DOCSLIB.ORG

Rimrock Rose Ranch Acquisition and Taos Resource Management Plan Amendment Addressing Livestock Grazing on Two Allotments in Sabinoso Wilderness

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Rimrock Rose Ranch Acquisition and Taos Resource Management Plan Amendment Addressing Livestock Grazing on Two Allotments in Sabinoso Wilderness Rimrock Rose Ranch Acquisition and Taos Resource Management Plan Amendment Addressing Livestock Grazing on Two Allotments in Sabinoso Wilderness Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NM-F020-2016-0011-EA Taos Field Office 226 Cruz Alta Road Taos, New Mexico 87571 Rimrock Rose Ranch Acquisition and Taos Resource Management Plan Amendment Addressing Livestock Grazing on Two Allotments in Sabinoso Wilderness Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NM-F020-2016-0011-EA Table of Contents Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... 3 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 3 1.1 Background ...................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Purpose and Need for Action ........................................................................................... 4 1.3 Land Use Plan Conformance............................................................................................ 4 1.4 Decisions to be Made ....................................................................................................... 5 1.5 Applicable Authorities ..................................................................................................... 5 1.6 Identification of Issues ..................................................................................................... 6 1.7 Issues Considered but Dismissed from Detailed Analysis ............................................... 7 2.0 Description of Alternatives................................................................................................ 8 2.1 Alternative A: Proposed Action ...................................................................................... 8 2.2 Alternative B: No Action ................................................................................................ 9 2.3 Alternative C: Reapportionment of Allotments 735 and 736 (Outside of Wilderness Boundary) ................................................................................................................................. 10 2.4 Alternatives Considered but not Analyzed in Detail ...................................................... 11 3.0 Affected Environment ..................................................................................................... 13 3.1 Sabinoso Wilderness ...................................................................................................... 14 3.2 Sabinoso ACEC.............................................................................................................. 14 3.3 Recreation....................................................................................................................... 15 3.4 Cultural Resources ......................................................................................................... 15 3.5 Paleontological Resources.............................................................................................. 17 3.6 Riparian Resources ......................................................................................................... 18 3.7 Livestock Grazing .......................................................................................................... 20 3.8 Wildlife and Special Status Species ............................................................................... 21 3.9 Economics ...................................................................................................................... 25 4.0 Environmental Consequences ......................................................................................... 26 4.1 Direct and Indirect Effects ............................................................................................. 26 4.1.1 Alternative A: Proposed Action ................................................................................... 26 4.1.2 Alternative B: No Action ............................................................................................. 32 4.1.3 Alternative C: Reapportionment of Allotments 735 and 736 Outside of Wilderness Boundary ............................................................................................................................... 34 4.2 Cumulative Effects Analysis .......................................................................................... 37 4.2.1 Past and Present Actions .............................................................................................. 37 1 4.2.3 Cumulative Effects....................................................................................................... 37 5.0 Consultation and Coordination ...................................................................................... 38 5.1 Summary of Consultation and Coordination .................................................................. 38 5.2 Summary of Public Participation ................................................................................... 38 5.3 List of Preparers ............................................................................................................. 38 6.0 References ......................................................................................................................... 39 Appendix A: BLM Responses to Public Comments.............................................................. 41 Appendix B: Map 1 and Map 2 .............................................................................................. 