US vs AZ

[sagebrush]

Last year we had a fire in the Huachuca Mountains and when the monsoon came in, the resulting mudslides wiped out the water supply for the City of Tombstone. The water was piped from 25 springs over tewnty-four miles to the water tanks above town. This system was put in place in 1881 and has been in continuous use since then. Governor Brewer declared a state of emergency and allocated $50,000 to help the city with the repairs. They bought the pipe and started doing the work. That is until the USFS found out and force the city to stop. The springs are located in a wilderness area and the city cannot use wheeled vehicles and power tools in the repair. Even though the city's water system was grandfathered over the wilderness area, the Forest Service says the work is too great a risk to the Mexican spotted owl and the Chiricahua leopard frog. There is no wildlife left in the moonscape that resulted from the wildfire. The city is making do with two ground wells, but if there is a fire or a pump failure, the city will be dry. The city is suing the USFS to compell them to allow the repairs and the Forest Service has promised to appeal all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary.

This is a perfect example of how the federal government is completely out of touch with the citizenry. The health and welfare of a community of 1,400 full time residents and 400,000 annual visitors is at risk. Several times I've commented on how the feds have stopped the work on wildlife projects, water catchments and predator control in our state that goes unreported and unnoticed except by the struggling mule deer and bighorn sheep. If the feds are willing to sacrifice 1,400 people, just imagine how willing they are to sacrifice a few deer and sheep.

This is why I am opposed to adding any more wilderness in our state. There are currently two proposals that would add 2,400,000 acres to the wilderness already contained in AZ. We already have an area larger than the entire states of Rhode Island and Connecticut combined designated as wilderness in our state. I wonder how the people in those two states would feel if the feds told them they could no longer use their cars, ride their commuter trains and use power tools in their entire state?

 

[MontanaWild]

I think it's great that they are adding more wilderness to your state. I agree that the feds don't always manage things properly but adding wilderness in my opinion is going to beneficial way more often than not. The stance you have essentially says lets not have wilderness for the sake of humans benefit when that's the attitude that has ruined so many great places in this country.

 

[mtmiller]

sagebrush, based on some of your other rants that don't seem to reflect reality, would you happen to have a link that substantiates what you presented to us.

Is this the project you are referring?

http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/nepa_project_exp.php?project=37510

 

[spook12]

Call to arms ! We must mobilize before Big brother ''sacrifices'' 1400 of our fellow citizens. [what] ?

 

[Big Fin]

Even though the city's water system was grandfathered over the wilderness area, the Forest Service says the work is too great a risk to the Mexican spotted owl and the Chiricahua leopard frog.

Thanks for the link, Miller. The official record seems to reflect a different outcome than what has been represented by the original poster.

Per the Forest Service Decision in this case:

DECISION AND RATIONALE

It is my decision to approve the City’s request to repair its water system infrastructure on NFS land as described above.

..........

CONSIDERATION OF EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES
Using the best available scientific and commercial information, Forest resource specialists confirmed for me that there are no extraordinary circumstances associated with the proposed activities that would result in individual or cumulative adverse effects to those resources identified in 36 CFR 220.6(b)(1)(i through vii). Their findings reported below confirm that the CE is valid for this proposed action and support my decision to approve the proposed repairs to the Tombstone municipal water system.

i. Federally listed threatened or endangered species or designated critical habitat, species proposed for Federal listing or proposed critical habitat, or Forest Service sensitive species.

Determination: The District Biologist determined that the proposed action would have no effect on Federally listed threatened and endangered species and designated critical habitat; and species and habitat proposed for Federal listing. The proposed activities would have no impact on Forest Service, Region 3, sensitive species (October 2007 list, Regional Forester); Forest management indicator species; and neo-tropical migratory bird species (Project Record, Item 2).

Read the link Miller provided and you will see that the Forest Service has authorized this repair under the allowances of special circumstances allowed under the Wilderness Act.

 

[spook12]

Ya but Fin they have to put the road back to the condition they found it. Darn overbearing Big brother. LOL.

 

[theat]

Ha, its interesting (and sad) how far some will distort the facts to promote their "cause?"

From Miilers link it looks like the forest service is making every accommodation that could be expected to help the city with this problem.

I worked as a wildland firefighter for several years and know that in that department the FS is willing to bend the wilderness rules when it is called for.

 

[cfree]

You might want to check this link

http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/10/us/tombstone-water-fight/index.html

feel free to donate a few shovels...

