POSTMUS PERSPECTIVE: MOJAVE NATIONAL PRESERVE COOPERATION LONG OVERDUE

By Supervisor Bill Postmus

From "Postmus Notes", a periodic electronic newsletter from the office of Bill Postmus, Chairman of the Board of Supervisors for the County of San Bernardino

The Mojave National Preserve fires have been put out. But concerns associated with the National Park Service’s management of the region are just heating up.

San Bernardino County’s concerns with the management of the Preserve go beyond the fire and the perceived lack of aggressiveness in preventing or suppressing it, including, but not limited to:

• The removal and obliteration of the ranching community within the Preserve;


• The removal and obliteration of the water infrastructure that served both livestock and wildlife;


• The regulatory control exerted by NPS over the use of County owned and maintained roads within the Preserve;


• Strong-armed law-enforcement tactics exerted by NPS on neighboring private lands within the Preserve;


• The dogged pursuit of reclaiming property with alleged non-conforming uses.

The Mojave National Preserve was created in 1994 by the California Desert Protection Act (CDPA). That law also created vast areas of congressionally designated wilderness, which previously had roads and had allowed access, but for which the Congress and environmental activists wanted "protection".

San Bernardino County actively opposed the creation of the Mojave Preserve. In one effort to quiet opponents, the Park Service created an Advisory Commission to include local government representation. My predecessor sat on the commission, provided input, and was ignored. The Commission had a 10-year life, which expired in 2004, but it never met during my tenure as a County Supervisor, which began in late 2000.

From early on, the Park Service had marching orders to manage the Preserve as a National Park, and to manage it according to Clinton-era Washington-directed criteria. One of the County's specific inputs was to retain the ranching infrastructure, and to keep committed stewardship on the ground. Instead, NPS set about buying out and getting people off the land almost immediately.

With respect to the fire, I suspect that if the ranching families were still in the region, much quicker action could and would have been taken when the fire first broke out. Part of the obliteration of the ranching culture has also involved the dismantling of all of the range improvement and development projects, including a vast system of wells. Their water could have helped fight the fire. There is a new fight brewing over whether the wells can even continue to be used to siphon a trickle of water for the remaining wildlife.

Prior to the Desert Protection Act there was a plan for desert management that contained a degree of wilderness designation on truly roadless areas. That plan was ignored. This resulted in many necessary back country roads being closed (even limiting access by fire trucks).

Going beyond the fire issues, when the Preserve was created, the Park Service immediately installed regulatory road signs (“No Commercial Vehicles”, etc.) on our roads in the region. The Service did not consult with the County.

Now, after ten years, we are embarking upon negotiations with the Park Service on the management and cost-effective maintenance of this system. I assure residents and property owners of my commitment to maintain this link to San Bernardino County government within the Preserve.

We have been forced to accept a management and culture that is foreign to our way of life that includes private stewardship. This culture prefers to manage resources in the name of "protection" and "preservation."

We can't restore the livestock industry in the region, but we can, perhaps with some creative management, keep a group of committed private residents and landowners in the area to provide stewardship of the land. These kinds of interests should be welcomed by the Park Service, not viewed as "inholders" to be dealt with.

Nothing can undo the damage that has been done by the recent fire to the landscape or to the private homes and property in the area. But there are repairs that can be accomplished.

The anticipated appointment of a new Superintendent of the Mojave National Preserve is a great opportunity to demonstrate leadership and to restore order from the top in an Administration that is less agenda-driven than the previous Administration.

This recent devastating fire doesn't have to be just another sad chapter in the history of the Mojave Preserve. It could serve as an example of the need for a partnership between the federal, state and local governments for the good of not only the natural resources, but also for the people of the area.

Train Burglary Arrests

National Park News
Mojave National Preserve

On August 5th, a Budget rental box truck was observed parked two miles from the Union Pacific Railroad tracks near Cima, California, within the park. Rangers Kirk Gebicke and Joe Spillane contacted the two men, Alejandrio Zamudio and Alfredo Cienfugo-Benitez, seated in the truck.

They determined that the men had been drinking and that their reasons for being parked in the area did not add up. The two men gave the rangers permission to search the vehicle, which proved to be empty.

While a computer check was being run on the pair, ranger Wayne Dingman found a bindle of cocaine four feet from the point where Cienfugo-Benitez had thrown it into the roadside grass. Both men were arrested.

The rangers consulted with Union Pacific special agents and found that the duo had possibly been involved in thefts from trains and were in the park to collect stolen property.

The two men were turned over to Union Pacific police for follow-up interviews, then taken to jail.

A ground and aerial search of the railroad tracks the next day led to the discovery of 75 stolen television sets that had been thrown from a train. The estimated value is in excess of $225,000.

Rangers and UP special agents watched the property throughout the night to see if other gang members would return for the property, but without results.

On Indian land, a twist on church vs. state

As US agencies and courts declare sites as holy ground, critics charge the government is establishing religion.

TWO CASES: A federal court decision declared Rainbow Bridge in Utah (left) a protected site because of its spiritual value to Southwestern native Americans. Another federal decision allowed scientists to proceed with examining 'Kennewick Man' (model shown, right), the 9,300-year-old human remains that Washington native groups claim as an ancestor. SARA E. RICHARDS/AP; KEVIN P. CASEY/AP

By Brad Knickerbocker - Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

ASHLAND, ORE. – The relationship between government and religion has been a complicated issue ever since the architects of the new American republic made it the lead item in the First Amendment to the US Constitution and Thomas Jefferson argued for "a wall of separation between church and state."

It remains a difficult legal and political issue, as witness the US Supreme Court's recent split decisions on public displays of the Ten Commandments. It may be even more complex involving claims by native Americans, whose spiritual and religious practices are so connected to what they see as holy ground.

A series of court cases and federal agency policy decisions have attempted to thread subtle differences between the constitutional protection of the "free exercise" of religion and the equally important prohibition against the "establishment" of religion.

As with the Supreme Court's two-way decisions on the Ten Commandments, federal courts seem to have moved in conflicting directions.

Holy monuments vs. sacred ground

In one case, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled against an 8-foot cross that had stood since 1934 on a hill in the Mojave National Preserve in California commemorating US soldiers lost in World War I. Yet another panel of judges from that same appellate court ruled that the owner of property in Arizona could not extract sand and gravel for commercial concrete from his land because Hopi, Navajo, and Zuni tribes considered it to be sacred.

Critics say that declarations of hallowed ground by the federal government - just as in cases involving Christmas crèches and other religious displays - go against the First Amendment. "That's a clear establishment clause violation," says William Perry Pendley, president of the Mountain States Legal Foundation. He reads the court decisions as "no to Christianity, yes to pantheism."

Ruling in the Arizona case, brought by gravel pit owner Dale McKinnon, three Ninth Circuit judges saw things differently. "Because of the unique status of Native American societies in North American history, protecting Native American shrines and other culturally important sites has historical value for the nation as a whole, much like Greece's preservation of the Parthenon," wrote Judge Betty Fletcher.

"The Establishment Clause does not require governments to ignore the historical value of religious sites," Judge Fletcher wrote. "Native American sacred sites of historical value are entitled to the same protection as the many Judeo-Christian religious sites ... including the National Cathedral in Washington, D.C.; the Touro Synagogue, America's oldest standing synagogue, dedicated in 1763; and numerous churches that played a pivotal role in the Civil Rights Movement, including the Sixteenth Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Ala."

Among the more well-known sites at least partially protected because of their religious and cultural importance to native Americans are Medicine Wheel and Devil's Tower in Wyoming, Rainbow Bridge in Utah, and Cave Rock on the Nevada side of Lake Tahoe.

The US Forest Service has closed Cave Rock to climbing, a move that is being challenged in federal court by the Access Fund, a 1.6-million member group that represents recreational climbers. Some observers predict that the case could end up in the US Supreme Court.

Related to such cases is the history of "Kennewick Man," the 9,300-year-old skeleton found on federal land in central Washington State in 1996.

Defining 'native' American

Indian tribes in the area claimed the "Ancient One," as they called him, as their own to bury. The federal government agreed, citing the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) of 1990, which provides for the return of sacred items, human remains, and other things to lineal descendants and "culturally affiliated" Indian tribes. No further excavation was allowed at the site.

But a group of eight scientists - asserting that the remains may be more nearly related to the prehistoric Jomon people of Japan, Polynesians, or even Caucasians - sued for the right to conduct detailed study. The scientists won that case in federal court, and they recently spent 10 days examining Kennewick Man at the University of Washington in Seattle.

That has led to a push in Congress to amend NAGPRA so that it applies to the remains and artifacts of any indigenous American people whether or not they have any proven cultural affiliation to present-day tribes.

"Everyone who worked on the [original] bill, including myself, logically assumed that all pre-Columbian remains indigenous to the United States are 'native American' and would be covered by the act regardless of their age or whether they can be culturally affiliated," Walter Echo-Hawk, an attorney with Native American Rights Fund, told a Senate hearing last week.

But archeologists, anthropologists, and others argue against such a change.

"If the proposed amendment is accepted, NAGPRA will be expanded far beyond the boundaries of what is reasonable, and you will have removed from the national patrimony ancient cultures and heritages that should be a source of pride for all Americans," Paula Barran, an attorney representing the scientists, told the Senate hearing. "Such actions will impoverish future generations and seriously harm education in this country."

