Friends of Big Bend National Park
Big Bend Conservancy

Over-estimating your experience or under-estimating the terrain in a place like Big Bend can result in serious injury or death. Use the information and advice found here wisely. Climb/Hike/Camp/Drive at your own risk.

+-Calendar for sale

 2019 BigBendChat Calendar on sale now!


National Park Service may acquire Christmas Mountains

  • 66 Replies
  • 14737 Views
*

Offline uh_clem

  • Texas Banded Gecko
  • Black Bear
  • *
  • 424
Re: National Park Service may acquire Christmas Mountains
« Reply #15 on: October 15, 2007, 12:45:12 PM »
  So, I guess the fact that this land is going to auction means there is no chance it will become part of BBNP.
I'll be the jump start for the car parked in your mind, 'Cause you left the lights on all night long.

*

SHANEA

  • Guest
Re: National Park Service may acquire Christmas Mountains
« Reply #16 on: October 15, 2007, 09:08:29 PM »

*

SHANEA

  • Guest

*

Offline STARLITDARKNESS3

  • Black Bear
  • *
  • 530
Re: National Park Service may acquire Christmas Mountains
« Reply #18 on: October 15, 2007, 09:33:32 PM »
NPS HEADQUARTERS OFFICE

Contact                                                                Phone                    Fax

Chief                      David Barna                          202.208.6843           202.219.0910
                               David_Barna@nps.gov

Deputy Chief          Gerry Gaumer                       202.208.6843           202.219.0910
                               Gerry_Gaumer@nps.gov



Im writing them, voicing my opinion. 
"Are we there yet?"  ... by my Kids

*

Offline STARLITDARKNESS3

  • Black Bear
  • *
  • 530
"Are we there yet?"  ... by my Kids


*

Offline rgibson

  • Coyote
  • *
  • 164
Re: National Park Service may acquire Christmas Mountains
« Reply #21 on: October 16, 2007, 11:06:54 AM »
This is getting out of hand!

More Christmas Mountain articles in the FW Star Telegram and the Statesman as well as blogs such as Texas Observer.

Patterson needs to go.  He is not a rational person.  The Mellon's original offer was to the Big Bend National Park.

Patterson needs to be reminded he was elected to represent the Great State of Texas and not to carry out any personal aggendas.  Politicians need to be nudged once in a while to be reminded of their responsibilities.  Maybe Patterson needs to be more than nudged.  Maybe a recall would get his attention!

Then GLO Commissioner Mauro accepted the Christmas to "warehouse" 'til things could be straightened out.

Do not know where Patterson is getting his info about the lack of wildlife, but there is a very healthy mule deer population and most of the other BB wildlife.

Patterson states you need a gun to protect yourself from the narcos.  Folks, the terrain is mighty tough and would add days to a trip if anyone was trying to tote by land.  There are better was to travel this country than to cut thru the Christmas Mountains.

I think the part about guns and hunting is an oversight in the original covenants.  Hunting  does not conform to the scope and intent of the rest of the very lenghty covenants.


The Christmas Mountains mean alot to me and I have gone through alot to try to protect them through the years.  I know them well and would like to see a "steward"  (BBNP) to obtain, protect and let folks enjoy as well.

*

SHANEA

  • Guest
Re: National Park Service may acquire Christmas Mountains
« Reply #22 on: October 16, 2007, 11:57:49 AM »
This is getting out of hand!

Well, unless there is divine intervention,

Christmas Mountains Ranch
Sealed Bid Land Sale
October 31, 2007


Non-Commercial Inventory

*

Offline Roy

  • Mountain Lion
  • *
  • 1529
Re: National Park Service may acquire Christmas Mountains
« Reply #23 on: October 16, 2007, 12:33:11 PM »
OK, I've Emailed the GLO expressing my displeasure, my Senator asking him to look into it (didn't bother with our local Rep, he's useless), talked to the local Audubon,Sierra,Nature Conservancy people, and the local paper.
Have you raised any Cain today??

*

Offline Roy

  • Mountain Lion
  • *
  • 1529
Re: National Park Service may acquire Christmas Mountains
« Reply #24 on: October 16, 2007, 03:30:17 PM »
Am trying to post an attachment from my Email;  consists of discussion on Audubon Society's site regardign the Christmas Mountains. 
« Last Edit: October 16, 2007, 03:36:05 PM by Roy »

*

SHANEA

  • Guest
Re: National Park Service may acquire Christmas Mountains
« Reply #25 on: October 16, 2007, 04:19:13 PM »
Ah, Texas Politics @ It's Best...

Official won't sell land to National Park Service

Quote
Posted on Tue, Oct. 16, 2007
Official won't sell land to National Park Service
By R.A. DYER
Star-Telegram staff writer
JERRY PATTERSON

AUSTIN -- Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson says he's going forward with a controversial plan to auction off the pristine Christmas Mountains to wealthy private interests despite renewed interest in the property by the National Park Service.

Patterson says he won't allow a delay of the sale, which could come as early as November, because the National Park Service will not allow hunting on the property in far West Texas. Patterson is a strong Second Amendment advocate who sponsored the state's concealed-handgun law.

"As he has stated in the past, Commissioner Patterson ... would not be willing to sell the Christmas Mountains to the National Park Service if it would mean that there would never be public hunting allowed on the property," Jim Suydam, Patterson's spokesman, said in a statement.


Controversial sales

Patterson's insistence on selling the 9,269-acre tract follows other controversial attempts by the state to sell public land to private interests. Last year the General Land Office presided over the proposed sale of 400 acres at Eagle Mountain Lake in Fort Worth, and in 2005 the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department tried to sell 46,300 acres at Big Bend Ranch State Park to a wealthy developer.

Those properties ended up staying in government hands after public outcry. But the Christmas Mountains deal continues to go forward despite an outcry from conservationists and statements from those who donated the Christmas Mountains land to the state that they intended that it remain in public hands.

The School Land Board, of which Patterson is a member, was set to complete the Christmas Mountains sale last month. But it delayed completion until this month because of a glitch in the official maps of the property.

The state parks department and the national parks system had declined to buy the property, which is part of the Permanent School Fund Inventory. But on Friday, Patterson received a letter from William E. Wellman, superintendent of the U.S. Interior Department, saying the National Park Service wants to re-evaluate its position.

Wellman acknowledged in his letter that the National Park Service had earlier said that adding the Christmas Mountains to its inventory would not be feasible, but said it now wanted Patterson to delay the sale so the agency could reconsider acquiring the tract, which abuts Big Bend National Park.

"The National Park Service ... requests that you postpone the sale until we have time to finish our evaluation," Wellman wrote.

Nothing doing, Patterson responded.


"The National Park Service prohibits hunting and enforces an unconstitutional ban on the personal possession of firearms," Suydam said. "Commissioner Patterson's message to Superintendent Wellman was simple: No hunting, no firearms, no deal."


A 'pet issue'

Luke Metzger, director of the advocacy group Environment Texas, said the state will have broken its promise if the sale goes through to private interests. He said that it was "grossly irresponsible" of Patterson to take the property out of public hands and insist that only a few wealthy individuals have access to it.

"The original intent [of the donors] was that the land be made available to the National Park Service or the [state parks department]," Metzger said. "For him to stand in the way of that for some pet issue is grossly irresponsible. Some of the buyers have said that under no circumstances would they allow the public on there. ... It'll be owned by one rich guy who lets wealthy elites go hunting on it. This is far from the vision of the original donation."

The Christmas Mountains are at the northwest corner of Big Bend National Park. The property was donated to the state in 1991 by the Virginia-based Conservation Fund and the Pennsylvania-based Richard King Mellon Foundation on the condition that it remain protected from development.

Then-Land Commissioner Gary Mauro told the donors that the state agreed to restrictions that would allow transfer of the land only to the National Park Service or the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department.


The General Land Office has said it had agreed to hold the property but cannot invest the hundreds of thousands of dollars needed to fence it and protect it from poachers. The agency also has a fiduciary duty to earn money on state land for the Permanent School Fund, Suydam said.

Residents of the area say the Christmas Mountains are about 6,000 feet high. The terrain is mostly desert. The encumbrances on the land restrict almost any development, including road construction.

According to the Land Office, the School Land Board intends to make an award to the winning bidder as early as the School Land Board's Nov. 6 meeting.
rdyer@star-telegram.com
R.A. Dyer reports from the Star-Telegram's Austin bureau, 512-476-4294

 

*

Offline jeffblaylock

  • Horned Frog
  • Golden Eagle
  • Mountain Lion
  • *
  • 2310
  • I'd rather be on the South Rim
Re: National Park Service may acquire Christmas Mountains
« Reply #26 on: October 16, 2007, 04:20:39 PM »
This was sent to be by a concerned citizen on my web site's email system recently. I think it pretty much sums up a lot of things about conservation and the need for park space and, in many ways, our collective frustration with the current situation.  It comes from William O. Douglas' Farewell to Texas: A Vanishing Wilderness, Chapter 11. It was published 40 years ago, in 1967:

Quote
Texans dedicated to the land, to wild life, to trees, grasses, and flowers -- Texans who want trails and parks for recreation -- Texans who want clean waterways -- Texans who share the passion for conservation that Thoreau and Muir knew -- these men and women are numerous. Their voices are beginning to be heard. But they have not yet won many battles. The Big Bend National Park& -- wondrous as it is -- was not a mark of Texas dedication to conservation. It succeeded because it "bailed out" ranchers who by overgrazing had turned rich land into a dollarless desert. Plain greed, not idealism, gave birth to that park. The creation of the Guadalupe National Park was a different story; and it may mark a turning point. Yet whether the modern Ahabs can be unseated remains to be seen.

They see a tree and think in terms of board feet.
They see a cliff and think in terms of gravel.
They see a river and think in terms of dams, because dams mean profitable contracts, don't they?
They see a mountain and think in terms of minerals, roads, and excavations.
They think of parks in terms of private enterprise -- money-making schemes -- not nature trails, but amusement centers.
 
Recreation is coming to be one of our major problems, and it will increase in intensity as our population soon doubles. Texas is mostly not concerned. Texas thinks not in terms of the wonders of baygalls and the glories of bayous. Those water wonders are either mere building sites for real-estate promoters and construction companies or open sewers for the easy use of cities such as Houston. In the six years it took me to complete the field work for this volume I heard every outdoor value I know appraised largely terms of dollars. All except one -- the wonderful sunsets of Texas. And I left Texas convinced that somewhere some promoter probably had plans for them, too.

The only hope lies in young ranchers such as Don McIvor; in oilmen such as Mr. Pratt and Mr. Hunter; in the men in Texas' politics such as Ralph W. Yarborough, Wright Patman, and Dempsie Henley, who are awake to the problems of conservation and are determined to do something about them; in courageous newspaper people; in men such as Lance Rosier, Peter Koch, Justice Jim Bowmer, and Bob Burleson; in small but growing organizations that are arousing the citizens; and in people such as Lyndon B. Johnson and Lady Bird.

But when it comes to saving the wilderness, these people are in the minority, which makes the conservationists of Texas a lonely lot. Conservationists the nation over will, however, join them in fighting the great battles that lie ahead. But the modern Ahabs are more strongly entrenched in Texas than anywhere else. That is why this is a melancholy book. That is why when we think of conservation,
nature trails, back-packing, camping, and outdoor recreation, we must say FAREWELL TO TEXAS -- unless the dedicated minority receives an overwhelming mandate from the people.
Jeff Blaylock
Austin, Texas

"We'll be back, someday soon. We will return, someday, and when we do the gritty
splendor and the complicated grandeur of Big Bend will still be here. Waiting for us."--Ed Abbey

*

SHANEA

  • Guest
Re: National Park Service may acquire Christmas Mountains
« Reply #27 on: October 16, 2007, 04:27:02 PM »
OK, I've Emailed the GLO expressing my displeasure, my Senator asking him to look into it (didn't bother with our local Rep, he's useless), talked to the local Audubon,Sierra,Nature Conservancy people, and the local paper.
Have you raised any Cain today??

Might want to check with the NRA to see if they can sway Patterson.  Serious.  What's the problem about not hunting in National Parks or more specifically Big Bend?  It's not like there are not a Brazillon acres of public land out there for hunting in West Texas?  BGWMA is primarily a hunters paradise.  BBRSP holds specific hunts, etc.  What's the problem with not being able to carry a loaded gun out at Big Bend National Park?    I don't have a problem with it.  Good question might be, when was the last time that "deep pockets" Patterson went hunting on public land in the first place or even visited a National Park or a state park for that matter.

 
« Last Edit: October 16, 2007, 04:29:22 PM by SHANEA »

*

Offline Roy

  • Mountain Lion
  • *
  • 1529
Re: National Park Service may acquire Christmas Mountains
« Reply #28 on: October 16, 2007, 04:50:46 PM »
His position is at least partly to gain support from the NRA and hunters to oppose the protests of conservationists (AKA tree-huggers) in the media;  which means he already knows they'll back him.  That 2nd Amendment stuff is thier bread and butter.  He knows this is going to stir up a storm, he wants political cover, especially after the way the last couple of proposed sales have gone.
I've received some reaction;  the Caller-Times is probably going to do an editorial and it won't be favorable for Mr Patterson or the sale.  Nice to have some muckrakers around when you need 'em. :evil:

*

Offline Roy

  • Mountain Lion
  • *
  • 1529
Re: National Park Service may acquire Christmas Mountains
« Reply #29 on: October 22, 2007, 09:55:34 AM »
Got a "snail mail" response to my Email to our state senator; "Chuy" Hinojosa. I'll quote the relevant part:

"As I understand, the National Park Service has proposed Christmas Mountains become part of its system.  Because the Legislature is not in session at this time, Commissioner Patterson has the legal authority to act in behalf of Texas in the disposition of this land.  I believe the vocal opposition to the sale which has been rebid and is scheduled for bid opening on November 6, 2007, may make a difference.  I will forward your letter of opposition to Commissioner Patterson so that he may consider your opposition."

 


 


©COPYRIGHT NOTICE

All photographs and content posted by members are to be considered copyrighted by their respective owners and may not be used for any purposes, commercial or otherwise, without permission.

+-Calendar For Sale

 2019 BigBendChat Calendar on sale now!

Powered by EzPortal

Facebook Comments