57 2 ABSTRACT This Environmental Assessment (EA) analyzes an offer to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) from The Wilderness Land Trust that has three key elements: 1) a donation of some 3,595 acres of the Rimrock Rose Ranch adjacent to the Sabinoso Wilderness, to become wilderness under the provisions of the Wilderness Act of 1964, 2) an offer to sell an additional 766 acres of the ranch to the BLM; and 3) the elimination of livestock grazing from the Rimrock Rose Ranch as well as from two allotments for which the ranch served as base property. There are three decisions to be made. The first and second, which are implementation-level decisions (project-level decisions) and do not require the amendment of the current land use plan, are whether to accept the donation and whether to pursue the purchase of the additional acreage. The third decision is whether to adjust the livestock grazing allocations on the two allotments. This decision involves an amendment to the 2012 Taos Resource Management Plan. This EA analyzes the potential consequences of three alternatives evaluated in detail, which include the Proposed Action (Alternative A), which would accept the three key elements described above; a No Action Alternative (Alternative B), which would decline the donation; and a third alternative (Alternative C) developed in response to comments provided to the BLM during the public review and comment period, which would preserve livestock grazing on those portions of the two allotments outside the present wilderness boundary. The EA also includes a discussion of an additional alternative considered but dismissed from detailed analysis. 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background The Wilderness Land Trust, a private non-profit organization, has purchased 10 parcels of private land, known as the Rimrock Rose Ranch (ranch property), totaling 4,361 acres adjacent to the Sabinoso Wilderness in San Miguel County, New Mexico. The Wilderness Land Trust is offering to donate 3,595 acres of the ranch property to the United States to be included as part of the Sabinoso Wilderness, administered by the Bureau of Land Management, Taos Field Office (BLM). The donation would provide public access for the first time to Sabinoso Wilderness, an area completely surrounded by private lands. While this proposal would provide an important opportunity to the public, it also poses a unique challenge in terms of resolving issues pertaining to livestock grazing. In summary, under Alternative A, the BLM proposes to accept the donation of 3,595 acres for addition to the wilderness under the authority of Section 6 of the Wilderness Act of 1964 (PL 88-577, 16 U.S.C. 1131-1136). The BLM also proposes to acquire the remaining 766 acres through purchase when funds become available under the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 or other sources, to be managed as part of the Sabinoso Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC), an administrative designation adjacent to the wilderness. The BLM is also proposing to make the two allotments for which the Rimrock Rose Ranch served as base property (per 43 CFR 4110.2-1) unavailable to livestock grazing. The grazing leases for these allotments, 00735 and 00736, were cancelled at the time the former owner sold the ranch property to The Wilderness Land Trust. These allotments, therefore, are not currently being grazed under an existing lease. The decision to make the allotments unavailable for grazing requires an amendment to the 2012 Taos Resource Management Plan (RMP), the applicable land use plan, since making lands unavailable for livestock grazing is considered a planning-level decision per BLM regulations. 3 The BLM is considering this latter decision—to make the two allotments unavailable—under unique circumstances. The BLM has a clear goal in the Taos RMP of securing public access to Sabinoso Wilderness, a designation of national significance, where
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Issues in the 111Th Congress
    Federal Lands Managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Forest Service (FS): Issues in the 111th Congress (name redacted), Coordinator Specialist in Natural Resources Policy (name redacted), Coordinator Specialist in Natural Resources Policy (name redacted) Legislative Attorney (name redacted) Analyst in Energy Policy October 22, 2010 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov R40237 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Federal Lands Managed by the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service Summary Congress, the Administration, and the courts are considering many issues related to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) public lands and the Forest Service (FS) national forests. Key issues include the following. Energy Resources. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-58) led to new regulations on federal land leasing for oil and gas, oil shale, geothermal, and renewable energy. The Obama Administration is reviewing some rules and has withdrawn certain oil and gas leases in Utah. Hardrock Mining. The General Mining Law of 1872 allows prospecting for minerals in open public domain lands. Several bills to reform aspects of the Law have been introduced to require royalties on production and establish a fund to clean up abandoned mines, among other changes. Wildfire Protection. Various initiatives seek to protect communities from wildfires by expanding fuel reduction, and one related program was established in P.L. 111-11. Cost concerns led to new fire suppression accounts in the FLAME Act (Title V of P.L. 111-88). Wild Horses and Burros. To reduce program costs and the number of wild horses and burros on the range, the Secretary of the Interior has proposed wild horse preserves and increased fertility controls.
