Land Use Seminar

[anderson750]

Thanks for the input Kurt. I agree with pretty much everything you said on how to make it better. As far as the rif that was mentioned, I was not part of USA-All at the time, so I do not have anything to add to that.

 

[Tacoma]

Given that I was at a USA-ALL meeting when the Moab RMP letter-writing shindig at the library was going on, and was told that USA-ALL didn't know anything about it, Mike's comment didn't sit real well with me either.

I agree with Kurt's critique.. I'd like to see a LONGER seminar, with fewer speakers maybe, which would give enough time and room to eliminate some of the.. rushed commentary... Seemed like some of the topics really needed more time than was available. That's what I meant in my other post about this event being a great concept and seed of idea to move forward...

Why more people don't get that they NEED to be involved is beyond me.

On a side note I have to comment about Mike Swensons commentary at the seminar. He mentioned the 'rif' between himself (Usa-All) and the 4wd community based on his 'advice' that the public comment period is not the 'silver bullet' for fighting this stuff. Unless I'm totally off mark on this particular rif, it had nothing to do with us thinking we had a silver bullet rather that Usa-All wasn't even going to take aim at a target Ie zero response to giant RMP's. The 4wd community did not start our approach at the comment period, we were there at the initial scoping 5-6 year earlier, in full force at the alternative scoping meetings and yeah I feel our users rocked the public comment period. Read the RMP decisions and when you see things like 'based on extensive public comment' as a reasoning factor for maintaining access, I call it a win. Granted these RMP's are all being contested by SUWA, but we fared out very well in the 6 RMP. Again, I might be off mark on this particular rif but that's the only one I'm intimate with.

 

[scoutabout]

Sounds like it was a good beginning, despite some of Swenson's misleading comments. Fair job USA-ALL.

 

[anderson750]

Sounds like it was a good beginning, despite some of Swenson's misleading comments. Fair job USA-ALL.

 

[Skylinerider]

I'll be honest, Mike's comment did turn me off, and it was part of the reason I left before hearing him wrap things up, that and it ran way over. I did enjoy hearing those people speak, and hand outs would've been great. Overall I'd give it a B+ great first time showing.

 

[anderson750]

Besides wanting more in depth discussion of a couple of the topics, what other topics would you like to see discussed?

 

[ZUKEYPR]

I think overall it was a great starting effort. I don't know about the whole riff issue so I have no comment on that.

What would I do different: Bring it down a few levels. I didn't learn a whole lot of new tactics or info but it seemed to me that it was at a 300 or 400 level of land use rather than a 100 or 200 level if that makes sense.

I could of done away completely with the first speaker. He clearly knows his material but a topic such as that really probably could have been passed by for a first meeting, besides that imho an approach such as what he was pitching (along with his books) for bases on a law suit would take decades. (even though I do agree with him). We don't have decades.

Number 1 bad point! Absolutely there should have been without a doubt handouts on "How to's" and all points of contacts.

Again this is all just to make it better, I was highly impressed at how many political representation was mustered there and how much they were on our side. Thank takes an enormous amount of work to establish those relationships and maintain them. Thank you USA-ALL for putting this together.

 

[jackjoh]

I am withholding comment until tomorrow. I basically agree with all of the above statements about how it could have been better but it is a beginning and what I had hoped would come out of USA-ALL when I was a board member. Will comment on the so called rift after I have had time to think about what to say.

 

[ret32]

Great seminar I thought! Thanks for putting this on USA-ALL. I enjoyed the speakers and I certainly came away with useful advice.

The most useful thing to me personally was the opportunity to hear from the congressional delegation's reps about how to be more effective in communicating with them.

Mark Ward's comments (UT Assoc. of Counties) was useful to me as well. Although I was really expecting his segment to be more about the actual structure of the land use planning cycle, it was an interesting twist (to me that is, it sounds like a lot of you already knew most of this stuff) to think of the counties themselves as a receptacle of public input and an advocate of the public toward the public land agencies.

As far as the timing, length of speakers, etc. I think for a first try, it went extremely well. You'll no doubt get all of those logistics dialed in with a little more practice.

One thing I would have liked to see is some formal recognition of who was there and what groups they represented (i.e. raise of hands how many are here from U4WDA?). Including a quick opportunity for a representative of each group to introduce themselves with a little description of what they are doing to fight the fight. Then, sometime during the seminar, have a dedicated time period for mingling and networking as a crowd. Perhaps some other group is succeeding or struggling with something "my" group has or needs advice on.

