-Gila Region Community News, Calendar, Forum-

Reader Supported Silver City News & SW New Mexico, Grant County NM, Gila NF
* Login   * Register

* FAQ    * Search

All times are UTC - 7 hours

News     Columns     Food: Growing, Fixing     Features     Water     Health     Business     Education     DIY & How-tos     Classifieds     Forum     Home 

Silver City Food Coop

We Are Reader Supported
Your recurring contribution goes to support the Forum, Calendar, and Email List, which exists to further local, sustainable, place-based community.
    Bill Me Now For: $

Bill Me Now For: $

You may also mail a check or cash to
Moses Clark
PO Box 1792
Silver City, N.M. 88062

Get your ad here

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ] 
Author ------ Message
 Author: crow
PostPosted: Wed Oct 11, 2017 1:12 pm 
My Red Arrow points to Silver City, Link to map is below, Written by Shelby Hallmark

The group of activists who have a regular conference call regarding the ongoing Gila National Forest management plan update obtained information only yesterday from GNF staff about Holloman Air Force Base's announced plan to create a new flyover zone for F-16 training missions that basically encompasses all of the Gila National Forest and most of its wilderness areas. The zone barely misses Silver City itself. Something like 10,000 F-16 sorties per year are contemplated, at altitudes as low as 500 feet, complete with the dropping of 15,000 bursts of anti-radar chaff and a similar number of "flares". Holloman says it will help in the rare event the flares cause fires.

Unfortunately, Holloman's notice of this planned expansion went out over a month ago, including public meetings in Carlsbad, T or C, and Las Cruces (there is another expansion area near Carlsbad) held in mid-Sept. Although the biggest new fly zone is right next to Silver City, no public meeting was scheduled or held here, and even State Senator Howie Morales was completely unaware of this plan. Although the official deadline set by Holloman for comment on its plan has passed, the New Mexico Wilderness Alliance believes that they will accept and consider comments received by October 12 -- tomorrow.

If you wish to comment, you have two easy options. One, you can go to the NMWA link below and sign on to the NMWA letter to Holloman demanding a Silver City meeting on this proposal and an extension of the consideration period until that meeting can be held and the comments digested. The linked page allows you to enter your email address, name and address (and organization name, if you are representing a group).

Second, you can deliver a comment directly via the Holloman AFB website at this link: http://www.hollomanafbairspaceeis.com/Default.aspx That link has a button labeled "Proposed Action and Alternatives" which will show you a map of the new flyover zone just above Silver City, and another labeled "submit comments online". The latter page says comments were due Sept. 25, but we're confident they will accept these comments, especially since Silver City was clearly not given an adequate chance to hear about and get involved with this proposal.

If you attended Joe Saenz's talk at the recent Gila River Festival, you know that Gila outfitters like him already have serious problems with military flyovers in the wilderness -- areas that are supposed to be maintained free of technology, support solitude and communing with the land and its wildlife. Land that has spiritual import for Joe as part of the homeland of the Apaches. The proposed new fly zone will have an even more dramatic effect on outfitters and wildlife, and is extremely close to Silver City and its environs as well. It could impact on tourism to the Forest, the economic future of our area, and even property values north and west of Silver, including Cliff/Gila. Please take a look at this, and if you wish to comment, please do so by tomorrow.

Shelby Hallmark

 Author: Raye
PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 7:10 am 
Thank you, Crow and Shelby. I hate to be blind-sided by stuff like this. Since I didn't see the NMWA link, I went to the Holloman site and placed a comment there, hoping to make some difference, and clicked on the box offering to send updated info when available. Wish me luck on that.

 Author: Zenaida
PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 10:16 am 
"Holloman says it will help in the rare event the flares cause fires."

I'm sure I'll find that a great comfort after they burn my house to the ground.

 Author: Harry Browne
PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 10:36 am 
Thanks, Shelby, and thanks to Nathan Newcomer of NMWA, who brought this to my attention earlier. Here's the NMWA link:

And here, in case it's helpful, is the comment I left for Holloman AFB on its website:

Thank you for inviting public comments about the proposed expansion and reconfiguration of airspace available to Holloman AFB for training. I am deeply concerned about Alternative 2, which would appear to involve a dramatic increase in overflights of the Gila Wilderness.

