Opposing the Potential Designation of a Greater Canyonland National Monument

[JL Rockies]

Another good move would be to write to the companies which did not sign the letter and let them know that you are pleased to see that they are not supporting this effort. When we took on GM we also encouraged people to write to Ford and Chrysler thanking them for not adopting animal testing.

 

[Jonathan]

Agree! We could all start with Camp Chef. https://www.facebook.com/campchef?fref=ts They are the only company to date to publicly redact their signature.

 

[zukijames]

Ashley Korenblat ashley@westernspirit.com	1:00 PM (4 hours ago)		​
to me

Hi James,

Not sure where you are getting your info, but it will not close one bike trail or motorized route. The point is to protect against oil and gas and other extractive industries around the National Park.


Ashley


so do you think all the companies are just playing dumb? or did suwa lie/ trick them?

 

[Herzog]

Reply back asking if they even read the document they signed and point out the sections where it says immediate closures.

 

[zukijames]

i dont think any of them read it..

maybe we could put together a letter with the sections that talk about closure . because it seems like everyone who signed it is saying it will keep access open for everyone including ohv's and they just signed it to protect it from gas companies

 

[brandonlmb]

Signed and emails send out.

 

[gorillaxj]

Signed petition and Emails sent. Letters will be dropped off in the mail tomorrow for a repeat/physical copy. I greatly appreciate this thread as I have been thinking about how/who exactly to contact and what details to put into it. Was a great platform to get it done and add my thoughts to. Thanks! ontpo FB postings....

well I have been posting and posting on FB, glad to see lots of other posts with an "anti-monument" outlook.

 

[jentzschman]

Signed and e-mails sent

 

[zukijames]

i know its just facebook but i think it will get alot of businesses to atleast rethink!

and everyone should thank camp chef for making the right choices

 

[Stephen]

How goes it everyone? I see that companies Facebook pages are getting hit pretty hard. There seems to be a pushback on some of the Facebook pages from people opposed to recreation in Utah. Lets get out there and hit back. Keep motivating people on other forums as well!

 

[zukijames]

it seems like most are claiming they support ohv access and then thats that .

and the pushback from the anti access people seem to have replys made and ready to post .. i cant believe how many people are posting and saying they support the companies!

 

[Olaf]

Yes, I noticed several comments in favor!!! We must keep up the momentum and ask others to post. If we don't then we'll be seen as insignificant.
I will be contacting all AreaBFE corporate sponsors and the like to contact these companies as well. Several of our supporters have very large social network presence and could have a very big impact!

 

[Jonathan]

The problem is that no one really knows what the OIA is proposing. Assuming that the SUWA has nothing to do with it I feel that the amount of support based on a one page document is disturbing.


Facebook pages for the signers on the document have been inundated with people posting support for the proposal in the last day with those against or cautioning against it have decreased dramatically. Continued momentum is key.

 

[Jonathan]

A reply posted on FB by Rim Tours:


"Thank you for taking the time to learn more about this important issue of protecting the area that we both want to continue using for recreation. I think we agree that the beauty and recreational opportunities of the Canyonlands area is what brings us back to enjoy this amazing landscape time and again. My business depends on the area retaining its wild feel and unobscured vistas remaining free from oil rigs and mining scars. I believe many visitors would cease to come here if we allow the mineral extraction industry to have their way with our resources. There are plenty of nearby areas more appropriate for responsible mineral extraction.


My business also depends on continued access to our public lands by bicycle and 4wd vehicles on legally created roads and trails. The National Monument proposal by the Outdoor Industry does not include closure of any legal roads and trails and envisions protecting an area much like the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument did. We run vehicle supported bike trips on that monument and use 4wd roads throughout that monument which allow us to access the backcountry that today is free of significant mineral development.


Please don’t make the mistake of confusing our proposal with earlier requests for wilderness designation for the Greater Canyonlands area. The signers of the recent letter from the Outdoor Industry Association are interested in preserving the economic benefits of the recreation industry which depends on public lands being accessible to all responsible users. Feel free to contact me with questions.


Sincerely, Kirstin Peterson"


My Reply:
Kristin Peterson. While your response sounds like you are in support of keeping the proposed monument OPEN to vehicle traffic the ONE page document from the Outdoor Industry Association specifically states "Federal land use
plans inappropriately open scenic and undeveloped land to drilling and mining and fail to address exploding
off-road vehicle use that is damaging riparian areas, cultural sites, soils and solitude." It says nothing about protecting existing access. I would ask you to redact your support until a comprehensive proposal is drafted that does not preclude this important user group.

 

[SportSawyer]

A few points:

The OIA hasn't created the "National Monument proposal", they have ".... signed a letter in support of designating the Greater Canyonlands area as a national monument."

The proposal comes from SUWA. See: http://www.suwa.org/issues/greatercanyonlands/

SUWA "made a formal request to the Secretary of the Interior requesting that Secretary Salazar bar off-road vehicle (“ORV”) use on 1,050 miles of ORV route in sensitive habitat, streams, wetlands, riparian areas, archaeological sites and other vulnerable areas until it can conduct further studies on the impacts of the activity and determine whether it is, in fact, a sustainable use."

So the Petition / Proposal would close "1,050 miles of ORV route(s)" until "further studies" are completed, appealed, and litigated at huge expense to the BLM. Anyone who thinks many of those 1,050 miles would be re-opened is a fool.

The current open routes are those that have already gone through extensive analysis during the RMP process. SUWA didn't like the result, even though thousands of miles were closed with the RMP, and now they want more closed. Once they get these closed, they'll come up with new reasons to close what remains open. That's the way they work, and "compromise" is always unilateral.

 

[gorillaxj]

I was looking around and came across this letter from Deseret Bistro in Moab.... I feel a lot of companies have not fully read the letter., by why hasen't anyone other then camp chef retracted it?

Deseret bistro - "Hello:

Thank you for the e-mail and also bringing this to my attention. I assure you that, while we have spoken to the folks who organized this letter in the past, we were under the impression that we were simply speaking out against exploitation of this land for oil drilling. Admittedly, we did not receive a copy nor did we take the time to look through any letters that were signed on our behalf which is obviously a gross oversight and for that I apologize. There is not a valid excuse other than we were very busy at the time and truly didn’t realize that we were signing a “much bigger” picture initiative. While I can understand the need to protect certain areas, I do believe in access to these wonderful areas and understand that motorized vehicles and roadways are a necessity for access a lot of the time.

Having lived in Moab for almost 12 years and Salt Lake for another 8 years prior to that, we are also outdoor enthusiasts! While many of our outdoor pursuits are not motorized, we have absolutely enjoyed some good fun on dirt bikes, jeeps, snowmobiles, etc and also understand that it’s an important aspect of our tourism based economy down here in Moab. We feel that Moab represents a wonderful multi-use model for many other communities struggling with the various user groups all trying to co-exist in the same space, on the same trails, etc. We applaud the efforts of those creating single track trails/spurs off main trails so that those who don’t like the motors can escape that, but we appreciate the fact that everyone has the opportunity to at least access these areas no matter their form of transportation.

While I realize this may not do much to change any opinion, I felt it important to note that we are not 4x4 haters and do not want to close off access to the wonders that this beautiful part of the country has to offer. Again, my apologies for not doing my part in researching this a bit more and knowing what we were actually signing.

Thank you for your time and also consideration in reaching out to us.

Michelle Kelley"

lots of posts/thoughts here. Read more: http://blogs.fourwheeler.com/6817161/editorials/who-hates-4x4s-in-utah/#ixzz2CdvALT5d

 

[Olaf]

Everything that I've seen suggests the the OIA letter and SUWA proposal have a connection despite many of the corporate responses believing that the OIA letter only addresses resource exploration. They must not have read the letter because it clearly states "...exploding off road vehicle use..." as one of the problems, and the SUWA proposal states nearly the same verbiage.

A few points:

The OIA hasn't created the "National Monument proposal", they have ".... signed a letter in support of designating the Greater Canyonlands area as a national monument."

The proposal comes from SUWA. See: http://www.suwa.org/issues/greatercanyonlands/

SUWA "made a formal request to the Secretary of the Interior requesting that Secretary Salazar bar off-road vehicle (“ORV”) use on 1,050 miles of ORV route in sensitive habitat, streams, wetlands, riparian areas, archaeological sites and other vulnerable areas until it can conduct further studies on the impacts of the activity and determine whether it is, in fact, a sustainable use."

So the Petition / Proposal would close "1,050 miles of ORV route(s)" until "further studies" are completed, appealed, and litigated at huge expense to the BLM. Anyone who thinks many of those 1,050 miles would be re-opened is a fool.

The current open routes are those that have already gone through extensive analysis during the RMP process. SUWA didn't like the result, even though thousands of miles were closed with the RMP, and now they want more closed. Once they get these closed, they'll come up with new reasons to close what remains open. That's the way they work, and "compromise" is always unilateral.

 

[Olaf]

Is Michelle from the Desert Bistro going to ask them to remove her from supporting the letter?

I was looking around and came across this letter from Deseret Bistro in Moab.... I feel a lot of companies have not fully read the letter., by why hasen't anyone other then camp chef retracted it?

Deseret bistro - "Hello:

Thank you for the e-mail and also bringing this to my attention. I assure you that, while we have spoken to the folks who organized this letter in the past, we were under the impression that we were simply speaking out against exploitation of this land for oil drilling. Admittedly, we did not receive a copy nor did we take the time to look through any letters that were signed on our behalf which is obviously a gross oversight and for that I apologize. There is not a valid excuse other than we were very busy at the time and truly didn’t realize that we were signing a “much bigger” picture initiative. While I can understand the need to protect certain areas, I do believe in access to these wonderful areas and understand that motorized vehicles and roadways are a necessity for access a lot of the time.

Having lived in Moab for almost 12 years and Salt Lake for another 8 years prior to that, we are also outdoor enthusiasts! While many of our outdoor pursuits are not motorized, we have absolutely enjoyed some good fun on dirt bikes, jeeps, snowmobiles, etc and also understand that it’s an important aspect of our tourism based economy down here in Moab. We feel that Moab represents a wonderful multi-use model for many other communities struggling with the various user groups all trying to co-exist in the same space, on the same trails, etc. We applaud the efforts of those creating single track trails/spurs off main trails so that those who don’t like the motors can escape that, but we appreciate the fact that everyone has the opportunity to at least access these areas no matter their form of transportation.

While I realize this may not do much to change any opinion, I felt it important to note that we are not 4x4 haters and do not want to close off access to the wonders that this beautiful part of the country has to offer. Again, my apologies for not doing my part in researching this a bit more and knowing what we were actually signing.

Thank you for your time and also consideration in reaching out to us.

Michelle Kelley"

lots of posts/thoughts here. Read more: http://blogs.fourwheeler.com/6817161/editorials/who-hates-4x4s-in-utah/#ixzz2CdvALT5d

 

[gorillaxj]

Sadly it seamed as though she noticed it was more then she intended but still was not walking away from it... maybe if more contact her directly they will.

 

[Stephen]

Response I got from Mammut:

Dear Stephen ... thanks for your feedback. I'm just checking what this is all about with our person responsible for the States. Thanks for your patience. We take our clients opinion always very serious.

Greetings,
Peter

My response:

Thank you for taking a look into it. I'm concerned that perhaps your company didn't understand fully what they were signing on to. Camp Chef and Deseret Bistro, two other companies listed as signatories, have both stated that they were never sent a copy of the letter before it was sent to the President and have since asked the OIA to remove their names.
I love the Mammut products that I've owned over the years and I hope that your company will withdrawl its support from this proposal to limit recreational opportunities in Utah.