There is not much more to say about the proposal beyond what Mr. Wakeem said in his email to members of the Open Space Advisory Board on Wednesday night.
Mr. Jobe proposes to turn over that portion of his leased land that contains Arroyo 41A to the PSB. He stated that he will leave a buffer between the quarry and the north rim of the arroyo thus preserving the arroyo from rim to rim. The GLO will have to agree to grant an easement to PSB and the PSB will have to agree to take it.
At his expense, Mr. Jobe will survey the area in question. That survey will take two to three months. Rim to rim with a buffer is critical. So, where the final stakes are laid is very important to those who want to see the Mountain to River Corridor preserved.
If the PSB agrees to take the land, then they will preserve it in its natural state.
Whether Mr. Jobe was motivated by a sense of public duty or pride (and he didn’t have to be) can not be known. Some have suggested that, by ceding 41A, he will not be required in the future to go through the kind of permitting that will involve public comment. Public scrutiny can be costly and he and his advisors may have thought that this proposal may be the least expense in the long run.
It might also be that there is nothing of great value to mine in and around 41A. Being magnanimous then would be an acceptable gesture. There is little chance of continuing a bike trail at Mile Marker 6 to Arroyo 42. Stanley Jobe intends to mine that area. Anyone who has hiked or biked this area knows the solid limestone bedrock that is there.
Whatever reasons Mr. Jobe may have for making his proposal, it doesn’t matter. That the Mountain to River corridor will be preserved does matter.
Of course, not all are happy and many want to see more land left unquarried or no land mined at all. I know that efforts to oppose quarrying on this piece of land owned by the People of Texas next to the Franklin Mountains State Park will continue.
Nevertheless, if Jobe truly grants an easement from rim to rim and provides a real buffer, then there ought to be cause for some celebration among conservationists.
There is much more here than Stanley Jobe. Our mountains (Franklins and Huecos) will continue to be eaten up as long as we demand “zero-scapes” of rock for our homes, our streets, our businesses and our commercial and public building landscapes. As long as the City fails to contain sprawl and encourages it by keeping all aspects of building cheap, there will be a demand for mined materials.
Few may know it, but GLO’s lease of the quarry now operated by Cemex at McKelligon Canyon goes all the way to the amphitheater in the canyon itself. Viva El Paso!
Until recently, the Open Space Advisory Board had little authority to accomplish the mission of preserving land. There are those who still resent the added duties given to OSAB by City Council and want to thwart OSAB’s efforts. Games were played with the last agenda. They will be played again.
Learning to live sustainably needs to become the norm. We live in a City whose landscapers are mostly rock spreaders and tree toppers. Sand is so cheap that we don’t even think about recycling glass when we should be.
Bottom line: if we want to preserve our mountains, if we want fewer quarries and less mining, than we had better change ourselves and how we relate to this still beautiful and sacred land here in the Chihuahuan Desert.
Jim, Thank you for explaining a complicated issue in clear language. Let’s celebrate this victory and get to work preserving other critical open spaces, starting with the rest of Arroyo 41A.
ReplyDeletejudy
Thank you...in my work, I hope to help drive the development and the related gravel-centered landscapes towards something more sustainable, locally-inspired and cleverly contrived.
ReplyDeleteThere are plenty of Quarries and plenty of limestone on the westside right now -- that JOBE himself sold to CEMEX. But JOBE cannot be competitive with CEMEX now unless he starts up another QUARRY on the westside. And the people of el paso are caught in the middle of this money-power-game. Meanwhile JOBE has a lot of money from building the Border Wall that he can give to organizations hungry to save other pockets of land under the guise of mitigating the damage from his yet-another-quarry; and he can then sit back to watch the resulting fight that the money causes between groups and people otherwise dedicated to preserving nature, plants and animals in our region..... Meanwhile that 41A is "saved" is hardly happy news to the plants and animals who depend on the 480 acres next to Transmt. Drive and the State Park; and dwell in Arroyo 42 --- or, the school children attending classes at EPCC and the high school just a stone' throw away from there. But who gives a voice to children and nature? They have no voice. The kids can be ignored, and the plants/animals can be easily bulldozed into oblivion for roadbed to build yet another highway (yes, this is about HIGHWAY building, not rockwalls for homes). SHAME EL PASO and SHAME to those who think that selling out to JOBE is a "Win-Win".
ReplyDeleteYes, it is about rock walls and landscaping as well as sprawl which includes highway building. What it really boils down to is that we have to take responsibility for our environment. It's easy to scapegoat Jobe (and, yes, there should have been and should be conservation and environmental restraints.) But, as long as we do not address our own behavior as consumers and citizens, our demand for materials will be met by suppliers. It is easier to set aside land for open space preservation than to mandate that businesses be restricted to set percentages of commerce. Who dictates the apportionment? Who dictates the limits of competition? The negative repercussion on our economy would be huge. Again it is better to develop a culture and economy of sustainability. There are a number of lessons to be drawn from this experience. Frankly, if Mr. Jobe preserves 41A from rim to rim and provides a buffer, then it is time to ask Mr. O'Leary to reconsider reducing that same arroyo in the Desert Springs development from a width of 1200 feet to just 120 feet and dalloing the sides. ("Dallo" is the coined word after City of El Paso Engineer, Kareem Dallo, who thinks destroying an arroyo with concrete sides is equal to having a natural arroyo. We should not dallo arroyos.)
ReplyDelete@ Judy, David and Jim - well said and way to look forward. @ Anonymous - shame on you for making assumptions about the people who have worked so hard to achieve a positive outcome in this first small step. I have not heard anyone characterize this as a "win-win" nor has anyone turned away from the wildlife and the children. People are working hard to represent the wild land and life, to enable children in finding their own voices and to ensure that their words are heard. The real world is complicated and difficult - change comes in small increments if it comes at all. Disparaging those who are willing to take little steps one at a time towards a better future contributes nothing to the process and, in fact,offers encouragement to those who would love to see conservation fail.
ReplyDelete