What lawmakers, judges, and government agencies continue to look for here are ways to balance the needs of science, cultural heritage, and the demands of the US Constitution regarding religion.

In any case, says Mr. Pendley, "This is an issue that's not going to go away."

The Great Mojave National Preserve Fire

22-27 June 2005

Between 22 and 27 June 2005 a fire that will change the crown of the East Mojave forever destroyed more than 70,000 acres. Before it was over, more than 1,100 fire fighters and associated equipment, aircraft, and support vehicles were involved. It is always difficult to estimate the cost of something like this, but the authorities involved are already admitting over $4,000,000 just to "fight" the fire ... and then there'll be rehabilitation and restoration costs.

Starting out with the good news (or "best" news I guess since none of it is good), I consider it remarkable they were able to contain the Hackberry Fire to the mountain range of that name. I was concerned the fire would get into Lanfair Valley. It didn't. Of course we have the rest of the fire season to be concerned about.

The fire destroyed at least 50% of the piñon & juniper habitat in the East Mojave. Included were historic piñons that were hundreds of years old that were used by Indians in prehistoric times as a source of pine nuts. In that sense these trees were more than simply part of the botanical landscape. And it must be understood that these trees will not be back in my lifetime, or in the lifetime of my children, or my children's children's lifetime. It might be noted that the fire burned only 70,000 acres out of the 1,600,000 acre preserve. But that 70,000 acres likely included half or more of the piñon/juniper habitat. It was part of the crown that gave the high country of the East Mojave such great natural charm. For many of us, the East Mojave will never be the same. We are left with our memories and the photos on file in Goffs.

The fire also consumed innumerable priceless historical sites. And when I say "consumed" I mean they are gone - not even much in the way of ashes. These include Bob Hollimon's home site, Pettit's Well, the Stotts Stamp Mill site, part of the Government Holes Corrals, Barnett Mine, up to a hundred other mine sites, and much more. These things are gone. They will never come back. When you combine these losses with the losses of cultural resources deliberately destroyed through the action of the National Park Service, it can be seen the preserve that started out so rich in that regard will soon be destitute of historical sites. I used to think the information and photographs we are collecting here at Goffs would serve as an interpretive adjunct to the historical sites themselves. Instead, our information and photographs will, in many cases, be all there is.

Residences were consumed by the fire in Round Valley. The fire entered the valley from the S and SW. I have no way of knowing whether that phase of the fire could have been prevented. The destruction is too complete and of course MNP NPS filters and spins any facts that come out. Anyway, a number of residences were completely and utterly destroyed. The landscape was completely changed from one of a lush piñon/juniper region to something that looks like it is on the moon. Many use the word "moonscape."

Mid Hills Campground was mostly destroyed. As I understand it (the way in is blocked by MNP NPS so I haven't actually seen it), only one tier of camp sites remains. Mid Hills represents 50% of the camp grounds in the MNP and the most popular one, especially by experienced desert campers. I imagine some grand new plan will be needed to make up the difference.

Hardly a thing can be found in the more intensely burned areas. Jo Ann and I noted three weeks after the burn a complete absence of lizards and even insects while walking across a badly burned area in Round Valley. The charred remains of rabbits and smaller rodents that couldn't get out of the way are encountered here and there. More agile critters likely fared better.

To exacerbate the situation, on Friday 22 July and again on Sunday 24 July heavy rains fell in the Round Valley/Gold Valley region. The rain served to soften the bleak black coloration of the countryside, but the black slurry rushed down the hill sides forming raging torrents that washed the road out through the narrows in Black Canyon and did other damage. We can expect that to continue. The rain extended out some into Lanfair Valley which might help with the dryness there. (Later note: rains have continued in this area up to the time of writing - 3 August 2005.)

As we leave this fire behind us, we must worry about what lies ahead. We are maybe a month into the fire season with two or more months ahead. There's much yet to burn in the East Mojave. My most urgent worries would be Lanfair Valley and Cima Dome. Keep your fingers crossed on these. It has already been demonstrated that the force and will available to confront fires in the East Mojave is not sufficient to stop them.

As to the Mojave Desert Heritage & Cultural Association and its properties in the East Mojave, none were burned. President Chris Ervin and Executive Director Dennis Casebier each have personal property in Round Valley that was very badly burned - or, the phrase is, "the land is toast." Several of our long-time members and close friends lost their residences in this fire.

Mojave National Preserve is attempting to come out of this looking like it was not a failure and making it appear they have a grip on things. On Saturday 23 July 2005 they hosted a get-together amongst their "neighbors" to "share information about the recent fire, discuss concerns, and learn how to prepare for future fires and other emergencies." Although I do not commonly attend affairs like this, considering them to be mainly a waste of time, I decided to go to this one for two reasons: (1) Because I wasn't invited and yet I own four pieces of land in the preserve and the Goffs Cultural Center shares a border with the preserve, and, (2) I had a house guest who wanted to attend because he, too, owns land in the preserve.

Park Service is putting as good a face on this as they can. Comments like "we did all that was humanly possible," "it was an act of God," "it was the wettest winter on record and hence the undergrowth expanded to an unusual extent," "there was too much dead material on the ground and it needed to be burned." Every once in awhile MNP NPS tries the approach of "the fire was started naturally so it is OK" but that doesn't fly, especially with people who really care about the East Mojave and those who lost their homes or cabins. This meeting was definitely a propaganda and posturing affair.

As it turned out a large number of people were there and we all did get to visit with many of our acquaintances. You could get along OK at this meeting unless you made the slightest suggestion that the response to the fire was less than perfect. Yet there was an undercurrent from the "neighbors" pointing to poor management practices and other bungling that permitted the fire to become much larger than it might have been. For example the things I heard at this meeting included: (1) There were arguments among the various factions in the command center at various points as whether to fight the fire or to just let it burn - valuable time was lost in the discussions. (2) Fire fighting units were held back because of uncertainties about whether they were supposed to drive in wilderness. (3) At the onset it was thought water would be available in the big tank at the mouth of Carruthers Canyon, but it was dry - as were many other potential water reserves around Lanfair Valley (this because MNP NPS has cut off all the waters previously maintained by ranchers). They had to wait up to five hours for water to be hauled in. (4) Communications between various elements of the huge fire-fighting force were poor. (5) The formal fire plan drawn up last year by MNP NPS was a waste of time. (6) There were major errors in certain of the multi-colored maps MNP NPS had drawn up, but when "neighbors" attempted to comment on that (or anything else for that matter) the MNP NPS people became very defensive. (7) While the fire was raging there was government equipment including a front loader with a blade being used to tear out corrals and fence lines only a few miles from the fire but this equipment was not brought into play. (8) Someone had heard from a fire fighter that certain properties were to be protected at all costs, while others received little or no attention. (9) A critical group of fire fighters were not informed there were residences in 4th of July Canyon which placed the residents at risk. We'll likely never know the truth about these things because of the standard NPS practice of withholding data (just make a formal request for something sometime and you'll find out what stonewalling and the shell game really are).

However, the data provided by MNP NPS (just for show and tell, you couldn't take it home) made one scenario clear that might well have gone another way. I'll try to explain.

The fire came into Round Valley from the south. It went down both sides of the valley and was an inferno along Black Canyon Road. It was heading for Cedar Canyon Road which was a natural fire break to prevent it from going farther north into the southern end of the New York Mountains. As the fire approached the northern end of the valley and Cedar Canyon Road, it slacked off - that is, the inferno died down as the fire approached the natural barrier of Cedar Canyon Road. That was the place to make the stand. But that was not done. By the time the fire reached Cedar Canyon Road there were just two small relatively harmless fingers to stop, one just east of Black Canyon Road and the other over near Rock Spring. But the fire was permitted to go on.

Having been over that ground several times since then, it can be seen the fire might have been stopped there. There are places in that area where the fire was stopped naturally by a small two-tracker desert backroad. And most of that area didn't burn at all. It is still green. Anyone who wants to, can go out and see that. Or you can see it on the special multi-colored maps MNP NPS has prepared. Why a stand wasn't made here is a question for the people who have all the data (including command structures &c) and we all know MNP NPS are reluctant to share data with us lay people. My guess would be it was an error on the part of those in direct charge and that when the inferno that had been experienced in the southern part of the valley started to fade, just at that moment when a decision should have been made to make a stand, someone faltered.

As a comparison, we can take a look at the same Cedar Canyon Road a little to the west. The fire burned hard from the south right up to Cedar Canyon Road and was stopped there, thus clearly showing the Cedar Canyon Road had the potential as a fire break to stop the fire. Instead, a little to the east in Cedar Canyon, it was permitted to cross the road and continue around Pinto Valley and into the New York Mountains sacrificing additional tens of thousands of acres of piñon/juniper habitat. I asked one fire fighter why, if they felt Cedar Canyon Road itself wasn't enough of a fire break, they didn't use a blade (like bulldozers or front loaders) to widen the fire break and he said the use of such blades for this purpose was against "park" policy. He quickly reversed himself saying there weren't any available anyway, although we all have knowledge that there is a perfectly good front loader nearby being used to destroy fence lines and corrals.

