The Friday Video: Owls Underground

Here's our very own Urban Biologist, Lois Balin, in a well-produced Texas Parks and Wildlife Department video. It well documents the kind of habitat destruction caused by urban sprawl as well as the habits of burrowing owls who are pretty darn cute. (The video also includes the amazing dog, Zimba.) Lois and her volunteers have constructed some burrows fitted with cameras so that the birds can be documented in their homes.

Sad to report that yesterday Lois discovered that a burrow at the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park had been vandalized. She and some of her helpers are doing repairs today. It is so sad that some will destroy things just for the sake of destruction.

If you'd like to volunteer to help Lois with her burrowing owls, contact her at Lois.Balin@tpwd.texas.gov.

Visit El Paso Urban Wildlife on Facebook.

Here's one more video about development, burrowing owl habitat and Lois:

Construction Encroaches on Burrowing Owls Habitat 

If you get elpasonaturally by email, click on the link or go to elpasonaturally.blogspot.com to see "Owls Underground".

Killing Algae at Ascarate Lake

Photo by KFOX News

You probably have heard about the algae problem at Ascarate Lake that is killing fish. The El Paso Times story is HERE. The proposed remedy is a product called GreenClean Liquid 5.0. A Texas Parks and Wildlife Department official says: "As the GreenClean kills the algae it may be causing a dissolved oxygen problem that would kill the fish. The lake may need more aeration or they may not be following the directions on the label. The information is contradictory as to whether it is toxic to wildlife and the label places 77% of the ingredients under the category of 'other'."

The matter will take more time to discover if GreenClean Liquid 5.0 is really safe for lake life and people. TPWD personnel are working on it.

Question: will the County wait for the verdict or just go ahead and apply the broad spectrum algaecide? According to Commissioner David Stout the County is holding off on the treatment for now in order to explore options.

TPWD Has No Idea

In my November 13th post, I said that Cemex has much more mountain to destroy at its quarry at McKelligon Canyon.

I wrote: "I asked Dr. Cesar Mendez, the Superintendent of the Franklin Mountains State Park, about the boundaries between the park and CEMEX and whether there had been any encroachment that he was aware of. He replied that he is concerned about 'any potential encroachment, as well as the changes in the landscape. But there is not much we can do if they are working legally and within their boundaries.'  He added that 'for now we are neighbors and respect each other.' He and his team keep their focus on protecting the land within the State Park as well as potential land that they might annex."

Dr. Mendez advised me to contact the open records division of Texas Parks & Wildlife Department (TPWD). I sent this request:

"Please provide me with any information describing the boundary between the Franklin Mountain State Park and the Cemex Quarry near McKelligon Canyon in El Paso, Texas. Digital files are preferred."

The response from TPWD Attorney, Laura Russell:

"According to our staff, the best available data currently is the El Paso City / County parcel data maintained by the Paso Del Norte Mapa, a coalition of local agencies.

http://www.pdnmapa.org/HTML/datasets.html

This parcel data is the foundation of the data TPWD presently uses in our GIS to depict the boundary of Franklin Mountains SP.  Franklin Mountains SP does not have a boundary survey.  It is described in the 1987 deed by Sections included in the park."

I also asked about a boundary survey for Wyler Aerial Tramway State Park. Ms. Russell again responded:

"Mr. Tolbert, Wyler Aerial Tramway is totally contained within the boundaries of Franklin Mountains SP.  It does not share a common boundary with the CEMEX quarry.  Have a good day."

So on Tuesday of last week I emailed Ms. Russell and asked: "How does TPWD know that Cemex has not encroached on its boundaries already?"

No response from her to date. 

It appears that the TPWD has no idea whether Cemex has already encroached on their boundaries. At its last Executive Committee meeting the El Paso Group of the Sierra Club voted to begin a petition calling for such a survey.

Now the Bad News from the MPO: No State Park Entrance

At the Metropolitan Planning Organization/Transportation Policy Board meeting last Friday (7/13/13) State Rep. Marisa Marquez spoke in favor of an appropriate entrance to the Tom Mays section of the Franklin Mountains State Park (FMSP) and asked what funding might be possible.  The board listened respectfully as Richard Teschner, Pat White, Scott White, Lois Balin and Judy Ackerman spoke in favor of TxDOT’s option 4, the underpass that the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department has determined to be the safe and appropriate entrance for the Park.  

