Army Seeks 331,000 Acres of Mojave; Activists Object

The largest off-road vehicle organization in the nation wants to buy 331,000 acres of public land in the Mojave Desert for its exclusive use, raising the passionate ire of desert protectors and users alike.

If the $40-million acquisition is approved, it would amount to the largest California desert land grab in 50 years.

“It makes me sick that they’re even asking for it,” said Eldon Hughes, chairman of the Sierra Club’s California Desert committee. “They already have enough.”

The organization seeking that desert acreage? None other than the U.S. Army, which wants to expand its National Training Center at Ft. Irwin, northeast of Barstow.

If the White House agrees and Congress approves the acquisition, 310,000 acres of public access land now managed by the federal Bureau of Land Management, along with about 16,000 acres of state land and 5,000 acres of private property, would be captured by the Army so it can conduct more extensive war games.

The property is bisected by California 127, the two-lane highway that leads motorists from Baker to the southern entrance of Death Valley. The harsh land is popular among off-road vehicle enthusiasts, campers, prospectors, dry-lake land sailors, rock hounds and university students and researchers in biology and geology.

Once in Army hands, property beneath mountain slopes would be used for tank maneuvers and overhead helicopter flights by Army units from around the country. There would be no live-fire exercises, but motorists might be startled by the simulations.

*

Ft. Irwin already is host to the Army’s largest training facility. It was established in 1940 for antiaircraft, armored and mechanized training, and designated as the National Training Center in 1981 for large-scale level training. But nearly half of its original 642,000 acres have been whittled away as environmentally sensitive habitats, Air Force live-fire bombing ranges and even NASA’s 33,000-acre Goldstone Deep Space Communications Center and satellite tracking facility.

Because increasingly sophisticated technologies allow tank and helicopter combatants to strike from greater distances and move more swiftly, war game scenarios require more land on which to train, says Brig. Gen. Scott Wallace, commander of Ft. Irwin. Many of the battle strategies employed in Desert Storm, he noted, were developed and practiced at Ft. Irwin.

Although the Army would not conduct maneuvers in some of the region’s most environmentally sensitive sections--including rare desert streams, dry lakes and mountains that are home to bighorn sheep--it would nonetheless eliminate public access to those areas. The Army would not take over nearby Dumont Dunes, an 8,150-acre playground popular among off-road enthusiasts.

But critics--and a draft environmental statement now under public review--say the Army would significantly harm, if not destroy, pristine desert land, including habitat for the threatened desert tortoise.

The Army previously considered expanding to the south, but that area was even richer in desert tortoises, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service suggested that the Army look east instead.

*

“Our official position is, we’ll still lose some tortoises, and some critical habitat won’t look good, but they’re not in a jeopardy situation,” said Fish and Wildlife Service biologist Ray Bransfield, who has studied the area extensively. “We don’t know of any other species out there [that would be so threatened] that would raise a major red flag. . . . But it will still have significant adverse impacts on the biological community.”

The draft environmental report said that native Mojave Desert vegetation and Joshua tree woodlands would be significantly impacted.

The first in a series of public hearings to discuss the environmental impact of the land purchase was conducted last week in Riverside, drawing only about 25 people. But it played like an early skirmish of an impending battle, pitting the Army against various special interest groups claiming a stake of the desert and which, under other circumstances, sometimes battle among themselves.

Some speakers worried that dust would restrict visibility along the bisecting highway--or that motorists might dangerously pull over to watch tanks rumble across the desert and cross beneath the highway through six large underpasses the Army would construct.

Jim Ringo, a hunter, challenged the Army’s need for more space “based on its excellent record in conflicts in this century.”

Daniel Patterson, speaking for the Desert Tortoise Council, said the area would turn into a “sacrifice zone” for the military. And Jeff Wright, a critic of the Army’s plan, said, “The Bureau of Land Management is not a land bank for the Army; it is supposed to be a land steward.”

The bureau is withholding its opinion on the land sale until after the April 4 deadline for written responses to the environmental impact statement.

Among those fearing the loss of the desert land is the California Desert Studies Consortium, representing seven California State University schools. “This is a preferred area for geological and biological study,” said Bill Presch, a Cal State Fullerton biology professor, who directs the consortium. Students and faculty alike backpack overnight into the area to conduct various studies and mapping exercises.

“The general said they’ll let us have access into two areas of prime interest . . . on their schedule,” Presch said. “But it’s a military base and there are always operations going on, so I don’t know what that means.”

*

The environmental report said that 70 miles of utility and gas lines run through the site and that damage to power lines--say, a tank collision with a utility tower--could disrupt electrical service to Southern California. But the Army promised to protect utility towers with huge boulders and other devices and to restrict military traffic from the areas.

Specific environmental concerns aside, desert lovers say they grieve over the proposed loss of public access to the area.

“There’s desert, and then there’s desert, and this area is beautiful,” said Jim Dodson, a Sierra Club vice president. “The dramatic escarpments, the really beautiful interior canyons, the historic and archeological remains--it’s an area we’ve supported for years to be preserved as public wilderness.”

Dodson, who is the budget officer at Edwards Air Force Base and himself an Army veteran, said he questions the need for the expansion. “This technology-driven argument scares the hell out of me,” he said. “Technology never stops evolving and if you carry this logic through, then in the middle of the next century they’ll want all of Southern California.”

Wallace, the base commander, said the Army needs to enhance what is already the most technically advanced training grounds in the world--a place where 7,000 visiting soldiers at a time “battle” 5,000 local soldiers with lasers and other high-tech devices, then retreat for computerized analysis and debriefing.

He said he was surprised there were not more critics at last week’s hearing, but is braced to hear them. Is this a bureaucratic battle the Army can win?

“Reasonable people will make reasonable decisions,” he said. “Our obligation is to make sure the Army’s position is presented as clearly as possible, and that the environmental impact statement is presented as a factual statement, and then let people who are intelligent enough to read it, develop their own opinions.

“We’ve been working on this for more than 10 years. We’re well aware of the concerns and think we’ve adequately addressed them.”