By Mary Alice Murphy

The New Mexico Central Arizona Project Entity had a large crowd in attendance because of one issue on the agenda—consideration of passing a resolution in opposition to the Wild and Scenic River Act proposal that New Mexico U.S. Senators Tom Udall and Martin Heinrich are pushing to pass through the Senate.

Several entities, including the town of Silver City and the County of Grant have supported the proposal. Other entities throughout the area and state have opposed the proposal.

Before approving the agenda, a request was made to move the auditor report to before public comment, so that the auditor giving the report, who was attending by telephone, could get back to work. The amended agenda was approved.

Robert Gonzales, principal partner of Cordova CPAs, presented the fiscal year 2019 audit.

"The audit was a several month-long process," Gonzales said. "We started it in June 2019 and had the exit conference in November 2019. We sent the draft for review and met the state deadline to submit by Dec. 15, 2019. It was OK to print on Jan. 27, 2020 and it met standards. We received the release letter Feb. 3, then there was public comment for five days and the final report was issued on Feb. 10. The audit provides reasonable assurance of its accuracy. We do it using sampling techniques. The audit received the unmodified opinion, the best there is, because no findings came to our attention. Deming, which is your fiscal agent, was fantastic to work with."

Board members unanimously approved the resolution on the audit.

Next came public comment, with the first speakers being Melanie Goodman of Sen. Udall's Office and Dara Parker of Sen. Heinrich's Office.

"We are looking forward to hearing from the New Mexico CAP Entity," Goodman said. "I have spoken with your Executive Director Anthony Gutierrez and with members Vance Lee and Allen Campbell. I appreciate hearing from members Howard Hutchinson and (Van) Bucky Allred, who have had an impact on the bill. The bill in its present form is on the senator's website. We ask all of you to present comments to help the bill."

Parker said: "We hope to receive comments as soon as possible to inform the draft. We don't know when the markup will be. It is in the control of a Senate committee, so it may be at least a few months until the final bill is ready."

Member Ty Bays, representing the Grant Soil and Water Conservation District, asked if it was fair to say that Senator Udall led the effort because he would like to see it in place before he leaves office.

Goodman said it was fair to say that Senator Udall would like to see it done, but it's up to the legislative process.

Parker said she expected it will be introduced sooner rather than later. "We changed the March 1 deadline for comments and moved it back. Feedback is still important. We're looking forward to its introduction so it can go through the formal process."

Hutchinson said he understood there are some changes to language.

Parker said they are working on getting the changes together, so it can be released. "The changes are in the draft we have given you copies of here. The changes are in the grazing allotments and water rights, in particular. Section 4a says the Secretary of the Interior will have jurisdiction. That is an error. It should say the Secretary of concern will have jurisdiction."

Allred thanked the senators' representatives for coming to Catron County, "where we passed a resolution opposing the proposal. We invited Udall and Heinrich to come speak to us, but they never replied and sent you. I have a passion for our people, our county, our water. I don't see anything to protect the waters and the way we use them. I see it as an attack on people's private property. I'd be scared to come to Catron County if I were you. You know how opposed we are to this act. I want these senators to come to Catron County to face the real stakeholders, who will lose the most with this act."

He asked if Mark Allison of New Mexico Wild was in attendance. "I want to thank him for correcting me that he is the executive director of the organization, but I would also say to him: 'Shame on you for doing this to hard-working citizens.'"

Chairwoman Darr Shannon said that Hidalgo County and the Hidalgo Soil and Water Conservation District had both passed resolutions in opposition to the Wild and Scenic designation.

Joe Runyan, representing the Gila Farm Ditch, said a number of those in the room are concerned about adjudicated water rights and the potential new water available through the Arizona Water Settlements Act. "What language would modify the traditional uses of the water?"

Parker replied that language in the act protects infrastructure already in place. "It is making clear that management of the water remains with the state."

Runyan noted that in order to use the AWSA water, certain flows have to be in place at certain times of year. "Our concern is that this potential designation may limit our rights to use the water for irrigation. Some feel the language would limit the use above the Lower Box in the Cliff-Gila area."

Parker said the designation could make some water rights junior water rights, so the date of priority would determine the use of the water.

Billy Billings, representing Grant County, asked a follow up question to Runyan's question. "It says in the act 'free of impoundments.' Are any diversion or ditches grandfathered in?"

"Yes," Parker answered. "Where we're aware of any diversions, those areas are excluded from wild and scenic designation. It's just the segments proposed that are free from impoundments."

Billings noted that flood events can change diversions. "Is there language to allow for future changes?"

Parker replied that they are triple checking that question.

Shannon asked why the senators want to make much of the Gila River wild and scenic. "Is it really to protect the traditional uses? I think everyone values the river."

Benjamin Segovia of the New Mexico Farm and Livestock Bureau, attending by telephone, said the deadline for comments is usually in the Federal Register. "You have to announce the changes of dates."

Parker said because the designation is a congressional process, it's not in the Federal Register. "They are separate processes."

Public comment began. Don Luhrsen read from a rebuttal from Haydn Forward (of Catron County) to an editorial in the Las Cruces Sun-News written by Lt. Gov. Howie Morales, who supports the wild and scenic designation.

Forward's rebuttal included these comments: "Don't be fooled by the camouflaged and pleasing name of this act. The facts are, if implemented, it will take out current and future water rights, handing them without claim to Arizona water users. Our senators' actions are compounding frustration when you consider the importance of land and water in our state's history. Prior to admitting New Mexico into the union, the congress and both presidents Roosevelt and Taft required expanded use of our number one natural resource, water, along with irrigation and improvement of our lands. This government support has continued historically to the present day where the Department of Agriculture through the USDA energetically financially supports ongoing irrigation projects and conservation water use within our county through EQIP programs, grants and funding. That is a meaningful fact, known to our senators, yet they have engaged section 7 of the Act which controls all water usage on private property. This same section 7 Act language has the potential to stop all water usage, essentially ending economic growth and depleting our tax base. Why would the senators oppose our Agriculture Department's ongoing positive efforts within our watershed?"

The remainder of his letter continues: "If the senators' special interest groups' agenda is successful, water will flow freely into our neighboring state where it will be used to Arizona's financial benefit, rather than fulfilling New Mexico needs. …Lt. Gov. Howie Morales in his opinion piece says that designating the Gila and San Francisco Rivers as wild and scenic will protect these rivers. If he were truthful, he would have stated the purpose is to stop New Mexico from obtaining 14,000 acre feet of new water for the state. In addition, he would have said that the state is in favor of ceding state jurisdiction to the federal government and environmental litigants over the waters of the two rivers.

We now know that the Secretary of Interior is denying an extension for reaching a record of decision that cost the state 62 million dollars, "It's a disappointment this project, that would bring critical water supplies to rural communities in New Mexico, has faced such scrutiny and a lack of support from the State of New Mexico. And, "The State's lack of action undermines the importance of the water supplies provided by the NM Unit in ensuring that rural communities in southwestern New Mexico have the water security necessary to thrive and grow.”

"In thinking this through, I find it disturbing that outside entities have more influence on the Senators and Lt. Governor's position that will affect our county, than those citizens living within our county.

"Should it not be expected from our Senators to spend equal time with stakeholders that will be affected by their actions as with those single-minded outside influencers?

"You will hear from those outside influencers’ 'private land and water will not be affected.' Truth is; if you own land or water rights on designated rivers or any tributary to our waterways you ultimately lose control of land maintenance and improvements. This will be due to section 7 of the Act and/or lawsuits that will be implemented by those outside interest groups, who the senators support.

"Yes, the senators are attempting to wash their hands clean, while building a foundation for lawsuits and river management actions that will facilitate their unspoken goal. You’ll see mining, agricultural and industry slowly shut down and tax base decrease, along with population. This reality is likely the long-term goal of those strategically implementing the Act, leaving an empty watershed devoid of population.

"Some segments of our government and conservation districts are keenly aware of this coming threat and have asked our senators to take their opposition of the Wild and Scenic River Act seriously. In response, the senators sponsored six meetings, managed through their representatives, who invited input from a small selected group. This was in a veiled attempt to claim public comment is being gathered. To the senators surprise an uninvited overwhelming majority of opposition to the Act gained access to those meetings (that majority mobilized with a 2-day notice) asking all stakeholders input be documented and not simply that of a select few.

I believe it is required of our senators and Howie Morales to stop ignoring those NM citizens whom their oath was given to represent."

James Dines lives on an irrigation ditch in the Mimbres. "I have several questions of the senators. Much of the Gila River is in the Gila Wilderness. The Whitewater-Baldy Fire burned 872 acres of it. What's the end game of the wild and scenic designation? The river is already in the wilderness. Any future disposition of private holdings on the San Francisco and Gila rivers is merely government taking without any recompense whatsoever. I have seen the mismanagement on the Mimbres River from the Black Range fires, where 138,000 plus acres burned. It's difficult to get information on the Silver Fire. As an irrigator on the Mimbres, I can tell you we are in high water right now. We don't know what will happen for sure on ditch diversions. Other than enhancing the reputations and making a check mark for Senators Udall and Heinrich, I question the purpose of the Wild and Scenic designation."

Carolyn Nelson, representing the Nelson grandchildren, said she has sent emails to the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish. "The first was about the Endangered Species Act and whether the cooperative agreement with the secretary is renewed annually. I never got an answer. When an act gives control of waters to the federal government, it comes in so nice and pretty, but 50 years later, our reserve in Reserve, New Mexico, is shut down from the timber industry. What does the public actually have in the public land? They have access and can camp or hike. Who shuts off public access? The Wilderness Act shuts off public access; the Endangered Species Act shuts off public access; and Wild and Scenic can shut off access. They aren't telling the truth. They took pictures about the 100-year flood and claimed that cattle did that. When forest lands were created, they were not created for speculators to take. Forest lands were created for the common man to follow his dreams. These federal acts take that away. It's time to recognize the importance of small communities."

Chris Overlock said he was representing himself as a resident of Grant County. "I understand the fear of government overreach. And because of that I ask every person on the New Mexico CAP Entity to resign immediately. You are taking federal money to feather your own nests. You've already squandered millions. It's a failed project. The Gila River does not belong to the residents. It belongs to everyone. It's a foolhardy scheme ,and at the same time you are protesting federal overreach."

Candy Luhrsen alleged the New Mexico senators have held secret meetings with some organizations, "but we are all stakeholders. The maps only became available last week. The river is already protected by the Gila Wilderness. Private land is no barrier to this act, if they decide private land is affecting the wild and scenic designation. The government will have the authority to restrict all commerce. The environmentalists already go after the mines. The cost of more regulations will be high. As a former Forest Service staff member, I know the Forest Service will see more paperwork. We used to be out in the forest, now workers are in their offices filing paperwork. The environmentalists think the plants, animals and rivers remain static. Even rocks change through wind and erosion. Preservation is not the answer. Conservation is the answer. This designation will authorize more restrictions. The Gila National Forest has chosen conservation, but with more environmentalists as personnel, it is changing to preservation as its purpose. They now choose more restrictions and less tradition usage. The Forest Service has chosen one preferred use and that is recreation. The Wild and Scenic designation and management plan will likely pull thousands of acres out of production. I also believe the mines are targeted. In my opinion, evidence shows that our senators, the Gila National Forest, and four of the Grant County commissioners cannot be trusted. It is obvious they do not respect conservative, traditional values or those who work the land."

Tom Shelley, representing himself, said he is a fifth-generation rancher on Mogollon Creek. "Along my allotment a portion has been named a wild and scenic segment. I submitted my comments. I felt blindsided by the act and by our commissioners supporting it. If I were representing my area, I would have met with the people on the potential economic impacts. That is starting to happen now, but it seems like it is behind the power curve. It seems an environmental group was given the reins to go with this legislation. This group wants to expand the wilderness. They have used a lot of litigation to get their way. It led to grazing allotments being suspended. The environmental groups are proud of their litigation. I feel like those of us who have worked well with the Forest Service, it seems like we're under fire."

Jeanine Jump of Glenwood said: "If you go into the Wild and Scenic Act, you find that they can take land within a mile of your private land, which means it would take all of Reserve, all of Glenwood, all of Alma. It's scary. It's not showing it here on the map."

Don Luhrsen spoke again on behalf of the Farm Bureau Mimbres Local and himself. "One of my major concerns is talking about the Gila and the San Francisco. If you look at the map, the East Fork of the Mimbres and the Las Animas are also on there. Do you know where Las Animas Creek is? It leads right to that mine that is being developed near T or C. So, it's threatening to shut down the mines. You remember Mo Udall, Secretary of the Interior? His son Tom is trying to tap into his legacy. It's just another layer of bureaucracy. I don't believe the Forest Service even wants this. power grab. One thing we heard at a meeting about this issue was that it would provide for thick stands of timber along the streams. I spent 40 years in the Forest Service, fixing those thick stands of timber where fire had burned them. It doesn't work to have thick stands of timber along streams. It creates havoc when they are destroyed, and it takes a long time to bring those trees back. Comments I've heard about our forest supervisor is that he is not in favor of another layer of bureaucracy. The designation can have an impact on especially the downstream users. In my 40 years, I've seen a lot of legislation passed. We spent more time in litigation to resolve the issues the legislation caused."

The next speaker, Billy Donaldson, said he didn't officially represent anyone, but unofficially represented himself. "All the people up and down the rivers are building their lives. I've been to as many meetings on this issue as possible. Haydn (Forward) has spent a lot of time spreading facts on both sides. The ones who wrote the legislation presented only one side. In all the meetings I've been to, overwhelmingly they were people who did not favor the designation. The few who favored it came from who knows where and don't have the long-standing history of living here. One of my frustrations is because politicians are supposed to represent everyone. If anything like Wild and Scenic was ever passed, it will be a travesty of justice."

Dines spoke again. "I don't like public speaking, and I forgot some things I wanted to say." He read from the act that the purpose was to protect for current and future generations the outstandingly remarkable traits of the greater Gila watershed. "I don't disagree at all with the gentleman who said public lands belong to all of us. They were created when people in the East decided they didn't want all the land in the West grabbed up by people before they canceled the Homestead Act. Once and if this Wild and Scenic gets passed, for the gentleman who wants this land to belong to all of us, which it already does, what happens to access? What happens to the road that leads to Snow Lake? You can't tie down everything, so it's nebulous. Can I still go fishing in Turkey Creek or will there be new businesses that you have to have a license to access? How's this all going to work?"

The next article will continue public comment and get into the rest of the meeting.