I can’t remember the title of the book; something I read, probably 30 years ago?
But I remember one particular paragraph, near the end of the book, where a noted Indian Chief was delivering a speech to a gathering of non-Indians on the east coast. Maybe Congress? Or maybe the United Nations? I don’t remember which gathering, but I remember the essence of the Chief’s statement, because it struck an emotional chord in me.
As I recall, reading the Chief’s speech brought me to tears. This happens very rarely, when I’m reading a book — that I am brought to tears — and this is one instance I distinctly remember.
His statement began something like this:
“I am here to speak on behalf of the bear, the deer, the owl, and all of the animals — because they cannot speak on their own behalf…”
Perhaps animals have ways of communicating that we simply don’t understand. Who can say? Perhaps, someday, we will be able to understand them. But we can still hold this truth to be self-evident, that someone should be speaking on their behalf, when governments and developers sit down in the same room together.
For example. The animals were unable to speak on their own behalf, at the Tuesday, January 25, Town Planning Commission meeting… but a small group of local activists were able to.
The discussion that evening involved a ‘Sketch Design Review’ for a large, new hotel complex proposed for a vacant parcel immediately adjacent to the existing Springs Resort.
The staff had suggested that the ‘Final’ version of the hotel complex proposal should include 13 items not included, so far, in the Sketch Design.
Which is not to imply that the Springs Resort ‘Sketch Design’ had been hastily assembled. Not at all. Mr. Dronet and the architect team from Denver-based Tres Birds have been working on a proposed Springs Resort expansion for at least three years. They even brought forward a petition asking the Town government to create an “Urban Renewal Authority” (URA) which — according to a Springs Resort study — would be authorized to grant the Springs Resort up to $79.6 million in tax refunds. (The URA was indeed created by Town Council, but the $79.6 million proposal appears to be off the table, ever since a voter-initiated ballot measure established a requirement that URA tax giveaways of more than $1 million must obtain voter approval.)
We didn’t hear any discussion, on Tuesday, regarding the potential cost of this project, or what types of jobs would be generated, or how it might affect the viability of surrounding businesses. But we did hear a discussion about wildlife, and about an existing wetlands.
Here’s a quote from the Tres Birds website:
Working across the disciplines of architecture, art, engineering, and science, Tres Birds’ transformative projects get to the core of what matters ― beauty, timelessness and consideration of biodiversity. Without a need to proclaim a signature style, Tres Birds is free to create the best outcomes…
…Projects range from mixed-use developments and corporate headquarters to net-zero energy homes, museums and city parks. Each one is designed to bring wellbeing to the people who spend time there and the surrounding ecosystem.
While the above quote doesn’t mention the bear, the deer, or the owl specifically, we find language that hints at a human desire to protect nature. The terms used are, however, much more vague and abstract than “bear” or “owl”, which are actual living beings. Instead, the language focuses on scientific-sounding terms like “biodiversity” and “ecosystem”.
Mr. Dronet pointed out two “conditions” in the Planning staff report, with which he was not entirely happy:
6) Wetland impact assessment prepared by a qualified environmental consultant to include a delineation report, recommended minimum building setbacks and opinion on warm water inflow temperature and volume impacts;
7) An evaluation on measures to reduce window Bird mortality probability;
Mr. Dronet stated that the Springs Resort is already working with a consultant — Durango-based SME Environmental — to create a professional assessment of how a new 84,000 square-foot resort complex might affect the surrounding “biodiversity” and “ecosystem”.
Mr. Dronet:
“SME has already studied this [site] several times in the past, during various growing seasons, and they are working on a delineation and impact study for the wetlands. So, that first part of Number 6 makes complete sense. I think the concern that we have is the last portion of Number 6, and also Number 7.
“What I’m referring to, is where it says, ‘and an opinion on warm water inflow temperature and volume impacts’…
“We’ve talked, numerous times, and held meetings with some members of the Pagosa Wetland Partners. You know, I think we have an aligned interest in trying to protect the wetlands. They’re an amazing amenity and kind of an experience, for not just this community, but also our guest that come. We view them like we view the river, and river frontage. They are extremely valuable.
“And the concern, here, is: I don’t know where this language is being pulled from, in the LUDC [Land Use and Development Code]. I also don’t know if it’s going to be applied to other properties that have similar conditions. And so, to put this as a condition [on the development plans] seems a little out of keeping with what is actually within the Code.
“Our suggestion would be, that we replace this language — after “assessment prepared by a qualified consultant” — with:
…and will work with Town staff and legal counsel, to address the concerns relating to the wetlands and wildlife impacts.
“We have every intention of doing that, but to try to impose something here, that isn’t drawn from the LUDC, and doesn’t have a history, seems like we are maybe making up [new regulations] along the way. And that could create issues.”
Like, for example, legal issues?
I enjoy listening closely to the language people use when making an argument. For example, we might note that Mr. Dronet told us that the Springs Resort has an interest aligned with the interests of the Pagosa Wetland Partners, in trying to protect the wetlands.
He did not say, “an aligned interest in protecting the wetlands.” Rather, he said, “an aligned interest in trying to protect the wetlands.”
Which implies that there are more important considerations, which might prevent the Springs Resort from actually protecting the wetlands. And I think we can hear — listening between the lines — what those more important considerations are. The Resort guest experience.
Sitting in the room directly behind Mr. Dronet and his team, were several members of the Pagosa Wetland Partners, an organization that formed about two years ago, around the time that Mr. Dronet was revealing plans to expand the Springs Resort in the general direction of the Town-owned wetlands.
Presumably, these concerned citizens had come to speak on behalf of the animals?
Bill Hudson began sharing his opinions in the Pagosa Daily Post in 2004 and can’t seem to break the habit. He claims that, in Pagosa Springs, opinions are like pickup trucks: everybody has one.