The rule ensured conservation, wildlife, clean water, cultural resources, and Indigenous Knowledge would be fully considered alongside development across more than 250 million acres of public land. Rescinding the rule strips the agency of critical tools needed to manage land health and respond to growing climate and ecological challenges, while also harming local communities built on recreational tourism who depend on healthy landscapes.

The move is part of the administration’s agenda to weaken protections in order to benefit extractive industries. As it has with similar attacks on our environment, the administration pushed the rule forward with a truncated public comment period and ignored more than 130,000 comments submitted on the rule–  98% were in support of the Biden-era protections .

The Sierra Club Rio Grande Chapter urges our state officials to join other states in opposing this latest attack on New Mexicans, our environment and communities who need more safeguards than ever as climate-related disasters increase.

“The Bureau of Land Management has a responsibility to the land, not to corporations and their corrupt allies in the Trump administration,” said Chapter Director Camilla Feibelman. “Our public land supports tourism, recreation and local economies. And, as our wildfire and drought conditions continue to get worse, this short-sighted move would all but guarantee greater risk for the people of New Mexico. We need our officials to act now and protect us.”

Even with recent policy changes, the responsibility to care for public lands has not changed. The Bureau of Land Management continues to have both the authority and obligation to manage lands for long-term health, balance competing uses, and address the very real degradation facing many landscapes today. Land conservation and management has overwhelming public support. The Sierra Club and its allies will continue to resist all smash-and-grab attempts by the Trump administration to loot our public resources.

■ ■ ■

Recently I visited two Albuquerque manufacturing firms: Submaterial, which makes efforts to reuse or recycle their waste byproducts from their interior architectural products, and Soilutions, which takes organic materials that might otherwise end up in a landfill producing methane and turns them into prime topsoil.

Founded in 2006 in Seattle, Submaterial relocated to Albuquerque in 2012 and now employs 32 people. They manufacture architectural acoustical panels using natural and sustainable materials such as wool felt, cork, and wood. Submaterial uses byproducts from their industrial projects in the residential market. A lot of their cork and felt byproducts go to local schools, artists, makers, and become dog toys for Animal Humane’s Doggie Dash and Dawdle event. Biodegradable leftover waste goes to Soilutions, another local firm that produces mulch, compost and topsoil. Submaterial Marketing Director Brigid Harmon says they submitted the specification for their glue to Soilutions to ensure there wouldn’t be an impact on the quality of Soilutions’ compost.

Visiting Soilutions meant driving through the south side of Albuquerque, surrounded by industry. At their office, I was struck by how much of an oasis they are. You can smell the warm dirt and hear the Sandhill cranes at the Rio Grande. I met with co-owner Dawn Dewey and Wendy Blair of Soils and Marketing. Both are passionate about what they do, which is lovely and often missing from the working world. Wendy is a Master Gardener and Dawn grew up in the business.

Soilutions is New Mexico’s largest private compost and soil company and was started by the Brooks family 28 years ago. In 2021, Justin and Dawn Dewey bought Soilutions and are very enthusiastic about the future. The business is also a “carbon sequesterer” and is helping to reduce our carbon load.

Soilutions diverts tons of organic waste from landfills each year, and their intake fees are lower than the dump’s. Their green waste suppliers include businesses (such as Bueno Foods green chile peels), Little Green Bucket, which does home and business compost pickup, grocers, restaurants, hotels, and even Sandia Labs. They use these materials to produce mulch and compost using carefully controlled processes and temperatures. Various piles of in-progress materials have to be turned, mixed and temperature-controlled over about a year. The soils are tested to ensure their quality is high.

The richly colored soils they produce smell as if you are going on a hike through the woods. End-use customers include landscapers, contractors, gardeners, and farmers throughout the state. Soilutions products are carried by other local companies, such as Osuna Nursery, Rehm Nursery, and Los Poblanos Lavender Farm uses their compost.

