I have a composed a current contact list of both the house & senate subcommittees that this legislation was forwarded to. If anyone is interested I will forward or post a link here...

Manny it's good hearing from you again ~(:

more later ~k

Post the link here...

yes, kirra, please do post it here. my letter responding to vilsack's position is going out tomorrow and i will CC the members of the subcommittees.

i will also be contacting the american mountain guides association to ask them to respond to his comments as well.

Hey ya'all,
Does anyone know when the date is for this bill to come up for a vote again? Will it be here in AZ or in D.C.?

curious...
Linda

Red, Geir et.al, here ya go ~

S.409 Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources: Subcommittee Public Lands & Forests

HR.2509 House of Reps. Committee on Natural Resources: Subcommittee National Parks, Forests & Public Lands
--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~


Today in < 1 hr. there is a Radio show at 11:00am: Here and Now - Resolution Copper Mine

"David Salisbury, president and CEO of Resolution Copper Mining, will join host Steve Goldstein to discuss the proposed Resolution Copper Mine near Superior. Roger Featherstone of the Arizona Mining Reform Coalition will Roger Featherstone will discuss environmental and cultural concerns about the project."

Wow Kirra! Nice work, you kick ass!

I listened to KJAZZ today...interesting interview going back and forth. (The gentleman from the Environment Agency made some real good points!)
One of the messages I picked up on was the reason for San Carlos Apache Native Americans not reaching back to compromise with Resolution Copper Co. is because they are not interested in negotiating a deal. That 'NO MEANS NO!'

I understand that perspective, but honestly folks, we are not the San Carlos. (All due respect)

I remember when McCain mentioned that the 'rock climbers' have been dealt with...I do not think we have.

Yesterday I sent a letter to Vilsack to say (in a nutshell) that climbing is actually safe and in the public interest. I cc'd Mccain, Kyl, Kirkpatrick, and Wyden and asked that they do NOT remove the provisions for the climbing community from the bill.

I'll post part of the text up here for anyone who wishes to do the same.

awesome, thanks Kirra!


Geir...McCain mentioned that @ the Superior Town meeting this last month when Ken Salazar was in attendance with him...


L

k. thanks. :)

Geir,

Yup, wrote a couple emails back when I first resurfaced and noted this was going on. Haven't had a chance to keep up since then and just went over this thread -- will follow up with written letters as I think those are most helpful. If you've got convenient list of names and addresses pls. send/post, or were you just going over the list that Kirra or Susan posted?

As you know, this area means a lot to me and I do want to put some effort into helping save it. Also have about 6 others who would do the same and will pass the word on to them.

On another note, just managed to scan other MP pages and see the awesome pic that of LDC-east from you and Marcy. Yay!! Didn't get there today, but perhaps next wkd. and will scout that road to the south that I was mentioning. That has very good potential as an alternate route in/out.

a

Hey Linda - I met up in Cochise this weekend with the guys that run the Meet Up Groups for Phoenix and Tucson - They are going to distribute that letter that was on here to various members - Could you PM me the information so I can make it available to them. I figure we can probably send out another 100 - 200 letters

Linda,

I saw a few days ago that you posted up about whether the legislation was at the state or federal level?

Since the land at OF is primarily Federal property (save for Lower Devil's which is on State Property and accessed via federal property) the legislation is at the Federal (Washington) level.

Senator Kyl has sponsored the bill in Washington in the Senate (SB 409) and Representative Kirkpatrick has done so in the House (HR 2509).

The way the legislation system often works is that a person/organization that wants/needs something at the federal level writes up its legislation and then goes searching for a sponsor. In this case, probably primarily because it is an Arizona issue for the foreign mining groups involved, they approached the Arizona congressional delegation for sponsorship.

Once a bill is introduced, it is assigned to a committee or subcommittee (SB 409 went to Sen. Wyden's subcommittee-Public Lands and Forests; HR 2509 is in the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands, chaired by Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva).