 

[Big Fin]

cfree - Thanks for the link. A long read, but a good read.

 

[mtmiller]

If you get bored, more reading for those inclined.

http://a123.g.akamai.net/7/123/1155...ai.com/11558/www/nepa/84906_FSPLT2_071876.pdf

 

[sagebrush]

The USFS allowed the city access as long as they comply with the wilderness act, no power tools or wheeled vehicles. As of May 10, the city is still in litigation. Thanks for the link, cfree. I am no fan of an overbearing federal government. That's not the way our founding fathers envisioned the country and I agree with them. Powers not specifically enumerated under the constitution to the federal government are reserved to the states. Last time I checked, there was nothing in the constitution that allows the federal government to deny the citizens access to their own property to protect the "rights" of owls and frogs.

 

[Dinkshooter]

Has anyone ever been to a wilderness proposal type meeting and watched the circus?

The few I’ve seen have the “Environmental Wackos(hippies, tree huggers and do- gooders)” behaving appropriately and stating facts while the general "guns, god and glory" crowd are rude and interruptive while blatantly misrepresenting the truth.

Makes me support a wilderness initiative any place any time…………..dirka, dirka, dur………….

 

[Dinkshooter]

If you get bored, more reading for those inclined.

http://a123.g.akamai.net/7/123/1155...ai.com/11558/www/nepa/84906_FSPLT2_071876.pdf

Hmmmmm I do not see any chain gang activities listed there as the only alternative.

 

[sagebrush]

What we have seen in the links here is the work that has been approved. Take a look at the work that has not been approved and is the subject of the ongoing litigation.

http://goldwaterinstitute.org/sites/default/files/SOF.pdf

 

[Oak]

Hmmmmm I do not see any chain gang activities listed there as the only alternative.

No, actually the selected alternative allows mechanical equipment in the wilderness.

 

[sagebrush]

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
CITY OF TOMBSTONE,
Plaintiffs,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil Action No. 11-845-TUC-FRZ
Hon. Frank R. Zapata, presiding judge
SEPARATE STATEMENT OF FACTS
IN SUPPORT OF CITY OF
TOMBSTONE’S MOTION FOR
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
)


