LAND SWAP MEETINGS

[JackP]

Those are all good suggestions and I will definitely write to each of them.

Do you have any thoughts for contacts at the BLM? Or within the Department of the Interior? In a sense we could work back up the Chain of Command from the local BLM office all the way to the Secretary of the Interior?

Also what about writing the Senators on the US Senate Committee on Energy & Natural Resources or the House Natural Resources Committee - both oversee the Department of the Interior and the BLM.

Also I wondered, has anyone reached out to the Sierra Club and other groups like this that have significant resources?

[bluerail]

The meeting lastnight wasn't very reassuring, the feel from Jim foote is that he is on the. Indians side more than the American public.

The idea of putting together a historical aspect to skyline might not be a bad idea either.

There seems to be several very determined and deligent groups putting their energy into this, thank goodness because I don't feel like our public agency is on our side.

For whatever reason.

Oh yea, the tribe had someone speak..

He wanted to let us know the Indians are watching.

[Wildhorse]

I have the same impression that the BLM is pushing for the exchange to go through rather than looking at it with the right amount of skepticism. Everyone has the same impression who discusses this with the BLM.

According to the information I have, the Tribe first proposed the land exchange to the Secretary of Interior in the late 1990's, and the Sec'y agreed to it. That does not mean that the agreement is binding or even legal. Not even the President has that kind of authority. The Sec'y and the BLM did not involve the public as they should have before initiating this deal. They signed what they have called a "Memorandum of Understanding" with the Tribe based on that meeting. That agreement was not exposed to public comment. The BLM appears to regard that agreement as something like a treaty, and yet, as we know, treaties take Congressional approval. In the federal act that established the national monument, Congress authorized the BLM to make the land exchange as long as they complied with the standing laws for land exchanges. The BLM has been treating that authorization as a mandate or directive, which it is not. I think, however, that both the Tribe and BLM believe this deal has been blessed and that the Tribe would regard disapproval of the exchange as a betrayal, even if not legally a breach of a contract.

My impression has been that the BLM regards the Tribe as a partner and the public as a nuisance. I have heard BLM refer to the Tribe many times as its partner. At the same time, the BLM has treated the public as if we are unimportant and irrelevant, ignorant of what is good for us, and even stupid. It should not be that way.

My impression is that the BLM believes higher ups in Washington have given them the green light on this deal, and have even urged them to step on the accelerator hard. It should not be that way.

As you have written, the BLM and the Sec'y should be protecting the interests of the United States and doing so in a democratic way. They should not be making back room deals and then acting as if public disapproval of that is somehow off base.

[halhiker]

I have to wonder. Where the hell are the environmental groups like the Sierra Club or the Center for Biological Diversity on something like this? Maybe they should quit worrying so much about Desert Tortoises and stopping some solar project in the middle of BFE and start serving the public on an issue that matters.

[Wildhorse]

There are indeed serious environmental concerns about this land exchange.

The land the public would give up in the exchange matters to four endangered and threatened species, including big horn sheep and desert tortoises, and two birds. It contains water and other resources that matter to them. The land the public would receive contains no endangered or threatened species.

The USFWS would lose its authority to protect the wildlife over the lands given up. The BLM needs permission from USFWS to "take" endangered and threatened species before the BLM can complete the land exchange because it is foreseeable that the Tribe would develop the land and in that process kill or harm wildlife. My understanding is that the Tribe and the BLM have been trying to find a way to get around this requirement if they can.

Ultimately, the BLM must assess the effect of the exchange on the environment considering the foreseeable future land development that can result from turning over such a large tract of land to the Tribe. That effect includes harm to wildlife, harm to the atmosphere and harm to other things that matter. The problem they must face is that the federal government would have limited, if any, ability to protect wildlife, the atmosphere, the water, trails and many other things once the land is owned by the Tribe because the Tribe is a sovereign nation.

Turning over the land in the national monument to the Tribe also appears to enable the Tribe to develop more land outside of the Monument and the reservation than they could otherwise develop and more land than any other developer could develop. The environmental impacts are huge. The potential gain to the Tribe is great. The potential loss to wildlife and the public is even greater.

This deal is scandalous financially and environmentally.

[cynthia23]

I was at both meetings. It wasn't encouraging. Our best hope is political protest, because adminstrative measures aren't going to work. The BLM isn't going to respond to anything except an outburst of negative publicity. Write Bono-Mack and Boxer and Diane Feinstein. Point out that the BLM's behavior has been improper, even illegal. Although required to by their own regulations, they haven't had an appraisal of the lands to be exchanged; they didn't hold public meetings after the initial feasibility study in 2001 (again, they're required to), and they didn't prepare an "issues' paper after the (public hearings they didn't have). They falsely told people that there was nothing the public could do because Congress had mandated the exchange. (it hasn't.) They released notice of the proposal in the "Public Notices" section of the newspaper, instead of issuing a press release. They released the EA at the beginning of August,when no one is in Palm Springs, with only a thirty day comment period. And the EA is highly defective in so many ways: although it claims the need for the exchange is "improved management" it doesn't cite a single example of any problems with the current land layout; it does not deal with the obvious development potential of 36 or the effect on wildlife. And last but not least, the BLM is in a crony-like relationship with the Agua Caliente that is totally improper. An example is the location of last week's scoping meeting, which was held at the Spa Hotel (owned and operated by the Agua Caliente.) When an attendee at the meeting mentioned her discomfort with the venue, Jim Foote said, without a trace of concern, that they used it because the AC had given the venue to them for free. I was shocked. The DOI ethics page explicitly forbids accepting gifts from "prohibited sources'--i.e. people who stand to benefit from a BLM proposal. When I brought up this gift at the second meeting, Foote was totally nonplussed--it hadn't even occured to them that there was anything unethical in accepting gifts from the tribe while simultaneously negotiating an eighty million dollar land giveaway to them. "We don't consider this a gift," he said. Uh, really? Because if I wanted to rent the Canyon Conference room, it would cost me a several hundred dollars, Jim. We have filed a complaint with the GAO. I advise all of you to not focus on the minor points of this (i.e. "Will the Thielman trail still allow mountain biking?") because if this goes through, within twenty years there won't be a Thielman trail, there will be McMansions there and another Bighorn or La Mirada type development. This is fraud and theft on a massive scale. Write loud, angry letters. Don't be polite, people. It's okay to yell when a mugger tries to grab your wallet.

[bluerail]

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/9626 ... ocess.html


whos agency is it anyway ?

[halhiker]

Cynthia,
The Desert Sun has done some stories on this but has anyone contacted any non-local media like the LA Times or some larger national publication? Spreading the word beyond this valley might not hurt.

[Perry]

Great idea Hal! Done. If anyone else wants to contact LA Times, here is a big list of names:
http://www.latimes.com/about/mediagroup ... .htmlstory

I'm not exactly sure who would be writing the article. I emailed 3 people.

[halhiker]

http://www.kcet.org/updaily/socal_focus ... rails.html