The MPO looked at 47 projects for the 2014-2016 four-year Transportation Improvement Program funding.  The desired FMSP Entrance was one of four projects that was not included.  Members of the public spoke about other projects in the TIP.  Then without further board discussion, they voted to approve the list of 47 projects.  The FMSP entrance project is still in the 20 year Metropolitan Transportation Plan but there is no immediate funding for it.

El Paso Times report: http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_23653206/new-park-entrance-doesnt-get-priority

Whatever Bielek Wants, Bielek Gets

We may have to re-write the words of the popular Richard Adler and Barry Ross song "Whatever Lola wants, Lola gets" from the 1955 musical, "Damn Yankees".  It will go like this: "Whatever Bielek wants, Bielek gets."




In a recent email to Rep. Jody Pickett, Judy Ackerman wrote:

From: judy Ackerman [mailto:jpackerman53@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 8:26 AM
To: jill.breitinger@house.state.tx.us; joe.pickett@house.state.tx.us
Cc: Escobar Veronica Asst. Ruben Vogt; vgescobar@gmail.com; Escobar, Judge's asst Celeste A. Varela; CountyJudge@epcounty.com; TxDOT ProjectManager Tony Uribe; TXDOT Bob Bielek; Moody Campaign Daniel Mahoney; Moody, Joseph; Moody, Joe For El Paso; joe.moody@house.state.tx.us; ngonzalez@bowlawfirm.com; Gonzalez, Naomi District76; Rodriguez, Jose Asst Corinne ; Rodriguez, Jose for Senate; Rodriguez Leg Aid Sushma Smith; Rodriguez, Aid Cecilia Rodriguez; Teschner, Richard; mary.gonzalez@house.state.tx.us; naomi.gonzalez@house.state.tx.us; marisa.marquez@house.state.tx.us; Marquez, Marisa State Rep Dist 77
Subject: Move Project Forward, FMSP Entrance

Dear TX State Representative Joe Pickett,

We need your guidance on how to ensure a timely resolution to a safe and effective entrance to the Tom Mays Section of the Franklin Mountains State Park.  At the Apr 2013 meetings of the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), Transportation Policy Board (TPB), I understood that an entrance option would be selected (with public input) THIS FY so that funding would be locked in by the first quarter of next FY.  However, communication with Bob Bielek (below) indicates considerable delays. 

Note the original schedule:

Click on image to enlarge.

Thank you for your help.  I look forward to your suggestions on how to move this project forward.

Judy Ackerman

The communication with Bielek was this email:

From: Bob Bielek [mailto:Robert.Bielek@txdot.gov]
Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2013 2:15 PM
To: judy Ackerman
Cc: Tony Uribe; Eddie Valtier
Subject: Bielek Re: Entrance to Franklin Mountains State Park

Ms. Ackerman:

As I told you, we have a large number of projects that are letting this month and next which have our staff fully occupied. I have asked the project manager, Tony Uribe, to have the consultants look at Dr. Bonart's suggestion as well as any others that may be similar. I also requested that we ask the folks at TPW about migration/forage trails. I know we have asked for this information before without sucess but will do so again.

I expect that we will get heavily involved in this project again after the letting rush is over, probably in September. Should you have any further questions please feel free to contact me.
Bob Bielek sent from my Blackberry

He had previously called Judy and Judy reported that he told her that [h]is preferred option is #6 [option 4 is supported by the TPWD and local environmentalists] with no change to original plans for the expansion of Transmountain Rd, at grade entrance with eastbound vehicles using a left turn lane and crossing 2 lanes of traffic headed down hill, west.

"He talked at length about a short span bridge, under Transmountain Rd, for hikers, bikers, and animals that would be located between the old entrance and the 3 culverts at the bottom of the arroyo."

