PDA

View Full Version : San Pedro Planning "Listening" Meetings Florence Junction



Sandee McCullen
02-02-2006, 08:25 PM
NOTICE.... MARK YOUR CALENDARS!!!!

As many of you know, your letters regarding the Valentines Day meeting brought results. BLM will still host the Valentines Day meeting in Chandler but we also demanded, and got, another meeting now confirmed for SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 25th from 1:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. at the Industrial Commission Building auditorium located at 800 W. Washington downtown Phoenix. One of our members arranged this room for us free of charge. I'll post a map next week.

It will be counted as part of the planned "Listening" meetings so our responses and/or questions will count. Each will have 3 minutes to speak if you wish and we all will be available to the answers. Our most crucial issues will revolve around the MIDDLE GILA AREA (FLORENCE JUNCTION). I will host a meeting a week or so prior to enable us to put together a united paper and list of questions that are important to all.

It is IMPORTANT we get as many RED SHIRTS there as possible................. The auditorum will hold 110 so lets pack it! The retainment of our access AND favorite trails will depend on this. I know Tucson office is already planning on closing Lower Woodpecker, Over Dose, Woody's Wash, Broken Ankle and probably others. YOU HAVE A VOICE.

xFallen
02-02-2006, 08:35 PM
NOTICE.... MARK YOUR CALENDARS!!!!

As many of you know, your letters regarding the Valentines Day meeting brought results. BLM will still host the Valentines Day meeting in Chandler but we also demanded, and got, another meeting now confirmed for SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 25th from 1:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. at the Industrial Commission Building auditorium located at 800 W. Washington downtown Phoenix. One of our members arranged this room for us free of charge. I'll post a map next week.

It will be counted as part of the planned "Listening" meetings so our responses and/or questions will count. Each will have 3 minutes to speak if you wish and we all will be available to the answers. Our most crucial issues will revolve around the MIDDLE GILA AREA (FLORENCE JUNCTION). I will host a meeting a week or so prior to enable us to put together a united paper and list of questions that are important to all.

It is IMPORTANT we get as many RED SHIRTS there as possible................. The auditorum will hold 110 so lets pack it! The retainment of our access AND favorite trails will depend on this. I know Tucson office is already planning on closing Lower Woodpecker, Over Dose, Woody's Wash, Broken Ankle and probably others. YOU HAVE A VOICE.


Sandee,

May I cross-post this to another 4 wheelers board?


Barry

Sandee McCullen
02-02-2006, 08:43 PM
Sandee,

May I cross-post this to another 4 wheelers board?


Barry

Please do................... we need to get the word out. Thanks.

Hackle
02-03-2006, 06:20 PM
This is the meeting we forced' to be taken seriously in the future we had better show up in force or they will look at it as we are wasting their time. I personally look forward to the Tucson BLM office sitting in front of over 100 pissed off wheelers that are finally learning to have a voice. Speak up (by showing up) and be heard.
Jim F.

Sandee McCullen
02-04-2006, 10:13 PM
This is the meeting we forced' to be taken seriously in the future we had better show up in force or they will look at it as we are wasting their time. I personally look forward to the Tucson BLM office sitting in front of over 100 pissed off wheelers that are finally learning to have a voice. Speak up (by showing up) and be heard.
Jim F.

We are confirmed for SATURDAY, Feb 25 at the Industrial Commission Building at 800 W. Washington from 1:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. It will be an open question and answer forum so everyone can speak should they wish.
Directions from the South: I-17 to 7th AVENUE (NOT 7th Street). North on 7th AVENUE across the bridge over RR Tracks, to Washington. West (left) on Washington. The Industrial Commission Building is 1/2 - 1 blk west on Washington on your right.
OR
I-10 to 7th AVENUE....... south to Washington.... right on Washington.

Enter the front doors.... Tell the guard what you're there for and he'll let you in. I believe the guard is planning on leaving around 1:30 p.m. so if you're late please call me on my cell at: 480.688.8132
RED SHIRTS PLEASE.

My1stJeep
02-09-2006, 10:31 AM
Do we have a pre-meeting scheduled yet so we can go in prepared?

Sandee McCullen
02-09-2006, 11:04 AM
Do we have a pre-meeting scheduled yet so we can go in prepared?

No, actually I haven't had the time to even "think" about a meeting but we certainly need to do it.

Any ideas on dates or places?.......... help me out on this one please.

Post up some dates and times and we'll go with the majority!

Wind_Danzer
02-17-2006, 09:50 PM
One week till the meeting, is there a pre-meeting set yet to go over our stand?

Sandee McCullen
02-17-2006, 11:03 PM
One week till the meeting, is there a pre-meeting set yet to go over our stand?

I have been called out of town and will be gone Monday thru Thursday. What I'd like for you all to do is either meet and put "issues" or "thoughts" or "questions" together and I will compile them on Friday and have available for handouts on Saturday. OR.......... check with Hackle and see if he can help out OR......... simply write your concerns here and I'll get them together throughout the week while in Colorado. It's going to be too dang cold for me to go outside so the evenings I can "snuggle" with my computer and start............. Ask about your "favorite trail"; what's the status until the designations are done, do the evaluations have any standing until designations are complete, are there any trails closed to us at this time, are all trails on the inventory maps..... if not how do we get them there. These types questions need to be answered..... ASK.

My1stJeep
02-21-2006, 08:08 AM
Sandee or Hackle,

I was looking, do we have a link to a document for this area like we did for the Bradshaws meeting? I see which trails they are looking to close, but what are their reasons for these? Are we back to the migration of the Prong Horn Sheep or aotehr animal? Is this one a dust issue? Is this just based on a green office out of Tucson?

Hackle
02-21-2006, 05:51 PM
This is the link to all the info.
http://www.blm.gov/az/LUP/san_pedro/sp_plan.htm
Jim F.

My1stJeep
02-22-2006, 07:46 AM
OIIIIO

This is normal process for the Tucson office. Keep us in the dark until it is too late. I did find some additional information, but very high level, no specifics. If they give us too much information we would come too prepared and they don't want that.

It also appeared from the website that they are in the planning stage, this is the best case scenario in my book as it will allow us to have input prior to any decisions already being made. Hackle or Sandee correct me if I am wrong about where we are in the process or if I am missreading what I saw on their site. Are best bet if this is indeed where we are is to show up in force and let them know we are going to fight for our rights and the use of the land from day one.

I did find a place to email with questions,so I sent off the following:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
AZ_TucsonRMP@blm.gov

Tucson BLM,

I am very interested in receiving information about the planning process. I would also like to know exactly where we are in the process currently. What major issues are being taken on at this time? When is the process expected to be complete? What is being used to determine the best uses of the land? Who is determining the best uses of the land? How is public input going to factor in?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also found this document that may be helpful: http://www.blm.gov/az/env_docs/library/SanPedroRiparianMgmtPlan.pdf

I would suggest if you have specific questions about the process, where we are and want additional information I say email the address above. I would be specific, but don't tip your hand as to what side of the fence you fall on.

I will post up any answers I get to the questions I sent as soon as they come back.

My1stJeep
02-22-2006, 11:21 AM
Pretty much. Most of the people who apply and work for the land management organization tend to be on the Green side. They have been apart of their various organizations for years outside of the land management organization so they know the game very well. As with previous posts they have a proven track record of deception.

Their preference is to make us come after it until they have the plan they want ready to sell (by that I mean the plan they want to pursue).

That published document is the last one and is the current one in place as far as I know. If I have been reading everything right the process we are entering into is to update this plan with a new one.

Normally one of the options presented is a No Action, which just means if that is what is adopted nothing changes from the previous plan.

I am still waiting to hear from Hackle or Sandee if I have read this correctly and this indeed is the stage we are at and what process is happening.

My1stJeep
02-22-2006, 01:37 PM
There was a change in designation to some of the lands and they are now set aside as wilderness, a very loaded term these days. Plus the greenies are on a never ending battle to close off lands and OHV use.

1BLKJP
02-22-2006, 01:48 PM
So what action did they take? The prefered alternative? That plan did seem to kinda cover all the bases...I am sure there are some details in there I missed.

WHY WHY WHY are they updating? Has something dramatic changed?

It sounded like prior to '88, they had strict access rules for OHV, am I reading this right?

That LMP was set back in the 80's based on a specific growth target for the area. Well Phoenix has well surpassed those growth targets and doesn't seem to be slowing down. The current route designations and mapping that are occuring is for a plan to be drawn to govern access for the next 15 to 20 years or so. I believe for this area it is still in the earlier stages of development. That is why we need to know favorite trails etc... so that we can help draft a preferred alternative for this recreation zone.

(Jim or Sandee please step in here if I am way off base with my comments above.)

And John, Your previous comments are pretty much right on target. The gov't agencies are so prone to lawsuits that they tend to keep information more close to the vest until they really have to. Yes the information is there and yes we do have the rights to see it, but we have to ask for it constantly or we get blindsided by some of the groups that want to keep the land out of the publics hands. Francisco of the Tucson BLM is well known for using these tactics.

Sandee McCullen
02-24-2006, 07:12 AM
OIIIIO

This is normal process for the Tucson office. Keep us in the dark until it is too late. I did find some additional information, but very high level, no specifics. If they give us too much information we would come too prepared and they don't want that.

It also appeared from the website that they are in the planning stage, this is the best case scenario in my book as it will allow us to have input prior to any decisions already being made. Hackle or Sandee correct me if I am wrong about where we are in the process or if I am missreading what I saw on their site. Are best bet if this is indeed where we are is to show up in force and let them know we are going to fight for our rights and the use of the land from day one.

I did find a place to email with questions,so I sent off the following:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
AZ_TucsonRMP@blm.gov

Tucson BLM,

I am very interested in receiving information about the planning process. I would also like to know exactly where we are in the process currently. What major issues are being taken on at this time? When is the process expected to be complete? What is being used to determine the best uses of the land? Who is determining the best uses of the land? How is public input going to factor in?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also found this document that may be helpful: http://www.blm.gov/az/env_docs/library/SanPedroRiparianMgmtPlan.pdf

I would suggest if you have specific questions about the process, where we are and want additional information I say email the address above. I would be specific, but don't tip your hand as to what side of the fence you fall on.

I will post up any answers I get to the questions I sent as soon as they come back.

I'm back in town. I will be working on "talking points" today. Tucson is not keeping anything back from us at this time. They haven't even started into this plan. They are talking to the communities BEFORE starting the plan to ASK WHAT WE WANT OR THINK. Being the FJ area has already had the inventory done and the 3 alternatives given to them, we simply need to let our needs or wants be known. Supposedly (we know better) they haven't made any PRE-JUDGEMENTS re closures etc. Anyway, I'll work on some "issue" points.............
See you ALL IN RED TOMORROW!!!!!!!!

jeep4offrd
02-24-2006, 07:34 AM
I'm back in town. I will be working on "talking points" today. Tucson is not keeping anything back from us at this time. They haven't even started into this plan. They are talking to the communities BEFORE starting the plan to ASK WHAT WE WANT OR THINK. Being the FJ area has already had the inventory done and the 3 alternatives given to them, we simply need to let our needs or wants be known. Supposedly (we know better) they haven't made any PRE-JUDGEMENTS re closures etc. Anyway, I'll work on some "issue" points.............
See you ALL IN RED TOMORROW!!!!!!!!
Hi Sandee.
Before I read your post. I went ahead and posted up a simple "hopefully" means for the basic tools to get this done tomorrow. If you could look it over and add what ever you feel we simple folks need, to be a solid voice. I'd appreciate it. It's in general under KISS for tomorrows meeting.
Thanks, Bruce

Sandee McCullen
02-24-2006, 09:06 AM
Hi Sandee.
Before I read your post. I went ahead and posted up a simple "hopefully" means for the basic tools to get this done tomorrow. If you could look it over and add what ever you feel we simple folks need, to be a solid voice. I'd appreciate it. It's in general under KISS for tomorrows meeting.
Thanks, Bruce

I will be bringing maps of the MGCP. These will be the 3 alternative maps reflecting the trails the enviro asked to be closed, the open access and the "tweeners". Eventually these alternatives will be used for the development of the preferred alternative that will be submitted to us when the DRAFT EIS comes out sometime in late 2007. We can then again recommend changes......... pulling pieces of one alternative and/or eliminating others.

What we need to do right now is get a feel of what they plan on doing in the meantime. I know for fact that Francisco is trying very hard to close Lower Woodpecker NOW........ he doesn't want to wait until the Plan is finished. He's also declaring that OverDose, Woody's Wash, & Broken Ankle are not within the existing RMP because "IN HIS OPINION THESE TRAILS WERE NOT USED IN 1988 AND THUSLY ARE NOT LEGAL". Everyone needs to mention "NO INVENTORY was ever done and NO ONE other than the users could know how long these trails were used".
They will bring up the issues of "trees being cut down"...... Jawbreaker (we've already lost this one) and Woody's Wash. Our response should be.......... if they had helped maintain these trails maybe these things would not have happened.
They believe "we could not have traversed these trails without cutting down the trees, thusly we illegally made the route". ONE TREE??????????????
Anyway............. I am working on a white paper with "bullet point issues" that I will hand out at the meeting tomorrow.
I'm hoping we have a full house or all our work will simply come back to bite us. If after getting this meeting moved and only 15-20 show up any/all positive steps we've taken will be forever lost. We MUST have at least 100 RED SHIRTS!!!
The new Field Manager is expected to be there........ he's a good guy and seems to want to get this mess straightened up so it's even more important to show we are RESPONSIBLE AND CONCERNED. If we reflect the "yahoo side" it will only make Francisco look right.

SEE YOU ALL TOMORROW>

xFallen
02-24-2006, 10:48 AM
What about preparing and submitting our own plan and recommendations in advance, proactively, rather than after they take our input and come up with their own? I'd be willing to help but it is difficult for any one person to do alone, I think.


Barry

My1stJeep
02-24-2006, 01:05 PM
Sandee,

About 15+ of us are going to meet early at the Arizona Center, specifically Hooters (I know it may not be your favorite place to eat), if you would like to join us so we could have additional time to review your hand out and be prepared we would all appreciate it. We are planning on being there about 11:00am.

Sandee McCullen
02-24-2006, 04:25 PM
What about preparing and submitting our own plan and recommendations in advance, proactively, rather than after they take our input and come up with their own? I'd be willing to help but it is difficult for any one person to do alone, I think.


Barry


This meeting is simply a PRE-scoping meeting. This planning process has not been officially opened. We ARE actually presenting our recommendations in advance but we will have to go through the actual public scoping meetings AFTER they develop the DRAFT EIS. AND AGAIN after they publish the DRAFT FINAL. They do not have to do these PRE-scoping meetings at all. We simply need to show our interest in a responsible way and make sure they don't start doing things or making decision behind closed doors.

After the DRAFT EIS comes out is when we need to write a full plan. That's what we're in process of doing for the Table Mesa area right now.

Sandee McCullen
02-24-2006, 04:31 PM
Sandee,

About 15+ of us are going to meet early at the Arizona Center, specifically Hooters (I know it may not be your favorite place to eat), if you would like to join us so we could have additional time to review your hand out and be prepared we would all appreciate it. We are planning on being there about 11:00am.

I will try.............. I will try and get this list finished in time to post tonight. Please remember this will simply be a PRE-scoping meeting for BLM. They supposedly have NO PLANS at this time (you can bet Sir Francis does). They simply want to "hear from us as to what we would like to see or what our concerns are". They didn't even plan on bring MGCP maps............. actually I am bringing the maps of the 3 alternatives so everyone can see the presented alternatives showing the recommended closed routes, the recommended open access and the ones in between. I have the recorded info regarding why each decision was made I'll bring so we can look up each trail if we need to. I simply want everyone to know some of the issues this office is already trying to do. I want the questions asked so they can hang themselves each time they answer with some "personal opinion" statement. It was confirmed today that the Field Manager will be there as well as a top official from the State Office.

Sandee McCullen
02-24-2006, 05:47 PM
That LMP was set back in the 80's based on a specific growth target for the area. Well Phoenix has well surpassed those growth targets and doesn't seem to be slowing down. The current route designations and mapping that are occuring is for a plan to be drawn to govern access for the next 15 to 20 years or so. I believe for this area it is still in the earlier stages of development. That is why we need to know favorite trails etc... so that we can help draft a preferred alternative for this recreation zone.

(Jim or Sandee please step in here if I am way off base with my comments above.)

And John, Your previous comments are pretty much right on target. The gov't agencies are so prone to lawsuits that they tend to keep information more close to the vest until they really have to. Yes the information is there and yes we do have the rights to see it, but we have to ask for it constantly or we get blindsided by some of the groups that want to keep the land out of the publics hands. Francisco of the Tucson BLM is well known for using these tactics.

ATTENTION......... URGENT NOTICE

I know having all these scoping meetings running in parallel are confusing but please take a minute and make specific attention to the NAME of the project plan.

The Agua Fria / Bradshaw Harquahala plan is an actual DRAFT EIS and covers the Agua Fria National Monument and TABLE MESA. This is an actual plan with alternatives and a "preferred alternative". What they get from these scoping meetings and YOUR COMMENTS they may add another alternative for submittal to the FINAL DRAFT EIS. The OHV Coalition will be submitting a full "PLAN" to match the enviros before the April deadline date. EACH OF YOU SHOULD ALSO WRITE YOUR COMMENTS. I need your comments also however so we can include them in the OHV Plan.

The San Pedro scoping meetings are PRE-PLANNING meetings. They have NO PLANS AT THIS TIME. They are going out to the public to survey the public to help them to find a "starting point" going into their plans. The Table Mesa area will be the ONLY RECREATION AREA within this specific planning. The rest is a National Conservation Area. Our concern is specific to the Florence Junction area. I will have the maps from the evaluation team that will reflect the 3 alternatives submitted to the Tucson Field Office. One alternative was from the "enviro group"; one was from the "access group" and the third one is from the "middle group". These are NOT decisions. These are NOT firm.............. they are only offering a "range of alternatives" that is required by NEPA. These maps would normally not be available if not for the MGCP. Because of OHV dollars funding the inventory and the evaluation we got this done within PUBLIC FORUM instead of allowing Tucson BLM Field Office doing this internally.

Hope this helps.......................

xFallen
02-24-2006, 05:55 PM
This meeting is simply a PRE-scoping meeting. This planning process has not been officially opened. We ARE actually presenting our recommendations in advance but we will have to go through the actual public scoping meetings AFTER they develop the DRAFT EIS. AND AGAIN after they publish the DRAFT FINAL. They do not have to do these PRE-scoping meetings at all. We simply need to show our interest in a responsible way and make sure they don't start doing things or making decision behind closed doors.

After the DRAFT EIS comes out is when we need to write a full plan. That's what we're in process of doing for the Table Mesa area right now.

Thanks for straightening that out. I and I am sure others would sure like to see any plans submitted on behalf of our membership in advance if possible.


Barry

Sandee McCullen
02-24-2006, 09:06 PM
Thanks for straightening that out. I and I am sure others would sure like to see any plans submitted on behalf of our membership in advance if possible.


Barry

1) This thread is involving the San Pedro "Listening" meetings so there won't be any proposed or submitted "OHV plan" for a couple of years yet. These meetings are nothing more than LISTENING to what we would like. I'm not sure they truly care but NEPA demands they consider "community" comments. If we are not involved in these first meetings and are not on list for "comments" either in person or in writing we have NO RIGHTS to comments or demands when it comes to the actual EIS or FINAL RMP. (This is the FLORENCE JUNCTION area under Tucson BLM) I am working on "questions and/or facts" re the Florence Junction area for the meeting tomorrow. I will post them later this evening and I will also have them to pass out tomorrow.

2) Re the Agua Fria / Bradshaw Harquahala plan that we are attending are the DRAFT EIS/RMP scoping meetings....this "OHV plan" will be lengthy. Most likely we will simply post a link to the AZOHVC. I will probably post them as we draft them to allow for additions or corrections. These comments are due early April. (TABLE MESA under the Phoenix BLM)

My1stJeep
02-25-2006, 02:01 AM
Here is the written statement I plan to read:

Introduction as to who I am... then lead into the following...

Areas to Cover
• Reduction of Trails
• Future Growth
• Trail Maintenance
• Enforcement/Education

Reduction of Trails
Reducing the number of trails will lead to increased use of the remaining trails which in turn will lead to additional erosion on the trails. This will have a negative impact on the trails left open. By allowing all trails to remain open it will disperse the OHV users amongst the different trail possibilities and thus cut down on the erosion of the trails thereby preserving the environment.

If the trails/routes are affected by migration of any species of animal during certain months have partial year closures been considered? If no, why not? What would be the benefits of a full year closure of a trail when the migration only happens during certain months of the year? I propose that for any trails/routes that are being looked at for migratory reasons be reviewed to see if only a partial year closure for the migration period only and only when absolutely necessary would be more beneficial. Trail closures are not necessarily a benefit and need to be proven as such before a trail/route closure for even a partial year should be considered. Even then other options should be pursued before a closure is put into affect. I suggest reviewing the options with the Arizona Off Highway Coalition for alternatives prior to closing.

I have heard some trails are being mentioned for closure:
• Lower Woodpecker
• Over Dose
• Woody's Wash
• Broken Ankle
• Jawbreaker (already closed)

My question is why? The OHV community has know of these trails for over two decades, longer than the Tucson BLM has been in place. I am not sure exactly how they were over looked in previous mapping efforts, maybe the OHV community was not a participant in the inventory when last taken, but they need to be included now. There is no evidence to support claims that they did not exist prior to 1988.

As for the closure of Jawbreaker I ask that you reconsider the closure. At this time we have no proof that an OHV person caused any damage to the trail. We have many examples of organizations opposed to OHV use doing less than stellar things to get lands closed, it would not be beneath them to remove a tree in an attempt to show destruction, with the thought the area would be closed. Look at the case of the park ranger planting evidence supposedly of an endangered species to close an area, the inaccurate information given to close parts of the imperial sand dunes, just to name a couple. So how does anyone know that an OHV user was responsible for this act? Why then close the trail when no proof exists that OHV use caused the issue?

Trail Maintenance
I have heard that in some cases what has been deemed trail maintenance by some is considered trail abuse by others. Included in this plan should be outlined specifically how all users of the lands can participate in trail maintenance, whether it be a hiking, biking, horse or OHV. For example what has more impact on the environment, trimming a tree that has started to grow into the path of the vehicles or vehicles trying to pass, the limbs catching on the vehicles body/roll cage and pulling the tree/plant out of the ground or breaking it into two parts or users of the trail cutting a new path to get around it? My guess is that the trimming of the tree will have the least impact. A well defined process on how a permit can be obtained to perform maintenance would benefit the BLM in not having to spend the dollars to go out and take care of it and preserve the plants, which in turn gives shade for some animals, food for others and an escape path for other avoiding predators, thus preserving the balance in the environment.

Enforcement/Education
As most of the people in this room would agree, the people responsible for the damage and destruction of the trails are people we would all like to remove from the trails. We enjoy seeing a spoil free trail when we enjoy our past time. However if we close trails/routes the only ones on them will be the irresponsible as they will ignore signs. Who then will stop them? Working to educate them to be responsible is the only way, a perfect example is the efforts recently by a Mesa PD Officer in the Tonto National Forest. He worked with the Forest Service, Tami Pike, to distribute information and educate people who were not using the land properly. This had a huge positive affect and curtailed misuse of the lands. First offense was education, second was a ticket. Education does work, but needs Enforcement to back it up. Please consider putting in some enforcement guidelines as well as looking into creating something the sheriffs posse or partnering with OHV groups to assist. It may mean taking down license plates and taking photographs to catch violators, but some sort of program to help out law enforcement is needed, you guys can’t cover all the ground.