As evidenced by the Comprehensive Plan we recently adopted, I and my fellow Grant County Commissioners believe that outdoor recreational tourism is a key ingredient to this region’s economic viability. We are pursuing plans to enhance our attractiveness to hunters, anglers, bicyclists, and hikers. All of these plans depend heavily on the fact that Silver City is the gateway to the Gila Wilderness and the Continental Divide Trail. These features attract thousands of visitors per year to Grant County who seek both the rugged physical beauty of the area and the spiritual rejuvenation that comes with time spent in the vast, quiet spaces of the wilderness.

Overflights by military jets are extraordinarily detrimental to the quality of the wilderness experience. I have endured several such flights in the past few years as I have hiked with my family in the wilderness and as I have led twice-yearly student backpacking trips associated with Aldo Leopold Charter School. They are far louder, closer, more sudden, and vastly more intrusive than the commercial jet flights one also sees in the Gila. I have no doubt that a large increase in such overflights would negatively affect this County’s efforts at economic diversification and development, as well as degrading our quality of life.

I urge you to reject Alternative 2 as incompatible with the purposes of the 1964 Wilderness Act and as inappropriate in an area economically and culturally dependent on its relationship to the natural world.

 Author: newerResident
PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 10:46 am 
I just left a direct, personal feedback at http://www.hollomanafbairspaceeis.com/Default.aspx by clicking on "SUBMIT COMMENTS ONLINE" & then entering my personal response online. There is also an option to download a form & snail mail your response to them.


 Author: newerResident
PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 10:56 am 
Excellent response to Holloman by Judy Calman, Staff Attorney, New Mexico Wilderness Alliance (NMWA): https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIp ... w/viewform

Harry, really liked your personal response to Holloman.

QUESTION: can I also sign online the NMWA letter to Holloman even though the online form requires me to enter an 'Organization Name'?


 Author: crow
PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 12:14 pm 
Thanks for all the great responses. What I'd like to see is the County Commission, SC Town Council and all the mining district's councils demand Holloman come to Grant County for a community input meeting. I understand that they had one in Las Cruces, 150 + miles away, why wasn't there one here in the area most heavily impacted by such activity? Why isn't the Forest Service here, acting as custodians of our public lands and the Park Service at the Cliff Dwellings, raising hell ; why did the GNF wait until late in the game to say "Oh, by the way, did you know...". Holloman doesn't know to send press releases to me but the GNF and Cliff Dwellings do know, but not a word was uttered.

So Harry, will you take this suggestion for a Holloman meeting to your fellow commissioners ASAP?

 Author: crow
PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 12:24 pm 
Nadine, I can't answer your question about the Wilderness Alliance but if that field must be filled in you could just type "Concerned Citizen"

 Author: GRIP
PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 6:33 pm 

Sign the Petition TODAY!
https://www.change.org/p/holloman-air-f ... wilderness

Military overflights threaten the Gila Wilderness

Holloman Air Force Base is requesting special use airspace for training F-16 pilots. One of the alternatives being considered is to expand its existing airspace into southwestern New Mexico, including the Gila National Forest and Gila and Aldo Leopold Wilderness areas.

The Air Force initiated the scoping process under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and the public comment period ended on September 25. However, no local elected officials, the public, or conservation groups in Grant County were notified of this proposal and no public meeting was scheduled for Silver City, despite the potential for adverse impacts in the Gila Bioregion.

Tell the Air Force to extend the public comment period for scoping comments and to hold a public meeting in Silver City.

Alternative #2 as currently proposed includes up to 10,000 sorties annually over the Gila and southwestern New Mexico. Although the F-16's would observe flight restrictions to not fly below 2000 ft over Wilderness Areas, the proposal is to fly outside of designated Wilderness as low as 500 ft above ground level and up to 18,000 above mean sea level.

Additionally, the proposal requests use of chaff and up to 30,000 flares annually for aircraft defense 2000 feet above ground level. These radar-disrupting systems introduce aluminum, plastic fibers, and magnesium into the environment, with potential impacts to water quality and wildlife.

The economy of Silver City and the surrounding areas is heavily dependent on people visiting the Gila from all over the world. The nation’s first wilderness area, and the largest in the state, attracts visitors who want to experience its quiet places, see its archeological sites, float its rivers, see its wolves, and hunt its elk. All of these activities require a quiet forest and would be disastrously impacted by 10,000 low-elevation military flights and 30,000 flares, which can devastatingly disrupt wildlife in addition to the activities of humans. This is especially troubling given the pervasive risk of forest fires.

Sign the petition TODAY asking the Air Force to extend the public comment period for NEPA scoping for its Special Use Airspace Optimization Project at Holloman AFB and to hold a public meeting in Silver City.[/b]

https://www.change.org/p/holloman-air-f ... wilderness

More information:

Environmental Impact Statement for Special Use Airspace Optimization at Holloman AFB - http://www.hollomanafbairspaceeis.com/Default.aspx

Alternatives - http://hollomanafbairspaceeis.com/Resou ... atives.pdf

 Author: crow
PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 9:51 pm 
Thanks Allyson, when I talked with SC Councilor Bettison earlier today she too had read this article and talked to Sen Morales who had just heard about it but pledged to try to get a Holloman/Community meeting in Silver City; We'll be watching Howie, text him at 575-590-7804 and remind him.

Also text Heinrich and Udall about our displeasure from being kept out of the loop and that we need a meeting here.
Sen. Martin Heinrich: DC office: 202-224-5521- Las Cruces office: 575 523 6561 and
Sen. Tom Udall DC office: 202-224-6621 Las Cruces office: 575 526 5475

Bettion also said she didn't think the Forest Service here nor the Park Service Cliff Dwelling knew but I have a hard time believing that but if it is true we have a bigger problem than I thought.

Letters to the Base Commander my get to him at:
Holloman Base Commander
Holloman AFB Alamogordo, New Mexico, 88330

If and when the pages disappear from Holloman's website try the address above or the company doing the EIS:
Holloman Airspace EIS
501 Butler Farm Rd., Suite H
Hampton, VA 23666

 Author: sh1
PostPosted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 10:08 pm 
Crow -- thanks for your coverage of this important issue. Let's hope Holloman will listen. Shelby

 Author: frances
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 5:39 am 
Just signed the petition. Alert Center for Biological Diversity, someone? I know there must be a follower of the forum who has direct contact. Also, has our newspaper reported on this. We need the general public to have all information available. What a travesty.

 Author: crow
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 10:37 am 
Thanks frances, but this is "our newspaper", one of 3 and the only one that allows interactive input from its 2259 local subscribers. So far this article has had, as of 11 am Friday, 3,203 views and 11 comments. As far as I can tell no other newspaper, Daily Press nor GC Beat, have picked up the story yet.

 Author: Kevin B
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 3:26 pm 
It's unlikely we'd by able to get a full or truthful answer to this, but I am curious to know if there's any alternative areas the AF could use to conduct these exercises. It may be the Gila Wilderness offers unique qualities that make it essential for the AF's needs. By no means am I suggesting that makes it okay, without knowing all of what's involved I don't have enough information to form that opinion, but there are some things shaping up we do know, or should be aware of.

We've all been watching this tit-for-tat squabble going on between Trump and North Korea. Not only should we have no confidence in Trump's ability to avoid war with NK, really from the way it's going I'd sooner place my bet on his intention to achieve exactly that aim. At least I think we must consider the possibility. Trump thinks in terms of business dollars and war is good for business. We can certainly assume got his fingers deep in the industrial/military complex pie.

We might also consider the degree of provocation and damage he's managed to wreak in just the few months he's been in office, with still more than three years of opportunity left to cause even more mischief, and certainly instigate a war. He's voiced multiple threats and insults aimed directly at the equally unstable Kim Jong Un, who absolutely does have access to nuclear armaments and the vehicles to carry them. Moreover though, given the miniaturization potential of those weapons it would be no big trick to smuggle a few in and stash them in rental cars left parked in strategic target areas, no ICBMS needed.

Now consider that Trump has just called for the full revamping of our entire nuclear arsenal. He's not asking for additional numbers of weapons, just updated ones of improved capability. Los Alamos will almost certainly take the lead on that initiative and HAFB will almost certainly serve as their primary test wing to assess and optimize their air borne delivery methods. With that in mind, now at this juncture, Holloman releases notice of their intent to use the Gila in a manner that essentially side steps any opportunity for public opposition. If our government was intending to provoke and conduct a major armed conflict we'd be seeing exactly what we're already seeing out of Washington. If our military was preparing to execute that conflict we'd see them pulling stunts just like what Holloman has done, taking actions clearly at odds with public opinion in a way that circumvents public discourse about it. What we're seeing here may be just part of our nation's larger scale preparation for a very nasty war.

If that's what's in play, and if all this brings us to nuclear conflict, no matter what the outcome or where the majority of the conflict takes place, the results will be devastating, globally devastating. To the extent it might be possible to minimize the devastation that might be possible with a single preemptive strike of the kind that would require considerable preparation, testing, and training in the most accessible and optimal location. Imagine for instance if the military had developed the ability to deliver a guided warhead on Hitler's 1938 Nuremberg rally. An appalling loss of life for sure, but one that would have short circuited all of WWII.

