Skepticism due on trail protection

On June 30, The Grand Junction City Council annexed 17 acres at 166 Edlun. Orchard Mesa Neighbors in Action asked the council to postpone decisions because of questions regarding the adjacent Old Spanish Trail and ownership issues raised by requirements on the BLM’s trail easement.
OMNIA members, who spent hundreds of hours researching the trail, gave a clear and concise presentation. Nobody spoke in support of annexation — the developer was not represented during the hearing process — but still the city chose to annex.
There was also discussion, and commitment, regarding the city’s role in protecting the trail. I hope council members are sincere. I also hope they understand the reasons for my skepticism:
u2713 The city’s logo is on signage proclaiming a partnership with the BLM and Mesa County. However, when asked in early February, staff had no documents regarding historical or contemporary easements. To my knowledge, the city has never participated in maintenance, expansion or study of the trail — nor did it participate in an OMNIA-hosted tour of the area in May.
u2713 Staff admitted the trail is not shown on their GPS system because they cannot determine where it is. Earlier June 30, a staff member also said they “cannot be sure which trail is the actual Spanish Trail and/or the Gunnison Bluff Trail.” Hint: The Gunnison Bluff Trail is along the Gunnison River.
u2713 The city has had meetings about the trail with county and state officials. However, members of the Old Spanish Trail Association were not invited. By not including OSTA’s resources and knowledge, these meetings are incomplete. OSTA’s maps show where the trail is. They’re even fairly accurate.
u2713 A nearby development that may jeopardize public access to the trail will be reviewed by the city soon. It will be interesting if city officials remember their pledge. This will be their opportunity to demonstrate real commitment and to put my skepticism to rest.
VICKI FELMLEE, President
OMNIA
Grand Junction

Rules for gas drilling
not as strict as others
I have been an environmental consultant to industry for almost 30 years. When I began my career in the early 1980s, my first jobs entailed helping large manufacturing facilities eliminate unlined waste ponds. Not until 2008 did Colorado pass a law requiring oil and gas drillers to limit use of unlined ponds.
I’ve worked with manufacturing facilities when they produced water that “might” be contaminated. They were required to use closed-loop, on-site treatment for that water. I recently inspected a few Mesa County drill pads. I saw a hillside sliced off at a 90-degree angle. I saw land slumping well above a pad because insufficient attention was given to soil testing. I saw tanks releasing vapor into the atmosphere with an obvious hydrocarbon odor, an activity my manufacturing clients could never get away with.
As near as I can tell, the proposed new state rules will still not bring the oil and gas activities to the level of environmental care already practiced by most U.S. industry.
Perhaps, the fierce opposition by some to the proposed regulations is the fear that if they have to live up to what other industries have to do, maybe they cannot compete economically with alternative energy sources. If that is true, it is time to find out.
NIC KORTE

Gen. Clark was correct
about McCain’s experience
Bob Strong’s July 3 letter to the editor, “Clark ridiculous in McCain attack,” misquoted Gen. Wesley Clark’s comments about John McCain. Clark did not say that getting shot down in Vietnam disqualifies McCain to be president, as Mr. Strong indicated.
Clark’s actual quote was “I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president.” This was his response after his host on CBS’s “Face the Nation” said that Obama had no more wartime policy experience than McCain, and had not “ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot down” as McCain had.
Clark is right. McCain’s service does not qualify him in itself. As Mr. Strong’s letter showed, there is no historical correlation between a president’s military service, or lack thereof, and competent or incompetent decision making as president.
MACKENZIE GIBSON
Grand Junction

This entry was posted on Monday, July 7th, 2008 at 9:04 am and is filed under Printed letters. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.