The Removal of Palms

In MOAPA Warmsprings, Nevada
& Why we should care!

A Short Introduction to the Issue
An Invitation to Make YOUR voices heard

by Spencer,   & Greg Smith -  September 2011

The threatened Palms of Moapa Valley Nevada

What kind of Palm do we refer to?

Washingtonia filifera
These Palms grow wild in no less than 10 different springs north of Katherine's Landing and all the way north to Bunkerville NV. on the East side of the Mormon Mesa and nearly to the mouth of Arrow Canyon in the upper Moapa Valley on the West of Mormon Mesa.

At least 10 other Palm species may grow well and thrive in the area but we only refer to the thick trunked Fan type having the natural petticoat of dead leaves, pictured above.

Before reading further, please NOTE: This is an INTRODUCTORY page. If you are concerned about footnotes, citations, plant community comparisons, signed, Native American Affidavits collected, Photo evidence and direct researched refutation of the ORIGINAL documents which threaten this Palms legacy, you need to read the FULL 100 page unabridged report in 6 sections Plus the formal Introduction. The intro may be found - HERE - OR... the FULL report may be found - HERE -. Or simply continue reading this page for a synopsis and commentary.

At the bottom of this page you will find all the Links again as well as an e-mail link to make your voice heard. Thank you.

Where did this palm evolve?

It Evolved right HERE in North America
Through fossils we know this palm evolved to it's current form as early as 70 million years ago and by 50 million years ago it's range extended from our current states of Colorado and Oregon to the north as well as southward just beyond the northern edge of Mexico. The epicenter of the ancient evolutionary range of this Palm would be somewhere around the Nevada - Utah border. Indeed, the Fossil record of Fan Palms is abundant throughout Western North America. The Author recently viewed a perfectly preserved Washingtonia leaf fossil with the Full Leaf and Petiole [stem] intact - It measured 6 feet and was recently unearthed in Wyoming.

Today although it remains largely unchanged in appearance - the changes to the climate throughout it's habitat over millions of years and the more recently formed deserts of Western North America have forced it to survive in only a few scattered pockets throughout the Southwest. Some oases of this palm possess thousands of Palms but there are many which possess as few as a dozen or so.

All known natural areas where this palm is found are similar in climate, rainfall and companion riparian species. [including the incidence of native FISHES - even though pupfish and dace and others are all very different things] All such Oases environs fall along the Colorado drainage and all exist along ancient trade routes of these tribes which were used for centuries.

Currently, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife services and the Lake Mead National Recreation area and others are working on "habitat restoration" for native endangered species of fishes - these are the Dace as well as other small fishes. They have used scant information and some brief studies -ALL under substantiated - which over-reach a true understanding of this Palm and insinuates that this palm is a 'nuisance plant introduction' brought by White European settlers when in fact, they can't demonstrate this.

IT is true ONLY if in reference to the palms close relative: "the Mexican Fan Palm or to the "Date palm." But lumping filifera Palms with the others is a huge environmental mistake in Moapa and now threatens to destroy some of the last remaining natural Palm habitat.

These Palms remain wild exclusively in locations with permanent water, dampness or warm springs BUT with adequate protection from flooding. Today they are only found in widely separated colonies yet though they are often separated by great distances, genetics indicate that like alligators and Solpugids and other Biota which have not changed in many millions of years, this Palm too remains stable with no genetic variation among native groves. (It has also been noted by the author that in over 150 years of world-wide plantings of this palm for landscaping, no NEW variants have yet been formally documented. [SPENCER, W. 'Filibusta or Filibuster' - International Palm Society of South Texas - newsletter, 1996] The one identified genetic variant [probably not a truly separate species yet having enough genetic variation to be visually different from filifera] is only naturally found in groves in Northern Mexico - it is called robusta or Mexican Fan palm.

Natural areas where the W. filifera palm is found are often separated by great distances from other palm Oases. This is seen at Castle Creek Arizona [where this palm was actually discovered in mid 1800's] Here the Castle Creek grove is 250 miles from identical wild palm groves to the West in Palm Springs. Moapa follows this very common pattern of wide separation from other groves - although at 130 miles, it is closer to the nearest currently recognized Native grove to the south than Castle Creek is from other groves and remember: Castle Creek is where the plant was originally described and named scientifically.