I believe discussion about the morality, civility, humanity, and wisdom of such an act is important to carry on. So too is acknowledging the importance of the Gila and the role it plays in our tourism objectives, recreation and spiritual well being. But perhaps more important, is deciding which side of the outcome we prefer to end up on. If the AF's use of the Gila Wilderness is essential for, to use a phrase, "achieving victory", and if that outcome results in the minimal number of American lives lost, including yours, should that consideration influence our position on the AF's announcement? In that context I still ask if there's any alternative areas the AF could use to conduct these exercises. But if that answer is no, should we then bite our tongue, or continue to object to the peril and potential sacrifice of our own survival?

In any case I think it would be foolish for any of us to conclude that there's no possibility we could end up at war, no possibility the military is preparing for it, and no possibility that that's what we're seeing. And if ever there were a time or issue on which I welcome your thoughts, surely this must be it.

 Author: crow
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 4:35 pm 
Kevin, in case you haven't looked through the links provided, the Gila is alternative 2, alternative 1 is an expansion of the existing practice area east of White Sands.

 Author: Kevin B
PostPosted: Sat Oct 14, 2017 12:16 am 
Thanks John, I got into this thread late, on my way to SoCal, son's getting married, been busy, nope, I didn't fully review the various links. Having gone back to do so I see what you mean, nice to know there's an alternative area also under review.

Still, the AF's underlying purpose is to increase air space so as to considerably ramp up flight training, 10,000 flights/year sounds like a lot. Why would the AF need to do so much flight training at this particular time? Why would they need to practice dropping chaff and flying as low as 500 feet? Why are they training here, over undeveloped land rather than off VAFB out over the Pacific? What's their underlying mission objective should we suppose? It just doesn't seem like they're really focused on the goal of achieving world peace.

 Author: RFS!
PostPosted: Sat Oct 14, 2017 5:35 am 
Ahhh, The Donhole...

Guess we're getting a sneak preview of what comes after "the calm before the storm."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... the-storm/

North Korea? Iran? Venezuela? Mexico?

I remember passing through Tucson in the runup to Shock & Awe in Iraq. The skies over Davis-Monthan looked like a cloud of locusts with military jets taking off and landing almost every minute.

Uh... your tax dollars at work.

Feel more secure?

 Author: msauber
PostPosted: Sat Oct 14, 2017 7:42 am 
This issue is national in scope, dealing with national public lands and the Air Force. Concern should be addressed to Senators Udall and Heinrichs.

 Author: Kevin B
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2017 3:00 pm 
Mike, I surely don't disagree. We can and we should express our concerns and objections, and we should direct our voices at the national level. I don't believe that's all we should do however, and I don't believe we should ignore or dis-link the AF's intentions from their true objectives. I do believe we are a nation preparing for war, and I do believe the AF's proposed increase in land area for training purposes is a part of that preparation. That said, perhaps a separate thread should be opened to further that point but for now this is where the conversation has traveled on this thread.

In that respect, throughout the course of my life I've watched every one of our international conflicts opposed by conscientious objectors. As far as I know that's been the case dating all the way back to the American Revolution. Also as far as I know, not once have those voices of objection succeeded in staving off our pursuit of war. Based on that record plus our maniacal president I'm presuming our objections will fall on deaf ears in this case too. As that pertains to the AF's expansion into the Gila, if that's what the AF sees as being its optimal land area, that's what they're going to end up using. The rest of their conversation amounts to smoke and mirrors so they can claim they operated within the bounds of policy. It's just easier that way, which brings us to what I believe to be the larger issue, our nation's preparation for engagement in war.

On that score I believe we should be thinking about which side of the conflict we want to end up on. If we want to end up on what history comes to call the winning side, we need to commit ourselves to that aim more so now than ever. If doing so means supporting our military's use of the Gila then accepting the consequences of that decision falls squarely within the bounds of the word commitment. If what's shaping up here becomes a nuclear conflict, as it surely has the potential to become, we're confronting all out war of the kind none of us has experienced in our life times short of any few remaining WWII vets who may be speaking out here. That being the case, this is not a time for half measures or expecting to end up with our cake and eating it too. Should we speak out against it? Absolutely. That's the only way we can then say we tried to advance our moral standards, but just happened to end up on the winning side anyway. Truly I don't like it. But war does come down to compromises and hard decisions. Unless my logic and knowledge of history is faulty that's what's in play here. If I'm seeing this wrong for sure straighten me out. I'd love to have my point of view changed on this one.

