Route Guide - iPhone / Android - Partners - Forum - Photos - Deals - What's New
Login with Facebook
 ADVANCED
Resolution Copper - Queen Creek Coalition: News Release
View Latest Posts in This Forum or All Forums
   Page 1 of 4.  1  2  3  4   Next>   Last>>
Follow replies to this topic? Notify me at the top of web site.
1

Email me.
 
By Dief
Jul 11, 2012

Resolution Copper and Queen Creek Coalition reach long-term license agreement

Pact allows rock climbing and hiking to continue on RCM property for QCC registrants and provides resources for future development to offset climbing opportunities lost to the mine’s development.

PHOENIX, Ariz., July 11, 2012 -- Resolution Copper Mining Limited and the Queen Creek Coalition have signed a long-term license agreement that allows rock climbers and hikers continued access to some of their favorite climbing and bouldering spots on RCM private land in Queen Creek and in and around Oak Flat.

Climbing and bouldering problems and off-highway access points covered in the agreement are primarily located on RCM private land and US Forest Service land located in the region of RCM’s proposed under-ground copper mine, near Superior, Ariz. When in full operation, the mine will be the largest in North America. The project is in the pre-feasibility stage and expected to begin production early next decade.

The agreement, which comes after eight years of negotiations, also provides funding to the Tempe-based group to develop other access points or climbing areas outside the mine zone to offset climbing and bouldering areas in the Oak Flat area that may be inaccessible or lost as a result of a pending legislative land exchange and mine development. QCC will act as the single point of contact with regard to rock climbing on RCM’s current and future lands to educate the public about RCM’s policies as land owner in return for those offsets. Persons desiring to access the routes for climbing should contact QCC for access rules and registration procedures.

Popular climbing areas including The Pond and Atlantis, which are located on RCM property and which are not currently expected to be affected by mining, will remain accessible to climbers under the agreement. It also gives rock climbers who register with QCC continued access to climbing areas in the Oak Flat area that are currently on US Forest Service land but are part of the pending land Exchange. In the event those lands transfer to RCM or are otherwise impacted by mining, QCC registrants will have access to them as long as it is safe to do so and does not interfere with mining operations. This includes access points to Upper Devil’s Canyon.

QCC also will work to maximize rock climbing on current rock climbing areas such as Apache Leap, Lower Devil’s Canyon and Tam O’Shanter, in addition to other current and potential rock climbing areas within the region. The agreement specifies that climbers must first register with QCC as a member or daily pass-holder to access the climbing areas. The access also may be terminated or restricted due to regulatory or safety concerns and is subject to certain other conditions to be managed by QCC.

Financial terms of the agreement and specifics of the business contract are protected by confidentiality arrangements, but in general the funds will be used to educate climbers on the acceptable and prohibited land uses covered by the license and to maximize climbing opportunities in the area through projects targeted at regional rock climbing.

RCM and QCC officials applauded the good working relationship they have achieved. “We look forward to a long and constructive relationship with our climbing friends,” said Jon Cherry, project manager. “We believe it’s a fair and reasonable long-term solution to a difficult and complex issue, said Paul Diefenderfer, QCC chairman.

About RCM
Resolution Copper Mining is a limited liability company whose members are a subsidiary of London-based Rio Tinto – the managing member – and a subsidiary of Australia-based BHP Billiton, to develop the third largest undeveloped copper resource in the world near Superior, Ariz. The project is currently in the pre-feasibility phase and production is not anticipated until the early 2020s. The project, which will mine ore using underground block-caving methods at depths of nearly 7,000 feet below surface, currently employs more than 500 RCM employees and contractors. When in full production, the mine will employ 1,400 workers directly and generate an additional 2,300 indirect and induced jobs. The mine will be North America’s largest copper producer when in full production, capable of producing more than 25 percent of the nation’s demand based on today’s usage.

About QCC
Queen Creek Coalition is a tax exempt non-profit organization based in Tempe, Ariz., whose mission is to maximize rock climbing opportunities in the Queen Creek region, east and south of Superior, Ariz. It is one of Arizona’s major rock climbing areas, with more than 700 roped climbing routes and 1,000 boulder problems. As part of its mission, Queen Creek Coalition seeks to promote safe and sustainable climbing in the region by serving as a source of information for climbers intending to visit the region. Queen Creek Coalition is the successor to Friends of Queen Creek, the original rock climber group who began negotiations with Resolution in 2004.


FLAG
By agd
Jul 11, 2012
alaska

What are the social/legal incentives for RCM to not revoke the license? Licenses are freely revocable by the grantor. Did QCC pay consideration for the license?


FLAG
By AccessFund HQ
Jul 11, 2012
AF logo

Congratulations to the QCC for putting in years of work to gain a long term agreement with RCM. We applaud their efforts and thank them for dedicating themselves to what has been at many times a thankless job. It is also important to note that this agreement does not preclude the continued work of the Concerned Climbers of Arizona (CCA) and the Access Fund to advocate for land exchange legislation that is more favorable to climbers, other recreational interests, addresses environmental concerns, and protects the many other values of Oak Flat and the Queen Creek region. The Access Fund will continue to work with QCC, CCA, Congress, current and future Administrations, and RCM to achieve the best outcome for climbers.


FLAG
By Red
From Arizona
Jul 11, 2012
Cobra Kai

Dief wrote:
QCC also will work to maximize rock climbing on current rock climbing areas such as Apache Leap, Lower Devil’s Canyon and Tam O’Shanter, in addition to other current and potential rock climbing areas within the region. The agreement specifies that climbers must first register with QCC as a member or daily pass-holder to access the climbing areas. The access also may be terminated or restricted due to regulatory or safety concerns and is subject to certain other conditions to be managed by QCC. Financial terms of the agreement and specifics of the business contract are protected by confidentiality arrangements

Dief, I have a couple questions. It would be great if you would answer them and the ones you ignored in your last thread about this license agreement!
The above quote states that "climbers must first register with QCC as a member or daily pass-holder to access the climbing areas" within the region. It mentions Tamo, "in addition to other current and potential rock climbing areas within the region".
questions:
Why do climbers have to register with the QCC to climb at areas "in the region" that are nowhere near the property that is in the proposed land swap? (such as Tamo) Neither Resolution nor QCC has any authority or power to require such a thing for an area such as Tamo. Please explain why Resolution and QCC are trying to police land that they do not nor will ever own.
What are the boundaries of this "region"? How far East and how far South of Superior are you claiming stakes for?
Why are financial terms of the agreement and specifics of the business contract protected by confidentiality arrangements?
Aren't you claiming to be negotiating on my and all other climbers behalf? If so, we should be able to know all the details. If not, you're only negotiating on your and the QCC's behalf.


FLAG
By Alex McIntyre
From Tucson, AZ
Jul 11, 2012

alexdavis wrote:
What are the social/legal incentives for RCM to not revoke the license? Licenses are freely revocable by the grantor. Did QCC pay consideration for the license?

+1
Give us answers, QCC.


FLAG
By Dief
Jul 11, 2012

Hey Red

The license only applies to private land owned by Resolution, (Atlantis, Pond, etc) so registration will only be required for climbing on private land owned by Resolution. As part of the mitigation for loss of climbing areas directly impacted by the mine QCC will be looking at the region for ways to improve existing access or gain new access (ie Tamo). We will be seeking input from climbers on what access issues should be pursued. To be clear: If QCC (or anyone else for that matter) gains access to Tamo (or other non Resolution owned land) it would not be covered by this license.


FLAG
By Red
From Arizona
Jul 11, 2012
Cobra Kai

Dief, thanks for answering that one question. It appears that your news release misspoke or at least is very unclear about what areas climbers need to be registered with the QCC to access.
"QCC also will work to maximize rock climbing on current rock climbing areas such as Apache Leap, Lower Devil’s Canyon and Tam O’Shanter, in addition to other current and potential rock climbing areas within the region. The agreement specifies that climbers must first register with QCC as a member or daily pass-holder to access the climbing areas."

If you could address the other questions I and others have on this and your last thread, that would be great! Thanks.


FLAG
By Dief
Jul 11, 2012

Yes, that part of the news release was a tad fuzzy - I hope I've cleared things up.

Why are the specifics of the agreement confidential? Because that is what the landowner requested.


FLAG
By catlady
From scottsdale
Sep 27, 2012

You are not to accept a bribe,for the bribe blinds clear-sighted men and distorts the words of righteous men - Exodus, 23:8


FLAG
By Lindajft
From maricopa, AZ
Mar 21, 2013
The loaf

Dief wrote:
PHOENIX, Ariz., July 11, 2012 -- Resolution Copper Mining Limited and the Queen Creek Coalition have signed a long-term license agreement that allows rock climbers and hikers continued access to some of their favorite climbing and bouldering spots on RCM private land in Queen Creek and in and around Oak Flat.

Well, well, well... I do not think that today was much of a surprise to many, do you?
Dief wrote:
Financial terms of the agreement and specifics of the business contract are protected by confidentiality arrangements


Was that an endorsement that Gosar mentioned in the hearing today from a few guys in the group the old Queen Creek Coalition?
How much money did he mention was paid for that?
Who else saw that today?


FLAG
By BlueFrog
Mar 22, 2013

Hi Linda -

What did Gosar say exactly about climbers yesterday? I didn't catch the whole hearing but did see Gosar try to call Peralta a liar after she said Superior says "no" to the mine.




FLAG
By Lindajft
From maricopa, AZ
Mar 23, 2013
The loaf

Bare with me, I'm just summarizing.
Maybe Dief or someone from the QCC could provide word for word

Gosar said: 'He has an endorsement of a local climbing group, the Queen Creek Coalition stating they support the land exchange.'


Please someone correct me if I'm wrong


FLAG
By Fred AmRhein
Mar 23, 2013

BlueFrog wrote:
Hi Linda - What did Gosar say exactly about climbers yesterday? I didn't catch the whole hearing but did see Gosar try to call Peralta a liar after she said Superior says "no" to the mine.


Blue Frog,

At approximately 59:23 of the archived committee hearing as posted on the House Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources website, Representative Gosar submits for the record a document from a

"climbing recreation group from Queen Creek . . . that support this mine."

Whether this group as referenced is QCC, Inc., is not explicit.

Archive Video of HR 687 Hearing, Oak Flat Privatization Bill

Fred


FLAG
By Geir
From Tucson, AZ
Mar 24, 2013
Toofast

What a pile of crap. Everyone concerned should contact Gosar and insist he stops insinuating that climbers broadly support this legislation. It would be great if the AF and CCA contacted him as we'll.


FLAG
By Davis Stevenson
From Flagstaff, Arizona
Mar 24, 2013
Following up a new route out in the Mojave Desert.  Info coming soon maybe?  Fun 5.10 hands and fingers.

What about getting everyone fighting from a different angle?

It's a foreign company that's sweeping in to take advantage of our suffering economy, throwing around phrases like "local jobs" and "boost the economy"

Essentially they want to take advantage of us, force us to give up some prized land so they can bail and leave us high and dry when they're done mining, after destroying such a beautiful and unique area, and sending all the actual profits over to Europe...

This is also going to set a bad precedent for skirting around the policies that are in-place for land exchanges, too, that will hurt everyone in the long run.


FLAG
By Lindajft
From maricopa, AZ
Mar 24, 2013
The loaf

Geir wrote:
What a pile of crap. Everyone concerned should contact Gosar and insist he stops insinuating that climbers broadly support this legislation. It would be great if the AF and CCA contacted him as we'll.


The public can rest assure that the CCA in conjunction with the AF are in regular contact with all those involved along with informing them that a few guys in small group (QCC) do not represent the climbers in AZ as a whole.

