Navy officials repeated their sales pitch in Lovelock and other communities on the need to expand the Fallon Range Training Complex. If the plan is approved by Congress, the Navy would take over and fence off thousands of acres of public and private land in Pershing County.
Last week, the Navy presented its Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and heard oral rebuttals at public hearings in Hawthorne, Gabbs, Austin, Eureka, Fallon, Lovelock and Reno. The public has until January 15, 2019 to submit written or online comments on the document. The Draft EIS includes four alternatives including a “No Action” Plan that would cancel the modernization and lead to possible closure of the training complex according to Navy officials.
“Current and proposed training on the Fallon Ranges would likely need to be accommodated elsewhere,” states the Draft EIS. “The no action alternative does not meet the purpose and need since it would not provide a suitable area for military training.”
Fallon Naval Air Station Commanding Officer David Halloran explained the “counterintuitive” need for the expansion. Modern weapons are more precise only until something goes wrong. The longer-range bombs need more land where they can crash without injuring the public.
LIMITED CONCESSIONS
In apparent concessions to other areas, the Navy’s “preferred” expansion plan for the south end of the complex would rotate Bravo-17 to maintain access to Rawhide Mine, Fairview Peak and increased access to the Sand Springs Range. The Navy would reroute, not close, part of State Route 361 to Gabbs and part of the Paiute Pipeline would be moved, at taxpayers’ expense.
Under Alternative 3, the Navy’s preferred plan, the Navy would not withdraw public land south of U.S. Route 50 to expand the Dixie Valley Training Area. Instead, it would create two “military electromagnetic spectrum special use zones” under both BLM and Navy jurisdiction where hunting, mining, grazing, recreation and other public land uses might still be allowed.
To the north, however, the Navy has ignored Pershing County requests for changes in the expansion so Pole Line/Bombing Range Road remains open. If that’s not possible, county officials have asked that the county road be moved north of the expanded B-20 bombing range.
If B-20 is expanded north of the road and the county line, Pershing County would lose PILT (Payment in Lieu of Taxes) and private property tax payments. Road access to mining claims, grazing allotments, an iron mine and popular hunting areas would be eliminated or reduced.
“The Navy’s proposed B-20 expansion area extends into Pershing County and overlays the County’s Bombing Range Road which is part of the County’s official transportation plan,” states a county letter to the Navy. “This road is an important connection between U.S. Highway 95 and Coal Canyon Road. Moreover, Bombing Range Road provides the only access across this portion of southern Pershing County and is access to thousands of acres of private land and a mine that straddles the county line. Pershing County does not support the taking of Bombing Range Road and the impacts this will have on our county.”
In the Draft EIS, the Navy quotes Nevada Revised Statutes Chapter 405, on “Control and Preservation of Public Highways” requiring it to replace roads closed for military training.
“The Navy would replace any public roads that are closed in kind to maintain accessibility for the population to previously reachable locations,” states the document.
PRIVATE LAND UNDER THREAT
The Navy says it will pay “fair market value” for private land acquired for the expansion. If B-20 is expanded across the county line, James Drake would lose his 40 acres near Bombing Range Road and fair market value would not come close to covering his investments in the property.
The Navy has not responded to Drake’s written comments sent more than two years ago.
“They haven’t made any attempt to contact me,” he said. “I don’t think they’re interested in compromise. They’re making sales presentations, not looking for feedback. I brought up the mining claims, the road, the springs and they just adopted those talking points into what they are going to do. Bombing Range Road is important for anyone that wants to get into that valley.”
Contrary to what the Navy claims in the Draft EIS, Drake said there are no signs on Bombing Range Road to indicate that access to the road is restricted to Navy personnel.
If other groups or entities with greater resources decide to “stand up to the Navy,” Drake would be on board but he cannot fight it alone. He might be forced to move on but he would rather not.
“I don’t want to sell my property,” he said. “They’re going to have to make me sell my land.”
UNSAFE AIR SPACE
Pilot Douglas Martin pointed out that plans to expand restricted air space for the Navy would impact general aviation pilots including those that use the Derby Field Airport south of Lovelock.
“I just bought property five miles north of Lovelock, essentially to get away from the Navy, but that’s beside the point,” he said. “The FAA was remiss in their air space usage. They are going to end the MOA (Military Operations Area) just south of our airport and make it a restricted area. If someone was making an instrument landing but couldn’t land and had to go around, they’re going to break that restricted area. It’s an unsafe condition and it should be left as a MOA.”
General aviators should have the same rights as commercial and military aircraft, Martin said. More restricted air space would force small planes up into more turbulent, less safe air space.
GRAZING THREATENED
The expansion would impact some grazing allotments including the Humboldt Sink, Rochester, Copper Kettle and White Cloud allotments in south Pershing and north Churchill counties. Since bombing ranges are off-limits to cattle, the Navy would reimburse ranchers for lost income.
“The Navy acknowledges that it has the authority, under the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, to make payments to federal grazing permit holders for losses suffered as a result of the withdrawal or other use of former federal grazing lands for war or national defense purposes.”
After last week’s hearing, some locals wondered how the Navy could possibly calculate the income lost from allotments that can last for generations. Impacts on ranchers affects others including those that haul livestock according to Lovelock Valley farmer/trucker Jeremy Burke.
ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Pershing County Commission Chairman Rob McDougal told Navy officials that county officials would like Bombing Range Road to remain open to protect the county’s economic interests
“We would like see access maintained,” he said. “We recognize the necessity of the Navy to have an outstanding facility and good training but we think that there’s some possible compromise that they could consider making.”
Pershing County Commissioner Carol Shank said she and other leaders had hoped the Navy would consider the economic impacts on Pershing County and adjust the plan accordingly.
“They have pretty much ignored our comments but I’m going to keep the pressure on,” she said. “There’s going to be lost property taxes, PILT and net proceeds of mines. The iron mine is just starting to develop and there’s probably other minerals that might be in that area. If they are not going to keep Bombing Range Road open then they need to relocate it.”
Retired Lovelock Valley farmer Paul Davidson believes the Navy could find another way to expand the Bravo 20 bombing range without closing an important Pershing County road.
“Whatever they have to do but they should leave that road open,” he said. “I support the expansion if needed but there’s some things that shouldn’t be done and that’s one of them.”
Lovelock resident Dave Skelton, who read the entire 1500 page Draft EIS, was more blunt.
“Of the three alternatives, I would go with No Action,” he said. “If they’re not going to listen to us then absolutely no action. They’re taking a lot away and we’re not asking for much. Just relocate the road and don’t just say that road is lost. Contrary to what they say, that is not a Navy road.”
As usual, Pershing County resident John Heizer was even more blunt.
“They threaten to pull out of an area and put economic harshness upon us. The Navy better wake up and realize they have no other place to go because the Air Force is not going to accept a bunch of Navy jocks in their air space,” he said. “Agriculture, ranching and especially mining should be protected at all costs- vested interests that have been here longer than the Navy.”