 

[anderson750]

One thing I would have liked to see is some formal recognition of who was there and what groups they represented (i.e. raise of hands how many are here from U4WDA?). Including a quick opportunity for a representative of each group to introduce themselves with a little description of what they are doing to fight the fight.

This is something I thought about on my drive home.

 

[ret32]

But most of all! I would LOVE to see some follow up and leadership from USA-ALL on the "action item" detailed by Mark Ward.

Now, I would imagine that many of us individually and/or with our clubs can probably take time out of a trip that's already on our schedule to take on a specific assignment. Check out a few roads from the county maps, take some pictures, and turn it in to U4 or USA-ALL. But without a leader, or a central repository for the information, it will be a feeble and disorganized effort.

 

[Tacoma]

I am not 100% on that, but I want to say U4 tried something like that when Steve Jackson was president? I could very well be mistaken. At any rate it's a good idea that we talked about with Mark Ward a few months ago, and was somewhat sidetracked by uncertainty...
Definitely something I would personally like to get going on. I think there may be a chance with all these different groups more or less heading in the same direction finally.

 

[anderson750]

But most of all! I would LOVE to see some follow up and leadership from USA-ALL on the "action item" detailed by Mark Ward.

Now, I would imagine that many of us individually and/or with our clubs can probably take time out of a trip that's already on our schedule to take on a specific assignment. Check out a few roads from the county maps, take some pictures, and turn it in to U4 or USA-ALL. But without a leader, or a central repository for the information, it will be a feeble and disorganized effort.

If the action item you are talking about is getting an inventory of the routes, we did put together a tool to submit data to one central location with the help of Herzog during the St. George comment period last year. It worked ok, but does need some refinement.

http://www.rme4x4.com/showpost.php?p=699891&postcount=1

 

[ret32]

I am not 100% on that, but I want to say U4 tried something like that when Steve Jackson was president? I could very well be mistaken. At any rate it's a good idea that we talked about with Mark Ward a few months ago, and was somewhat sidetracked by uncertainty...
Definitely something I would personally like to get going on. I think there may be a chance with all these different groups more or less heading in the same direction finally.

If the action item you are talking about is getting an inventory of the routes, we did put together a tool to submit data to one central location with the help of Herzog during the St. George comment period last year. It worked ok, but does need some refinement.

http://www.rme4x4.com/showpost.php?p=699891&postcount=1

Not just an inventory, not just a tool to submit data, but an ORGANIZED effort to compile, share info, and document progress.

For example... I decide to take an extra day on my way to Vegas to do some exploring in West Central Utah. I decide to check out some roads through some SUWA proposed wilderness. So I check their maps against my maps against the county maps and identify a dozen roads in a particular SUWA proposed wilderness. I want to go verify a few of the roads, take pictures, and prepare a statement about my use of the road. I want to use this during some future re-consideration of the area as Lands with Wilderness Characteristics, or Wild Lands designation, or whatever.

My effort would be nice, but it would be 10 times more effective if I could first check with USA-ALL and/or U4WDA and/or my club to see if any of the roads in that area have already been documented. Maybe my efforts are better off on road A instead of road B. Or maybe there is an area 50 miles from my intended exploration that needs more attention and I choose to reroute my trip a little bit. Or maybe USA-ALL has assigned some ATV organization to check out that area and I should instead fulfill an assignment that U4WDA has in nearby XXX area.

Maybe A LOT of this has already been. Hopefully SOME of this has already been done.
But "I" need to know what's been done and what I should do.
My local club needs to know what's been done and what it should do.
U4WDA needs to know what's been done and what it should do.

IMHO Nothing could make these seminars more effective and useful than if USA-ALL takes to heart the messages of the seminar and takes a leadership role on this specific task, utilizing all of its associated user group organizations like U4WDA, ATV groups, motorcycle groups, etc; communicating to each about progress and needs.


Some of the action phrases from Mark Ward as written in my notes:

"4x4 groups need to mobilize, review ARRWA for roads"
"Marshall an effort to make the argument the WE use these roads BECAUSE they are public"
"Start inventory...data...pictures...statements"

 

[anderson750]

I understand now. While it would not be impossible, the logistics of this task would be big. First we would need to get a copy of maps that have been produced by each counties GIS department, next we would need to come up with a way to efficiently get the route information out to the users in a form they can use it in. Next we would need an effective an efficient way to gather, catalog and disseminate the data.

