Date: 11/14/2010 Utah and N. Arizona Action Alert
Comments needed on Glen Canyon National Recreation Area ORV Management Plan
Dear BRC Action Alert Subscriber,
BRC sending an Action Alert out on a Sunday?!?!
We decided to come in on a weekend to blast this Action Alert because Chad Booth from At Your Leisure is featuring the ORV Management Plan at the Glen Canyon National Recreation Area on today's program.
At Your Leisure (AYL) http://www.ayltv.com/ is a weekly outdoor recreation show that covers both motorized and non motorized family oriented outdoor recreation around the western United States. AYL covers great rubber tire, track, and sportsmen destinations, product reviews, and many stories including vital news on important land issues. AYL can be seen: Saturday nights at 11 and Sunday mornings at 9 on ABC-4 in Salt Lake.
On today's program, AYL travels to Kanab, Utah, to discuss the release of preliminary alternatives for off-road vehicle (ORV) use at Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, located in northern Arizona and southern Utah.
Sadly, all of the preliminary alternatives released for public review limit motor vehicle use. Only the “no action alternative,” which is never considered a viable alternative by federal land managers, maintains the existing level of OHV use.
BRC has reviewed the GCNRA's alternatives and other materials and is asking its members and supporters to make a few specific comments on this important plan.
The GCNRA is managed by the National Park Service, so comments must be made via webform. We've provided instructions and also some suggested comments below. The comment deadline is November 24, 2010. Please take action today!
Thanks in advance,
Brian Hawthorne
Public Lands Policy Director
BlueRibbon Coalition
208-237-1008 ext 102
BRC ACTION ALERT
COMMENTS NEEDED ON GLEN CANYON NRA ORV MANAGEMENT PLAN
Situation:
The National Park Service has announced the beginning of the public alternatives scoping period for an Environmental Impact Statement to assess the management of off-road vehicle (ORV) use at Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, located in northern Arizona and southern Utah.
The ORV Vehicle Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will evaluate a range of alternatives associated with recreational ORV use at Glen Canyon and their environmental impacts.
Sadly, all of the preliminary alternatives released for public review limit motor vehicle use. Only the “no action alternative,” which is never considered a viable alternative by federal land managers, maintain the existing OHV use.
What you need to to:
BRC has reviewed the GCNRA's alternatives and other materials and is asking its members and supporters to make a few specific comments on this important plan.
Comments can be made electronically at http://parkplanning.nps.gov/GLCA, (select ORV Management Plan and Regulation). Comments may also be mailed to, Superintendent, Glen Canyon National Recreation Area Re: ORV Management Plan/EIS, P.O. Box 1507, Page, AZ 86040.
NOTE: You may have to navigate to the site if the link above doesn't work. Try going to http://parkplanning.nps.gov/ and then clicking on "Glen Canyon National Recreation Area" from the list.
Suggested Comments:
While the GCNRA is managed by the National Park Service, it is important for the decision maker to consider that it is a National Recreation Area. The enabling legislation mandates the agency to provide for public outdoor recreation use and enjoyment of Lake Powell and lands adjacent thereto, and to preserve scenic, scientific, and historic features contributing to public enjoyment of the area.
Outdoor recreation, including motorized vehicle based recreation, has grown in popularity over the last several decades. Given the legislative mandate to provide for recreation and the administration's desire to facilitate outdoor recreation, I request that the agency develop at least one Alternative that does not limit ORV use, and one Alternative that enhances recreational access to the GCNRA.
As noted in the Scoping Brochure and the Notice of Intent, the agency has just recently completed a management plan and environmental analysis for the Lone Rock Off Road Vehicle Area. To include this area in this planning effort is unneeded and a waste of agency budget and staff resources. In addition, ORV enthusiasts are likely to view including Lone Rock as a “second bite at the apple” designed to impose additional restrictions on motorized recreation. The recently completed planning effort for Lone Rock complies with the agency's mandate to complete the ORV designation, management and monitoring. There is no change in conditions or compelling need to revisit these decisions. The Lone Rock area should be removed from consideration in this planning project.
Just as the agency lacks jurisdiction to plan for Tribal or private lands, its jurisdiction over certain roads on the NRA is similarly limited. As a citizen, valid existing rights of way granted via R.S. 2477 are important to me. The agency must not ignore State and local government authority over roads existing in the NRA.