5. Despite the manifest emergency facing the desert-parched City of Tombstone,
Defendants are refusing to allow Tombstone to take reasonable emergency action to
repair its Huachuca Mountain water infrastructure. Since October of 2011, officials of
Defendant U.S. Department of Agriculture have repeatedly and continuously ordered
Tombstone’s employees both verbally and by electronic communication under threats of
criminal prosecution to refrain from exercising its vested rights in the Huachuca Mountains by refusing to allow Tombstone to use heavy and light vehicles upon and
along the road right of way easements in Carr and Miller Canyon, heavy and light
mechanized equipment to construct, rebuild and maintain water structures within the
scope of the City’s vested rights. (Exh. A, ¶ 61.)
6. Despite requests by Nancy Sosa in person of Defendants’ representative Duane
Bennett on October 3, 2011, Defendants by and through Glenn Frederick in an email
communication on October 26, 2011 to City Clerk/Manager George Barnes refused to
allow the construction or rebuilding of any permanent water structures, such as dams,
reservoirs, or catchments at the land use and right of way easements including and
surrounding Mill Spring No. 1, McCoy Group Spring Nos. 2, 3, 4, Marshall Spring No 5, Bench Spring No. 6, Maple Group Spring Nos. 7, 8, and 9, Gird Reservoir No. 9 ½,
Lower Spring No. 10, Clark Spring No. 11, Brearley Spring No. 12, Head Spring No.
13, Cabin Spring No. 14, Cabin Auxiliary Spring No. 15, Rock Spring No. 16, Rock
Auxiliary Spring No. 17, Smith Spring No. 18, Porter Spring No. 19, O'Brien Spring No.
20, and Storrs Spring No. 21; Quartz Spring No. 22, Hoagland Spring No. 23, and
Gardner Spring No. 24. (Exh. A, ¶ 62 (Exh. 62).)
7. Despite letter requests on December 5, 2011 by City Clerk/Manager George
Barnes to Defendants’ representative Jim Upchurch, the Defendants by and through Jim
Upchurch in a letter written on December 7, 2011 are preventing Tombstone from conducting any repairs or construction at the spring heads located at McCoy Group
Spring Nos. 2, 3, 4, Marshall Spring No. 5, Bench Spring No. 6, Maple Group Spring
Nos. 7, 8, and 9, Gird Reservoir No. 9 ½, Lower Spring No. 10, Clark Spring No. 11,
Brearley Spring No. 12, Cabin Spring No. 14, Cabin Auxiliary Spring No. 15, Rock Spring No. 16, Rock Auxiliary Spring No. 17, Smith Spring No. 18, Porter Spring No.
19, O'Brien Spring No. 20, and Storrs Spring No. 21; Quartz Spring No. 22, and
Hoagland Spring No. 23. (Exh. A, ¶ 63 (Exhs. 63-64).)
8. Despite requests by email from City Project Manager Kevin Rudd to
Defendants’ representatives Kathleen Nelson and Walter Keyes on November 29, 2011,
Defendants by and through Walter Keyes in an email written to Kevin Rudd on
December 2, 2011 have refused and are preventing Tombstone from building any abovegrade
protective flumes at the land use and right of way easements including and
surrounding Gardner Spring No. 24. (Exh. A, ¶ 64 (Exh. 65).)
9. Despite requests by email from City Project Manager Kevin Rudd to
Defendants’ representative Jim Upchurch on November 14, 2011, Defendants by and
through Jim Upchurch in a letter written to City Clerk/Manager George Barnes on
December 1, 2011 have refused and are preventing Tombstone from building any repairs
or construction at the spring head locations of Head Spring No. 13, Cabin Spring No. 14,
Cabin Auxiliary Spring No. 15, Rock Spring No. 16, Rock Auxiliary Spring No. 17,
Smith Spring No. 18, Porter Spring No. 19, O'Brien Spring No. 20, and Storrs Spring
No. 21. (Exh. A, ¶ 65 (Exh. 66).)
10. Despite requests by letter from George Barnes to Defendants’ representative Jim Upchurch on January 13, 2012, Defendants by and through Jim Upchurch in a letter
written to George Barnes on January 26, 2012 are refusing to allow any emergency
repairs at the locations of Head Spring No. 13, Cabin Spring No. 14, Cabin Auxiliary Spring No. 15, Rock Spring No. 16, Rock Auxiliary Spring No. 17, Smith Spring No.
18, Porter Spring No. 19, O'Brien Spring No. 20, and Storrs Spring No. 21, Maple
Group Spring Nos. 7, 8, and 9, Clark Spring No. 11. (Exh. A, ¶ 66 (Exh. 67).)
11. Defendants by and through email from its representative Kathleen Nelson to
City Project Manager Kevin Rudd on February 28, 2012 are requiring only hand tools to
be used in repairs at the land use and right of way easements including and surrounding
the spring sites and pipelines servicing Mill Spring No. 1, McCoy Group Spring Nos. 2,
3, 4, Marshall Spring No. 5, Bench Spring No. 6, Maple Group Spring Nos. 7, 8, and 9,
Gird Reservoir No. 9 ½, Lower Spring No. 10, Clark Spring No. 11, Brearley Spring No.
12, Head Spring No. 13, Cabin Spring No. 14, Cabin Auxiliary Spring No. 15, Rock Spring No. 16, Rock Auxiliary Spring No. 17, Smith Spring No. 18, Porter Spring No.
19, O'Brien Spring No. 20, and Storrs Spring No. 21; Quartz Spring No. 22, Hoagland
Spring No. 23, and Gardner Spring No. 24 as of March 01, 2012. (Exh. A, ¶ 67 (Exh.
68).)
12. As of March 1, 2012, Defendants will not allow the City of Tombstone free
and unimpaired access to its water system in the Huachuca Mountains. Defendants
currently only allow hand tools to restore nearly all of its water supply and infrastructure
in the Huachuca Mountains. (Exhibit B (Supplemental Declaration of Kevin Rudd), ¶ 11; Exh. A, ¶ 68.)
13. As recently as Tuesday, March 27, 2012, Tombstone’s Public Works
Manager Kevin Rudd went into the Huachuca Mountains with his crew and a
wheelbarrow carrying hand tools to complete scheduled work on Miller Canyon. In response, the Forest Service ranger on duty initially denied the crew their usual access to
the Wilderness Area, claiming the wheelbarrow was "mechanized equipment" under the
Wilderness Act, which the Miller MRDG prohibits. Acting District Ranger Kathleen
Nelson verified that wheelbarrows are prohibited mechanized equipment in a phone call
with Kevin Rudd. Finally, at the end of the day, Ranger Nelson gave Kevin Rudd verbal
permission to take the wheelbarrow into the Wilderness Area for all future work on
Miller Canyon. She said the Forest Service would amend the Miller MRDG and replace
"mechanized equipment" with "motorized equipment."

 

[sagebrush]

No distortion, no unsubstaniated rants. Just the facts as recorded in the suit filed with the district court. It would appear that the complete record is different than what was represented by the responders. Funny how guys in Montana, Arkansas and Colorado know more about what is happening in Arizona than the people that actually live here. I guess it shouldn't surprise me because the people in Washington, DC know whats better for us than we do and will spend millions of dollars in court to prove it.

 

[Ben Lamb]

1.) This does sound like the FS putting process ahead of common sense.
2.) It doesn't sound like the city understood the NEPA process and is putting emotion ahead of common sense.
3.) There are courses out there that teach elected officials and government bureaucratic how to work within the system rather than stage hokey shovel brigades.
4.) The guys commenting on this thread are well familiar with the processes necessary to make this happen, so at some level, they do know more about this than you.
5.) All your wilderness belong to us.

 

[spook12]

Sagebrush no distortion or unsubtaniated rants? Who suggested the feds where willing to sacrifice 1400 of its citizens? I wonder if you would care to withdraw your statement about what the founding fathers intended when they wrote our constitution? You might want to reread the constitution ,it clearly states in article 4,section3 that congress[the federal gov] has the right to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or property belonging to the united states.

 

[sagebrush]

To points 2, 3, and 4, the city workers from Tombstone were doing the same work they have done for the past twenty years. They used to go up into the Huachuca Mountains every Monday and Friday in a pick up truck with a work crew and clear out debris. When the work crew found leaky pipes, they sent up a maintenance crew is a six wheeler with a crane and welder and replaced the leaking sections. This was not a staged hokey shovel brigade, but a city work crew doing what they have always done in the past, unchallenged, but this time with handcarts and hand tools. So I don't think the guys in other states have any idea of what is really going on in Tombstone, they only think they know. Maybe the Forest Service should have been more consistent with their enforcement efforts during the past twenty years.

I guess my problem is with point number 5. If the people in CA want to have a debauchery in their public parks, that's their business. If the people in MT want to declare everything outside of the city limits a wilderness area, that is their business. But please do not force your values on people in another state. I may not agree, but I will support and defend their right to self determination within their sovereign borders. If I lived in a state and disagreed with a policy, I have two choices. I can join with like minded people and cause change through the ballot box or I can vote with my feet and move elsewhere. That was the vision of our founding fathers, that each individual is endowed with rights, freedom and liberty. The individual cedes a limited amount of those rights to his state of residence to enjoy a civil society. The states cede a limited amount of their rights to the federal government to accommodate interstate and international commerce, the raising of a military force to defend the several states borders and common enemies, etc, as enumerated in the constitution. Nowhere does the constitution state that the citizens of one state have the right to impose their will over the citizens of another state.

In my opinion, people in the US fall into one of three categories. One category believes the federal government is the answer to everything from cradle to grave and the citizens are subservient to it. They think the federal government has the right to dictate what we eat, how we prepare it, what light bulbs to use and even the kind of toilet we install in our homes. Basically, the European socialist model. Another category believes in the rights of the individual, that states have the authority to administer as directed by the citizens within their borders and the federal government has a very limited role as specified in the constitution. The third category is probably the largest. This group goes to work to earn a living, comes home and spends time with the family usually in front of a television and really isn't concerned one way or the other about the form our government has taken. They are those that are swayed to vote by the other two groups. That's not a judgement, its an observation. I don't think the people in the first two groups will ever convince each other to change. My comments are not meant to insult or enrage the folks that believe the Department of the Interior or the Department of Agriculture should dictate what happens in our local communities. Rather, I would like to inform those that do not have a strong opinion and invite them to become engaged in the process. While the romantic notion of preserving large tracts of land in another state for all creatures great and small and for future generations to come sounds like a grand idea, it comes with a price. That price is ceding the right to self determination within your own state. The people of Tombstone are dealing with that price now. Without the interference of the federal government, the work would've already been completed. Now, we are four weeks away from the monsoon season which will create even more work and greater exposure to risk for the local community.

Here in Arizona, we have faced some harsh realities in the past decade or so. People are becoming more aware of the problems the federal government is causing in our state. Attitudes are changing and previously uninvolved people are becoming engaged and that is a good thing. It is my hope that people are at least willing to consider that putting the tag "wilderness" onto a proposal does not necessarily mean that it is instantly good for the local people and wildlife.