Oak Flat land exchange legislation

Great to hear the good news!

Keep fighting the good fight, everyone!

Concerned Climbers of Arizona wrote: Thank you everyone who took a moment and sent a letter to your Representative, asking them to vote "NO" on this bill. You definitely made a difference.

A special thanks to the Concerned Climbers of Arizona and the Access Fund for their continuinig efforts. I really appreciated the AFund letter to my local Rep in Congress and I do hope it made a difference.

Thanks again,

Fred

What was Lujan's amendment? He's my local guy! (and yes I did put a bug in his ear).

@Chris -

"require the Secretary to remove Native American sacred and cultural sites from the conveyance in consultation with affected Indian Tribes"

lujan.house.gov/index.php?o…;view=article&id=417&Itemid=98

Yes! I am very happy to see the destruction of this land avoided again!

From facebook.com/pages/Rock-Cli…

Erik wrote:
"The QCC has placed an update on its web site regarding Queen Creek climbing resources. If you have comments, please contact info@theqcc.org.

theqcc.org/"

So if it does pass the House, what are the chances of it passing the Senate, Conference, not being vetoed by the President, etc?

NC Rock Climber wrote:Yes! I am very happy to see the destruction of this land avoided again! From facebook.com/pages/Rock-Cli… Erik wrote: "The QCC has placed an update on its web site regarding Queen Creek climbing resources. If you have comments, please contact info@theqcc.org. theqcc.org/"

After Erik Filsinger orchestrated the culling out of diverse voices from the original, unincorporated QCC (including myself) I warned him and the remaining members that if they continued in the same mode they would eliminate all voices until only one dominant personality was left and here you have it.

From the September 2013 theqcc.org Update: (excerpted 9/27/13, 9:15 pm MDT, just in case it gets edited . . . )

"How it appears to me is that when QCC reached its deal, the AF felt that the AF coming out against the Land Exchange might enable the AF to obtain an even better deal with little downside given what had been achieved by the QCC."

So, I guess the QCC is now Erik Filsinger and . . . well, I guess it's just Erik from what he has written? I hate to get hung up on a single word . . . and then there was one? Freudian slip?

Just my view.

Fred

From the same QCC link:

"...Climbers have faced only two real alternatives – either negotiate the best deal they could, or hold to their high ideals and principles and fall on their swords if they lost. The alternatives are a contrast of realism versus idealism. In the real world, the Mine or Land Exchange will occur. And if either happened and climbers haven’t negotiated the best deal they can, climbers would be left with nothing..."

In an attempt to justify selling out, it is convenient to cast this as a black or white issue--cut a deal or get nothing. In reality, the above statement represents a false dichotomy and is extremely misleading.

little qcc inc.. HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa ! ! !

i'm so happy it's hard to raise ire this moment though our 'former friends' are quite deserving

THANK YOU TO EVERYONE for this combined effort ~ group Hugg!!!!!

the other stooge most likely is Paul Dief owner of PRG climbing gym & for some reason doesn't give a poo-d'poo for this incredible outdoor climbing area -I wonder why? Local spending habits might consider alternative options for retaliation. These secret shenanigans w/E. Filsinger who's continuing presence here as an Access specialist is shameful to say the least

just my view of course..

-------x----------x--------

H.R.687 amendment details: LINK to text, constitutional authority & misc.vote history

article by Ted Lake: House Vote on Land Exchange 'BUMPED AGAIN' - Sept. 27, 2013

While the update link on the QCC website is an interesting read, it's extremely weak on content. Where verifiable facts are concerned, the QCC is simply wrong. For example:

"...While it is true that the Land Exchange legislation has failed to pass in the past decade, it has come close and climbers have had very little to do with the reasons for its past failures. In different congresses it has passed both chambers of congress..."

In reality, no Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act (as the bill is called) has ever been passed in the United States Senate and the legislation has never been "close" to becoming law. From Paul Gosar's website regarding the background of the legislation:

"...The Senate companion to Rep. Gosar’s bill, introduced by Senators John McCain and Jeff Flake, is S. 339. Both the Senate and House versions are nearly identical to the bill Rep. Gosar introduced and navigated to passage last Congress; the first time the exchange passed either body of Congress..."