 Author: Kevin B
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2017 6:25 pm 
8:22 PM ET, Sun October 15, 2017 - Tillerson on North Korea: Diplomacy will continue 'until the first bomb drops'

 Author: BigBird
PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 11:01 am 

I don't think this proposal is related to any imminent war as they've already had to deal with this same situation up in the Greater Taos area! War games are happening all of the time - they're just on our radar screen now because of the local threat of them. In the Taos area the flyovers have been a problem for some and there was a backlash and I'm not sure if the "training" area got minimized of if the whole thing was successfully fought off. I believe the military likes to use mountainous areas because they fight in similar terrain in places such as Afganhistan (the never ending war!).

Maybe we should send them to AZ as that is a hawkish state!

 Author: GRIP
PostPosted: Mon Oct 16, 2017 9:11 pm 
Tuesday 10/17/17 on Earth Matters at 10 am on 89.1FM and streaming live on gmcr.org

We'll be discussing the Holloman Air Force Base proposal to expand its Special Use Airspace for F-16 training, possibly over the Gila National Forest and Gila Wilderness. Earth Matters co-producer Allyson Siwik will be interviewing Karen Sullivan, retired US Fish & Wildlife Service biologist, founder of West Coast Action Alliance, and board member of the Olympic Forest Coalition. Karen has been fighting the Navy's efforts to turn the Olympic Peninsula into an Electronic Warfare Range. Karen will be sharing with us her community's first-hand experience with the negative impacts of noise, chaff and flares that we could expect should Holloman's proposal turn into reality for the Gila Bioregion. Other guests include Earth Matters co-producer Nathan Newcomer of the NM Wilderness Alliance and Larry McDaniel, hunter and Conservation Voters NM board member.

 Author: BigBird
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 10:52 am 
I'm concerned that asking for a meeting is not the same thing as a guarantee that this insane plan will be killed. Just like other issues, such as Genetically Engineering our food, labeling, meetings etc. are a smoke screen. Just as completely banning GMOs from being released into the environment is more saner than allowing them and labeling them (the labeling didn't even get to happen, btw); military exercises of this type in populated and beautiful wilderness areas should be banned outright. We shouldn't be put in the position of always having to fight this stuff.

This needs to be nipped in the bud and I think we need to rely on Senators Heinrich and Udall to do this. So please make sure you call them.

 Author: crow
PostPosted: Fri Oct 20, 2017 10:27 am 
This issue is on the SC Town Council agenda for this Tuesday Oct 24, 6 pm under:
11 New Business
C. Request for Council authorization to forward two letters regarding Holloman AFB's expansion of

As always there is Public Input early in the meeting.

 Author: Harry Browne
PostPosted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 8:14 pm 
Three weeks after Tuesday’s Town Council meeting on this infuriating proposal, there will be a public meeting in Silver City with an Air Force representative. Thanks to active citizens, community groups like NMWA and GRIP, the staffs of Senators Udall and Heinrich, and at least three County Commissioners who expressed opposition, the Air Force agreed to hold a public meeting in Silver on Nov. 14 at 6 pm in the County Admin building. Thanks especially to Commissioner Alicia Edwards for taking the lead on coordinating with our Senators and insisting the meeting be held after normal work hours to allow more public participation!

It should be noted that this meeting will not be part of the scoping process, since the Air Force felt it could not reopen that phase of the EIS process, but all comments received at that meeting will be made part of the official record.

 Author: sh1
PostPosted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:01 pm 
Thanks for that news, Harry, and for keeping watch over this. I take it this will not be a County Commission meeting, just a public meeting for Holloman to present their proposal and get our input? Shelby

 Author: crow
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 1:30 pm 
Public Meeting on Holloman Flights over the Gila
November 14, 6pm
Grant County Administration Building

Legal notice has now been sent by the County but word is that there will be No Public Input.
Word is that at east some of the commissioners will accept written questions from us which may or may not be ask at the meeting.
We need to make sure that our commissioners request (demand?) a real public input meeting when the actual draft EIS is finished,

 Author: timothius
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 6:21 pm 
Thanks John, no public input, but will accept written input. Is the a time line for this written input? This sounds like a lecture to me. I hope that we can get this stopped or at least modified. Not lookin good to me!

If you are not outraged,,,, You are not paying attentiion!

