PDA

View Full Version : FJ/BLM/AzVJC meeting Trip Report



SavageSun4x4
02-25-2006, 04:36 PM
I attended the Hooters pre meeting and the subsequent BLM meeting. With a few exceptions, most of the Hooters girls needed to lighten up on the fork just a bit or maybe its the left over wings they are gnawing on. At any rate, I remembered why I had not visited Hooters in about 10 years or so. Other than the sometimes eye candy the food is only so-so and like the girls there, when you leave, you leave hungry

The meeting with the BLM folks I thought was a very good one. Patrick Madigan, the Tucson Field Manager was IMO clearly on our side and willing to work towards a sane and logical solution. That I can deal with.

I did have some concern with the report/plan that was passed around. Albeit I didnt read it cover to cover I did pick up on item 15 that stated: The desire to close Martinez Cabin was due to the development and seeding of endangered fish in the spring. Or words to that effect. The concern is for the endangered fish. Certainly if they are not endangered they will be when they are dropped into the spring and bite dust. Let me get this straight128 days with no rain, we live in a desert and are trying to grow fish. Where is my thinking wrong, this does not make sense, you think?

GOOD NEWS:
Anyhow, I will address that with Pat on our next meeting. At the conclusion of the meeting, I went up to him and asked if he had ever been wheeling in a Jeep. His reply was no, but I would like to. He then gave me his e-mail address and asked that I contact him to set something up. This could be a good opportunity for AzVJC and the OHV community.

FrenchChili
02-25-2006, 05:43 PM
Other than the sometimes eye candy the food is only so-so and like the girls there, when you leave, you leave hungry




lol that's why i go back to France sometimes:D


So far I think the new manager is very much open minded for the REDs and GREENIES and believe he has lots of potential to get both sides satisfied...

I thought I heard some people laughing when John persisted at knowing how they will evaluate our comments. I admit I did laugh a little (I think ur a funny person:D sorry:p ...and intelligent) but he has a strong point...the way they evaluate those answers will strongly affect us, the land and further discussed issues. We can speak to them all day long write what we want but it better mean something in the end. I want to see teh report when they'll be done w/it...

From what I understand is they generalize the idea of what we write to them; although they did say to write specific things such as a trail...Do u know how many letters they will get? A LOT!!!

So to get our point across strongly in writing, for them to get a more 'specific' idea, should we organize ourselves on what we'll specifically write to them???
:confused:


Maybe I'm being too complicated:rolleyes:

xFallen
02-25-2006, 05:57 PM
lol that's why i go back to France sometimes:D


So far I think the new manager is very much open minded for the REDs and GREENIES and believe he has lots of potential to get both sides satisfied...

I thought I heard some people laughing when John persisted at knowing how they will evaluate our comments. I admit I did laugh a little (I think ur a funny person:D sorry:p ...and intelligent) but he has a strong point...the way they evaluate those answers will strongly affect us, the land and further discussed issues. We can speak to them all day long write what we want but it better mean something in the end. I want to see teh report when they'll be done w/it...

From what I understand is they generalize the idea of what we write to them; although they did say to write specific things such as a trail...Do u know how many letters they will get? A LOT!!!

So to get our point across strongly in writing, for them to get a more 'specific' idea, should we organize ourselves on what we'll specifically write to them???
:confused:


Maybe I'm being too complicated:rolleyes:

It was a totally rational question. If one does not understand the process, how does a thinking person know when to interject or judge what is reasonable? Whether it was appropriate or not at the time may be up for debate, but the fact that the BLM folks went out of their way to ensure that the question of transparency was addressed lends credence to the fact that it was legit. They stated as much.

For me, I don't accept things just because someone makes a claim. If a person/group can't back it up, then maybe it shouldn't be stated.

Truth withstands scrutiny, folks.


Barry

My1stJeep
02-25-2006, 06:04 PM
First I want to thank the 85 people that showed up. It was a great showing of support for the area and I think you all deserve a huge THANKS for being there.

Second to the shops that were challenged to come out, a HUGE THANKS as well, it means alot the support you showed today. Among the shops I saw there (I apologize if Missed any shop that showed and I did not see someone from there)

Absolute Offroad
4 Wheeler Supply
Desert Fab
Hunter Off Road
Simply Off Road


I echo Don's thoughts, this guy Patrick seems to have something I think many are missing, common sense. Don let me know when you organize the run with Patrick I would love to too.

I know with the discussion centered around how the comments will be wieghed some of you might want that they will be 30% or 40% or??? of the decision, but they don't have it set that way. They will be gauged on content, that is why they want us to be specific. If you want something in the document that outlines the steps to maintain a trail, be specific and give possible ideas you see as solutions. If you want them to have in place a process to open trails in the future between RMP processes tell them, same with more education or law enforcement. Be sure to tell them why it is important to you. If trails have significance list them and what that significance is. Those letters/comments will carry more weight than any form letter, you heard Linda (I think that was the lady BLM persons name) say form letters get tossed in as one issue.

As for lunch you should have had the burger. My mushroom swiss burger with grilled onions took care of me, no hunger felt when we left.

Some of the other Hooters do have better eye candy, the AZ Center one is lacking a bit there.

All in all I think it went pretty well and again thanks to all or YOU that showed up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

FrenchChili
02-25-2006, 06:16 PM
I know with the discussion centered around how the comments will be wieghed some of you might want that they will be 30% or 40% or??? of the decision, but they don't have it set that way. They will be gauged on content, that is why they want us to be specific. If you want something in the document that outlines the steps to maintain a trail, be specific and give possible ideas you see as solutions. If you want them to have in place a process to open trails in the future between RMP processes tell them, same with more education or law enforcement. Be sure to tell them why it is important to you. If trails have significance list them and what that significance is. Those letters/comments will carry more weight than any form letter, you heard Linda (I think that was the lady BLM persons name) say form letters get tossed in as one issue.



thanks I needed to read that...now I can start writing :)

My1stJeep
02-27-2006, 07:48 AM
Well give us some insight as to what he has said. Any information that can assist us in the process will only help our cause.

While I agree there were a few too many fingers pointing I think some comments were heard by Patrick and some input was good and worth while.

As for the conspiracy theories, some comments may have tended to appear that way, some may have been valid and some may have been a ghost story. But since there have been some very underhanded things attempted to be slipped by us on the down low, it gives the impression that they are not theories.

In a previous discussion we had you told me that if there is evidence at an early stage, evidence at a later stage the middle part can be concluded. Well we know in the beginning we had a trail, we know reason that could not be proven was given and the trail was closed. Since this has happened more than once and over the course of several years in tends to lead toward people seeing anything as an attempt to take away lands.

I was very specific in my points about things I thought were needed in the plan, both a process to allow us to perform trail maintenance and a process that will allow for future trails to be opened with the growing demand and to keep trails from overuse and errosion. I think both points were very well received by Patrick, however it looked like Francisco was cringing just a bit.

I will post my full thoughts on the other thread... then again it might just be a blank post then... :D

My1stJeep
02-27-2006, 11:02 AM
No problem, fact is that you and I might agree on this more than you thinkg (can't believe we are agreeing... :eek: :confused: :D )

I can respect not ready to talk about it yet (information you are getting from ex-intern. When you are ready I would love to hear what you have found out.

Yes fundig creates a boat load of issues. Also having to do it over again does not help when funding is short.

I agree, many fuzzy answers were given, which only mad those who were angered even more hot tempered. While I agree some of the responses they gave did not make me happy and some times made my blood boil, I did not raise my hand until I knew I could control my comments and not say something with the intent to solicit an angry response.

I totally agree, valid or not the comments and pretty much so personal attacks toward the BLM were not helpful to our cause one bit. I was just giving reasons why I can understand their mindset and whey they were upset, but I agree it was not the time nor the place. I also did not appreciate the lack of respect that the one individual was giving Patrick as he went on a personal attack of Francisco. While not a fan of the tactics he has used, the things he has done, a personal attack on him in that forum was wrong and even worse when Patrick tried to defuse the situation and step in he was basically told to back off, I want an answer. That was very bad form on our part.

I think the suggestion that we call and apologize to Patrick is a great idea, he was being penalized for his previous reign holder.

On your previous post you said you did not know the trails so your comments would only be taken as a vote. Not so. My comments about a process to allow future trail openings had nothing to do with a specific trail, but Patrick said that is what they want to hear and include. So if you think education, enforcement, trail maintenance, process for future growth, and anything else along those lines is important you do need to write your comments too, they will count.

I agree not knowing all the facts about how they make their decision makes it hard to fight. Keep in mind that is by design, there are some within all organizations that are far to one side of an issue and will do less than nice things to get there way, like not giving you all the information about why they close a trail. Then again the reason a trail was closed and what they then tell you in front of a crowd not matching also don't help the mindset of the crowd. I will tell you this in the discussion about one of the trail closures the reason given in the meeting Saturday was a lie, it was not what was given previously for the trail closure. This did also lend a hand towards the meeting taking a downward spiral. Not in anyway to I see it as justification, just giving everyone some insight as to why some may have been losing their temper.

I agree, we are pissed off. They do need to know it. They also need to know that we are hesitant to trust them. Both factual points, both needed to know where both sides stand, but we have to be able to bring them up in such a way that we don't put them on the defensive and feel like they need to call meetings early. We did a very poor job conveying our concerns in these areas and made it more like a personal attack. Very bad for our side IMO.

JMO Sounds really strange to say I agree with you OIIIIO, does it feel as strange to you??? :D :D

My1stJeep
02-27-2006, 11:28 AM
I will look forward to your PM.

I guess my humor did not ring through, I meant with all the other discussions you and I have had where we are usually on the opposite side of the topic it fealt strange to be agreeing...LOL :D It was just meant as a funny side note...

SavageSun4x4
02-27-2006, 11:40 AM
I agree, many fuzzy answers were given, which only mad those who were angered even more hot tempered.

I think the suggestion that we call and apologize to Patrick is a great idea, he was being penalized for his previous reign holder.

I agree, we are pissed off. They do need to know it. They also need to know that we are hesitant to trust them.

We did a very poor job conveying our concerns in these areas and made it more like a personal attack. Very bad for our side IMO.

Fuzzy answers are given when ambush and one does not have the facts and or answers at hand and that was clear.

I disagree with the call(s) to Patrick. It only reopens the wound each time and goes to interfere with his daily and I am sure very busy schedule. I suggest leaving it and him alone. Furthermore, to call and apologize only reinforces the fact we were wrong leave it alone! If you want to do some damage control, write a letter, but do not call.

Yes, they need to know we are pissed off and hesitant to trust. As you said we did a very poor job of conveying it. We put it on a personal level. Patrick was almost pleading to us to move forward, he told us many times, there was a new sheriff in town, and things would be different. Repeatedly he stated he was on our side and was going to provide us support and even better, work with us not against us.

I can only imagine the conversation on the way back to Tucson. Our adversaries stating see I told you so, these Jeepers are just a bunch of red neck jerks who trash the trails, you saw their attitude.

My1stJeep
02-27-2006, 12:40 PM
Good point Don, better to just put it in a letter.

However I kinda of disagree a bit on the fuzzy answers. Yes it can come from being blind sided, however it can also come from giving one answer to a small group and knowing that giving that same answer in that room would start even deeper personal attacks. Knowing he had done wrong he was trying to cover his tracks, he knew the right answer that would suffice, but also knew he has given a different answer previously and some of those peope were in the room. He was stuck between a rock and a hard place so the only way to go was be fuzzy.

Even when blind sided if you have your facts straight your answers can be more clear cut than what we got. I do think the personal attacks had him on the run and agree the conversation on the way back down to Tucson was more than likely not to our advantage, lucky for us they did not ride together and I can only hope their cell phones were not working well.

