PMC Land Use (1 Viewer)

[petescoffee]

Calico Clean up a Huge Success-

There are good land use items happening as well. Great Job by The Trail Crew/Los Angeles County Toyota Land Cruiser Association and Toyota Territory Off Road Association Southern California for coordinating the clean up.
Dave


Calico Cleanup a Huge Success
By Mark Watkins, Event Organizer

Hosted by The Trail Crew/Los Angeles County Toyota Land Cruiser Association and Toyota Territory Off Road Association Southern California while being sponsored by Banks Power and other off-road sponsors that care about land use issues, our Calico Clean Up 2007 tasks and goals were accomplished through the joint efforts of various 4WD clubs and volunteers from California, Nevada, and Arizona. This clean up was made possible by the following committee members: Art Banks, Alan Draper, Mike Wood, Darrin Walker, Ron Quitevis, and Phil Aaland.


Together our goal was simple; Clean Up the historic mining area-together. We didn't care what group they were from or what type of a rig they drove up in. This wasn't a marketing campaign for any club, organization, or corporate manufacturing group. It was solely about the Calico mountains that had been neglected for years.

The Calico Clean Up 2007 was a complete success. The Bureau of Land Management Barstow Field Office was extremely grateful and appreciated our combined efforts. We fed well over 600 volunteers and raised funds from our raffle to assist Friends of the Rubicon/Rubicon Trail Foundation, Discovery Trails, and BlueRibbon Coalition.

We recovered five (5) abandoned cars, six (6) tons of scrap metal, and filled three (3) 40' roll off containers (unknown weight). I wouldn't doubt it if we recovered 10-12 tons of trash and refuse from the Calico area once the final numbers come in from Burrtech Waste Management.

We installed approximately 75 trail markers and cleaned up all the graffiti from the various canyons. We also installed two kiosks.

Our event was organized around the Recreational Incident Command System format that Del Albright provided. This allowed us to safely and productively accomplish our goals throughout our massive clean up. Please check out our website at www.calicocleanup.com to see the joint efforts and energetic folks working together.

In excess of 600 volunteers (and over 100 kids) participating, we had one incident where an individual group, not affiliated with our clean up decide to drive into an area off limit and clearly identified by the red signs. One vehicle drove off the single tracked trail and ended up flipping over. Although the parties were drinking and driving, no injuries were reported. We quickly sent a recovery team and one of our E.M.T. 's from staging to assist. We also notified BLM of the incident. The vehicle was recovered and the mess was cleaned up. Again, we had a detailed plan in place and it worked flawlessly.


The Barstow Office staff of the BLM made it clear that this this was the most organized and well run events their office had ever witnessed. The Recreational Incident Command System (RICS) by Del Albright, made this possible.


Again, we are determined to set the bar and rally with other recreationalists to protect our lands. I personally thank Del Albright for the encouragement and the opportunity to make this event a true success. I look forward to making this an annual event and working hand in hand with those that care about our area.

Respectfully Submitted,

Mark Watkins
Trail Crew/TLCA L.A. County
Calico Clean Up Organizer

 

[petescoffee]

Oceano Dunes area- Possible reduction in Park Size

Oceano Dunes off-road park would shrink without sale, lease
By April Charlton/Senior Staff Writer

An off-road enthusiast makes his way along the eastern fence line at the Oceano Dunes Vehicular Recreation Area in January. San Luis Obispo's opperating lease for Oceano Dunes is set to expire in June. //Staff file



Even if the county doesn't sell almost 600 acres it owns in the Oceano Dunes to the California Department of Parks and Recreation and its operating lease for the land expires next June, the popular off-road park won't close.

However, the riding area of the Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation Area would likely become much smaller and off-road vehicle use would be curtailed.

And the park's impact to the local economy would also take a big hit if the county doesn't sell the land, according to a state official.

“The beach would still be accessible (if the sale doesn't happen),” Andy Zilke, Oceano Dunes SVRA superintendent, said at last week's tri-chamber luncheon, where the guest speaker Jim Suty also gave a presentation on the proposed sale.

“The worst scenario would be that the county would fence the area off.”

If the county chooses to not sell the 584-acre La Grande Tract, which is located inside the five-mile riding area of the Oceano Dunes, and were to fence off the area, Zilke said, the riding area would be impacted.

“We'd have to reduce the number of people allowed in the park ... and probably couldn't sustain off-highway vehicle (use) because riders wouldn't be able to get into the back dune area,” Zilke added.

State Parks only permits a maximum of 1,000 camping spaces in the off-road park, with one of the biggest weekends being the Fourth of July holiday, when the park sees between 50,000 and 60,000 visitors over four days.

The county has leased the La Grande Tract to State Parks since 1982. The 25-year lease expires June 16, 2008, and the state agency has offered the county $4.8 million for the property.

Suty, a San Jose resident and president of Friends of the Oceano Dunes, told the luncheon audience that if the county doesn't sell the land to State Parks, the off-road park would close.

“If this (land) isn't sold or is no longer useable, the park can close,” Suty said. “Half of the beach would be lost during the busiest summer months - March to September.”

State Parks employs 140 people to operate and maintain Oceano Dunes SVRA. The employees all live locally - within the county - and contribute to the local economy, according to Zilke.

“We are partners and neighbors in this local community,” Zilke said. “I consider us to be a neighbor and a listening ear. The voice of the community is definitely heard.”

It's estimated, conservatively, according to Suty, that the off-road park and its 2 million annual visitors generate more than $200 million for the local economy, which would be affected if the park's size shrinks.

“There will be an impact (if the sale doesn't happen),” Suty said. “All those funds will go away. This threat is very, very real.”

The $200-million estimate is based on information from a 1993 State Parks-developed economic impact study on the area that claims the average visitor to the off-road park spends $72 a day while here.

State Parks is currently developing an updated economic impact study for the area and off-road park that's expected to be released this summer, Zilke said.

Although the off-roading community supports the sale of the land to State Parks to preserve the off-road park as it's now operated, many area residents don't support the sale because they feel local control of the area would be lost.

During a recent town hall meeting on the proposed sale, longtime county residents like Nipomo's Mike Winn urged 4th District Supervisor Katcho Achadjian to not support the sale and instead offer State Parks a short-term lease, with a sunset clause.

“I don't see any benefit of transferring control from the Board of Supervisors to Sacramento,” Winn said during the meeting. “They won't listen to us as well.”

Zilke said, in his opinion, local control of the Oceano Dunes wouldn't be lost if the county were to sell its land in the off-road area to State Parks.

State Parks approached the county last year about buying the property because the agency was told by county staff that the supervisors were more interested in selling than renewing the lease, according to Zilke.

“We are open to any possible option that would allow us to continue operating out there,” Zilke said.

The Oceano Dunes off-road park is the only place in the state where vehicles can legally be driven on the beach.

April Charlton can be reached at 489-4206, Ext. 5016, or acharlton@santamariatimes.com.

March 24, 2007

 

[petescoffee]

Tahoe National Forest Route Update

Tahoe National Forest Updated April 12, 2007

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Received the following email today, April 12, 2007, from Ann Westling regarding the Tahoe National Forest.