Future Growth
The family sport of OHV use is growing at a pretty rapid rate. Thus far participating in other land management meetings and reading of the documents surrounding how the land is to be managed I have seen an abundance of information and processes outlined on how and why lands can be closed, however I have not seen processes put in place for the establishment of new trails/routes. Previous comments I have made have spoken to the adverse affects too few trails can have, thus with more and more families enjoying the great Arizona outdoors it is imperative that we put in place as part of any land use management plan the option and process by which new trails and routes can be established. It is only fair that if the plans incorporate ways to close off lands there has to be the flip side of the coin and ways to open news ones. Adding trails will only help lesson the affects on individual trails/routes as this family activity increases.


Thank you for your time and efforts and I look forward to the BLM and OHV organizations working together to provide and adequate and safe environment for us to enjoy the Arizona outdoors.

xFallen
02-25-2006, 08:10 AM
Another point I have heard form the other side is one of global nature. The greenies will attempt to muddy the waters as it were by bringing in global issues -- essentially saving the planet, usually from ourselves. Were they to have their way by the way they talk we as human beings should be eliminated. I am exaggerating somewhat but that is not far from the message, and it is one supported by the lunatic fringe in the eco-terrorism stints that kill or harm humans, wildlife and sometimes natural resources.

The BLM does not have a mandate to "save the planet" they have a mandate to manage the Federal lands (OUR land) in a manner consistent with meeting the needs of ALL people. That is a difficult role to fill, but that's what it is. Here's what Congress wrote way back when it ratified the BLM:

"management of the public lands and their various resource values so that they are utilized in the combination that will best meet the present and future needs of the American people."

The greenies will use guilt-laiden wording that makes it sound like the BLM is supposed to protect the land from everyone by limiting or eliminatnig access. They will also try to minimize "legitimate use" of the land. That term has a specific meaning for the BLM and inlcudes OHV, hiking, vehicular access, target shooting, hunting, mining, livestock grazing and so on, as well as protecting the natural resoucres and cultural sites.

This came from one of the BLM blurbs somewhere:

"identifying and protecting significant natural, cultural, and recreational resources"

There are numerous legitimate uses besides making everything a wilderness or protected area and making it nearly impossible to enjoy due to restricted or no access.


Barry

azrubyman
02-25-2006, 08:44 AM
Here is my planned statement for todays meeting.

My name is Ken.......
Address

I would like to thank the panel here and others who have helped make this Saturday meeting possible and for taking time away from a precious Saturday to attend.
As a 27 year resident of Arizona, a father, husband, hunter, fisherman and OHV user I am here to add to todays record a reminder of the importance of a well defined inclusive plan. With emphasis on inclusive. We should be reminded that OHV use is not just a dirt bike, not just an ATV, not just a quad, not just a jeep. But the OHV community includes, pick up trucks and SUVs loaded with camping, hunting, fishing gear, birding gear, wildlife watching gear, cameras, binoculars and most importantly people. Happy people, young, old and in between all traveling backroads and trails in our beautiful state. But all with one thing in common. A love of the outdoors and an ability to get away from the crowds to enjoy natures beauty and bounty. The love for the outdoors is sometimes intangible, however the ability to get there is tangible. That ability many times is through the use of an OHV and in many of those instances, it is the only way these people would be exposed to nature. These same folks bring adventurous stories and memories home with them to share with friends and family. They also bring home their permits, licenses, fee receipts and sales receipts showing the taxes paid...which as you all know go into many public funds and grants to support the very wildlife and nature those folks have witnessed. To close roads and trails deprives these people from not only witnessing natural beauty, but also will facilitate their removal from the funding chain in place and the subsequent tax dollars directed to certain natural resource projects.
For these reasons, I urge that all future planning for this area, be inclusive to OHV use by expanding current maintained roadways, leaving current OHV trails open and improving hunting, fishing and "throw down" type camping areas.
Thank you for your time today.