Pueblo Design
 La Jicarita

A community advocacy newspaper for northern New Mexico

Box 6 El Valle Route, Chamisal, NM 87521

Volume VII

September/October 2002

Number IX


Current Issue




About Us




Picuris Pueblo Requests Hearing on Expansion of Mica Mine By Mark Schiller



Rio Arriba County Logging Ordinance Challenged by Governor Johnson

Sandia Pueblo Buys 160-Acre Sandia Mountain Wilderness Inholding to Help Settle Land Claim


Editorial: The Forest Service - Bureaucracy Out of Control By Mark Schiller

New Mexican Land Grants Organize for Action on Their Land Claims By Kay Matthews

Agua/Caballos Proposed Projects Record of Decision Appealed By Kay Matthews

Qué Pasó en Agosto?

The personal . . . Betsy Martinez leaves Peñasco Health Centers after many years of service as the clinic's Physician's Assistant

Back row: Kevin Nolan, new Peñasco physician; Betsy Martinez; Robert Martinez, Betsy's husband. Front row: Tamara Singleton, Peñasco physician; Debbie Romero, office staff


The political . . . Saint Pete fails to show up in Santa Fe to hear citizens voice their opposition to a preemptive strike against Iraq

Picuris Pueblo Requests Hearing on Expansion of Mica Mine

By Mark Schiller

Oglebay Norton Specialty Minerals, owners of the mica mine on U.S. Hill between Peñasco and Taos, has filed a Permit Revision Application with the state's Mining and Minerals Division to expand its mining operation. According to the company's Public Notice "the proposed modification will entail new discrete pit areas, overburden dumps, crushing, screening, temporary overburden dumps, and stock pile units."

Its current operation, on lands patented from the Forest Service under the 1872 Mining Law, has drawn severe criticism from Picuris Pueblo, which contends the mine has destroyed the micaceous clay pits pueblo potters have used for centuries. The Pueblo, along with other community members and environmental groups, has also been critical of the company's closeout plan, which they claim does not do enough to address safety, wildlife, and erosion issues. Its milling operation in Velarde has also drawn criticism from that community, which claims its stockpiles are polluting the air, causing respiratory problems for residents, and fouling machinery.

The new proposal is also controversial. At the center of the controversy are two approximately 20 acre units (Holder #5 and Holder #6) at the northeast corner of the patented area, which directly border State Highway 518. If the plan is approved, these units, which are steeply sloped, would be clearcut and used for "overburden dumps." This means that tailings and low grade ore would be stored in large heaps right next to the highway, which is the main thoroughfare between Taos, Peñasco, and Mora. The plan proposes no mitigation measures to prevent the "dumps" from eroding onto the highway.

Several groups, including Picuris Pueblo, the Taos/ Rio Arriba Mining Reform Alliance, and the Sierra Club, have already sent letters to the New Mexico Division of Mining and Minerals criticizing the proposed expansion and requesting a public hearing on the application. On behalf of the Pueblo, The New Mexico Environmental Law Center wrote ". . . the information included in the application reflects a primary and inadequate knowledge of the cultural resources that will be impacted by the company's proposal, inaccurately reflects the topography of the mine site, fails to show the anticipated surface configuration after reclamation, ignores the existence of a Drainage in Holder #5 [which could be a source of surface water pollution], and omits detail on how Oglebay Norton will control erosion or minimize mass movement [which could cause damage to or the closure of Highway 518]." The Sierra Club's letter cites a study done for the previous owners of the mine, KMG Minerals, which states "The capacity of the southeast dumps (a reference to Holder #5 and Holder #6) is fairly small and the presence of a drainage nearby may complicate both permitting and execution of the plan. Reclamation will also be more expensive since considerable dozer work will be required to bring reclaimed topography back to the state mandated three foot horizontal to one foot vertical." (The existing slope is at least 4 to 1.) The Club's letter also claims ". . . there is currently a crusher in use at the mine site that has neither an Air Quality Bureau permit nor a Mining and Minerals Department permit. Further, it is necessary to determine if a permit is needed from the N.M. Highway and Transportation Department for the intended unit as it has the capacity to impact a state highway and may encroach the right-of-way."

Readers interested in more information or who would like to comment on the application should contact New Mexico Mining and Minerals Division/ Attention: Director, Doug Bland/ 1220 South St. Francis Dr./ Santa Fe, 87505/ 505-476-3400.


