ap

Skip to content
PUBLISHED:
Getting your player ready...

Recent disclosures of environmental damage inflicted during training exercises at the U.S. Army’s Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site underscore the importance of carefully evaluating the Army’s plans to add 400,000 acres to its existing 235,000-acre site.

The ultimate outcome of such studies could be of national importance, because the Army talks about a 5 million acre “deficit” in training land in the continental U.S. by 2011 — an area four times as large as the state of Delaware.

The documents released by the Army in response to a federal Freedom of Information Act by foes of the expansion plan paint a mixed picture. The Army’s own evaluations show that high-speed maneuvers by tanks and other heavy vehicles have destroyed hundreds of trees, torn up grass covers, and inflicted other damage. Yet the documents also show the Army trying hard to be a good steward of its land, replanting native grasses and plants after exercises and otherwise cleaning up after itself.

The importance of the environmental issues on the parched eastern plains should weigh heavily on Washington lawmakers as House and Senate negotiators work out differences on the pending military appropriations bill.

Both chambers have passed amendments that would block the Army from spending money on the expansion for one year. The Post favors that moratorium. During that year, the Army is expected to provide answers to questions posed by Colorado Sens. Ken Salazar and Wayne Allard. They include:

  •  Is there a need for expansion, given that a 2005 review by the Base Realignment and Closure Commission found that Fort Carson already has sufficient training land to support its needs?
  •  Is the Piñon Canyon Maneuver Site being used to capacity? If not, how could it be better used?
  •  If the Army does need additional land to train Fort Carson units, can it use other federal lands?
  •  If the Army were to expand the Pinon Canyon site, what economic benefits would it provide to local communities and how could the ranching heritage of Southeastern Colorado be preserved?

    These are important questions — and not just for Colorado. If the Army really is considering adding 5 million acres to its domain, there are huge and varied environmental questions that need to be addressed. The Pinon Canyon review could be an important first step in such an evaluation. Yet the appropriations bill approved by the House even prohibits spending money on an environmental impact statement in relation to the Pinon Canyon site.

    That’s fine with us. An EIS is a detailed and formal process that should follow, not precede, a decision to acquire more land. But the Army should be free to weigh at least general environmental issues.

    An aide to Salazar assured us Thursday the senator wants the language in the final conference report to be flexible enough for the Army to make a thorough study of the issues surrounding Pinon Canyon during the upcoming year. We trust the time will be used fruitfully.

  • RevContent Feed

    More in ap