 Author: BigBird
PostPosted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:22 am 
We need to have public input BEFORE the EIS is finished. That is what the scoping period is for is my understanding. We don't need a lecture on something they're already hell bent on doing!. They've already been sneaky about it by not letting Silver City residents know ahead of time.

Our congressional representatives need to help us on this!

 Author: crow
PostPosted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:44 am 
Tuesday evening the ToSC Town Council unanimously passed a resolution to send letters to all of our state and federal representatives and the commander of Holloman Air Force Base with a compelling story about how the bombing exercises over the Gila NF and Aldo Leopold Wilderness will cause harm to this community and included a strong request for public meetings that include public input. We were unformed that these letters will be posted on the Towns' website soon, http://www.townofsilvercity.org/index.php Mayor Ken read some of the letters during the meeting. The meeting can also be watched (streamed) from the Towns' website in a day or so.

 Author: BigBird
PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 12:49 pm 

Romo, Rene (Tom Udall) <Rene_Romo@tomudall.senate.gov>
12:38 PM (54 minutes ago)
to me
Ms. ,,,,,,,,,,,,:
Thank you for your call about your concerns regarding the environmental impact statement (EIS) for Holloman Air Force Base’s Special Use Airspace Optimization Project and the lack of a formal scoping session in Silver City on this project.
Please see the announcement we received Monday concerning a public meeting hosted by the Grant County Commission during which Air Force representatives will present information about this project, answer questions submitted by members of the public to the Commission, and collect written public comments that will be taken into account during the production of a draft EIS.
You can obtain additional information about this project at the Air Force’s project website: www.HollomanAFBAirspaceEIS.com .
The website linked above provides a tab through which you can submit written comments directly, without having to wait for the County Commission meeting on Nov. 14. Air Force officials have assured us that, even though the advertised public comment period has passed, written comments submitted will still be accepted and taken into account as part of the EIS process.
As I mentioned, the decision whether to allow verbal comments from the public at the Nov. 14 meeting is up to the Grant County Commission, and we have already advised a County Commissioner that they should allow public comments. Nevertheless, it is always in your best interest to submit your concerns in writing, because verbal comments are subject to the interpretation of the person recording them and may not accurately reflect the message you want to convey.
I hope this information has been helpful.

Hi everyone

On Nov. 14th at 6:00pm in the commission chambers, Alan Shafer, USAF HQ/A30T, will present information to the Grant County Commission regarding the Holloman Air Force Base (HAFB) Special Use Airspace Optimization Project. This is not a public scoping meeting nor is it a public input meeting. However, the public is invited to attend the meeting and to provide written comments. Written comments should be submitted on the official USAF comment sheet which is attached and will also be available at the county admin building, on the county website, at the meeting or the link at the end of this note. You will be able to give your written comments to Mr. Shafer at the meeting or submit them through the HAFB website. Please include in your written comments a request for the Air Force to hold a public input/scoping meeting in Silver City when the draft EIS is ready for comments, which should be 6-12 months from now. If you have specific questions for Mr. Shafer, you may submit the question to your commissioner and request that the question be asked of Mr. Shafer if he does not address it in his presentation. I realize this may not be the ideal way to go about this but it is our best efforts to get people’s concerns in front of the USAF without causing months of delays in the EIS process. Please pass this on to anyone you know that wants to know more about the possibility of the USAF flying over the Gila National Forest and the Gila Wilderness


Alicia Edwards
Grant County Commissioner, District 3
1400 Highway 180 East
PO Box 898
Silver City, NM. 88062


Rene Romo
Field Representative
Office of U.S. Sen. Tom Udall

201 North Church St., Suite 201B
Las Cruces NM 88001
Phone: (575) 526-5475
Connect with Tom at tomudall.senate.gov
Facebook Twitter emailinsta YouTube Flickr http://tomudall.senate.gov/images/newsl ... Update.gif

 Author: BigBird
PostPosted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 11:52 am 

DEBUNKING THE DEBUNKERS – Aluminum is NOT a natural compound found on the earth

May 24, 2012, by Fred Anthony
by Fred Anthony on Friday, March 9, 2012 at 12:31pm original article

I keep seeing this comment in chemtrail debunking websites often quoted by chemtrail doubters:
”Aluminum is the most abundant metallic element in the earth’s crust, about 8% of the ground is aluminum”


Where does aluminum come from?
Where does fluoride come from?

Aluminum is derived from the ore bauxite. First bauxite is mined from typically shallow deposits, and then it is refined into alumina (alumina hydroxide – Al2O3) using the Bayer process at an alumina refinery. The alumina, a powdery white substance, is then sent to an aluminum smelter where it subjected to electrolysis (Hall/Héroult process) which separates out the aluminum metal.http://aluminium.org.au/FAQRetrieve.aspx?ID=42259


Bauxite is a naturally occurring, heterogeneous material composed primarily of one or more aluminum hydroxide minerals, plus various mixtures of silica, iron oxide, titania, aluminosilicate, and other impurities in minor or trace amounts. The principal aluminum hydroxide minerals found in varying proportions with bauxites are gibbsite and the polymorphs boehmite and diaspore. Bauxites are typically classified according to their intended commercial application: abrasive, cement, chemical, metallurgical, refractory, etc. The bulk of world bauxite production (approximately 85%) is used as feed for the manufacture of alumina via a wet chemical caustic leach method commonly known as the Bayer process. Subsequently, the majority of the resulting alumina produced from this refining process is in turn employed as the feedstock for the production of aluminum metal by the electrolytic reduction of alumina in a molten bath of natural or synthetic cryolite (Na3AlF6), the Hall-Héroult process.

http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/ ... y/bauxite/


The Bayer process is the principal industrial means of refining bauxite to produce alumina (aluminium oxide). Bauxite, the most important ore of aluminium, contains only 30–54% aluminium oxide, (alumina), Al2O3, the rest being a mixture of silica, various iron oxides, and titanium dioxide.[1] The aluminium oxide must be purified before it can be refined to aluminium metal.

In the Bayer process, bauxite is digested by washing with a hot solution of sodium hydroxide, NaOH, at 175 °C. This converts the aluminium oxide in the ore to sodium aluminate, NaAl(OH)4, according to the chemical equation:

Al2O3 + 2 NaOH + 3 H2O → 2 NaAl(OH)4

The other components of bauxite do not dissolve. The solution is clarified by filtering off the solid impurities. The mixture of solid impurities is called red mud, and presents a disposal problem. Next, the alkaline solution is cooled, and aluminium hydroxide precipitates as a white, fluffy solid:

NaAl(OH)4 → Al(OH)3 + NaOH

Then, when heated to 980°C (calcined), the aluminium hydroxide decomposes to aluminium oxide, giving off water vapor in the process:

2 Al(OH)3 → Al2O3 + 3 H2O

A large amount of the aluminium oxide so produced is then subsequently smelted in the Hall–Héroult process in order to produce aluminium.



the Hall–Héroult process
The Hall–Héroult process is the major industrial process for the production of aluminium. It involves dissolving alumina in molten cryolite, and electrolysing the molten salt bath to obtain pure aluminium metal.

Aluminium cannot be produced by the electrolysis of an aluminium salt dissolved in water because of the high reactivity of aluminium with the protons of water and the subsequent formation of hydrogen. As in aqueous solution, protons (H+) are preferentially reduced to atomic hydrogen before Al3+ ions, the reduction of Al3+ is done by electrolysis of a molten aluminium salt. This is a water free medium, and hence, H+ reduction is avoided.

In the Hall–Héroult process alumina, Al2O3, is dissolved in an industrial carbon-lined vat of molten cryolite, Na3AlF6 (sodium hexafluoroaluminate), called a “cell”. Aluminium oxide has a melting point of over 2,000 °C (3,630 °F) while pure cryolite has a melting point of 1,012 °C (1,854 °F). With a small percentage of alumina dissolved in it, cryolite has a melting point of about 1,000 °C (1,830 °F). Some aluminium fluoride, AlF3 is also added into the process to reduce the melting point of the cryolite-alumina mixture.

The molten mixture of cryolite, alumina, aluminium fluoride is then electrolyzed by passing a direct electric current through it. The electrochemical reaction causes liquid aluminium metal to be deposited at the cathode as a precipitate, while the oxygen from the alumina combines with carbon from the anode to produce carbon dioxide, CO2. An electric potential of three to five Volts is needed to drive the reaction, and the rate of production is proportional to the electric current. An industrial-scale smelter typically consumes hundreds of thousands of Amperes for each cell.[1][2]

The oxidation of the carbon anode reduces the required voltage across each cell, increasing the electrical efficiency, at a cost of continually replacing the carbon electrodes with new ones, and also the cost of releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Hundreds of Hall-Heroult cells are usually connected electrically in series, and they are supplied with direct current (DC) from a single set of rectifiers that convert the alternating current (AC) supplied to the factory into direct current. The very high electric current is supplied to the cells through heavy, low electrical resistance metal busbars made of pure aluminium or copper. The cells are electrically heated to reach the operating temperature with this current, and the anode regulator system varies the current passing through the cell by raising or lowering the anodes and changing the cell’s resistance. If needed any cell can be bypassed by shunt busbars.

