As the Northern Corridor looms, driving a wedge between recreationists and conservationists serves no good purpose

As the Northern Corridor looms, driving a wedge between recreationists and conservationists serves no good purpose

County leaders, with the help of Congressman Stewart and Senator Hatch, are attempting to expand the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve and Red Cliffs National Conservation Area. They aim to do this by adding a new zone, Zone 6, so they can build the Northern Corridor — aka the Washington Parkway — through a critical desert tortoise habitat in Zone 3.

I wrote about this last month when the county held an open house to “educate” the public. It was evident at the open house and at a recent St. George City meeting held to approve a resolution by the county to support the expansion that the effort is driving a wedge between recreationists and conservationists in our county.

“Divide and conquer” may or may not be the purpose of county leaders, but if it is their plan, manipulating constituents seems to be an irresponsible way for them to get what they want.

Concerned recreationists feel that the creation of Zone 6 would protect an area they enjoy for mountain biking, rock climbing, and off-road vehicle activities. But they are relying on politicians who seem willing to take any tack to achieve their goals. And in spite of the high number of tortoises in the heavily-recreated area, human activities in general have been shown to have a negative effect as evidenced by early studies leading up to the listing of the tortoise as threatened in the early ‘90s and the most recent 2011 Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Only recently, on April 24, were Stewart’s bill (H.R. 5597) and a Zone 6 map made public through his press release — although even the press release did not include the text of the bill.

A “draft” copy of Stewart’s bill states in Sec. 3, “Upon receipt from Washington County, Utah, of a proposal to amend and renew the Desert Tortoise Habitat Conservation Plan…” which seems to indicate that there is no plan upon which recreationists can hang their hats and their hopes at this point.

The county is pushing local governments to support an expansion resolution, the details of which are missing.

Many in the recreational community are apparently not conservationists since it appears they will concede to anything, including allowing the county to renege on a 22-year agreement to protect the existing Red Cliffs Desert Reserve’s prime habitat. As long as they get their recreational area, they are fine with allowing anything else to happen to the reserve, including the construction of a new road that runs through it.

Let me be clear that this assertion may not apply to all recreationists. But it is clear from comments overheard and stated publicly at recent meetings that many feel this way.

Much of the proposed Zone 6 area to the west of Bloomington and Sunbrook residential areas is owned by School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration, or SITLA, an organization whose mission is to make money off its lands to support Utah schools. Zone 6 is bordered on the west by the proposed Western Corridor, which would run from Interstate 15 through Santa Clara area to Highway 91 tentatively and which may very well present its own set of development pressures in this sensitive Zone 6 area.

For many years, the area under consideration has been used heavily for recreation. Now, in conjunction with the county’s effort to get the land in the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve, SITLA is warning recreationists that if the deal is not completed, SITLA will sell the land for development, thereby eliminating the recreation area.

This has thrown the recreation community into a panic. From what I understand, they have basically thrown Northern Corridor opponents under the bus so they can have their recreation area.

But wait — let’s look at this a little more deeply.

As noted, the land for Zone 6 has been vacant for many years. Yes, there is a lot of development occurring in Washington County now, but it’s actually less than was occurring back in the mid-2000s before the Great Recession served Washington County a gut punch. Will SITLA really develop that area now, or is SITLA just in cahoots with county and national leaders since these folks stick together like a nasty wad of gum on a shoe sole?

What will a new Zone 6 cost us?

Currently, there is no defined budget for managing Zone 6. Already, pressures due to human activity in the existing reserve, including Snow Canyon State Park (Zone 2), are exceeding the county’s and other agencies’ ability to control and will require additional expenditures.

A recent Habitat Conservation Advisory Committee meeting revealed that “social” unapproved trails in Snow Canyon State Park are impacting the area.

These problems will only increase with the county’s growth.

Garbage resulting from human activity in Red Cliffs Desert Reserve areas draws in predators that harm young tortoises, while visitors let dogs run loose, apparently unaware that dogs can damage tortoises or cause them to void their precious water resources.

As growth and human pressure increase, what future surprises will leaders have for recreationists who support them in their effort now to secure the road in exchange for recreation but may change their tune when a new focus of their attention arises?

Now, their effort is to get the Northern Corridor through the existing Zone 3. What’s to say they won’t have another “darling” project in the future that would affect Zone 6? Already, a road through the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve’s Babylon area (Zone 4) is being pushed by Hurricane leaders.

Given that the Red Cliffs National Conservation Area’s Habitat Conservation Plan says no new roads, will this be the next “darling” project promoted by the county and for which they will turn to Congress for help? What will follow as leaders work to undo the 1996 Habitat Conservation Plan agreement that has allowed development in Washington County to flourish for over 20 years?

If Zone 6 is so rich in tortoises, why was it not considered for inclusion in the reserve back in the mid-90s when the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve’s Upper Virgin River Recovery Unit, the smallest of the six tortoise recovery areas, was established?

Now, all of a sudden, the county is keen to secure and preserve the area. But it wasn’t back then, apparently, even though population projections revealed where we were heading. Leaders and agencies in the mid-90s were either not aware of the number of tortoises there or they just didn’t care to add that to an already bitter battle over the 62,000 acres under consideration that would allow development on 300,000 acres in the county.

Tortoises could not just have magically appeared there over the past 22 years in such abundant numbers.