Another detail to work out is gathering the data in a manner that cuts down on the amount of processing. Scott Wheeler could better explain this. He learned a lot of tricks putting together the San Rafael map.

I know it can be done, it is just going to take a huge amount of volunteer effort on the inside to do the work.

Anybody want to help?

 

[Tacoma]

I know it can be done, it is just going to take a huge amount of volunteer effort on the inside to do the work.

Wish in one hand.... No, no. That would be great if there are enough people that WOULD volunteer to run the roads and document this stuff.

 

[scoutabout]

Wish in one hand.... No, no. That would be great if there are enough people that WOULD volunteer to run the roads and document this stuff.

Where were you when we were trying to do this 6 years ago? Wishing in one of your other hands? Wish we would've had some support then, before it was "hip" to be into land use.

This idea is one of the most important things that has never happened. Collection and dissemination of spatial route data. It was always frustrating that this hadn't been attempted sometime in the previous 30 years of the fight (one of the reasons I'm very unimpressed with some of the past efforts). The data collected re SRS was a great start! We need more such projects.

Not so good to see the same excellent ideas coming up every five years (not just this one). Probably won't be necessary the next time this is discussed in five years, closures will be old news by then.

Eric R correctly identified the importance of this issue the FIRST day I ever introduced him to land use. He asked, "Where's your inventory?" Uh, still don't have one. Whoops!

Fantastic idea that I'd support financially.

 

[anderson750]

Wish in one hand.... No, no. That would be great if there are enough people that WOULD volunteer to run the roads and document this stuff.

Your NY sarcasm is coming out.

In all seriousness I would hope we can gather enough enthusiasm to take on a project like that. I look at what we were able to accomplish with the data gathering that Scott talked about with alternative E in the San Rafael in 2007 with only about 10 people working over a period 30 days. We had a plan and system.......it was just on a smaller scale with a group of people using the same system to collect the data.

It's not unrealistic, it's just a tall order.

 

[anderson750]

Where were you when we were trying to do this 6 years ago? Wishing in one of your other hands? Wish we would've had some support then, before it was "hip" to be into land use.

This idea is one of the most important things that has never happened. Collection and dissemination of spatial route data. It was always frustrating that this hadn't been attempted sometime in the previous 30 years of the fight (one of the reasons I'm very unimpressed with some of the past efforts). The data collected re SRS was a great start! We need more such projects.

Not so good to see the same excellent ideas coming up every five years (not just this one). Probably won't be necessary the next time this is discussed in five years, closures will be old news by then.

Eric R correctly identified the importance of this issue the FIRST day I ever introduced him to land use. He asked, "Where's your inventory?" Uh, still don't have one. Whoops!

Fantastic idea that I'd support financially.

Steve, your a lot more tech savvy than me. How would you handle this much data?

 

[Tacoma]

6yrs ago I was roaming the East Coast and unaware of the enormity of the issue. I wish it WAS "hip" to be into land use, we'd be all set and all the trails would be freed.

I don't see any reason NOW, when we have something of a second chance, that some progress on this particular matter can't be made. You know as well as I do that you get what you get, and do what you can with it.

There seems to be a growing interest on the state and county level in the same things we as an offroad community are interested in: keeping the trails open. So I'd like to think that maybe now is the time the help will be there, and maybe, just maybe, the one hand will fill up just a little slower.

Still keeping those Miata catalogs handy, but what could have been done never was, so why complain about it. Yes, it's frustrating, but what's new?

:amy:

Where were you when we were trying to do this 6 years ago? Wishing in one of your other hands? Wish we would've had some support then, before it was "hip" to be into land use.

This idea is one of the most important things that has never happened. Collection and dissemination of spatial route data. It was always frustrating that this hadn't been attempted sometime in the previous 30 years of the fight (one of the reasons I'm very unimpressed with some of the past efforts). The data collected re SRS was a great start! We need more such projects.

Not so good to see the same excellent ideas coming up every five years (not just this one). Probably won't be necessary the next time this is discussed in five years, closures will be old news by then.

Eric R correctly identified the importance of this issue the FIRST day I ever introduced him to land use. He asked, "Where's your inventory?" Uh, still don't have one. Whoops!

Fantastic idea that I'd support financially.