There is no question on my part about the quality of these fire fighters. Likely they are the best that can be had. They worked hard, faced some danger, went without sleep, did a good job as they were told, and made a lot of money in five days. But as with a military engagement (and I wouldn't make this analogy except a MNP NPS person did at the open house) you can have the best soldiers in the world and lose the battle if they are not given the right orders at the right time. The ability to sense out what the right order is at the right moment is what leads to success and makes a brilliant field commander. Anyway, the two fingers of fire coming down the central part of Round Valley were permitted to cross Cedar Canyon Road with the loss of more piñon/juniper habitat and creating a major threat to 4th of July Canyon (which was mostly saved by the fire fighters).

On 21 April 2005, almost two months to the day before the MNP Fire started, MNP Superintendent Mary Martin was here for a meeting. I asked her a question: "What do you plan to do when the big fire starts?" With a great show of confidence, she replied: "We have a plan, we'll implement the plan - do you want a copy?" I said "yes" and she subsequently sent me one. Through the days of the great fire, I wondered how many people were sitting around thumbing through this tome - none I hope. To face up to a great challenge like this fire, you don't need a detailed plan. You need to know what to do and you need to have the courage to do it - truly great people win. Others fall by the wayside studying their plans. Following are just a couple of paragraphs from that plan:

MOJAVE NATIONAL PRESERVE - FIRE MANAGEMENT PLAN

B. WILDLAND FIRE USE

Opportunities for Wildland Fire Use

Fire is not thought to play as significant a role historically in the Mojave Desert as it does in other western ecosystems, most notably the southern chaparral or Sierran mixed conifer zones. Within the true Mojave Desert vegetation types, small infrequent fires characteristic of the historic fire regime are a function of the low fuel loads and wide spacing that characterizes the Mojave Desert flora. Within the Mojave Preserve, however, a number of vegetative communities reflect a transition between Mojave and Sonoran or Great Basin desert types. These communities do support fire and their historic fire regimes and characteristic fire adaptations differ from true Mojave plant communities. Lightning ignitions do occur and resulting fires are a natural, albeit relatively infrequent, disturbance regime.

The objective for wildland fire use within the Mojave National Preserve is to allow the natural process of fire to occur with minimal interference, thus fostering landscape and biotic diversity. Acceptable results include the creation of vegetative mosaics and edges, removal of decadent shrubs and grasses to encourage growth of new and vigorous individuals, promotion of nutrient cycling, and creation of improved short and long-term foraging opportunities for certain species of animals.

Fires from natural ignitions will be allowed to burn within given areas and under specific circumstances where there are minimal values at risk. Approximately 342,927 acres are zoned for fire use, including portions of all Fire Management Units except the Cima Unit. In all cases, fire use zones are coincident with designated wilderness. In these areas, a timely suppression response would be unlikely or has the potential to result in adverse impact to wilderness values. Natural ignitions in these areas are expected to be infrequent and isolated with fire spread contained by natural barriers. Fire use will only be implemented where the current spot weather forecasts indicate no wind events that could cause spread of spotting that would pose a risk to life, property, or sensitive resources. A number of pre-determining factors would also be weighed, including natural preparedness levels, air quality restrictions, and current local resource availability. Maximum manageable area per wildland fire use incident will not exceed 200 acres. In all cases, wildland fire use incidents will be monitored by fire personnel. The fire management strategy will transition from fire use to suppression when a) conditions change, b) the fire threatens to exceed the maximum manageable area, c) or the fire poses a threat to other values.


It can be seen from these words that MNP NPS doesn't (or didn't) really understand the power of a wildfire. Their tremendously exaggerated opinion of themselves and their abilities, precludes them from seeing the truth. Then apparently the National Park Service heritage prevents them from speaking the truth when things go wrong. (I believe it is a bigger problem than just our local Mojave National Preserve.)

The two paragraphs quoted above raise many questions. One question that comes to my mind from my own experience that reflects a misguided policy on the part of MNP NPS has to do with the prohibition against burning "dead and down" in campfires. If you want a campfire in the MNP, you must bring in your own wood and fire pan. Maybe in other parks that makes some sense. I've been camping in the East Mojave for over forty years and frequently I have used the same camping spot many times. Just as a matter of course and concern about the possibility of fire, I would clean up around my camp site. I even got to bringing along a small rake so I could get the weeds from under larger bushes. This undergrowth facilitates the spread of a wildfire in the desert and it serves to ignite the larger bushes. Over a period of time my camping areas would be neat and tidy for some distance around. I always had open camp fires and never had a problem. Under NPS management (and we've had ten years of that now) that isn't permitted. In fact, if you even looked like you wanted to gather a piece of dead and down wood for a fire you'd be approached by Big Brother armed to the teeth and ready to haul you off to jail. So they would prefer to burn 70,000 acres at a time?

Early in the fire, I guess before MNP NPS people realized the wildfire was out of control, you'd hear words from NPS people like: "It is a natural event so we will let it burn." Or that no fire suppression efforts would take place until it was out of wilderness. In the early stages, it was not necessarily viewed as a bad thing. One MNP NPS person spoke in very defensive words about the naturalness of the fire and went on to swoon: "I am thrilled (not my word) to be part of such a dramatic event." The word "thrilled" stuck in my mind. How about being "appalled?" or how about feeling remorse or even guilt?

I don't especially mean to say that if MNP NPS had permitted burning of "dead and down" the outcome of this fire would have been any different. How could I know? But it does point up how inappropriate many of the regulations they bring with them from other parks have no application in the desert. And, from the very beginning, MNP NPS has steadfastly refused to listen to any desert expert or resident. They still seem not to understand that there are many people out here (permanent residents and visitors) that know a lot more about this place than they do.

Another inflammatory issue is to suggest in the presence of MNP NPS people that the removal of cattle and burros from the East Mojave made any difference. The point is that if cattle had been present they would have eaten much of the grass and other fuel making it more difficult for the fire to spread. This of course reflects on another disaster MNP NPS is responsible for, i.e., removal of cattle from the East Mojave. There are, however, cattle yet on the 7IL Ranch, so MNP NPS is quick to point out that fires burned in areas where cattle are yet grazing. And that is true. Yet you don't have to be a rocket scientist to deduce that if cattle have grazed an area, that area will be less susceptible to fire. But, with characteristic behavior, MNP NPS seems to be totally unable to be objective about any issue that reflects upon them in any way. If you carry that thinking another step, then it is safe to say there is no scientific basis for anything they say or do since objectivity is the essence of science. And I believe that to be the case. There is no person involved in this trained in science that is free to speak the truth.

Now that the fire is over, MNP NPS is busy making reports of all the damage. They are even compiling lists of cultural resources. This isn't because they care about those resources, it is because they can now apply for funds for restoration. Funds that would be outside their normal budget process. I'd be surprised if this doesn't amount to another four million. And what good will it do? You cannot replace things that are priceless.

Thus ends the first decade of National Park Service management of the East Mojave. And this fire is just one more in a long ten-year list of disasters out here. I don't know if we can stand another ten years. And yet NPS guardianship is touted as the highest level of protection the nation can provide.

Life could be so much nicer for MNP NPS, and everyone around them, if they could just kick back and accept the reality of their situation in the East Mojave. If they could accept that they are the Johnny-come-latelys here. That nothing is gained by their deceit ... their unwillingness to be honest and straightforward ... their difficulty with accepting and respecting the multitude of people who have vested interests here.

One bottom line that seems clear to many who understand the East Mojave is that this area should never have been put under the management of the National Park Service. The area was doing just fine under BLM management and it should be changed back. Senator Dianne Feinstein and her colleagues, the vast majority of the news media, and the multitude of Dark Ages People (Enviros) were all wrong. And to prove that point we are privileged to watch the destruction of the East Mojave before our very eyes with no way to stop it.

Final note. I've agonized over this report for more than a week. That has given me an opportunity to show it to others, including people who were involved in the fire in official capacities. There is general concurrence of the major points described here, including failures in coordination and management and especially in the confusion contributed by faltering leadership on the part of MNP NPS. An investigation by an unbiased third party is in order.

Dennis G. Casebier
Goffs Schoolhouse
37198 Lanfair Road G-15
Essex, California 92332

STRATEGIES ADDRESSED FOR LIMITING DANGER, DESTRUCTION OF WILDFIRE

Needles Desert Star, Needles, CA

MOJAVE NATIONAL PRESERVE - Fire professionals and scientists with the National Park Service are still sorting out the aftermath of the Hackberry Complex Fires, a lightning-ignited conflagration that consumed 70,736 acres of the Mojave National Preserve just west of Needles, Calif. in late June.

Raging through pinyon and juniper country at approximately four to six-thousand feet elevation the fires, traced to seven separate starting points, fed on high fuel loads grown from the past winter's generous rains then dried to tinder under a brutal summer sun.

Most of the popular Mid Hills Campground was wiped out. Hole-in-the-Wall Campground and Mitchell Caverns, a state-owned attraction surrounded by the federally-run preserve, were spared and remain open.

