|
|
|
|
|
2080 Cubic yards |
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
Last Updated 02/23/2010
PNMTA |
|
||
We are partnered with the Great Basin Institute in a $78,201 grant to:
We have made two trips with the Dave Mensing of the GBI and Arthur Callan of the BLM to start the survey process to identify the major access routes, loacation of the gateway signs and kiosks. At this popint it looks as if we will add a kiosk in Dayton, Johnson Lane and one on the east side of the Pine Nuts. Dave Mensing is starting to realize the 6 gateway signs will not cover the all the major access routes, and the 100 route signs will just make a dent in marking the major access routes. There will need to an additional grants to finish out this first step. In our two trips we have begun discussions with Dave and Arthur on how the BLM Travel Management Plan should address the dirt bike and quad trails that exist in the Pine Nuts. It looks hopeful that we will be able to get the Travel Management Plan to state that all existing routes are open unless marked closed. In this way Arthur will be able to create a Travel Management Plan without getting wrapped around the axle trying to identify all the exising trails. Indentifying which existing trails need to be closed will be done after the Travel Management Plan is released. This also helps to establish the legitimacy of the existing trail network. In our intial discussions we have al talked about the Pine Nut Mountains Management area being treated as an OHV area. Hopefully we can turn this into a win-win for both sides, while avoiding the debacle that Sand Mountain has become. |
||
|
|
||
Douglas County has asked our Congressional Delegation to write a Public Land's Bill to help support the County's goal of preserving open space. Unfortunately our Congressional Delegation has told the Copunty they can not have a Land's Bill unless it inlcudes the creation of at least one Wilderness Area. The current proposal will turn the Burbank Canyon Wilderness Study Area into a Wilderness Area. Based on our experience with Land's Bill process in Lyon, Esmerelda and Mineral Counties the PNMTA is willing to go out on a limb and state it is Senator Reid that is demanding the creation of a Wilderness Area in return for his support. This puts the county between the rock and a hard place. While our State Legislature has directed our Congressional Delegration not to include the proposal for WIlderness Areas without the backing of County Governements our Congressional Delegation is insiting the county include such a proposal if they want a Land's Bill. While we support the gola of Douglas County to preserve open spaces, we wll not be able to support the creation of a Wilderness Area in Burbank Canyon. There are various problems with this proposal including the fact the mouth of Burbank Canyon runs along private property along Upper Colony Road, there is an easement for power lines to go through this area, there is a private airport that relies on the airspace about Brubank Canyon for landings and takeoffs, and there are grazing allotments. Our Congressional Delegation is telling us we must find something to sacrafice as a Wilderness Area, even if the area does not fit the defeinition of wilderness, if we want a lands bill and the PNMTA feels the only answer is to tell our Congressional Delegation to take a flying leap and to remember who is the boss. |
|
|
William Lajeunesse, FOXNews.com November 19, 2009 American taxpayers are being forced to fund thousands of lawsuits filed against the federal government by environmental organizations -- with their lawyers clocking thousands of hours and charging fees of up to $650 an hour. The U.S. government hands out millions of dollars each year to various environmental organizations to help protect fish, wildlife and other aspects of the environment. And every year, those same groups spend millions suing the government over everything from forest policy and carbon emissions to water quality and wolf habitats. When the CIA failed to replace 30 percent of its fleet with hybrid cars, the Arizona-based Center for Biological Diversity sued because "its members and staff are impacted by the health effects of oil production," according to the filing. And when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service failed to review the status of slick-stop pepper grass, the group ran up $200,000 in legal bills. Who paid the attorneys fees? The American taxpayers did. In the lucrative world of environmental law, the biggest defendant is the federal government, and taxpayers foot the bill. The nation's ten largest environmental groups have sued the government more than 3,000 times in a nine-year period, according to legal fund the Western Legacy Alliance, an Idaho-based legal fund that defends ranchers and farmers. "The federal government is paying environmental groups to sue the federal government," Karen Budd-Falen, a former government official and an attorney in Cheyenne, Wyo., affiliated with the Western Legacy Alliance, told Fox News. "Taxpayers are paying for litigation, but not over substantive but procedural