Texas Senator Hutchison has made comments regarding the current availability of training sites in other locations that the Army already has. It's what we've been saying all along - they have space currently to conduct the training they need so tell us again, why do they want to sacrifice southeastern Colorado?
Stories include:
Pueblo Chieftain
Colo Springs Indy
5280 Magazine
Fox 21 Pueblo/Colorado Springs
Fort Worth Star Telegram
Houston Chronicle
KVIA El Paso
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
It's about convenience
We now have Rep. Coffman, Rep. Bishop and Senator Hutchison agreeing with what we've been saying all along; that the Army already has available training ranges. It's all about economics and convenience - nothing more.
And which is more patriotic; honoring the rights of American Citizens to be secure in their homes by using available training ranges, or wasting tax-payers money acquiring unnecessary private and state lands for the advantage of defense contractors?
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Mr. Coffman: take from the poor to give to the rich
US Rep Mike Coffman made more statements this past weekend regarding the Pinon Canyon expansion - primarily that enlarging the little used maneuver site will be an 'economic benefit for Aurora and Colorado Springs'. Yet even he admits there are other locations that can be used for training our troops that they already own.
Read the Post story on it along with the almost 30 responses.
Read the Pueblo Chieftain letter to the editor on agriculture, water and land.
It's also important to note that the area he represents has a very high concentration of defense contractors - from Boeing to Northrup Grumman.
Seems his efforts to push the expansion through are against the majority of other Republicans and Democrats in the state. It's not the partisan issue he is trying to spin it into.
Read the Post story on it along with the almost 30 responses.
Read the Pueblo Chieftain letter to the editor on agriculture, water and land.
It's also important to note that the area he represents has a very high concentration of defense contractors - from Boeing to Northrup Grumman.
Seems his efforts to push the expansion through are against the majority of other Republicans and Democrats in the state. It's not the partisan issue he is trying to spin it into.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Bill Signing used to create more fear
Today's editorial in the Denver Post (read the full article here)
The well written response to that article:
From the perspective of those of us who live in the area of Pinon Canyon, there are three fallacies in this editorial; 1. that the people of southeastern Colorado should "compromise" with the Army, 2. that an Environmental Impact Statement should be done, and 3. that the Army might pull out of Colorado all together.
First of all, we already made a huge compromised with Army. It occurred in the early ???80s when over a quarter of a million acres of land was taken out of the heart of Las Animas County to create the current Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site. American citizens were forcibly removed from their land and we lost the tax revenue associated with it. A magnificent landscape rich with archaeological and historical treasures, which had been on track to receive National Natural Landmark designation became instead a live-fire range.
But it was framed as a compromise; as a "win-win." Army brass told us, "You give up the land and in exchange we'll hire people and contract with locals and you'll see economic benefits come to your region." Ranchers were called upon to do their patriotic duty, to give up the homes that their families had lived in for a century for the benefit of the military and the local economy. We were assured that lost taxes would be compensated for. And we were promised that there would be no further compromises required of us; that there would be no further future expansions.
So we've already tried the compromise thing and found it lacking.
Secondly, there is a misunderstanding of the purpose and the effect of an Environment Impact Statement. An EIS is not the beginning of a process but in effect it is the last step which sort of ties a nice bow around a project. By the time an EIS is completed tremendous time and money have been poured into the process and it is rare in deed that a project is scraped once an EIS has been done.
Congress understands this. That's why they placed a ban upon the Army, prohibiting them from moving forward with an EIS and instead requiring them to justify the expansion to Congress in a less formal report. According to the Government Accountability Office, they failed to do that. Congress has done the right thing in blocking the funding for a Pinon Canyon expansion EIS.
Thirdly, the idea that the Army will behave like a petulant child, pick up its marbles and move out of the state, just because they didn't get what they wanted, is ridiculous. How can they argue that they are suffering from a shortfall of training lands and at the same time threaten to abandon what they have called one of the best training facilities in the country? The threat by Army bureaucrats that they might pull up stakes is pure coercion.
The people of southeastern Colorado are doing the right thing in refusing to compromise. Congress has done the right thing in blocking an EIS. Our state legislature and Gov. Ritter are doing the right thing in deciding not to sell state school lands to the military. And we will all be doing the right thing to take a deep breath and relax about the Pentagon's idol threat that they're going to leave the state.
Doug Holdread
The well written response to that article:
From the perspective of those of us who live in the area of Pinon Canyon, there are three fallacies in this editorial; 1. that the people of southeastern Colorado should "compromise" with the Army, 2. that an Environmental Impact Statement should be done, and 3. that the Army might pull out of Colorado all together.
First of all, we already made a huge compromised with Army. It occurred in the early ???80s when over a quarter of a million acres of land was taken out of the heart of Las Animas County to create the current Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site. American citizens were forcibly removed from their land and we lost the tax revenue associated with it. A magnificent landscape rich with archaeological and historical treasures, which had been on track to receive National Natural Landmark designation became instead a live-fire range.
But it was framed as a compromise; as a "win-win." Army brass told us, "You give up the land and in exchange we'll hire people and contract with locals and you'll see economic benefits come to your region." Ranchers were called upon to do their patriotic duty, to give up the homes that their families had lived in for a century for the benefit of the military and the local economy. We were assured that lost taxes would be compensated for. And we were promised that there would be no further compromises required of us; that there would be no further future expansions.
So we've already tried the compromise thing and found it lacking.
Secondly, there is a misunderstanding of the purpose and the effect of an Environment Impact Statement. An EIS is not the beginning of a process but in effect it is the last step which sort of ties a nice bow around a project. By the time an EIS is completed tremendous time and money have been poured into the process and it is rare in deed that a project is scraped once an EIS has been done.
Congress understands this. That's why they placed a ban upon the Army, prohibiting them from moving forward with an EIS and instead requiring them to justify the expansion to Congress in a less formal report. According to the Government Accountability Office, they failed to do that. Congress has done the right thing in blocking the funding for a Pinon Canyon expansion EIS.
Thirdly, the idea that the Army will behave like a petulant child, pick up its marbles and move out of the state, just because they didn't get what they wanted, is ridiculous. How can they argue that they are suffering from a shortfall of training lands and at the same time threaten to abandon what they have called one of the best training facilities in the country? The threat by Army bureaucrats that they might pull up stakes is pure coercion.
The people of southeastern Colorado are doing the right thing in refusing to compromise. Congress has done the right thing in blocking an EIS. Our state legislature and Gov. Ritter are doing the right thing in deciding not to sell state school lands to the military. And we will all be doing the right thing to take a deep breath and relax about the Pentagon's idol threat that they're going to leave the state.
Doug Holdread
Friday, May 22, 2009
Article in Colo Springs Bus Journal and ResponseC
The following link is to an editorial of sorts in the CSBJ and the associated response from Doug Holdread. Some profound thoughts.
CSBJ Blogger
Doug Holdread response
CSBJ Blogger
Doug Holdread response
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Our youth is our future
Regionwide support