Hi all - the Federal Register published the Notice of Intent yesterday before we expected and we did not get this announcement out to you before hand. We apologize! The information is currently on the TNF website at http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/tahoe/projects_plans/ohv_inv/index.shtml. The entire Forest map takes a while to load, but you can click on the individual districts/areas that are smaller in size. The comment period extends through May 14. Please see the information below for a general overview and a reminder of the public meetings in the next 2 weeks. Several of you have asked if you need to attend the meeting closest to the trails you are interested in or if the meetings will all be the same. For the most part, the meetings will be similar, however more emphasis will be placed on the trails in the area nearest the meeting. The majority of time at each meeting, however, will be spent reviewing the
criteria as to how the trails were evaluated. The purpose of these
meeting will be to share the Forest Service proposal with you - they will not be hearings to take comment.


Tahoe National Forest
OHV Route Designation/Motorized Travel Management Project
April 2007

Overview
In 2004, the Forest Service started a process to designate off-highway vehicle routes for the Tahoe National Forest as part of a Region-wide effort. This project has grown over the last few years to incorporate new ideas and revised National direction and now includes all (wheeled) motorized travel.

This project was initiated to respond to the growing use of off highway vehicles. It will help establish a system of routes that offers a fun and challenging experience while protecting sensitive areas. This project will only designate trails, routes, or areas on National Forest System land – not on private land.

At the end of this project:
· Some routes that are currently being used for motorized travel (but
are not designated) will be added to the designated trail system;
· Some routes that are currently being used for motorized travel (but
are not designated) will be closed to motorized wheeled vehicle use;
· Seasonal restrictions may be placed on some routes and areas;
· Access to dispersed camping sites may change;
· Some routes/roads may be designated for specific types or widths of
vehicles;
· Motor vehicle use off designated routes, trails, and areas will be
prohibited.

Current Status:
After several years of mapping the existing (non-designated) routes and areas and discussions/meetings with the public to determine popular trails or environmental concerns, the Tahoe National Forest is completing an Environmental Impact Statement to assess various alternatives regarding possible motorized roads, trails and areas and the effects of those alternatives.

A Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been published in the Federal Register. A public comment period beginning on April 11 will close on May 14. Comments can be emailed to tnf_rte_desig@fs.fed.us or to Travel Management Team, Tahoe National Forest, 631 Coyote St, Nevada City, CA 95959. Maps that show the proposed routes are available on the Tahoe National Forest website – www.fs.fed.us/r5/tahoe . For those that don’t have web capacity, a map is also available for review at TNF District Offices and the Forest Headquarters.

Identified in the Proposed Action, impacts from the following will be disclosed in the EIS:
1. The addition of 50 miles (48 segments) of existing, unauthorized
trails to the current motorized trail system;
2. The addition of one 60-acre area where the use of wheeled motorized
vehicles by the public would be allowed anywhere within the area;
3. Allowing non-street legal vehicle use on approximately 3 miles of an
existing National Forest System road where such use is currently prohibited;
4. The prohibition of wheeled motorized vehicle travel off designated
roads, trails or areas, except as allowed by permit or other authorization.

Public Meetings:
Three public meetings will be held to share the Forest Service proposal.
These will not be hearings and public comments will not be taken at the
meetings. The emphasis at each meeting will be the trails/roads/areas for
that local area although all the maps will be available at the meetings.

April 18 – Truckee – 6:30 – 9:00 pm – Hampton Inn – 11951 Highway 267 April 24 – Foresthill – 6:30 – 9:00 pm – Foresthill High School Gymnasium, Foresthill Road April 26 – Grass Valley – 6:30 – 9:00 pm – Banner Grange, 12629 McCourtney Road

Additional EIS Comment Period and Timeline The draft EIS is expected to be available for public review in the fall, 2007. A 45-day comment period will follow. The final EIS is expected in the winter, 2008.

Background - 5-Step Process
The TNF has been following a 5-step process outlined in the Regional Route Designation Guidebook.
1. Map existing unauthorized roads, motorized trails, and areas –
Completed 2005
2. Issue Temporary Forest Order prohibiting motorized wheeled vehicle
use off mapped roads, trails, and areas. Expected completion – spring 2007
3. Evaluate inventoried roads, trails and areas and collaborate with the
public in developing a proposed system of roads, trails and areas.
Completed 2006
4. Complete analyses and prepare National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) documents. In progress
5. Issue Forest Order prohibiting motor vehicle use off roads,
designated trails and areas. Install signing and publish maps showing designated motorized travel system. Expected completion 2008.

Mailing List:
If anyone would like to be placed on the TNF Travel Management Project mailing list, please contact Ann Westling (awestling@fs.fed.us )

Contacts:
Project Coordinator – Phil Horning (phorning@fs.fed.us) 478-6210 Interdisciplinary Team Leader – David Arrasmith (darrasmith@fs.fed.us )
478-6143

Ann Westling
Tahoe National Forest
Public Affairs Officer
(530) 478-6205

 

[petescoffee]

Updated Rubicon Trail Work Days

Rubicon Trail Workdays

You need to sign up on Del's site to participate with the work days.

I pulled the following work days from Del's Web Site:


WORKDAYS and PROJECT SIGN UPS

2007 Rubicon Trail Workdays:

June 9-10 (Tahoe)

June 30th (BFG Event)

July 21-22 (Tahoe)

August 18-19

This is where we keep track of and let folks know about Rubicon Trail projects and sign ups. Sign up forms and more information will be posted here as well as on the FOTR email network (list).

Link to Del's site to sign up for work Days:
http://www.delalbright.com/Rubicon/workday.htm



Dave Thomas

 

[petescoffee]

Mendocino Forest- Site Facility Master Plan

You can start to see why the forest service is behind on the Route Designation Process. At the same time all of the districts are supposed to be invenotoring routes they are also going through "Recreation Site Facility Master Planning". Basically reviewing what they have and deciding what needs to be fixed, upgraded, replaced or closed. In the end, their budget will probably be cut as projects are deemed high level of importance or low level.

Below is an update on Mendocino Forest:

News Release

USDA Forest Service
Mendocino National ForestPublic Affairs Officer
Phebe Brown
Phone: (530) 934-1137
Fax: (530) 934-7384
Email: pybrown@fs.fed.us


Proposed Recreation Program Changes
Willows, April 30, 2007 - The Mendocino National Forest has completed the analysis for a proposed 5-year program of work for the 64 developed recreation sites on the forest. This has been completed through a national process called " Recreation Site Facility Master Planning" (RS-FMP).

The process involves seven steps to help identify the developed recreation sites that are best suited for the forest. A primary reason for the plan is to eliminate the backlog of deferred maintenance at recreation sites by focusing limited resources on the recreation sites that meet changing public demands and desires.

Before the plan is finalized, the RS-FMP must be approved by the Pacific Southwest Regional Forester and any changes in fees would need to be approved by the California Recreation Resource Advisory Committee, a federal advisory body for the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management in California.

"Out of the 64 developed sites on the Mendocino National Forest, changes are proposed for only 17 sites," said Tom Contreras, Forest Supervisor.

Proposed Changes:

Two of the currently designated developed campgrounds, Lower Nye and Surveyor, are proposed to have the few remaining developed facilities removed. This proposal would change the developed campgrounds to dispersed recreation sites that can still be used by the public; they just would not have picnic tables, toilets, or fire rings.
Thirteen other campgrounds, mostly in the off-highway vehicle use areas, would start charging a nominal camping fee for the use of those facilities. In the past, California State OHV grant funds have helped pay for maintainance and operation of those campgrounds, but those funds were cut in half over the last three years.
The two boat ramps at Red Bluff Recreation Area would start charging a nominal fee for boat launching on the Sacramento River below the Diversion dam and at the Lake Red Bluff launch ramp above the Diversion dam.
There would be No Changes at 47 recreation sites -

The public will not see any changes in services at the other 47 recreation sites on the forest, except campground fees at 12 family campgrounds, the 3 group campgrounds, and one lookout would be increased after October 1, 2007.
"This would be the first increase in fees for our campgrounds since 1999," said Mr.Contreras. "Those fees will help us provide better service at our campgrounds and allow us to repair or replace facilities that have become worn out."

Most of the fees collected now stay on Forest for use at these sites under the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act. Eighty percent of the campground fees will go to the operation and maintenance of those campgrounds. Fifteen percent of the fees will go to the collection and enforcement of the fees at those campgrounds. The remaining five percent goes into a fund that the Forest Service can apply for in grants to improve the resources in or adjacent to those campgrounds, such as trails around a lake, interpretive signing, or dealing with soil erosion at recreation sites.

Fees at the following locations would change under the proposed plan:

Grindstone Ranger District: Main Letts Campground (CG) $12, Mill Valley CG $10, Plaskett CG $10, Saddle Camp CG $12, Spillway CG $12, Stirrup CG $12, Sycamore Grove CG $16, Camp Discovery Group CG $175, Gray Pine Group CG $75, and Masterson Group CG $75.
Upper Lake Ranger District: Middle Creek CG $8.
Covelo Ranger District: Eel River CG $8 and Hammerhorn CG $8.
The Mendocino National Forest would also be adding other recreation sites to the fee system after October 1, 2007.

Grindstone Ranger District would start charging fees at the following recreation sites:
Davis Flat Campground (CG) $5, Dixie Glade Horse CG $5, Fouts CG $5, Little Stony CG $5, Mill Creek CG $5, North Fork CG $5, South Fork CG $5, Lake Red Bluff Boat Launch $6, and Sacramento River Boat Launch $6.
Upper Lake Ranger District would start charging fees at the following recreation sites:
Deer Valley CG $6, Penny Pines CG $6, Oak Flat CG $5, Fuller Grove Boat Launch $6, and Pillsbury Pines Boat Launch $6.
Covelo Ranger District would start charging fees at the following recreation sites:
Howard Lake CG $6, Howard Meadows CG $6, and Little Doe CG $6.
To make comments or for further information on forest recreation sites please contact Jack Horner, Forest Recreation Officer, at (530) 934-3316 or visit the forest website at www.fs.fed.us/r5/mendocino/projects/rsfmp/ to view the proposed 5-year program of work and comment on the results.

 

[petescoffee]

Eldorado Forest Update on Restrictions

NEWS RELEASE
USDA Forest Service
Eldorado National Forest
100 Forni Road, Placerville, CA 95667
Date: May 24, 2007 Contact:Anthony Scardina
Release: Upon Receipt Phone: 530-621-5276
TTY 530-642-5122
Eldorado National Forest Continues to Implement Court Ordered
Restrictions on Wheeled Motor Vehicles Until a New Plan is Adopted
Placerville, CA…..Visitors to the Eldorado National Forest need to keep in mind that the national
forest remains under a 2005 court order that restricts wheeled motor vehicle travel to routes identified
on the Motor Vehicle Restrictions map. Travel off of routes identified on the map is prohibited. The
restriction map is available free-of-charge at all Eldorado National Forest offices.
Forest Supervisor Ramiro Villalvazo says that visitors who plan to camp outside of developed
campgrounds must park their wheeled motor vehicles on a route identified on the map, or within a
reasonable distance of the route so as not to block the travel way, create a safety hazard, or damage
vegetation and other forest resources.
“People have done a great job adjusting to the new restrictions over the past two years,” said
Villalvazo. “Visitors have generally responded well to the restrictions as we continue to help them
understand how to comply. However, when violations of the restrictions occur we will issue citations.”
The Eldorado National Forest continues to move forward toward completing a new wheeled
vehicle management plan that will designate a system of routes throughout the national forest as
ordered by the court in 2005. For the past two years, the Forest Service has been developing and
evaluating a preliminary range of alternative options to manage wheeled motorized vehicles on
existing routes throughout the national forest.
Eldorado National Forest Route Designation Team Leader Anthony Scardina, says that a
preliminary range of alternatives was discussed at public meetings last summer and that changes were
made to these preliminary alternatives before moving forward with the environmental analysis.
MORE
Route Designation Page 2 of 2
A Draft Environmental Impact Statement is expected to be ready for review in early July. The
Forest Service’s preferred alternative will be identified in the DEIS. The Forest Service says all of the
alternatives were developed to be consistent with current federal laws, regulations, and policies; to
create a system of routes that can be better maintained and enforced, while providing high quality and
diverse motorized recreation opportunities; and to minimize impacts to forest resources.
“The route designation process has placed an emphasis on developing a system of routes that
create quality recreation experiences,” said Scardina.
A 45 day public review and comment period will follow the official release of the DEIS. The
information learned from the public will be evaluated by Ramiro Villalvazo who will issue his final
decision before December 31, 2007, the deadline set by the court in 2005.
Information about the route designation process is found of the Eldorado National Forest
website at: www.fs.fed.us/eldorado. Comments and questions can be e-mailed to
eldoradoroutes@fs.fed.us.
-FS

 

[petescoffee]

Lake Pillsbury Access

Lake Pillsbury Recreation Area
Willows, May 22, 2007 - The Upper Lake District of the Mendocino National Forest announces the following information regarding recreation activities at Lake Pillsbury.

Forest Road M8 (River Road) from Potter Valley to Lake Pillsbury is currently closed. County Road 240/303 is open to Lake Pillsbury. Access to Lake Pillsbury is also available from Elk Mountain Road (Forest Road M1) through Upper Lake.

Fees at Fuller Grove, Pogie, Navy Camp and Sunset campgrounds are $13.00 per night with a maximum of 6 persons per site. There will be a $3.00 charge for an extra vehicle, and a charge of $1.00 per pet per night. Pets need to be on a leach at all times.

From May 18 through September 8 each year, off-highway vehicle (OHV) use is prohibited by Forest Order within the Lake Pillsbury Basin; OHV use is allowed outside the Basin during this time period, only on the designated OHV trail system.

Persons wishing to camp at Lake Pillsbury at any time, but particularly on the major holidays of Memorial Day, Fourth of July and Labor Day are encouraged to check ahead on campsite availability before beginning travel to the Lake Pillsbury area. Campsite availability is first-come-first served.