    [Show full text]
  • Fiscal Impact Reports (Firs) Are Prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for Standing Finance Committees of the NM Legislature
    Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance committees of the NM Legislature. The LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports if they are used for other purposes. Current FIRs (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) are available on the NM Legislative Website (www.nmlegis.gov). Adobe PDF versions include all attachments, whereas HTML versions may not. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be obtained from the LFC in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North. F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T ORIGINAL DATE 02/07/13 SPONSOR Herrell/Martinez LAST UPDATED 02/18/13 HB 292 SHORT TITLE Transfer of Public Land Act SB ANALYST Weber REVENUE (dollars in thousands) Recurring Estimated Revenue Fund or Affected FY13 FY14 FY15 Nonrecurring (See Narrative) There (See Narrative) There may be additional may be additional Recurring General Fund revenue in future years. revenue in future years. (Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Revenue Decrease ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL OPERATING BUDGET IMPACT (dollars in thousands) 3 Year Recurring or Fund FY13 FY14 FY15 Total Cost Nonrecurring Affected General Total $100.0 $100.0 $200.0 Recurring Fund (Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases) Duplicate to SB 404 SOURCES OF INFORMATION LFC Files Responses Received From Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) General Services Department (GSD) Economic Development Department (EDD) Department of Cultural Affairs (DCA) Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department (EMNRD) State Land Office (SLO) Department of Transportation (DOT) Department of Finance and Administration (DFA) House Bill 292 – Page 2 SUMMARY Synopsis of Bill House Bill 292 (HB 292) is the Transfer of Public Lands Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Mineral and Energy Resources of the BLM Roswell Resource Area, East-Central New Mexico
    U. S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Mineral and Energy Resources of the BLM Roswell Resource Area, East-central New Mexico by Susan Bartsch-Winkleri, editor Open-File Report 92-0261 1992 This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey editorial standards or with the North American Stratigraphic Code. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. 1 Denver, Colorado iMail Stop 937 Federal Center P.O. Box 25046 Denver, Colorado 80225 MINERAL AND ENERGY RESOURCES OF THE BLM ROSWELL RESOURCE AREA, EAST-CENTRAL NEW MEXICO Summary.......................................................................................... 1 Introduction.................................................................................... 1 Location and geography of study area...................................... 1 Purpose and methodology........................................................ 3 Acknowledgements......................................................................... 4 Geology of east-central New Mexico, by Susan Bartsch-Winkler, with a section on Intrusive and extrusive alkaline rocks of the Lincoln County porphyry belt by Theodore J. Armbrustmacher 4 General..................................................................................... 4 Structure................................................................................. 5 Uplifts........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1517 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1131 (Pub. L
    Page 1517 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1131 (Pub. L. 88–363, § 10, July 7, 1964, 78 Stat. 301.) Sec. 1132. Extent of System. § 1110. Liability 1133. Use of wilderness areas. 1134. State and private lands within wilderness (a) United States areas. The United States Government shall not be 1135. Gifts, bequests, and contributions. liable for any act or omission of the Commission 1136. Annual reports to Congress. or of any person employed by, or assigned or de- § 1131. National Wilderness Preservation System tailed to, the Commission. (a) Establishment; Congressional declaration of (b) Payment; exemption of property from attach- policy; wilderness areas; administration for ment, execution, etc. public use and enjoyment, protection, preser- Any liability of the Commission shall be met vation, and gathering and dissemination of from funds of the Commission to the extent that information; provisions for designation as it is not covered by insurance, or otherwise. wilderness areas Property belonging to the Commission shall be In order to assure that an increasing popu- exempt from attachment, execution, or other lation, accompanied by expanding settlement process for satisfaction of claims, debts, or judg- and growing mechanization, does not occupy ments. and modify all areas within the United States (c) Individual members of Commission and its possessions, leaving no lands designated No liability of the Commission shall be im- for preservation and protection in their natural puted to any member of the Commission solely condition, it is hereby declared to be the policy on the basis that he occupies the position of of the Congress to secure for the American peo- member of the Commission.
