BLM Moab Resource Managment Plan

[Seth]

BLUERIBBON COALITION ACTION ALERT:

MOAB BLM SCHEDULED TO RELEASE DRAFTS OF NEW MANAGEMENT PLAN THIS SUMMER

ANALYSIS OF PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVES POSTED ON SHARETRAILS.ORG


The Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) Moab and Monticello Field Offices are preparing new Resource Management Plans and new Travel Management Plans. There isn't an activity occurring in these two field offices that won't be affected by these new plans.

BLM began this process back in 2003. During 2003 and 2004 the Moab BLM held meetings and received public comment on various planning issues.

Since that time the BLM has been working to formulate a range of management alternatives, each with a different theme or emphasis. BLM is set to release a Draft Resource Management Plan, Draft Comprehensive Travel Management Plan and the related Draft Environmental Impact Statement(s) (Draft EIS) in the summer of 2007.

The Moab BLM has given the public a 'sneak peak' at their proposed management alternatives. The information is available on the web at: www.blm.gov/rmp/ut/moab/ BRC has reviewed the information and posted a brief analysis on our website. Just go to www.sharetrails.organd click the "Moab Update" button on the right.

Moab BLM is proposing drastic changes from traditional public land management!

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.

Beginning sometime this summer, the BLM will move to a critically important stage in the process: the release of the Draft Plans and Draft EIS. There will be a limited public review and comment period in which all of the various stakeholder groups as well as the general public can submit comments and suggestions to the BLM.

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 is initiating 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.

BRC's Moab Partners will receive the Moab Update, a special quarterly newsletter dedicated to the latest news on BLM's planning process. The Moab Update will keep you informed about how your donation is being used and is the best way to keep informed about potential changes in the Moab area. In addition, BRC's Moab Partners receive a limited edition "Moab Partner" T-Shirt and sticker combo. Check the details on BRC's Moab Partnership page: http://www.sharetrails.org/public_lands/index.cfm?section=Moab2

Why is this so important?

Let me explain it this way; future recreational uses in the Moab area will depend on how the Final Resource Management Plan and Travel Plan are written. That's because these agency plans are open to interpretation and revision via appeal and litigation.

The best example I can give on this is the way BLM's preliminary alternatives are currently written. In the Bookcliffs Special Recreation Management Area (see Appendix F ) the Moab BLM has the management proscription as "primitive" in the administrative setting (no motorized and no mountain bikes allowed). But the travel plan shows roads and trails in the area and BLM admits some mountain bike trails may exist there. Which will hold sway when SUWA or some other radical group marches in to federal court to close a road? The answer depends on the way the document is written!

We are going to need a full team of legal professionals, NEPA experts and even biologists if we are going to stop the unfair and arbitrary closures. That will require a commitment from the very people who enjoy this wonderful area. This is why joining our Moab Partnership is so important.

I want to thank you in advance for your help. Together, we can keep this spectacular recreation destination open.

Brian Hawthorne
BlueRibbon Coalition
208-237-1008 ext 102


More info on the web:
BRC'S MOAB UPDATE PAGE http://www.sharetrails.org/public_lands/index.cfm?section=MoabUpdate

BRC'S PARTNERSHIP PAGE
http://www.sharetrails.org/public_lands/index.cfm?section=Moab2

MOAB BLM PAGE
http://www.blm.gov/rmp/ut/moab/

 

[Kiel]

Sounds like a good idea to level the playing field

 

[greenjeep]

My $10 is on its way!!

Who else is in?

 

[Stephen]

Sticky this! EVERYONE needs to sign up for the Moab Partner program. I don't care how apathetic you are about other land use issues, this is MOAB that we are talking about here. SUWA and the other psedu-religious wacko's are going to do everything they can to limit our access down there, we need to be in a position to fight that. This is the line in the sand, this is the big battle. This one RMP could change everything for us as recreationalists. JOIN AND JOIN NOW!!!

 

[Cody]

I signed up for the 10 per month. I'm going to send this to all of my family and friends that aren't on the board.

 

[SAMI]

my question is, is this more for ATV's or fullsize? or both??... anyone know what does RR4W's opinion is?

 

[Cody]

do you think SUWA differentiates between atv's and 4x4's? They hate us all equally and will be trying to close down all roads to all ORV's.