The Upper Lake Ranger District Office will be open on Saturday, May 26 and Sunday, May 27 from 8AM to 4:30 PM for the convenience of the public. Closed from 12:00 to 1:00 for lunch break. The office will also be closed on Monday, May 28, 2006. Woodcutting permits are available at the Upper Lake Office.

Please remember to keep your National Forests clean. Properly dispose of trash in available receptacles or pack out what you pack in.

For further information call the district office at 707-275-2361.

 

[petescoffee]

Spotted Owl Study in Shasta- Trinity

Media Release: SHASTA-TRINITY NATIONAL FOREST PARTNERS WITH DIVERSE GROUPS IN OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE IMPACT STUDY
Contact: Shasta-Trinity National Forest - Megan Godwin
Phone: (530) 226-2320
Date: June 26, 2007


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

REDDING, CA (June 25)--This summer U.S. Forest Service employees on the Shasta-Trinity National Forest (STNF) are working in conjunction the University of Washington Center for Conservation Biology and the BlueRibbon Coalition in a wildlife study that is truly the first of its kind.

U.S. Forest Service
click image to view


The study focuses on the potential effects of off-highway vehicles (OHV) on the federally threatened northern spotted owl, a subject in which there is currently little scientific data. While the study alone is quite notable, the unusual collaboration between the diverse groups makes this project a stand-out.

"This is one of the first times an OHV community has solidly partnered with academia on such a scale," said BlueRibbon Coalition Western Representative Don Amador. "This project is laying the foundation for great partnerships between these types of groups."

The groups include the STNF, University of Washington Center for Conservation Biology, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, the BlueRibbon Coalition, California Parks and Recreation and the Redding Dirt Riders. The study is being conducted in the Shasta-Trinity National Forest this summer and researchers and interns are living in barracks at the Hayfork Ranger Station.

"The Shasta-Trinity is part of the heart of these owls' habitat," said Forest Service Wildlife Biologist Paula Crumpton. "The results from the study will help wildlife biologists implement sound management principles where there is similar owl habitat."

The University of Washington Center for Conservation Biology works to "quantify change in the abundance and distribution of endangered species as well as the degree to which these species are disturbed by human pressures in remote areas." The BlueRibbon Coalition is a group who strives to ensure that responsible use of public lands is maintained for the benefit of all recreationists. Their motto is "Preserving our natural resources for the public instead of from the public."

Don Amador-BRC (lt), Scott Sinclair-BRC (center), and Clark Frentzen-CERA (rt.) test ride at owl test site.
click image to view


While it seems these groups may have opposing interests, they have formed an unlikely bond and are working together to achieve a common goal.

"That is what makes this study really unusual. The OHV riders are actually helping us implement these experiments in the field," said Lisa Hayward, post doctoral researcher with the University of Washington Center for Conservation Biology and project manager.

The study requires that the owls in the test area are exposed to certain events to look for collective effects on physiology and reproduction throughout the season. The primary event involves using hour-long ?simulated enduro events? with volunteer OHV riders to analyze data for short-term changes in behavior or physiology. These "simulated enduro events" mean that three to five volunteers will ride their motorcycles back and forth near owl territories for an hour, totaling about 45 passes by owl territory.

Both Hayward and Amador explain management practices regarding land use in the area could possibly have been more restrictive than necessary. The goal of the study is to properly assess the impact these OHV users are making.

Researcher collects data at owl test site
click image to view


"Good science is always the best tool in determining management practices," said Amador. "Then you just have to let the chips fall where they may via mitigations, restrictions or new recreational opportunity."

Forest Service Wildlife Biologist Kelly Wolcott agrees. "It's really significant that OHV users are going out on a limb participating in activities that could restrict recreation. But generally speaking, this kind of research tends to loosen regulations up."

Even though there are such different groups involved in the study, everyone has the same ultimate goal ? that the research gathered will help land managers implement smart and effective land management policy.

"Hopefully the public will be happy with whatever results come from the study," said Hayward.

Hayward is still seeking volunteers to ride their OHVs past owl territories for one hour while researchers measure owl behavior and/or hormone levels. Volunteers are compensated $50 per day and provided with lunch.

For more information on the study or to volunteer, please contact Lisa Hayward at lhayward@u.washington.edu or visit http://www.ohvstudy.com.

 

[petescoffee]

Tahoe Area Trail Closures

Call before you go. This includes the Fordyce Trail.Fordyce is a trail not a road.

Newsroom News Release
Tahoe National Forest
631 Coyote St.
Nevada City CA 95959


June 7 , 2007 Contact:
Greg Schimke
Minerals Officer
530-288-3231

Additional Fire Restrictions in the Tahoe National ForestNevada City… Due to continued hot, dry, and windy weather, fire restrictions in the Tahoe National Forest (TNF) will be increased beginning Monday, July 2, 2007, announced Judie Tartaglia, Deputy Forest Supervisor. “The fire near South Lake Tahoe is a good example of the explosive fire conditions this year. In making the decision to increase fire restrictions, we have tried to find a balance between minimizing the risk of human-caused fires and reducing the impacts for the recreating public and contractors. We need everyone to be especially vigilant when it comes to fire safety,” stated Tartaglia. The restrictions will affect several activities:

Fireworks – Absolutely no fireworks are permitted in the National Forest.
Campfires – Only permitted in those campgrounds that have water systems, metal campfire rings, fire engine accessibility and regular patrols by campground hosts. Visitors can contact any TNF office for a list of campgrounds where campfires are permitted.
Portable Stoves and Lanterns - Permitted in all campgrounds and the backcountry with a valid campfire permit.
Woodcutting –.Check the woodcutting hotlines each day to determine if chainsaws are permitted.
Off-Highway Vehicle Use – Only permitted on designated roads; the Prosser Pit area near Truckee; and the Sugar Pine OHV area north of Foresthill. (Not permitted on trails other than the areas mentioned.)
Smoking – Limited to vehicles, buildings, and in a 3-foot cleared area.
Contract/Permittee Operations – Any operation or permittee that uses internal combustion engines or fire, must have an approved fire plan.
For More Information - Contact any Tahoe National Forest office in Camptonville (530) 288-3231, Foresthill (530) 367-2224, Nevada City (530) 265-4531, Sierraville (530) 994-3401 or Truckee (530) 587-3558 or check out the webpage at www.fs.fed.us/r5/tahoe.

 

[petescoffee]

Mendocino Fire Restrictions in Place- Trail Still Open to OHV

Special Orders/Closures

Order No. 08-07-03
Mendocino National Forest
Fire Restrictions

Pursuant to 36 CFR 261.50(a) and (b), and to protect public safety and natural resources, the following acts are prohibited within the Mendocino National Forest. This order is effective from July 13, 2007, through the end of the official 2007 fire season.