Linda
Keep writing


FLAG
By Lindajft
From maricopa, AZ
Mar 24, 2013
The loaf

feel free to email, fax or call
Committee on Natural Resources
United States House of Representatives
1324 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Phone: (202) 225-2761
Fax: (202) 225-5929

Paul Gosar - Arizona, 4th District
ph: (202) 225-2315 | fx: (202) 226-9739
or sumit email:
https://gosar.house.gov/contact-me/email-me

Be sure to note to PUT ON RECORD:
In opposition to HR 687


FLAG
By Lindajft
From maricopa, AZ
Mar 24, 2013
The loaf

stay tuned on the forum:
www.mountainproject.com/v/saving-oak-flat-2013-does-anyone-c>>>


FLAG
By kirra
May 18, 2013

Last week the House voted to pass and favorably report H.R.687 to by a vote of 23 yeas to 19 nays

Congratulations to the Access Fund for contributing & encouraging the confusion of 'climbers supporting the land exchange' in Congress.

Exhibiting mixed messages and highlighting Paul Dief & Erik Filsinger's QCC,Inc. on the Access Fund website creates an appearance that climbers support the land exchange and the destruction of Oak Flat which in fact a majority of climbers do not.

The Access Fund endorsement here of QCC,Inc. 'license-agreement' *deal* is an insult to many who have spent countless hours with a consistent goal of keeping Oak Flat climbing & recreational use available for future generations. There has been great success for years in holding off the mine especially of late with Resolution Copper cutting jobs and the Town of Superior reversing their support. AF recent actions here seem somewhat internally defeating to the community after such progress.

For the record: Paul & Erik did not "retain the name QCC" they formed a conspiracy and "stole it" for political purposes now evident. The Queen Creek Coalition was created specifically as a group entity, by a group from the community -as representatives of the community, to represent the community as a whole. Due to the failure of Paul Dief who ruined the name and good reputation of the FOQC when he negotiated a deal with the AF and forget to to ask or tell anyone he was doing so (sound familiar?) -we had to start over. Typically, individuals who disagree with a group tend to leave the group and form another group -so why didn't this happen? How can the Access Fund support such actions of conspiracy & treason committed against their own community?

$$$ ?

QCC,Inc operates privately, accepting deals, dollars and contracts they say, are on behalf of the community. How can an organization claim to speak on behalf of a community when it holds no public meetings nor allows any membership from that community and only accepts comments & questions they personally agree with? Shame on the AF for endorsing any secret financial negotiations purported to be on our behalf regarding a public recreational area.

I personally give no such right to the Access Fund or QCC,Inc to negotiate any secret financial deal, agreement or exchange on my behalf.

Queen Creek Coalition was not created to be a formal voting entity, or was it ever designated or allowed to be a formal voting entity on matters that tie it to it's reason for creation -the mission statement which all members agreed to upon it's creation and the #1 item was- No subsidence. To date, there has been no mining plan produced so it is impossible to support legislation. The Queen Creek Coalition was created as an all or nothing informal consensus group. The group operated in this manner to insure the representation of all. Paul & Erik had no personal original ownership of the original group name 'QCC'. The original Queen Creek Coalition created by the group, for the group, for a specific mission & purpose, ended when Paul & Erik "forced a vote" to endorse the land exchange thus changing the main mission statement. Because of this they will always be referred to as QCC,Inc. The Original Queen Creek Coalition retains creative rights to it's original historical identity and also to display historical documents.. The creation of the mission statement and it's tie to the original group that created it of which I am one, remains intact. Despite QCC,Inc attempts to remove all historical references on the internet or other attempts to rewrite history, the Original QCC will always exist in it's original form and has every right to do so as part of public record and 1st Amendment rights.

With all due respects, unless the Access Fund can exhibit good faith toward the following 3 requests, I will have no choice but to ask for the return of my donation and proceed to lobby against the Access Fund. My requests will be copied to AF Board of directors.

I encourage all climbers serious about saving Oak Flat to take a firm stand at this time.

Request #1. Send out a press release or letter to Congress (especially Gosar) clarifying and discrediting 'climbing community' endorsements of this land exchange

Request #2. Remove QCC,Inc. from AF website area that promotes saving Oak Flat

Request #3. Divulge copies of all contracts and details of any financial arrangements made or amounts signed on behalf of the community with regards to the current Oak Flat land exchange

I never expected to see my $$$ used toward assisting a secret campaign that inevitability lead to the destruction of Oak Flat.

AccessFund HQ wrote:
Congratulations to the QCC for putting in years of work to gain a long term agreement with RCM. We applaud their efforts and thank them for dedicating themselves to what has been at many times a thankless job. It is also important to note that this agreement does not preclude the continued work of the Concerned Climbers of Arizona (CCA) and the Access Fund to advocate for land exchange legislation that is more favorable to climbers, other recreational interests, addresses environmental concerns, and protects the many other values of Oak Flat and the Queen Creek region. The Access Fund will continue to work with QCC, CCA, Congress, current and future Administrations, and RCM to achieve the best outcome for climbers.


Access Fund, can you elaborate in further detail of the continued work you are doing or detail any actions recently executed that support climbers against the land exchange? (aside from signing the AzMining Reform sign-on letter)

What were the results of meetings recently held in D.C. Are there any suggestions, plans or strategies on hand to continue the fight against this bad legislation?

Why has the Oak Flat area of your website seemingly not been updated since the last session of Congress? Where are the Action Alerts, notices, updates or other emails that were usually sent out in a timely manner to encourage letter writing or contacting our representatives about the exchange?

Geir wrote:
What a pile of crap. Everyone concerned should contact Gosar and insist he stops insinuating that climbers broadly support this legislation. It would be great if the AF and CCA contacted him as we'll.

Geir -Yes quite a pile and anyone who wants to save Oak Flat should be outraged. IMO a petition drive in front of Paul Dief's climbing gym would be in good order if folks have enough cojones.

Be well~ k

save it -don't sink it
save it -don't sink it


FLAG
By Rocky Climber
May 19, 2013

kirra wrote:
Last week the House voted to pass and favorably report H.R.687 to by a vote of 23 yeas to 19 nays Congratulations to the Access Fund for contributing & encouraging the confusion of 'climbers supporting the land exchange' in Congress. Exhibiting mixed messages and highlighting Paul Dief & Erik Filsinger's QCC,Inc. on the Access Fund website creates an appearance that climbers support the land exchange and the destruction of Oak Flat which in fact a majority of climbers do not. The Access Fund endorsement here of QCC,Inc. 'license-agreement' *deal* is an insult to many who have spent countless hours with a consistent goal of keeping Oak Flat climbing & recreational use available for future generations. There has been great success for years in holding off the mine especially of late with Resolution Copper cutting jobs and the Town of Superior reversing their support. AF recent actions here seem somewhat internally defeating to the community after such progress. For the record: Paul & Erik did not "retain the name QCC" they formed a conspiracy and "stole it" for political purposes now evident. The Queen Creek Coalition was created specifically as a group entity, by a group from the community -as representatives of the community, to represent the community as a whole. Due to the failure of Paul Dief who ruined the name and good reputation of the FOQC when he negotiated a deal with the AF and forget to to ask or tell anyone he was doing so (sound familiar?) -we had to start over. Typically, individuals who disagree with a group tend to leave the group and form another group -so why didn't this happen? How can the Access Fund support such actions of conspiracy & treason committed against their own community? $$$ ? QCC,Inc operates privately, accepting deals, dollars and contracts they say, are on behalf of the community. How can an organization claim to speak on behalf of a community when it holds no public meetings nor allows any membership from that community and only accepts comments & questions they personally agree with? Shame on the AF for endorsing any secret financial negotiations purported to be on our behalf regarding a public recreational area. I personally give no such right to the Access Fund or QCC,Inc to negotiate any secret financial deal, agreement or exchange on my behalf. Queen Creek Coalition was not created to be a formal voting entity, or was it ever designated or allowed to be a formal voting entity on matters that tie it to it's reason for creation -the mission statement which all members agreed to upon it's creation and the #1 item was- No subsidence. To date, there has been no mining plan produced so it is impossible to support legislation. The Queen Creek Coalition was created as an all or nothing informal consensus group. The group operated in this manner to insure the representation of all. Paul & Erik had no personal original ownership of the original group name 'QCC'. The original Queen Creek Coalition created by the group, for the group, for a specific mission & purpose, ended when Paul & Erik "forced a vote" to endorse the land exchange thus changing the main mission statement. Because of this they will always be referred to as QCC,Inc. The Original Queen Creek Coalition retains creative rights to it's original historical identity and also to display historical documents.. The creation of the mission statement and it's tie to the original group that created it of which I am one, remains intact. Despite QCC,Inc attempts to remove all historical references on the internet or other attempts to rewrite history, the Original QCC will always exist in it's original form and has every right to do so as part of public record and 1st Amendment rights. With all due respects, unless the Access Fund can exhibit good faith toward the following 3 requests, I will have no choice but to ask for the return of my donation and proceed to lobby against the Access Fund. My requests will be copied to AF Board of directors. I encourage all climbers serious about saving Oak Flat to take a firm stand at this time. Request #1. Send out a press release or letter to Congress (especially Gosar) clarifying and discrediting 'climbing community' endorsements of this land exchange Request #2. Remove QCC,Inc. from AF website area that promotes saving Oak Flat Request #3. Divulge copies of all contracts and details of any financial arrangements made or amounts signed on behalf of the community with regards to the current Oak Flat land exchange I never expected to see my $$$ used toward assisting a secret campaign that inevitability lead to the destruction of Oak Flat. Access Fund, can you elaborate in further detail of the continued work you are doing or detail any actions recently executed that support climbers against the land exchange? (aside from signing the AzMining Reform sign-on letter) What were the results of meetings recently held in D.C. Are there any suggestions, plans or strategies on hand to continue the fight against this bad legislation? Why has the Oak Flat area of your website seemingly not been updated since the last session of Congress? Where are the Action Alerts, notices, updates or other emails that were usually sent out in a timely manner to encourage letter writing or contacting our representatives about the exchange? Geir -Yes quite a pile and anyone who wants to save Oak Flat should be outraged. IMO a petition drive in front of Paul Dief's climbing gym would be in good order if folks have enough cojones. Be well~ k


OMG! This crap is what the Concerned Climbers have come to? Makes me glad I relocated out of state!


FLAG
By Geir
From Tucson, AZ
May 20, 2013
Toofast

Rocky Climber wrote:
OMG! This crap is what the Concerned Climbers have come to? Makes me glad I relocated out of state!


Hold on a minute ... I am not an expert in the CCA but I am pretty sure this is not an official statement.

Second, I thought Kirra made reasonable requests in #1 and #3. And this is coming from someone who has strongly disagreed with her in the past.


FLAG
By Concerned Climbers of Arizona
May 20, 2013

The Access Fund statement quoted above is nearly one year old. The following statement posted by the AF much more recently (in another thread) better summarizes the current AF position:

"The Access Fund supports the QCC and their successful negotiation of a license agreement with Resolution Copper (RCM) that allows continued climbing access on RCM's private land near Superior, Arizona. The QCC has not been the only or primary representative of Arizona rock climbers on the proposed Land Exchange and copper mine project. In May of 2012, the Access Fund hired a dedicated staffer (Curt Shannon) to advocate for a favorable outcome for climbers and all those who love Oak Flat. This work has included educating Federal, State and agency policy makers on the significant problems with the proposed land exchange legislation, reaching out to like-minded organizations and entities, and helping to build out a coalition of those opposed to the proposed, extremely destructive, block cave mine at Oak Flat.

Other than the Access Fund, the Concerned Climbers of Arizona and more recently the American Alpine Club have been active in addressing the ongoing concerns of climbers as they relate to the potential loss of Oak Flat and surrounding climbing areas. The QCC has been the principal climbing organization directly negotiating a license and settlement agreement with Resolution Copper to potentially offset the loss of climbing that would be caused by the RCM mine. Each individual climber will have to decide for him or herself which groups best represent their position on Oak Flat."


The Concerned Climbers of Arizona (CCA) and the Access Fund have been working tirelessly to oppose the current RCM land exchange legislation and any suggestions to the contrary are both uninformed and counterproductive. In the last few months, the CCA and AF have met personally with Congressman Gosar and also with his staff (both here in Arizona and in Washington D.C.) to correct any assertion that any other group has a monopoly on representing climbers with regard to the RCM land exchange. We have also met recently with Congresswoman Ann Kirkpatrick's staff, Senator John McCain's staff, the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee staff, the Forest Service, the White House CEQ and others to oppose this legislation.


FLAG
By kirra
May 21, 2013

Geir, you are correct~ same troll that crawled out before so we're moving on..

Concerned Climbers of Arizona wrote:
The Access Fund statement quoted above is nearly one year old.

The updated shuffling of words basically change nothing, my questions remain:

-- What were the results of meetings recently held in D.C. Are there any suggestions, plans or strategies on hand to continue the fight against this bad legislation?

-- Why has the Oak Flat area of the Access Fund website not been updated since the last session of Congress? The letter writing templete is even out-of-date. Where are the Action Alerts, notices, updates or other emails that were usually sent out in a timely manner to encourage letter writing or contacting our representatives about this land exchange?

What specific actions have the Access Fund performed in 2013 toward defeating H.B.687 while engaging the community? Can you pont me to any formal notices, alerts, feeback on meetings etc. regarding Oak Flat from the AF on their FB page?

Concerned Climbers of Arizona wrote:
"The Access Fund supports the QCC and their successful negotiation of a license agreement with Resolution Copper (RCM) that allows continued climbing access on RCM's private land near Superior, Arizona.

The Access Fund supported (1 year ago) and continues to support the ideas & ideals of 2 climbers who are committing fraud against an entire community. How can you applaud a "temporary climbing license" if to get it requires endorsing the exchange which would loose it all then anyway? If Oak Flat goes, so then goes the Pond and Atlantis. You make it sound like these folks are doing something honorable. Can you please explain?

Concerned Climbers of Arizona wrote:
" In May of 2012, the Access Fund hired a dedicated staffer (Curt Shannon) to advocate for a favorable outcome for climbers and all those who love Oak Flat.

Most of us know by now the Access Fund hired Curt. At that time the community had to pony up $$ themselves to send him to D.C. because the AF was sitting on their hands about what to do with Paul & Erik. The hiring of Curt also curtailed a somewhat valuable outspoken presence & personality agaist the exchange, mostly on RC.com. The hiring of anyone doesn't guarantee actions or results. Your post is quite oddly written -if this account is still managed by Mr. Shannon who coincidentially is now both the CCA and the AF person for Oak Flat. Is Curt of the AF now writing here on behalf the CCA which is also Curt ????

Concerned Climbers of Arizona wrote:
This work has included educating Federal, State and agency policy makers on the significant problems with the proposed land exchange legislation, reaching out to like-minded organizations and entities, and helping to build out a coalition of those opposed to the proposed, extremely destructive, block cave mine at Oak Flat. Other than the Access Fund, the Concerned Climbers of Arizona and more recently the American Alpine Club have been active in addressing the ongoing concerns of climbers as they relate to the potential loss of Oak Flat and surrounding climbing areas..

Some fluffy corporate crafted words void of details, sorry. I personally invited the AAC to come to the party. I have more trust in them for now and we needed an extra group to offset the damage caused by QCC,Inc.

Concerned Climbers of Arizona wrote:
The QCC has been the principal climbing organization directly negotiating a license and settlement agreement with Resolution Copper to potentially offset the loss of climbing that would be caused by the RCM mine. Each individual climber will have to decide for him or herself which groups best represent their position on Oak Flat." The Concerned Climbers of Arizona (CCA) and the Access Fund have been working tirelessly to oppose the current RCM land exchange legislation and any suggestions to the contrary are both uninformed and counterproductive.

Spin however but some folks are not buying and have already decided morally & ethically for you. QCC,Inc.announced it supports the land exchange and accepted a deal -and you (CCA & AF) are endorsing it and promoting the endorsement. Spinning facts then telling the community to decide is in part a cop out, imho.

Concerned Climbers of Arizona wrote:
In the last few months, the CCA and AF have met personally with Congressman Gosar and also with his staff (both here in Arizona and in Washington D.C.) to correct any assertion that any other group has a monopoly on representing climbers with regard to the RCM land exchange. We have also met recently with Congresswoman Ann Kirkpatrick's staff, Senator John McCain's staff, the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee staff, the Forest Service, the White House CEQ and others to oppose this legislation.