If you have hiked Petroglyph National Monument North, you know its rugged beauty and cultural significance. New Mexico Gas Company is proposing a $180 million facility for storing and regasifying liquefied natural gas (LNG) on 25 acres close to these petroglyphs, and just two miles from Ventana Ranch and Double Eagle Airport.

The facility poses health and safety risks to surrounding communities and could raise the prices of gas by $3 a month for the next 30 years for ALL gas customers.

LNG is created through an energy-intensive process to cool methane gas to –260° F, changing it from gas to a liquid that is 1/600th its original volume. The proposed facility would store about 12 million gallons of liquid natural gas and regasify 200,000 gallons per day to be distributed back into existing pipelines.

At a recent Public Regulation Commission forum, New Mexicans testified for over three hours, with about 80% of speakers raising concerns about the LNG facility, such as the potential to spark wildfires, risks to first responders, recent explosions at LNG plants in Texas, stranded assets of fossil-fuel infrastructure, and economic hardships already faced by New Mexico Gas customers:

“As a homeowner, I strongly object to LNG in my backyard or being in anyone’s backyard. This is not an energy source we need to be pursuing. We need to be investing in solar and solar energy storage,”
said Madigan Ray, a Rio Rancho resident.

“Why would you site a 12-million-gallon, 10-story LNG facility right next to a large metropolitan area? …There have been no independent environmental impact studies… What’s going to be the impact on property values?”
said Russ Poggensee, Santa Fe Village Neighborhood Association president in Rio Rancho.

State Sen. Harold Pope, along with 13 New Mexico representatives, also wrote a letter to the PRC outlining their concerns:

“The primary physical danger at an LNG plant is a leak forming a low-lying vapor cloud of methane gas that drifts until it hits an ignition source — even simple static electricity — igniting an inferno that cannot be extinguished with water. Depending on wind speed and topography, these vapor clouds can drift for miles. First responders require specialized training and equipment to respond to these leaks, and the risk of an explosive wildfire spreading in the arid Rio Grande Valley threatens the health and safety of our largest population center,”
Sen. Pope’s letter to PRC said.

In February 2021, a severe storm strained the gas supply in Texas, causing technical issues at gas plants, excess demand and unprecedented price spikes as gas-plant owners capitalized on the supply shortage. New Mexico Gas contracts with Keystone storage facility in Texas, and when the company was warned of potential shortages, it incurred over $107 million in fuel costs  procuring alternate supplies on the volatile gas markets.The PRC ordered New Mexico Gas to evaluate  potential measures to prevent future extraordinary price spikes. Hence, the company’s proposal for this LNG plant in Rio Rancho.

However, since 2021, improvements have been made at the Keystone facility to prevent reliability issues. The proposed LNG facility would offer just half the gas supply available through the Keystone contract. Solely relying on the proposed facility could put New Mexicans at greater risk of price volatility in the event of another major storm. The true rationale for the $180 million plant is likely the guaranteed return on equity that New Mexico Gas can charge ratepayers for its capital investments.

Residents are rightly concerned about their health and safety. Now is the time to find alternatives, not invest $180 million in more fossil-fuel methane infrastructure.

The LNG proposal comes before the Public Regulation Commission on January 8.

Submit your concerns by emailing: public.comment@prc.nm.gov.

Niagara Bottling Request Tabled Indefinitely

Los Lunas, NM: Last Thursday, July 28th, the Los Lunas Village Council voted to “table indefinitely” the Niagara Bottling corporation’s request to increase their water draw from the Albuquerque Basin aquifer from 285 acre-feet/year (92+ million gallons/yr) to 700 acre-feet/year (228+ million gallons/yr).

While Valencia Water Watchers is cautiously optimistic about Niagara’s request being indefinitely tabled at this me, we remain watchful. The community should have the opportunity to review the Water Rights report that the Village of Los Lunas is waiting on, and should be actively involved in major decisions such as these that will impact the Albuquerque Basin aquifer for generations to come.