issues." Procedural issues pertain simply to instances in which the federal government missed a deadline or lost the suit on a technicality, as opposed to substantive issues that are argued before a judge and require a ruling on a dispute or question. In most legal cases, each side pays their own legal bills. That is not the case, however, when nonprofit, public interest groups sue the federal government. Under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), Congress allows needy individuals and nonprofit organizations to recover attorneys fees whether they win, lose or settle. And while the original intent was to guarantee access to the courts for the poor, a dozen of the nation's wealthiest environmental groups are using the law. The Environmental Defense Fund has shelled out $69 million in 67 lawsuits over the past nine years. The National Wildlife Federation has spent $97 million on 233 cases. The Wilderness Society has spent $36 million on 150 cases. And the Sierra Club has spent $46 million on 983 cases. That's just a partial list of lawsuits against the federal government over the past nine years, according to the Western Legacy Alliance. "I absolutely believe that these cases are more about gathering attorneys fees than 'damages,'" Budd-Falen told Fox News. "There is no evidence that one dollar of these fees awarded to any group has gone into on-the-ground habitat or species protection actions. "A majority of environmental groups use in-house attorneys, but they are requesting private attorney rates, in some cases up to $600 per hour," she said. "These fees make money for the organizations to be used to fund more litigation." In one case, the Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund and the Western Environmental Law Center challenged a forest service regulation. There was no trial, and the agency did not contest the claim, which was resolved administratively. Yet seven environmental attorneys claimed 930 hours of work and $479,000 in attorneys fees, with one lawyer seeking $650 an hour. In just one month, The WildEarth Guardians filed petitions to list 700 species as endangered. Each petition requires U.S. Fish and Wildlife to produce and publish a scientific response in 90 days. If it misses the deadline by one day, the agency can be sued -- and it usually loses. But according to members of WildEarth Guardians, these suits help, rather than harm, the American people. "We step in when the government doesn't do its job. Our work is vital to protecting clean air, clean water and native wildlife," John Horning, executive director of WildEarth Guardians, told Fox News. "The claims that our work is frivolous is totally unfounded. We only do work when the government doesn't do its job. "Every day that we can delay development or ensure that the government complies with both the letter and the spirit of the law is a day where we feel like the public interest is victorious," he said. WildEarth Guardians has filed at least 180 lawsuits in the federal district courts and at least 61 appeals in the appellate courts. Now, the growing number of cases is beginning to attract the attention of some lawmakers in Congress. Rep. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., has written to the Department of Justice asking for an investigation, pointing out that much of the money being paid comes out of the Equal Access to Justice Act fund, which Congress set up for the indigent and public interest groups to recover legal fees. Right now, the government does not account for how much is paid out to whom or for what reason. "These are taxpayer dollars that are being used by the federal government to compensate people who have sued the federal government. I believe that taxpayers have the right to know who those people are and how much they've been paid," Lummis told Fox News. "I think we are creating an incentive for environmental organizations to develop shops of specialists that are extremely well compensated, just to sue the federal government and recover attorneys fees." The Sierra Club, the Center for Biodiversity, the Natural Resources Defense Council, The National Wildlife Federation and Earthjustice all refused to comment on the findings of the Western Legacy Alliance. But Horning maintains that despite their multimillion-dollar budgets, these environmental groups still qualify as the little guy. "The government sometimes forgets to serve the little guy, and the little guy is sometimes the voiceless, whether it's public interest in clean air, water or wildlife." But rancher John Kirkbride sees it differently. When groups sue the federal government over grazing rights, he is forced to hire an attorney to protect his rights but can't collect his legal costs because he files as "a friend of the court" and is not a named plaintiff. "Taxpayers are footing the bill for a lot of this. I can't help but be angry this is happening," Kirkbride told Fox News.
"These interests have become very proficient at stalling, delaying and impeding progress. That is their stock and trade. It is a cash cow for them to be able to take advantage of this (EAJA) act." |
||