Dyer Mountain Development Going to Court

Mountain Meadows Conservancy, Sierra Watch, and Sierra Club petitioned Lassen County Superior Court to overturn the county's approval of a massive resort development project proposed for remote Dyer Mountain.

Dyer Mountain Associates proposes 4,000 new homes, three golf courses, and a ski resort on 7,000 acres of forest lands in remote Lassen County.

"The county has an obligation to look before it leaps into approving a development that threatens everything we love about Lassen County," said Steve Robinson of Mountain Meadows Conservancy. "That's not just common sense; it's also the law."

Local residents contend that the project would overrun existing communities; at build out, the new development would dwarf neighboring Westwood and stress county services. The threatened landscape also has important wildlife, watershed, and cultural value. Dyer Mountain is home to bald eagles and an important part of the Feather River watershed. And it's the ancestral home of the local Honey Lake Maidu tribe.

In a sweeping fifteen-page petition to Lassen County Superior Court, the coalition of conservation groups contend that approval of the proposed development was not only irresponsible but also illegal.

A version of the project was initially approved by a voter initiative in 2000. Since then, the scope of the project, as well as the prospects for its actual completion, have changed dramatically.

The initial project proposed about 1,000 houses and a ski resort, with construction guaranteed by fall of this year. It has ballooned into a massive proposal of more than 4,000 resort homes, with no completion date in sight.

In the meantime, the project is mired in deepening legal and financial turmoil. The development proponents, Dyer Mountain Associates, have been subject to at least four lawsuits and two scathing court orders. In May, San Francisco Superior Court assigned a majority stake in DMA to a court appointed receiver, stating that DMA "...is in default of outstanding loans to creditors, payroll, rent and other financial obligations."

In June, Santa Cruz Superior Court ordered a lien placed on DMA, ordering the Lassen County Sheriff to "attach" Dyer Mountain property until payment. And in August DMA was sued by a creditor for defaulting on a $10 million loan.

"Any way your look at it, this project simply does not make sense," contends Peter Van Zant of Sierra Watch. "It ignores every lesson we've learned about planning in the Sierra Nevada – threatening our irreplaceable resources and local communities with irresponsible development."

The lawsuit clearly contends that Lassen County violated the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) when it approved the project last month. CEQA is the foundation of environmental policy in California; it requires state and local decision makers to consider the environmental consequences of their actions. But environmental review of the Dyer Mountain project failed to assess its impacts on issues ranging from local traffic patterns to global climate change.

Conservationists throughout California are taking note. Earlier this month, the 700,000-member Sierra Club signed on to the suit to stop the Dyer Mountain project.

"We recognize that growth will continue in the Sierra Nevada," says Terry Davis of Sierra Club. "Our goal is to encourage responsible growth instead of irresponsible development that consumes our scenic forest habitat."

In the coming months, the Court will assign a judge to the case. There is no time table for resolving the case.

"We're in this for the long haul," says Robinson of Mountain Meadows Conservancy. "Our own communities and surrounding landscapes are at stake."

The Mountain Meadows Conservancy's mission is to conserve and enhance the natural beauty and environmental health of the Mountain Meadows watershed; protect its significant Mountain Maidu burial and cultural sites; and provide recreation and public access for generations to come. For more information, visit www.mtmeadows.org.

Sierra Watch defends the incomparable natural resources and unparalleled quality of life in the Sierra Nevada mountain range. For more information, call (530) 265-2849 or visit www.sierrawatch.org.


nail on the head

Last comment can be signed by Landau Taylor of Pinetown which is a part of Westwood near the planned resort.  Thanks...

Planning

I walk to work, drive a car that gets 45-50 miles per gallon, and live in a small house. I am 40 years ahead of the Kyoto Protocol.  Lassen County has never seen such a planned development proposing "green" development and clean industry. Dyer Mountain will greatly enhance the area and a clean economy. Where was the Sierra Club, Mountain Meadows Conservance, Sierra Watch when the prisons went in? The real environmental impacts in the area take place without planning when every tom, dick, and harry wants to divide thier property.  This has a cumulative impact that the so called environmentalists ignore.  Why attack the first planned green project in the history of Lassen County?  The fact is that these folks (Sierra Watch) have their resorts already and get to enjoy the lifestyle, services, and economic opportunities that come with resort development.  I suppose if they kill the Dyer Mountain project, I will have to move to where they live near Lake Tahoe in order to have the same opportunities that they do.  Steve Robinson of Mountain Meadows Conservancy is not so concerned about the environment as he is about change, competition, and maintaining a forgotten snapshot in time.  The new west mentality is a reflection of people who found a nice small town to live in at some point in the past and then they want to close the door behind them.  It is ok for them to come, but please, no one else.  I would ask that person if that place was different before they came and for that matter, before white man came.  Change will happen.  We need to plan for that change and steer it in a green direction.

Joel Rathje

Nail on the head

Joel couldnt have said it any better.  Its typically the people who don't live in a community that want to throw around lawsuits telling people who live there how to build.   Its a shame that we live in a time when lawsuits by overzealous environmental groups want to dictate to others how they are going to build their own community.  I would agree that the number of homes needs to be scaled back a bit on the final plan but that area is one in dyer need (pun intended) of jobs and a viable economy.  The town of Westwood has been in constant decline since the closure of the mill many years ago and a resort of that type  would only benefit them.   Now consider that the land around Walker Lake (mountain meadow reservoir) is used to graze cattle that dump 3 tons of urine and feces every month into the lake as they graze its shores , I am not sure how there is a viable argument that this would be an environmental tragedy.  If you have ever swam in that lake you probably have had an ear infection. The town of Westwood has an antiquated sewer system that simply flows into dispersion ponds that are frequently flooded over and dumped into the lake which flows to Lake Almanor.  DMA plans on building a state of the art green sewer treatment plant large enough to serve the town.   Another interesting point is that a large portion of  money that is paying lawyers to stop this project came from Northstar where they took a pay off of over twenty million to walk away and let them do as they please without any further lawsuits or distractions.  This was justified by a mentality that even though they allowed Northstar to get away with environmental murder of mass proportions they would be able to use that money to feed lawyers high bills and stop other developments like Dyer.   This is environmental protection at its sleaziest.  Allowing overzealous building in Tahoe where there is allready way too much developments and four or five large ski resorts in order to stop smaller resorts in far less built out areas without any economy whatsoever besides jails in Susanville.  It would be a shame if this project which is clearly committed to building in a responsible green way in a an area with no major resorts and without even a fraction of the building going on in the Tahoe area was stopped with "go away" money taken from a rich resort in Tahoe.

 

 

Post new comment

Anyone can post a new comment without registering. Your comment will go to a moderator before it is posted. We encourage you to sign your comment.

  • Allowed HTML tags: <p> <br> <a> <em> <i> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img>

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.