Most of the update, however, does not deal with facts at all--and is really nothing more than unsupported opinions, speculation and conjecture of the QCC.

good news! now I can climb there again in the future

Concerned Climbers of Arizona wrote:Most of the update, however, does not deal with facts at all--and is really nothing more than unsupported opinions, speculation and conjecture of the QCC.

not to mention blatant lies to shortsell truth

.."And if one looks at Congressional proceedings.. Rock climbing does not have much to do with it.."

Climbers are STILL #1 stakeholder usergroup next to Native Americans (unless we stop visiting). Climbing is no longer mentioned due to secret meetings, deals & agreements made w/Resolution Mine by 2 aforementioned individuals, we are so lucky..

volume of voices matter & we + joe public own This Land, still

little qcc inc, you don't have my vote to turn Queen Creek >> into a Mining pit for China

FYI: This is the email I just received from my congresswoman here in southwestern Washington in response to the letter that I sent prior to the vote in September:

October 28, 2013

Dear Brigette,

Thank you for contacting me regarding H.R. 687 , the Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2013 . It is an honor to represent the people of Southwest Washington, and I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with me.

As you may know, H.R. 687 was introduced by Representative Paul Gosar on February 2, 2013. This legislation would facilitate the extraction of mineral resources in southeast Arizona. It is estimated that his mine could provide one-fourth of our nation's annual copper needs. Increasing development of our own U.S. copper resources will grow our economy, generate billions in revenue and strengthen our national security.

On September 26, the full House of Representatives began debate and consideration of amendments to the Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2013 . Please know I will keep your thoughts in mind when we vote on passage of H.R. 687.

Thank you again for contacting me on this important issue. I invite you to visit my website at jaimehb.house.gov for additional information or to sign up to be kept up to date on these issues. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can ever be of assistance.

Sincerely,

Jaime Herrera Beutler
Member of Congress

Who gets the "billions in revenue"? Certainly not us.

I'm sure RCM isn't sharing much. They will do it as cheaply as possible.

Exactly, Manny. It sounds like this congresswoman is ignorant to the fact that this mine is owned by foreign companies. Great, she gets a vote!?!

Anyone have insight about why news reports on Rick Renzi's being sentenced to 3 years in jail usually fail to mention Resolution Copper. I did find this buried in USA Today:

"The defense lawyers also argued that the proposed real-estate exchange was a sound legislative effort to protect the San Pedro River, benefit the Fort Huachuca Army base and enable development of a huge copper mine near Superior, Ariz.

The scandal surrounding Renzi likely played a role in stymieing Resolution Copper Mining's plans to develop one of the largest ore-extraction operations in the world."

One would think it important that RCM created the environment that enables dirty and bought politics.

Bruno Hegner (former Resolution General Manager) testified at Renzi's trial. Hegner admitted that while he knew of Renzi's illegal activities, he did not bother to report Renzi to the authorities or confront Renzi. His reasoning was that he (Hegner) didn't want to jeopardize the Resolution project. In other words, his loyalty to Resolution trumped his legal responsibility to report criminal behavior.

Concerned Climbers of Arizona wrote:Bruno Hegner (former Resolution General Manager) testified at Renzi's trial. Hegner admitted that while he knew of Renzi's illegal activities, he did not bother to report Renzi to the authorities or confront Renzi. His reasoning was that he (Hegner) didn't want to jeopardize the Resolution project. In other words, his loyalty to Resolution trumped his legal responsibility to report criminal behavior.

Got a link to the testimony?

ClimbandMine wrote: Got a link to the testimony?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/05/16/rick-renzi-congressman-corruption-trial/2166243/

From the article:

He (Hegner) said he did not call the FBI because he did not want a scandal to squelch the overall land swap. He also said he did not directly confront Renzi because, as manager at a multinational copper company, "I was not going to take my company to war with a sitting United States congressman."