Conservation activist, Dr. Richard Teschner, offered this comment to other comments Mr. Bielek made and which Ackerman had written down and shared with Teschner in an email:

Cleverly, TxDOT District Engineer Bob Bielek is seeking to give the impression that we’re still in the early stages of discussing the Tom Mays Entrance. Some quotes from Judy’s notes: 'TxDOT received one suggestion.' False. TxDoT received dozens of suggestions earlier this year, including one long one from me. 

'After the end of year rush, the end of August, [Mr. Bielek] will look at the Park Entrance project and the related environmental process.' Misleading. This project has been being “looked at” since before Mr. Bielek assumed the district engineership at the beginning of September, 2012. 

'He [Mr. Bielek] prefers option 6 [which] is the do nothing, no change, no cost option.” True—and that is the option he’s supported since last fall. '  I asked if he was working with TPWD and got a vague answer about 'somebody should be talking with them.' There’s no “should be” about it. Scott Boruff, Deputy Executive Director for Operations, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, has been talking with equally-high-up officials at TxDOT about the Tom Mays Entrance since (again) before Mr. Bielek took on the job of El Paso-area District Engineer, and has continued to do so thereafter. 

'Mr. Bielek was particularly interested in any work TPWD has done on identifying ‘defined migratory trails’.' If he picked up the phone he could learn. I suspect, however, that “defined migratory trails” is a red herring, one that TxDOT may hope will delay further consideration of Option 4 until the time has passed for it to be funded. (Another way in which “defined migratory trails” can be used as an Option-4 killer: to hope that such trails lie either well within the Park and thus way to the east of the Tom Mays Entrance, or way to the west of the Entrance and thus within an area zoned “commercial” or “residential.”) 

'Mr. Bielek expects no problem with east[-]bound traffic entering the park by turning left across 2 lanes of traffic headed downhill, westbound' etc. This “expectation” conveniently—shockingly—overlooks the rationale that TxDOT repeatedly used three years ago when appearing before City Council in defense of its proposed West Transmountain Loop 375 freeway: that the Safety Of The Public is the primary reason the freeway must be built. Vehicles entering Tom Mays are not public maybe? 

'Mr. Bielek expects to hold a public comment after Aug 2013.' Fine: we’ll be as ready for this public comment as we were for the previous public comment, a public comments whose public comments somehow didn’t get recorded, let alone publicized, by the TxDOT folks who were running the show. 

'In the environmental process he will look for ‘categorical exclusion’ and a finding of no significant environmental impact[;] otherwise there will be extensive delays.' Of course “extensive delays” will enable any option other than Option 6 (“Do nothing; retain the Entrance as it—at grade level”) to get defunded.

I also note how far off mark the “Project Development Schedule” is, and how parts of it put paid to the notion that Schedule is a paramount concern by TxDOT. See especially “Anticipated Environmental Approval—Spring 2013” and “Construction Letting—May 2013.” I also note the “Public Hearing” bullet: “Dec 2012/Jan 2013.” The public hearing/public comment was held back then. To schedule yet another one (“Mr. Bielek expects to hold a public comment after Aug 2013”) is at best disingenuous, at worst cynical and self-serving (as in, “Whoops, this meeting came too late”).

Joe Hardy/El Paso Citizens: "We have to keep training and strict rules and all that."

Lola/Bob Bielek: "You can tell me all them rules!"

Joe/El Paso:  "You're making things very complicated."

Lola/Bielek:  "Then be good boy."

Joe/El Paso:  "I'm trying to."

Lola/Bielek:  "And do like Lola tells you to do."

Let Your Will Be Heard; Don't Let TxDOT Dictate

The email address that TxDOT is giving out for public comments about the park entrance is still no good.  Truth is - they don't give a damn about your opinion.  

At the public meeting last week, Bob Bielek asked how many people in attendance wanted the TPWD alternative entrance (4) into the FMSP.  Over half raised their hands.  He announced that about half the people were for it.  His aim was to show that there is no consensus in the environmental community for the entrance.  Judy Ackerman then asked for those who were with TxDOT to raise their hands.  The other half did so.  The real point: the game was rigged.  Must be tough when your boss tells you that you must show up for an event to overturn public opinion.  Bielek announced that he and only he will decide what will happen.  Isn't history littered with dictators who believed that they and they alone can decide?  The question is this: how long will we allow one person or one agency to have such profound power? 

Bobby wants his Lone Star doodads - aesthetics they are called and not a safe, attractive entrance to our park - safe for humans and safe for wildlife.

Here's the email rejection notice:

-------- Original Message --------

Subject:	Undeliverable: Tom Mays Park Entrance
Date:	Sun, 14 Apr 2013 23:24:27 +0000
From:
To:

Delivery has failed to these recipients or groups:
elp-fmsparkentrance@txdot.gov
Your message can't be delivered because delivery to this address is restricted.



TxDOT and Bob Bielek don't want what you do.  I'm reminded of the first meeting of the Mayor's Blue Ribbon panel regarding PSB land management. Bulldozing Ted TxDOT Houghton (Rick Perry's personal pick as Chairman of the TxDOT Commission) didn't want the meetings to be open to the public.  It's the same arrogance. 

Again: how long will we allow one person or one agency to have such profound power?

Go to Franklin Mountains Wilderness Coalition and read and respond to "Our State Park Needs Your Help".  Spread the word.

Attend tomorrow's MPO meeting:
Date: Monday, April 15, 2013
Time: 4pm
Location: 10767 Gateway West, Suite 605.  Arrive before 4 pm and sign up to speak in favor of Oprtion 4 and let Mayela Granados (915-591-9735, ext. 11, mgranados@elpasompo.org) know that you want to speak.

This may be a good time to re-read (or read for the first time) Ralph Waldo Emerson's Concord Hymn.

Outraged? Email Bulldozing Ted "TxDOT" Houghton

Apparently not all comments about the State Park entrance sent to the email provided by TxDOT are getting through.

Note this response to one person who wished to comment:

From: <postmaster@txdot.onmicrosoft.com>

Date: April 3, 2013 11:23:15 AM MDT

Subject: Undeliverable: Please choose Entrance Option 4

Delivery has failed to these recipients or groups:
elp-fmsparkentrance@txdot.gov
Your message can't be delivered because delivery to this address is restricted.

If you are outraged by TxDOT's pulling funding and support for the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department's preferred entrance to the Franklin Mountains State Park, send your email comments to:

Robert Bielek  Robert.Bielek@txdot.gov

Ted Houghton  ted4@houghtonfinancialpartners.com

Rep. Joe Moody Speaks Out About Park Entrance

In an email to a constituent, Rep. Joe Moody (D-El Paso) wrote this:

"First, thank you for your commitment to El Paso in supporting a number of choices for the entrance to the Franklin Mountains State Park.

As a representative of the El Paso residents closest to the park, I support projects that will ease access, preserve the area's natural beauty, and promote tourism. After conducting research and meeting with a wide array of El Paso stakeholders about the proposed entrance options, I am firmly in support of alternative four.

That entrance plan is not only the most convenient for visitors but also the safest. Creating an overpass would allow for improved and orderly traffic flow because of the dedicated entrance and exit ramps for vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. It also ensures that emergency vehicles will have the easiest access and swiftest response times when dealing with emergencies in the park.

An equally important consideration is that alternative four is the option least disruptive of the natural aesthetics of the area. The project blends in with the landscape, utilizes existing arroyos for natural drainage to prevent flooding, and includes a wildlife crossing to protect the park's animal life.

Although alternative four is not the cheapest solution, it is the best long-term investment. The park already hosts over 50,000 visitors every year—90% of them local. Improving visitor access while preserving the park itself will drive further growth in both local visitation and tourism from outside the El Paso area.

Franklin Mountains State Park is important to me, to our community, and to Texas itself. Please feel free to contact me any time.

