Get out and VOTE!!!!

[utahmike]

Dear Voter,

*******Disclaimer: USA-ALL is a Non-Profit organization as such we DO NOT endorse or support any candidate or party. The information contained in this email is for voter education only*******

Here is your chance to really make a difference…I’m SERIOUS! How can we complain about problems or expect change if we don’t even care enough to vote for those who can help us on access related issues? Many people have fought and died for the right to elect a representative government. All American citizens have the privilege and even the duty to go to the polls and vote. We cannot stress enough the importance that ALL of you get out and vote. The issues we deal with are highly political. Remember that not only does you vote affect your immediate representative but our elected officials in turn elect house and senate leadership. It is that leadership that TRULY sets the tone and agenda for the county for the next few years. Realize the importance of this and elect those who will support leaders who reflect your values and will protect Utah’s interests. The representatives that we choose have the ability to help protect our interests and access to public land. The motorized community and other multiple use advocates must unite and let their voice be heard on Election Day (That’s Tomorrow Tues. Nov 7). Let the candidates know that access to public land is important to you and their stance on these issues will affect the way you vote! Please Vote, The race for the 2nd District congressional seat has been decided by a very small margin in the last few elections, Your VOTE REALLY DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE!

Here is some valuable information about some of the Utah candidates for Congress and their views on public land related issues. Please read carefully and then vote for the candidate that you feel will best represent your interests. For more information on the candidates, polling locations, maps, etc please visit the State of Utah Elections Office website; Also see KSL Election 2006 for additional info.

Last week we sent out information requests to all of the Utah candidates for federal positions. Here are the questions and unedited responses we have received thus far.

1- Why is motorized access to public land in Utah important to you?

2- What will you do, or have you done, to protect motorized access to public land?

3- What are your thoughts on the proposal by wilderness activists to create 9 + million acres of Wilderness in the 22 million acres of federal land managed by BLM?

4- In your opinion how does the closure or restriction of motorized access of public land affect Utahans?

5- Any other thought on related issues.
*******************************************************

 

[utahmike]

U.S. House of Representatives

District 1

KSL Debate http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=321&sid=604829

Rob Bishop (R) Incumbent seeking 3rd term. (Congressman Bishop has been VERY RECEPTIVE to USA-ALL. We have appreciated his work)

1 - The best use of public lands should be for wise and prudent multiple use purposes. That was the original intent and should be maintained. Motorized access to public lands is important so that all Americans have the opportunity to enjoy the lands for which they are all taxed.

2 - We have opposed any closure of roads on forest service property.

We fully support in any way we can state efforts to maintain their RS

2477 rights-of-way. And we helped facilitate the negotiations that successfully maintained the rights of snowmobilers to recreate on northern Utah forest lands.

3 - There are not 9 million acres of federal land that would legally qualify for wilderness designation in the state of Utah.

4 - Closure harms us now and destroys the potential for future generations to enjoy the benefits of the great outdoors.

5 - I support the rights of Utahns to access, use, and recreate on public lands.

Challenger Steven Olsen (D) (We have not met w/ Steve)

District 2

KSL Debate http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=321&sid=607476

Jim Matheson (D) Incumbent seeking 3rd term (Congressman Matheson is the only member of Utah’s Congressional Delegation that has not found time to meet with USA-ALL despite our requests. He has been VERY UNRESPONSIVE to our issues; we have been very disappointed by his lack of involvement.)

Failed to respond.

Challenger LaVar Christensen (R) (State Legislator) (We have met with LaVar and worked with him on access issues, he is HIGHLY responsive to access issues and sensitive to ALL users and the environment)

Intro: I am dedicated to pushing back against extreme environmentalism and excessive federal control and regulation in Utah that denies us access to and use of public lands. I cannot support a concept of "roadless beauty" where we must content ourselves to remain home and look at pretty pictures on calendars of places we can't access and enjoy. Yes, we must be good stewards of the land and have a balanced land use policy but there are far too many examples of extreme restrictions by the government. Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA) has sued Kane County and has cost us over $100,000 in legal fees to date. Utah lost $300 million in the Legacy Highway suit filed by Sierra Club, Mayor Anderson and other "coalition" members. Those funds could have helped pay for the Lake Powell pipeline but are lost and unrecoverable.

The Constitution never contemplated federal ownership and permanent control of land. The government is supposed to "dispose" of public lands. They should be ours upon granting of statehood and they should be subject to local authority and control. I strongly support the 10th Circuit opinion upholding our public roads in the vast open spaces of Utah and will work to support responsible multiple use of those lands.

1) Family recreation is one of the greatest joys of life and the natural beauty of Utah is to be both preserved and enjoyed. The disabled also depend on such access. We can have a balanced system that does not shut down access and fail to recognize that this earth was created for man’s use, benefit, and enjoyment.

2) I have supported such a position in the state legislature and as an attorney and will do so in Congress.

3) See intro above-- I do not accept the threshold premise that the Federal government should be allowed to assert such extreme control over Utah.

4) See intro above.

District 3

KSL Story http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=321&sid=591867

Chris Cannon (R) Incumbent seeking 5th term (Of the entire congressional delegation Congressman Cannon has been the most involved in access issues. He is AMAZINGLY RESPONSIVE to our issues; he has gone above and beyond to protect access to public land in Utah.)

1- Why is motorized access to public land in Utah important to you?

I believe that all Americans should have access to enjoy Utah’s beautiful land. Utah is a beautiful state with many land, water, and wildlife resources. Visitors from all across the globe come to Utah to experience its diverse and pristine land. I feel privileged to be a native Utahn having had the ability to enjoy recreational activities in our state, and believe that others should have the experience to do the same. Despite what opponents argue, we can allow motorized access while still preserving our land.

2- What will you do, or have you done, to protect motorized access to public land?

Since coming to Congress in 1996, I have consistently worked to protect our access to public land. As Chairman of the Western Caucus and as a member of the Resources Committee, I continually work with my colleagues to defend the rights of our citizens to have access to our nation’s land.

The Federal Government owns over 660 million aces of land and every year is increasing its holdings. Over 90 percent of federal land is located in western states. Despite the enormous land holdings already in its portfolio, the federal government continues to spend hundreds of millions of dollars each year to acquire additional land. I support legislation that requires that any acquisition of more than 100 acres of new federal land in the West (defined as states with 25 percent or more of federal lands) be offset by a corresponding sale of existing holdings of equal or greater value.

Additionally, I supported legislation to reform the Endangered Species Act. Over the past thirty years, the ESA has failed to recover endangered species while conflict and litigation have plagued local communities and private property owners alike. Only 10 of the 1,300 species listed as endangered have recovered. The Threatened and Endangered Species Recovery Act, which passed the House earlier this year, addresses several – but certainly not all -- of the long-outstanding problems of the Endangered Species Act.

As a member of the NEPA Taskforce, I traveled around the country to attend meetings on the current state of the environmental law. Since the NEPA was signed into law in 1970, it has never been thoroughly reviewed by any Congressional body. The Act requires federal agencies to document the environmental impact of their actions, including an evaluation of alternatives. NEPA has become a real problem for public land users throughout Utah and the West. The current NEPA process takes too long, costs too much and is often exploited to delay or stop many activities on federal lands designed for multiple use. NEPA is being used to delay and frustrate the efforts of public land users who rely on these areas for their economic survival. Streamlining the NEPA compliance procedures would enable public land managers to devote their efforts to actually managing the public lands and spend less time and money on excessive and duplicative paperwork and litigation.

3- What are your thoughts on the proposal by wilderness activists to create 9 + million acres of Wilderness in the 22 million acres of federal land managed by BLM?

Unfortunately, some would like the Federal government to limit our access to public land, but I believe that citizens should have the ability to enjoy these areas through many various recreational activities.

In its enabling statute, Congress instructed the National Park Service “to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic object and the wild life therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.” I believe that it is important that we maintain Congress’ original intent and allow citizens access for the enjoyment of Utah’s land.

4- In your opinion how does the closure or restriction of motorized access of public land affect Utahans?

The closure of these areas will negatively affect local economies benefiting from dollars spent by motorized users as well as all those who enjoy these lands for recreational purposes. Many Utahns utilize these areas in a variety of ways and restricting access affects generations who have a history of not only enjoying these public lands, but using them wisely.

5- Any other thought on related issues.

Unfortunately, there are some who are trying to limit or deny our access to public lands. In fact, recently the BLM decided to limit motorized access in the Factory Butte region due to inadequate original ESA policy, which is a reason I supported its reform in the House. It is misguided decisions like this that I am committed to work to prevent in Congress. I believe that preserving our land is important but can be accomplished while protecting our right to access public lands.

Challenger Christian Burridge (D) (We have not met w/ Christian)

Failed to respond

 

[utahmike]

US Senate

KSL Story http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=321&sid=594683

Orrin Hatch (R) Incumbent (Senator Hatch has meet with USA-ALL on a few issues, he is understanding of our issues but seems to be somewhat burned out on public land issues, he is responsive to our meeting requests but not as involved as we would like to see.)

Failed to respond

Challenger Pete Ashdown (D) (We have not met w/ Pete but we are pleased he has responded to our questions.)

1- Why is motorized access to public land in Utah important to you?

Pete feels that motorized access to some public lands is an important part of enjoying the beautiful resources we are blessed to have in our midst.

2- What will you do, or have you done, to protect motorized access to public land?

As a US Senator, Pete will put the needs and wishes of local residents first, before the environmentalists and the industrialists. Pete will fight to protect multiple use access to public lands, but will not go against the wishes of those who are affected most by federal public lands decisions. There must be balance for preserving lands without spoil and ensuring access for our enjoyment.

3- What are your thoughts on the proposal by wilderness activists to create 9 + million acres of Wilderness in the 22 million acres of federal land managed by BLM?

Pete talked about this a little bit during the end of the KUTV debate on October 24. Pete will fight for as much wilderness as the local residents want, and will consult with the mayors, county officials, and legislators in the area before deciding on the designation of new wilderness areas. Pete will not give a number of acres because I don't feel that is appropriate for Pete to do without knowing where it is and why it should be designated.

4- In your opinion how does the closure or restriction of motorized access of public land affect Utahans?

Pete believes that some areas need to be closed, but again, the local residents should have the greatest input on that decision. If such closures are not based on science or the wishes of the local residents, Pete feels that contributes toward the cynicism rural residents feel toward the federal government, and increases hostilities in other areas of federal concern (education, energy development, etc).

5- Any other thought on related issues.

From Pete's environment issues page: "Local control and communication is also an essential part of taking care of environment. The declaration of the Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument without local cooperation did more to harm the environment of that area than it did to protect it. The Federal government needs to work in cooperation with local officials rather in opposition. I have confidence in the people of Utah, their love of the outdoors, and their commitment to the future of their children. The majority of Utahns want to preserve and protect their backyards and know best how to take care of their own environment."

*******************************************************

 

[utahmike]

Please remember to get out and vote, and encourage your friends and family to do the same, if your not sure who to vote for at least consider the information contained in this email and choose the candidate that will be best for you and your family. No matter your choice PLEASE GET OUT AND VOTE!!!!!! The direction of our country and access issues is partially in your hands please encourage other to get out and vote and protect our right to access public land! Feel free to forward this to other concerned voters.

 

[SAMI]

i've been arguing with my mom for some time now about why she shouldn't vote for the land closure or, "preservation":-\ .... she's not budging from her views.

-Jason

 

[offroaddave]

i've been arguing with my mom for some time now about why she shouldn't vote for the land closure or, "preservation":-\ .... she's not budging from her views.

-Jason

There's folks on here that vote for land closure.
Not to start a fight or nothin, but dems support land closure.
Nethier party want's to get anything really done.
But I'm voting on land use.





(not that your mom's not on here):greg:

 

[SAMI]

she agrees there should be land set aside for preservation... as do i, but 9+ million acres? i mean, let's get real here... that's nearly half of the available land to close in the state of Utah.

I'd like to see SUWA, with thier huge budget and resources, educate the ATV'ers they are so openly against on thier website... they could easily make it happen, and be affective if they wanted it to... but, they'd rather see huge pieces of land closed because it's a bigger, more noticable win for them on paper...

...whole nother rant...

-Jason

 

[Paul R]

Thanks for all this info it really helps to know where they stand when it comes time to cast the vote.

 

[offroaddave]

she agrees there should be land set aside for preservation... as do i, but 9+ million acres? i mean, let's get real here... that's nearly half of the available land to close in the state of Utah.

I'd like to see SUWA, with thier huge budget and resources, educate the ATV'ers they are so openly against on thier website... they could easily make it happen, and be affective if they wanted it to... but, they'd rather see huge pieces of land closed because it's a bigger, more noticable win for them on paper...

...whole nother rant...

-Jason

I'd have to disagree.
I don't think they care if public land get's closed.
The closer they get to getting what they want, the closer they are to looking for a real job.



anyways, Whole nother rant.