New Mexico Off-Highway Access Issues (1 Viewer)

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

Good News!

Case 1:12-cv-01272-WJ-LFG Document 35 Filed 06/14/13 Page 1 of 7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
THE NEW MEXICO OFF-HIGHWAY
VEHICLE ALLIANCE, a New Mexico
nonprofit corporation,

Petitioner,
v.

Civil Action No.1:12-cv-01272 WJ-LFG

UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE,
an agency of the United States
Department of Agriculture, THOMAS
TIDWELL, in his official capacity as
Chief of the United States Forest Service,
MARIA T. GARCIA, in her official
capacity as Santa Fe National Forest
Supervisor, GILBERT ZEPEDA, in his
official capacity as Southwestern Region
Deputy Regional Forester, UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE, and TOM VILSACK,
in his official capacity as Secretary of the
United States Department of Agriculture,
Respondents.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION TO INTERVENE
THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon a Motion to Intervene filed by the
Center for Biological Diversity, WildEarth Guardians, and the Sierra Club (collectively, “the Center”), on February 11, 2013 (Doc. 19). Having reviewed the parties‟ briefs and applicable law, I find that the motion is not well-taken and shall be denied.

(insert six pages of discussion here)

Allowing the Center to intervene would “be an invitation to any member of the public who holds strong views about the outcome to seek to intervene.” Id. The Court is confident that the Forest Service will provide the Court with ample information and legal authority to support its position in this matter, and finds that additional briefing would not be helpful and perhaps may even distract from the issues at the center of this litigation. The motion is denied under Rule 24(b) as well.

THEREFORE,
IT IS ORDERED that the Center’s Motion to Intervene (Doc. 19) is hereby DENIED for reasons described in this Memorandum Opinion and Order.
 
Last edited:
Ummm, and why is that good? I would like to see those three organizations spend a lot of their money in legal fees on the matter. Though, I guess their distraction would also cost at our end.
 
though I agree they should have to spend their $ too, i do like the basic statement that their input is basically invalid and distracting.:D
 
pappy said:
Ummm, and why is that good? I would like to see those three organizations spend a lot of their money in legal fees on the matter. Though, I guess their distraction would also cost at our end.
Click to expand...

I interpret your statement as saying that you don't believe spending lots of money on good lawyers makes any difference in the courtroom. If that were the case there wouldn't be a market for good lawyers, to put it in basic economic terms. Either that or you think the result is a foregone conclusion and no matter what, except for those who want to backpack in, (a very small minority) all the driving and camping in the SFNF will be done on less than one percent of the land - literally.
 
Sadly, my bet is that if NMOHVA wins, all it means is a delay while the FS reworks to address the failures found by the court. As much as I'd love to see the decision thrown in the trash and focused on resource problems instead of the public, there isn't much of a history for starting over from scratch.

SteveLCetc said:
I interpret your statement as saying that you don't believe spending lots of money on good lawyers makes any difference in the courtroom. If that were the case there wouldn't be a market for good lawyers, to put it in basic economic terms. Either that or you think the result is a foregone conclusion and no matter what, except for those who want to backpack in, (a very small minority) all the driving and camping in the SFNF will be done on less than one percent of the land - literally.
Click to expand...
 
It wasn't...

http://campaign.r20.constantcontact...5b546&ch=19a69850-dfb1-11e2-81e9-d4ae5275b546

Court of Appeals Grants Intervener Status to Greens

In our last update, we told you our lawsuit was on hold until the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on the environmentalist's request to intervene. The good news is that the lawsuit is once again moving forward on a schedule. The Court of Appeals granted the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) et al the requested "intervener" status. This was not unexpected. Denying intervener status to them could have hurt us in future cases where we are the ones seeking to intervene. However, having Big Green involved in our lawsuit won't make it any cheaper for u as the case moves through the court process.

The Forest Service (and now also the CBD) have until March 14th to file their response to the initial brief NMOHVA filed in June. We then have until April 25th to file our final response. After that, the judge will review the information and either schedule oral arguments or make a decision from the briefs.

So...the net result is that the lawsuit was delayed about six months. This delay hasn't changed our position. We still can not afford to lose interest, take our eyes off the ball, or lose momentum. We need to continue to spread the word that NMOHVA is aggressively fighting to protect our motorized access and we are continuing to raise money for the Access Defense Fund. Winning isn't cheap!

And again, THANK YOU!!!! Without the support of all of you, none of this would be possible.

The Center for Biological Diversity has been very bad this year.
 
NMOHVA 10 Year Anniversary!

http://campaign.r20.constantcontact...5b546&ch=19a69850-dfb1-11e2-81e9-d4ae5275b546

NMOHVA will hold its Annual Meeting on Saturday, March 15th at REDW LLC, 7425 Jefferson NE in Albuquerque from 9:00 am - 12:00 noon. The REDW building is located at the corner of Jefferson and Masthead about half way between Osuna and Paseo del Norte. Park in the parking lot on the north side of the building and we will have greeters to point the way to the 1st floor conference room.
 
Chokecherry Canyon Comment Period

http://campaign.r20.constantcontact...5b546&ch=19a69850-dfb1-11e2-81e9-d4ae5275b546

SHORT Public Comment Period for Glade Run Recreation Area (Chokecherry Canyon) Travel Management Plan

The Farmington Field Office of the BLM has released the draft Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Glade Run Recreation Area Recreation and Transportation Management Plan for public comment. This a revised draft of the plan that was first released in March of last year.

The official notification of the 15-day public comment period was yesterday and public comments are due by midnight of February 20th. published in the Albuquerque Journal today (Nov 22). This is an unusually short comment period but they have already rejected NMOHVA's request for an extended public comment period.

Written comments must be submitted via mail to:

BLM Farmington Field Office,
GRRA T&TMP
Attention: Janelle Alleman
6251 College Blvd, Suite A, Farmington, NM 87402.

Comments may also be mailed electronically to:

BLM_NM_FFO_comments@blm.gov

Please put "GRRA R&TMP" in the subject line of the email.

NMOHVA has done a very brief preliminary review of the three alternatives. Here is a very quick overview:

The Good:

The BLM now agrees that they have no authority to try and manage "user conflict". This is hugely important as this was one of the primary drivers for the creation of the Recreational Management Zones (RMZ's). This is a DIRECT RESULT of comments submitted on the first draft plan. Congratulations!

The preferred alternative and Alternative B both contain at least 3,300 acres of "open" play area and official designation for dozens of the Cliffhanger's historic 4WD trails.

The Bad:

The preferred Alternative A includes closing 127.5 miles of existing routes.

The preferred alternative (Alternative 1) and Alternative 3 still contain over six thousand of acres of "RMZ 1" which is focused on providing non-motorized recreation.

The RMZ 1 (Non-motorized) zone runs right down the center of the area with RMZ 2 (Motorized on designated routes) zones on both sides. This appears to be an open invitation for continued agitation by the non-motorized users in the future.

Alternative C does not include an "open" area and recognizes very few of the Cliffhangers 4WD trails or the existing ATV and motorcycle trails.

We will defer to the local users of the Farmington area to provide feedback on the suitability and completeness of the trails designations for 4WD, ATV/UTV, and motorcycle single track trails.

Submit your comments now! Again, time is of the essence as the comments are due by February 20th!
 
This took me 30 seconds...

It's a petition: Please do not move on a proposed 500,000 acre National Monument in Dona Ana County New Mexico

http://campaign.r20.constantcontact...5b546&ch=dbac5a80-dfb0-11e2-81e9-d4ae5275b546

Direct Link:
http://www.change.org/petitions/opposition-of-national-monument-in-dona-ana-county

"We, the undersigned, are opposed to the proposed 500,000 acre National Monument, because it would negatively impact: (a) border security and other law enforcement missions, (b) the maintenance of existing flood control dams and the construction of new dams, (c) 41 ranches, including some which have been in the same family for over 100 years, and (d) economic development.

We join the following organizations in opposing the proposed National Monument: Greater Las Chamber of Commerce, Las Cruces Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, Dona Ana County Sheriff, Dona Ana County Farm Bureau, Dona Ana Soil and Water Conservation District, Village of Hatch, Elephant Butte Irrigation District, Western Heritage Alliance, Mesilla Valley Sportsmans Alliance, National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers, Southwestern Border Sheriffs Coalition, Southwestern Couty Commission Alliance, Council of Border Conservation Districts and many other local and state organizations too numerous to list here.

We urge you not to exercise your authority under the Antiquities Act to designate 22 percent of Dona Ana County as National Monument based on a stage hearing and instead take adequate time to engage the local public for accurate and complete information that can lead us to a land use designation that benefits all the citizens of Dona Ana County."
 
Oh yeah, most importantly - SPREAD THE WORD! This is Chile Challenge land!
 
See below for the whole story.

NM ​Senators Heinrich and Udall are claiming this huge land grab has the overwhelming support of the public. Sign the petition and let the President know that this is simply not true.

Take two minutes to sign the petition against the the 500,000 acre Udall/Heinrich land grab in Dona Ana County.

