- Location
- Riverton, UT
Would it be possible for you to visit their office at least twice a week and let us know of any changes or developments in the process?
Cedar City RMP
- Thread starter anderson750
- Start date
Would it be possible for you to visit their office at least twice a week and let us know of any changes or developments in the process?
Skylinerider
Wandering the desert
- Location
- Ephraim
I'll stop in there when I can, and see what's new, or if there is anything we need to take to them (new routes etc) I can do that as well.
- Location
- Riverton, UT
Thanks, keep us posted.
Sorry, I wasn't clear. They DID know about Frisco Peak and DIDN'T suggest closing that particular area to motorized travel. They just mentioned as a general idea that they might use topographic contour lines in areas that they don't know well and where they don't receive any public input to guide them in analyzing the area for closure. I used Frisco Peak as an example of why that is a silly idea.
Yes they are! But, if, for some reason, they decide to throw SUWA a bone. And designate an area or two, WE need to have sufficient comments in so that they don't dare designate those areas beyond any true roadless boundaries.
I wish I understood the process better. I wasn't involved in public land issues until the tail end of the 2008 RMPs, just in time for the public comment period for the draft alternatives. So this early stuff is still kind of new to me.
But my understanding is that this IS THE time for meaningful public comment. Once they draft the alternatives, any public comment at that time is really just jumping through hoops and doesn't do much to change anything. They do state explicitly in their documentation that the RMP (designating "areas") will have a slightly different timeline than the Travel Plan (designating specific roads). But, from all official documentation that I can find, there is no mention of a seperate public scoping period for the Travel Plan. So as far as I can tell, based on their published documents, THIS IS IT, until they draft the alternatives.
So, IMHO the result of all our combined comments needs to be (first) for as little area as possible be designated as "closed to motorized travel," and (second) for as many inventoried routes as possible to be designated as "open to motorized travel."
As a side issue, there is also the concern over routes on the ground that aren't on the inventory. The 4x4 challenge routes Wild Wild West and Skull Canyon are the only routes that I know of, there are probably more, but if anybody has knowledge of anything else, they haven't come forward publicly. I have personally assured the BLM that we would have GPS tracks for them before the comment period ends. It looks like I will be able to fulfill this promise thanks to a valiant group from the Utah 4x4 Club who went out yesterday and recorded those tracks. On foot no less, after some mechanical carnage, kudos to them for stepping up. So now we need as many as possible to comment on those routes. And to comment about any proposal that U4 might be making for any SRMAs.
Last edited:
- Location
- Sandy, Ut
They haven't thrown them a bone so much as let their voice be heard, we'll see how much of a bone they are thrown when the actual alternatives are developed and furthermore when an alternative is selected. Lets hope they throw us a bone and develop not only a pro-OHV alternative but also a preferred alternative that would suit us reasonably.
Yes this is a good time for 'official' comment ie from groups like U4, specifically about adding thing that are missing if they will accept them, some cannot and will not, that was specifically my question about 'whats next', will they take more input? Ie added trails. In some of the RMP's they could not take any trail information that didn't appear on their inventories when the RMP process started a year+ before, hopefully this one is different.
The public comment after the alternatives are formed is much more important for the general user imo. They are going to have 4-5 alternatives to choose from, each with varying degrees of closures, wilderness, industry, etc. They will likely have the 'do nothing' which won't ever get accepted. They will have a pro-Wilderness that would be damning to us, a preferred method that best represents their ideal mix (which we can influence with comments now) as well as a couple of in between alternatives. That is when we need our users to step up and comment, let the BLM know they want to visit that area with their OHV.
In this stage its not about asking them to not close something or keep something open so much as develop an alternative that leave a lot open or doesn't close much. The U4 approach during the last RMP's was to support the BLM preferred alternative with some modifications where needed. Its a given they are not going to accept the full-blown wilderness alternative (SUWA) or the full-blown leave it open alternative... but the game is influencing how far to either direction it sways.
Like I said, I don't have a lot of history with these things so I'm not super familiar with the process. Those who are, please continue to educate the rest of us.
Anyhow, they have specifically told me that routes can be added to their current inventory, which is why we are turning in GPS tracks for missing routes. Once the public scoping period ends on 12/27/2010, it is not clear whether or not they will take additional trail data after that date, I am trying to get clarification on that.
- Location
- Sandy, Ut
That is the answer right there
We need to pour over the maps and verify they have all the important routes before that 12/27 deadline.
So if/when we find routes that need to be added to their inventory who is going to organize and submit them to the BLM?
- Location
- Riverton, UT
So if/when we find routes that need to be added to their inventory who is going to organize and submit them to the BLM?
I would like to see them submitted by U4WDA because we are hoping to become the statewide recognized OHV representative to all government agencies. Don Black is our Natural Resource Administrator so he or someone he designates would be the one to make the presentation. I do not want to offend Utah4x4 because they have done so much work on Cedar City but rather give them recognition for their hard work. We are all in this together and I believe we need a single voice so we carry recognition throughout the state. Since both Ron and Don belong to U4 and Utah4x4 I would like to hear what they have to say.
I would like to see them submitted by U4WDA because we are hoping to become the statewide recognized OHV representative to all government agencies. Don Black is our Natural Resource Administrator so he or someone he designates would be the one to make the presentation. I do not want to offend Utah4x4 because they have done so much work on Cedar City but rather give them recognition for their hard work. We are all in this together and I believe we need a single voice so we carry recognition throughout the state. Since both Ron and Don belong to U4 and Utah4x4 I would like to hear what they have to say.