Building, maintaining, attending or using a fire, campfire, or stove fire except in the designated recreational sites and fire safe recreational sites, shown in Exhibit A. 36 CFR 261.52(a).
Smoking, except within an enclosed vehicle or building, or in the designated recreational sites and fire safe recreational sites, shown in Exhibit A. 36 CFR 261.52(d).
Operating an internal combustion engine, except on National Forest System roads or trails. 36 CFR 261.52(h).
Welding, or operating an acetylene or other torch with an open flame. 36 CFR 261.52(j).
Using an explosive. 36 CFR 261.52(b)
Possessing, discharging or using any kind of firework or other pyrotechnic device. 36 CFR 261.52(f).
Pursuant to 36 CFR 261.50(e), the following persons are exempt from this order:

Persons with a permit from the Forest Service specifically authorizing the otherwise prohibited act or omission.
Any Federal, State, or local officer, or member of an organized rescue or firefighting force in the performance of an official duty.
Persons with a valid California Campfire Permit are not exempt from the prohibitions contained in this order. However, persons with a valid California Campfire Permit may use portable stoves or lanterns using gas, jellied petroleum, or pressurized liquid fuel.
This prohibition is in addition to the general prohibitions in 36 CFR Part 261, Subpart A .

Done in Willows, California, this 13th day of July, 2007.


/s/ Thomas A. ContrerasThomas A. Contreras
Forest Supervisor
Mendocino National Forest

A violation of this prohibition is punishable by a fine of not more that $5,000.00 for an individual or $10,000 for an organization, or imprisonment for not more than six months, or both. 16 USC 551 and 18 USC 3559, 3571, and 3581.

EXHIBIT A
Designated Recreational Sites
Covelo Ranger District:
Eel River Campground, Little Doe Campground, Howard Lake Campground, and Hammerhorn Lake Campground.

Grindstone Ranger District:
Whitelock, Kingsley Glade, Sugarfoot Glade, Three Prong, Wells Cabin, Sugar Springs , Lake Red Bluff Recreation Area, Big Springs Day Use Area, Letts Lake, Mill Valley, Dixie Glade, Plaskett Meadows, Masterson, Little Stony, Grey Pine, Fouts Springs, Davis Flat, South Fork, Cedar Camp, Mill Creek, North Fork and Old Mill.

Upper Lake Ranger District:
Fuller Grove Campground, Fuller Group Campground, Navy Camp Campground, Pogie Point Campground, Oak Flat Campground, Sunset Campground, Middle Creek Campground, Deer Valley Campground, Bear Creek Campground, Penny Pines Campground, Pine Mountain Lookout and Lake Pillsbury Summer Home Sites.

Fire Safe Recreational Sites
(Permits Required)
Upper Lake Ranger District:
Pine Mt. Hunter Camp

Covelo Ranger District:
Atchison, Rock Cabin, Green Springs, and Wye camp.

Grindstone Ranger District:
Dead Mule, Kenny Camp, Del Harleson, Brewers Oak, One Bee, Black Jack, Side Rod, Government Flat, January Camp, Post Pile, Williams Camp, Howell Saddle, Big Stump, Rocky Cabin, Browns Camp, Ides Cove Horse Packer and Back Packer Camps.

 

[petescoffee]

Eldorado NF Update

HERE IS THELINK TO THE DRAFT EIS http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/eldorado/projects/route/deis/index.shtml IT IS A VERY LARGE DOCUMENT AND NOT DIAL UP FRIENDLY TO DOWN LOAD. YOU CAN ORDER A CD OF THE DOCUMENT BY FOLLOWING THE DIRECTIONS ON THE WEB PAGE.

NEWS RELEASE
USDA Forest Service
Eldorado National Forest
100 Forni Road, Placerville, CA 95667
Date: July 13, 2007 Contact: Jason Nedlo
Release: Upon Receipt Phone: 530-622-5061
TTY 530-642-5122
Eldorado National Forest To Release Travel Management Draft
Environmental Impact Statement for Public Review
Placerville CA … The Eldorado National Forest is one step closer to having a system of designated travel
routes for wheeled motorized vehicles. On July 20, the U.S. Forest Service will release a Travel Management
Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a 45 day public review period which will end on September 4.
The Travel Management DEIS examines five alternative ways to manage a designated system of
existing routes running throughout the Eldorado National Forest. The DEIS describes these alternatives and
the public input used to develop them, the analysis of the alternatives and the effects of implementing each
one. The Eldorado National Forest Supervisor’s preferred alternative is also identified.
“This is an important step in our on-going public involvement process,” said Ramiro Villalvazo,
Eldorado National Forest Supervisor, who will make the final decision. “It’s my desire is to balance the need
to provide a diversity of road and trail riding opportunities with the need to protect forest resources.”
Following the analysis of public comments, the Forest Service will create a final environmental
impact statement and make a final decision. The decision is schedule to be made before the end of this year.
Public information meetings are scheduled later in July and early August.
Villalvazo says that the travel management project is part of a Forest Service initiative designed to
address the impacts of unmanaged recreation on the health of national forests. The DEIS proposes to regulate
and manage wheeled motor vehicle use in the Eldorado National Forest and to identify roads and trails where
this use will be allowed. It also addresses seasonal closures of wheeled motor vehicle routes, and wheeled
over-the-snow travel. Other National Forests in California are developing similar management direction.
The DEIS and other project information is available now on the Eldorado National Forest website at
www.fs.fed.us/r5/eldorado/projects/route or a CD can be requested by email from eldoradoroutes@fs.fed.us
or by contacting Jason Nedlo, Project Team Leader, at (530) 621-5276.
Public meetings explaining the DEIS and the 45 day public comment period will be held from 7:00
p.m. to 9:00 p.m. on the following dates and locations:
o July 24, 2007 in Placerville at the Marshall Building, El Dorado County Fairgrounds, 100
Placerville Drive, Placerville, CA 95667.
o July 25, 2007 in Jackson at the Civic Center, 33 Broadway, Jackson, CA 95642.
o July 26, 2007 in Markleeville at the Turtle Rock Community Center, 17300 State Route 89,
Markleeville, CA 96120.
o July 31, 2007 in Folsom at the Lake Natomas Inn, 702 Gold Lake Drive, Folsom CA 95630.
o August 2, 2007 in Concord at the Pleasant Hill Recreation Center, 320 Civic Drive, Pleasant Hill,
CA 94523.
-30-

 

[petescoffee]

Legislative Alert Annual Emissions Tests

FROM THE SEMA SAN WEB SITE WWW.SEMASAN.COM :

California Bill to Require ANNUAL Emissions Tests for Vehicles 15-Years Old and Older Passes Assembly; Moves to Senate
Legislation (A.B. 616) to require annual Smog check inspections for vehicles 15-years old and older has been approved by the California Assembly and has been sent to the Senate for consideration. The bill would also require that funds generated through the additional inspection fees be deposited into an account which can be used to scrap older cars. You may recall that in 2004 a new law was enacted in California to require the lifetime testing of all 1976 and newer model-year vehicles. Pre-1976 motor vehicles would remain exempt under A.B. 616. The bill has been now referred to the Senate Transportation Committee.

We Urge You to Contact Members of the Senate Transportation Committee (List Below) Immediately to Oppose A.B. 616

A.B. 616 ignores the minimal impact vintage cars have on air quality.


A.B. 616 could entice vintage car owners into allowing these vehicles to be scrapped.


