Agenda 21 impact, ecology now, environmental impact, GO's (Government Organizations), NGO'S (non-government organizations), politics

Mitigation Plan for Nevada Solar Farm part 2…

You will notice that I refer in a previous post on mitigation of solar farm in Nevada to the “Dry Lake” solar farm. (Amorgosa) and the mitigation plan refers to other locations all using or referring to Gold Butte as the offsite mitigation location.


This excerpt is taken directly from the “Summary of Mitigation requirements”

Of all the mitigation measures identified in Appendix A, there were only a few
that indicated off-stie mitigation requirements. These are listed here: 1) (VEG-
6) Pre-construction surveys will be conducted to identify the locations of plants
protected by the State of Nevada (NRS 527.60-120); these locations will be
flagged and avoided until BLM authorizes a proper salvage protocol. 2) (VEG-7)
Vegetation salvage and replanting will be implemented and completed as
required by the BLM in accordance with their established guidelines. Adopting
roadway signage that discourages off-road travel will help protect vegetation
along the road margins. 3) (WL-18) Any Desert Tortoise removed from
construction sites shall be placed in an unoccupied burrow similar to the one in
which it was found or in an artificial burrow, following the protocol approved
by the BLM and USFWS and in compliance with NRS 503.597 and NAC 503.093.
(WL-19) Desert Tortoise eggs found within construction sites will be removed
by qualified tortoise biologists, in accordance with BLM and USFWS protocols


The off-site mitigation of the Desert Tortoise demands that the turtle be relocated to abandon burrows and artificial burrows. The relocation cost to the farm will be $3,366,900 or $774.00 per acre for a total of 4350 acres. Do you think this is more than the grazing rights have cost landowners. Just think the politician says I can get more money mitigating the BLM land than allowing a rancher to pay for grazing rights???????

We must not forget the pale-kangaroo rat a multiple year study by a biologist will take place to determine the rats stress from the solar farm.$200,000.00 study.

Payments into a tribal conservation fund for the desert tortoise at $786 dollars per acre (no acreage total identified)  Bases on acreage purchased by  ENN Energy it would be a potential of $7,000,000 plus or minus.

Total fees for disturbance of tortoise habitat within the material site and expansion area would be $2,295,684 ($774/acre X 2,966 acres)
Long term maintenance fee $1450.00 an acre X 6950 acres = $100,775,00.
The following chart shows just one summary of the hard dollars for mitigation plan. It does not show the soft dollars that have been written into the plan:


There is another 12 million and some change on another chart, that I did not include, if you would like to see it click on the link at the top of this post to see the whole mitigation summary. Pay close attention to the other projects that are referenced for mitigation. It is not clear that they a doubling and tripling down on each project, but the way dollars are spent on conservation, I would say they are.

ecology now, environmental impact, GO's (Government Organizations), NGO'S (non-government organizations), politics

How the money works with mitigation….

I found this letter that describes just how this mitigation idea works and I felt it would be a good addition to what I have written so far. I make no claim to this letter only that it describes the money in simple form. What makes this letter credible is the person writing the letter is an Environmental Engineer who is in the business of EPA regulatory and permitting. I found this letter on

SOC912 Facebook Group
———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Marc Harris <[address removed]>
Date: Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 4:03 PM
Subject: RE: ALERT!!!! Feds Plan to Raid Bundy Ranch!
To: Bobby TEA Florentz <[address removed]>

I watched the video by StormClouds Gathering, and the BLM webpage that was hastily scrubbed was quite telling, along with the revelations of the sleazy (and I believe criminal) dealings involving Harry Reid, his son Rory, and the Chinese energy group ENN Energy.

I’ve been seeing a lot of discussions about the ENN purchase of Nevada land in order to do a massive solar energy plant; and the misinformation about it that is put out to hide the accurate facts; in particularly a major funding mechanism for the left.

