National Forest will be releasing their preliminary draft EIS for the Red McCombs Land Swap Offer in another couple months - and considering people will have a short moment of opportunity when sharing their thoughts will actually matter - an update is called for.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Regarding the swap - letter to the Durango Telegraph
Coming back from the State Democratic Convention, I finally had the time to do something I’d wanted to for years. Track down and actually look at the land I’ve always treated with derision. A derision based on long ago secondhand stories of what someone else thought they knew and my own opposition to developing Alberta Park.
Although the land trade information is fairly obscure, Forest Service personnel were very helpful. After hop-scotching a couple people, having a little patience, there it was, the legal descriptions to nine parcels that Mr. McCombs traded for Alberta Park. Armed with that information I detoured to the Saguache County Court House & Forest Service Field Office where everyone was friendly and helpful in translating the legal descriptions into rough locations on the map.
I knew my notions were in trouble before Ieaving town in search of the “traded parcels.” They cluster around CR.41G about ten miles west of Hwy 285, south of Saguache. Very nice Mid-elevation country.
I wound up driving near or past six parcels feeling chagrined. I could see how the foresters out of Saguache district rejoiced at stitching those inholdings into the protection of the National Forest. I could even see how Mr. McCombs probably felt it was a square deal. In fact, when imagining what went on, back in 1986, in that Washington office (where the Interior Dept. overturned RGNF’s rejection of the land trade) a whole new layer of intrigue appears.
But then, from a citizen’s perspective it immediately begs the question: why must Alberta Park be sacrificed to gain protection for these other worthy parcels?
None of the virtue of what McCombs traded, justifies Alberta Park being bulldozed for a doomed speculation. Especially, not in the face of the challenges we will be grappling with these next years. Precious clean mountain water is a commodity we can’t afford to squander.
Although the land trade information is fairly obscure, Forest Service personnel were very helpful. After hop-scotching a couple people, having a little patience, there it was, the legal descriptions to nine parcels that Mr. McCombs traded for Alberta Park. Armed with that information I detoured to the Saguache County Court House & Forest Service Field Office where everyone was friendly and helpful in translating the legal descriptions into rough locations on the map.
I knew my notions were in trouble before Ieaving town in search of the “traded parcels.” They cluster around CR.41G about ten miles west of Hwy 285, south of Saguache. Very nice Mid-elevation country.
I wound up driving near or past six parcels feeling chagrined. I could see how the foresters out of Saguache district rejoiced at stitching those inholdings into the protection of the National Forest. I could even see how Mr. McCombs probably felt it was a square deal. In fact, when imagining what went on, back in 1986, in that Washington office (where the Interior Dept. overturned RGNF’s rejection of the land trade) a whole new layer of intrigue appears.
But then, from a citizen’s perspective it immediately begs the question: why must Alberta Park be sacrificed to gain protection for these other worthy parcels?
None of the virtue of what McCombs traded, justifies Alberta Park being bulldozed for a doomed speculation. Especially, not in the face of the challenges we will be grappling with these next years. Precious clean mountain water is a commodity we can’t afford to squander.
Monday, March 1, 2010
Reflections on local meetings regarding the VWC
Sunday, December 20, 2009
The following was written after attending a couple local meetings in Pagosa Springs (I live in the next county over)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Dear Pagosa Springs Daily Post Editor & local Representatives,
I felt a bit like a party crasher at the Archuleta BoCC and Pagosa Springs Town Board meetings this past week.
On the one hand, I can appreciate annoyance at some outsider poking his nose into local issues. On the other hand, I hope people appreciate that Alberta Park, located within the unspoiled source waters to the Rio Grande River isn’t just another local real estate issue. What happens up there will ultimate effect all down stream inhabitants of an interstate, international river.
Consider the claim made at the Town Board meeting: “It’s the economy stupid!” This way of thinking implies that building something, anything, so long as we can put a few people to work ~ even if it’s only a couple seasons ~ is good for the community.
What good does that do the young families who are trying to think in terms of decades?
There is a great deal of avoidance going on. No one wants to look our growing economic/biosphere monster in the eye. But, all indications are that society is coming to the end of a creation old spendthrift era.
The incoming economic battle cry is:
“It’s about the sustainability stupid!”
An integral part of sustainability is protecting our resources, especially water. It’s easy for us up here to overlook what an incredibly precious commodity it is. If you don’t believe it, go down to the Mexican border and watch the people on both sides struggling with a greatly depleted Rio Grande River water supply.
