We begin today's entry with a math problem. A writer recently wrote a letter to ROAR listing some points ROAR has made against the OTR project, along with his/her own varying opinions. Some of the listed points indicated mistaken understanding, most notably that those in opposition to OTR are a small minority. To quote: "...the small minority that makes up your organization feel that you can speak for the rest of the residents of Fremont county." A ROAR Board member has responded to that: "We do not purport to represent every resident in Fremont County. Instead we represent our membership, which is almost 4000 people. Given that only 4500 people live in Bighorn Sheep Canyon, we feel that the membership is significant, rather than a small minority."
4,000 ROAR members, not all from the affected area, to be sure, but quite a force in favor of protecting a canyon area that includes 4,500 human residents. That's good math!
Our second topic for today: the promised PowerPoint show ROAR to the RAC meeting (see earlier posting). An abbreviated version is posted here. The main point is to see and read about the massive equipment that will be used to create OTR. You can imagine the traffic impediment and unavoidable collateral damage this will cause.
So that's our Math and Reading for today. Class dismissed.
On Wednesday, April 22, in Canon City, CO, ROAR presented construction, environmental and safety concerns to the Front Range Regional Advisory Council (RAC).
Dan Ainsworth, president of ROAR, detailed some of the construction equipment proposed in Christo's plan as submitted to the BLM for the EIS. Paired with photos and descriptions in a PowerPoint presentation, it brought a compelling sense of scale to the impacts of this proposed industrial assault on Bighorn Sheep Canyon. Safety, economic and environmental concerns rounded out the program. An extended Q&A followed, demonstrating the council's commitment to hearing and understanding all the processes and considerations involved in the OTR proposal. Along that line, it must be mentioned that a pro-OTR contingent presented at a previous RAC meeting.
An abbreviated version of the PowerPoint slide show will be added to ROAR's website within a few days.
Websites, blogs, and letters to editors of regional newspapers have been buzzing lately (again) with OTR supporters parroting Christo's placating promise that his Arkansas River project will only be for 2 Weeks. Most notable was Senator Doug Lamborn's press release, generating a near landslide of letters and articles voicing outrage over his quick, unresearched endorsement of OTR based on a quick sales pitch by Christo in Washington D.C. How could anyone object to anything that only lasts "2 weeks?"
Nearly sliding by unnoticed was an opinion article in the Canyon Courier, a weekly paper out of Evergreen, Colorado. Writer Rob Witwer, a former Colorado legislator and a resident of upscale Genesee just west of Denver. recounts his enamouring encounters with Christo and Jeanne-Claude over the years. Amid the romantic view of the artist couple and their work, and even though acknowledging the existence of ROAR, he glibly passes on the same misinformation: "An
organization called ROAR (Rags Over the Arkansas River) cites increased
traffic and environmental impacts as reasons to “say no to Christo.”
Christo and Jeanne-Claude counter that the project will last only two
weeks and will leave no permanent changes to the landscape." You can read the full article here.
Now, just because C&JC "counter" that their project is "only" 2 weeks and won't leave permanent changes doesn't make it true.
Don't miss the comment that follows in response. No, wait. Since it's so concisely and fervently stated, here it is right here:
It's not your call to make
Rob Witwer is a metro area resident telling those of us who live in a completely different geography 2 hours or more from his own working and living environment that we have to allow the invasion of our living and working space by this smooth talking European artist.
The myth of “only two weeks” is put forth as the reason for us to back off and let the smarter, wiser city folks decide what is best for this place. Consider the claim about the mere “two week” imposition: that means Christo’s specially designed translucent fabric and the structures that hold it up will magically appear one day across 5.6 miles of a Colorado river canyon. Then, just as magically and mysteriously, it will all vanish 15 days later. No harm, no foul.
Mr. Witwer, have you read even one page of the massive construction proposal Christo includes on the website link you quoted? It is a three year – yes, THREE YEAR – major industrial assault on a narrow, winding two-lane mountain road, the only transportation route for personal, medical, and commercial traffic through this part of the state. My livelihood, for one, will be hampered at best, destroyed at worst.
There is extensive documentation on the ROAR website (www.roarcolorado.org) of the project's impacts. All of the legal and construction analysis is based on Christo's own proposal. It merits a read.
If you want this project, then promote its occurrence where you live and work. Promote the 3-year industrial assault in your Genesee neighborhood. But Do Not tell me that I have to sacrifice my safety, my environment, and my livelihood so you can have some frilly, feel-good outing one day 2 or 3 years from now.
Haven't heard from ROAR for awhile? Well, you've heard the phrase "hurry up and wait." The approval process for Christo's Over the River project seems to follow that path, approval processes being what they are. One important announcement marking a move forward was the awarding of the EIS report contract. Read the BLM announcement.