I request the agency formulate at least one alternative that allows unlicensed ATVs and UTVs on some or all of the unpaved roads in the NRA. There is no provision that bans unlicensed vehicles in the GCNRA's enabling legislation. Also, the settlement of the 2005 lawsuit does not mandate the elimination or restriction of unlicensed ORVs. Where appropriate, and with public involvement and environmental analysis, it allows the agency to designate routes and areas for unlicensed ATV and UTV use.
There are compelling reasons for considering at least one alternative that allows unlicensed ORVs on some or all unpaved roads in the NRA. First and most importantly, the GCNRA is not a National Park, and unlicensed ORVs should be considered a suitable use of the NRA. Unlicensed ORVs are allowed on lands adjacent to the GCNRA, including on roads within the Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument. Unlicensed ORVs are allowed on unpaved roads in Kane and San Juan Counties in Utah. Allowing unlicensed ORVs on certain roads is consistent with San Juan and Kane County ordinances.
Allowing unlicensed ORVs provides several benefits. First, doing so will enhance recreational use of the NRA consistent with the enabling legislation. Allowing unlicensed ORVs will also improve the agency's opportunity to leverage funds for management and enforcement that are available via Utah State Parks and Recreation's OHV program. Both Utah counties, as well as user groups, are eager to cooperate with any federal agency that provides for this popular recreational use.
The range of alternatives is too narrow! Of the 4 “action” alternatives, three are proposing significant restrictions on ORV use, including one that virtually eliminates all ORV use. The alternative that is purported to be on the other “range” of options also limits ORV use significantly! To remedy this, I strongly encourage you to formulate an alternative that allows unlicensed ORVs to travel on some or all of the unpaved roads in the NRA.
Of the preliminary alternatives, Alternative “D” best meets the purpose and need and is the most consistent with enabling legislation and existing management plans. Although I believe the agency should develop an alternative that allows unlicensed ORVs to access some or all of the backcountry roads, of the preliminary alternatives presented, Alternative D is the best option.
Link
Comments needed on Glen Canyon National Recreation Area ORV Management Plan
Dear BRC Action Alert Subscriber,
BRC sending an Action Alert out on a Sunday?!?!
We decided to come in on a weekend to blast this Action Alert because Chad Booth from At Your Leisure is featuring the ORV Management Plan at the Glen Canyon National Recreation Area on today's program.
At Your Leisure (AYL) http://www.ayltv.com/ is a weekly outdoor recreation show that covers both motorized and non motorized family oriented outdoor recreation around the western United States. AYL covers great rubber tire, track, and sportsmen destinations, product reviews, and many stories including vital news on important land issues. AYL can be seen: Saturday nights at 11 and Sunday mornings at 9 on ABC-4 in Salt Lake.
On today's program, AYL travels to Kanab, Utah, to discuss the release of preliminary alternatives for off-road vehicle (ORV) use at Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, located in northern Arizona and southern Utah.
Sadly, all of the preliminary alternatives released for public review limit motor vehicle use. Only the “no action alternative,” which is never considered a viable alternative by federal land managers, maintains the existing level of OHV use.
BRC has reviewed the GCNRA's alternatives and other materials and is asking its members and supporters to make a few specific comments on this important plan.
The GCNRA is managed by the National Park Service, so comments must be made via webform. We've provided instructions and also some suggested comments below. The comment deadline is November 24, 2010. Please take action today!
Thanks in advance,
Brian Hawthorne
Public Lands Policy Director
BlueRibbon Coalition
208-237-1008 ext 102
BRC ACTION ALERT
COMMENTS NEEDED ON GLEN CANYON NRA ORV MANAGEMENT PLAN
Situation:
The National Park Service has announced the beginning of the public alternatives scoping period for an Environmental Impact Statement to assess the management of off-road vehicle (ORV) use at Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, located in northern Arizona and southern Utah.
The ORV Vehicle Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will evaluate a range of alternatives associated with recreational ORV use at Glen Canyon and their environmental impacts.