At a time when New Mexico is in a severe drought and the aquifer is not being recharged with surface water, we need elected officials to be good stewards of our most precious and finite resource: Our water. 

This is the third time in five weeks that the Los Lunas Village Council has tabled this agenda item.

On June 23, 2022, the Niagara expansion was item #1 on the Los Lunas Village Council Agenda. Valencia Water Watchers (VWW) rallied community opposition to Niagara’s request and 75 people showed up to express their opposition to the expansion, many holding “NO to Niagara” flyers. The Council chambers were filled, with dozens of community members spilling over into the overflow area outside the chambers. That evening, the Village Council tabled the agenda item to July 14th, because a report from the Village’s “water rights experts” was missing. After the item was tabled, Mayor Griego was not going to permit the community members to make public comments, but local attorney Del Conroy persuaded the Mayor to allow commentary from those in the audience.

On July 14th, the Niagara expansion was on the Village Council agenda, but it was tabled again (to July 28th) because the Water Rights Experts’ report was still missing. Then, on July 28th, the Village Council tabled Niagara’s request “indefinitely.”

Faced with Niagara’s renewed request for more water (to 228 million gallons/year), VWW has collected 2,981 signatures on a petition launched in mid-June, asking the Village of Los Lunas Councilors to Vote NO on Niagara’s request for more water. In addition, VWW is conducting an ongoing online survey targeting the Valencia County community.

Local opposition to Niagara’s requests is overwhelming. From the ongoing survey:

• 9.9% report being Very Dissatisfied with Niagara Bottling’s operation in Los Lunas,
• 76% are Extremely Worried about Niagara’s current use of local water (and another 16.2% are Very Worried), while
• 93.5% Strongly Oppose Niagara’s request for more water (and another 3.9% Oppose the request)

Valencia County residents are not the only ones who oppose Niagara’s taking of community water. In 2016, people in Bloomfield, CN, also protested the secretive water deal that Niagara negotiated with their city leaders and water authority. And in June, 2022, the people of Eau Claire, WI, rallied against Niagara coming into their community.

Valencia Water Watchers formed in January, 2020, when Niagara first gave notice of their intent to request more water from the Village Council. In late January, 2021, after a one-year delay, Niagara submitted a request for more water – to 650 a-f/year. Valencia Water Watchers organized a rally, started a petition that garnered over 3,000 signatures, and got the press to cover the February 9, 2021 rally. Niagara ended up withdrawing their request on February 10th, one day before the scheduled Village Council meeting.

Valencia Water Watchers continues to remain diligent in protecting water for the people of Valencia County, and beyond. 

About Valencia Water Watchers (VWW)
Valencia Water Watchers is a non-political, non- partisan grassroots coalition of local residents advocating for water conservation to ensure a sustainable and equitable future for generations to come. We advocate, promote, and educate about water issues with our community.

References
Bloomfield, Connecticut: foodandwaterwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/fs_1605_niagara-boling-web.pdf
Eau Claire, Wisconsin: www.weau.com/2022/06/14/community-members-rally-against-proposed-eau-claire-water boling-facility/

Ann McCartney
Valencia Water Watchers
(505) 550-3045
Valencia.Water.Watchers@gmail.com

Valencia Water Watchers and supporting groups respond and plan to take action against the Valencia County Commission’s approval of the Natural Resources Overlay Zone Ordinance

Los Lunas, NM – Valencia Water Watchers and supporting groups will take action on a recently approved ordinance that makes it far too easy to drill for oil & gas drilling in Valencia county.

On Thursday, July 14th, on a vote of 3–2, the Valencia County Commission approved the Natural Resources Overlay Zone ordinance (NROZ) with amendments – despite hearing nearly 7 hours of public testimony overwhelmingly opposed to the ordinance, including presentations from several expert witnesses. The public’s comments cited a range of issues that were not being considered in the NROZ, from inadequate state agency oversight of oil & gas operations, negative health and climate impacts of oil & gas development, the potential for contaminating the Albuquerque Basin Aquifer if fracking were to occur in the county, the lack of tribal consultation, the possibility of significantly increased seismic activity if drilling occurs, and much more.

Drafting of the ordinance was heavily influenced by the oil & gas industry. Due to vigorous public pressure, the amended NROZ ordinance now includes stricter criteria for oil & gas operations, incorporated directly from the existing Mineral Resource District (MRD) code – which has been in effect since 2004. However, the amended NROZ ordinance still includes special exceptions for oil & gas drilling, a fact of great concern to the community. The July 14th Public Hearing process was flawed and there are several reports that many attendees were unable to hear or to fully participate in the proceeding.

In May of this year, the first version of the NROZ ordinance was pushed through by the County Commission with no public input (other than from oil magnate Mr. Harvey E. Yates, Jr.). The amendments to the second (now adopted) version of the NROZ ordinance were presented at the end of the seven-hour Public Hearing in July, with no advance copies available to the public.

###

Statements in response:

“Valencia Water Watchers is extremely concerned about this amended Natural Resource Overlay Zone ordinance. If drilling occurs in Valencia County, our community is at risk of earthquakes and contaminated groundwater. Our health and the health of future generations is at risk. We are looking into every option to protect the safety of our community and our water.”
— Valencia Water Watchers

“As a water rights holder and descendant of the Peralta Land Grant, I am personally disappointed in the negligence of commissioners that voted to keep the NROZ. There is a less than twenty-percent success rate for the proposed project but a nearly certain chance that we will affect the geology of the area, causing seismic activity, and we will contaminate these ancestral Tiwa homelands. We cannot allow any of our water to be contaminated by this industry; we must keep fracking out of Valencia County.”
— Alejandría Lyons, EJ Organizer, Southwest Organizing Project

“Because fracking may contaminate the Albuquerque Basin aquifer and the Rio Grande itself, causing an ecological disaster to the riverine Pueblo of Isleta, the Valencia County Commission should have engaged the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs to consult with the Pueblo of Isleta before approving the Natural Resources Overlay Zone. Throughout Valencia County, the existence of Nave American archeological resources that could be destroyed by exploration for oil and gas – and consequent earthquakes – further required such government-to-government consultation. In addition, case law demonstrates that at least one commissioner should have recused himself from the vote, owing to a financial conflict of interest. The hearing itself precluded participation by hearing-impaired county residents, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Thus this decision was egregious!”
— Teresa Smith de Cherif, Arid Land Specialist, 15-year resident of Valencia County, and physician

“Geologists, Water Experts, Doctors, Indigenous Frontline Groups, youth, and local residents all spoke out against the NROZ ordinance and how oil and gas would be a disaster in Valencia County. Will we leave the next generaons a legacy of pollution, contaminating fresh groundwater, and leaving Valencia County tax payers on the hook for clean up? This vote ignores the warnings of scientists and the will of the residents. It is both unethical and unconscionable that commissioners would ram through the NROZ ordinance.”
— Anni Hanna, NM Climate Justice

“This commission will have a lot to answer for in approving the Natural Resources Overlay Zone ordinance. Valencia county residents overwhelmingly spoke against approving the NROZ and it’s unfortunate the majority of the commissioners ignored their constituents. Public officials should be in the role of protecting their communities, not selling them out to an industry that has a proven track record of harming public health and the environment.”
— Miya King-Flaherty, Organizing Representative, Sierra Club Rio Grande Chapter

For more information about this developing NROZ ordinance situation, visit www.ValenciaWaterWatchers.com

About Valencia Water Watchers (VWW): Valencia Water Watchers is a non-political, non-partisan grassroots coalition of local residents advocating for water conservation to ensure a sustainable and equitable future for generations to come. We advocate, promote, and educate about water issues with our community.