The chair of these sub/committees may choose to push the bills along the process (or not) and it is essentially up to him or her on whether the bill gets a hearing to go on to any further steps. (There's a lot of arm twisting, etc., involved of course) In the case of this land swap, Senators Kyl and Mccain pushed hard for the hearing back in June and got that in the Senate. (This is where Senator Kyl testified that climber's concerns had been addressed) As I understand it, if a bill doesn't really have any support to move on it essentially stays in the chairperson's drawer and "dies in committee." At this point the House version has not had a hearing set for it yet, but this could change at any time.

Once a bill has had a hearing, there may be more questions that need to be answered as was the case for this bill before it either gets moved on to the amendment phase (known as "mark-up") or just left in somebody's drawer until it "dies" at the end of that session of congress.

So, at this point the Senate bill has had a hearing, but the steps that follow are not clearly known.

As an interesting point: No bill related to the Oak Flat land swap has made it beyond the hearing stage over the last 5 years and the 3 times that a bill has been introduced on behalf of the mining company.

Hope this helps,

Fred

Hey Shiloh,
I think I used the letter from http://www.queencreekcoalition.com/media/qcc_letter_july3_20>>>>>

Geir what have you used recently?

The link above from Kirra is great for info to send these out. I would suggest faxing over snail mail.

• I think what is important is to educate folks that :

Geir & Marcy,

I'd love to see what has been done out @ LDC when it cools off a bit. Please give me a shout out sometime and I'll join ya.


Linda

Fred - thanks for all the great info. regarding the process and current status of these bills!

Arjun - glad you like the picture. Geir is doing an outstanding job documenting the new stuff. Can't wait to get back out there! BTW - could you assign your students to write letters in opposition to the land exchange legislation...xtra credit perhaps...haha :)

A & L: We'll keep you posted as we finish up the trail work. Geir and I are looking forward to LDE season and getting folks out there to check out the new routes (and to get back on them ourselves :) ).

-m

Geir,

The environmental issue and process has been a big point of contention for a lot of people, including many in the climbing community. Seems rational that it's something that should be given a lot of thought before anybody goes into block cave mining mode.

Thanks for helping bring awareness to the issues about our public land. Every little bit counts.

Fred

Hey all-

My next round of letters is done and going out shortly.

This letter argues that the NEPA process should be completed prior to the land exchange. It is addressed to the AZ representatives on the subcommittees where the bill currently resides in the Senate and House. I have also addressed it to the chairs of the subcommittees.

For those of you who also think that an environmental impact study should be completed prior to the land exchange, feel free to download my letters and edit them as you like to contact these representatives. Assuming that Resolution is forced comply with NEPA, the QCC will have additional time to negotiate with them.

If you don't know what NEPA is or why it's important, read the letters. That should help. :)

http://www.geir.com/queencreek/NEPA1.docx (Word '07 format)
http://www.geir.com/queencreek/NEPA2.doc (Word '97-'03 format)

I love Oak Flat - save Queen Creek

Marty

SSSSOOOOO good to see you Marty!!!!

Yes, we need do ALL we can to help Oak Flats remain in OUR family!!!

Fight the good QCC, for all of us!!!!