    [Show full text]
  • Newly Added Materials in the Libraries - Government, Legal, Illinois, Maps April - May 2016
    Newly Added Materials In the Libraries - Government, Legal, Illinois, Maps April - May 2016 Call Number Author Title Publisher Enum Publication Date Gov CDROM GOVCDROM. PREX 28.2:P Know the risk, raise your shield : campaign Office of the Director of 2016 43/DVD materials. National Intelligence, National Counterintelligence and Security Center, Gov Pubs GOVPUBS. D 221.2:V 67/6 Mobley, Richard A., Knowing the enemy : naval intelligence in Department of the Navy, 2015 1952- Southeast Asia / Naval History & Heritage Command, GOVPUBS. HS 5.102:ST Student Tools for Emergency Planning (STEP) U.S. Department of 2015 9/2015/PACK. program : curriculum for 4th and 5th grade Homeland Security, students. FEMA, GOVPUBS. I 19.91/3:3343 Ryder, Robert T., Geologic cross section I-I' through the Appalachian U.S. Geological Survey, 2015 Basin from the eastern margin of the Illinois Basin, Jefferson County, Kentucky, to the Valley and GOVPUBS. I 29.2:AR 7/5 Treasured landscapes : National Park Service art National Park Service 2016 collections tell America's stories. Museum Management Program, GOVPUBS. I 29.2:R 92 Pipeline to Russia : the Alaska-Siberia Air Route in Alaska Affiliated Areas 2016 World War II / Program, National Park Service, GOVPUBS. I 29.6/6:SA United States. National Salem Maritime National Historical Site, National Park Service, 2015 3/2015 Park Service, Massachusetts. U.S. Department of the Interior, GOVPUBS. I 29.8:SH United States. National Shenandoah National Park : Riprap area road and National Park Service, 2013 4/10/2013 Park Service, trail map / U.S. Department of the Interior, Monday, June 06, 2016 Page 1 of 185 Call Number Author Title Publisher Enum Publication Date GOVPUBS.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Lands Managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Forest Service (FS): Issues for the 111Th Congress
    Federal Lands Managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Forest Service (FS): Issues for the 111th Congress Ross W. Gorte, Coordinator Specialist in Natural Resources Policy Carol Hardy Vincent, Coordinator Specialist in Natural Resources Policy Kristina Alexander Legislative Attorney Marc Humphries Analyst in Energy Policy May 13, 2010 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R40237 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Federal Lands Managed by the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service Summary The 111th Congress, the Administration, and the courts are considering many issues related to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) public lands and the Forest Service (FS) national forests. Key issues include the following. Energy Resources. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-58) led to new regulations on federal land leasing for oil and gas, oil shale, geothermal, and renewable energy. The Obama Administration is reviewing some rules and has withdrawn certain oil and gas leases in Utah. Hardrock Mining. The General Mining Law of 1872 allows prospecting for minerals in open public domain lands. Several bills to reform aspects of the Law have been introduced to require royalties on production and establish a fund to clean up abandoned mines, among other changes. Wildfire Protection. Various initiatives seek to protect communities from wildfires by expanding fuel reduction, and one related program was established in P.L. 111-11. Cost concerns led to new fire suppression accounts in the FLAME Act (Title V of P.L. 111-88). Wild Horses and Burros. To reduce program costs and the number of wild horses and burros on the range, the Secretary of the Interior has proposed wild horse preserves and increased fertility controls.
    [Show full text]
  • Northwest New Mexico Southwest New Mexico Northeast New Mexico
    S1M6N C A N Y ON REC REATI ON ARE A WE S T MALPAIS WILDERNESS Northeast New Mexico The Information Corner This sandstone canyon offers dispersed camping, hiking, and The West Malpais Wilderness encompasses grassland, pinyon/ bird watching. The San Juan River provides excellent fishing juniper woodland, Ponderosa pine stands, and lava fields. A TAOS FIELD OFFICE 575-758-8851 PUBLIC LANDS ARE YOUR LANDS. Wheth er visitin g on foot o r h orseback, at the mouth of the canyon. Overlooking the area, the partially designated trail leads into Hole-in-the-Wall, an area surrounded, by b icycle or motor vehicle, we ask you to tread lightly, an d once you reach your www.blm.gov/nm/taos restored Sim6n Ruin, a single-room Navajo Pueblito, is built but not covered, by lava flows. The Wilderness is located destination, practice outdoo r skills tha t leave no trace. on top of a 20-foot-tall boulder. The area has a restroom, within El Malpais NCA. DIA BLO CANYO N RECR E ATION AREA RULES AND GUI DEL NES are in place to en sure your safety, the continu ed h ealth picnic tables, and campfire ri ngs. However, there is no This area near Santa Fe is a very popular destination for WHITE RIDGE BIKE TRAILS of the land, and th at visitor enjoys a q ua lity exp erience . Breaking th e rules drinking water or electricity. its rock climbing opportunities. A 2-mile route through the e~ery The bi ke trails cross a landscape of spectacular beauty and canyon takes you to the Rio Grande.