According to the county’s 2017 tortoise survey of the area, approximately 30 percent of the tortoises observed in Zone 6 were juvenile tortoises. That means that 70 percent were adult tortoises.

The desert tortoise, according to the 2011 Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan, requires 13 to 20 years to reach sexual maturity and has low reproductive rates. They live for 50–80 years. It seems clear that the area should have been included in the Upper Virgin River Recovery Unit back then.

Also, the 1994 Desert Tortoise (Mojave Population) Recovery Plan makes it clear that human activities including those currently existing in Zone 6 are major reasons for the decline in tortoise populations that led to the “threatened” listing, but the county is arguing that they can coexist and support a healthy tortoise population— even as they know use of the area will grow as this county grows.

So perhaps the bigger question is why the area is not protected already anyway? Why not keep Zone 6 for recreation and protect it from development, imminent or not, but not in trade for a road in Zone 3?

The proposed $110 million road will not solve Washington County’s transportation problems no matter how much leaders argue that it will. Anyone who looks at the master road plans can see that the Southern Corridor and planned Western Corridor are far from St. George’s city center. Not so for the proposed Northern Corridor, which is barely outside St. George’s city center.

Proponents assert that the road has been planned for decades, but early 1996 Habitat Conservation Advisory Conservation meeting minutes reveal otherwise. Roads were discussed — but only existing roads in the new reserve.

Why were leaders not arguing for the Northern Corridor then as current leaders would have us believe? Perhaps because it did not suit their purposes and they left that for others to do at a future time?

As a conservationist, I’m willing to concede that perhaps Zone 6 recreation should be allowed to continue given the current healthy population and to support the recreationists within reason in spite of the challenges that growth and the ensuing additional recreational activities will present.

Unlike many recreationists who apparently are just out to protect their own lifestyles at the expense of other considerations, I, as a supporter of the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve and an opponent of the Northern Corridor, am willing to support their effort to pursue their activities. But I have some warnings for them.

A handout provided at the county’s open house stated that Stewart’s bill would include the following:

Here are some excerpts from the handout’s referenced “previous” (current) Habitat Conservation Advisory agreement (2009 amended) they say will be followed.

Zone 2

Zone 3

So which of the above management requirements will apply to the new Zone 6? The draft bill gives no clear direction but only states as follows:

Stewart’s bill effectively eliminates the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, a principal agency involved in the 1996 Habitat Conservation Advisory, from the current process. However, the service’s 2011 Revised Recovery Plan for the Mojave Population of the Desert Tortoise provides these recovery actions, among many others, which seem relevant as decisions are made.

Protect Existing Populations and Habitat

2.1. Conserve intact desert tortoise habitat

Fragmenting existing and prime Zone 3 with the Northern Corridor does not support this, even if Zone 6 lands are used as mitigation for the road.

2.10. Restrict off-highway vehicle events within desert tortoise habitat

Will the recreation community be happy with this limitation? Is it appropriate for them to turn to the county commission to ask for exceptions for these activities as they see fit or for the commission to allow?

2.11. Connect functional habitat

This is a reason why Zone 6 should be supported, but not in exchange for an expensive and unnecessary road. But where’s the budget to support a new Zone 6? How much will this cost Washington County tax payers? How will the SITLA land be purchased or exchanged, and at what cost?

It’s clear that there are many questions that need to be answered and problems that need to be solved. Running a road through our existing Reserve Zone 3 creates a problem for all National Conservation Areas in this nation. If the rules that protect these areas can be overrun in Washington County by the stroke of a D.C. pen, what’s to happen elsewhere in these important areas?

As for the angst-filled recreationists, if I were them, I would not be too comfortable with what SITLA or the county tells me with regard to how things will play out with the Zone 6 deal. I would not take anything that SITLA or the county says to the bank yet in their effort to garner support. It’s clear that they are willing to adjust the story to meet their needs, as they’ve done with their tales about the history of the proposed Northern Corridor.

There is also nothing to assure that the terms of Stewart’s bill will not be altered. In fact, recreationists would do well to join forces with conservationists and insist that Zone 6 be added to the existing Red Cliffs Desert Reserve with reasonable recreational protections, but not in exchange for a $110 million road that will not serve transportation needs well.

The county’s “divide and conquer” tactic should be viewed with skepticism and caution should be the byword as this process evolves.

As conservationist and recreationists wrestle with the situation that’s been handed to them, southern Utah’s leaders would do well to heed some warnings from other quickly growing areas like Fort Collins, Colorado. Particularly, as city leaders review Washington County’s resolution to build the contentious Northern Corridor through the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve and the Red Cliffs National Conservation Area, they should heed this warning from those in Fort Collins regarding growth and roads:

Washington County’s leaders would do well to study and learn rather than donning their cheerleading outfits and pompoms.

Articles related to “As the Northern Corridor looms, driving a wedge between recreationists and conservationists serves no good purpose”

Rep. Stewart introduces H.R. 5597, legislation for Washington County Northern Corridor

The Ghost Highway: The battle for the Northern Corridor

The Ghost Highway: The battle for the Northern Corridor, part II

The Ghost Highway: The battle for the Northern Corridor, part III

The Ghost Highway: The battle for the Northern Corridor, part IV

The Ghost Highway: The battle for the Northern Corridor, a conclusion