As often as Patrick said there was a new sheriff in town you would have figured we would have caught on. I think having Francisco there was a huge mistake, those really angry at him overlooked Patrick and focused on Francisco. All out questions should have been directed (politely) to Patrick and let him defer if he so chose. He truly does sound like he is on the side doing what is right and fair, which for once will include us rather than exclude us.

I hope this is all taken as a learning experience so that we do better in the future.

Triple-XJ
02-27-2006, 03:13 PM
Every one of us has a right to be bent out of shape, THIS IS OUR LAND that they manage for us. From my observations, the previous managers of the Tucson office have their own personal agenda :mad:

What burns my arse is the fact that we have people in our group that have studied, or ARE; Geologists, Engineers, Biologists, Pathologists Wildlife specialists or just down right good people that are willing to lend a hand to specific government entities. Our group is well known by the BLM and other offices, so my question is this;


How come we could go to them and offer our help with trail clean-ups, but the THEY can't come to us and say, "Hey guys, that's great that you want to do a clean-up. But right now we have a more serious issue. We need some-one to put up signs because we are understaffed and people are still using some sensitive areas." Or what ever the case may be. :mad: :mad:
What kind of public relationship do they have :rolleyes:








However I kinda of disagree a bit on the fuzzy answers.

a bit fuzzy,

Their answers were CLEAR AS MUD

I hope Patrick is the "stand up person" he appears to be, then maybe some of the smoking mirrors will diss-appear :cool:

SavageSun4x4
02-27-2006, 04:34 PM
Every one of us has a right to be bent out of shape, THIS IS OUR LAND that they manage for us.

How come we could go to them and offer our help with trail clean-ups, but the THEY can't come to us and say, "Hey guys, that's great that you want to do a clean-up. But right now we have a more serious issue. We need some-one to put up signs because we are understaffed and people are still using some sensitive areas." Or what ever the case may be.

Yes we do and yes its their job to manage for us. No doubt, however, there are lots of groups atv, greenies, bird watchers etc, etc and they all have their own agenda. The BLM must manage for the people BY the people. However it will not aid our cause or do us any good, in fact it will only cause harm when we show up 'pissed off' and shove red shirts in their faces. BONK! Wrong answers and you don't get to spin the cash wheel or get any more OHV trails added...

They cannot come to us for anything. If they do they are in big trouble. They cannot show any kind of favortism nor can they ask a outside enity to perform any duties or they are in violation of the Federal contracting rules and regulations. Much like you will not hear the military endorse a certain weapon, rifle, pistol or knife. Just not allowed and you are in danger of losing your job.

Triple-XJ
02-27-2006, 05:44 PM
Yes we do and yes its their job to manage for us. No doubt, however, there are lots of groups atv, greenies, bird watchers etc, etc and they all have their own agenda.
The BLM must manage for the people BY the people.

Well, to me it seems that previous managment of that office had their own PERSONAL AGENDA .......



They cannot come to us for anything. If they do they are in big trouble. They cannot show any kind of favortism nor can they ask a outside enity to perform any duties or they are in violation of the Federal contracting rules and regulations. Much like you will not hear the military endorse a certain weapon, rifle, pistol or knife. Just not allowed and you are in danger of losing your job.

If you want to split hairs thats fine, my point is that we have a LARGE GROUP of people that DON'T belong to an "Orginized" club and they are willing to volunteer for just about anything that has to do with the great outdoors.

I dont know about you Don, but I was born and raised in Az. and I like Native fish, birds, deer, lizards and so on. I am also about ecological resoration, conservation and preservation. WHEN ITS JUSTIFIED!!!!

So lets put some frickin signs up, huh!

Triple-XJ
02-27-2006, 05:59 PM
I quess us wheelers are only good for picking up some-one elses shotgun shells and beer cans, if we do more ecological work it would be a conflict of intrest :rolleyes: BS

Triple-XJ
02-28-2006, 02:41 PM
I hope we are always working towards those goals...

Why wait for the problem?

"Ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure"

Agreed! :cool: