Mesquite City Council Votes To Strike Wilderness From Gold Butte NCA Resolution

By VERNON ROBISON

Moapa Valley Progress

The Mesquite City Council voted last week to draft a replacement to a pair of earlier resolutions in order to assert some key limitations in its support of proposed new federal designations on the Gold Butte complex.

In a meeting held Tuesday, April 14, Council members voted that the language of the new resolution should still support the concept of a National Conservation Area (NCA) designation. But this support would only be on the condition that no new federal wilderness areas be designated in the process.
“I have never had a problem with the NCA designation at Gold Butte,” said councilwoman Cyndi Delaney. “But I do have some big problems with adding more wilderness designation. With more wilderness comes greater restrictions. You can’t even take a bicycle in those areas because it is what they call a modern conveyance. You can take a horse, but not a cart.”

The council decision came after more than 90 minutes of hotly divided public comment. The city council chambers were completely packed with around 150 people in attendance.
Many of those who spoke urged the council to uphold the earlier resolutions. A large group had come from Las Vegas, wearing orange stickers on their shirt which read “Protect Gold Butte!” which were being passed out to the public before the meeting at the door.

“Previous city councils have supported protection for Gold Butte,” said Henderson resident Jaena Moan who is also the Executive Director of the Friends of Gold Butte organization. “There is a lot of common ground here on both sides: a love of Gold Butte and also a love for the City of Mesquite. This protection would be win-win scenario for everyone. We ask that you uphold the earlier resolutions.”
Grace Larsen of Las Vegas said that she was of the “millenial” generation and has been interested in coming to Mesquite because of Gold Butte.

“I don’t come to gamble,” she said. “I don’t golf either. I do want to come out and hike the area. That’s why I come. Your keeping Gold Butte from becoming an NCA might cause people like me to just not come anymore.”

Many local residents expressed similar positions. Vicki Simmons of the Moapa Band of Paiutes said that she supported the protection of Gold Butte through an NCA designation.
“I love the desert land and I want its beauty and peacefulness preserved for my people,” Simmons said. “If you turn these resolutions down this will be no place to be.”

Mesquite resident Elaine Hurd said that overturning the resolutions would send the wrong message. “Gold Butte is public land,” she said. “It belongs to all of the people, not just the few people with pioneer ties to the community. We need to look out for the interests of everyone. We are stewards of the land it doesn’t belong to us.”

Other local residents expressed the desire for the council to overturn the resolutions. Bunkerville Town Advisory Board member Brian Haviland reminded the council that the Gold Butte area falls within the Bunkerville township.

“The Bunkerville Town Board is against an NCA for the area,” Haviland said. “We feel that the current designation provides adequate protection that is needed out there if it was just adequately enforced. Just making it an NCA doesn’t solve the problem, it just adds a layer of complexity and distances local people from the decision-making.”

Seasonal Mesquite resident Roy Sutton said that he had been spending a lot of time camping out in the Gold Butte area lately. In all of his travelling he hadn’t seen any of these NCA/Wilderness advocates out there using the land.
“I haven’t seen any of these people out there and I doubt if most of these folks have ever been out there,” he said. “But when I came down here tonight, I did see a big tour bus idling out in front of city hall that had brought a lot of people from somewhere else. Could it be that someone got the word out on how folks should flood this meeting with people who have an agenda?”

A couple of commenters asked questions about why this item should suddenly be appearing on the agenda. They wondered if it had anything to do with the one year anniversary of the showdown between BLM officials and Bunkerville rancher Cliven Bundy which occurred last week.

After public comment and during council discussion, Delaney assured the public that the item’s appearance on the agenda had nothing to do with Bundy.
“As far as that goes, I don’t think anyone even realized that that anniversary was coming up,” she said. “I think we have all been too busy running the city. But thanks so much for reminding us about it!”

Delaney said that the reason that the resolution was coming up now for review was more about the way the City had been treated during the recent BLM Resource Management Plan process.
“The BLM were up here and, like happens a lot of the time, the City got treated like an ugly stepchild,” Delaney said. “They never gave us a separate hearing on the plan or any time for people to come and discuss it. We asked for an extension and they wouldn’t give it to us. So some of us got a little warped about it and we said, maybe we should relook at these things.”

Previous city councils in 2009 and 2010 had approved resolutions that supported legislative designation of the Gold Butte area as an NCA with new Wilderness. The resolutions urged the U.S. Congress “to enact these designations and mandate that an effective management plan be implemented that secures the interests of neighboring jurisdictions.”

Since that time, numerous bills have been presented in both the U.S. House and Senate by certain members of the Nevada delegation. None of these have made it to a vote, however.

Councilman George Rapson said that he felt the earlier resolutions were too broad in their support.
“The existing resolutions support virtually any legislation that comes along without considering the content of that legislation,” Rapson said. “What I’d like to see is a resolution that is a little more specific and says ‘If it is an NCA, then fine. But new wilderness is a problem.’”
“I think it is irresponsible to push for generic legislation that says, ‘Yeah, whatever you guys give us is fine.’” Rapson added. “I just disagree with that.”

Rapson was doubtful whether the NCA designation would bring the economic benefits to the city that have always been promised by proponents.
“I look at the economic benefits that have been generated by the nearby Beaver Dam Wash NCA, for example,” he said. “Wow! It has been unbelievable, right? No, it hasn’t really drawn anybody. I don’t see a soul out there. So I’m not really getting this thing about all the economic benefits that it will bring us.”

Nevertheless, Rapson said that he was “absolutely willing” to make a motion to rescind the earlier two resolutions and create a new resolution that supports the NCA, as long as no more wilderness is added.

Councilman Kraig Hafen agreed with this idea but said that the new resolution should also include a provision that all existing roads should remain open and accessible in perpetuity.

Speaking of the previous iterations of proposed Gold Butte legislation over the years, Hafen said, “They have all been very specific about the new wilderness areas being designated. In fact, it is the only thing that is spelled out. But the future of access and roads, that is always a matter of ‘Well, we will take it under advisement and the committee can give suggestions.’ But you know that ultimately, the feds will determine it.”

Councilman Richard Green added concerns about the city being able to maintain access to water rights in the Virgin Peak area. Those areas are currently part of what is being proposed for possible wilderness designation.
“My concern is with the rights that the Virgin Valley Water District has out there,” Green said. “It would be an economic disaster if we didn’t have access to those.”

Rapson made a motion to instruct staff to draft a new resolution that included support for a Gold Butte NCA with the condition that no new wilderness be added, all existing roads maintain accessibility in perpetuity and that nothing would impair the city’s ability to access its water rights in the area. Once the new resolution is drafted, presented to the board and approved, the previous resolutions would be rescinded, according to Rapson’s motion.

The council approved the motion with a unanimous vote.