This brings me back to Alberta Park. I heard a couple representatives muse about how they love that land up there and if they had their way nothing would be built up there. Then vote against it. Their words indicated that in their hearts they know what a precious commodity Americans have up there. Why not fight for it?
And this brings me back to my intrusion. Mr. Red McCombs’ Reagan era pipedream is a huge mistake in the making, and since so few are screaming bloody murder, I will.
Why? Because I’m haunted by too many examples of counterproductive destruction of critical natural resources that I’ve watched go down over the decades.
Please, put some effort into taking this whole issue back to first base and figuring out a way to get that ill-gotten land back into the protective fold of Rio Grande National Forest.
That land, all of it, deserves to remain unmolested for the greater national good.
Sincerely,
The following was written after attending a couple local meetings in Pagosa Springs (I live in the next county over)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Dear Pagosa Springs Daily Post Editor & local Representatives,
I felt a bit like a party crasher at the Archuleta BoCC and Pagosa Springs Town Board meetings this past week.
On the one hand, I can appreciate annoyance at some outsider poking his nose into local issues. On the other hand, I hope people appreciate that Alberta Park, located within the unspoiled source waters to the Rio Grande River isn’t just another local real estate issue. What happens up there will ultimate effect all down stream inhabitants of an interstate, international river.
Consider the claim made at the Town Board meeting: “It’s the economy stupid!” This way of thinking implies that building something, anything, so long as we can put a few people to work ~ even if it’s only a couple seasons ~ is good for the community.
What good does that do the young families who are trying to think in terms of decades?
There is a great deal of avoidance going on. No one wants to look our growing economic/biosphere monster in the eye. But, all indications are that society is coming to the end of a creation old spendthrift era.
The incoming economic battle cry is:
“It’s about the sustainability stupid!”
An integral part of sustainability is protecting our resources, especially water. It’s easy for us up here to overlook what an incredibly precious commodity it is. If you don’t believe it, go down to the Mexican border and watch the people on both sides struggling with a greatly depleted Rio Grande River water supply.
This brings me back to Alberta Park. I heard a couple representatives muse about how they love that land up there and if they had their way nothing would be built up there. Then vote against it. Their words indicated that in their hearts they know what a precious commodity Americans have up there. Why not fight for it?
And this brings me back to my intrusion. Mr. Red McCombs’ Reagan era pipedream is a huge mistake in the making, and since so few are screaming bloody murder, I will.
Why? Because I’m haunted by too many examples of counterproductive destruction of critical natural resources that I’ve watched go down over the decades.
Please, put some effort into taking this whole issue back to first base and figuring out a way to get that ill-gotten land back into the protective fold of Rio Grande National Forest.
That land, all of it, deserves to remain unmolested for the greater national good.
Sincerely,
Village at Wolf Creek: Why not a Nature Preserve resolution?
Saturday, September 5, 2009
{Thank you www.lutheransource.net/WolfCreek.htm for the image of Alberta Park}
~ ~ ~
Last week the Durango Herald was filled with news about the reawakened push for the Village at Wolf Creek speculative development. First Red McCombs hires Michael Dino a heavy weight Democratic lobbyist. His mission - bring in the money cannons. Dino knows where to aim them for greatest effect in developing political channels for side stepping public review.
As the week unfurled we learned the new plan was hinged on a new land swap effectively moving the development a few hundred yards. Also, ‘Hal Jones Development’ is now proposing a resort merely three-quarters the size of the original ten thousand person conception.
The key ingredient to this new strategy would be Congressman Salazar sponsoring a land-swap bill. As Clint Jones, of HJD, says John Salazar is the only one who could credibly carry the land-exchange act through Congress. This may be true, but credibility is hard won and easily lost.
It seems difficult to believe Congressman Salazar could be swayed into compromising his credibility to join this speculative real estate scheme. Should you oppose the idea of developing Wolf Creek, now would be a good time to drop Congressman Salazar a line at http://www.house.gov/salazar/contact.shtml. or (202) 225-4761 or (970)-245-7107 or (719)-543-8200.
In another article US Senator Bennet speaks of “serious concerns about the potential impacts” and “We need to keep a close eye on the matter and get answers to a number of questions...”
Here are some starter questions: How viable is this eighties pipedream of building a small village at 10,000 elevation to begin with? Look at today’s economic reality and outlook. Consider the under appreciated future ripple effects our continuing rising chronic unemployment will have.
Look at the lower elevation areas around Wolf Creek Pass, Colorado ~ they have a frightening saturation of unsold vacation homes, as documented in a Pagosa Sun article by James Robinson (7-8-9). Why add to the glut?
