Option A & B

[ZUKEYPR]

I was asked why I don't support Option A of the land-use issue regarding EJS. First let me say it is by far a better option then B. However the reason that I don't "fully" support option A is this; I use the analogy of a ski resort (hey it's the best that I can do). If my family (wife, 3 teenagers) have one period during the year that we all have no obligations to work, school, etc and that happens to be during Easter and we have made plans to come to Utah to ski at the Canyons (I used this resort specifically because it has more trails then any other) and I get there (or find out prior to departure) that many of the "better" trails are going to be closed to me because some private organization has exclusive rights to them, I'm going to be pissed..........extremely. Now you can argue all you want that you should pick another time to go (which I'm sure you will) but the fact is not only might that be the only time that the entire family can take vacation together (which in my personal case it has been for years (due to kids go to other parents in the summer-before someone tries to argue that point) but it's my absolute right as a citizen of this great country to utilize that public land when I want. I am certain I earned that right. You can argue that there are plently of trails that will be open to me at the Canyons to utilize but that dog don't hunt either with me. I want full access.
OK that's "my" opinion so please try to respect it. You don't have to agree with it, I just simply ask you respect it. So don't make a dozen attempts persuade me otherwise and don't try to dissect the **** out of it to minipulate it to your advantage. It is what it is.
May you keep the shiny side up and the rubber side down, peace out.

 

[mbryson]

I'm cool with you thinking that. It is public land after all. I've gotten on an EJS trail during EJS without being registered. Honestly, it wasn't worth waiting, so to me it was 'closed' due to use. I found somewhere else to go. I think if you're bound and determined to run the trail, you can follow them (or beat them out to the trail which is what I'd try to do).


Personally, I avoid EJS due to the lack of ability for me to run trails instead of wait.

 

[rkillpack]

EJS Blues

This last year we went from Gold Bar Rim over to Poison Spider backwards to avoid the Jeep Safari. You only end up fighting them once this way. Sure you have to make some conpromises but you get there in the end.

 

[Rick B]

I agree with you. If you're willing to deal with the hassle you should be able to be out on the trail.

 

[greenjeep]

Fair enough, thanks!

 

[ZUKEYPR]

Fair enough, thanks!

Your welcome

 

[utahmike]

ZUKEYPR,

I completely understand your reasoning. While this may not be a completely comprehensive answer it may explain why many in our community are okay with the RR4W's SRP. It is one more layer between the public and total closure. While you and others may feel it is essentially “closed” during EJS, is it not better than closed period?

The use of SRP’s is valuable to our community. They show real, tangible economic benefit to local economies. Even w/ all the complaining one may hear, Moab knows EJS despite all its associated "problems" is very valuable to local businesses and therefore local governments and citizens. Without EJS there would be one less reason to keep certain trails open.

Granted I may be wrong and certainly other arguments for and against my reasoning could be made. But the fact remains, in order to close this area BLM by law must consider socioeconomic impacts to local economies. We have seen other areas, less intensely used closed. These closures have negatively affected businesses, but in the planning process there was a clear lack of socioeconomic data. (Which could bring up a whole additional argument) BLM wasn’t going to wait for years to collect the data and then see there is real value in motorized recreation, heck no, then they would have to further justify their agenda to close.

With RR4W using these trails we have a cause and effect relationship between an organized event, a lot of people, and a influx of outside cash (very important, economists please back me up). So perhaps you can see this as a minor inconvenience that will allow you to run the trails another day, which I believe is much better than not at all.

Either way we're ALL in this together, motorized community, motorized unity. Take care.

 

[Broncoman]

I'm a little confused zuk doesn't want rr4w to have exclusive access to public lands . But he's is willing to pay for exclusive access to those ski trails that are mostly on forest service land (public lands). They are on permit from the dept. of the interior just like the rr4w are applying for . The only difference is the Canyons has exclusive access all the time not just a couple of trails a couple of days a year ....what would happen if he got to the canyons and refused to pay for access (lift pass) do you think that he would have access to all the trails he wanted to ski ... the Canyons spends a lot of money to maintain the access that they do have and they require payment for that access .. the RR4W maintain trails , fight to keep the trails open ALL year long , and don't charge any thing except a small fee to people who register for the safari. then they have to fight to have access 2 days a year for a couple of the many trails ..IMO to many people have been freeloading on what the RR4W have done for too long . now they think that they are "INTITLED " sure it's public land . but freedom isn't free . HEY GUYS WE ALL HAVE TO STICK TOGEATHER OR LOSE IT ALL TO THE GREENS

 

[UtahFire]

ZUKEYPR,

BLM wasn’t going to wait for years to collect the data and then see there is real value in motorized recreation, heck no, then they would have to further justify their agenda to close.

Either way we're ALL in this together, motorized community, motorized unity. Take care.

I guess there is something I don't understand. If the BLM has an interest in closing areas to a large portion of the public (non-hiking), don't they work themselves out of a job? How much management is required by BLM officials if the land is effectivly shut down?

 

[EZRhino]

Just so y'all know, SUWA supports alternative B. Yes that's right. So does that mean y'all side with SUWA? Here's their latest propaganda:






BLM WILL ACCEPT JEEP SAFARI COMMENTS BY EMAIL


You recently received an Action Alert on the Moab Jeep Safari.
Although snail mail letters and faxed letters are generally better
and receive more attention from the BLM , we know you have limited
time to devote protecting Utah's wild places. Please feel free to
email your comments to BLM as the agency has stated that it will
accept email comments on the Jeep Safari . Email address below.


TAKE ACTION NOW!


BLM SET TO ISSUE BAD JEEP SAFARI PERMIT

The Moab BLM has released its Environmental Assessment (EA) for the
issuance of a 5-year permit for the Easter Jeep Safari and other
off-road vehicle (ORV) events. Unfortunately, it appears that BLM
will soon issue a decision that will include ORV routes or route
segments which are located in areas that are being damaged by - and
that are entirely inappropriate for - ORV use. We hope you can write
a letter today urging BLM to act prudently to protect a few of the
area's outstanding resources, rather than continuing to allow
particular areas to be ravaged by ORV use See below for details and
address information.


YOUR LETTERS CAN HELP.
SUWA submitted an alternative proposal to BLM that would remove less
than 10% of the total miles from the Jeep Safari permit, in order to
protect the most sensitive resources. In particular, SUWA requested
that the newly-proposed route up Arch Canyon and the nearby Hotel
Rock route be prohibited, and that several short segments and spurs
in sensitive areas be omitted from the permit. BLM did not analyze
SUWA's proposal. The BLM's EA includes an alternative -- Alternative
B -- that, while not as protective as SUWA's proposal, is better
than the Proposed Action.

Although BLM has all but said it will issue a decision that will
approve 630 miles of routes on public lands so that the Jeep Safari
and other organized events can use these routes for the next 5 years,
there's still a chance BLM can be convinced to do its job and protect
some of southeastern Utah's most spectacular natural resources,
rather than let them be ravaged indiscriminately by motor vehicles.

WHAT YOU CAN DO
Please take a moment to mail, FAX or email a letter to the Moab BLM
Manager, Maggie Wyatt, and request that she protect the resources
that she manages for all citizens, by:

* choosing Alternative B. Fully analyzing SUWA's alternative would
be even better, but Alternative B is, nevertheless, better than the
Proposed Alternative
* issuing a 1-year permit, rather than a 5-year permit for the Jeep
Safari, as a 5-year Jeep Safari permit would essentially preclude BLM
from considering route designation alternatives in the on-going
Resource Management Plan revision (the agency's long-term management
plan) that would conflict with the 5-year permit.

If you've been to Moab during the Jeep Safari event or witnessed the
aftermath of the event in the canyons around Moab, please include
your stories in your letter to the BLM

DEADLINE
Please MAIL, FAX or EMAIL your letters (including your name and
address) by Monday, October 31 to:

BLM
Maggie Wyatt, Manager
Moab Field Office
82 East Dogwood
Moab, UT 84532

FAX: 435.259.2106

maggie_wyatt@blm.gov


Thank you!

 

[ZUKEYPR]

I don't believe that anyone has stated that they support option B. In fact I said A is by far better than B. Some, I included just don't fully support option A, that's all, a difference of opinion. We are all still in the same fight. Some folks just use different weapons, approaches, and strategies that's all.

 

[utahmike]

I guess there is something I don't understand. If the BLM has an interest in closing areas to a large portion of the public (non-hiking), don't they work themselves out of a job? How much management is required by BLM officials if the land is effectivly shut down?

I guess I need to ask the question, "Do you think that most BLM employees are actively managing the land in regards to motorized recreation?" I think they are just waking up to the realities of our activities, and many dont want to deal with it. There are many interests in which BLM is supposed to manage for, the severe restriction of motorized recreation will not create a void of things to do. I know of land managers and even planners who have never been to areas in their jurasdication, and they make management decisions regarding these same areas. My point is even if removing motor vehicles from public created nothing to do, how could they do any less? Indeed much of our problems stem from a pathetic lack of management for many decades. And now rather than deal with the situation they would seemingly rather close and ignore. I know it sounds so cynical, and yes I know this is not true of all BLM employees, I know some good people that work for BLM and USFS.

 

[UtahFire]

I guess I need to ask the question, "Do you think that most BLM employees are actively managing the land in regards to motorized recreation?" I think they are just waking up to the realities of our activities, and many dont want to deal with it. There are many interests in which BLM is supposed to manage for, the severe restriction of motorized recreation will not create a void of things to do. I know of land managers and even planners who have never been to areas in their jurasdication, and they make management decisions regarding these same areas. My point is even if removing motor vehicles from public created nothing to do, how could they do any less? Indeed much of our problems stem from a pathetic lack of management for many decades. And now rather than deal with the situation they would seemingly rather close and ignore. I know it sounds so cynical, and yes I know this is not true of all BLM employees, I know some good people that work for BLM and USFS.

It seems to me that much of the management that the BLM is suppose to be doing has to do with timber, mineral rights, oil and gas, water, grazing and recreation. Wilderness eliminates most of those activities. What is left for them to manage?

 

[EZRhino]

Exactly! It's not "management", it's non-management. I've been saying this for years.

E
Z

 

[utahmike]

It seems to me that much of the management that the BLM is suppose to be doing has to do with timber, mineral rights, oil and gas, water, grazing and recreation. Wilderness eliminates most of those activities. What is left for them to manage?

In my last post I quoted your question which basically said, if they close everything they don’t have a job.
You are right that Wilderness excludes many of the mentioned activities, while some may be grandfathered in for the most part it a hands off management approach.

My point is simply they don’t do their job now, and if they don’t have anything to manage then they will have less headache. But I am not suggesting that they will go away, nor am I advocating that. BLM would find things to micro manage or mismanage, they would find a niche, how many bureaucracies have you seen dissolve? Few if any. This brings up an interesting point, whether it be BLM or radical enviros that say lets just close this or just create this wilderness and we will be done...yeah right in 10 years we will go though it again, it's kinda like the old adage about how to boil a frog. Slowly turn up the heat…a little here a little there and when my kids are old there wont be anything left…unless we stand up to it now.

 

[UtahFire]

In my last post I quoted your question which basically said, if they close everything they don’t have a job.
You are right that Wilderness excludes many of the mentioned activities, while some may be grandfathered in for the most part it a hands off management approach.

My point is simply they don’t do their job now, and if they don’t have anything to manage then they will have less headache.

Mike,

Do you have any detailed maps of the proposed "America's Redrock Wilderness" boudaries? I am looking for something detailed enough to see what trails/roads would be closed in the Swell and Moab areas if the Act is passed. The maps on the SUWA web site are not very detailed.

 

[utahmike]

I dont have detailed maps, but believe it or not, I talk with SUWA on a regular basis, I need to get a map of thiers on an non-wilderness area I can ask for wilderness proposals as well.

 

[Todd Adams]

Mike,

Do you have any detailed maps of the proposed "America's Redrock Wilderness" boudaries? I am looking for something detailed enough to see what trails/roads would be closed in the Swell and Moab areas if the Act is passed. The maps on the SUWA web site are not very detailed.

I have the detailed maps of Moab from our "Fight Back Forum" in '99. The company that did the maps for us is out of business so all the digital data has been lost. The larger maps that I had got damaged so they were discarded. After almost 7 years and nobody seeming to care about the “citizens inventory” I am surprised I have anything left.
Todd

 

[UtahFire]

I dont have detailed maps, but believe it or not, I talk with SUWA on a regular basis, I need to get a map of thiers on an non-wilderness area I can ask for wilderness proposals as well.

There has to be some detailed maps somewhere on this "wilderness" proposal. Amazingly, I have contacted the BLM office and they don't have any. I have contacted SUWA several times and have never herd back from them. It's almost like they don't want the details of this "inventory" available. I can't imagine that something like this would be voted on without a detailed review of maps of the area. I would love to get my hands on these maps if you can get them.

 

[Todd Adams]

There has to be some detailed maps somewhere on this "wilderness" proposal. Amazingly, I have contacted the BLM office and they don't have any. I have contacted SUWA several times and have never herd back from them. It's almost like they don't want the details of this "inventory" available. I can't imagine that something like this would be voted on without a detailed review of maps of the area. I would love to get my hands on these maps if you can get them.

All I can tell you is that in ’99 the U4WDA commissioned a mapping company in Moab (which is now out of business) to do a series of maps for us. The road data was provided by Ber Knight and the wilderness study as well as the “citizens inventory” (which is the red rock Wilderness Bill) was provided by the Moab BLM office. I still have one small detailed map of the Moab area highlighting these proposals. Some of them have been changed since then so new data would be needed. The BLM has it they just may not be willing to relinquish the data without some pressure that an individual does not have. Mike would be the one to force their hand.
Todd