Here is the link to the petition:

http://www.change.org/petitions/opposition-of-national-monument-in-dona-ana-county



CHILE CHALLENGE

Unfortunately the Las Cruces Four-Wheel Drive Club and other affected groups and individuals have struggled for the past few years to maintain access to the trails and to prevent a wilderness designation to a large portion of the county. The latest push is to have President Obama designate almost 500,000 acres as a national monument to bypass Congress unwillingness to designate the area as wilderness. The proposed monument includes all the areas that has been used for Chili Challenge northwest of the river and the Dona Ana mountains in addition to some portion of Organ mountains and a substantial area southwest of the fairgrounds.

I ask you to get this information to their your members and encourage them to attend the event in support of Chili Challenge and the Las Cruces Four Wheel Drive club.

As a side note. New Mexico Four-Wheel Drive Club is planning on hosting the SWFWDC summer quarterly meeting July 10th-12th at Chalk Creek Campground, Nathrop Colorado. This is between Salida and Buena Vista. Information was in the last driveline or a link to the website can be found at swfwda.org or nm4w.org.

These events will be held regardless of the outcome of the upcoming teleconference.

Jeanne Meier
SWFWDA Member
membership@swfwda.org or jmeier44@swfwda.org
505-281-3704


http://gallery.mailchimp.com/5895c7...ail&utm_term=0_8f23f9c249-5b40aaa161-67774673


Press Release

Chile Challenge Leaving Las Cruces
Las Cruces Four Wheel Drive Club Relocates Chile Challenge
Las Cruces NM, March 14, 2014:

The Las Cruces Four Wheel Drive Club announces that the nationally acclaimed 4x4 rally, the Chile Challenge, will relocate from Las Cruces to Sierra County. This year the event will be held October 15 – 18, The event will be staged from Caballo Lake State Park Riverside Campground on the banks of the Rio Grande.

Although the Chile Challenge has been a major annual event in Las Cruces for the past 23 years, due to restrictions imposed by the Bureau of Land Management on the use of the traditional Chile Challenge trails, the 24th Annual Chile Challenge will move. When the LCFWDC began the application process to the BLM for a permit for the 2014 event, BLM made it known that three of the four extreme trails, which are the most popular and are considered the heart of the Chile Challenge, would not be permitted. Without these trails, the character of the event would be undermined. Therefore the club determined that it is time to move the event, again.

This will leave the economy of Las Cruces without the annual benefit of the $12+ million economic impact generated by the event. This impact value was determined by a study done in 2009.

This will be the third move of the Chile Challenge occasioned by encroaching wilderness and monument designations. The event originally was run on trails in the Robledo Mountains and acquired a national reputation for challenging terrain and beautiful scenery. In 1997, the BLM declared the area a Wilderness Study Area and denied access for the Chile Challenge. At that time the BLM suggested that the event could be staged in an area that became famous as the Chile Challenge Canyons.

Unfortunately, in 2009, that area became designated as a 5,280 acre Prehistoric Trackways National Monument, the first National Monument established under the Barack Obama administration.

The BLM website states that “viewing trackways is limited; as they are discovered ... the trackways are
removed and transported to the New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science” – in Albuquerque.
So even if somebody wanted to view the trackways at the National Park, it would be impossible! Neverthe-
less, under pressure from the two current US senators for New Mexico to promote wilderness and
the monument established in 2009 by President Obama, the BLM is restricting 4x4 access to the area.

Therefore, the LCFWDC is working hard to identify new trails in Sierra County. These trails are
rated from easy to super extreme! We know you will not want to miss out on this once-in-a-lifetime
opportunity to enjoy new, relatively unknown and little-run trails! We are working to set this event up so
that all 4x4 enthusiasts can enjoy these new trails.

We have had a lot of vendor excitement surrounding the new venue, and hope to have both major,
national manufacturers represented as well as more local shops.

Thank you,
David Smith
President, Las Cruces Four Wheel Drive Club

Dan Pettit
Chile Challenge Committee Chairman
 
Last edited:
Just signed the petition. It is very easy to do. Everyone on this forum needs to take the 3 minutes out of your day and sign it.
 
I signed it.
 
I signed it.
 
done..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
ISO Inspector Recommendation: Ruidoso, New Mexico
Replies
3
Views
745
banjo1981
banjo1981
Mauser
Fenix ammo free shipping to New Mexico
Replies
2
Views
1K
pappy
pappy
krazykat69
New Mexico Expedition Rigs and Coffee 7-29-2023 9 am
Replies
5
Views
763
Dumpolina
Dumpolina
marcfj60
Finally a new 4R
Replies
14
Views
752
peneumbra2
P

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom