To Whom It May Concern:
I’m writing in behalf of an online forum (
www.rme4x4.com or Rocky Mountain Extreme) of over 14,000 users with motorized interests in/around Utah. We are quite a diverse group ranging from extreme rock crawlers to backcountry explorers. Our vehicles and interests range from extremely modified “tube buggies” to basically stock vehicles with all terrain tires. We have sections for ATV, motorcycle and “other” categories. The site has evolved over the years from a rockcrawling site to more of an exploring type site with a sprinkling of all kinds of recreational use. Hiking, biking, motorcycles, rockcrawling etc. It’s become a great site for people to share information about the great and amazing landscapes available for exploring in Utah. We discuss things such as the potentially confusing and complex land use management areas in the areas we choose to recreate.
All of the users of this site share one thing. A passion for responsible mixed use of available lands. The Glen Canyon Recreation Area is managed by the National Parks Service and charged with managing the area which contains an amazing amount of diverse terrain and could be an overwhelming space to manage with the resources available.
This group’s travel in the area is likely measured in the thousands of nights spent in the area per year. This would be difficult to measure but this travel plan is an item of concern for our user base.
Being an actual recreation area surrounded by National Monuments and State and National Parks, we feel that the “recreation area” part of the Glen Canyon Recreation Area name should be a big part of the mission of this management plan. National Monuments and State and National Parks are truly treasures that should be preserved. The Glen Canyon Recreation Area borders quite a number of those and is a truly unique opportunity to give motorized users access to similar terrain in an area that is quite strictly managed. These areas can be otherwise inaccessible to those users that are not hiking or using equestrian means of travel which is the “preferred” method in monuments and parks. Limiting motorized travel in the Glen Canyon Recreation area in any manner will affect these types of users.
With the above in mind, Rocky Mountain Extreme (rme4x4.com) supports proposal E of the NPS Glen Canyon Off-Road Vehicle Management Plan with some reservation on a few points that follow.
- All current routes should remain open to vehicles. We support mixed use of all routes.
- The proposed permit process is incredibly vague and undefined. Without definition, this could be an incredible hassle and/or restrictive. If permitting is deemed necessary, some kind of a web based permit system would seem to be the only sustainable method due to the size of the area in question. Permits should be simple, affordable and without usage limits.
- The reopening of historically open routes unless they are found to have archeological or historical value (it could be argued that motorized travel is historical use and those routes could be subjected to a review/approval process?)
- We support the outlined “open travel areas”. This will allow those users looking for that type of recreation to those designated spaces. Behavior and impact of those users is different than those users that are seeking a “backcountry” experience.
- This Glen Canyon Recreation Area is an ever changing landscape due to natural environmental factors. These changes can and will affect routes of travel. There seems to be no provision for modifying or creating routes to established points of interest or upcoming areas of interest. Could there be some language included in the plan that groups could petition for routes to be opened or modified due to natural forces or “closed” historically open routes? A system for maintaining or establishing routes should be defined due to the proposed long term effects of this travel plan.
- Closing routes or play areas would likely have a potentially detrimental effect on the remote travel plans of all current users that use the area. That would push current “play area” users out on to the established routes. Backcountry vehicle sales are at an all time high. Closing areas would push usage pressure onto the few remaining open routes/areas.