    [Show full text]
  • Rio Mora National Wildlife Refuge and Conservation Area Environmental Assessment
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Rio Mora National Wildlife Refuge and Conservation Area Environmental Assessment July 2012 U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Mission Statement The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is working with others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. National Wildlife Refuge System Mission Statement The mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System is to administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation, management, and, where appropriate, restoration of fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans. —National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Rio Mora National Wildlife Refuge and Conservation Area, Colfax, Mora, and San Miguel Counties, New Mexico June 1, 2012 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge System Southwest Region Division of Planning Albuquerque, NM Table of Contents 1. PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR PROPOSED ACTION ..................................................... 1 Introduction................................................................................................................................. 1 Project Area Location ................................................................................................................. 1 Background................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mineral Resources of the Sabinoso Wilderness Study Area, San Miguel County, New Mexico
    Mineral Resources of the Sabinoso Wilderness Study Area, San Miguel County, New Mexico U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1733-A Chapter A Mineral Resources of the Sabinoso Wilderness Study Area, San Miguel County, New Mexico By ANNE M. LEIBOLD, RICHARD W. SALTUS, V.J.S. GRAUCH, and DAVID A. LINDSEY U.S. Geological Survey CARL L. ALMQUIST U.S. Bureau of Mines U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1733 MINERAL RESOURCES OF WILDERNESS STUDY AREAS- NORTHERN NEW MEXICO DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL MODEL, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON: 1987 For sale by the Books and Open-File Reports Section U.S. Geological Survey Federal Center Box 25425 Denver, CO 80225 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Mineral resources of the Sabinoso Wilderness Study Area, San Miguel County, New Mexico. (U.S. Geological Survey bulletin ; 1733)(Mineral resources of wilderness study areas northern New Mexico ; ch. A) Bibliography: p. 1. Mines and mineral resources New Mexico Sabinoso Wilderness. 2. Geology New Mexico Sabinoso Wilderness.. I. Leibold, Anne M. II. Series: Geological Survey bulletin ; 1733. III. Series: Mineral resources of wilderness study areas northern New Mexico ; ch. A. QE75.B9 no. 1733-A 557.3s 87-600221 [TN24.N6] [553'.09789'55] STUDIES RELATED TO WILDERNESS Bureau of Land Management Wilderness Study Areas The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (Public Law 94-579, October 21, 1976) requires the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Bureau of Mines to conduct mineral surveys on certain areas to determine the mineral values, if any, that may be present.