- Location
- Sandy, Ut
I could really care less who's name is on the letterhead but at the end of the day it should be a 'statewide' organization with clout, recognition and a following to call upon.
Once I get those 2 GPS tracks in my hands, I will give them to U4WDA. I have promised the members of Utah4x4 that I would get the tracks turned into the BLM. I have promised the BLM the same. if U4WDA will collect it all and turn it in, that is good enough for me, I will have fulfilled both obligations.
As far as other routes, the inventoried routes maps were available at the scoping meetings. Those 2 are the only routes I knew of that were missing, but I don't know everything about every route in the planning area. I did verify every route in Peter Massey's Backcountry Adventures Utah book, all of which were on the inventory. And I did take my DeLorme and Benchmark atlases with me. There simply wasn't time to verify each and every route, but the ones I did verify were all there. As a general rule, I found that the BLM's inventory included more routes than what my atlases had.
If anybody else knows of anything else, those will need to be submitted as well. The problem is, unless you have a copy of the inventory map (or live close enough to Cedar City and can visit the BLM office in person), how do you know what's missing?
The BLM did say they would put up pdf copies of the inventory maps on their website before the scoping period ends. But there is no assurance as to a specific date. I would say it would be safe to say that there will be very little time between them posting up the maps and the actual deadline.
So if you've got trails you want to verify, and if you didn't make it to a meeting to inspect the maps in person, and if you don't have the ability to visit the BLM office in person, you best be prepared for a very short time period to compare your trails to the BLM inventory maps.
Don B
formerly rebarguy
- Location
- Southern Utah
I'm going to submit a comment for U4WDA and I'll include any information that anyone wants me to. I'll include a proposal for a SRMA at the Swett Hills for sure along with any others we can put together.
I don't think their is any problem with clubs and individuals submitting data and comments on their own while giving the info to U4 or any other group for an "official" comment. Some redundancy is good, if the BLM receives GPS tracks from a few different sources, the are not likely to lose it.
I asked if they would accept data on trails after the Dec.27th deadline and could not get a definate answer. I believe that if we want something added that is not on their current maps we should have it in by the 27th
I don't think their is any problem with clubs and individuals submitting data and comments on their own while giving the info to U4 or any other group for an "official" comment. Some redundancy is good, if the BLM receives GPS tracks from a few different sources, the are not likely to lose it.
I asked if they would accept data on trails after the Dec.27th deadline and could not get a definate answer. I believe that if we want something added that is not on their current maps we should have it in by the 27th
- Location
- Riverton, UT
Don, I will have mine in to you by the 20th. Will that give you time to put it all together by the 27th? (Because of the Christmas holidays)
Don B
formerly rebarguy
- Location
- Southern Utah
No problem,
I'll have a basic outline of the comment ready and add whatever we get right up to the deadline.
Only a few more days left to send in your comments.
SUWA is on an active campaign asking their member to send in comments. Have you sent in your comments to represent your views?
SUWA's form letter asks their members to include the following statement:
"In particular, I urge the BLM to:... Not designate off-road vehicle routes in the areas proposed for wilderness in ARRWA."
Well I've gone through the maps, and like Cruiseroutfit said in an earlier post there are a ton of existing roads and off-road vehicle routes in the "areas proposed for wilderness in ARRA" (see the maps in my earlier post). I suggest that your comments include a general comment that ALL inventoried routes should be included as designated routes on the Travel Plan. And that NO areas should be managed as quasi-wilderness except for those areas previously designated as Wilderness Study Areas.
SUWA is on an active campaign asking their member to send in comments. Have you sent in your comments to represent your views?
SUWA's form letter asks their members to include the following statement:
"In particular, I urge the BLM to:... Not designate off-road vehicle routes in the areas proposed for wilderness in ARRWA."
Well I've gone through the maps, and like Cruiseroutfit said in an earlier post there are a ton of existing roads and off-road vehicle routes in the "areas proposed for wilderness in ARRA" (see the maps in my earlier post). I suggest that your comments include a general comment that ALL inventoried routes should be included as designated routes on the Travel Plan. And that NO areas should be managed as quasi-wilderness except for those areas previously designated as Wilderness Study Areas.
- Location
- Bountiful, land of rocks
OK, I've been a total slacker on writing a letter on this one. Is this where we write while putting in words from above (don't cut and paste as that makes things pretty obvious)
I'm assuming that's the mailbox things should head to?
I'm assuming that's the mailbox things should head to?
- Location
- Riverton, UT
Greg, do you have anything to report from the Cedar City BLM office especially since the Salazar Wild Lands letter?
Skylinerider
Wandering the desert
- Location
- Ephraim
I don't know about Greg, but I stopped in just before Christmas and they were still collecting comments. I've been out of town for a couple weeks so I haven't been in since then.
- Location
- Riverton, UT
Skylinerider, one of my "old folks" malladies is forgetting names and not checking back on the post. Let us know the latest when you can and thanks.
- Location
- Riverton, UT
Trying to update info on the RMP. Did it work???
Cedar City 5-2013.pdfPreview · Download · Upload Revisi
The Draft Evaluation Report For Areas of Critical Environmental Concern public review and comment period ended June 3 2013. They are now developing the Draft RMP/EIS that should be released late 2013 or early 2014. The public 90 day comment period will start spring of 2014 that we need to be aware of and make intelligent comments.
Cedar City 5-2013.pdfPreview · Download · Upload Revisi
The Draft Evaluation Report For Areas of Critical Environmental Concern public review and comment period ended June 3 2013. They are now developing the Draft RMP/EIS that should be released late 2013 or early 2014. The public 90 day comment period will start spring of 2014 that we need to be aware of and make intelligent comments.
Last edited: