A Matter of Conservation Districts

Progressive versus Legal Conservation

A Matter of Conservation Districts

A continuing Essay of Right Action

By Stephen L. Wilmeth

            Richard Wetherill approached the matter biblically. The Westerner himself, Francois DuBois, approached the matter horseback.

            Wetherill’s essay on the Natural Law of Right Action reminded the human race to be rational, honest, and morally right thereby enabling human life to continue. His lesson came from the creation of the first man, Adam. God told Adam what to do and what not to do. Adam followed those instructions. A primary instruction was he was told not to eat the fruit of the tree in the center of the Garden or he would surely die. Left to his own devices, Adam obeyed.

            DuBois’ jail house lecture reminded the captive audience that the human race is naturally inclined to stray off the trail and trip into pits of irrationality, dishonesty, and moral corruptness until some force comes along to slap them back into shape.

            Today, certain people and elements are doing their level best to confound the foundation of honest attempts to tend the gardens of which we have long treasured. There is not a better example than the community of Las Cruces, New Mexico. It is there an agrarian influenced economy was started soon after 1598 when Don Juan Onate and his band of Spanish settlers crossed the Rio Grande with several thousand head of livestock and founded the first European settlement in del Norte. It was also there the first major reclamation project was started soon after the turn of the 20^th Century on the Rio and the controlled water was captured and distributed from Elephant Butte Reservoir for the stability and benefit of a very unique mixed population and agricultural center.

It is there, too, a noose is now being tightened around the community and at stake are a multitude of factors that collectively form the customs and culture of this special area. Many will argue the war against customs and culture of the community is a violation of natural rights. Others will suggest it is simply a misguided threat to the freedom to grow and eat chile.

The real facts, though, remain. If the dismantling of the community continues, a plethora of unwanted, disagreeable results will take place.

Private property isolation and the looming Triumvirate

The day of May 21, 2014 will live in infamy for the Las Cruces community. That was the day the progressive voter block of the community and its New Mexico congressional representation prevailed upon the President to bypass the legislative process and declare nearly three quarters of a million acres as national monument. Notwithstanding the eight years of unmitigated psychological warfare that was waged upon the citizens who had duties, responsibilities and investments on the lands under the footprint, the progressive secular juggernaut cheered the outcome.

The resulting footprint places immense uncertainty on the management of the lands of the county where private ownership equates to only 13% of the surface and well over half of that total hugs the narrow Rio Grande Valley with its growing floodplain implications. Every point of higher elevation, 100% of the headlands of the surrounding watersheds, is controlled by the government under increasingly restrictive access implications.

All residential development will be confined to the private lands and that will necessarily require the attrition of irrigated farmland to accomplish. The isolation of private lands with accompanying private property rights, the heart of customs and culture of the community, is vulnerable to elimination.

There also looms the specter of yet more governmental intrusion.

In January, the president signed Executive Order 13690. At stake is the demand for agencies to do what they can to preserve the nation’s floodplains. Those areas of consideration are floodplains that are subject to a 1% or greater chance of flooding in any given year based on a 100 year flood plan. The agencies are further ordered to limit development activities in the floodplain where possible and they must incorporate the new definition and risk reduction strategies into their existing programs and regulations. They are also tasked to scope beyond the 100 year flood plan models.

This has huge and debilitating implications for Las Cruces.

With such sweeping expansion of authority, the Las Cruces community may well have been sucked into a vacuum whereby 60% of its already depleted expansion corridor opportunities will become unacceptable for any development and in violation of United States standards for floodplain health and sustainability.

That crisis will be added to the federal agency intent to expand the Waters of the United States rule and the expansion of critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act both of which will have dire implications for the freedom to develop and to source and use natural soil and water resources. At a minimum, the city will face aggregate floodplain operations restrictions equating to additional studies and yet more costly permitting conditions.

A most likely scenario is yet more ominous. It takes in the third leg of this progressive invoked nightmare.

When the disallowance to access surrounding watersheds is added to the confounding situation because of national monument lands that consume all points of higher elevation and critical watershed alluviums, a plethora of unwanted disagreeable results will indeed take place. It relates to destruction of those unique customs and culture, the inability to grow and prosper, and the reckless disallowance to address fundamental matters of public safety, and … human life!

 The election

On May 5, the Dona Ana Soil and Water Conservation District elections will be held.

Three board positions are at stake. The slate of successful candidates will eventually stand for an oath of office and pledge their adherence to the Constitution of the State of New Mexico and their legal responsibilities of the office. The Soil and Water Conservation District Act serves as the guiding statutory authority over their actions. The purpose of the Act is to oversee the management of soil and water resources within conservation district administrative boundaries. Paraphrased, those duties require the board members to develop the natural resources of the district, provide for flood control, preserve wildlife, protect the tax base and promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens.

The slate of candidates stand in stark contrast.

Three candidates interpret the enabling legislation on the basis of original intent. Natural resources must be conserved and developed for beneficial use. Beneficial use means the use of impounded water for irrigation, recreation, propagation of fish and wildlife, and other urban and industrial needs that collectively promote the tax base. Protecting the tax base means protecting those drivers of the economy that fuel jobs, create future for the populous, and provide housing and a path of economic growth that can be sustained when only 13% of the landmass is relegated to the primary benefit of the citizenry.

The other four candidates represent the Progressive Voter Alliance … period.

Their interpretation of board duty is a matter of the structured agenda that hails the permanent withdrawal of natural resources, the expansion of critical habitat for an enumerated future catalogue of creatures, and the supposition that regulatory burdens will support vitality and robust floodplain health. Their agenda doesn’t demonstrate anything but lip service to the tax base and disdain for customs and culture formed over several hundred years.

Indeed, the contrast is stark.

Sustainability to the former slate of candidates is what the law demands. Soil and water resources are basic physical assets and their preservation and development are vital to protect and promote the health and general welfare of the people.

Sustainability to the progressives is the expansion of critical habitat that conflicts with matters of customs and culture, the political support for expanding the definition of waters controlled by the federal government and the reinstatement of watershed health on the basis of originality. That means breaching dams, levees, and minimizing the footprint of man.

Public health and safety

No community can grow and prosper when resources are locked down by regulations and all growth corridors are restricted or closed. Moreover, if all remaining growth is forced into the highest areas of flooding vulnerability, it isn’t just private property that is in jeopardy. Citizen life is put at risk through a contrived agenda.

It will be interesting to see the outcome of this election. The stakes are high. The results will reflect an agenda that is totally contrary to the county’s history and law or any decision to defend customs, culture, and the public health. A lackadaisical electorate has allowed this matter to fester and expand. A robust electorate can demonstrate that within customs and culture is a morally and trustworthy society … enabling human life to continue.

Stephen L. Wilmeth is a rancher from southern New Mexico. “The Westerner has standards out of the Old Rock. His definition of ‘force’ that is sought to maintain cultural dignity is not government inspired. It comes from conscience, family, community standards, market forces, timely woodshed visits, and … front row pew seating.”