• Chellis Glendinning will be signing the new edition of her book Off the Map: An Expedition Deep into Empire and the Global Economy at Allá Latin American Books, 102 West San Francisco Street, Santa Fe, on Friday, October 18 from 5 to 7 pm. As described by Kirkpatrick Sale, the book " . . . is nothing less than an attempt to show the awful consequences of the Western mindset that almost all of us have inherited (or adopted) - what it means to be a product of 500 years of unrelenting violent, indefensible, largely racist, and successful imperialism." Glendinning is a psychologist, social activist, poet, and pioneer in the field of ecopsychology. Her books include My Name Is Chellis and I'm in Recovery from Western Civilization, When Technology Wounds, and Waking Up in the Nuclear Age.

• The New Mexico Organic Farming and Gardening Expo 2003 will be held February 7 and 8 in Glorieta, New Mexico. Sponsored by the New Mexico Organic Commodities Commission and The Farm Connection, this year's expo will feature Wes Jackson, founder of The Land Institute and author of New Roots for Agriculture and Meeting the Expectations of the Land (edited with Wendell Berry and Bruce Coleman), and Deborah Madison, noted chef, author, and slow-food advocate. The expo also offers educational workshops, a large vendor hall, and delicious organic food. For more information call: 505 266-9849 or e-mail joan.quinn@state.nm.us.


KRZA Taos Advisory Council (TAC) recently submitted a proposal to the community radio station board members that would establish a Taos production office and full-time local KRZA staff member to support and expand the listening audience in northern New Mexico. The TAC has made a commitment to help raise the necessary funding - $25,000 per year - to implement the project. The station currently relies on dedicated volunteers like Mike Tilley, Fabi Romero, and John Nettles to supply listeners with reports on Taos area news events.TAC strongly feels it is time to pay a professional staff person who would be responsible for maintaining local coverage and expanding community involvement in programming. The staff person would also be responsible for recruiting new volunteers and providing training in audio production. KRZA defines itself as a southern Colorado-northern New Mexico community radio station and Taos area listeners currently provide a significant portion of funding to the station. Those who support this proposal should contact the radio station and board members, who at their last meeting agreed to review the proposal at the board meeting in October. The KRZA telephone number is 1-800-290-0887 and station manager Mike Clifford's e-mail address is: krzafm@yahoo.com.

Rio Arriba County Logging Ordinance Challenged by Governor Johnson

In late August Rio Arriba County received the good news that the U.S. Court of Appeals in Denver had upheld the county's Timber Harvest Ordinance (which allows the county to regulate logging on private land) by overruling an earlier district court decision by Judge James Parker. The Court of Appeals decision recognizes that New Mexico's state forestry law does not prevent counties from adopting more restrictive timber harvesting ordinances. Then, several weeks later, the Rio Arriba County Commission was shocked to hear the bad news: Governor Gary Johnson had filed a "friend of the court" brief supporting a request for rehearing before the appeals court of the Texas partnership (Rancho Lobo) that challenged the county's ordinance. This consortium wants to log 40 million board feet on 60,000 acres of private land in the Rio Brazos watershed near Chama. According to County Commissioner Alfredo Montoya, "The Governor is intruding in a case in which he has no business and is taking a stand that attempts to undercut the authority of counties throughout the state to protect the health and welfare of their residents."

Rio Arriba County developed the timber ordinance in 1998, with the help of the Western Environmental Law Center, that addresses the threat of the Rio Brazos timber sale, which the county felt would negatively impact the watershed and acequia parciantes. The Rio Brazos watershed is largely in private hands and not under state or federal management. State forestry regulations set no minimum amount of trees that private logging operators must leave after harvesting, and the county was concerned that the proposed timber sale would significantly reduce the forest canopy and ground cover, resulting in siltation of the acequias, an increased risk of spring and summer flash floods, and reduction in the amount of water available for summer irrigation.

Rio Arriba County Planner Patricio Garica points out that the Timber Harvest Ordinance "complements and strengthens" state forestry law, and contrary to Johnson's brief which claims that the appeals' court decision could have a negative effect on the state's ability to manage and control fires, protects against wildfires by promoting sustainable thinning. Lawyers for the Law Center also question the legitimacy of Johnson's brief, noting that it should have been filed while the case was still pending and by the state's attorney general, not the general counsel of Gary Johnson.

The court subsequently rejected Rancho Lobo's request for rehearing, which Johnson's brief supported. According to Law Center attorney Simeon Herskovits, every judge on the court agreed that Rancho Lobo's petitions had no merit: "This was a significant judgement." The lawyer for Rancho Lobo says he intends to file a petition on the case to take it to the U.S. Supreme Court, but Herskovits points out that it is very unlikely that a case like this would be heard.

Sandia Pueblo Buys 160-Acre Sandia Mountain Wilderness Inholding to Help Settle Land Claim

Sandia Pueblo continued its herculean efforts to settle its Sandia Mountain land claim with the purchase of 160 acres within the disputed wilderness area. Owners of the inholding had been threatening to develop the property, which sits on the Piedra Lisa Trail, several miles north of the La Luz Trail in the middle of the Sandia Mountain Wilderness. They had already sued the Forest Service, demanding the right to improve the trail into a road for access to their potential development.

During the ongoing talks between the pueblo and the New Mexico congressional delegation on legislation that would settle the 9,900-acre claim, the Pueblo has insisted that the tract be purchased by the federal government and included in the wilderness area, or that the pueblo be reimbursed if it bought it. It remains to be seen if the government will do so.

The Albuquerque businessmen who owned the land acquired it in 1995 for $225,000 (it has been a private inholding for many years), outbidding Sandia Pueblo by a few thousand dollars. Although they will not disclose the current selling price, according to Governor Stuart Paisano, the pueblo paid more than five times what the owners paid for it in 1995 (the sellers had recently been asking $2.8 million for the property).

The pueblo's land claim was first filed in 1983 and languished in the Department of the Interior until 1988 when the Department denied the claim. The Pueblo then filed a lawsuit in federal court in 1994, and in 1998 the court ruled that the Department of Interior had improperly rejected the Pueblo's claim. Bernalillo County and a coalition of homeowners who live in the subdivisions on the west side of the Sandias (private lands the Pueblo has stated are exempt from the claim) appealed that decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals. These two parties, along with the city of Albuquerque, Sandia Peak Tramway, and the Forest Service, entered mediation, and in April of 2000 the Forest Service, the Pueblo, and the tram company (the other parties had dropped out of the mediation talks) announced a settlement agreement that included: guaranteed Pueblo access rights - as opposed to sovereignty rights - to practice their religion in the mountains; assurances that the mountains will not be further developed; the retention of private property owners' clear title; and civil jurisdiction of county, state, and federal laws.

However, Senator Pete Domenici, Representative Heather Wilson, Bernalillo County, Albuquerque Mayor Jim Baca, the landowners, and environmental groups (some of whom have actively opposed the land claim since the 1980s) all vehemently criticized the agreement as "irrelevant," "bad faith," and "a back-room deal." Senator Jeff Bingaman subsequently submitted a bill that incorporated much of the settlement agreement, and the Pueblo has since been negotiating with Bingaman and Domenici on issues like the Piedra Lisa inholding. In a recent letter to the Albuquerque Journal an Albuquerque resident chided Domenici for holding up the settlement agreement because of his support of Guy Riordan, the primary owner of the inholding, who credits the senator for "protecting property rights". The pueblo was essentially forced into buying the inholding to move the legislation forward.



Editorial: The Forest Service - Bureaucracy Out of Control

By Mark Schiller

Despite the many watchdog groups throughout the country that regularly expose Forest Service incompetence and demand accountability, that agency's dismal record of negligence continues. At the end of August an internal audit revealed the Forest Service "misplaced" 215 million dollars intended for wildfire management. This money, from the 2000 fiscal budget, should have been used two years ago to reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire which this year has devastated 6 million acres, killed 20 firefighters, and cost the taxpayers 1.5 billion dollars. "How in the world does an agency lose hundreds of millions of dollars so desperately needed to help extinguish fires in the west?" asked Eric Lynch, a policy analyst for the group Taxpayers for Common Sense.

The Forest Service hasn't been doing such a great job of late in northern New Mexico, either. Let me cite a few examples. Community foresters who were awarded grants under the National Fire Plan in 2002 to do hazardous fuels reduction were recently informed that there is currently no money available to underwrite these grants because it was all used to fight fires. I'd like to know how the Forest Service authorized itself to spend money, specifically designated by Congress for the Collaborative Forest Restoration Project to prevent catastrophic wildfires, on fire suppression. How can we ever hope to keep pace with the accumulation of hazardous fuels within our forests if this money is not used for the purpose for which it was designated? Ironcially, the Forest Service has repeatedly told the public (as an excuse for not addressing their concerns) that it cannot shuffle money from one program to another simply because there is a desperate need for that money in a program that has been underfunded.