The Park Service will hold an open house at Hole-in-the-Wall on Saturday, July 23, from 2 to 4 p.m. The fire and its aftermath will be discussed. The public is encouraged to attend, ask questions and visit with service personnel. From Needles take Interstate 40 west to the Essex Road exit, travel 20 miles north to the Hole-in-the-Wall fire center. Linda Slater, public information officer with the service, stressed the importance of maintaining what emergency responders call "defensible space:" a clear area around homes and outbuildings that would discourage the spread of flames and give firefighters space in which to work.

"The biggest thing would be for people to clear around cabins," Slater said in a July 15 telephone interview. "That's a critical item. We clear around park buildings for that very reason. There's no fire department to protect homes; people need to take the initiative."

"It's a shame to see all the beautiful vegetation lost," Slater allowed, "but another big factor is the private homes and cabins. That's a greater loss for a lot of people."

Advice, including printed resource materials, will be dispensed at the open house. Slater also recommended a Web site: www.firewise.com

"I think it's pretty important to note that we're at the beginning of the fire season, not at the end of it," Slater pointed out. "We have a lot of hot weather ahead, a lot of lightning strikes."

While debate continues about cause and effects, so far service officials seem to feel not much can be done in the way of prevention.

Jim Andre, director of the Granite Mountains Research Center, was quoted in a NPS mailing on the fire as saying: "Fire is very likely a part of the east Mojave. In the pinyon zone, looking at about 30 fires over the last 100 years indicates that it's somewhat frequent. This was a natural ignition, it was a heavy fuel year ... regardless of weeds, regardless of fire suppression history, regardless of grazing, there would have been fuel to burn and we would have had a fire."

Grazing is the point of a lot of controversy since the preserve's creation. Post fire, proponents are pointing out that cows do a pretty fair job of creating defensible space by cropping potential fuel.

Park officials are quick to point out that some of the ignition locations of the Hackberry Complex Fires are within areas where grazing occurs.

Rob and Kate Blair of the 7IL Ranch were among the first to battle the blaze. Between them, the Blairs and park service fire fighters built a half-mile of fire line to keep the fire north of the ranch. They're reported to have stayed up all night putting out flare-ups, and hosted eight "hotshot" crews for several days.

Said Slater: "Several fires did start on areas being grazed. Those areas burned. The idea that grazing over the whole preserve could have prevented the fire is not true."

"There were seven different starts," she continued. "The rangers were out there immediately. There are not many folks in the area. It took awhile to ramp up and get all the resources needed out there to get a handle on it."

Those resources: a reported 1,133 firefighters, five helicopters, 15 engine crews, four air-tankers and two small planes, came with a price tag of $4.5 million and rising.

A bright spot: there was only one lost-time injury. Another: the desert critters seem to have done a good job of surviving the fire; even those too slow to get out of the way.

Slater reported a biologist's evaluation was begun shortly after the fire, mostly because of the threatened desert tortoise.

"Most of the fire burned at higher elevation," Slater said, "but it did kind of finger down into (tortoise) habitat."

"They found live tortoises that came out of their burrows after the fire."

"Another critter is deer, and some bighorn (sheep). We flew over the area after the fire and didn't see any deer carcasses. There was not direct mortality that we're aware of."

It's too soon, she continued, to determine how post-fire regrowth might affect the ungulate population.

It's also too soon to make predictions about erosion, always a concern following a fire. "Right after the fire ended a team came out, looked it over and created a plan," Slater said.

That plan is an inch thick and will continue to develop over the course of the next couple of years. The team did undertake immediate stabilization efforts for things like fire lines, which create pathways for erosion.

Count on controversy, whatever the course chosen in the East Mojave. As Slater put it, "It's amazing how quickly an act of nature, an act of God, becomes a tool for people to use in political battles."

ANTHEM OF THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

This "anthem" was found on a faded piece of paper blowing around the East Mojave.

Composed for the NPS by we the members of the California Chapter of People for a Perfect World in Grateful Recognition of Services Rendered.

MELODY: THIS LAND IS YOUR LAND WITH APOLOGIES TO WOODY GUTHRIE

This land was your land but now it's our land
Controlled with a heavy hand, give in to our demand
Or please just stay away and we'll collect our pay
Like we would anyway while doing things our way

From the 15 freeway down to the 40
This is our property for all prosperity
We don't like cars and trucks, we don't like people much
Cause this is our own land and we have our own plan

Chorus
We are the NPS and sure that we know best
You're warned not to transgress or you will face arrest

Like a band of jackals we removed the cattle
What does it matter? We won the battle
The burros are now gone and some think we did wrong
This land to us belongs just kindly move along

We turned the water off and let the land go dry
It's just too damn bad the wildlife had to die
There are a few who think us cruel
But this land was made for us to rule

Chorus
We are the NPS and sure that we know best
You're warned to not transgress or you will face arrest

Let's make it very clear there are no crosses here
We made one disappear because we have no fear
We have a higher law and we expect your awe
We are the NPS and God can find no flaw

This land was your land but now it's our land
With an overactive gland Dianne had it planned
Unlike Disneyland, all fun here is banned
If you don't like it here why don't you go pound sand!

Chorus
We are the NPS and sure that we know best
You're warned to not transgress or you will face arrest

Property Ruling Strikes Nerve in House

Reacting to high court decision, lawmakers pass amendment that would ban use of federal funds for some seizures of private land.

THE NATION
By Maura Reynolds and David G. Savage, Staff Writers
Los Angeles Times

WASHINGTON — Angry over a recent Supreme Court decision, the House on Thursday began a legislative drive to roll back the power of local governments to seize homes and other private property for economic development projects.

By a vote of 231 to 189, the House approved an amendment forbidding the administration from spending money on local projects that seize private property for business development.

"What all of us who wish to see this legislation enacted into law want to make sure happens is that the federal government's money isn't used to finance taking someone's property from them to build a strip mall," said Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.).

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California was among those who voted against the amendment, saying she opposed withholding federal dollars "for the enforcement of any decision of the Supreme Court, no matter how opposed I am to that decision."

The vote was loosely along party lines: 192 Republicans and 39 Democrats voted to approve; 157 Democrats, 31 Republicans and one Independent were opposed.

In a ruling that has touched a public nerve, the high court in a 5-4 decision last week upheld the power of cities to condemn private property for redevelopment projects. The ruling was a victory for the city of New London, Conn., which had condemned a number of homes in its old waterfront district to clear the way for offices and a hotel.

The city said it wanted to create new jobs and raise more tax revenue. The homeowners who fought the seizure said the city should not be allowed to take their property to give it to private developers.

The ruling in Kelo vs. City of New London sparked outrage, and a number of lawmakers said they wanted to repudiate the high court.

Rep. Scott Garrett (R-N.J.) said the court had failed to "defend the liberties and freedoms our forefathers so desperately envisioned when they established our great nation."

Although the federal government does not initiate such projects, its money may play a crucial role in some of them, he said. "The practical effect this amendment will have is that it will prohibit federal funds from improving or constructing infrastructure support on lands acquired involuntarily, through the use of eminent domain, for private development," said Garrett, the amendment's chief sponsor.

The vote on the amendment came as separate bills were introduced in the House and Senate that would deprive state and local governments of federal funds for any development project that relied on eminent domain to seize private property.

The Garrett amendment, added to the annual spending bill that funds the departments of Housing and Urban Development, and Transportation, would be in effect just for the coming fiscal year, which starts Oct 1 and lasts to Sept. 30, 2006. By contrast, if either of the two standalone bills were to pass, they would be more sweeping and permanent.

"The Supreme Court voted last week to undo private property rights and to empower governments to kick people out of their homes and give them to someone else because they feel like it," said House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas).

DeLay and other conservatives in Congress accused the Supreme Court of "judicial overreach" and expanding the rights of government at the expense of private property.

"The only silver lining to the cloud of this decision is the possibility that this time the court has finally gone too far and that the American people are ready to reassert their constitutional authority," DeLay said.

The House bill introduced Thursday was sponsored by Sensenbrenner and Democrat John Conyers Jr. of Michigan. The Senate bill was introduced Monday by Republican John Cornyn of Texas.

"This [court] decision, in my opinion, has the potential of becoming the Dred Scott decision of the 21st century," Sensenbrenner said, referring to the 1857 court ruling that upheld slavery.

"We had a civil war as a result of the mistake that the Supreme Court made in the 1850s."

Usually, conservatives criticize the court for "judicial activism." In this instance, they criticized the court for failing to act to block the initiatives of a city council.

In their opinion, the justices noted that state legislatures are free to pass laws that bar officials from condemning property for private development. California and at least eight other states have laws on the books that forbid the use of the eminent domain power to condemn private property for economic development, except in "blighted" areas.

In the House on Thursday, Democrats in the California delegation voting for the Garrett amendment were Loretta Sanchez of Anaheim, Ellen O. Tauscher of Walnut Creek, Maxine Waters of Los Angeles and Lynn C. Woolsey of Petaluma; Republicans voting against were Jerry Lewis of Redlands and Bill Thomas of Bakersfield.

Ruffled Feathers

Audubon sues the DWP for the sake of songbirds

By JUDITH LEWIS
LA Weekly

It must have been a tough day for Charles Bragg when the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power’s board of commissioners met on April 19 to give final approval to a long-awaited wind-energy project in Kern County. While one environmentalist after another rose to laud the DWP for finally making good on its commitment to “green power,” Bragg had been charged with the opposite task: to warn the commissioners that if the DWP went ahead with the plan stated in its most recent environmental-impact report, Audubon would sue. “As a ratepayer I’ve been paying into the green-power project for a long time,” intoned Bragg, a tall, thin man with graying hair, the editor of Audubon’s Santa Monica Bay Chapter newsletter. “But I don’t want to lay awake at night thinking of wings hitting propellers so I can turn on my lights.”

Sadly for Bragg, the commissioners were in no mood for the hand wringing of bird lovers. Earlier in the meeting, the board had received the happy news that its former PR firm, Fleishman Hillard, would pay nearly $6 million to settle charges that it defrauded the DWP and other city agencies, and Audubon’s complaints came off as entertainment, much like the antics of solar-power agitator Doug Korthof, who, in his rumpled suit and two-day stubble, showed up to use the bird issue as fodder for his own agenda. Korthof’s assertion that “solar doesn’t have any opponents” got a laugh, as did the commissioners’ lighthearted banter over the definition of passerine. And when Audubon’s attorney, Andrew Lichtman, rose to address the board, the commissioners’ president, Dominick W. Rubalcava, confidently introduced the city’s lawyer, seated not far from him at the commissioners’ table. It was almost a punch line.

Like every wind farm built or proposed in the United States since the 1970s, the Pine Tree Wind Development Project, to be built in the high Mojave Desert near Jawbone Canyon by Wind Prometheus with General Electric equipment, has been beset by pressures from conflicting sides. On one side are clean-air advocates who complain that after its pricey unveiling ceremony in February of 2003, the project has moved forward so slowly that they doubt the DWP’s sincerity about green power; on the other sit not only Audubon members, but off-roaders and hikers who worry that the project will spoil the area’s recreational opportunities and scenery. “It’s an area that rivals Yosemite in beauty,” says David Laughing Horse Robinson, who calls himself chairman of the Kawaiisu tribe, although other Kawaiisu disagree. “Why don’t you go put up wind turbines in Yosemite and see if you meet with any resistance?” Robinson also fears that Pine Tree will tread upon Native American burial grounds.

But there’s also a lot to like about the wind project, including its place in the DWP’s portfolio, which has so far remained stubbornly tied to coal-fired power generated in neighboring states. If it goes online as planned next spring, it will power close to 60,000 homes with 120 megawatts of power, all of it owned and controlled by the DWP. It will be the largest municipally owned wind farm in the country, and it will help the DWP meet its Los Angeles City Council–mandated portfolio standard of 20 percent renewable-source power by 2017. The original 21,500-acre study area has been whittled down to 8,000 acres, all of it on private land leased to the DWP by the Hansen Family Wilderness Ranch. It sits close to existing transmission lines, and the winds in the hilly valleys where the turbines will be sited blow steady most of the year at about 11 to 45 mph. Of a little more than 100 possible Indian cultural sites identified by the tribal elders who consulted the DWP in its early studies, only a few remain within the development area, and all will be avoided during construction.

As for the scenic beauty of the region, “I’ve been to the site and I’ve been to Yosemite,” says DWP Chief Operating Officer Henry Martinez, “and the only thing I’ll say about the two is that there are some nice rolling hills in Kern County. It would be a stretch to compare the two.”

The birds, however, remain an issue. On June 1, the Los Angeles and Kerncrest chapters of the Audubon Society did just as Bragg promised, and filed suit in Kern County Superior Court against the DWP and its board of commissioners, alleging that the utility violated the California Environmental Quality Act when it ratified an inadequately prepared report.

In addition to underestimating potential aesthetic and air-quality issues, the suit states, the DWP’s studies focused almost exclusively on resident eagles and hawks, ignoring the smaller birds — the passerines — headed north for the summer. Martinez says he’s puzzled by the suit, which comes even after the DWP agreed in writing to relocate any turbines that prove lethal to birds. “Evidently they didn’t accept that was a gesture of good will, or a sign that we’re willing to work with them,” he says. “We felt all the issues had been adequately addressed.”

“I want you to see the gall of that formula,” says Audubon’s lawyer, Andrew Lichtman. “They’re not saying we’ll close down the whole field or all the turbines if we’re killing birds in a way we didn’t anticipate. They’re only saying we’ll close the turbines that are killing disproportionately more. That won’t help a single thing. It’s a jaded, cynical view of what it would take to protect birds.”

Lichtman says Audubon wants sound scientific studies. “Several years ago at Altamont, they found — surprise, surprise — they were killing golden eagles. That was a complete shock to the whole industry, because no one had done any work to anticipate the problem. Everybody’s playing catch-up on raptors. Now we want them to start looking at songbirds.”

Since biologists began counting bird deaths at the Altamont Wind Resource Area in 1988, the wind farm’s bloody avian legacy has slowly evolved into the wind industry’s Three Mile Island, stalling wind projects in some places and halting further development at Altamont. In a recent report, the California Energy Commission estimated that Altamont’s 5,400 turbines in Alameda County kill between 1,766 and 4,721 birds a year. The pass has been branded an “ecological sink” for the golden eagle, which dies there in greater numbers than the habitat can support.

Bird kills at fields like Altamont’s leave the wind industry vulnerable to attacks by the coal and gas lobby, which has been eager to capitalize on every environmentally motivated complaint against wind. Last week, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tennessee) offered an amendment to the energy bill that would deny federal tax credits to any wind farm built within 20 miles of a national park, on the grounds that the towers could threaten the vistas of such national treasures as Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Ironically, Great Smoky consistently suffers from the thickest smog in the national-parks system due to its proximity to Tennessee’s seven coal-fired power plants — an issue Alexander has never breathed a word against. The amendment was defeated, but next time around, for the sake of his state’s coal, Alexander could well become a bird fanatic, and his argument might gain some traction.

Or it might not: For the most part, wind has enjoyed bipartisan support in the federal government, which currently rewards new wind-energy projects with a 1.5-cent-per-kilowatt production tax credit, a kickback that has now been extended through the end of 2005 (and will likely be extended through the end of 2006 as well). And wind’s advocates insist a lot has been done in the last two decades to design bird-friendly turbines. I recently met Dale Strickland, vice president and senior ecologist with Western EcoSystems Technology in Cheyenne, Wyoming, on a ranch outfitted with wind power in the mountains near Evanston, Wyoming. On the side of a hill where we took shelter from a persistent breeze, Strickland, a consultant on natural-resource and wildlife issues, detailed some of the reasons for bird (and bat) mortality in turbine blades and explained how the new machines were different.

“Those early turbines typically were on lattice towers,” he said. “And some of them were not only lattice, but they also had horizontal bars within the lattice structure, so they provided a perfect perching ledge for birds.” Also, older turbines had gearboxes, called “nacelles,” set upwind of the propellers. When a bird lands on an upwind nacelle and later lifts off, it literally glides into the blades. The turbines in Wyoming, by contrast, were set on smooth, tubular towers, with nacelles downwind of the propellers. While Strickland talked, as if on cue, a bird approached a nearby turbine, slowed and hovered for a moment, and then expertly negotiated a safe route between the whooshing propellers.

“That was a kestrel,” Strickland told me later in a phone conversation. “It’s one of the species we worry about — one that commonly gets whacked in wind plants.” Whether a songbird — or even a different kind of raptor — would so capably choose the same trajectory remains a matter of speculation, but the serendipitous flight of this particular hawk at least made it seem possible that, with some ingenuity and forethought, birds and wind energy can coexist.

Lichtman says he hopes that’s what the science confirms, but first the “DWP has to stop obfuscating” the lack of songbird studies in their environmental reports. “We don’t want to say, ‘Satisfy us or your whole wind project will go to hell,’ ” he says, “because environmental groups are trying to get the power companies to stand for something that’s important for other conservation goals. But maybe we can get them to think about all the other wind farms coming down the pike.” And who knows? Maybe when the science is in, “they’ll work up some good solutions,” says Lichtman, “like towers that make owl noises. But no one’s really done the studies to come up with anything like that.”

Hunters fight for desert 'guzzlers'

By Chuck Mueller, Staff Writer
San Bernardino Sun

BARSTOW - A simmering battle over desert water tanks once used by range cattle is pitting hunting and wildlife groups against environmentalists.

Hunters of big and small game in the Mojave National Preserve claim it is vital to retain artificial watering sites in a 600,000-acre area in Lanfair Valley, near Needles, but two environmental groups say the water holes actually will harm wildlife.

Scores of hunters, wildlife advocates and conservationists gathered here Monday to include their views in an environmental assessment being prepared by the National Park Service.

"The assessment will outline our proposal to convert 12 former ranch wells into guzzlers over a three-year period," said Larry Whalon, the preserve's chief of resources.

Comments will be accepted on the plan until Oct. 31 at the preserve's headquarters at 2701 Barstow Road, in Barstow.

Hunters want to turn the wells into artificial water sites called "wildlife drinkers" or "guzzlers" to provide water for the preserve's mule deer, bighorn sheep and game birds. But environmentalists claim the park's exising 133 guzzlers are sufficient.

A decision by the Park Service to convert the former wells into artificial watering sites prompted a lawsuit by two environmental groups in March.

The Center for Biological Diversity and Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility went to court to block the plan, claiming it would harm wildlife and violated Park Service policy.