Linda

THIS WAS IN THE RECENT AZ MOUNTAINEERING CLUB'S NEWSLETTER

Land Advocacy: Erik Filsinger gave an extensive update and overview of the issues and strategies that are currently in place for the McDowell access effort and for the Queen Creek land exchange and related efforts. The Board had passed via electronic voting procedure the following reaffirmation of its public policy stances:
Be it resolved that the Board of the Arizona Mountaineering Club (AMC) does hereby reaffirm and instruct its representatives to follow the public policy directions for the AMC to seek and maintain direct contact and relationships with the land owners involved with climbing access in Arizona. Be it further resolved that in no situation will the AMC forego its independence of action if and when it enters into alliances with regard to public policy goals on either a temporary or permanent basis the AMC reserves its right to seek a different direction that the Board deems more beneficial.
These directives indicate that the AMC may 2009 enter partnerships with other volunteers to assist in obtaining and maintaining rock climbing access goals, but that the AMC will not in any circumstance take a subsidiary position that limits its ability to independently seek and obtain such direct and primary relationships with land owners that could assist in obtaining Board approved goals for its membership.
The Board approved a policy directive published elsewhere in this newsletter concerning the roles and responsibilities of various entities who are involved with the McDowell Sonoran Preserve and its magnificent rock climbing opportunities. This chart lays out what the Board views as the appropriate roles and responsibilities with regard to City staff prerogatives, primary roles of the McDowell Sonoran Conservancy (a not-for-profit entity that trains Stewards for the Preserve in addition to many other good works), and the role of the rock climbing community as evidenced through the AMC and its representatives.
Edited Agenda notes from a recent City of Scottsdale Council meeting were distributed and discussed. It was agreed that the Board wishes the AMC to stay active with regard to its access agenda in the Preserve.
The Land Advocacy Chair and other select AMC representatives will meet with City of Scottsdale officials to offer help and assistance in obtaining rock climbing goals and in establishing ways the rock climbing community and the AMC can work with the City staff on an operational level.
The AMC received the grant from the Access Fund for climber signage to be placed in the McDowell Sonoran Preserve and the AMCrepresentatives will work with City of Scottsdale staff to implement when the funds are received.
Due to the importance and timeliness of establishing the long term working relationship with the City in the North Access Area of the McDowells, the Board decided to hold its Annual Adopt-A-Crag event sponsored by the Access Fund in the North Access Area on October 31, 2009. The City has already indicated its interest. A sub-committee of Erik Filsinger, John Keedy, and Robert England will work with City staff to make the event a grand success.
Due to the increased work load of the Land Advocacy Committee and the high profile cases that are currently confronting the AMC, Erik Filsinger moved that John Keedy be appointed the Vice Chair of the Land Advocacy Committee. The intent is to provide additional resources to work and speak on behalf of the AMC as the situations arise. The motion was seconded and approved.
John Keedy may also work with the McDowell Sonoran Conservancy on climbing related issues to enhance the cooperation and interchange among the two groups.
The Board was given a copy of the last minutes of the Queen Creek Coalition Board meeting. These are also published elsewhere in this newsletter. A draft policy statement from the Board stating its history and goals in its efforts with regard to the Land Exchange and other efforts to obtain long term rock climbing goals is published elsewhere in this newsletter. The intent of the policy is to find a balance and professional stance that highlights the positive goals that can be obtained and stating a preference for positive avenues and relationships to obtain those goals.
The Board also was given recent newspaper articles about the Asarco land exchange being challenged for not going through the proper NEPA procedures.
The Board moved, seconded and approved a motion that its official channels of communication will only be used for public policy statements approved by the Board and its delegated representatives.
The Board will ask Marty Karabin if he is interested in occasionally publishing articles specific to the history and current opportunities for rock climbing at Queen Creek. The intent is to focus on fun and informational pieces about rock climbing resources and let rock climbers know what a great place Queen Creek continues to be. Erik Filsinger will coordinate with Marty to see if there is interest and to work with Marty on those newsletter pieces.
October 2009 AMC newsletter


I AM COMPLETELY CONFUSED... I THOUGHT THE AMC CAME OUT WITH A STRONG STANCE AGAINST THE LAND EXCHANGE PROPOSITION TWO YEARS AGO....WHAT HAS HAPPENED?

I believe if you read that right, it probably is stating that the AMC would not neccessarily be tied to whatever direction the Queen Creek Coalition might decide on.

The level of legality that has crept into the AMC over the years since I was there is pretty amazing. Back then (and I'm guessing even now), people just wanted to have fun. All that stuff sounds way too much like what you have to deal with at work.