A.B. 616 ignores the fact that vehicles 15-years old and older still constitute a small portion of the overall vehicle population and are a poor source from which to look for emissions reduction.


A.B. 616 ignores the fact that classic vehicles are overwhelmingly well-maintained and infrequently driven.


A.B. 616 would increase costs by creating an annual inspection fee for owners of these vehicles.


A.B. 616 represents another attempt by California legislators and regulators to scapegoat older cars.
Please contact members of the California Senate Transportation Committee immediately by phone, fax or e-mail to request their opposition to A.B. 616.

Please e-mail a copy of your letter to stevem@sema.org. Thank you for your assistance.


Senate Transportation Committee

Senator Alan Lowenthal (Chair)
Senator.Lowenthal@senate.ca.gov
(916) 651-4027

Senator Tom McClintock (Vice Chair)
Senator.McClintock@senate.ca.gov
(916) 651-4019

Senator Roy Ashburn
Senator.Ashburn@senate.ca.gov
(916) 651-4018

Senator Gilbert Cedillo
Senator.Cedillo@senate.ca.gov
(916) 651-4022

Senator Ellen Corbett
Senator.Corbett@senate.ca.gov
(916) 651-4010

Senator Robert Dutton
Senator.Dutton@senate.ca.gov
(916) 651-4031

Senator Tom Harman
Senator.Harman@senate.ca.gov
(916) 651-4035

Senator Christine Kehoe
Senator.Kehoe@senate.ca.gov
(916) 651-4039

Senator Joe Simitian
Senator.Simitian@senate.ca.gov
(916) 651-4011

Senator Tom Torlakson
Senator.Torlakson@senate.ca.gov
(916) 651-4007

Senator Leland Yee
Senator.Yee@senate.ca.gov
(916) 651-4008

 

[petescoffee]

Mill Creek

In Focus: Public can help create plan for an addition to Mill Creek

Published: June 15, 2007

The Mill Creek Addition will open to the public for the summer starting June 30. The gate at Hamilton Road off of U.S. Hwy. 101 will allow visitors from 9 a.m. to 8 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays. The access will let hikers, bicyclists and horse riders explore the area. The opening will give the public a preview of the resource as a process begins to draft a management plan for the addition to Redwood National and State Parks, said state park superintendent Bruce Lynn. Added to Redwood National and State Parks in 2002, the site has remained closed except for guided tours, due partly to a lack of staff and resources. The site, once owned by Stimson Lumber Co., hosts more than 350 miles of former logging roads.
The Daily Triplicate/ Bryant Anderson


By Hilary Corrigan

Triplicate staff writer

Next week, people can start plotting the future of 25,000 acres of public land in Del Norte County that hosts second growth forests, huge stumps of old growth redwoods, the shells of old logging mills, hundreds of miles of abandoned roads and streams critical for endangered salmon.

Mill Creek Addition needs a management plan and a public meeting will kick off the effort 6:30 p.m. Thursday in the Crescent Fire Protection District Station on Washington Boulevard. A public tour at 9 a.m. on June 23, at the site off Hamilton Road will show off its assets.

"Everybody has their own ideas of what they want to do," said Petra Unger, a project manager with EDAW, the firm that Redwood National and State Parks recently contracted for $250,000 to plan the park's future. "We're just really barely getting started here."

To Ruskin Hartley, executive director of the nonprofit Save-the-Redwoods League, the process offers a chance to make sure that the site returns to its former glory.

"To see it restored to a wonderful, ancient, redwood forest," Hartley said.

It also offers a unique chance to envision a forest 1,000 years from now by integrating different types of stream, road removal and habitat restoration work in one large area.

"It's one of the few places that's bringing all of these disciplines together," Hartley said.

Rick Hiser has been leading tours to see the forest and the salmon spawning in its creeks.

"The possibilities for hiking, biking, horseback riding – there's 25,000 acres in there. That's a lot of land," Hiser said. "There's probably uses that I haven't even thought about."

He noted the old mill sites that could offer campground and RV facilities.

"That's a market that needs to be tapped into," Hiser said.

Don Amador, the western representative for the BlueRibbon Coalition that seeks to ensure access for off-highway vehicle riders and other outdoor enthusiasts, aims to map out space at Mill Creek Addition for riders.

"It's the remote nature of the area that we find particularly suitable for off-highway vehicle recreation," Amador said.

Grant Werschkull, executive director of the nonprofit Smith River Alliance, plans to make sure that the plan includes fishery monitoring and stream and habitat restoration projects for endangered salmon that sparked the effort to buy the addition and save it from further logging.

"We would be heavily interested in seeing how those would be restored," Werschkull said of streams and salmon populations.

Werschkull also wonders about tourism and education possibilities for the site that includes old vacant mills that might host museum exhibits.

"People are literally driving right by it as they come from the south on (U.S. Hwy.) 101," Werschkull said.

A large addition

The nonprofit Save-the-Redwoods League donated Mill Creek Addition to the Redwood National and State Parks in 2002, after buying the land from Stimson Lumber Co.

The move followed the park's revision to land management plans in 2000 that guide the other 105,500 acres that make up Redwood National Park, run by the National Park Service, and the state-run Prairie Creek Redwoods State Park, Del Norte Coast Redwoods State Park and Jedediah Smith Redwoods State Park.

Crafting a management plan for the Mill Creek Addition could take about two years, with a draft likely to come out by the end of 2008. The State Park and Recreation Commission must approve a final version.

The plan would allow the parks to use money for development and construction, such as for campgrounds, interpretive facilities or a lodge, said state park superintendent Bruce Lynn.

The addition adds a piece to the puzzle of the larger park system.

"What is unique to this is just the sheer size of it," Unger said of the parcel.

Next week's meeting will not collect public comments for the record, but will detail existing conditions and resources at the property. Natural resource managers already working on projects at the site will review their progress on road removal, stream and habit restoration.

Hartley expects such projects at the addition to draw visitors who will want to see forest restoration in action, as less than 5 percent of the ancient redwood forest remains.

"I'm just excited to be able to have that dialogue with the community and to help place Mill Creek in that broader perspective," Hartley said. "Restoring the old forest of the future."

The public has already shown interest in the planning process. Lynn has heard concerns about plans for the elk herd and a request from the International Mountain Biking Association to get involved in the management plan process.

Hiser, too, expects the public to get involved.

"It's only limited by people's participation," Hiser said.

Reach Hilary Corrigan at hcorrigan@triplicate.com.

 

[petescoffee]

OHV Green Sticker Information SB 742

The current Green sticker program is set to expire at the end of this year. SB 742 is the Senate Bill that would reinstate and modify the program. Below is some information on the current status.

Link to SB 742 home page http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_742&sess=CUR&house=B&site=sen

Link to our Thread on SB 742 in this forum https://forum.ih8mud.com/showthread.php?t=172338

Sorry about posting this so late in the game. Dave Thomas

Also see the SB 742 Separate Posting in our Forum

Previous reports of the demise of SB 742 have proven to be premature.