In July David M. Stewart, Forest Service regional director of rangeland management, claimed Santa Fe National Forest grazing allotments were ". . . the most horrible example of grazing administration I've experienced in 35 plus years with the Forest Service." This evaluation prompted acting forest supervisor Gilbert Zepeda to order all permittees to remove their cattle from allotments within the Santa Fe National Forest. Permittees claimed Stewart's assessment only reflected "what he could see in a fast one day trip from a truck window." They claimed that his evaluation "was very limited and definitely not representative of the allotments." They further claimed they were being unfairly scapegoated for years of Forest Service negligence and its lack of preparation for this year's drought. Guess what? On August 9 the New Mexico Range Improvement Task Force, a state funded team of experts associated with New Mexico State University, found that 17 of 25 allotments which were ordered vacated "still have enough forage to support cattle this year." The report also underwrote the permittees claim that an exploding elk population is doing more damage to grasslands and riparian areas than cattle grazing, a claim the Forest Service and their cronies in the Fish and Wildlife Service have long turned a deaf ear to. Most importantly, the task force found that the main impact to Forest Service grasslands is forest encroachment due to Forest Service failure to implement thinning and prescribed burning projects.

Ranchers protest Santa Fe National Forest removal order

And what about the mess the Forest Service has created at Sipapu Ski Area and Summer Resort? Back in the early 90s the Forest Service undertook an Environmental Impact Statement for an expansion that would have made the ski area five times as large and allowed twice as many skiers. That document, done at the taxpayer's expense, was appealed by a coalition of local residents, Picuris Pueblo, and environmental groups. The appeal claimed there was no legitimate "purpose and need" for the action and the assessments of potential impacts, social, cultural, and environmental, were inadequate. Acknowledging the legitimacy of several of the appeal points, the Forest Service withdrew the EIS and eventually the proposal was scrapped.

In the light of that fiasco you'd think the Forest Service would be pretty careful about justifying any action it considered permitting at the ski area in the future. Guess again. Fast forward to the summer of 2000 when ski area owners submitted a vague, non site specific "summer work plan" to expand their operation. Without any environmental assessments or even a detailed work plan, the Forest Service gave the ski area permission to proceed with its plan. It wasn't until November of 2000 (after several areas had been clearcut and a new lift had been purchased) when a group of local citizens asked to see the assessments that would permit such work, that the Forest Service realized there were none and ordered the work to stop. The Forest Service was subsequently sued by the ski area (claiming irreparable economic harm based on the work they had already completed) and ordered by a federal judge to allow the work to proceed and assess the impacts after the fact. The whole idea of assessing impacts after they have occurred is completely antithetical to the intent of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). But for some unknown reason the Forest Service failed to appeal this precedent setting decision. I find this particularly egregious in light of the fact that its legal division continues to take parciantes, whose acequias predate Forest Service management, to court for not obtaining special use permits in order to maintain their ditches and diversions which fall on or cross Forest Service land (see La Jicarita, July 2001). It seems obvious to me that if the Forest Service was liable for the labor and equipment the ski area had purchased, it should have compensated the ski area financially and proceeded with a normal NEPA assessment before they considered permitting any expansion of the facilities.

Most recently we've found out via a Forest Service scoping letter to solicit public input about the effects of the illegal work at the ski area that the Forest Service wants to "modify the existing permit area boundary to incorporate the new improvements - approximately 30 acres." This is the Forest Service's euphemistic way of telling us that the ski area trespassed on 30 acres of public land outside its boundaries and just to tidy things up the Forest Service will simply modify the boundary to include the trespassed area. If you or I owned a piece of land adjacent to the National Forest and decided to cut down lots of trees and put up a ski lift next door, I bet the Forest Service wouldn't be quite so accommodating. And meanwhile, the aforementioned parciantes who have a legitimate preexisting right to operate on Forest Service land were, in at least two instances, prosecuted for trespass. Go figure.