As gas prices continue to rise, the cost savings of biking become more apparent.

In fact, some e-bikes can be purchased for the equivalent of about five trips to the gas station to fill up a pickup truck. Trek, an e-bike company, determined that their manufacturing emissions are offset after using one of its products to replace 430 miles of car travel. Cost and emissions savings add up quickly!

If your regular route isn’t easily bikable, don’t assume that biking won’t work at all. A vicious cycle keeps people from biking: There aren’t enough safe streets for people to ride on, so they drive more, inducing demand for more streets, which don’t have safety features because there aren’t enough people riding bikes. Help break the pattern by biking somewhere, anywhere you are comfortable doing so. Ride to complete a nearby errand, or if you don’t have any nearby errands, explore your neighborhood and find a new favorite. Make your patronage by bike noticeable to the business and other customers too!

Of course, not all destinations are within easy range of a relaxed bike ride (about 3 miles, or about 6 miles on an e-bike). Fortunately, Albuquerque has extended the Zero Fares pilot for another year! A bus and a bike are a great way to extend the reach of low-carbon transportation. Each bus has bumper-mounted racks, or interior racks on the ART routes. Internal racks would be nice, of course, but as an alternative, scooters and folding bikes are a great last-mile option and compact enough to carry on board.

Micromobility options such as scooters, folding bikes, and other one-person transporters are also a way to offset some car travel. Try combining errands by parking in a central location and biking to each place on your weekend to-do list.

Low-carbon, active transportation unfortunately isn’t the easy default option it should be. Don’t give up — find safe options that work for you, and keep asking your municipal planners for improvements.

Link – Albuquerque bicycling maps

Featured image from Visit Albuquerque

On May 16, the Albuquerque City Council voted 7-2 (with councilors Grout and Lewis opposed) on a budget that includes $1.5 million to keep city public transit free through June 2023.

Even the councilors who were initially hesitant in their support of the program, called Zero Fares, did not alter it in any of the amendments.

Many groups and passionate individuals, including members of our Rio Grande Chapter Central New Mexico Group, called, emailed and spoke with their Councilors and Mayor Tim Keller to ensure this program stayed in the budget.

The program reduces the use of single-passenger vehicles and makes it easier and less costly for Albuqureque residents to get to school, work and other destinations. The Zero Fares program is about equity (people most impacted getting what they need) and racial justice (addressing historic injustice and disparities based on ethnicity and race) solutions.

NM Voices for Children reports that area nonprofits and other organizations could save as much as $1.6 million over the next three fiscal years that previously went to purchasing bus passes.

These savings may now be reinvested into client services.

Zero Fares has a profound positive impact on the health and wellbeing of people in Albuquerque. Until the pilot program began in January, fares were the greatest barrier for Burqueños to ride the bus. Funding Zero Fares removed this barrier, so all Albuquerque residents have reliable, no-cost transportation connecting them to school, work, recreation, healthcare and food sources.

Featured image from the City of Albuquerque

What’s Happening with #ZeroFares?

In 2021, Albuquerque City Council approved $3M to fund zero-fare transit for everyone, eliminating barriers to transit access for all riders until December 31, 2022. The Zero Fares coalition is organizing our communities to urge the City Council to support funding zero-fare transit through June ‘23.

Why #ZeroFares?

ABQ Ride reports:

74% of riders are low income

73% of riders either don’t have a vehicle or their vehicle isn’t working

Vast majority of riders are people of color

NM Voices for Children reports:

Area nonprofits saved $1.6M over the most recent three fiscal years that previously went to purchasing bus passes.

Transit savings may now be reinvested into client services

Zero Fares are about equity (people most impacted getting what they need) and racial justice (addressing historic injustice and disparities based on ethnicity and race) Continued funding of the Zero Fares pilot project is the right direction for Albuquerque.

Register your support

By the 1990s, it was apparent that Albuquerque and Bernalillo County did not sit over a water supply the size of Lake Michigan as previously thought. The Albuquerque Basin Aquifer was being depleted faster than it was able to recharge. River diversions were necessary to protect and maintain the longevity of the aquifer.

Most of the tap water for roughly 600,000 Bernalillo County residents is supplied by the Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water Utility Authority via a combination of groundwater from the Albuquerque Basin Aquifer and surface water from the San Juan-Chama Drinking Water Project.

Groundwater wells combine with the San Juan-Chama project to produce about 32 billion gallons of drinking water for Water Authority consumers every year.

The Albuquerque Basin Aquifer is finite but can recharge if adequate surface water is available to offset its use. That’s why the current ratio of surface water to groundwater may be of concern (see chart). Diminishing water supplies (due to climate change) in the Upper San Juan River Basin forced the ABCWUA to shut off the use of surface water in early runoff season the last two years.

Last year, 25% surface water and 75% groundwater supplied Bernalillo County, which has consumed a fairly constant overall total since 2012. That ratio is reversed from surface water making up 70% of the demand in 2017 and 2019. The water authority’s 2022 annual operating plan, which will include a projection of diversions for 2022, may not be available until the end of May. It all depends on snowpack and runoff.

Constant vigilance is needed to protect our water supply, and we must question the push to continue unsustainable growth like the proposed Santolina development, which could further deplete our water resources.

For current U.S. Drought Monitor conditions for New Mexico, go to https://www.drought.gov/states/new-mexico

If you live in District 7 or District 9, it’s urgent that you vote! This is a nonpartisan election, but both of the candidates endorsed by the Sierra Club are Democrats running against Republicans.  In the last City runoff election, the Republican vote dropped off 18% from the general election vote, while the Democratic vote dropped off 32%.  That’s the difference between winning and losing these races.  So far, in Rob Grilley’s race, Republicans are outvoting Democrats.  46.7% of the votes have been cast by Republicans, while only 40% have been cast by Democrats.

Conservatives made gains in the November 2 vote.  Progressive Councilor Lan Sena lost to a very conservative Democrat in District 1, and conservative Republican Dan Lewis beat Democratic incumbent Cynthia Borrego in District 5.  It is critical that both Tammy and Rob win their runoff races on the east side if we are to have a chance of passing good legislation in City Council!

Please, please, please: If you live in District 7 or 9, vote in the December 7 runoff election, and vote for Rob Grilley in District 9 or Tammy Fiebelkorn in District 7!

Here is information on voting:

Election day is December 7. As in the regular election, you can vote by absentee ballot, you can vote early, or you can vote on Election Day.

Early voting began November 16 and continues through Saturday, December 4, except that voting locations will be closed on Nov. 25-27. You can vote Monday through Saturday from 10 am to 7 pm. Here is the list of locations where you can vote early.

On Election Day, Tuesday, December 7, you can vote from 7 am to 7 pm at these locations.

You can apply for an absentee ballot through December 2 here. If you return your ballot by mail, fill it out and get it in the return mail with plenty of time to ensure it is received by December 7. The recommendation is to have it in the mail no later than December 2 to be sure it arrives in time. You can also drop your absentee ballot off at any of the early voting locations, at Election Day voting locations, or at secure drop boxes at these locations:

Voting Machine warehouse, 2400 Broadway Blvd SE, Building H
Alvarado Square, 415 Silver SW

You can check the status of your voter registration here.

You can’t register to vote at this point at the County Clerk’s office or online, but same-day registration is available during early voting at the Early Voting sites. In order to take advantage of same-day registration, you will need to bring (1) a New Mexico driver’s license or New Mexico identification card issued through the Motor Vehicle Division;  (2) any document that contains an address in the county together with a photo identification card; or (3) a current valid student photo identification card from a post-secondary educational institution in New Mexico accompanied by a current student fee statement that contains the student’s address in the county. There will not be same-day voter registration on Election Day.