As was approved by the 10 major off road recreational and business groups who were actively participating in negotiating SB 742, the off road community and the environmental community continued to negotiate with the Department of Parks and Recreation acting as the facilitator after Senator Steinberg announced that he was dropping the bill two weeks ago.

An estimated 20 hours (including a weekend meeting) of negotiations have taken place since then. We have been making some progress. We were all surprised last Friday, July 6, when we were told that SB 742 was to be amended yet again.

Please be assured that neither side, especially the off road community had ever agreed to these amendments – so when you see the amendments, do not get excited.

Because of these amendments, the DPR-led negotiating group met with Senator Steinberg and his staff on July 9 to find out what was going on.

In that meeting, Senator Steinberg told us he had decided to try to keep the bill moving. He also was brought up to speed on our progress and most importantly he stated that he would accept any reasonable agreements that are worked out by the parties.

So SB 742 was heard in the Assembly Water, Parks & Wildlife committee on Tuesday, July 10, as amended with testimony by all sides that we will continue to work in good faith. The vote in committee was 8-3. (One Republican, Assemblyman Tom Berryhill, gave a courtesy “Aye” vote at the request of the OHV community so that negotiations can continue without missing a legislative deadline.)

We will continue to work on the bill and when both the enviros and OHV sides have a proposed solution, we will bring it to the OHV Leadership for discussion and a vote on the agreed upon provisions.

If we don’t reach agreement by the time the bill goes to Assembly Appropriations Committee (around August 20th) we will all walk away from SB 742 and introduce our own OHV legislation.

In order to reach an agreement, we may not get all that we want, but we should be able to support a functional OHV program that is ecologically balanced. The key provisions that we have already been successful on include:

The OHMVR Commission becomes mostly advisory in nature. This is similar to federal resource advisory councils.

The Governor gets 2 more appointments to the Commission giving him 5 appointments which effectively gives him control of the Commission (which is customary in 95% of all the state boards & commissions in California)

The restriction on red sticker vehicles has been removed.

No new rules on trespass or requiring the rider to get permission from the owner to go on private property

No license plate on motorcycles and ATVs

Increase O & M grants to 50% of the grant program. More funds will be available for on-the-ground trail projects and maintenance.

A more stewardship or holistic oriented “Restoration” pot where said funds can be used to restore or rehabilitate trails closed in a legal NEPA process. Relevant OHV studies may be funded as well.

So we need the off road community to “take the high road” and hang in there a little longer. Launching mean spirited and disingenuous attacks like the enviros did last week is not the path we should take at this time.

We will keep you posted.

You may use this information on your websites and send it to other websites

From Pete Conaty, Terry McHale, & Don Amador

 

[peesalot]

Dave , in pursuit of a solution I was wondering if you have knowledge of any process by wich a trail can be created ? I 'm talking independently of this whole route designation BS.
I mean like is it totally impossible to cut/create new trails ?

 

[petescoffee]

Dave , in pursuit of a solution I was wondering if you have knowledge of any process by wich a trail can be created ? I 'm talking independently of this whole route designation BS.
I mean like is it totally impossible to cut/create new trails ?

Haven't looked into it before. I am sure the forest service has a process in their guidlines.

Dave

 

[petescoffee]

Eldorado DEIS

Please see the separate posting within our Forum for more information on this. the DEIS for Eldorado is taking a life of it's own. Comments are due by September 4, 2007. Yodaman has the FULL SIZE copies of the maps at his shop to view and get a good perspective of what is going on.


Here is the link- https://forum.ih8mud.com/showthread.php?t=168467
Dave

 

[petescoffee]

Mendocino Forest Update as of August 27, 2007

Dave - we are preparing our environmental documents, but they will not be EIS because we have not identified any significant effects in our analysis or from public scoping comments. Here is the link to the 8 proposals we are analysing, in case you have not checked it out yet.
http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/mendocino/projects/ohv/#status We hope to have
some of our draft documents out for public comment in mid to late
September.

Mike
Forest Planner
Mendocino National Forest
mvandame@fs.fed.us
530 934 1141

 

[petescoffee]

MOAB, UTAH, Draft Resource Management Plan

BLUERIBBON COALITION ACTION ALERT:

Dear Friends,

The Bureau of Land Management's Moab Field Office in Utah has released their Draft Resource Management Plan (Draft RMP) and Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS). The Draft RMP includes a comprehensive travel plan affecting both motorized and non-motorized recreational trails.

The Draft EIS includes four Alternatives, including a "no action" alternative which will be used as a baseline for comparison. Moab BLM has also developed a "Preferred Alternative" which is what BLM would like to do. There are two other alternatives.

The BLM is just beginning a 90 day public comment period. Based on the input they receive, the agency will modify the "Preferred Alternative" into a "Proposed RMP" (and Final EIS). After a brief comment and appeal period, this will ultimately result in a Final Plan (or "Approved Plan"). BLM will likely select parts of all of the Alternatives to formulate the Proposed RMP.

Your comments on this plan are extremely important. But formulating substantive comments may not be easy. The document itself is huge (the Table of Contents alone is nearly 50 pages) and it is difficult to discern exactly what the BLM is proposing to do.

BRC will be releasing a detailed review and analysis of the Alternatives, but it will take several weeks to complete. The purpose of this email update is to give you some help in wading through the document in order to learn what changes the BLM is proposing.

Those of you who regularly visit the Moab office are strongly encouraged to take a look at key parts of the document and provide comments.

As always, feel free to contact BRC with comments or questions. Part of our job is to help you understand what the BLM is proposing and help you make effective comments.

Thanks,
Brian Hawthorne
BlueRibbon Coalition

IMPORTANT NOTE:
BLM is proposing huge changes from what is currently allowed. Much of the proposed management is decidedly "Park-like." While some of the changes are needed, and BRC will be supporting the BLM on many of these, others are arbitrary and unnecessary.

Anti-recreation groups such as the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA) have staff to review the environmental analysis to find flaws that will nudge the final decision their way. Indeed, many stakeholders are paying for professional review of these documents in order to protect their interests. The OHV community must do this as well.

As always, funds for such an effort are limited. In order to raise funds for this important effort, BRC has initiated the "Moab Partnership" program.

Partners make a pledge of $10.00 per month or make a one-time Partnership donation of $120.00 to enroll for one year. Your donation is placed in a restricted account to be used for efforts related to the BLM's Moab and Monticello Field Office planning processes.

Please consider helping us with the detailed analysis this project deserves. Become a Moab Partner today. Click here: www.sharetrails.org/public_lands/index.cfm?section=Moab2


Moab BLM'S Draft Resource Management Plan
and Draft Environmental Impact Statement

AT A GLANCE:

Moab BLM's website is pretty easy to navigate. Check http://www.blm.gov/ut/st/en/fo/moab/planning.html for the complete Draft RMP and Draft EIS as well as all the background documents.

Comments may be submitted electronically at: UT_Moab_Comments@blm.gov. Comments may also be submitted by mail to: Moab Field Office RMP Comments, Bureau of Land Management, Moab Field Office, 82 East Dogwood, Moab, Utah 84532. To facilitate analysis of comments and information submitted, we strongly encourage you to submit comments in an electronic format.