Okay, I know I've been pretty negative so far, but believe it or not I'm going to try to end this rant on a positive note of sorts. I, along with a number of other community members, recently met with the new Regional Forester, Harv Forsgren, and some of his staff from the Santa Fe and Carson National forests. We tried to give them some idea of the problems forest dependent community members face dealing with the Forest Service in terms of communication and accountability. I think we were all impressed by the intelligence of the new forester and the candor with which his staff admitted their own frustrations with the agency. Perhaps, if we can get some help from inside the agency we can rescue our co-dependent relationship from complete dysfunction.

New Mexican Land Grants Organize for Action on Their Land Claims

By Kay Matthews

Land grant heirs from all over northern New Mexico and southern Colorado came together on September 14 in Santa Fe to talk about strategies for implementing land claim remedies for community land grants. The General Accounting Office's (GAO) Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo study, which defines and identifies community land grants, will be released in January, and heirs want to ensure that congress takes the necessary steps to reconstitute these grants.

The conference was sponsored by the New Mexico Land Grant Forum and the Mexicano Education and Conservation Trust (MECT), a new non-profit, described by its interim co-chair Moises Gonzales as a "nuts and bolts" organization that will assist the Land Grant Forum in advocating for the return of the community grants. MECT plans to organize as a democratic body made up of member mercedes, or land grants, that can work on policy, organization (MECT will help mercedes that lack structure organize), and political strategy. Its interim board is comprised of Gonzales and Juan Sanchez as co-chairs, Georgia Roybal, Jerry Fuentes, Jaime Chavez, Macario Griego, and Paula Garcia.

David Lujan of Tonantzin Land Institute provided an overview of some of the strategies that can be taken over the next few months. He encouraged all land grant communities to form boards of directors and register with the Secretary of State. They could then come together as a congreso, similar to that of the New Mexico Acequia Association, which several years ago formed a congreso of regional acequia associations around the state. As part of a democratic organization the land grants could become more involved in the electoral process by sponsoring candidate forums, officially contacting new officials after the November elections, and having a presence in the state legislative session in January.

The group then broke down into two sessions: Developing Political Strategies and Organizing Land Grant Governance. Juan Sanchez of the Chilili Land Grant, and Jerry Fuentes of the Truchas Land Grant, led the organizing workshop to provide land grants with help on how to develop bylaws, comply with state statutes, and elect governing boards. Moises Gonzales, an heir to the Carnuel Land Grant, facilitated the Political Strategy workshop.

He provided an overview of what is currently on the table regarding redress of the loss of community grants. As mentioned previously, the GAO study, which was made possible by a bill introduced by Senators Bingaman and Domenici, will be completed in January of 2003. Gonzales said there will inevitably be disagreements regarding the findings of the study, and heirs need to be ready to advocate for changes. House Bill 1823, ordinally introduced by Congressman Bill Redmond in 1998 (the current bill also addresses land grants outside of New Mexico and Colorado), will be reintroduced during the 2003 session by Representative Tom Udall. Rep. Udall introduced the bill in 2002 but it never got out of the Natural Resources committee and heard on the floor. There needs to be a comprehensive lobbying campaign to ensure that this time the bill gets out of committee. In New Mexico, a bill establishing the Attorney General Task Force, which would research the role of the state in upholding the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo , passed the state legislature but was never funded. Just this year a Registry of Community Land Grants was established by the Secretary of State.

The groups then discussed the importance of working with as many segments of the community as possible for the return of the land grants. They identified land grants in southern Colorado that are dealing with the same issues, the Native American communities whose political and economic interests are critical to the process, non-land grant Chicanos and Mexicanos who share common concerns about water and economic development, and progressive environmentalists who recognize the potential for good land stewardship by communities. Angela Herrera, a Tecolote Land Grant activist, said that "We need to welcome people from Mexico, they are increasing the Hispanic population in our state and will be our allies." Another heir pointed out that "we all have Indian blood, indigenous people are part of our community."

Short and long-term strategies were developed. Initially, the group hopes to formally organize the 20 mercedes that already have governing boards and then work to add 20 more into a congreso or governing body. The group will work to gain the support of local organizations and to work in the political process with a political action committee (PAC). Long term goals include the mobilization of 50,000 land grant members, the formal organization of 50 community land grants, and continued political organizing through the PAC.

Miguel Santistevan, La Jicarita Enterprise Youth Development Specialist, brought a contingent of youth from Peñasco High School who participated in the meeting as well and whom everyone welcomed as the land grant activists of tomorrow. The meeting continued into the afternoon, with groups switching attendance at the workshops, a press conference, and the formation of committees on media, governance, and organizing a PAC.

