Help preserve Oak Flats and Queen Creek Access
|
The Senate Natural Energy and Resources Committee will be having a comparison hearing on HR 1904 The Southwest Land Swap Bill(which just past the House) and SB409 next Thurs Feb 9. There are so many things wrong with these bills, but the major concern for climbers is that if this goes through it will be the largest loss of public lands with climbing in the history of our country. |
|
A petition has been created for public Action over at Arizona Mining Reform |
|
Thanks Chris. Thank-you Kirra. |
|
I just signed the petition. If you care about the Oak Flat/Queen Creek climbing areas in Arizona, please take the minute or so required and do the same. Many thanks to those of you who do! |
|
Petition signed. I also used the following link - energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm? |
|
Thanks for bringing attention to this and providing contact info Chris! |
|
some sweet jumps out there too!! |
|
Here is the Access Funds congressional testimony for Thursdays Senate hearing on the Arizona Land Exchange bill (H.R. 1904 and S. 409). We will be urging our members to write Senate Energy & Natural Resource Committee members. Neither Arizona Senators are on this committee, but you can still write them to weigh in on this issue. |
|
AccessFund HQ wrote:Here is the Access Funds congressional testimony for Thursdays Senate hearing on the Arizona Land Exchange bill (H.R. 1904 and S. 409). We will be urging our members to write Senate Energy & Natural Resource Committee members. Neither Arizona Senators are on this committee, but you can still write them to weigh in on this issue. Senator Kyl: kyl.senate.gov/contact.cfm Senator McCain: mccain.senate.gov/public/in…Thanks to all at the AF who have worked so hard on this complicated and controversial issue over the years. Regardless of one's perspective on the specifics, one thing that about all climber's can agree upon; the loss of this climbing area would be terrible and shouldn't happen for so many reasons and on so many levels. These are obviously bad bills as written as the AF has shown; please join in and add your voice in opposition. Thanks again, Fred |
|
Hank Caylor wrote:some sweet jumps out there too!!Wow, that is crazy. NO SUBSIDENCE! Please use your voice. |
|
|
|
Fred AmRhein wrote:.. the loss of this climbing area would be terrible .. Chris Bastek wrote:but the major concern for climbers Curt Shannon wrote:If you care about the Oak Flat/Queen Creek climbing areas in Arizona,I'm probably stating the obvious here but as a federal employee, I can say that the best way to oppose this action is not as climbers but as *the public*. Decision makers are more far more likely to be swayed by a group of tax payers consolidated on this issue than a bunch of disgruntled climbers. Keep this in mind while sharing it on Facebook, writing your individual letters, spreading the word and rallying support, in general. Same thing would go for the Red Rock development. In terms of rallying support, the simple fact that needs to be conveyed to everyone with any interest in outdoor recreation is that as this resource falls, the bar moves significantly on what other areas may be considered consumable. As potential, non-climbing supporters hear about this deal being spun as a great loss to the climbing community, significantly less will be inclined to be concerned simply because they don't climb. "I don't climb - I'm not affected". Even worse; it's likely they will associate anything sounding like "Save Oak Flat" with "Doesn't concern me". And btw, I'm not intentionally picking on anyone in particular. Just using these examples to convey my point. |
|
+1 Daryl |
|
It's a cool place. Unfortunate that there continues to be an issue. |
|
Thanks everyone for posting all this great info. I'm signing petitions and sending a letter to the Energy & Natural Resources Committee Office (full committee). And gonna make a few calls too. |
|
Ok, so at the risk of getting flamed, I compiled this letter to send that was created from the oak flat thread, the access fund letter, the Arizona Mining Reform Coalition, the petition Kirra posted, my own thoughts, etc. I am going to post it here before I send it. If anyone wants to read it, and if there are any major errors/typos/etc, PLEASE let me know. I paraphrase all the sources mentioned above into this letter, so much good info that I thought very useful-any objections? I wanted this letter to reflect the public and not just climbers (too narrow a group to hold much clout was my thinking), my opinion is this is a larger issue than just climbing, and as Daryl stated, the federal government responds to the American public & Arizona citizens as one large group of opinion... (SORRY-it is LONG-but if this is the last chance I really want my/our thoughts known (feel free to use this when you write in/or if it sucks, don't) -