    [Show full text]
  • Kiowa National Grassland Wilderness Evaluation Report
    Kiowa National Grassland Wilderness Evaluation Report Canadian River Potential Wilderness Area PW-03-03-01G October 17, 2008, Revised March 2011 Table of Contents Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 2 Area Overview .................................................................................................................... 3 Wilderness Capability ......................................................................................................... 4 Availability for Wilderness ................................................................................................. 8 Need for Wilderness ......................................................................................................... 10 Effects of Recommendations ............................................................................................ 16 Appendix A: Process Consistency .................................................................................... 21 Appendix B: Capability Evaluation and Rankings for the Canadian River PWA ............ 23 Appendix C: Availability Evaluation and Rankings for the Canadian River PWA ......... 28 Appendix D: Need Evaluation .......................................................................................... 32 Appendix E: Species that Warrant Consideration ............................................................ 36 Appendix F: Definition of Scales from the USDA Forest Service’s National Hierarchical
    [Show full text]
  • Grazing Data by Wilderness
    Year Acres Acres Wilderness Name Agency State Total Acres AUMs Designated Allotted Grazed Aleutian Islands Wilderness FWS AK 1,300,000 1980 0 0 0 Andreafsky Wilderness FWS AK 1,300,000 1980 0 0 0 Becharof Wilderness FWS AK 400,000 1980 0 0 0 Bering Sea Wilderness FWS AK 81,340 1970 0 0 0 Bogoslof Wilderness FWS AK 175 1970 0 0 0 Chamisso Wilderness FWS AK 455 1975 0 0 0 Chuck River Wilderness FS AK 74,876 1990 0 0 0 Coronation Island Wilderness FS AK 19,118 1980 0 0 0 Denali Wilderness NPS AK 2,124,783 1980 0 0 0 Endicott River Wilderness FS AK 98,396 1980 0 0 0 Forrester Island Wilderness FWS AK 2,832 1970 0 0 0 Gates of the Arctic Wilderness NPS AK 7,167,192 1980 0 0 0 Glacier Bay Wilderness NPS AK 2,664,876 1980 0 0 0 Hazy Islands Wilderness FWS AK 32 1970 0 0 0 Innoko Wilderness FWS AK 1,240,000 1980 0 0 0 Izembek Wilderness FWS AK 307,982 1980 0 0 0 Jay S. Hammond Wilderness NPS AK 2,619,550 1980 0 0 0 Karta River Wilderness FS AK 39,917 1990 0 0 0 Katmai Wilderness NPS AK 3,384,358 1980 0 0 0 Kenai Wilderness FWS AK 1,354,247 1980 0 0 0 Kobuk Valley Wilderness NPS AK 174,545 1980 0 0 0 Kootznoowoo Wilderness FS AK 979,079 1980 0 0 0 Koyukuk Wilderness FWS AK 400,000 1980 0 0 0 Kuiu Wilderness FS AK 60,183 1990 0 0 0 Maurelle Islands Wilderness FS AK 4,814 1980 0 0 0 Misty Fjords National Monument FS AK 2,144,010 1980 0 0 0 Wilderness Mollie Beattie Wilderness FWS AK 8,000,000 1980 0 0 0 Noatak Wilderness NPS AK 5,765,427 1980 0 0 0 Nunivak Wilderness FWS AK 600,000 1980 0 0 0 Petersburg Creek-Duncan Salt Chuck FS AK 46,758 1980
    [Show full text]
  • Why We Fight
    New Mexico WILD—THE NEWSLETTER OF THE NEW MEXICO WILDERNESS ALLIANCE VOLUME X, NUMBER I— SPRING 2008 WILDERNESS! why we fight. New Mexico WILD! Page 1 stephen capra, executive director new mexico Notes from the WILD! Executive Director SPRING 2008 By Stephen Capra Newsletter With this issue we choose to look a little deeper at wilderness, the core principle of our organization. Wilderness has been a part of the New Mexico landscape of the for more than 80 years. But we have come to understand that the concept of wilderness has been lost to a generation New Mexico or more because of the lack of wilderness designations in the late 80’s and 90’s. For the past year, we have spent a considerable amount of time educating elected officials Wilderness and citizens on the importance and value of designating wilderness on our federal public lands. Alliance The net result has been the introduction of the Sabinoso Wilderness bill and the growing support in the south for our Doña Ana Wilderness proposal and in the north for the El Rio Grande del Norte National Conservation Area. It has also led to broader conversations among the State Land Office, the Bureau of Land Management and the National Park Service about trading lands important to the conservation of Chaco Canyon National Historical Park and the possible designation of wilderness within the park’s boundaries. Guidelines, which were incorporated into every piece of Yet today a radical fringe group of ranchers continue their wilderness legislation since 1990, state that there can be ideological fight to stop wilderness designation in our “no reduction of livestock numbers because of wilderness state, working with groups like the Paragon Foundation designation.” So the very congressional act that this small and even a few professors at New Mexico State University’s group of ranchers is fighting, is the very legislation that Rangeland Improvement Task Force.
    [Show full text]