Respectfully,

Representative Joe Moody

District 78 | El Paso County"

Outraged by TxDOT's pulling funding and support for the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department's preferred entrance to the Franklin Mountains State Park?Send your email comments to:

Robert Bielek  Robert.Bielek@txdot.gov

Ted Houghton  ted4@houghtonfinancialpartners.com

More Information about Park Entrance Travesty

Before I go any farther, take the time to go to the FMWC call to action concerning the park entrance.  In addition to meeting dates and an email that you can write (complete with a list of email addresses), also go to TxDOT's Public Meeting Notice and see where you can send comments.  In all 4 calls to action: emails to officials, an MPO meeting on April 5 and the TxDOT meeting on April 10, and information where you can email your comments to TxDOT - window dressing for them, of course; but it will be great to have on record emails from all of you.

Now here's how the bad deal went down - the defunding of the TPWD preferred entrance to the FMSP which provided safety and better access by motorists along with an animal corridor. Just know that there is still more information coming in.

On February 25, 2013 Dr. Richard Bonart met with Bob Bielek, the El Paso District TxDOT Engineer, and City Council representative, Susie Byrd.  Rep. Ann Lilly also joined the meeting at the park entrance from Transmountain in question is in her district.  

Dr. Bonart reportedly either was misunderstood or misrepresented the position of the environmental/conservation community - viz., their support of the TPWD's Alternative 4: an underpass at the entrance that will support motorists, animals and hikers and bicyclists.  Bonart has opposed such a plan for a long time now and has lobbied for a route from Paseo del Norte about 1.5 miles from the park.  Since OSAB changed an earlier recommendation of the Bonart proposal to the TPWD preferred alternative, it seemed certain that the park entrance would be the TPWD's preferred plan.  Rep Lilly apparently also favors the TPWD proposal for an entrance in her district.  Unfortunately, one meeting can undo what the larger public favors.  Bielek is using the mis-information at the meeting to further what it now seems was his plan to scuttle a safer entrance to the park in the first place.

Bielek has been making several assertions about defunding the project for a new entrance that just don't seem to add up.

In one email he blames the Sierra Club:

From: Bob Bielek [mailto:Robert.Bielek@txdot.gov]
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2013 8:44 AM
Subject: Re: TXDOT Option 4

Ray,

To clarify the actual situation regarding the project to alter the entrance to Franklin Mountain State Park, the following are the facts:

1.  The funding for the project had to be obligated by the end of August of this year.  Because of the suit by the Sierra Club environmental processing was delayed and therefore the project can not be funded with those funds.  Also, the funds reserved for this project were insufficient for the alternative you describe.  We do not believe that finding alternative funding once the environmental process is complete will be a problem.

2.  In reviewing the situation, it does not appear that a change to the entrance that will exist after completion of the TransMountain West Project is necessary from a traffic safety perspective.

3.  A Public Meeting will be held April 10th, from 6PM to 8PM at Canutillo High School to advise the public of the alternatives that have been investigated and to permit the public to offer their own alternatives.  This is particularly important since it appears that the Purpose and Need for this project is not traffic safety but other issues, such as the safe passage of pedestrians and wildlife that wish to transit TransMountain.

We certainly welcome anyone with an interest in this project to attend the Public Meeting and to participate in the environmental process.

Bob Bielek, DPA, PE

District Engineer, El Paso District

Texas Department of Transportation

Sent from my iPad

However, the Sierra Club's attorney says that the Sierra Club's suit did not affect the entrance in any legal way:

From: David Frederick [mailto:dof@lf-lawfirm.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2013 9:23 AM
Subject: Re: FMSP Entrance and Sierra Club ?

All:

I am overseas for a short break.  So, this is perfunctory.  But, it is not correct or fair to say the Club's suit, which was over the expansion project from which TxDOT had earlier deleted (segmented) the park entrance project, affected the park entrance project in any legal sense.  TxDOT may have wished to move slowly on the park entrance project to make look more reasonable it's argument in court that the two projects were wholly independent, because, otherwise, the environmental impacts of the park entrance project should have been considered in the EA for the Transmountain road expansion project, and they were not.  Basically, TxDOT could more easily argue the park entrance project was not related to the expansion project, if the two were separated by more time and if the park entrance project were still vaguely defined.

David Frederick

Lowerre, Frederick, Perales, Allmon & Rockwell

Austin 78701      phone: (512) 469-6000

Furthermore traffic safety has been the primary reason for a discussion about a new park entrance since the expansion of Transmountain West from 2 lanes to 4 has been in front of the public.