 

[SAMI]

do you think SUWA differentiates between atv's and 4x4's? They hate us all equally and will be trying to close down all roads to all ORV's.

oh trust me i'm not justifying not paying... just looking for more details is all...

 

[scoutabout]

My dough is on the way. BRC will be working with USA-ALL on this, and I'm sure RR4W will be involved in the process as well. Here's the chance for all us Moab users to "put our money where our mouth is" in a very literal sense. I hope more people contribute.

 

[SAMI]

saweet.... next paycheck...

 

[Don B]

We all need to do our part on all these fights.

I'm in for one year at $120.

Also, our local club has already made a donation to BRC this year, but I'm going to suggest we make another contribution towards this fund. After all, Kanab's RMP is coming up next

 

[Stephen]

my question is, is this more for ATV's or fullsize? or both??... anyone know what does RR4W's opinion is?

This RMP will affect all users of the region, from hikers to resource exploration. RR4W's opinion is probably the same as it has always been, the trails that they use for Safari are their primary concern. If they can keep those usable, they will be happy. All other trails are of lesser concern to them, they'll fight for them but not as hard.

 

[SAMI]

This RMP will affect all users of the region, from hikers to resource exploration. RR4W's opinion is probably the same as it has always been, the trails that they use for Safari are their primary concern. If they can keep those usable, they will be happy. All other trails are of lesser concern to them, they'll fight for them but not as hard.

more power to em!

 

[greenjeep]

For all you RR4W members/associates/supporting members, the club has voted to MATCH any club member who signs up for the Moab Partnership program. Brian Hawthorn will keep track and tell the club know how much we owe. It's like buy one get one free!!!!

The club is very much behind this program!!!

 

[U4WDA]

More information.

The Moab Draft Resource Management Plan (DRMP) is now available!

This document will determine how motorized recreation is managed in Moab for the next 15-20 years. Closures to cross-country travel areas and some existing routes are recommended in most of the alternatives. BRC, USA-ALL, U4WDA, RR4W and others are working on analyses of the DRMP, and more specific information will be available soon.

The comment period extends through November 30th. There are also 4 public meetings. Moab on 9/25, Monticello on 9/26, Grand Junction on 9/27 and Salt Lake City on 10/3. It is important that the motorized recreation community makes a strong showing with both comments and attendance at these meetings (full schedule and details available at http://www.usaall.org/moab).

Mail comments to:
Bureau of Land Management
Moab Field Office
RMP Comments
82 East Dogwood
Moab, UT 84532
435-259-2100

Email comments to:
UT_Moab_Comments@blm.gov

To view the full DRMP, visit:
http://www.blm.gov/ut/st/en/fo/moab/planning/draft_rmp_eia.html

For more information, visit:
http://www.usaall.org/moab

 

[greenjeep]

FWIW


My personal opinion is: Alterative A - best option, but least likely; Alterative D - next best, but probably unrealistic in it succeeding; Alterative C - not bad, not good, but not bad, most likely to be chosen; Alterative B - SUWA's wet dream, pray it never happens.

Basically I think C will be implemented with some modifications, the questions is will the modifications lean more towards B or D; we need to do everything we can to have it lean towards D.

As for trail closures, I talked with Jeff Stevens last night, and it looks like at this point, that under all of the alternatives Jeep Safari trails will remain open. Also, a large percent of the trails marked for closure are north of I-70, mainly in the Book Cliffs. At least that is a little good news.

I will be witholding an official written comment to the BLM until after the 9/25 meeting, and I see some detailed analysis from people like Ber Knight and Blue Ribbon. I think that's our key, detailed oriented comments, tell BLM exactly what we want and why.

 

[Seth]

Near as I can figure I don't see Coyote Canyon on either Alt b or d.

I would like to think I have jerry rigged this map correctly. If I am correct we need to address this.

Anyone in Moab have a yes/no on this?

 

[drtsqrl]

Near as I can figure I don't see Coyote Canyon on either Alt b or d.

I would like to think I have jerry rigged this map correctly. If I am correct we need to address this.

Anyone in Moab have a yes/no on this?

I haven't been able to confirm it yet, but I doubt that Coyote is in the travel plan. I will post when I can verify one way or the other. If it is not listed, we will definately want to ask for it in our comments to BLM.

