Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Moderator: HAZ - Moderators

Linked Guides none
Linked Areas none
User avatar
CannondaleKid
Soap Box Kopelli
Posts: 1239
Joined: May 04 2004 8:39 pm
City, State: Mesa, AZ
Contact:

Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Post by CannondaleKid » Nov 04 2014 10:14 am

While I truly hate politics and politicians, this has got my goat...
:SB:
Anybody been keeping up with the scrub-land for Oak Flat land exchange between Resolution Copper and the US Government?
Namely: H.R. 687 - Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

There may be a Land Exchange taking place but I don't believe Conservation has anything to do with it. Maybe conservation of $$ for Resolution Copper, or more accurately, Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton, two of the largest mining companies in the world (English & Australian), who just happen to be partnering with an up-and-coming Chinese mining company.

Between the billions of gallons of water necessary for this type of mining along with the monstrous hole in the ground that will eventually form when the 7,000-foot deep 'cave' collapses in 25-30 years, I may be dead and gone by the (and possibly so will the legislators who vote for it) but I don't believe it's a good thing.

If interested, you can read the whole bill here: (all two pages of it so I would hope it is a summary)
http://www.cbo.gov/publication/44416
Check out all the vague language in the document...

"Enacting the legislation could increase offsetting receipts..."
What? Vote on the unknown, sounds like a good idea? NOT!

"If the property sought by Resolution Copper is appraised at more than the appraised value of the property that the company offers for exchange, the company could donate additional land or make a cash payment to the United States."
COULD?! This should read MUST!

If the company’s property is appraised for more than the federal acreage, the difference in the value would be considered a donate to the federal government"
What?! So they can write more off their taxes?? Oh wait... And further what taxes will come to the US and Arizona out of it anyway? The employee's?

"In addition, after completion of the exchange, Resolution Copper would have to pay the federal government a portion of any future income earned on the former federal property if the company determines that the actual cumulative production of minerals located on that property exceeds the value of the estimated production used in the original appraisal process."
Again, shouldn't the US Government or an independent organization make this determination and NOT the company who will benefit if (when) they understate the value?

"Therefore, we cannot determine whether the company would make a payment or estimate the size of any such payment."
So much for having valid information to make an informed decision to vote for against this bill.

While Senator McCain visited the current mine and got the two-bit propaganda tour, what he needs to do is go look at the scrub-land that Resolution wants to trade for Oak Flat. From what I've seen of it it isn't fit for recreation anything like the Oak Flat area.

Oh well, if it gets passed then in 25-30 years maybe the monstrous hole in the ground that forms could be called the Gosar/Flake/McCain Meteor Crater... after all, we Arizonans won't know what hit us until too late.

:M2C:
CannondaleKid

User avatar
chumley
budding artist
Posts: 6803
Joined: Sep 18 2002 8:59 am
City, State: Tempe, AZ

Re: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Post by chumley » Dec 04 2014 11:47 pm

Jim_H wrote:Line item vetoes of a Federal Law would be performed by the President,
Except for that pesky thing called the Constitution. The president doesn't have the power of line item veto and the Supreme Court has ruled against allowing it (~1996). So either congress removes the land swap language from the bill before submitting it or the president has an all or nothing decision when it lands on his desk.

Yay disfunctional government! :roll:
smoke it

User avatar
friendofThundergod
Exploring Kokopelli
Posts: 904
Joined: Jan 21 2013 10:47 am
City, State: AZ

Re: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Post by friendofThundergod » Dec 05 2014 7:50 am

@Jim_H

Gotta go with Chumley on this one Jim, you are definitely the authority on weather and forestry but leave this one to the underpaid government teacher ;)

Chumley is right, I think your confusion might be in the wording of line-item veto, yes it is reserved for the "executive authority" but in this case the executive authority refers to governors (also members of the executive branch, albeit at the state level) nearly every state allows their governors the ability to perform a line item veto. Without using the google machine I want to say Chumley is spot on, Presidents have pushed in the past for the power to utilize a line-item veto and argued that it would prevent "pork barrel" spending, however, the Supreme Court does not see it that way, and I feel it was once granted and immediately struck down..but last part could be my poor memory, either way line-item vetos do not exist at the Federal level, nor are they Constitutional.

User avatar
Jim_H
Climate Windchime
Posts: 4670
Joined: Sep 08 2006 8:14 pm
City, State: Phoenix, AZ

Re: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Post by Jim_H » Dec 05 2014 8:18 am

Clinton had it, or I thought he did, but I stopped paying attention to the national evening news about 8 years ago, or so. I had enough of ads for penis dysfunction pills, pills to destroy my liver while dangerously changing my body chemistry, and pills to make my stomach stop doing what it is supposed to do, so I tuned out. It never ceases to amaze me, what the Supreme Court likes and doesn't like. Corporations are now considered legal people, but can't go to jail, but then the line item is unconstitutional. Oh well. I now listen to the radio, since my TV is turned off, and that means NPR. All they report on are millennials -probably to gain pledge support for being relevant in their lives, Ebola, and that town in Missouri.

Oh, I have no problem being wrong, I thought the thing still existed. However, if you tell me the LIV went away before I tuned out 8 years ago, I will be in shock! Is Britney Spears still adorable and sexy?
Nothing more enjoyable than a good hike out of town.

User avatar
chumley
budding artist
Posts: 6803
Joined: Sep 18 2002 8:59 am
City, State: Tempe, AZ

Re: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Post by chumley » Dec 05 2014 8:23 am

@Jim_H
You are correct that it did exist. But even before it was struck down, it was exclusively to reduce wasteful spending appropriations (e.g. pork). A land swap would not have been eligible for line-item removal even if the court had ruled the law to be ok.
smoke it

User avatar
Jim_H
Climate Windchime
Posts: 4670
Joined: Sep 08 2006 8:14 pm
City, State: Phoenix, AZ

Re: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Post by Jim_H » Dec 05 2014 8:25 am

What of Britney Spears!!??
Nothing more enjoyable than a good hike out of town.

User avatar
chumley
budding artist
Posts: 6803
Joined: Sep 18 2002 8:59 am
City, State: Tempe, AZ

Re: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Post by chumley » Dec 05 2014 8:32 am

[-X :lol:
smoke it

User avatar
friendofThundergod
Exploring Kokopelli
Posts: 904
Joined: Jan 21 2013 10:47 am
City, State: AZ

Re: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Post by friendofThundergod » Dec 05 2014 9:13 am

@Jim_H
and that means NPR
Jeesh even going after NPR, you are in rare form today Jim ;) I grew up on "Car Talk" "All things considered" and "Wait Wait Don't Tell Me" lol

User avatar
Jim_H
Climate Windchime
Posts: 4670
Joined: Sep 08 2006 8:14 pm
City, State: Phoenix, AZ

Re: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Post by Jim_H » Dec 05 2014 9:16 am

friendofThundergod wrote:@Jim_H
and that means NPR
Jeesh even going after NPR, you are in rare form today Jim ;) I grew up on "Car Talk" "All things considered" and "Wait Wait Don't Tell Me" lol
Oh, I like NPR, and that is basically all I listen to aside from music flipping, i just get tired of their news. I follow them on FB, and myself and a number of other people began to notice and become irritated with their heavy millennial reporting. However, isn't news a bit irritating after a while? It is generally the same thing over and over, and I am largely powerless to change these otherwise depressing events. Where is the heavy reporting on, "Puppy greets owner at door, holds bladder"? Well, I also follow the Onion.
Nothing more enjoyable than a good hike out of town.

User avatar
azbackpackr
River Paddler
Posts: 8113
Joined: Jan 21 2006 6:46 am
City, State: Flag-summer-Needles-winter

Re: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Post by azbackpackr » Dec 09 2014 6:47 am

Please sign the petition and share with whatever other social media you participate in. Thank you:

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petiti ... b/rnMfH0WL
Last edited by joebartels on Dec 09 2014 7:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: link to campaign with advertisements removed, direct link to petition added
There is a point of no return unremarked at the time in most lives. Graham Greene The Comedians
A clean house is a sign of a misspent life.

User avatar
neilends
Exploring Kokopelli
Posts: 142
Joined: Jan 29 2008 8:32 am
City, State: Scottsdale
Contact:

Re: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Post by neilends » Dec 09 2014 2:33 pm

friendofThundergod wrote:@Jim_H

Gotta go with Chumley on this one Jim, you are definitely the authority on weather and forestry but leave this one to the underpaid government teacher ;)

Chumley is right, I think your confusion might be in the wording of line-item veto, yes it is reserved for the "executive authority" but in this case the executive authority refers to governors (also members of the executive branch, albeit at the state level) nearly every state allows their governors the ability to perform a line item veto. Without using the google machine I want to say Chumley is spot on, Presidents have pushed in the past for the power to utilize a line-item veto and argued that it would prevent "pork barrel" spending, however, the Supreme Court does not see it that way, and I feel it was once granted and immediately struck down..but last part could be my poor memory, either way line-item vetos do not exist at the Federal level, nor are they Constitutional.
Yep. The Supreme Court struck down the federal line-item veto during the Clinton administration, in Clinton v. City of New York, 524 U.S. 417 (1998). While I like the line-item idea myself, the Constitution just doesn't allow it so we'd need an amendment. Laws require passage by both the Senate and House followed by signature of the President, per the Constitution. But a line-item entails passage by only one house, followed by signature of the President.

Great idea; Constitution needs to be modified to allow it. It's pretty much that simple.
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams

User avatar
chumley
budding artist
Posts: 6803
Joined: Sep 18 2002 8:59 am
City, State: Tempe, AZ

Re: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Post by chumley » Dec 09 2014 5:12 pm

@neilends
We will never see another amendment to the Constitution passed. :M2C:
smoke it

User avatar
azbackpackr
River Paddler
Posts: 8113
Joined: Jan 21 2006 6:46 am
City, State: Flag-summer-Needles-winter

Re: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Post by azbackpackr » Dec 14 2014 5:31 am

This is still being shoved through, and Obama is probably going to sign it. He could send it back, ask that to be removed, but I don't see that happening.
There is a point of no return unremarked at the time in most lives. Graham Greene The Comedians
A clean house is a sign of a misspent life.

User avatar
chumley
budding artist
Posts: 6803
Joined: Sep 18 2002 8:59 am
City, State: Tempe, AZ

Re: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Post by chumley » Dec 14 2014 8:52 am

Obama won't touch it. The senate vote was 89-11 in favor. I'm no government teacher, but a veto would be easily overridden, and absolutely nothing our government does these days comes with that kind of bipartisan support. We lose.
smoke it

User avatar
chumley
budding artist
Posts: 6803
Joined: Sep 18 2002 8:59 am
City, State: Tempe, AZ

Re: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Post by chumley » Dec 14 2014 1:35 pm

Even some conservation groups hail this as a victory for preservation! ](*,) Part of the bill that transfers the Arizona land to the mining company also protects over a million of acres elsewhere, including the establishment of 6 new wilderness areas covering 245,000 acres across the west.

http://wilderness.org/victory-congress- ... ublic-land
smoke it

User avatar
azbackpackr
River Paddler
Posts: 8113
Joined: Jan 21 2006 6:46 am
City, State: Flag-summer-Needles-winter

Re: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Post by azbackpackr » Dec 14 2014 6:36 pm

Yeah, I heard about that, but hadn't looked into it. Sigh.
There is a point of no return unremarked at the time in most lives. Graham Greene The Comedians
A clean house is a sign of a misspent life.

User avatar
blisterfree
GET & SKIT Kopelli
Posts: 176
Joined: Jan 29 2012 11:47 pm
City, State: lithosphere

Oak Flat land exchange

Post by blisterfree » Dec 15 2014 8:05 pm

(Originally posted to the AZT forum, but moved to this thread.)

Here's an old topic of discussion on HAZ that might be worth reviving. My apologies if it's been discussed more recently elsewhere on the forums.

Arizona Trail users in particular should watch this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiME3XWEPjU

Realize that the town of Superior will lie just 2 miles from what would become North America's largest copper mine, larger than Morenci. The mine is likely to have a major (albeit temporary and at significant environmental cost) economic impact on Superior, with the first impacts for trail users likely coming in the form of reduced lodging availability. The mine tailings may end up being dumped somewhere west of town, possibly impacting the Arizona Trail and Superstition Wilderness viewsheds.

Is the Oak Flat mine a done deal? In spite of US Congress having just passed the land exchange as part of an unrelated defense appropriations bill, the situation is arguably still fluid and there remains a small window of opportunity to let your voice be heard by policy-makers with the hope of redress. Check out Saving Oak Flat Campground on facebook and their links to petition the federal government to protect this outstanding area, including important Gaan riparian canyon, from permanent destruction.
Last edited by blisterfree on Dec 15 2014 9:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
blisterfree
GET & SKIT Kopelli
Posts: 176
Joined: Jan 29 2012 11:47 pm
City, State: lithosphere

Re: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Post by blisterfree » Dec 15 2014 8:39 pm

Does anyone have details on the planned location of the mine tailings site? I've heard of several areas under consideration, from the old Pinto mine "brownfield" site in Gila County to "across the street from the Boyce Thompson Arboretum."

The land swap gives the mining company the title to the future mine site, but it doesn't guarantee them an off-site tailings dump that would be needed to operate the mine. Might this issue be the one that bides a bit of time, say, until a less hostile US Congress emerges that can undo some portion of this mess?

User avatar
Bradshaws
Exploring Kokopelli
Posts: 259
Joined: Feb 12 2011 11:55 am
City, State: Phoenix, AZ

Re: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Post by Bradshaws » Jan 09 2015 9:12 pm

I received this email from the White House today as response from the petition I signed online. At the time, it kinda felt like signing it would be like spitting on a forest fire.... and I was right ](*,)




We the People
We'll Work With Tribes to Protect Sacred Land

By Jodi Gillette, Special Assistant to the President for Native American Affairs

Thank you for your petition. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015 (NDAA) became law on December 19. Section 3003 of the NDAA -- which the Administration opposed -- provides for the exchange of thousands of acres of public land to a private company called Resolution Copper Mining. The public lands to be transferred have significant religious, cultural, historical, and archeological value to the San Carlos Apache Tribe and other tribes in the region. For these tribes, the area is sacred.

As Department of the Interior Secretary Sally Jewell said in her statement on the passage of the NDAA, which you can read here, "I am profoundly disappointed with the Resolution Copper provision, which has no regard for lands considered sacred by nearby Indian tribes."

In legislatively providing for the exchange of these lands, section 3003 "short circuits the long-standing and fundamental practice of pursuing meaningful government-to-government consultation with the 566 federally recognized tribes with whom we have a unique legal and trust responsibility. Although there are consultation requirements in the legislation, the appropriate time for honoring our relationship with tribes is before legislating issues of this magnitude." The provision also significantly weakens the environmental assessment generally required by the National Environmental Protection Act -- an assessment that similarly should have been conducted before providing for the transfer of these lands.

Moving forward, the Administration will work with Rio Tinto (Resolution Copper's parent company) to determine what can be done to work with the tribes to preserve these sacred areas.

Tell us what you think about this response and We the People.



You're receiving this email because the address this is where my email address was ;) was entered to sign a We the People petition.
Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy
Please do not reply to this email. Contact the White House

The White House • 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW • Washington, DC 20500 • 202-456-1111

"We the people..." Nowadays it just seems like there's no "We" anymore :lone:

:stop: I didn't post this to start a heated, hate filled discussion. I'm simply sharing information
“ you know what I think?... It doesn’t matter what I think”

User avatar
chumley
budding artist
Posts: 6803
Joined: Sep 18 2002 8:59 am
City, State: Tempe, AZ

Re: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Post by chumley » Jan 09 2015 10:28 pm

Bradshaws wrote:I didn't post this to start a heated, hate filled discussion.
Well that takes all the fun out of an internet forum? :roll:
smoke it

User avatar
CannondaleKid
Soap Box Kopelli
Posts: 1239
Joined: May 04 2004 8:39 pm
City, State: Mesa, AZ
Contact:

Re: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act

Post by CannondaleKid » Jan 10 2015 6:59 am

I got the same email and I see it's just more politics... they get better press by making the Resolution Copper deal only about the issue with a federally recognized tribe when that was merely one piece of a giant puzzle...

One could go on and on about the other pieces that are of even more significance, but why? Not much point in closing the barn door now.
CannondaleKid

Post Reply

Return to “Political”


cron