The two groups contend the additional drinkers or guzzlers would dry up natural springs and wetlands, attract predatory ravens, and sustain non-native burros.

The Park Service reversed course, and blocked conversion of the ranch wells until environmental issues are reviewed.

"Congress allows carefully-managed hunting in the preserve, but this proposal to uncap the ranch wells is a game farm concept ... (and) an attempt to manipulate the web of life," said Daniel Patterson, desert ecologist with the Tucson, Ariz.-based Center for Biological Diversity.

"Bighorn sheep have lived in the east Mojave a lot longer than artificial water sites. They have survived because of natural springs and riparian areas, and we would like to focus on the restoration of springs and streams."

Ken Schwartz, spokesman for the 50,000-member Safari Club International, said artificial water sources provide water for a wide variety of animals and birds, not just game creatures.

"This issue is about conservation, and protecting wildlife," he said. "It's not just an issue of game animals. Some of these water sources are known to provide water for as many as 90 desert animals. Of those, only 10 or 12 were allowed to be hunted."

Lifelong hunter Cliff McDonald of Needles said the water sites are vital for all wildlife in the 1.6-million-acre national preserve. "There are about 113 guzzlers for small animals in the east Mojave but none for large animals," he said.

"In a 20-square-mile area in Lanfair Valley, there is no year-round water (for big game)."

Wells in the east Mojave were capped off four to five years ago when land was transferred from private ranchers to the national preserve.

"All of the casings still exist at the 12 ranch wells, and we want to recap them," said Needles City Councilman Pat Murch. "This will provide a guaranteed water source for wildlife. It's not a hunters' issue, it's a wildlife issue."

Andrew Pauli state wildlife biologist from Apple Valley, said various volunteer groups ranging from Quail Unlimited to the Society for Conservation of Bighorn Sheep assist the California Fish and Game Department in well maintenance.

But well closings are compounding the problem to sustain desert wildlife. "About 125 water sources, many fed by pipes from a major well, have been shut off the past five years," Pauli said.

Park service water proposal draws interest

By KELLY DONOVAN/Staff Writer
Desert Dispatch [Barstow, CA]

BARSTOW -- An estimated 75 people from all over the region gathered in Barstow Monday evening to give their input on the controversial topic of artificial watering sources in the Mojave National Preserve.

The National Park Service's meeting at the Holiday Inn Express & Suites was part of the public scoping process for a proposal to bring former ranchers' well systems back online.

Hunters and environmentalists generally disagree on the artificial water issue.

The 12 wells would furnish water that would be accessible to a variety of animals, most likely via wildlife drinkers, Larry Whalon, chief of resources for the Mojave National Preserve, said.

Hunting groups have been pushing for the preserve to restore the water that the ranchers' wells had provided until the ranchers moved in recent years and removed their well equipment.

However, attendees said the push to restore the well systems isn't just about providing water for game to benefit hunters.

"It's for the preservation of the wildlife that's out there," said Walt Zielinski, a 71-year-old Apple Valley resident who attended the meeting.

Ken Schwartz, Safari Club International's state governmental affairs and communications manager, said his group and the other supporters of the water proposal want to help more than just game animals.

Animals that can't even be hunted will benefit from restored water sources, he said.

The Park Service initially was going to convert some former well systems into guzzlers, but the agency faced opposition from environmental groups and backed off on the plan this spring.

Environmental groups fault artificial water sources for attracting ravens, a predator of the desert tortoise, and they blame guzzlers for the deaths of tortoises due to the reptiles getting trapped in them.

Last year, the Park Service cleaned more than 30 guzzlers in the preserve and discovered in them the remains or shells of 13 tortoises.

The Center for Biological Diversity and the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility filed a lawsuit in March asking that the guzzler proposal be reviewed under the National Environmental Policy Act.

In early April, the Park Service rescinded its prior approval of the guzzler plan and agreed to move ahead with environmental review of the artificial water source issue.

Unlike guzzlers -- watering holes that animals must walk into -- wildlife drinkers are raised off the ground and wouldn't pose a threat to desert tortoises, Whalon said.

Still, Daniel Patterson, desert ecologist for the Center for Biological Diversity, didn't attend the meeting but said in a phone interview Monday that his group doesn't want the preserve run like a game farm.

"We support hunting on the preserve, but it needs to be managed consistently with the values of a national preserve," he said. "This isn't an issue of water versus no water. It's about using these agricultural wells that are supposed to stay off."

Patterson said his group would like to see a preserve-wide environmental impact statement addressing water, with an emphasis on the restoration of natural springs.

He also said there's an abundance of water in the preserve now, and he'd like to see the Park Service catch up on its maintenance backlog of existing guzzlers before moving ahead with any additional artificial watering sources.

One hunter who attended the meeting, 61-year-old Ray Osgood of San Diego County, said he's strongly in favor of getting the wells back online, and prefers wildlife drinkers over guzzlers.

Many birds can access drinkers better than they can guzzlers, he said.

Hunters' and sportsmen's groups represented at the meeting included Safari Club International, Quail Unlimited, Society for the Conservation of Bighorn Sheep and the California Deer Association.

Safari Club International supports the restoration of the 12 wells, Schwartz said.

"Those animals have relied on (the wells) for over 100 years," Schwartz said. "They've come to know that's where they can go to get a drink. When that's taken away, it's a shock to their system."

The Park Service is preparing an environmental assessment document for the proposal, and a draft of the document will be available by Sept. 1.

Kippy Poulson, a 61-year-old Needles resident who supports the restoration of the well systems, couldn't attend Monday's meeting but said in a phone interview that she's hoping the Park Service will install wildlife drinkers.

The drinkers Poulson would like to see draw from an underground storage system, and they would benefit wildlife like bighorn sheep, deer, foxes and quail.

Unnatural disasters: 'We will spend whatever is necessary'

Fire costs escalating

San Bernardino Sun
By Guy McCarthy, Staff Writer

It cost fire agencies more than $5.2 million to fight three major blazes ignited Wednesday in San Bernardino and Riverside counties.

Nearly half that cash was spent battling the Hackberry Complex Fire in the remote and sparsely populated Mojave National Preserve.

A $5.2 million bill for less than a week of firefighting may sound like a lot. But it's a pittance compared to recent fire seasons in Southern California, one of the nation's most inferno-prone regions and home to unprecedented housing booms encroaching ever further into fire country.

"That's one of the complications of civilization,' said Santa Barbara County fire Capt. Steve Kliest, who worked the Hackberry Complex Fire on Monday. "With communities spreading into these wilderness areas, we have to protect the homes. And it's costly.'

During the height of the 2003 fire season, the U.S. Forest Service spent $100 million on 10 days of firefighting in Southern California alone. The Forest Service averaged $75 million per season in the region during the past five years, said Vallejo-based Forest Service spokesman Matt Mathes.

While state agencies such as the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection cope with limited annual budgets, federal agencies such as the Bureau of Land Management have access to virtually unlimited congressional cash if it is needed.

The CDF budget for fire protection statewide for 2005-06 is $748 million, Sacramento-based CDF spokesman Michael Jarvis said. CDF also has $95 million in emergency funding set aside.

"Bottom line, BLM dispatches the level of resources crews, aircraft, equipment determined by the personnel in charge of any given fire,' said Janet Bedrosian, a BLM spokeswoman in Sacramento. "They tally costs as they go against appropriations funded by Congress.

"When those costs are expended, bills are paid from other accounts, or new funds are appropriated by Congress as needed, either during the fires or at the beginning of the next fiscal year to make up for other funds spent on fires,' Bedrosian said.

"We will spend whatever is necessary to protect lives and property.'

The federal BLM had spent $2.3 million on firefighting in California so far this year as of Sunday, Bedrosian said.

Federal guarantees of unlimited firefighting funds help developers and pro-growth elected officials continue to sell the myth of the Southern California dream that fuels mass migration to the region, said fire ecologist Richard Minnich, based at UC Riverside.

"There's a big difference between fighting fire in a consolidated city with paved streets and blocks, compared to the wildland fuel-scape that we're building into more and more,' Minnich said. "People living in these areas unrealistically expect the same fire protection, and Congress fuels that with unlimited cash.'

The message to property owners and new homeowners translates all too often into a soothing subsidy of risky lifestyle choices, Minnich said. People who a hundred years ago either would never live in such fire-prone country or would pay for their own fire protection now rely on state- and federal-funded services.

"They say, 'I can live in a lake of gasoline and expect to be protected,'' Minnich said. "The government encourages land-use sprawl into wildlands through FEMA (the Federal Emergency Management Agency), getting people money to rebuild in these landscapes of gasoline. Where's it going to end?'

The Hackberry Complex Fire in the Mojave National Preserve cost $2.3 million as of Monday afternoon. Federal authorities said the fire was 95 percent contained Monday morning, but about 950 firefighters were still working.

Final costs of fighting the Paradise Fire in Morongo Valley and the Soboba Fire near San Jacinto in Riverside County totaled $2.9 million. Hundreds of structures were threatened in more densely populated communities nearby.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost estimates for the region's largest blazes so far this fire season, as of Monday afternoon:

Hackberry Complex Fire: More than 70,600 acres burned, including natural and cultural resources. Five homes, six trailers and other structures destroyed. Wednesday through present. COST: $2.3 million.