 

[valleysol]

Everyone,
Comments for the Moab RMP are due in 30 days. We all need to get our comments in as soon as possible. If I had to choose one of these alternatives it would be A, But they will never accept the no-action alternative, so then I would have to go with alternative D with some changes. Some of those changes would be to increase the size of the open riding area at White Wash and to change several routes from Motorcycle only to Motorized routes, with the addition of a few routes that were left off there inventory. I will be including in my comments some maps that will go into detail about my comments.
I hope that everyone that uses OHV’s will take some time to comment to the Moab BLM field office even if you don’t go into as much detail as some of us will, let them know that you enjoy recreating using OHV’s and how important having the routes, washes, and trail’s available with a variety of views, vistas, and terrain. Let them know what vehicles you use, what areas, what special needs you and those that recreate with you have. For example; I have a friend that rides with me that is on the heart transplant list that cannot visit public lands without motorized vehicle access. (He did that grueling ride on May 11)
If you only can make a comment as to which alternative you prefer, that’s better than not commenting at all. You don’t need to be a legal expert or understand the entire RMP process. This is time to let your opinions, and desires for routes to be herd. Every comment is important even if others may think it was lame.

After you comment on the Moab RMP start looking at the Price FO RMP. Comments are due Dec 13 07
Vernal due Jan 3 08
Kanab Jan 10 08
Richfield Jan 23 08

I received a few phone calls yesterday with some very good questions. So I’ll try to relay some of them to you, you may have some of the same ones.

Q. How do we identify a route we want left open?

A. The best way would be to use the name of a geologic name to a canyon, mountain, or wash that the route travels along. Or give the township, Range and sections the route goes throw. These can be found on the BLM EDITION USGS Surface Management Status 1:100,000 maps. Many people want to use names of what clubs or others call routes or trails, this may not be a good idea. For example there is a trail that goes from Crystal geyser to Salt wash along Little Grand Wash, I have maps from several clubs that identify this trail as; Little Grand wash Trail, White sands trail, Brian’s Trail, Crystal Geyser trail, and the little grand to salt wash connector. Also on these same maps there is different names for the same route for what I call the tubes, some other groups call them the shoots, the slots, the half pipes and the north wash Dead cow wash. I have 2 maps from different clubs from back in the early 1990s that show Dead cow wash as the north fork of Red wash. So if possible township range and sections would most likely be best.

Q. Would form letters be the best way for us to respond?

A. I say NO; Form letters do some good but say the same thing those reading the comments stack them in one pile. And only read one and makes one comment for the pile. Every letter that is personal and different receives review and comments for that comment. My opinion is the more personal comments the better even if they are short and not very specific as to all the trails. I see more good in letters saying how much a family enjoys recreating in an area using the routes to access scenic vistas with there 4X4 or the challenge of riding a wash on there OHM with friends and family as a pile of letters from a group with all kinds of legalize with just a signature. That’s just my opinion.

Q. Are Maps good to add with comments?

A. Yes Yes Yes, If you have a lot of routes a large map is OK if commenting on a few smaller routes a small map with good detail (81/2”X11”) is great, try to get entire route on page, use as many as needed (a lot of routes a lot of maps). National Geographic TOPO, ALL TOPO maps and other Map programs are great for this. Photocopies of map sections with lines (color that stands out) work also.

Q. Do my comments really matter and will they do any good?

A. Yes they matter. Your comments are saved and documented. If you turn in a route on a map it documents that the route was there prior to there decision, and a change of travel plan. As to how much good they will do, I don’t know but I can say, “ If you don’t comment you have no right to complain about the outcome.”

The best that I can tell everyone is it is very important that everyone comments on all the RMP’s that are now in the works. After the decisions are made there will be only limited areas with open riding. And the rest will be designated routes only. This is your chance to make sure your cherished routes are designated.

Dates To keep in Mind
MOAB November 30 2007
Price December 13 2007
Vernal January 3 2008
Kanab January 10 2008
Richfield January 10 2008

You can get information on all of these RMP’s By going to http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en.html click on the map of the US on Utah then on the Field office. There is a lot of maps and information to go over but if you take one at a time it not so bad

Dale

 

[Herzog]

Thank you for posting Dale!

I'm going to be drafting my letter and getting it out by early next week.