I write in opposition to H.R. 1904, the Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011, and S. 409, the Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2009, as reported by the Committee during the 111th Congress. I am a concerned citizen who opposes this proposal on behalf of myself, the large entity of other user groups that oppose this bill, the environment, and creatures that inhabit this land. This legislation would direct the Secretary of Agriculture to convey the highly popular public recreational & environmental resource at Oak Flat, Arizona for use as an underground copper mine, effectively reducing it to a large concave sink-hole in the ground. Native Americans, birders, climbers, campers, canyoneers, bikers, hikers, and the public in general, enjoy the area throughout the year, all of whom would be greatly harmed if these lands were forever taken from public access, not to mention the flora and fauna that cant speak to this. Native Americans have traditionally used the area for cultural, spiritual purposes, and for sustenance. All Arizona Indian tribes oppose the Land Exchange. The National Congress of American Indians passed a unanimous resolution in June of 2009 opposing all legislation that would allow mining at Oak Flat. In addition, the Concerned Citizens and Retired Miners Coalition in Superior, AZ is opposed to the land exchange and testified in Washington, DC against S. 409 in 2009. Many other groups are against this bill as well. Everyone will suffer a huge environmental, spiritual & sacred, historical, and recreational loss if this area is destroyed by mining activities. Oak Flat area stands to subside into an enormous crater if Resolution Copper Mining (RCM) is allowed to proceed, and this would be a terrible travesty. It has also come to light that The Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2011 fails to require any meaningful environmental analysis prior to the transfer of public land to RCM. This bill would circumvent the public process mandated under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for prior analysis of any major federal action on public land. Such an analysis would assess the impact mine operations would have on the health of nearby residents, water quality, air quality, cultural resources, transportation, and the overall environment. H.R. 1904 unreasonably requires the exchange to be completed within one year. Such a rushed timetable will eliminate any meaningful analysis of this project and limit a real determination whether this mine is in the publics interest. Because the provisions in H.R. 1904 virtually ensure the development of this mine, and the public has very little information on the environmental implications of this mine, this exchange is not in the publics interest. The H.R. 1904 bill is being purported as a jobs bill. But after reading the article Rio Tinto says mine automation benefits outweigh costs" in which it is stated In iron-ore, we are introducing automated trucks, blast-hole drill rigs, sorting machines and trains, all of which are capable of being controlled by our operations center in Perth (Australia), which already integrates our port, rail and mine logistics, said McGagh. Also to note, previously, there were amendments offered to the House Bill by Rep. Raul Grijalva to make sure that the jobs that Rio/RCM was projecting/promising would be located in the local vicinity. This amendment was rejected by the majority in power in the House at the time. Claiming this is a jobs bill is only accurate in a short sited vision. This bill doesnt benefit Americans in the long term, except only perhaps in the short term future. With the automation of many supposed jobs, the number of new jobs is questionable, along with the longevity of said jobs. When the company leaves, the environment has been exploited and destroyed, and the foreign interests profit incredibly with no sense of loss once they leave. RCM plans to mine using the block-cave method, a block cave mine is designed to ultimately result in the subsidence of the surface, the end result, a giant sink-hole, land rendered a featureless, sunken wasteland. One of the great problems of this bill is the lack of demanding RCM to use a different mining method (which exist) in which the environment is not destroyed, and the mining could occur simultaneously. To mine in this block-cave manner is an example of just because you can, doesnt mean you should. This bill should be re-written so that the environment can remain intact, the mine required to put our (the public and environment) interests parallel to the mining interests, regardless of the possibility of slightly less profits. The mine should have to be accountable to its American hosts for how they impact our environment, not simply have ownership & free reign of this, our public land. As a taxpaying concerned Arizona citizen, and as this bill is currently written, I am opposed. Please find a way to preserve this public land that was set aside by President Eisenhower for all Americans to enjoy. It and the surrounding lands including Apache Leap, Gaan Canyon, and Queen Creek Canyon must be preserved from the large foreign mining companies that threaten to take public ownership away and destroy the land. For the past 6 years, these companies have unsuccessfully asked the US Congress to pass legislation giving away these lands. I ask that the current bill that is being considered be denied as it is currently written. If this bill passes, we will lose a priceless piece of our natural and historic heritage. I ask that you deny this request until the proposal does not destroy this land, and the foreign mining companies are accountable to America, the EPA, NEPA, we the people, and the diverse living creatures & plant life that inhabit this area. Sincerely, Catherine Conner |
|
Catherine, |
|
Perfect, thanks Linda :-) |