Paradise Fire, Morongo Valley: 3,022 acres burned. Six homes destroyed, one damaged. Wednesday through Saturday. COST: $1.2 million.

Soboba Fire, San Jacinto: 2,080 acres burned. No homes or structures destroyed. Wednesday through Saturday. COST: $1.7 million.

Mojave fire draws shock, anger

Flames consume 67,000 acres and destroy five residences and two cabins built in the 1800s


Frank Sparks Looks over what's left of his four-bedroom house in Round Valley after it was consumed by the Mojave National Preserve wildfire.
Photo submitted by Richard MacPherson

By LEROY STANDISH/Staff Writer
Daily Press, Victorville, CA

"The old way is being destroyed," Dennis Casebier said.

He remembers the "old way." Days when cattle grazed, juniper and pinyon pine trees flourished, and deer drank from water drawn from beneath the parched desert floor by ranchers. In the last week fire has swept through more than 67,000 acres of the 1.4 million acre Mojave National Preserve destroying much of the old.

Dry grasses here in what used to be the heart of cattle country were ignited by lightning Wednesday and converged into one across a massive area between Interstates 15 and 40 east of the Nevada border. The fire has scorched a path from the Gold and the Round valleys on the west along the New York Mountains on the north to the edge of the Lanfair Valley to the east, said Greg Cleveland, spokesman for the Southern California Interagency Incident Management Team One.

"We haven't seen a fire of this extent for centuries," said Robert Fulton, executive director of the California State University Desert Study Center at Zzyzx Road. "Those of us in the know knew that this was going to be a high fire risk year."

As of Sunday afternoon five residences were lost, two cabins built in the 1800s and six trailers/structures and additional outbuildings were destroyed. "A couple of those buildings that were burned were historical sites, ranch sites from the 1800s," Cleveland said.

Evacuations were still in affect for the Round Valley and Fourth of July Canyon areas. Determinations on letting residents back in those areas will be made Monday, Cleveland said. At the height of the fire more than 1,000 firefighters and numerous apparatus including half a dozen helicopters were brought to bear on the flames, which late Sunday were 65 percent contained. Officials anticipated 100 percent containment by Monday night.

The fire started and remained in lands above 4,000 feet. Of concern to firefighters were abandoned mine shafts and unexploded ordinances left behind by troops training for World War II. As of late Sunday there were no reports of injury, Cleveland said.

Many residents expressed anger toward park management. "It's National Park Service management," said Casebier, executive director of the Mojave Desert Heritage and Cultural Association, which owns 640 acres lost to fire in Gold Valley and additional acreage scattered throughout the preserve. "They have gotten rid of the cattle out here as fast as they could. They got rid of all the burros and now they have shut off the water. There is a price to pay for all this and now we are payin' it."

Others see it as nature's way.

"When you take cattle off the range the fuels grow and it increases your fire potential. That is a fact, but we had a 100-year rain this year therefore we had a 100-year fire. Everyone wants to point their finger and say this is someone's fault," said Kate Blair, whose family runs the last remaining ranch within the preserve — on 350,000 acres a hundred miles east of Barstow. "There could have been thousands of cattle here and the same thing would have happened. It is just one of those acts of nature — those acts of God — it just blew up so fast they couldn't get the resources on it fast enough."

Frank Sparks owns 10 acres of land 6,000 feet above sea level in the Round Valley. "This fire has just devastated people," he said. Lost to the flames was his four-room house, trailer, water tanks and several out buildings. He estimated his losses at $50,000, but could only express sorrow for the loss of all that surrounded his property.

"Twenty- to 30-foot pinyon pines and junipers and there is nothing there now. It will take at least 100 years for it to grow back with trees and stuff," Sparks said.

Like many other residents of the preserve he blames the park service, which took over control of the preserve more than a decade ago from the Bureau of Land management, for the devastation.

"I was kind of pissed off at the park service. They have had the attitude that the original people that are there shouldn't be there and they have tried to buy everybody out," Sparks said. "Their theory is it is Mother Nature's fire, but now they have just about terminated all the animal life, the bird life, the turtle life in the Eastern Mojave."

Sixty-year-old Richard MacPherson planned on retiring on his 80 acres in the Round Valley, about eight miles from Hole in the Wall, but now his dream has turned to ash. "The whole thing has just blown us away so bad," MacPherson said.

He estimated his losses at well over $100,000. The total includes a mobile home, two cargo containers, a tractor, generators and solar panels.

When he and his wife visited the property Friday, the scene was one of utter devastation. "The juniper and sage brush are all gone. It will never be (replaced) in my and my grandson's lifetime. They grow very, very slowly," he said.

Fulton, who owns 40 acres in the preserve, said about one-fifth of his property was scathed. In areas were the fire moved slowly and burnt into the roots the junipers won't return for hundreds of years, he said.

"If the fuel load was not too substantial and swept through many of the trees at least in part will survive," he said. "It is going to be a mixed bag in areas where everything will be burned off and take decades to recover." How animals, such as the Desert Tortoise fared, will have to wait until after the smoke clears and studies undertaken, he said.

Though fire of this magnitude is rare here the risk of even greater fire looms. Many areas of the preserve are still green and have yet to dry in the summer heat. "We haven't even started the fire season," Casebier said. "I felt sure we would have a disaster before the season was over, but I never thought it would come before the fire season."

Large blaze in Mojave National Preserve destroys 67,000 acres

San Francisco Chronicle - San Francisco, CA

Kelso, Calif. (AP) -- Mild winds and steep terrain have helped slow a 67,000-acre wildfire in a southeastern California wilderness preserve that destroyed five homes and two cabins built in the late 1800s, officials said Sunday.

Firefighters had surrounded most of the blaze, which was 65 percent contained in the Mojave National Preserve. They made good progress after a cold front moved in with winds that were not as strong as expected, said Capt. Greg Cleveland, a spokesman with the Southern California Incident Management Team.

"The weather today helped out a lot," Cleveland said. "It was still hot but the winds were mild. And the humidity was still low but it wasn't down in the single digits."

Officials expected the fire to be 100 percent contained by 6 p.m. Monday.

The large fire formed after lightning sparked five separate blazes Wednesday afternoon near the Nevada state line. Those eventually merged and were burning at the edges of critical territory for the threatened desert tortoise. A federal biologist walked the burned area Saturday to determine how the fire had affected the animals, but did not find any live or dead tortoises, officials said.

More than 900 firefighters working in rocky terrain were battling the blaze in an area north of Interstate 40 and south of Interstate 15. It was fueled by grass, sagebrush, juniper and pinyon pine stands made unusually dense by heavy winter rains. Six trailers or other structures also were destroyed.

The fire scorched sections of the preserve containing historic mines and sites of ancient Indian pictographs, but the extent of the damage to such places was unknown.

"It definitely burned into a lot of those areas," Cleveland said.

Evacuations were maintained Sunday in the Round Valley and Fourth of July Canyon areas, where about a dozen people had residences, officials said.

Crews Make Headway Against Fires Raging in Mojave National Preserve

The five blazes are 65% contained after burning 65,200 acres and razing five homes, six trailers.

By Louis Sahagun, Staff Writer
Los Angeles Times

A group of fires in the eastern Mojave Desert was 65% contained Saturday after burning about 65,200 acres of dry brush and destroying five homes and six trailers, authorities said.

About 935 firefighters from throughout the state battled the five fires, which were started by lightning Wednesday in the sprawling Mojave National Preserve about 40 miles west of the Nevada border, said Capt. Greg Cleveland of the Southern California Incident Management Team.

"This was the largest fire on record within the 1.6-million acre preserve," he said. "The fire behavior we experienced on Thursday, when we had strong southwesterly winds, was almost explosive."

The fires charred vast expanses of grass, sagebrush and pinyon in remote, rocky terrain in the preserve, which includes historic vertical mine shafts and unexploded ordnance dating to World War II, he said.

"Firefighters made good progress Saturday because the winds were not as strong as expected," Cleveland said. "We only had one minor injury: a pulled hamstring."

Also Saturday, a fire in the Santa Clarita area charred about 125 acres and was 100% contained.

About 100 firefighters attacked the blaze northwest of Val Verde Park and southwest of Castaic. There were no reports of injuries or damaged structures.

Separately, two fires in San Bernardino and Riverside counties that together burned 5,100 acres were fully contained Saturday, fire officials said.

In San Bernardino County, the Paradise fire in Morongo Valley, about 20 miles north of Palm Springs, destroyed six houses and damaged another.

"We will be doing minor mop-up and patrolling over the next few days," said California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Capt. Steve Faris. "But this fire is pretty much out."

In Riverside County, the Soboba fire near San Jacinto burned 2,080 acres.

One firefighter battling that blaze hurt his knee, and another had abdominal pain. No structures were damaged.

Hackberry Complex Fire racing towards Nevada

By Nikki Cobb, Staff Writer
San Bernardino Sun

KELSO - The 65,200-acre fire sweeping across the Mojave National Preserve was racing toward Nevada Saturday night as fire officials worried that a change in the weather could bring winds gusting up to 45 mph.

More than 930 firefighters battling the Hackberry Complex Fire were hindered by 90-degree temperatures, 8-percent humidity, steep, rocky terrain and strong breezes as they struggled to beat back the fire Saturday, which by nightfall was 65 percent contained.