Also see March 5, 2009 Durango Herald's story "(Luxury) Resorts morph into "toxic" real estate assets."
Why risk that high value fresh water resource?
Remember we are talking about source waters to the Rio Grande River. Any digging and construction will disrupt, even destroy portions of an exquisitely tuned biological super-organism, one that produces any number of priceless services for all down stream inhabitants. Moving the project a few hundred yards one way or another doesn’t change that.
There is also the matter of the original “dirty land swap.” Documented in Mike Soraghan’s 2-5-6, Denver Post article:
“Wolf Creek development tangled with political ties.”
B.J. Red McCombs may hold legal title but, he does not possess ethical or moral title to that land. Therefore some of us continue to beg Mr. McCombs, and now his daughter, to please revert that land to some Nature Conservancy status, protecting that irreplaceable resource for the greater national good.
If you agree, please encourage Red McCombs to reconsider his priorities. He can be reached through
http://www.koontzmccombs.com/main/contact_us.php
Sincerely, Peter Miesler
Durango, Colorado
PS. Mr. McCombs doesn’t “The Billy Joe “Red” McCombs Fresh Water Biological Preserve” ~ dedicated to all down stream children yet to be born, have a nice ring to it?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For more information visit Friends of Wolf Creek at http://www.friendsofwolfcreek.org/
.......................................................................................................................
{Thank you www.lutheransource.net/WolfCreek.htm for the image of Alberta Park}
~ ~ ~
Last week the Durango Herald was filled with news about the reawakened push for the Village at Wolf Creek speculative development. First Red McCombs hires Michael Dino a heavy weight Democratic lobbyist. His mission - bring in the money cannons. Dino knows where to aim them for greatest effect in developing political channels for side stepping public review.
As the week unfurled we learned the new plan was hinged on a new land swap effectively moving the development a few hundred yards. Also, ‘Hal Jones Development’ is now proposing a resort merely three-quarters the size of the original ten thousand person conception.
The key ingredient to this new strategy would be Congressman Salazar sponsoring a land-swap bill. As Clint Jones, of HJD, says John Salazar is the only one who could credibly carry the land-exchange act through Congress. This may be true, but credibility is hard won and easily lost.
It seems difficult to believe Congressman Salazar could be swayed into compromising his credibility to join this speculative real estate scheme. Should you oppose the idea of developing Wolf Creek, now would be a good time to drop Congressman Salazar a line at http://www.house.gov/salazar/contact.shtml. or (202) 225-4761 or (970)-245-7107 or (719)-543-8200.
In another article US Senator Bennet speaks of “serious concerns about the potential impacts” and “We need to keep a close eye on the matter and get answers to a number of questions...”
Here are some starter questions: How viable is this eighties pipedream of building a small village at 10,000 elevation to begin with? Look at today’s economic reality and outlook. Consider the under appreciated future ripple effects our continuing rising chronic unemployment will have.
Look at the lower elevation areas around Wolf Creek Pass, Colorado ~ they have a frightening saturation of unsold vacation homes, as documented in a Pagosa Sun article by James Robinson (7-8-9). Why add to the glut?
Also see March 5, 2009 Durango Herald's story "(Luxury) Resorts morph into "toxic" real estate assets."
Why risk that high value fresh water resource?
Remember we are talking about source waters to the Rio Grande River. Any digging and construction will disrupt, even destroy portions of an exquisitely tuned biological super-organism, one that produces any number of priceless services for all down stream inhabitants. Moving the project a few hundred yards one way or another doesn’t change that.
There is also the matter of the original “dirty land swap.” Documented in Mike Soraghan’s 2-5-6, Denver Post article:
“Wolf Creek development tangled with political ties.”
B.J. Red McCombs may hold legal title but, he does not possess ethical or moral title to that land. Therefore some of us continue to beg Mr. McCombs, and now his daughter, to please revert that land to some Nature Conservancy status, protecting that irreplaceable resource for the greater national good.
The solution really is that simple. Leave that parcel alone to remain an unmolested portion of an important biological super-organism.
It would be a fitting gesture for someone who recently received the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars award for “corporate citizenship.”
If you agree, please encourage Red McCombs to reconsider his priorities. He can be reached through
http://www.koontzmccombs.com/main/contact_us.php
Sincerely, Peter Miesler
Durango, Colorado
PS. Mr. McCombs doesn’t “The Billy Joe “Red” McCombs Fresh Water Biological Preserve” ~ dedicated to all down stream children yet to be born, have a nice ring to it?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For more information visit Friends of Wolf Creek at http://www.friendsofwolfcreek.org/
.......................................................................................................................
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)