As further clarification of the FACTS behind all this; here are the important details for all of us to understand:

I am an Environmental Engineer, and deal with land development and EPA regulatory/permitting issues all the time. All development projects in the US, even a “green” energy plant, must perform “OFFSITE MITIGATION”; that is, a replacing and managing on another piece of land of ANY negative environmental impacts a project may create on its primary site. This is also where the issue of the desert turtle is also relevant in the Bundy case.

There has been talk about ENN’s purchase of 9,300 acres near Laughlin, and it not being a direct purchase of any of Bundy’s grazing land, as well as the info released by Reid that the Laughlin land deal supposedly being cancelled. While accurate, there is a deliberate effort to cover up the facts, and distract the public and the media from the truth as it relates directly to the Bundy Ranch and their grazing rights.

The ENN solar plant is still very much in play, and both Reid and his son Rory have indeed completely sold out to ENN, and stand to gain millions from arranging for ENN to control all of the solar energy production in southern Nevada–on multiple sites.

So it doesn’t matter if the Laughlin 9300 acre land deal fell through, ENN is still going to buy desert land somewhere in Nevada, and build several solar production plants. Now, as it relates to the Bundy ranch, the turtles, and offsite mitigation:

Wherever ENN decides to build the solar plant(s), US environmental law requires that they must purchase a multiple ratio of land, usually 3:1, somewhere in the same area for conducting the mitigation. In other words, if ENN buys 10,000 acres to build their plant, and they remove any plants or grasses, or disrupt the habitat of any animal, such as the tortoise, on that land–which of course will happen–they must replace those plants and habitats in not less than 3 times the amount of land, or 30,000 acres, located in another area of the Nevada desert.

Here’s where the Democrats and the environmental left have created a huge money machine at, of course, the expense of developers and us, the American people: The federal government (and often officials in local government) designate public lands (like the Bundy’s grazing lands) as the mitigation sites, and SELL the right to conduct the legally-required mitigation on that land. This is not a sale of the land, just the right to satisfy the mitigation laws. The dollar amounts are based on a per-acre fee, they are arbitrarily set, and are cumulative; that is, so-much per acre for each species being mitigated. One of the reasons the Bundy land was so desperately needed right now–and still is–was because ENN can’t get any permits to build the solar project UNTIL they have secured the off-site mitigation lands. The sale of whatever land ENN ultimately purchases is contingent on obtaining the mitigation site. Is it now becoming clearer?

So, a 9,300 acre development may easily impact several hundred species of plants and animals, each of which has a different mitigation plan and cost. Thus, the fees could easily run into the millions of dollars per year, and run for 5 to 10 years or more. This is why the Laughlin land that appraised for over $28 million was being sold to ENN for $5 million: $5 million for the land, and $23 million for “mitigation”– on the Bundy grazing lands. (Even worse, the same mitigation land and management programs are often sold many times over!…as happened in a mitigation program I funded in CA).

Who gets that money? Only those “approved” third-party environmental management groups, which are created and operated by captive Democratic donors such as “Friends of the Desert Tortoise” and “Friends of the Joshua Tree”, etc. These shady organizations have questionable qualifications for the mitigation work they purport to do, yet receive hundreds of thousands of dollars each year to “manage” the mitigation area. What actually happens? The BLM does the actual “management”, and then sends the monitoring reports and work product to the Democratic donors who claim credit for doing it.

So in summary: Harry Reid and other Democrats like Pelosi, Boxer, et al, make sweetheart deals with land users like the Chinese, use their political clout to secure public lands for the necessary off-site mitigation (even if it means kicking someone else like the Bundys off that land), have the developers pay the mitigation fees to their pet donors, who then turn around and funnel those monies back to the Democrats and leftist environmental groups who then lobby for more strict environmental laws; or as the Democrats refer to them, “funding mechanisms”.

While repairing harm done to the environment during development may sound like a sensible activity, it has been seized upon and exploited by the Democrats for unethically amassing political and economic power, as well as personal enrichment, which was never the original intent of environmental policies.

The Democrats are essentially “selling” public lands and converting those monies into Democratic political campaign war chests and building personal fortunes.

To add insult to this sleazy irony, this game forces all conservative developers to unwittingly pay monies to the Democrats and the green extremist groups. So, even if you don’t agree with the left, you are funding their growth and muscle anyway.

This is the insidious deceit of environmental politics. Its not about the environment, its about money. And the left is controlling the entire game.

Which brings up a very important final issue: there exists absolutely no mechanisms in any of these laws and regulations to prevent or even discourage this kind of abuse, and certainly no oversight or other mechanisms in place to stop such corruption.

Shedding light on all of this could present an enormous opportunity to swing voters back to the right; or at least to the center, in both California, as well as in the US Senate.

Be sure and join us for our all-day Forum on Sunday, April 27 in Los Angeles on the environmental extremists’ assault on California’s farmers and ranchers. We’ll be presenting all of this and more, as well as protective measures everyone can take to protect their property, their rights, and their freedom in the face of such rampant corruption.

Marc Harris

Agenda 21 impact, ecology now, environmental impact, GO's (Government Organizations), NGO'S (non-government organizations), politics

Mitigation plan for solar farm in Nevada…

So we have some interesting revelations in the Nevada Solar Farm and the information that is on the mitigation plan. First what you must know is in the past when there has been an endangered species located on a piece of land, it has been a big controversy. Usually the “save the whatever bunch” come out in droves. Yet on this issue they have been extremely quiet and extremely absent.

The Desert Tortoise is resident on the land that will be used for the solar farm. They are thriving and doing well. BUT, and here comes the BUT, if the tortoise is relocated the land can be used. Yes I said relocated. In the case of the Spotted owl this species was not relocated in order to log. All logging had to stop. The endangered species act required the logging to no longer take place in the area defined by the “scientists” of the ecology bunch.

So we see the bottom line is that the mitigation fee for a 30 year plan will be $3,000,000.00 yes million.

A mitigation action plan is usually put together by NGO’s, GO’s and public input. Did the public have much if any input to this plan? So where is and how did a national conservation area get identified?

The following is taken directly from the Regional Mitigation Strategy for the Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone


Proposed Mitigation Actions and Locations.

The Gold Butte ACEC is preliminarily recommended as the best recipient location for regional mitigation from the Dry Lake SEZ. This ACEC is located 32 miles (51 km) east of the Dry Lake SEZ

The total cost of affecting the protection of this
ACEC for 30 years, the expected term of a solar development right-of-way, is about $9 million. The
Gold Butte ACEC is about 350,000 acres, and the cost is about $25.92 per acre. The total mitigation fee
expected to be collected for the Dry Lake SEZ if full build-out of the 3,591 developable acres in the
SEZ occurs is approximately $6.6million (see Section 2.6).
Enough for now but ask yourself how much money does it take to save a desert tortoise. How many lively hoods are changed forever so that the Kyoto agreement is complete and how much land in the US has to be taken so that other countries can have enough carbon credits? How much money does conservation really require?
In any given situation when land is involved follow the money. Follow the money and you will find an under current of money that seems endless. Look closely at the mitigation plan, study it and you will find an enormous amount of money flowing into some pockets. It is not a drip it is a flood.
Agenda 21 impact, ecosystem, environmental impact, salmon, small community life

The Mudslide revisited…

Here it goes the multiple studies spending taxpayer money in order to find out about what happened. I am sure the survivors of the Steelhead Haven can tell everyone what HAPPENED. It rained hard, the hill was not stable and the hill cut loose.

But now come all the different highly paid scientific that have degrees to tell the people what happened. Of course these people are saying it will be a tough thing to explain it to the public. Really people! Is it that hard to explain that the hill was unstable. The earth was saturated with water. possibly the footing of the hill(support was taken away and there was no support).

It is wonderful that they are studying the site but why on the taxpayer dime? The taxpayer dime is how they KNEW it was going to slide!?

Agenda 21 at work once again. To utilize funds for sustainable development.