Pearce Submits People’s Proposal to the House

By Rebecca Powell, 6-23-08

	Caption: Ocotillo

Part of an ongoing series about the Doña Ana County Wilderness Debate. For more on the debate and the proposals, see A Biased Observer of the Doña Ana County Wilderness Debate and For Some, Wilderness is Simple.

HR 6300, a version of the People’s Proposal, was submitted to the U.S. House of Representatives by Steve Pearce (R-NM) on June 18, 2008, creating a flurry of activity this weekend on both sides of the Dona Aña County Wilderness Debate. 

An email to Doña Ana Wilderness Coalition supporters announced a press conference and rally against HR 6300. The email says HR 6300,

Eliminates ALL Current Wilderness Protections in the 8 Temporary Wilderness Areas in Dona Ana County, including in the Organ Mountains

Creates a New Process for Selling Off Public Lands in Dona Ana County and A Hand Picked Special Interest Group Committee to Decide How Dona Ana County Grows

Takes Federal Funding Away From the Federal Governments Ability to Maintain and Expand Americas Most Important Natural Lands

It sounds frightening. Presented like this, I would sign a petition and walk a picket line against HR 6300, however, I have been reading the proposal for what has become HR 6300 for over a month—there seems to be a misunderstanding.

HR 6300 asks that the lands be protected from disposal (sale), mining and mineral leasing, offering the same protections as a wilderness designation. The only difference in the levels of protection offerred is road use.  Existing roads stay open under HR 6300, and off-road use is permitted for range improvements, flood control projects, and law enforcement activities. The bill’s take on access is not as strict as wilderness, but it can hardly be said to roll back ALL protections.

The new process for selling public lands by a hand picked special interest group, refers to the land advisory board. When I first read the People’s Proposal, now HR 6300, the land advisory board made me nervous. Special interest groups flashed through my brain, too. I asked the principle author of the proposal Frank Dubois, a former New Mexico Secretary of Agriculture, to explain it to me. Mr. Dubois explained that presently the Bureau of Land Management’s land use plan calls for the disposal (sale) of 60,000 acres of the proposed protected lands*. If neither the Citizen’s Proposal nor the People’s Propsal is introduced and passed, the land will be sold and the monies distributed in accordance with the Federal Lands Facilitation Act (FLFA). FLFA says 80 percent of the monies can be spent in New Mexico, while 20 percent can be used anywhere in the nation. Conceivably, none of the money might end up in Doña Ana County. A local advisory board would not oversee the current disposal, conducted under the auspices of BLM.

Under HR 6300, a board consisting of representatives from the city, county, conservation community, business community, Elephant Butte Irrigation District, Department of the Interior, and the BLM District Manager would facilitate the how and when of the sale. The intent to sell would be announced and open to public comment. The bulk of the money from the sales would come back to Doña Ana County.

HR 6300 is undeniably different than wilderness, yet it is still a conservation effort. Homes will not be built on the Organs, the Robledos, the Las Uvas, the Potrillos. Off-road vehicles will not roam haphazardly. Neither the Citizen’s Proposal nor the People’s Proposal (now HR 6300) are all bad. Painting either as evil, as a loss for public lands, loses sight of the bigger picture—protecting the lands from development for generations to come.

The Doña Ana County Wilderness Coalition will hold a press conference at noon today. In my dream world, they will say, “Isn’t it great that we all care about protecting these lands? We are so glad legislation has been introduced taking us a step further in the direction of conservation. We’d like to suggest a few ways to make the legislation even better!” Yes, I am even hoping for the overused exclamation point. I know. I know. Not likely.

*Amendment and Correction - The BLM maintains, as a part of their land use planning process, an inventory of all lands for disposal.  They modify their Resource Management Plans every 10-15 years.  They identify lands available for disposal in that RMP.  The 60,000 acres are part of what was 65,000 acres in the 1993 Mimbres Area Resource Management Plan amendment.  5,000 has been sold in the last 15
years.  A map is available from the BLM.  These lands are not in the proposed RPA or SPA areas.
A significant amount of the identified disposal acres lie east of I-10, south of Las Cruces.  There are also some disposal lands on the east mesa.