In a conversation after the meeting, Gonzales emphasized that MECT can play a vital role in providing both training and funding for communities to organize and deal with land tenure, water, or economic development issues. For example, MECT could develop a leadership team that would be available to land grants or acequia commissions to help them mediate internal problems or identify the necessary resources they need to establish governing boards or file water transfer protests. Additionally, a percentage of membership dues could be set aside to provide a fund for legal defense in land grant claims or transfer protests.

For more information about MECT, call Moises Gonzales at 927-0402 or Juan Sanchez at 281-4726.

Agua/Caballos Proposed Projects Record of Decision Appealed

By Kay Matthews

The Agua/Caballos Proposed Projects Record of Decision and Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was released in June (see La Jicarita, July issue) and appealed in August by Joanie Berde of Carson Forest Watch, Paul Becker of Vallecitos Stables, John Horning of Forest Guardians, and Sam Hitt of Wild Watershed. Under NEPA regulations, Wild Watershed does not have standing to appeal and has been dismissed from the process.

Contrary to Hitt's recent claim that "It's not a coincedence that they [the Forest Service] started pushing this project as soon as the Bush administration came into office", this timber sale in the Vallecitos Sustained Yield Unit has been long in the making. Public involvement began in 1992; two Draft Environmental Impact Statements (DEIS) were released, in 1995 and 1999; a supplement to the DEIS was issued in 1999; and many public meetings and field trips were held over the course of the project. The second DEIS was released to comply with the amended forest plan and the supplement to the 1999 DEIS was issued in response to discrepancies regarding the actual number of road miles that would be needed to implement the Preferred Alternative. Two new alternatives were included in the supplement that included no new road building, and an Alternative G was developed that keeps road building to a minimum while still meeting the purpose and need of the proposal. Alternative G is now the Preferred Alternative.

Participants in one of the many Agua/Caballos tours

The appeal accuses the Forest Service of failing to gather the necessary population data for indicator species in the Unit as required by the National Forest Management Act (NFMA). The appeal claims that the agency relied on "habitat trend data" instead of acquiring the population data it needs to provide for diversity of plant and animal communities in the area. Kurt Winchester, El Rito District Ranger who is currently acting as assistant Carson National Forest Supervisor, met with both Berde and Becker in an effort to negotiate a settlement to their appeal (Forest Guardians was also invited but declined to participate). According to Winchester, the discussion with the two appellants focused more on their desire that no trees over 18 inches be harvested rather than the issues raised in the appeal. "I'm disappointed that this appeal is all about process rather than the merits of our decision. An appeal like this subverts the efforts of the many people and organizations who contributed to the modification of the original proposal, including Paul Becker, whose comments were specifically addressed in the FEIS. I'm confident that the decision will be upheld."


La Jicarita asked George Grossman of the Santa Fe Group of the Sierra Club for his analysis of the project as the Carson National Forest timber coordinator for his group. Grossman has both organized and attended many field trips to the site and has commented on all the draft versions of the sale, despite the national Sierra Club's opposition to commercial timbering on public lands. According to Grossman, "The Sustained Yield Unit is something very special, an area set aside by the federal government to economically benefit the local communities, and as such it should get special consideration." He points out that before the area was in the public domain, it was heavily logged, with many clearcuts: "As long as the Forest Service is committed to setting aside the required 20% old growth, I'm not concerned that the prescription includes some big trees," Grossman says.

One of the concerns of the Santa Fe Group was whether the development of temporary roads would just be replacing new road construction. The Forest Service intends to create 20 miles of temporary roads in Agua/Caballos that would be closed immediately after implementation. After harvest, the 130.3 miles of existing road would be reduced to 64.4 miles: 22.2 miles would be administratively closed; 13.8 would be physically closed; and 4.7 miles would be obliterated. This would result in reduction of the 98 drainage crossings to 53 and reduce the acreage of permanent open roadway from 391 to 193 acres.

Because the designated operators within the Sustained Yield Unit are relatively small businesses, it's likely that only 500,000 to one million board feet a year will be cut in the project, although Winchester points out that if the operators coordinate their efforts and pool their resources they could potentially harvest between one and two million board feet a year.



Home | Current Issue | Subscribe | About Us | Environmental Justice | Links | Archive | Index

Copyright 1996-2002 La Jicarita Box 6 El Valle Route, Chamisal, New Mexico 87521.