The final frontier

The Cold War’s over, but the armed forces continue their expansion at home.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Off Highway 50 (dubbed “the loneliest highway in America”) near the center of Nevada, a sign announces: “Caution — Low — Flying Aircraft.” Drive past it, and as if you had broken an invisible line, a series of sonic booms shatters the dreamy serenity. Test flights.

“Just the other day I was out in front of my store and a plane came down to just above the level of the power lines. I could actually see the pilot’s helmet,” says Chris Trease, owner of Smoky Joe’s truck stop, in tiny Smoky Valley. Trease says he moved away from west central Nevada to escape the bursts of sound coming from military jets overhead, but they followed him north. “What the hell’ s going on?” he asks.

What’s going on is a nearly 1 million-acre land and airspace grab by the armed forces. Ironically, the military’s increased homesteading has been sparked by the end of the Cold War and the declining need for an American military presence abroad. The Department of Defense has reduced its military force by a third, down to 1.4 million. Still, it plans to add to its 25 million acres in order to test its latest weaponry and to train pilots, including whole fighter wings returning home from closed bases in Europe and the Philippines. The additions include:

  • 200,000 acres to the Fallon (Nev.) Naval Air Station for enlarged bombing ranges;

  • 331,000 acres to the Fort Irwin (Calif.) National Training Center for ground maneuvers;

  • 25,600 acres to the White Sands (N.M.) Missile Range for missile drop zones;

  • 14,200 acres to the Yuma (Ariz. and Calif.) Training Range Complex, for an expanded bombing range;

  • 12,000 acres to the Mountain Home (Idaho) Training Range for an expanded bombing range.
  • Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell recommended the expansion to President Clinton in 1993, and the administration has yet to challenge any of the military’s expansions.

    This, even though the Defense Department’s stewardship of its Western lands insp ires little confidence. Its nuclear testing in Nevada in the 1950s created a legacy of cancer in the region. The military also has been blamed for bombing Indian lands, causing huge waterfowl and fish die-offs from military waste, and spilling thousands of gallons of highly toxic jet fuel.

    The Defense Department counters that its military operation areas — much of which are off-limits to the public — support nature preservation. (The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, for example, credits the Air Force for protecting endangered peregrine falcons within its military air corridors). But there also have been recent, high-profile accidents, including a 1991 fire ignited by a jet’s flare that scorched 32,000 acres in Alaska’s Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve. Similarly, a flare apparently caused a 1993 blaze that charred 20,000 acres in southern Nevada.

    The armed forces insist the land and airspace they’ve earmarked are needed. “The rationale behind expansion at the National Training Center [in Fort Irwin, Calif.] is to provide enough space so that units can properly move and train; the current space at NTC is not sufficient,” explains Army Staff Sgt. Gerrold Johnson. Daniel Smith of the watchdog organization Center for Defense Information questions the Army’s logic. “The basic argument for taking more land is the increased range of modern weapons systems,” he says. “It’s true, but that raises the question: Do you always have to fire at maximum range during training?”

    Meanwhile, the military’s planned Western takeover has created an unusual coalition of those opposed to what they call the “militarization of the American West”: ranchers and sagebrush rebels in Nevada fighting for states’ rights, environmentalists in California, subsistence hunters in Alaska, outdoorsmen in Idaho, and Native Americans in New Mexico.

    “The routes they’re proposing go right over one of our primary subsistence hunting areas,” says Air Force veteran Bill Miller, of Dot Lake, Alaska. The Elmendorf Air Force Base is expanding its flight zone nearby.

    “We’ve had our houses shook,” says Miller. “I’ve called operations [at Elmendorf]. They say ‘Our fighters are high.’ I say ‘Bull, I can count the rivets.’ “

    WE'LL BE BLUNT

    It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

    The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

    Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

    The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

    Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

    And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

    Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

    If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

    payment methods

    WE'LL BE BLUNT

    It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

    The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

    Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

    The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

    Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

    And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

    Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

    If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

    payment methods

    We Recommend

    Latest

    Sign up for our free newsletter

    Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

    Get our award-winning magazine

    Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

    Subscribe

    Support our journalism

    Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

    Donate