"the CCA and the AF " -Do you mean to say 1 person, Curt went to D.C.?

Respectfully speaking, I am of course sincerely happy to hear there were many timely meetings regarding however, unless followed up with formal coorespondence or other examples it is difficult to accept for face value at this time. You cannot endorse the land exchange with one group while being against it with another and not cause political and community confusion. How can Non-opposition or 'Passive endorsement' while not actively engaging this community benefit saving Oak Flat?

It would be sad to see any group supporting RCM's secret sell-out deals and encouraging a 'divide & conquer' strategy within our community by doing so.


FLAG
By David Arthur Sampson
May 22, 2013
Slap/Tickle

Geir and Kirra sitting in a tree..... !

Seriously, probably a Troll but it must be re-enforced that Kirra does not speak for CCA.

D


FLAG
By manuel rangel
From Tempe, Arizona
May 22, 2013
Trying to redpoint The Ugly 11c; steeper than it looks and the rock is scary in spots but good enough.

Kirra wrote: "IMHO" and I don't believe she has any humility around her. How can one person be so confusing. Everyone gets attacked even if we are on the same side.

I never saw Kirra at any QCC meetings that I attended. She was never a member. She can be a member of CCA, as could Erik and Dief. And I have seen her at CCA meetings and she is as pleasant as anyone else.

I'm sorry but you can't please everyone. Especially a person that already has their mind made up. Some people like to have drama in their life. Finding conspiracys and attacking everyone sounds like a lot of Drama to keep one busy.

Sometimes it is best to enjoy the show.

We do need to keep pushing the fact that not all Arizona rock climbers are supporting the land swap. Keep writing and stressing that we do not support this bad legislation.


FLAG
By Fred AmRhein
May 22, 2013

manuel rangel wrote:
Keep writing and stressing that we do not support this bad legislation.


Kirra,

I personally think Manny sums things up really well here.

As he points out, the real topic is Oak Flat and the legislation that threatens it; legislation that Curt and the Access Fund are actively and assertively working on behalf of all climbers to change to accommodate and maintain the recreational traditions in that area.

Now no longer intertwined with a license deal for private land in the area, in my view the Access Fund is free to very publicly oppose the legislation and to provide resources to make the greater climbing community's voice heard. I know first-hand that they are doing this in very important ways and places; playing the game that has to be played perhaps more quietly than we would all like at times but that's just the way it is at this point (my characterization of the hard-ball politics, not theirs here).

Think of this, with Gosar's bullying tactics in the lead, the legislation now not only pokes Native Americans in the eye (as it has for the many versions in the past), not only drives a mining dump truck of environmental muck over NEPA, potentially trampling evolving environmental protocols in the process, not only leads to the destruction of a federally protected recreational area (Public Land Order 1229),

AND NOW, evidently the legislation totally leaves the Town of Superior in the lurch by eliminating any goodies for them from the legislation (section 9 that contained various lands for the Town of Superior is now gone based on the Markup Hearing a week or so ago as I understand it).

This perhaps as retribution from Gosar for the Town standing up for itself and voicing its concerns and canceling the MOU with RCM and for testifying against the legislation at the recent public House hearing?

I certainly understand your angst at Erik and Paul and much of what you have to say is probably legitimate in terms of how they conducted themselves and played a game of power and control; in short, the politics needed to get what they wanted. At this point though, the QCC, Inc., and all of the associated actors are irrelevent as I see it. They've been bought off, are isolated, and secretive; I feel somewhat confident that decision makers on both sides understand this well and know in whose pocket they reside.



So, right now it's the worsening legislation that threatens our common concern, Oak Flat; it is this that has my attention. Again, I know for certain that the Access Fund and Curt in particular are hard at work on the greater climbing community's behalf; they deserve our support at this time.

Just my view of course.

Fred


FLAG


Follow replies to this topic? Notify me at the top of web site.
1

Email me.
Page 1 of 4.  1  2  3  4   Next>   Last>>