NOTE:
Please do not send the overworked and underpaid BRC staff emails complaining that the maps are un-readable. We know. If you contact the BLM regarding this, please be polite. We are working with Moab BLM to find a solution.

Brief Description of an EIS
Chapter 1 is the Purpose and Need, where BLM is supposed to define specific areas where management needs to be changed. Chapter 1 also describes the Planning Issues and Planning Criteria.

Chapter 2 is a detailed description of the Alternatives.

Chapter 3 is the Affected Environment section where the agency described the current condition and existing management.

Chapter 4 is the environmental analysis.

Chapter 5 describes the public involvement, consultation and coordination.

Key Sections of the Document:
It will be helpful to review the Dear Reader letter and the Executive Summary. The Executive Summary is worth review and gives a brief description of the "theme" of the Alternatives, but it won't give you much detail.

Chapter 2 describes the Alternatives and includes the "matrix" (pages 2-7 through 2-56). The matrix is a comparison of how each Alternative addresses the key issues. Important sections include "Recreation" (pages 2-17 through 2-20) and "Travel Management" (pages 2-48 through 2-50). This will be a lot easier to understand if you print and reference maps 2-8 A through D as well as 2-9 B through D. (Don't miss the description of how BLM addressed SUWA's "Red Rock Heritage Travel Plan Alternative" on page 2-107.)

Also important are the Recreation Rules in Appendix E, where you will find the Moab BLM's policy on Dispersed Camping and other activities.

Appendix G is the explanation of how the Moab BLM developed the Travel Plan. It will help if you can print and reference the following maps:
Maps 2-10 A through D
Maps 2-11 B through E
Maps 2-11-F B through D

The very brave will want to view Appendix F, the Special Recreation Management Areas (SRMA). But making sense of all of the various "overlays" isn't for the faint of heart!

Appendix F is a critical section. But the way the BLM is managing the SRMA's is unnecessarily confusing. Pay close attention! You'll need to fully understand the difference between Physical and Administrative management zones (Primitive, Back Country, Middle Country, Front County and Rural), Goals, Settings and Outcomes. The final step is to overlay all of that with the travel management program and see if it makes any sense at all. Again, you'll need maps 2-8 A through D.

Advanced level Access Advocates may want to review the "lands with wilderness character" and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern sections. (Chapter 2, pages
2-16 through 2-17, Appendix P and Maps 2-24 B and C for lands with wilderness character. ACEC's are on pages 2-33 through 2-39. Reference maps 2-14 A through C.)

Long time BRC members probably just felt a chill down their spines. The "lands with wilderness character" business is the legacy of Bruce Babbitt and his illegal effort to double the amount of Wilderness Study Areas in Utah. It's a long story, and we'll post details on our Moab Update webpage soon. But it is a key problem for recreation, and not just for motorized recreation. This is because some recent BLM plans require the agency to "enhance" wilderness character, instead of say, "maintain" or "protect against significant impacts." What this means is that eventually, these lands will be managed as Wilderness.

De-facto Wilderness. Nice....

That's why BRC and other multiple use stakeholders oppose this designation altogether. Let me be perfectly clear. Congress gave very specific instructions to the BLM regarding Wilderness. Those instructions are contained in Section 603 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA). Congress instructed the agency to inventory all of their lands, identify which were definitely not of wilderness quality and then to begin an intensive inventory and analysis to determine which of the remaining lands would be recommended for inclusion into the National Wilderness Preservation System.

The process was completed in 1991. All stakeholders (including Wilderness Advocacy Groups) have exhausted the protest and appeal options. After 10 years the "603 Process" left Utah with approximately 3.2 million acres designated as Wilderness Study Areas. Of those, approximately 1.9 million acres were deemed "suitable and manageable" and were recommended to Congress for Wilderness designation. Section 603 requires the BLM to manage WSAs in such a manner so as to not impair the suitability of such areas for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System, subject to existing uses.

There is no justification, no legal mandate and no process requirement for engaging in an ongoing, never ending wilderness inventory and review. The question of which lands should be included in the National Wilderness Preservation System is now between Congress and the American People. Other than the management of existing WSAs, the BLM should have no part in this issue. To do so is a tragic loss of management resources.

IMPORTANT INFO ABOUT MAKING COMMENTS:

Your comments on the Alternatives are extremely important. But the BLM is saying comments containing only opinion or preferences will be considered and included as part of the decision making process, but they will not receive a formal response from the BLM.

Comments will be most helpful if you can state specifically what you like and what you don't like about each of the Alternatives. Suggest changes and be specific. Include information, sources, or methodologies if possible. Also, it is good if you can reference a section or page number.

BLM is also encouraging feedback concerning the adequacy and accuracy of the four proposed alternatives, the analysis of their respective management decisions, and any new information that would help the BLM produce a Proposed Plan.

Comments may be submitted electronically to: UT_Moab_Comments@blm.gov. Comments may also be submitted by mail to: Moab Field Office RMP Comments, Bureau of Land Management, Moab Field Office, 82 East Dogwood, Moab, Utah 84532. To facilitate analysis of comments and information submitted, we strongly encourage you to submit comments in an electronic format.

 

[petescoffee]

Surprise Canyon Update 09/12/07

Property Owners Ask Court to Uphold Access to Panamint City

San Francisco - In court documents filed today, a group of property owners are asking a U.S. District Court Judge to hold the Bureau of Land Management in contempt of a 2001 order that closed Surprise Canyon Road to vehicle use by the public, but did provide owners of private property vehicular access to their property near Panamint City, California.

"The BLM has continually disregarded Federal District Judge Alsup's order by refusing to provide land owners a key to the gate across Surprise Canyon Road" said Kris Tholke, a property owner. "We are asking the court to ensure the BLM and other parties involved abide by the original court order".

According to a 2001 settlement agreement in the suit brought by a number of environmental organizations, the BLM agreed to close Surprise Canyon Road to the public, but the agreement also exempted owners of private property in the vicinity of Panamint City from the closure.

The 2001 settlement agreement also required the BLM to finish a National Environmental Policy Act, or "NEPA" document by July 2001. The document's purpose was to determine the public's access to Panamint City.

"Here we are six years later and there is no end in sight," says Bryan Lollich, a property owner. "The public has been told for four years that it's almost done, but they still haven't seen anything from the agency".

Property owners said in court papers filed today that the BLM has refused to allow property owners vehicular access to their property. The property owners have made numerous requests and filed applications for access which had been met with a series of delay tactics, and ultimately a decision by the Department of Interior to not even process requests for access by the owners.

Surprise Canyon Road is located on the western slope of the Panamint Mountains and is the only access route to the historic site of Panamint City, and the surrounding private property. Surprise Canyon Road and Panamint City are in a non-wilderness "cherry stem" created by an act of Congress, surrounded by Surprise Canyon Wilderness and Death Valley National Park. A "cherry stem" means that these areas were specifically excluded from wilderness because they did not meet the wilderness criteria. The cherry stem of Surprise Canyon Road and Panamint City was created by Congress to insure future public access to this historic town, and private property in the area.


Contact: info@fopv.org