OCR Text |
Show el Mada (Ceeme La aS (continued) survey his holdings. At last report the Hendricks home has just enough space for John and his wife to feel cozy---about 27,000 square feet. (See photo on page 18). It was reported to be the largest residential construction project in America a few years ago. Eel Clearly, Cloudrock was selling itself to the wealthy, but more specifically to high-end visitors and future home buyers who also considered themselves environmentalists. Liss was quick to point out the easy access to national parks and wilderness areas, some adjacent to Cloudrock itself. There was a time when the environmental community might have ben appalled by such an extravagant scheme. After all, the conservation movement is rooted in the word “conserve.” How could such an opulent, consumptive and arrogant plan even dream of winning the acceptance of environmentalists? In the Amenities Economy, anything is possible. As the Cloudrock development became better known and was required to submit itself to governmental and public scrutiny, the Glen Canyon Group of the Sierra Club weighed in on the issue. On behalf of the group, Jean Binyon addressed its concerns to M:chael Liss in a February 2001 letter. Binyon made it clear that, “It is our consensus that the best thing for Johnson’s is no development at all.” Having said that, however, it was also obvious the Sierra Club had no intention of putting up a fight. “We realize you are making efforts to ensure that Cloudrock ts standards al and beyond Grand County’s....We realize you are well on your way to completing the preliminary plat, and incorporating changes becomes more difficult with the passage of time. Never the less, we hope you will be receptive to our concerns...” What kind of concerns did the Sierra Club have and what were their requests? Besides setting structures farther back from the rim of the canyon, Binyon made the following demands: “coloring roads to match the surrounding soil...parking lots colored to match the surrounding soil...utilizing medium to darker earth-tones, and non-reflective materials on all structures...outdoor lighting should be kept to a minimum...” They were literally cosmetic in nature. Binyon also encouraged restrictions on OHVs...”Next to cows, (this is) the most damaging thing currently happening on the mesa. Please be explicit in not permitting their use on the mesa.” Apparently, keeping out cows and OHVs was an acceptable trade-off for a massive multi-million dollar “wilderness” resort lodge and scores of condos and homes built on $600,000 lots. Liss’s reply could not have been more accommodating, “I would be happy to discuss our project with you and members of your Chapter,” and added enthusiastically, “I am a member of the Sierra Club and greatly respect the work being done around the country.” ’ No other environmental group in Utah even chose to express an opinion. How could any environmental group be so passive or silent in the face of a project that was so contrary to the basic principles of conservation? constructed with the most energy-efficient, recyclable i fnatural resources, would be clearly and other scenic areas and would play havoc with the driving property values and taxes even higher. To recall These homes, whether they were technology available, would be visible from Arches National Park social fabric of nearby Moab by Thomas Power’s warning again: “.ongoing economic growth may well threaten the ecological integrity of wildlands as i por lation, h uman ttl t_ and commercial activities and their accompanying growing ww pollutants isolate and disrupt natural areas. How can environmentalists sit idly by? Because they can’t oppose the very economic strategy for the Rural West that they have embraced philosophically for years. And especially because they fear the risk of biting the hands (and dollars) that feed them. In the battle for wilderness in Utah, fundraising plays a greater role with each successive session of the U.S. Congress, as wilderness advocates push for permanent legislation. Money is everything. Or as Chris Peterson, Executive Director of the Glen Canyon Institute puts it, “Tt is felt that without playing the game on their opponents’ terms, they don't stand a chance. So is it better to win or lose the fight? Those with experience in the field of environmental advocacy deem it necessary to play ‘dirty’ and enlist any-and all means necessary to accomplish their goals, and believe that walking the alternative ‘high road’ is an exercise in futility and ultimately leads to failure.” How much “dirt” are environmentalists willing to endure?Try this on for size... The John Hendricks Castle is perhaps the most grandiose acquisition and construction in a frenzy of western land buying by America's wealthy and elite in the last decade. It is becoming a familiar sight—mansions and castles perched on the brink of some mesa rim or canyon, or mountain side, staring down at the little people. An acquaintance of mine, the leader of an environmental group in Western Colorado, and I were lamenting the mega-homes and mansions being built everywhere in Colorado, from the Front Range to Glade Park and eventually, Gateway came to mind... “What about this John Hendricks guy and his castle at Gateway,” I said. “He’s got to be the most extravagant of them all.” There was a long silence on the other end of the line. ’ “Uh...J think Hendricks is trying to do the right thing,” he said softly. I paused briefly... “So how much money does he give your organization?” Another brief pause. “A lot.” People like John Hendricks have found an age-old way of gaining respectability and even adoration; they simply buyit...they buy everyone. His contributions to ‘worthy causes’ are significant. He has kept a few artists eating well and contractors love him. Maybe the Second Feudal Society is our only option, where the peasants and serfs wait and hope for their wealthy masters to sustain them. And hope that their masters are the benevolent type. Environmental organizations have certainly benefitted from large contributions. Consider the financial status of the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA). For years, it has portrayed itself as the underdog, one more struggling environmental group, trying to survive against the powerful ranching, mining and ATV lobbies in Washington, D.C. ‘Calkin offered low should be in it environmentalists wisely, wages (to SUWA staff) because no environmentalist for the money...he offers as rationale both that have an obligation to spend their members' money and that small salaries ensure that only the passionate keep their jobs." Zephyr story about former SUWA ED Brant Calkin by Scott Groene. 1999 Ina 1999 story for the Zephyr, current SUWA executive director Scott Groene wrote in praise of his former boss, environmental legend, Brant Calkin: “Brant offered his staff low pay but lots of autonomy to ‘do good and fight evil. The benefit of lousy pay is you get to experiment.’ Calkin offered low wages because no environmentalist should be in it for the money, and ‘pay doesn't affect the quality of the staff.” He offers as rationale both that environmentalists have an obligation to spend their members' money wisely, and that small salaries ensure that only the passionate keep their jobs. He adds that while experience is useful, it doesn't automatically result in better or smarter actions: ‘smart young people with fresh ideas are just as important as those who have been around the track a couple of times.’” Groene continued, “Brant never asked his staff do anything he wasn't already doing. For example, he and Susan Tixier earned a total annual salary of $20,000 between the two of them as Director and Associate Director, about a third of what the current SUWA director makes now (in 1999). Brant never stopped working, whether it was leading the Utah Wilderness Coalition out of shaky consensus efforts, hustling money, or fixing a fleet a beater SUWA cars (he was renown for resurrecting aging office equipment and trucks). And when it seemed everything was done, he'd start cleaning the office. ” But in 2005, SUWA is awash in money. Its 2003 “Form 990" report, available to anyone who requests it because of SUWA’s non-profit status, shows the organization had net assets or fund balances worth $3,557,886 at the end of 2003. That figure is up significantly from the previous year, when net assets were $2,829,018...an increase of almost three-quarters of a million dollars in just one year. Salaries and benefits exceeded $600,000 annually. Its executive director earned an income of $72,000 plus benefits in 2003 (though according to new Executive Director Groene, that salary has been reduced to just under $50,000). SUWA even has a Charles Schwab Fund, worth $831,632, although the fund lost almost $100,000 during what turned out to be a bad year on the stock market. While many non-profits " invest their revenues in such ventures, it probably rarely occurs to most contributors that their membership dues might end up on Wall Street. SUWA’s counterpoint in the wilderness world, especially when it comes to road and trail access on public lands in the west, is the Blue Ribbon Coalition, headquartered in Pocatello, Idaho. The BRC has been a voracious advocate of ATVs and other forms of motorized recreation and most grass roots environmentalists would assume that the powerful motorized recreation lobby gives them the edge in fundraising. Yet a comparison of the two organizations’ Form 990s shows otherwise. SUWA outspent BRC by more than $1,500,000 in 2003. And while BRC operated at a loss that year, SUWA increased its net assets by BLACKHAT HUMANE SOCIETY Serving the Navajo Nation PO Box 2716 Window Rock, AZ 86515 928.337.2828 email: ambrwlfS51@yahoo.com Visit the Navajo Nation, enjoy the scenery & take home a pet with you BLACKHAT HUMANE SOCIETY takes in dogs, cats (even sheep & horses) and fosters Environmental benefactor John Hendricks! 27,000 square foot home near Gateway, Colorado. John Hendricks is the CEO of cable television's Discovery Channel. He says he has passionately loved the West since he was a kid when his father told him that the most beautiful place on earth was a seldom-visited redrock paradise called Gateway, Colorado. A few decades later, John Hendricks bought it---lock, stock, and barrel. John Hendricks is rich. His attorneys made offers to local landowners that were hard to resist and by 2002, he had accumulated more than 6000 acres of property, some of which he intends to put into conservation easements. Then, Hendricks decided to build himself a home where he could them in loving homes until they are ready to be adopted. All animals are in good health, current on vaccinations and are spayed/neutered....100% of donations go to the animals---spay/neuter surgery, vaccinations, food... Check out our website: www.rezdog.petfinder.org PAGEI8 |