Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tribal Rights topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Western Shoshone, ranchers and conservation groups urge denial of Ruby Mountain permit, cite treaty and water threats
Summary
Western Shoshone representatives, ranchers and conservation groups urged commissioners to overturn the Planning Commission approval for the Ruby Mountain lodge and lifts, citing treaty rights, lack of tribal consultation, water and wildlife risks, and the project's potential to set an undesirable precedent for open‑space development.
Western Shoshone representatives, ranchers and environmental advocates made a sustained case for rescinding CUP 26-004 at the Elko County Board hearing, citing treaty obligations, cultural resources, groundwater concerns and ecosystem impacts.
Steven McDade and other tribal speakers said the Ruby Valley Treaty of 1863 and subsequent federal review require consultation and careful cultural‑resource inventories. "This under the Ruby Valley Treaty of 1863, this is Western Shoshone land," said Steven McDade, who raised the need for tribal consultation and historic‑preservation review. Appellants and ranchers stressed that the region's aquifers and downstream grazing depend on limited water resources and that artificial snowmaking or large visitor uses could threaten ranch operations and wells.
The Western Shoshone Defense Project's executive director, Fermina Stevens, framed the issue as a broader human‑rights and stewardship question and argued that local land‑use decisions should not ignore unresolved federal‑level treaty concerns. Environmental organizations and local ranchers also pointed to the absence of comprehensive avalanche, water‑use or wildlife connectivity studies in the record and urged the board to either deny the CUP or require substantially expanded mitigation and monitoring.