Sadly, all of the preliminary alternatives released for public review limit motor vehicle use. Only the “no action alternative,” which is never considered a viable alternative by federal land managers, maintain the existing OHV use.
What you need to to:
BRC has reviewed the GCNRA's alternatives and other materials and is asking its members and supporters to make a few specific comments on this important plan.
Comments can be made electronically at http://parkplanning.nps.gov/GLCA, (select ORV Management Plan and Regulation). Comments may also be mailed to, Superintendent, Glen Canyon National Recreation Area Re: ORV Management Plan/EIS, P.O. Box 1507, Page, AZ 86040.
NOTE: You may have to navigate to the site if the link above doesn't work. Try going to http://parkplanning.nps.gov/ and then clicking on "Glen Canyon National Recreation Area" from the list.
Suggested Comments:
While the GCNRA is managed by the National Park Service, it is important for the decision maker to consider that it is a National Recreation Area. The enabling legislation mandates the agency to provide for public outdoor recreation use and enjoyment of Lake Powell and lands adjacent thereto, and to preserve scenic, scientific, and historic features contributing to public enjoyment of the area.
Outdoor recreation, including motorized vehicle based recreation, has grown in popularity over the last several decades. Given the legislative mandate to provide for recreation and the administration's desire to facilitate outdoor recreation, I request that the agency develop at least one Alternative that does not limit ORV use, and one Alternative that enhances recreational access to the GCNRA.
As noted in the Scoping Brochure and the Notice of Intent, the agency has just recently completed a management plan and environmental analysis for the Lone Rock Off Road Vehicle Area. To include this area in this planning effort is unneeded and a waste of agency budget and staff resources. In addition, ORV enthusiasts are likely to view including Lone Rock as a “second bite at the apple” designed to impose additional restrictions on motorized recreation. The recently completed planning effort for Lone Rock complies with the agency's mandate to complete the ORV designation, management and monitoring. There is no change in conditions or compelling need to revisit these decisions. The Lone Rock area should be removed from consideration in this planning project.
Just as the agency lacks jurisdiction to plan for Tribal or private lands, its jurisdiction over certain roads on the NRA is similarly limited. As a citizen, valid existing rights of way granted via R.S. 2477 are important to me. The agency must not ignore State and local government authority over roads existing in the NRA.
I request the agency formulate at least one alternative that allows unlicensed ATVs and UTVs on some or all of the unpaved roads in the NRA. There is no provision that bans unlicensed vehicles in the GCNRA's enabling legislation. Also, the settlement of the 2005 lawsuit does not mandate the elimination or restriction of unlicensed ORVs. Where appropriate, and with public involvement and environmental analysis, it allows the agency to designate routes and areas for unlicensed ATV and UTV use.
There are compelling reasons for considering at least one alternative that allows unlicensed ORVs on some or all unpaved roads in the NRA. First and most importantly, the GCNRA is not a National Park, and unlicensed ORVs should be considered a suitable use of the NRA. Unlicensed ORVs are allowed on lands adjacent to the GCNRA, including on roads within the Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument. Unlicensed ORVs are allowed on unpaved roads in Kane and San Juan Counties in Utah. Allowing unlicensed ORVs on certain roads is consistent with San Juan and Kane County ordinances.
Allowing unlicensed ORVs provides several benefits. First, doing so will enhance recreational use of the NRA consistent with the enabling legislation. Allowing unlicensed ORVs will also improve the agency's opportunity to leverage funds for management and enforcement that are available via Utah State Parks and Recreation's OHV program. Both Utah counties, as well as user groups, are eager to cooperate with any federal agency that provides for this popular recreational use.
The range of alternatives is too narrow! Of the 4 “action” alternatives, three are proposing significant restrictions on ORV use, including one that virtually eliminates all ORV use. The alternative that is purported to be on the other “range” of options also limits ORV use significantly! To remedy this, I strongly encourage you to formulate an alternative that allows unlicensed ORVs to travel on some or all of the unpaved roads in the NRA.
Of the preliminary alternatives, Alternative “D” best meets the purpose and need and is the most consistent with enabling legislation and existing management plans. Although I believe the agency should develop an alternative that allows unlicensed ORVs to access some or all of the backcountry roads, of the preliminary alternatives presented, Alternative D is the best option.
Link