In another email, Mr. Bielek asserts that he has never spoken with anyone at TPWD about the entrance alternative so, in effect, time has just run out and there is nothing that he can do about it now:

From: Bob Bielek <Robert.Bielek@txdot.gov>

Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 18:04:04 -0600

To: Teschner, Richard<teschner@utep.edu>

Subject: Re: Loop 375's FMSP Tom Mays Entrance: A grade-level crossing against two lanes of downhill traffic is safe?

Richard,

First, I am not familiar with the original arguments made for TransMountain West.  Transitioning from a four lane facility to a two lane facility on a steep grade is a safety issue and if this is the argument made at that time it is quite valid.  It would also be a valid argument that the road is four lane for much of its length and that reducing capacity on steeply graded sections has an adverse impact on capacity, delay, increases pollutant discharge, and wastes fuel.  That said, when considering the situation when TransMountain West is complete, there will be no left turns permitted to eastbound TransMountain from the park entrance.  Eastbound traffic will be required to exit westbound to the frontage road (downhill) and then use the Texas turnaround at any of the interchanges to proceed eastbound.  Eastbound traffic entering the park will need to cross two lanes of traffic; however, the sight distance is virtually unlimited and the volumes are so low as to not meet any warrant for signalization much less grade separating the crossing.

I was not at the January 11th meeting you mention and I don't know if anyone from TxDOT attended that meeting.  I am unaware of any agreement between TxDOT and TPWD other than an exchange of land for the former TxDOT District Office now occupied by TPWD.  While there was an agreement for this exchange of land, really cleaning up an old situation since TPWD has been using the Clark Street TxDOT property for more than a decade; any "done deal" on implementation of any alternative being considered would have been a gross violation of the environmental process.  Since I am the TxDOT official that will make the recommendation for the preferred alternative as the process proceeds I can assure you that I have never even spoken to anyone from TPWD regarding TxDOT adopting a preferred alternative.

I appreciate you position regarding highway safety; however, my professional opinion is not consistent with yours.  I am afraid we will need to agree to disagree on this point.

Bob Bielek, DPA, PE

District Engineer

Texas Department of Transportation

Sent from my iPad

Elpasonaturally has reason to believe that there was substantial communication between TPWD and TxDOT including Bielek. More coming, folks.  Promise.

No Underpass; No Overpass; Nada

Yesterday I reported a rumor about a possible bait and switch by TxDOT regarding the new entrance to the FMSP - an entrance endorsed by conservation and environmental groups and the City's Open Space Advisory Board.

Here's what I have learned so far and I will update you as I learn more:

TxDOT is not building an overpass instead of an underpass. They are choosing not to do anything with the entrance.

One observer at yesterday's MPO meeting said that the claim is that TxDOT must spend funds that they have immediately.  The design for the entrance is not complete.  Aesthetic "doodads" for the I-10/Transmountain exchange are needed - the kind of banal designs TxDOT is using at 375 and other places - Lone Stars and all of that.  

Here's what the El Paso District Engineer for TxDOT, Bob Bielek, wrote in an email:

Subject: Franklin State Park Entrance Environmental

All,

Based on our teleconference yesterday, and my review of the situation, I have reached the following conclusions:

1.      The purpose and need for the project have been inadequately defined.  It appears that the purpose and need to this point has been focused on some unspecified safety concerns from the public or stakeholders.  We need to subject the situation to a standard traffic engineering analysis taking into account the volumes on the main lanes, the volume on the entrance road, and the end state from the current project, i.e., no left turns exiting the park with eastbound traffic routed to the frontage road and the “Texas Turnaround” at the Paseo del Norte interchange.  We will gather historical information on accident data as well as current and projected traffic to support these analyses.

2.      The loss of funding for this fiscal year provides an opportunity to gather information from the stakeholders and the public on what additional factors, or substitute factors, should contribute to the purpose and need for the project.  For example, is the real purpose to provide a safe path to connect the two sides of the park for hikers?  For wildlife?

3.      For the public meeting, we will show the alternatives that have been developed so far and provide several blank aerials that depict the situation that will exist at the end of the current project to allow the stakeholders and public to offer their suggestions or additional alternatives that should be considered.

I appreciate the work that has gone into this so far and the work you have all done in developing and progressing the alternatives.  Given the scrutiny that projects are receiving today from other members of the public who, for example, question the wisdom of spending money on providing bike lanes on arterial roadways, we need to ensure that the purpose and need for the project are clearly stated and that we are solving a real, and not imagined, issue.

Bob Bielek, DPA, PE

District Engineer, El Paso District

Texas Department of Transportation

(915) 790-4203 Office

(915) 309-0482 Cell

Robert.Bielek@TXDOT.gov

This sounds like BS-ese for we really want a cheap solution that doesn't include animals, has no connection between the two sides of the State Park for hikers and bikers and we really prefer Lone Stars to people safety. Let people and wildlife die on Transmountain.  We just want our cute little Lone Stars.  

An alternative road into the Park via Paseo del Norte has already been nixed by TPWD for archaeological reason.  But, then again, I'm sure TxDOT prefers cheap over the preservation of rich archaeological sites.

TPWD officials voiced shock by the new stance of TxDOT (obviously TxDOT saw no reason to inform TPWD or get their input first).  Fortunately no property has been sold or transferred to TxDOT for the entrance project yet.

A public meeting about the proposed entrance is still scheduled for April 10 from 6 to 8 p.m. at Canutillo High School. (Map) 

I understand that the MPO will discuss this in a meeting prior to TxDOT's obligatory public hearing (probably another one of their window dressings).  I'll pass that info on when I get it.

If you have more information, please post here.  I'll update you with more later.

It Isn't Over

Here's today's elpasonaturally e-letter:

It’s not over until . . . you know the rest. The Federal Highway Administration has taken some time now to rule on TxDOT’s Environmental Assessment of its Transmountain project. They will either accept the EA or notify TxDOT that they must perform a full blown Environmental Impact Study. There is a Sierra Club account to collect money for legal fees in case FHWA says an EIS is not needed. “In that case the next step would be to sue TXDOT and FHWA,” a Sierra Club official told me. The Sierra Club attorneys will obviously not do anything else until FHWA has made their decision regarding the EA.

There is, however, the petition that has been re-circulating. It does not call for Transmountain not to be widened. It does call for keeping nearly 800 acres natural and it would prevent some of the major overpasses from being built as described in the Chris Roberts El Paso Times story, Bypassed, a story that keeps being talked about and keeps angering people.

Petitioners are carefully checking each signature to make sure that they are those of registered City of El Paso voters. Download the petition here. Email me and I’ll come pick it up or tell you how to mail it to me ASAP. The petition is just a sliver away from getting enough signatures. Even if City Council were to turn down the petition, the FHWA needs to know that El Pasoans don’t like being bypassed and don’t like the project as designed. There is no virtue in getting lots of highway money for El Paso went that money is spent on environmentally bad, poorly designed and poorly presented projects.

Even if you think that you signed the petition before March or April, you can sign again. Any doubt, sign.

Read the El Paso Inc. story about the state parks cuts. The El Paso Times also did a piece on last week’s massacre of Texas Parks and Wildlife employees that hit El Paso the hardest. One of my readers questioned my use of the term “firing” when I spoke about the termination of employees here in El Paso. She suggested that “laid off” was more apropos since “firing” has the connotation that the persons being laid off did something wrong. None of these people did anything wrong except work in El Paso for the TPWD since El Paso is a city unrepresented on the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission. Each and every one of these eight people has been hurt and will be missed. It is a tragedy and a travesty to lose John Moses, the John Wayne/Sean Connery of our local state parks. John wasn’t a pencil pusher. He got out there and knew the trails and the terrain of every square inch of our parks. I just hope he sticks around El Paso and continues to enrich our community with his leadership and wisdom.

Please support our friends at the Southwest Environmental Center. Read more here. Also, please visit Trap Free New Mexico, learn more, visit the petition page and the Facebook page.