Hey all, first I want to thank everyone on here who has tried to raise awareness of the PRMP. I just spoke with a getlemen from the Price BLM office for a while about it, and have a few questions for you all. He didn't know the answers to a lot of my questions but he gave me a few other numbers to call.... One issue I wasn't very much aware of, and apparently is pretty controverial is what they call ACEC's (Ares of Critical Environmentl Concern). From what he said they can be anything form a historic mine site to an area that just has amazing scenery. The different alternatives list different areas as ACEC's. He said that the different "interest groups" have concerns about them... but didn't elaborate much. What are your thoughts on them? He said that they had discussed overlapping ACES's with current WSA's so that if the WSA were removed in the future they could still manage the wilderness characteristics. This could be good or bad dipending on your viewpoint. Another thing that I found confusing... and still do is a map they have listing "Areas likely to have Wilderness Characteristics" and "Areas having Wilderness Characteristics.'" I asked what the difference was and whey designation as such really means. He said that such a designation legally is not very binding. His explatation as to where these areas come from was interesting. Basically he said that groups like SUWA do their own inventories of areas they think should be wilderness and submit it to the BLM. Essentially when the BLM agrees with them, the area is designated as an "Area Containing Wilderness Characteristics". If the BLM hasn't inventoried an are that the interest group (SUWA) claims has wilderness characteristics then it is listed as an "Area Likely to have Wilderness Characteristics". I find it amazing that an interest group could have that much pull in the BLM, it is unfortunate that they don't take the suggestions of all "interest groups" that seriously. Finally, as far a comments he said that comments such as "I hate this idea" or "I think its wonderfull" are essentially meaningless to them. The comments that are meaningfull point out factual information/ impacts that the document has overlooked. I'm still not sure exactly what that means.... but i'm not through talking with them. Before I can give them factual information regarding things they overlooked I need to figure out what the document really says. He said that its confusing even to them... which I thought was ironic. Anyways.... just thought I'd share and ask for your opinions.
Thanks,
Jeff
PS. Another thing I asked him that he said he didn't honestly know was something I noticed in the OHV alternative maps. Alternative A (which is supposed to be the least restrictive) has a larger "closed to motorize travel" area in the Mexican Hat Mountain area than does the Alternative D (which they call the 'perferred plan' and is generally more restricitve). I'm positive there are no designated routes in the drainage marked closed in Alt. A and marked designated routes only in Alt D. So whats the deal???
Thanks,
Jeff
PS. Another thing I asked him that he said he didn't honestly know was something I noticed in the OHV alternative maps. Alternative A (which is supposed to be the least restrictive) has a larger "closed to motorize travel" area in the Mexican Hat Mountain area than does the Alternative D (which they call the 'perferred plan' and is generally more restricitve). I'm positive there are no designated routes in the drainage marked closed in Alt. A and marked designated routes only in Alt D. So whats the deal???
Last edited:
