Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Nature
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-11-2015, 06:24 PM
 
Location: Type 0.73 Kardashev
11,110 posts, read 9,823,034 times
Reputation: 40166

Advertisements

Quote:
In a decision that is likely the killing blow for one of southern California's longest-running environmental controversies, a federal judge has reversed a 1999 land swap in Riverside County that would have allowed the Kaiser Eagle Mountain company to build a large landfill adjacent to Joshua Tree National Park.
http://www.kcet.org/news/redefine/revisit/land-use/court-order-final-blow-to-landfill-near-joshua-tree-national-park.html

This is absolutely the right decision - this landfill would have been on land that was formerly part of Joshua Tree National Monument, removed from the monument by Congress in 1950 solely to allow Kaiser Steel to extract iron ore from the desert. By the 1980s, that mine was no longer economically feasible, and was closed. Then, after emerging from bankruptcy, the newly-constituted Kaiser Ventures decided that the land it still controlled would make a great place to dump garbage from the Los Angeles basin.





However, given that the only reason for prying away from the monument that chuck of land was to build the mine, once the mine was defunct there was no longer any reason not to reincorporate that land into the monument - which in 1994 was upgraded to Joshua Tree National Park.

The mine, of course, has left a great scar on the land. However, almost all desert parks - from Joshua Tree National Park to Death Valley Natrional Park, from Mojave National Preserve to Anza-Borrego Desert State Park, and many others - are filled with mining ruins being slowly reclaimed by the desert.

The Colorado and Mojave Deserts (Joshua Tree National Park sits astride the boundary between the two) teem with empty land. There is plenty of room for landfills, if they must be put in the desert, on land that was never part of the Joshua Tree unit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-12-2015, 07:32 AM
 
Location: Duluth, MN
534 posts, read 1,171,389 times
Reputation: 925
Quote:
removed from the monument by Congress in 1950 solely to allow Kaiser Steel to extract iron ore from the desert.
Here's hoping there are no more decisions like this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-12-2015, 08:16 AM
 
Location: NC
9,361 posts, read 14,123,174 times
Reputation: 20920
So where should the landfill go? I agree with this decision (at least on the surface), but the big question remains.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Nature

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:23 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top