"This is definitely the biggest fire ever in the east Mojave,' said Park Ranger Linda Slater.

A thunderstorm that swept across the preserve on Wednesday afternoon had started five fires with multiple lightning strikes, Park Ranger Ruby Newton said.

At first, the fires were isolated. The Hackberry, the Wild Horse, the Ranch, the Brandt and the Narrows fires all burned separately.

The Hackberry fire was fully contained Saturday evening, and crews were mopping up. The Brandt, another isolated blaze, was mostly contained too, Newton said.

"There's not much fire burning at that place now,' she said.

But the Ranch, the Wild Horse and the Narrows fires have merged, and were burning steadily Saturday evening in a blaze called the Hackberry Complex.

Fire officials fear that a cold front, expected to blow through Saturday night, will change the wind's direction from north-northeast to southwest.

"The front could bring us winds that gust up to 45 miles per hour,' said Capt. Chris Hoover of the Kern County Fire Department. "We've had some pretty good breezes, particularly on the north side. But we haven't had to deal with those kinds of winds yet.'

Meanwhile, the Paradise Fire was 100 percent contained Saturday after having charred 3,022 acres near Yucca Valley.

In the Mojave National Preserve, the blazes have burned five houses, six trailers and several outbuildings, Hoover said. There were 30 to 40 homes threatened as well.

About a dozen people were evacuated from their homes in Round Valley, Fourth of July Canyon and Cedar Canyon. Mid Hills Campground was damaged in the fire as well, Slater said.

The fire is not expected to reach Interstate 15.

The Mojave National Preserve contains ecological treasures, and firefighters were mindful particularly of habitat for the threatened desert tortoise, Hoover said.

Fortunately for the tortoise, the fire is mostly burning at higher elevations than the hole-dwelling creatures live. Still, efforts are being made to minimize damage.

"We're trying to use water as much as we can, to avoid staining things with flame retardant,' he said. "We're trying to make as little impact as we can.'

Firefighters are also battling to save cultural sites, such as ranches and mining cabins built in the 1860s.

"There are mine shafts around there that pose another hazard for the firefighters,' Slater said. "It would be easy for them to fall in and get hurt.

"We don't want to lose anybody.'

The fire is burning pinyon pine, juniper and sagebrush, Slater said.

She said that though winter rains had brought spectacular displays of flowers this spring, they had also fed grasses that carpeted the desert. Those grasses have dried and are fueling the fire.

"When we don't have a lot of rain there's nothing to burn, so a fire jumps from one shrub to the next,' she said. "Now it's just sweeping across.'

By nightfall, though, fire officials were encouraged. Cooler temperatures had helped firefighters considerably. "We're making some progress,' Slater said. "We're real hopeful."

Fires burn in Mojave National Preserve

By KELLY DONOVAN/Staff Writer
Desert Dispatch [Barstow, CA]

About 250 firefighters are battling four fires, one of them encompassing 8,000 acres, on sparsely populated national parklands east of Barstow.

Lightning started the fires in the Mojave National Preserve Wednesday, preserve ranger Linda Slater said. It could take several days to contain the fires, she said.

As of early Thursday evening, there had been no evacuations, but cabins in the Round Valley might need to be need to be evacuated, Slater said. Roughly 40 cabins are there, about a dozen of them occupied, she said.

The fires are a little more than 100 miles from Barstow.

The largest fire is in the Hackberry Mountains, about 15 miles north of Interstate 40, west of Ivanpah Road.

The other fires are in the heart of the preserve along Black Canyon Road north of the Mitchell Caverns and south of Cedar Canyon Road.

Two of them burning between Black Canyon Road and Wild Horse Canyon Road could merge together, Slater said.

A fifth fire that had started Wednesday had been extinguished by Thursday evening.

Among the agencies working to fight the fires are the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management and National Park Service.

Tourists can still visit the preserve despite the fires, but Hole in the Wall and Mid Hills campgrounds are closed, and Black Canyon Road is closed.

Anyone planning to visit the preserve who needs information about how the fires might affect their trip can contact the preserve's Baker Information Center at (760) 733-4040.

The preserve encompasses about 1.6 million acres east of Barstow, most of it between Interstate 40 and Interstate 15.

Leaving the preserve

Longtime superintendent accepts new job

By KELLY DONOVAN/Staff Writer
Desert Dispatch (Barstow, CA)

BARSTOW -- After a decade of overseeing a vast desert landscape, Mary Martin is heading north.

Martin, who has been the Mojave National Preserve's superintendent since it was brand-new in 1995, has accepted a job as the superintendent at Lassen Volcanic National Park in northern California.

"I have mixed feelings as anyone would," Martin, who lives in Barstow, said. "I have a lot of friends here, and I love the desert. But Lassen's great ... In the Park Service, everyone has a wish list, and Lassen's long been on mine."

The Mojave National Preserve, with a staff of about 65, encompasses about 1.6 million acres east of Barstow, sandwiched between Interstate 40 and Interstate 15. The preserve's office is in Barstow.

At the helm of the preserve, Martin has worked on the restoration of the historic Kelso Depot and the construction of the National Park Service's new building in Barstow.

"I think the restoration and soon-to-be reopening of the Kelso Depot is a big achievement," Howard Gross, California desert program manager for the National Parks Conservation Association, said. "It's going to be such an asset for the preserve, and such a gift to the region, to have that heritage preserved for future generations to enjoy."

James Woolsey, the Mojave National Preserve's chief of interpretation, credited Martin for helping get the federal funding for the restoration by working well with both Democratic and Republican lawmakers.

He also said she's done a good job of helping coordinate the various projects that are part of the renovation.

Martin has also been involved with some of the controversial Park Service issues, like the retirement of ranchers' grazing allotments, the conflict over the Mojave Cross and disputes over guzzlers -- watering holes for wildlife -- in the preserve.

Some of the challenges of her job came with the territory because of the preserve being new, Gross said. He said he thinks she's had one of the toughest assignments in the Park Service.

"Typically, there are a lot of challenges when a new unit of the National Park Service is created," he said. "Lands that are transferred to the Park Service have been used for other purposes, and the Park Service's mission is one of greater conservation, and that presents challenges."

Martin, a 36-year veteran of the Park Service, said she'll still be in Barstow for another few months and will probably start her new job in early October. She said she plans to visit the preserve regularly even after she moves away.

National parks face problems

REPORT: Air pollution, non-native grasses and expanding suburbs are threatening resources.

By JENNIFER BOWLES / The Press-Enterprise (Riverside, CA)

Report Card
Overall conditions of natural resources, according to The National Parks Conservation Assocation:
Joshua Tree National Park: Fair
Mojave National Preserve: Poor
Death Valley National Park: Fair
To get a copy of the report: http://www.npca.org/stateoftheparks/californiadesert

National parks in the California desert rate fair at best when it comes to protecting their unique landscapes, historic buildings and cultural resources, according to a report issued by the National Parks Conservation Association, a watchdog group.

Joshua Tree and Death Valley national parks along with the Mojave National Preserve face a litany of threats and a lack of funding to do much about them, the group said.

Wedged between burgeoning Southern California and the Las Vegas area, the parks are experiencing air pollution from urbanized areas, the spread of non-native grasses that increase the chance of fires, and swelling suburbs that could deplete the parks of water needed for wildlife, the group said.

"Certainly, you can't blame air quality on the lack of sufficient staff, said Howard Gross, the association's California desert program manager. "But you can say we don't even have an air-quality monitoring station in Mojave National Preserve to have a sense of what the problem is out there."

The goal of the report, Gross said, is to help highlight challenges, stimulate discussions and help guide future decisions of the parks, which were expanded under the 1994 California Desert Protection Act.

"Here we are a decade after the passage of one of the most important public-lands legislation," noted Gross. "It's a good time to look at where we want to be a decade from now."

Park managers didn't dispute the report's findings.

"We would be able to address many of the issues sooner if we were funded to the level that our business plan calls for," said Curt Sauer, Joshua Tree superintendent.

That plan notes the park's $4.2 million annual budget is short by $2.6 million, he said, adding that many parks and federal agencies are experiencing the same shortfall.

Help could be on the way. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, an author of the Desert Protection Act, recently co-sponsored new legislation that would allow Americans to give money to the National Park Service through a voluntary checkoff on their tax returns.

"It is absolutely critical that these parks receive the funding that they need so that we can preserve them for future generations," Feinstein, D-Calif., said in a statement about the desert parks.

In Joshua Tree, non-native plants have invaded the world-renowned climbing mecca, growing between the spindly Joshua Trees and other native plants and increasing the chance of fire.

"The fire is going to be able to run," Sauer said. Studies could help figure out how to prevent them from taking over the park, he said.

The Mojave National Preserve, which gets less than 50 percent of the funding needed, is facing questions over whether to use groundwater for hunting purposes and threats from the proposed airport 13 miles from its border in Nevada, said Larry Whalon, the preserve's resources chief.

"Those are the kinds of issues that are going to plague our night sky and air quality," he said.

Sauer said he hoped Joshua Tree could get more funding to gain a better understanding of its historical, geological and Native American resources.

"We need to capture what went on in the past before it goes away," he said. "It's part of our heritage."