Today's Weather

Click for Sierra Vista, Arizona Forecast

Commend, not attack, groups on wash issue

Published/Last Modified on Sunday, Jul 01, 2007 - 05:24:42 am MST

Font Size

To the Editor:

Myrna Taylor’s letter to the editor on Tuesday was a bit shrill. Ms. Taylor’s conclusions that public access and parking at the west end of Kachina would be, in her words, “desecrating wildlife habitat” is nonsense. Her attack on Castle and Cooke and city and county officials is unwarranted in this case.

I have lived on Garden Canyon Wash for more than 18 years and have observed more than 120 bird species, fox, javelina, deer, coyote, raccoons, jack rabbits and cottontails, all from my patio. I live very close to Highway 92 and Buffalo Soldier Trail. There is a public access easement to Garden Canyon Wash through my property. Hikers, mountain bikers, dog walkers and strollers pass my house daily. We and the wildlife have not suffered. The species count in the wash has not diminished. Away from the wash the Cassin’s and Botteri’s sparrows seem to have moved on as development has reduced grassland habitat.

I admit to being somewhat of a “has been,” however, in the past I have conducted multiple Christmas bird count censuses for Audubon in Garden Canyon Wash. I have served as president of the Southwest Wings Birding Festival, president of Huachuca Audubon, president of the Arizona State Audubon Council and founder and president of the San Pedro 100. I have participated in several lawsuits to protect the San Pedro River and wildlife habitat. I made two trips to Washington, D.C., to lobby on behalf of the San Pedro and wildlife habitat. I certainly do not speak for or represent any of those organizations now but I cannot imagine any of them opposing the proposed access to the West end of the wash.

Minimum impact access for citizens to enjoy nature results in more people appreciating and protecting wildlife. Ramsey Canyon Nature Conservancy is an excellent example.

Over the years I have fought with and worked with the city, county and Fort Huachuca on numerous environmental issues. I have never hesitated to call the city, county, Fort Huachuca or Castle and Cooke to task when warranted. In this case, they should be commended. Ms. Taylor would be better off working with the city to make the best of a situation that so clearly serves the greater good.

Jim Horton

Sierra Vista

Print this story Email this story

Font Size

Use the form below to post a brief comment to this story, or respond to other readers. Please use the word count tool to assist you in keeping your remarks to 100 words or fewer.
Comments appear once they are approved. Your thoughtful contribution to the online discussion is appreciated.

Myrna wrote on Jul 2, 2007 1:48 PM:

" Hey Jim and Jack,what happened to the dialogue we started? Don't you think this important topic needs to be examined? Please, explain your thoughts on exactly what plans the city and county are following. Do you know that the subject of the enty/parking lot was never disussed with the immediate neighbors who actually live on the corner of Kachina & Calle Encina How is a parking lot going to teach respect for wildlife? "

Myrna wrote on Jul 1, 2007 2:45 PM:

" Jack in Tucson. Got your attention and that is what I wanted: attention to this issue. Neither the city or county is following the 20-20 plans. They've approved developments creating the unbuildable, landlocked 9+acres which Castle & Cooke so generouslly donated back. BIG BUSINESS GETS DEDUCTIONS & PUBLICITY; POLITICIANS GET BRAGGING RIGHTS FOR CIVIC MINDED ENDEAVORS. WHILE C&C GET TO SELL ANOTHER HOUSE, TAXPAYER'S GET TO BUY A DRIVEWAY INTO THE LOT WHICH THE CITY HASN'T DESIGNED YET, BUT WILL COST$25-30,000. Doesn't any-one-else see something wrong with this picture? No motorcycles access from lot equales no horses. "

Susie wrote on Jul 1, 2007 11:44 AM:

" I do not think Myrna sounded shrill. It sounds like you are trying to put her down. I read her letter as being concerned. Ramsey Canyon Nature Conservancy is a big vistor draw and creates more money than a local neighborhood wash. Since you think this is such a great idea and you have an established easement, why don't you suggest THE PARKING LOT be put in your area. Your wildlife doesn't seem to mind traffic & noise as you "live very close to HW92 & BST". Food & water draw wildlife as does the Fort's open space. "

Not so shrill Myrna wrote on Jul 1, 2007 10:24 AM:

" Jim, your good ol'boy attitude of I've been here longer and am wiser doesn't hold water with me, neither does paved areas next to the Antelope Water Well. Yes, I park my car on my propert: NO, I don't have 20 cars in the same area everyday. I wonder which of those "hikers, Mt. bikers, dog walkers, and strollers" keep cutting our fences to access state trust land from the wash? A parking lot means people can hang out, smoke and are more likely to start a fire. Keep destroying habitat and there won't be wildlife. "

Jack in Phoenix wrote on Jul 1, 2007 9:39 AM:

" Mr. Horton's words are well chosen. Sober reflection and serious, unemotional planning is what will get the job done for the many species in the Sasn Pedro. I always get a little nervous when I read something such as came from Ms Taylor. Those of us who are not swept along on algore's eco-tide sometimes characterize the dogma of such folk as Ms Taylor as quasi-religious, or if you like, a new substitute religion. How can we be so bold? Easy. When someone accuses another of "desecrating" wildlife habitat, what else can you call it but religious? "