The liquid aluminium is taken out with the help of a siphon operating with a vacuum, in order to avoid having to use extremely high temperature valves and pumps. The liquid aluminium then may be transferred in batches or via a continuous hot flow line to a location where it is cast into aluminium ingots. The aluminium can either be cast into the form of final cast-aluminium products, or the ingots can be sent elsewhere such as a rolling mill for being pressed into sheets, or the a wire-drawing mill for producing aluminium wires and cables.

While solid cryolite is denser than solid aluminium at room temperature, the liquid aluminium product is denser than the molten cryolite at temperatures around 1,000 °C (1,830 °F), and the aluminium sinks to the bottom of the electrolytic cell, where it is periodically collected.[3] The tops and sides of the cells are covered with layers of solid cryolite which also act as thermal insulation. The unavoidable electric resistance within each cell produces sufficient heat to keep the cryolite-alumina mixture molten.

With the percentage of aluminium dissolved in each cell being depleted by the electrolysis in the molten cryolite, additional alumina is continually dropped into the cells to maintain the required level of alumina. Whenever a solid crust forms across the surface of the molten cryolite-alumina, this crust is broken from time to time to allow the added alumina to fall into the molten cryolite and dissolve there.

The electrolysis process produces exhaust which escapes into the fume hood and is evacuated. The exhaust is primarily CO2 produced from the anode consumption and hydrogen fluoride (HF) from the cryolite and flux. HF is a highly corrosive and toxic gas, even etching glass surfaces. The gases are either treated or vented into the atmosphere; the former involving neutralization of the HF to its sodium salt, sodium fluoride. The particulates are also captured and reused using electrostatic or bag filters. The remaining CO2 is usually vented into the atmosphere.

The very large electric current passing through the electrolytic cells generates a powerful magnetic field, and this can stir the molten aluminium with magneto-hydrodynamic forces in properly-designed cells. The stirring of the molten aluminium in each cell typically increases its performance, but the purity of the aluminium is reduced, since it gets mixed with small amounts of cryolite and aluminium fluoride. If the cells are designed for no stirring, they can be operated with static pools of molten aluminium so that the impurities either rise to the top of the metallic aluminium, or else sink to the bottom, leaving high-purity aluminium in the middle.

Aluminium smelters are usually sited where inexpensive hydroelectric power is available. For some European smelters, the electric power produced by hydroelectric plants in countries such as Norway, Switzerland, and Austria is transmitted by high-voltage power lines to such places as Denmark, Sweden, Germany, and Italy to be used by aluminium and magnesium factories. Since aluminium factories require nearly-uniform supplies of electric current, they make the most of nearly-constant supplies of electric power, and these are also available close to many hydroelectric power plants. To give an example of such use of hydroelectric power, the three main regions for aluminium production in North America have always been in the Tennessee River Valley of the Southeastern United States, the Columbia River Valley of Washington and Oregon, and the St. Lawrence River Valley of southeastern Canada and the Northeastern United States.

Many decades ago, before the existence of the Tennessee Valley Authority, aluminium companies such as Alcoa even built their own hydroelectric dams and powerhouses in the Appalachian Mountains of North Carolina and Tennessee.


The lethal dose for a 70 kg (154 lb) human is estimated at 5–10 g.[6] Sodium fluoride is classed as toxic by both inhalation (of dusts or aerosols) and ingestion.[12] In high enough doses, it has been shown to affect the heart and circulatory system.
Sodium fluoride IT TOXIc to humans






http://familysurvivalhealth.wordpress.c ... our-teeth/

Flouride in your toothpaste causes what is known as Fluorapatite. Fluoride salts are used to enhance the strength of teeth by the formation of fluorapatite, a naturally occurring component of tooth enamel (not natural) but the crystalization of flouride


Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 7 hours

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:

Gila River Festival Ad

Silver City & Southwestern New Mexico Monthly Community Calendar

Click To Create A New Calendar Event

Community Events
Week of May 24, 2019


24th Annual SIlvr City Blues Festival

News     Columns     Food: Growing, Fixing     Features     Water     Health     Business     Education     DIY & How-tos     Classifieds     Forum     Home 
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group