It is possible that Places like Roger's Springs originally supported Palms as well [pers. comm. Ute Leavitt-1996] [prior to bulldozing of that area earlier in the century] -- This idea is supported by the fact that there are deep bedrock mortars near that warm spring which are identical to those used by Palm Springs Indians for soaking Palm seeds before crushing them. There are other small groves just east of Overton on the bluffs at seeps which are also adjacent to such deep bedrock mortars. Native Americans used such mortars to mix both mesquite beans and palm meal. Such widely separated groves emphasize graphically how this plant is now reduced to 'relict' widely dispersed populations from it's formerly vast range that we know from Fossil records endured for millions of years.

Another fact recently uncovered strongly suggests the Palms are anciently native to the Moapa area. The presence of a particular species of endangered BAT, - Lasiurus xanthinus - or, 'Western Yellow Bat' [ - SYNONYMS: Nycteris ega- Dasypterus ega- Lasiurus ega xanthinus - Vespertilionidae ] has been recently documented in Moapa. This bats habitat is described as strongly associated with Washingtonia filifera. In Moapa it is associated 80% with Washingtonia filifera.

Lasiurus xanthinus - ranges from California to Baja, from southern half of Arizona, to extreme southwestern New Mexico (in a remote finger of Sonoran life zone evidenced by presence of Saguaros!), extreme southern Nevada, and west and central Mexico. Recently recorded in Clark County, Nevada (NatureServe 2001). Primarily in palm tree groves, which likely play a substantial factor in determining the range of this species (J.A.Williams, 2001).

The Bats habitat is not clearly understood but appears to be associated with Washington fan palm trees. In the upper Moapa Valley, southern Nevada, Lasiurus xanthinus is clearly associated with Washingtonia filifera palms - which they TERM: EXOTIC. Of four habitats (riparian marsh, mesquite bosque, Washingtonia filifera groves, and riparian shrubland) investigated acoustically in the study area, Lasiurus xanthinus was detected in Washingtonia filifera palm groves 80% (n = 2,972 minutes of activity) of the time (Williams, 2001). Several observations have been made of L. xanthinus roosting in the dead leaf skirts of palm trees.

Meanwhile they admit:
That the most obvious threat to this species is the loss of roosting habitat. L. xanthinus roost in the dead leaf skirts of palm trees.

[quote] 'Trimming of palm trees for fire management purposes completely removes viable roosting habitat.[unquote]

So Were Humans responsible for palms in Moapa?

Not very likely.
Documentation continues to surface which demonstrates that Palms were already present when New World settlers arrived in Moapa. Furthermore the Cultural practices of Native American groups who traditionally used this Palm for thousands of years, assist in ruling out the likelihood that Native American groups may have brought the palm to Moapa as well.

However for a long time - a local Clark County tradition had suggested that an early Mormon settler: Mendis Cooper planted the first original palms in the Lower Moapa Valley in a straight line along the front of his home in Overton [formerly stringtown] sometime after he arrived from Mesa AZ in 1893. The idea that he may have brought palms with him from Mesa could be due to the fact that Mesa is now a place where many palms grow - So some might understandably reason that he brought the palms with him. Although the method of his planting at perfect intervals indicates he likely planted LIVE palms, not seeds... and Live Palms would have been very difficult to transport in 1893 over those hot bumpy dusty roads.

Further complicating the Cooper story: 4 researchers [AZ academy of Sciences-1986] soundly demonstrated that Palms were virtually unknown in turn of the century Mesa Area until after 1914 - when they were introduced as landscape plants - several years after Cooper had died. This means that Mesa could not be the source for Coopers Palms.

It was probably difficult for arriving settlers to Moapa to logically associate this very Northern location with Palms. Most of us today and especially at the end of the Victorian era are/were accustomed to thinking of Palms as exotic tropical plants. But what many do NOT know is that this Palm is NOT a tropical palm at all. In Fact, this palm completely evolved in the Western Portion of this Continent. It is easily among the OLDEST plants to have evolved in and remain on our continent. It's presence in small scattered groves throughout springs - in the Desert Southwest where Mild Winters occur- is it's LAST remaining naturally occuring habitat - no matter WHAT anyone believes about Moapa. This is simple fact. The plant occurs naturally no where else on Earth!

Evidence has surfaced indicating through old Journal entries, that Large Palms already thrived in Moapa before 1900. This new understanding requires that the Cooper story be altered to allow for the possibility of a previously unrecognized source for his Palms. Dated Photo evidence shows very large Palms around the time of Coopers Death. The Size of the pictured Palms indicate that the Palms must have been present before Coopers arrival - since they are too large to be logically attributed to him chronologically.

Additionally, In 1995 interviews with long-time residents from Moapa in 1995, further have indicated that Mature Palms already existed in the upper Moapa warm springs too early to be associated with New World settlers arrival. The fossil record, ethnobotanical clues, Type of Native American presence and abundant similarities of the Moapa groves compared to other Native Palm groves argues that it is a native species. And there is now even more evidence to back up these statements. There are major flaws in F & W - Dace Counts following fires. They used these counts and sheer conjecture [which will be made obvious below] which they used to blame reductions in Dace populations on the Palms.

There are also accounts from Elders of the Moapa Tribe - wherein statements were made to the effect that 'the Palms have always been here' to living descendants early in the last century. The possibility of Locally Native American Cultural uses for this Palm demonstrates the importance and gravity of considering the antiquity of the groves.

By 1920 the Moapa no longer owned property at the springs where the groves are centered. A finding that Locally indigenous Cultural uses were being made of this Palm as Late as the turn of the last Century would be farfetched indeed. Moapa Culture was severely eroded by the time these statements were made. It is not believable to suggest that entirely new cultural uses for a previously unknown plant were being invented by the Moapa Indians so late. Moapa Indians recall grandparents speaking of the Palms and its uses leaves us with the only logical explanation being that the Palm predated Whites to the area. IF this is true [and how could anyone suggest Moapa grandparents would LIE about their sacred areas and the plants to their grandchildren? ] then it is without doubt an ancient native plant in Moapa. That is the only rational conclusion we can draw from such information.

This very Palm was used traditionally by other Native Americans like The Palm Springs Cahuilla, The Chemehuevi and The To Hono O'odham - all related to the Moapa and All traded with the Moapa and according to Ethnographer Jack Forbes, They intermarried sometimes as well. They used these exact Palms for baskets, food and small shelters. This is exactly as it has been related to me by Moapa elders through written affidavits as long as 15 years ago.

NONE of the involved Agencies referring to this palm as 'NUISANCE' and 'NON NATIVE' have done anything to reconcile the ethnobotanical information with their current understanding of the area. This is unforgivable - since these stories are on the brink of being lost forever.

Although we refer to bureaucracy of the highest order here. MILLIONS of tax dollars go to protect just a single species of pup fish. The money flow into saving little fish is copious. So here, at last, we have funding in Nevada after long drawn out years of hearings and studies, however skewed to condemn peripheral plants like Palms. Now why would anyone want to interrupt all of that?

Perhaps because this sort of habitat is shrinking? Because it is the REAL habitat for Dace, Yellow Bats and other species? Maybe because it has meaning for our heritage? Because it is the truth and that protection of such natural ecosystems is more important than their personal BIAS against this tree?

Fire and Washingtonia filifera at Warm springs...

While it is clear to us that this palm must have evolved WITH the Dace as its habitat, the Fish and Wildlife remove it anyway potentially harming the dace. It certainly harms the Western Yellow Bat. The primary Current fears that the Fish and Wildlife have voiced center around their claims that roots clog streams or on the possibility of another fire like 1994. But their OWN Dace counts indicate removals of Palms may contribute to the decline since Dace numbers rose from 1987 until Aug 1994 after the Fire and after Palms were removed in 1997 Dace numbers declined dramatically. This had NOTHING to do with fire.

Fish and Wildlife appear to talk in circles
Scoppettone an ichthyologist conjectures - The numbers of dace counted in Aug 1994 would likely have been approximately 500 fish higher, if not for a catastrophic fire in June 1994 which nearly extirpated Moapa dace in the entire Refuge spring system .
[ RECOVERY PLAN FOR THE RARE AQUATIC SPECIES OF THE MUDDY RIVER ECOSYSTEM First Revision (Original Approved: February 14, 1983) Prepared by Selena J.. Werdon.]

He bases the claim that the Fish were destroyed on a count immediately following the fire wherein they FAILED to find 500 of the Dace that had been there previously and could only find 15. This count however is HUGELY countered by the REAL fact that numbers are shown to have increased from 1987 to Aug 1994 AFTER the fire. IT is only three years LATER that numbers are PROVABLY [not conjectured] shown to have been reduced by half. Since they can no longer blame FIRE on a conjectural figure that has no factual basis they now must blame something else on a REAL figure from exhaustive counts. So they blame Tilapia. Why weren't the Tilapia killed by the fire?

Following you will see how this stretches the credulity of Scoppettone on this matter...

In the following article which is used in part as the 'scientific' basis for removing the palms from Warm springs, the Fish and Wildlife writes:

On June 26, 1994, a fire originating on an adjacent resort property spread to the palm grove on Moapa Valley NWR.

Although the fire passed quickly,... the intense heat LIKELY caused water temperatures in the spring system to reach levels lethal to fish. ... NBS and USEWS biologists surveyed the refuge spring system on June 28 and July 5-6, 1994, and only 15 Moapa dace were observed (Scoppettone pers. comm.). The refuge was previously inhabited by as many as 500 adult Moapa dace; the number of larval and juvenile Moapa dace lost due to the fire is unknown.
(note above how they use the words: 'likely and 'unknown'?

Notice in the following reference that NO mention is made of the possibility that bulldozing and removing the palms roots may have killed many dace and yet the following DACE counts from reliable sources (not quick conjecture) that numbers were INCREASING up to and even AFTER the fire in counts taken in AUGUST 1994 and ONLY in 1997 did the NUMBERS Suddenly and significantly decline.

In 1997 after REMOVAL of the palms, the numbers declined from the POST FIRE counts of 3,841 individuals to only 1600. More than HALF. A fire did NOT cause this. They removed massive quantities of palms right after the fire. The August numbers strongly suggest that not only did fire NOT hurt the Dace, rather Dace numbers had increased since earlier counts. Three years later (after massive palm removals) the severe drop in numbers by 1997 is NOW attributed to Tilapia...NOT Palm fires. Below I quote:

During 1984-87, the Service's Seattle National Fisheries Research Center, now part of the USGS-Biological Resources Division (BRD), extensively surveyed Moapa dace habitats and estimated the adult Moapa dace population to be between 2,600 and 2,800 individuals (Scoppettone et al. 1992). These areas were re-surveyed by USGS-BRD in August 1994, when approximately 3,841 Moapa dace were recorded (Scoppettone et al. 1996).

Then in 1997 there was a substantial reduction in the number of individuals counted, with less than 1,600 adult Moapa dace observed, which was believed to be a result of the introduction of tilapia (Scoppettone et al. 1998). In January 2001, a total of 934 Moapa dace were recorded by a consortium of agencies, including the Nevada Department of Wildlife, USGS-BRD, SNWA, and the Service. In February 2002 and 2003, annual surveys enumerated approximately 1,085 and 907 individuals, respectively

IS F & W asking us to believe this?

F & W is also asking us to believe the ridiculous and undemonstrated notion that A Fire several Feet ABOVE quickly moving streams of water no less than 3 feet in depth ( with The total combined flow about 3.6 cubic feet per second and more ) was able to HEAT quickly MOVING water housing a MOVING SWIMMING fish by at least 16 degrees F. - (see notes following) meanwhile the swimming fish could not escape and thus were killed.

The Water in Moapa Warm Springs is around 89 degrees f.
Any lay person interested in Physics knows that heating water 16 degrees... especially if it is moving 3 cubic feet per second and especially if the heat is from ABOVE - NOT BELOW - is only believable IF there are large amounts of TIME involved.

The reason this is important is as follows:

There is a Pupfish - Cyprinodon (cyprinodontiformes) at Tecopah Hot springs and they have done temp studies. It has been shown that it can withstand water temps of 105 F. (41 c) although it likes water much the same as the temperatures of Moapa.

(Moapa coriacea, is a cyprinid cyprinoformes which is a different order) - However - it is not unfeasible that Coriacea would be able to withstand 105 degrees for short periods.

Even if the water on top of the moving stream heated 30 to 40 degrees higher it is a certainty that this could not have been the case all the way to the bottom of the springs OR behind the dense insulative masses or soda straw like WET undamaged Palm roots! This Dace is able to swim right? It can swim on the bottom right?

So let me get this straight...
They want us to believe the incredible notion that A FIRE CAUSED CONSTANTLY MOVING WATER to HEAT ALL THE WAY TO THE BOTTOM OF a quickly MOVING STREAM to WELL OVER 16 degrees Fahrenheit? And this caused the Fish to die? Where were the floating 500 dead fish the next day down stream? Where were the dead Tilapia? Why did the counts the next Month actually go UP from previous years?

No mention that perhaps the 500 fish they couldn't find could have been HIDING in the thick bundles of WET palm roots (which never burned or died) Nor do they give a fish millions of years old credit for being able to get out of harms way. Safety was very close. Scoppettone is trying to suggest that he himself SEARCHED - 9 springs covering many many acres and couldn't find 500 fish in a quick observation? We have no reports of DEAD FISH observed. I don't see a single remark anywhere that ANYONE OBSERVED A FLOATING boiled dead Fish. Mosquito fish, Tilapia, Molly, Dace or otherwise! Were the other fish immune?

For whatever reason... [and millions of dollars already slated for protection of the DACE, jobs, studies, and Palm removals MIGHT be a reason!] but Whatever the reason... the idea that the DACE just MIGHT have evolved with this plant in Moapa seems to be a VERY un-nerving possibility to the Moapa Fish and Wildlife - For whatever reason, they have so far refused to address this for more than 15 years, yet continue to refer to this plant as a NUISANCE and NON NATIVE in all literature and they seem to HOPE this debate will just simply go away. The fact that the Washingtonia filifera is habitat to the Western Yellow Bat may be the ONLY reason they don't remove ALL the palms completely. DAMNED be the notion that the DACE may have actually evolved over millions of years with this palm.

Agencies are in a hurry to remove palms from the Moapa Warm springs and LMNRA - They have also tried to use the claim that the Palms roots are harming the Dace by clogging waterways. This seems to be something thrown into the mix for good measure because it sounds good and makes the Palms into bad things. I have never seen such a case - Their own counts of the flows indicate that the water flows just fine...and very quickly. In fact the DACE need small still pools as an important part of their habitat, indicating that any areas partly blocked would be used by them as well.

Complicating their 'FIRE' argument the large fires of 11 years ago permanently removed much flammable dead leaves on large palms around the areas in question which are sensitive according to their own photos. Fears are being overstated. They wasted no time removing two hundred palms from the area. IN the end, If the Fire harmed the Dace [which their own records demonstrate it did NOT], it certainly did NOT harm the Fish and Wildlife's efforts to gain support in finding the excuse they needed to remove them quickly and the support from the public to justify the removal.

Other deliberate propaganda includes the glaring use of the term 'MEXICAN FAN PALMS' on their own pages in reference to these palms. [Don't they have a Botanist working there?] I have never seen a 'Washingtonia robusta' or Mexican Fan palm in the entire upper Warm Springs in question. They deliberately use this term on their pages to further incite the public's view that the palms are NON-native and from somewhere to the SOUTH. Botanist James Cornett has advocated calling the palm the California Fan Palm which equally biases the public. It was discovered botanically in Arizona, not California and the fact that he has been the curator of the Palm Springs Desert Museum and that he is considered an expert makes this point additionally worrisome to me. He has tried to claim fossils are not of W. filifera while admitting being unable to view them as well as a number of other claims which are directly refuted in documents linked here. The Fish and Wildlife deliberately leaves the term Mexican Fan palm on their pages even though they know for a fact there are NO Mexican Fan palms in Moapa. Wikipedia recently showed an article on Washingtonia filifera and the information appeared to be directly from Dr. Cornetts words. The Article claimed that W. filifera [California Fan Palms] are the dominant palm in southern California, when in fact it is NOT. IT is actually not common in Los Angeles or San Diego areas, while the Mexican fan palm is everywhere. Pictures with the article titled California Fan Palms were of Mexican fan palms, NOT W. filifera. This only leads to more confusion. Since the F & W and Lake Mead and Cornett are all involved together on this issue, I am calling it a deliberate misinformation campaign. Anyone remotely interested in Palms can tell the difference between the two species, it doesn't require a botanist. In this case, apparently the Botanists are the least likely people to have their facts straight. What a concept!

In summation: We don't approve of large amounts of Tax dollars allocated for the destruction of these palms - while on the same hand those destroying the palms continue to turn a deaf ear to these easily available alternative sources of information which demonstrates MUCH more powerfully that this palm is exactly where it is supposed to be.

We have shown that the information upon which they currently base their actions is rightfully being called into SERIOUS question and is being challenged. Once this ancient habitat is changed it will be changed forever. We cannot afford to CUT first, and ask questions later. We need to be vocal and let them know we will personally hold them responsible for a very expensive blunder committed in the name of preservation. IF continued, I will make sure those in charge will be named in documents historically connecting their names with the oversight of the demise of this habitat in perpetuity.

Be vocal - let someone know you care.

It is time for locals to voice concern over the irresponsible and Permanent actions of those who have presumed to be the caretakers of our natural areas. It is ultimately our response which helps to shape policy. The agencies will admit privately that they know there is a controversy by phone they have even admitted we could be right. BUT they then finish publicly by stating that their only mandate is to save the Dace and that these Palms are harming the Dace. There is insufficient evidence of this.


Whatever you may have been told, there are NO provable facts which demonstrate that these Palms have harmed the Dace. Additionally, NO less than 100 years of Dace co-habiting with these palms amply testifies to this. The Fish and Palms existed together long before the Fish and Wildlife arrived.

Meanwhile: - During that time, Cattle, Humans, pesticides, Tamarix, Flood control, Electrical generation, Swimming, Chlorine, Suntan lotions, Pets, Irrigation dams and catching Minnows for fishing have ALL harmed the Dace.


These agencies continue to use printed literature stating that the palms are a nuisance INTRODUCED species encroaching on our natural areas. They lump it together with Oleander (from China) Tamarix (from the middle east) Bermuda grass (from the Caribbean) and other non native nuisance species of Palms such as date palms and the palms southern Cousin - the tall thin W. robusta or Mexican fan palm. This is misleading and not backed by factual provable information.

It is true that other palms have become nuisance species. But this plant is in the same location it has survived for untold millions of years it is not a nuisance - Nor is it an introduction. Fish and Wildlife concerns are overstepping their boundaries as stewards and misleading the public with their presumptions which are not based upon hard facts.


Interestingly, In other warm springs areas where this palm is found (in almost identical environs) this palm is not only protected, it is even illegal to pick up the dead palm leaf litter on the ground since that is considered destruction of habitat.


A botanist who worked for years in Palm Springs area (where this palm also grows wild) Published this alternate information as President of the International Palm Society - South Texas chapter in The International Palm Society Newsletter. Dr. Bittle personally requested that it be published, and in phone conversations agreed with the content. Later, the Archaeo-Nevada Society voted by unanimous vote of its members to Endorse and sanction this alternate information.


We are convinced that the documents that Fish and Wildlife and Lake Mead Nat. Recreation Area have used for at least 15 years, to condemn this palm as a nuisance introduction are outdated, deficient and scientifically and factually unsound.

Through Links given below you may see that:
The dates given are incorrect,
the Palm tree Counts and math cited is incorrect,
the sources quoted are insufficient and incomplete and furthermore,
even the theorem cited as 'evidence' is insufficient, misleading and provably incorrect.

ALL of This has been pointed out to the agencies for years and yet today - all resist discussion of it openly and have not revised their policies. Now they are STEPPING UP the campaign to remove this palm where-ever possible.

For those who would LIKE to object, comment or read more information - more information is available On-line at the links below: There you will find the original arguments countering their current official position. There are several versions which are condensed for the lay person or you can go to the full 100 page report with footnotes and bibliography and photos and references.

Please - let your voice be heard.

We feel we should err on the side of caution not ignorance. It doesn't seem very professional or scientific to us that we have been continually dismissed as though we can't possibly have anything of value to say.

IF you would like to make your voice heard, you can tell the Fish and Wildlife offices yourself by writing to the manager at the following e-mail address: [you may cut and paste the letter typed in RED below if you wish.]

To E-Mail Fish and Wildlife to VOICE your opinion to GO ahead or NOT, Click Here

IF YOU OBJECT, You may Cut and Paste the following objection into your e-mail:

I would like to make my voice heard regarding the removal of Palms at Moapa Warm Springs and other locations in Clark county.

I object to the use of Taxpayer dollars to remove Washingtonia filifera Palms from the area of Warm Springs Dace Habitat in the name of public safety or Dace habitat restoration. We request that the research regarding this matter be thoroughly re-visited and re-documented with full attention given to the alternate findings which have been uncovered and long held by long time area residents including the Native American Moapa and others. We insist that a full review of the matter include the alternate information which has so FAR been over-looked or dismissed. We demand a full public accounting and that those removing palms be held responsible for proving their actions are 100% warranted with regards to the impact on the areas history and cultural legacy. We insist that the Fish and WildLife and Nevada Fish and Game and Lake Mead National Recreation area discontinue it's campaign to dismiss these possibilities by deliberately publicly referring to this this palm as a Non-native nuisance and by Listing this Palm as an introduction without verifiable proof, substantial evidence or scientifically sound and unbiased basis for doing so. We insist that agencies involved err on the side of Caution with an eye to history and cultural importance of this area and to seriously consider the possibility that this Palm IS in fact, the natural habitat for the Dace.
Sincerely: - your name -

Links to all the reports follow:

Links to Reports:
Articles about Moapa Palms and Related articles:





Rebuttals to existing Articles re: W. filifera:

Links to Moapa tribal Info: