S.409 - Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2009

A bill to secure Federal ownership and management of significant natural, scenic, and recreational resources, to provide for the protection of cultural resources, to facilitate the efficient extraction of mineral resources by authorizing and directing an exchange of Federal and non-Federal land, and for other purposes. view all titles (3)

All Bill Titles

  • Official: A bill to secure Federal ownership and management of significant natural, scenic, and recreational resources, to provide for the protection of cultural resources, to facilitate the efficient extraction of mineral resources by authorizing and directing an exchange of Federal and non-Federal land, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Short: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2009 as introduced.
  • Short: Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act of 2009 as reported to senate.

This Bill currently has no wiki content. If you would like to create a wiki entry for this bill, please Login, and then select the wiki tab to create it.

Comments Feed

  • Mrs_B 03/09/2009 7:50am

    I strongly OPPOSE this bill. 48.1% of AZ lands are already federalized!

  • SylviaInArizona 03/27/2009 10:13am

    This bill is fraught with problems…Water being one of the most important.
    Mining is an extremely water intensive industry and this bill does not tell us where the mine will get the water needed to sustain operations for the next 30+ years. The mine will require at the very least 20,000 acre ft. of water per year. Arizona and the West are in a drought!
    This land is Tonto Natinal Forest and currently used by many recreationalists. It is also protected by Public Land Order 1229 which deems it inviolate to mining.
    Can someone tell me what part of the land order some of our congressional delegates don’t get?
    This land swap must not go through before ALL NEPA studies are completed!
    Promising to do it AFTER the land swap is having the fox guard the henhouse.
    And last but not least…this area is sacred to the Native Americans.
    Don’t they have a right to continue to practice their religion?

  • Comm_reply
    opportunityisnowhere 04/25/2009 5:42pm
    Link Reply
    + -2

    Your opposition is fraught with problems:
    1. The miner will either pay the prevailing cost for water to sustain operations or go out of business.
    2. The land is used by a few (Phoenix-based) recreationists who were pushed east after the Federales declared the Superstitions a Wilderness Area and closed it to vehicle traffic. The remainder of users must be locals looking for a quiet place to party.
    3. You have your NEPA order backwards. NEPA compliance is required whenever an agency proposes to take “a major federal action” such as constructing facilities or approving permits. So, the land exchange must occur before construction or permit applications can be approve.
    4. There has been a mine on the site for almost 100 years. The bill as written does not prohibit the practice of religion. I say let the San Carlos worship the great spirit; let the miners worship the all mighty dollar and get the hand wringers out of the way!

  • opportunityisnowhere 04/25/2009 5:45pm
    Link Reply
    + -2

    The Az delegation needs to muster all its courage and push for one of the few projects that will bring real economic value to the state.
    The area needs it; the two miners can do it; but the pols are afraid to give it a change.

  • kgreene 11/02/2009 6:22am

    One thing this area does NOT need is the kind of “economic value” brought on by a mine. The first mine’s existence gave it a boom, but what followed was a bust that destroyed the area and left many people jobless with no option but to leave. Why start that cycle again, when you could create an industry that thrives on sustained development, such as tourism? The land is a perfect place: it’s home to a free camping and picnic area, which means families can take vacations there at a fraction of the cost of a trip to, say, the Grand Canyon. And those “few” “Phoenix-based” recreationalists are actually better known as a nationwide community of rock climbers, birdwatchers, hikers, etc., many of whom come from all over the country at least twice a year to take advantage of the area’s perfect outdoor temperatures when the rest of the nation is a frozen, rained-upon tundra of misery. Why would we want crappy, mine-destroyed land in exchange for the perfect tourism spot we taxpayers already own?


Vote on This Bill

61% Users Support Bill

11 in favor / 7 opposed
 

Send Your Senator a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments