Saturday, September 27, 2008

Proposed Village at Wolf Creek Pass, Colorado

Red McCombs has reengaged his drive to build a resort/housing complex at the top of Wolf Creek Pass. In the middle of an incredible expanse of undisturbed Fens (biological resource areas that are build, that is grown up of organic material only - no soil). They are integral to this watershed area because of their vast water holding, and purifying abilities. They are home to a host of small but important creatures - the health of these creatures is of importance and should not be ignored.

All downstream stakeholder and even the Rio Grande River would be adversely affected, should McCombs project be allowed to plow up and concrete up that pristine resource.

Today decision makers must look beyond the myopic dreams of self-interested developers and take the growing body of scientific information, and our greater future welfare into consideration.

All indications seem to be warning that the Southwest will become drier in the next decades, possibly much drier. Can we really continue plowing up unparalleled upland watersheds for vacation homes? Where will the water come to feed that proposed town when current allocations are already fully contested?

Economically, all indications are that the future will become much leaner. The politico/media chorus that current economic trends can somehow return to better normal days is pure delusion.

Extravagances like a 10,000 resident vacation town being plopped in the middle of the Rockies highlands, in an area that receives some of the highest snow fall in the nation - are no longer tenable. To allow McCombs to start a doomed project would be unforgivable. That wetlands resource can not be plowed up and back filled, then all’s well again. Any damage inflicted is long term, we can no longer afford such self conceited folly.

Another point, that land was ill gotten to begin with. Unfortunately the statute of limitations stands between McCombs and a full accounting of those acquisition proceedings. McComb’s has no moral justification for his conceit that he’s got the right to do whatever he wants with that property.

I for one believe the land should be returned unmolested to the National Trust. Please, do all you can to opposed construction of The Village at Wolf Creek in its entirety.

Express your concerns about the “Village.” Comments are due to the Forest Service by October 31, 2008. Send your letter to:
Wolf Creek Access EIS, C/O Content Analysis Group, 1584 South 500 West, Suite 202, Woods Cross, UT, 84010, or,
or Fax: 801-397-5628.

The Forest Service Plans “Open House” Meetings rather than Public Hearings about the proposed Village Access EIS.
* October 7, Creede Mining Museum, 503 Forest Service Road 9, Creede, CO.
* October 8, Rio Grande Annex, 965 6th Street, Del Norte, CO.
* October 9, Pagosa Springs Community Building, 451 Hot Springs Blvd., Pagosa Springs, CO.
For more information check out:

Colorado's prop. 48: Who's a person?

Proposition 48 wants to define the term “person” to include any human being from the moment of fertilization as “person” relating to inalienable rights, equality of justice, and due process of Law.

What are we coming to? Can we please consider a fertilized egg for a moment? It is a seed, home to unknowable potentialities. Do proponents understand that depending upon which data you believe, fifty to sixty-five percent of all pregnancies spontaneously (god initiated?) abort?

Yes, those fertilized eggs are bundles of sacred life and a world of potentialities. They deserve to be treated as sacred entities. But, death, passing on is a part of life, especially during those months of gestation. The fertilized egg must achieve genuine viability before it deserves the mantle of “personhood.” It seems most unreasonable to demand that a “Potentiality” deserves the same legal standing as an existing human.

From a political agenda perspective - I’m constantly amazed by the bizarre right-wing ability to proclaim their conviction in: “The Right to Life” and “The Sanctity of Life”... for an unborn being, then in the same breath support inflicting a thousand “9/11’s” upon another distant, yet innocent, citizenry. Right-wingers will exclaim: but that’s self-defense! Why not ask: What about the troubled mother who must make an agonized decision based upon self-defense for herself and her existing family? How can the right-wing be so cruel to disregard the all around tragic ordeal abortion is for those involved? When will our right-wing brothers and sisters grant women their own right to self-defense, dignity, empathy?

For a most thoughtful consideration of the dilemma look up Rachel Richardson Smith’s essay: “Abortion, Right and Wrong”