As far as ROAR is concerned, it seems to be more a case of "flurry up and wait." We wait, along with everyone else, for reviews and evaluations, then something triggers a flurry of activity. The latest trigger was a press release from southern Colorado's Congressman Doug Lamborn endorsing OTR. Oh boy, there is a flood of letters from Lamborn's constituency hitting area newspapers. Those who are fluent in the facts of OTR have no qualms about lambasting Lamborn for misrepresenting those he supposedly represents. There are several letters from local papers featured or linked on the Home and Docs&Pics pages of the ROAR website. You'll also find a couple editorial pieces from national publications.
For those familiar with life and landmarks on Colorado's Front Range (ok, if you don't know what that is, you may miss some of the meaning here), you'll enjoy the lighter side of Denver Post's Mark Obmascik's view. But also be sure to read the more serious letters on the pages noted above.
So you can tell that ROAR has been doing a lot of reading while we wait. And we've got some other news and info coming soon, so stay tuned.
ROAR responded to BLM's request for comments on the Notice of Realty Action for Christo's Over the River proposal. The letter was submitted through our legal representative. By way of summarizing our points, the opening and closing paragraphs are printed immediately below:
Dear Mr. Vieira:
This firm represents Rags Over the Arkansas River, Inc. (“ROAR”),
and the purpose of this letter is to identify some concerns of ROAR’sboard of directors and its members about the
Over the River Project (“OTR”) plan and the current project review process.First, the OTR project plan is still
incomplete.Second, ROAR believes that
the Council on Environmental Quality’s (“CEQ”) guidance requires additional
scoping once a complete plan is submitted.Third, ROAR would like to suggest additional scoping issues to be
considered in the OTR environmental impact statement (“EIS”).Fourth, the OTR proposal is not consistent
with the 1996 Royal Gorge Resource Area Resource Management Plan (“RMP”), and
therefore an amendment to the RMP would be necessary before BLM can approve the
OTR.Finally, none of the OTR project plan,
the RMP, the original permit application, or BLM’s most recent National
Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) schedule on its website identify the type of
land use authorization that OTR seeks; this information is critical to
determine the proper review and project standards and allow informed public
participation in the NEPA process for the OTR proposal....
Conclusions
and Recommendations.
Based
on the foregoing, BLM’s determination that the OTR project is in conformance
with the RMP is in error.Further, BLM’s
determination that at least portions of the proposed lands (e.g., the Arkansas
Canyonlands ACEC) are open for the OTR Project is also in error.
BLM
should withdraw its Notice of Realty Action, require Christo to submit the
identified missing information, re-open scoping and forbid any OTR construction
or activity in the Arkansas Canyonlands ACEC.Further, once the OTR application is complete, BLM must amend the RMP
before it can approve the OTR project.
Thank
you for considering ROAR’s concerns as you go forward with NEPA review.
On November 4, 2008, the BLM Royal Gorge Field
Office published a “Notice of Realty Action” (NORA) for the OTR Project.BLM is seeking public comments on this action
and its decisions (described below).
Comments are due on or before December 15, 2008.ROAR is preparing comments and will post them
on this website after they have been submitted to BLM.
ROAR encourages its members and supporters
to also submit comments to BLM. This is important because ---
BLM next considers any comments it receives by the December
15 deadline and then it will sustain, vacate or remedy the realty action.If no adverse comments are received, then the
Notice of Realty Action becomes a final determination as to this stage of the
process, and BLM moves on to the next step.
Mail your comments to BLM to arrive on or before Dec. 15, 2008 to:
Field Manager, Royal Gorge Field Office
Bureau of Land Management
3028 East Main St.
Canon City, CO 81212
Check the News and Events page on our website to learn more, get ideas for content in your comments letter, and read the BLM Notice and more.
Ken Tiegs, and a number of other ROAR members spoke to the Chaffee County Commissioners today at their regular meeting. Ken gave the commissioners new data regarding the number of predicted visitors that was projected when Christo first proposed the project in the late '90's, which was 600,000 to one million. The current figure has been somehow reduced to 250,000. Ken's concern is that the safety and environmental impact of the project is totally dependent on these figures. The commissioners were urged to consider this discrepancy. Ken also presented new data regarding a noxious weed that has made its debut in Chaffee County and could spread like wildfire with the help of the project. This weed is in the mustard family and has already been spotted at the Chaffee county line, growing in sheer rock. Weeds thrive in areas of disturbed soil, which is what would be created if this project is allowed. Ken then presented enlarged photos of the cement, I beams and other detritus left by Christo at the Rifle Gap project. Despite claims that none of this can be seen from the road, all photos were taken from the road. Other members of ROAR presented concerns regarding ability to get to medical care, (chemo treatment), effects of the project on river front private property, the National Geographic article noting that their art is not to please anyone but themselves, and the question of whether the project required the commissioner's consideration at all. The commissioners assured the audience that their number one concern would be safety, but were awaiting the EIS and a formal application from Christo.
The November issue of National Geographic has done an article on Christo and Jeanne Claude's Over the River project proposal. ROAR is mentioned briefly, but we were never contacted for our input to the article. You can view the article by going to
