[Vision2020] Naylor Farms

[Nils Peterson]

Daniel

Nice letter. Consider having your father re-write it to 300 words (I know
hard) and submitting to DNews editor and/or the Eagle. Its clear we need to
do much more organizing on this topic

I had started drafting a letter to the editor along the lines of jobs/gallon
of water used, dollars into the county/gallon of water used. We have an
(apparently) limited supply of groundwater and we need to decide how best to
use that resource in support of our other goals. Jobs in the county are a
good thing, but compare the Naylor job creation to other industry in the
county, including dryland farming for jobs & $ / gallon of groundwater.  We
need water-efficient jobs


On 7/13/06 7:16 PM, "vision2020-request at moscow.com"
<vision2020-request at moscow.com> wrote:

> Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 19:16:33 -0700
> From: "Daniel Foucachon" <daniel at lyonministries.com>
> Subject: [Vision2020] Naylor Farms
> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Message-ID:
> <b3fa419d0607131916j40001d62m518a29e4831d5d57 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> Here's a letter that my father wrote concerning Naylor Farms. Please
> consider writing the county commissioners, requesting them to reject this
> CUP!  Thanks.
> 
> Naylor Farms: It's about Zoning--the Reasonable Kind
> 
> *Naylor Farms Open-Pit Mine Zoning Request, Moscow, ID*
> **
> It's about zoning--the reasonable kind that protects the welfare of people,
> the kind that would protect you if a nuclear disposal site business was
> about to be established adjacent to your residence or right outside your
> town limits.
> 
> I'm a strong advocate of individual property rights, but there are limits on
> what an individual can do with land that he owns. He is called to give up
> his rights when they infringe on the rights of his neighbor. The justice of
> this principle is easy to see in areas of life other than property rights;
> an example is the issue of smoking in public places. One person's right to
> smoke in the presence of his neighbor takes away the neighbor's right to
> breathe clean air; the smoker needs to defer to the non-smoker. When it
> comes to property, it is not right for one person to do something on land he
> owns that will negatively affect his neighbors. Air space (of which peace
> and quiet are a part), the condition of the soil in an area, view, and water
> are all shared resources. One person can harm his neighbors' use of these
> gifts by what he does with them on his land.
> 
> The land between Moscow and Moscow Mountain is a beautiful, peaceful part of
> the Palouse. The Naylor Farms property lies in this precious strip of land,
> and is actually one-and-a half miles from Moscow itself. It's unthinkable
> that there should be an open pit mine so close to the town and in an area
> where there are residences. The planned mining operations on the Naylor
> property would involve excavations with tractors and other digging vehicles
> that would be the source of LOTS of noise and that would, in the beginning
> phase alone (according to the presentation given at the public meeting on
> June 21), launch 50 round-trips per day of trucks going in and out of the
> site.
> 
> Aesthetically, the effects would be terrible. The gravel mining near the
> entrance of Pullman gives a little idea of the ugliness of such endeavors.
> The residents of Moscow Mountain would look right down into these pits. The
> Naylor Farms people say they want to return the land to farming and
> agriculture when they are finished with their excavations--but they have
> presented a 60-year project that will take away from the town of Moscow and
> from the surrounding residents the beauty and peace of the area for more
> than an entire generation.
> 
> I possibly would not be aware of the issues surrounding the Naylor Farms
> application for a Conditional Use Permit if I were not in the process of
> buying a house on Foothill Road, directly across from the Naylor Farms
> property. I was horrified when I went to the hearing on June 21 and realized
> the magnitude of the operation that is proposed and the obvious enormous
> amount of money that these people have put into making this happen through
> the hiring of legal help and specialists to testify. I am not a no-growth
> person; I am for the growth of business and the creation of jobs. However, I
> believe that it is a matter of common sense to see that this area of the
> Palouse is not an appropriate place for an open-pit mining operation. There
> are many more remote places where the mining would not bother anyone, nor
> take away from the peace and beauty that near-by residents and the town
> itself enjoy. The area could support less invasive businesses --but not
> noisy mining in an area where the slightest noise is carried far by the
> wind--not unsightly gravel excavations in an area that people move to and
> drive to for the priceless visual beauty of the hills and the mountain.
> There obviously has been thought given to protecting this region, because
> restrictions already exist that limit the number of houses that can be built
> on the land (one house per 40 acres. Even if someone disagrees with the
> letter of the restrictions, he can easily see that the proposed mining
> business would certainly violate the spirit of the current thinking about
> the area.
> 
> There are many people who are strongly against the granting of a Conditional
> Use Permit to Naylor Farms on grounds other than the ones I have mentioned.
> They have done extensive research that brings to light serious concerns that
> the proposed mining could create health hazards caused by the breathing of
> the fine particulates sent into the air by the extensive dust that the
> excavations would cause. On the night of the hearing, two physicians spoke
> to me about their health-related concerns. Soil pollution caused by harmful
> elements leeching into the ground is also an issue. Another huge issue is
> the effect on the aquifers of the region in terms of quantity as well as
> quality of the water.
> 
> Conditional Use Permits are granted when the requested activity will have a
> positive effect on the surrounding neighbors and area. This is certainly not
> the case in this instance. In addition to the most serious considerations of
> health issues, of environmental, noise, and aesthetic pollution, and of
> water issues, there is the significant issue of Real Estate values
> plummeting if this mining operation takes place.
> 
> There are three factors that determine the value of real estate; they are 1)
> location, 2) location, and 3) location. The real estate that is located in
> the region of this proposed mining operation would drastically lose its
> value. After attending the Public Hearing on June 21, my wife and I
> considered backing out of the purchase of the house we had chosen on
> Foothill Road, and actually forfeiting our large amount of earnest money. As
> we heard the description of the Naylor Farms proposal, in our minds we heard
> the noise of trucks, back hoes, and tractors during the proposed 4 AM to
> midnight operational hours. What a nightmare this noise would be at any time
> of the day! From Foothill Road, you already hear the traffic from Highway
> 95. How much more would the noise carry from this land that is between 95
> and Foothill Road.
> 
> However, we have decided to go ahead with our plans to buy the house,
> trusting that those who have decision-making power will exhibit plain common
> sense and deny Naylor Farms this Conditional Use Permit. We ask the
> residents of Moscow and the surrounding area to communicate to those who
> have authority in this matter that they need to deny the requested CUP for
> an open pit mine on the Naylor property.