It is unfortunate the controversy over expansion of the Army’s Piñon Canyon training site has escalated so greatly that, in our opinion, reasoned compromise is now threatened.
In the latest chapter of this years-long saga, the chairman of the U.S. House Oversight Committee has called upon the Army to explain why it needs 100,000 additional acres.
Expansion opponents, some of whom have ranched in the area for generations, absolutely have a right to know what the Army’s long-term plans are for the region.
But we don’t think it’s reasonable that they conscript members of Congress to endlessly block a moderately sized and well-justified expansion of the training site until every critic is satisfied.
That will never happen.
Unfortunately, the Army has played into the hands of those who oppose all expansion of the 238,000-acre training site by not being forthright about its intentions. Initially proposed as an expansion of 418,000 acres, the Army scaled back to less than a quarter of that without explanation.
The Army should be able to offer residents assurances that this isn’t merely the first phase of a grander plan to eventually take control of hundreds of thousands of acres, inexorably changing the character of southeastern Colorado.
The lack of detailed information available was underscored by two Government Accountability Office reports that said the Army failed to justify its plans.
The Army ought to thoroughly answer the reasonable questions posed by Rep. Edolphus Towns, the House oversight chairman.
The Army needs to explain how and when it will do a complete environmental impact assessment, the type of training it will do on the land and whether there are alternatives to expansion of the training site.
The situation in southeast Colorado has become so inflamed that when published reports indicated the Army was contemplating leasing about 70,000 acres of land from a willing party, the potential deal was roundly criticized before it could be even officially announced.
We think leasing could be a good solution, so long as care is taken to not adversely impact ranching and farming operations in the area.
It would take eminent domain, the government’s purchase of land from unwilling sellers, out of the equation. That was one of the elements of the proposed Piñon expansion that initially caused so much controversy, and understandably so.
From the outset, the Army’s plans have been met with rumors and suspicion. We believe there is potential in a solution such as leasing from willing parties, but only after the Army has been forthright with residents whose way of life is on the line.
