Showing posts with label eldorado national forest. Show all posts
Showing posts with label eldorado national forest. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Eldorado SEIS Appeal Resolution - Enviros Get Another Bite at the Apple

One of the "18" Closed Routes - The "Mud Lake" Trail
 
 

 On September 11, 2013 the Eldorado NF reached an appeals resolution with appellants of the June 14, 2013 SEIS and Record of Decision that would have immediately reopened 24 of the “42 meadow routes”  and opened another 18 routes after corrective action (mitigation, such as hardening a meadow crossing, fixing drainage, etc.) was taken.

 
Copy of Agreement
http://www.peer.org/assets/docs/ca/9_16_13_Final_Eldorado.pdf
 

List of the 24 open routes and 18 closed routes
http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5435815.pdf
 

FS News Release on Agreement
http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/eldorado/news-events/?cid=STELPRDB5435834
 

Those corrective actions could range from a couple of hours of work with a pick and shovel to project-level NEPA efforts that might include a significant reroute or even installation of an OHV bridge.


HQ is still reviewing the resolution agreement, but it appears that environmental groups have managed to create an extra layer of red-tape by requiring the agency to allow them early review of any proposed   meadow project for those 18 routes.
 

The goal of many anti-OHV groups is to create an additional planning hurdle that must be crossed by the agency before that project can be developed.  It appears that goal has achieved in the resolution by creating a new modified NEPA process where those groups can gum up the project before it even gets off the ground.

Although the anti-OHV groups have succeeded in gaining some leverage in mitigation planning for those 18 routes, HQ believes that user groups should hold the agency’s feet to the fire by working hard to effect the Forest Supervisor’s promise to “get on with repairing the other 18 routes.”
 

Stayed tuned on this never ending saga.

 

 

Wednesday, March 6, 2013

Eldorado NF SEIS - Water Quality, Conditional Designations, and OHV

Rock Armor on Rubicon Trail
 
As OHV and other access stakeholder groups prepare comments for the Eldorado SEIS, HQ wants to remind readers that water quality-based travel management decisions – particularly in high elevation alpine-like settings – are here to stay.
 
Yesterday, BRC issued an alert/update with key concepts for affected parties to review as they prepare to file comments on the SEIS.  One of those ideas is “conditional designation” or pre-designation of routes once relevant mitigation measures are implemented.
 
BRC Alert with Key Concepts on Eldorado SEIS (link to 11 year Eldo legal fight there too)
OHV Bridge at Mace Mill OHV Area
 
OHVers already have examples of water-based legal and political battles at the Rubicon Trail, Mace Mill OHV Area, Minimization Criteria in the Stanislaus legal case, and Carnegie SVRA just to name a few.  Implementation of water-based mitigation measures (trail reroutes, hillside stabilization, bridges, barriers, construction of contour trails, armored trails in riparian areas, etc.) have been critical in those areas to keep trails open.
 
Link to QWR’s Recent Blog with Photos of Carnegie SVRA Mitigations
 
Overview of the “Minimization” Issue in the Stanislaus NF Legal Case
 
Contour Trail at Carnegie SVRA
 
 
 
HQ believes that conditional designations are an effective tool in travel planning.  Several Forests have adopted that prescription to restore access to historic motorized trails in alpine areas.  Also, our good friend, Steve Pretzel, the Director for Trail Bike Management in Australia, has addressed water-quality and other environmental and political issues to enhance OHV recreation in that country.  Trail crews at various state and federal agencies and private firms including the folks at Trails Unlimited and RecConnect spend a lot of their time installing water-based mitigation measures.
 
Link to Inyo NF Conditional Designations
 
Link to 2012 NOHVCC Conf. where Pretzel, Trails Unlimited, et al gave presentations
 
Given the current and foreseeable political, regulatory, economic, and legal climate, OHV user groups and clubs will have to work even harder with land management agencies and partners on efforts to address water-based environmental concerns that will “minimize” trail closures and maximize trail opportunities.    


Friday, November 2, 2012

Update - Eldorado NF SEIS Comments Due Nov. 7




The Recreation HQ wants to remind riders that the comment period for the Eldorado NF's
SEIS -- that addresses the "42 meadow routes" that were ordered closed this last summer by a federal court -- are due on Nov. 7.  Many of those routes are popular "high country" trails used by OHVers after the winter snow melts.

BRC has issued an updated alert today on this issue.  The alert below contains some key bullet points for you to consider when making your comments.  Also, it is important for users to talk about the importance of specific routes referenced in the SEIS/Proposed Action.

Nov. 2 BRC Alert (with talking points)
www.sharetrails.org



Here is the snail mail address for your comments:

Be sure and put: Eldorado NF SEIS in the subject line.

Kathryn D. Hardy
Forest Supervisor
Eldorado National Forest
100 Forni Road
Placerville, CA 95667

Email to: comments-pacificsouthwest-eldorado@fs.fed.us

Thanks for your efforts on this subject.

Don


Monday, October 1, 2012

Trout Unlimited Defends OHV Trail from Eco-Lawsuit in CO




Hell has frozen over.  OHV enthusiasts in California continue under the threat of trail closures based on our potential impacts to anadromous fish populations in the Sierra and Coastal mountains. For decades OHV recreationists have worked hard with agency staff to maintain trails so that any potential impacts will be minimized.  However at the end of the day, many of us believe that OHV recreation has coexisted with anadromous fish (even the non-existent Carnegie Hoax Fish at Carnegie SVRA) for years in our coastal waterways and mountain streams.

HQ believes our position was strengthened today by an article about the greenback cutthroat trout in Bear Creek near Colorado Springs, CA.  Here you have a coalition of user groups including Trout Unlimited, OHV groups, and others working to reroute a long existing OHV trail and voicing opposition to a recent lawsuit by CBD to close the trail before the reroute is made.

Article on Greenback Cutthroat Trout and OHV Trail Placement


 

HQ believes that coalitions of various stakeholder groups can find solutions that both protect the environment while allowing for motorized use on designated trails.  How refreshing and cost-effective that approach is compared to the legal route often selected by CBD, PEER, and other branches of the extreme environmental movement to impose their highly selective non-motorized agenda on the public.

 

EXTRA HOMEWORK:
 
Case Study of Eco-Groups Opposing OHV Efforts to protect Wild and Scenic Rivers from heavy siltation during winter months.  Local eco-groups actually got up in front of the Del Norte County Board of Supervisors and defended agency road ripping during the winter rainy season.
http://thegeneralsrecreationden.blogspot.com/2010/05/historic-lawsuit-filed-in-northern.html


Bogus Eco-Lawsuit at Carnegie SVRA
http://thegeneralsrecreationden.blogspot.com/2012/06/carnegie-lawsuit-win-makes-local-press.html


 

Thanks for your interest in trail management!

 

 

 

 


Tuesday, September 20, 2011

Closures and Analysis Paralysis Headline Sacramento Field Hearing


Photos: CERA President, Charles Hirst (left) and Hearing Crowd (right) - see if you recognize anyone?

Trail history was made yesterday in California when a congressional subcommittee held a field hearing that was primarily focused on the loss of multiple-use access to, and use of, our national forests.


As HQ told attendees at the Ride Reno 200 Dual Sport banquet on September 17, the OHV community has a lot to be proud of as they are now having their access issues being addressed by both the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. Two examples of that seismic shift was that a representative from U.S. Senator Dean Heller’s office was at the banquet to listen to concerns about special recreation permits being denied to clubs and there was a September 19 field hearing in Sacramento. At the field hearing the loss of forest trail access, abuse of the event permitting process, and forest health were front and center.

HQ is very proud of all the access and multiple-use witnesses including Charles Hirst, president of the California Enduro Riders Assn., and Nick Haris, the western representative for the AMA. PEER’s testimony that OHV recreation brings zero economic benefit to local communities was shot down quickly by Eldorado County Supervisor, Jack Sweeney. Plumas County Sheriff Hagwood gave very compelling testimony. The hearing played to a packed house.

The Recreation HQ strongly urges you to take time and watch the hearing including the Q&A. There is some very compelling testimony in both the written and oral presentations.

Link to the Hearing’s Audio and Written Documents

http://naturalresources.house.gov/Calendar/EventSingle.aspx?EventID=258843

Stockton Record Article on Hearing (pretty good overview)
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110920/A_NEWS/109200313/-1/A_NEWS14

HQ agrees with the one or two hearing panelists that a “TMR reset button” should be pushed because on many Forests it is both a planning debacle and public nightmare.

HQ Blog on Pushing the TMR Reset Button
http://thegeneralsrecreationden.blogspot.com/2010/06/criminal-invasion-closes-public-lands.html

In closing, HQ must give kudos to Randy Moore (R5 Regional Forester) for showing up and taking the heat. As it was pointed out by one of the congressmen, Moore is in a tough spot because of the planning and political box he is in.

# # #



Thanks to all who showed up and/or those who supported representatives to stand in their place. Access history was made on September 19 and you were part of it.

Thursday, July 21, 2011

BRC Issues National Call for Legislative Fix to Permit/Cost Recovery Mess


The Recreation HQ is proud that BRC has issued its call today for a legislative overhaul of the recreation permitting process including “cost recovery” on federal lands. For several years, OHV clubs such as the California Enduro Riders Association has been going through an ugly type of “permit hell” regarding several of its long-standing events held on the Eldorado National Forest.


July 21, 2011 BRC News Release Calling of Overhaul of Permit Process
http://www.sharetrails.org/releases/?node=14739&filter=media

BRC Overview of Permit Issue with Stories (a very good and informative read)
http://www.sharetrails.org/public-lands/?section=srp

Most of you know this issue has been steadily growing worse. After attending a number of meetings over the last 2 years with local OHV clubs, federal agencies, congressional staff, and other stakeholders, the Quiet Warrior became convinced that a legislative fix was the only way to address what has become a bureaucratic entanglement of red-tape and illogical cost recovery charges. The permit issue was not just happening in CA and NV, but throughout the West.

HQ Blog on NV Permit Issue
http://thegeneralsrecreationden.blogspot.com/2011/04/blm-in-nv-to-ban-ohv-events-in.html

Article About Congressman Tom McClintock Addressing the Permit Mess for Both OHV and Equestrian Events
http://www.theunion.com/article/20100826/BREAKINGNEWS/100829824/1066&ParentProfile=1053

May 2011 HQ Blog on Cost Recovery
http://thegeneralsrecreationden.blogspot.com/2011/05/congressional-fix-needed-to-address-ohv.html

QWR Call to Action in June 2011
http://quietwarriorracing.blogspot.com/2011/06/permitted-events-overview-solution.html

The Recreation HQ urges clubs to send in their horror stories about having to cancel historic club events and rides because the permitting process and cost recovery charges have gotten out of control.

Helmets off to the BRC crew for working on this issue. Time to change the rules and make them user friendly for both motorized and non-motorized clubs.

Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Court Says NO to Enviro Subpart A Claims on Eldorado Legal Case

The General on the Eldorado NF

The Recreation HQ wanted to share the good news about a court decision last week regarding the lawsuit filed by environmental groups against the Eldorado National Forest’s Travel Management Plan.


BRC May 31, 2011 News Release on Recent Court Decision
http://www.sharetrails.org/releases/?story=736&filter=media

Link to 82 Page Court Decision (a real good read)
http://www.sharetrails.org/uploads/Eldorado_lawsuit_decision_may_2011.pdf

Some of you may remember that BRC and other recreation groups filed to intervene in the case in January 2010.

BRC January 2010 News Release with Motion to Intervene
http://www.sharetrails.org/releases/?story=680&filter=media

The recreation groups had concerns that environmentalists would use this case to get a court to link a dollar amount needed by the agency to maintain a “minimum” number of trail miles on the unit. Even though OHV groups did not like the 2008 Eldorado travel plan we wanted to end the endless planning process and move forward with good management programs.

HQ feels that environmental groups are filling an avalanche of Subpart A lawsuits throughout the West to force a number on the agency and/or to require the agency to undergo Subpart A planning to establish a “minimum” route network before doing the Subpart B trail planning.

By using an “oil change” analogy (page 36), HQ believes the court rejected that argument when it denied the plaintiffs (enviro groups) their Subpart A claims.

HQ believes CBD issued a less than accurate news release last week by intimating the court cast aside the 2008 travel plan.

CBD News Release
http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/center/articles/2011/eldorado-05-27-2011.html

In fact, no remedy has been determined and the decision has asked the parties to address how much of a "remedy" is warranted for technical violations involving such small areas. HQ, on counsel's advice, prefers to leave it at that. We believe it unwise to characterize a court decision that has not yet been made.

# # #

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

November Election and Access on Federal Lands


On this mini ‘Super Tuesday” where there are a several primaries being decided, The General is reminded of the August 25 Forest Service Management Roundtable where Congressman Tom McClintock addressed a number of access issues that are impacting his constituents.
*
PHOTO: A few riders on a "Remember Eddie Diaz" trail ride



See July 21 blog on “Cost Recovery” and Issues on the Eldorado
http://thegeneralsrecreationden.blogspot.com/2010/07/ohv-cost-recovery-fight-on-eldorado-nf.html



The Recreation HQ believes the agency’s fear of environmental lawsuits is driving a lot of FS and BLM decisions here in California.

ELDORADO - As HQ points out in the aforementioned blog, the reason for increased cost recovery charges to CERA and the Polka Dots has nothing to do with protecting the environment but are simply self-preservation steps to protect the agency from being forced to spend hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars defending itself against ongoing and future eco-litigation. And then paying EAJA awards to the litigants.

TMR - The FS closed thousands of miles of forest roads and trails to OHVs because of the enviro’s promise of endless litigation if those closures were not put into effect. Yet despite massive closures, the greens showed their “lust for closures” by filing a lawsuit against the Stanislaus NF’s travel plan because it did not close enough.

See blog on Lust for Closures
http://thegeneralsrecreationden.blogspot.com/2010/08/new-green-subpart-lawsuit-shows-lust.html



CCMA - Here the BLM decided to make the Central BLM District of CA an “OHV free zone” by closing the 75K acre CCMA. HQ believes this is being driven by the threat of a lawsuit against the BLM unless they close the unit to OHVs. In fact, the BLM even stated that at a public meeting.

See Tobin’s June 22 blog (scroll down to it) and read BLM’s explanation for the closure regarding fear of litigation
http://www.salinasramblersmc.org/Tobin/Blog/blog.htm


What does all of this have to do with today’s primary? Since “all land use decisions [and closures] are political decisions,” the statement by Congressman McClintock to use the power of his position to hold access and recreation related hearings in the next session of Congress could have a significant impact on these issues.

Currently, there is an anti-trail majority in the House of Representatives. Most of the hearings have centered on the need to exclude historic public use of federal lands in favor of highly restrictive land use designations and programs with OHV being the scapegoat for all of this country’s environmental woes. At these hearings, McClintock and other pro-access legislators worked hard to advocate for public access, but most of the time they are ignored since they are in the minority.

If pro-trail interests are voted into office on November 2, access champions like Congressman McClintock and Congressman Rob Bishop will be in a position to hold agency leadership accountable for the decisions they are making. They could also work on EAJA reform. It’s unfortunate that land use has become a political football but that is the stark reality.

2011 could be a very interesting year depending on what happens November 2.


Tuesday, August 3, 2010

New Anti-OHV Lawsuit to Stop Bridges and Toilets


By now, many riders that follow the Recreation HQ are aware of another anti-OHV lawsuit filed on July 30 by the Center for Biological Diversity and the Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation against OHMVR and the Eldorado National Forest.
*
Photo: The General on a trail in the Rock Creek Area
*





The filing of this new lawsuit in state court (yet another example in the long line of anti-OHV lawsuits filed by the aforementioned antagonists) seeks to establish a new regulatory “high bar” for grants awarded for trail projects on federal lands. The suit actually is complaining about many of the trail improvements that these plaintiffs have been demanding over the years to address dirt bikes crossing the steam and sanitation at the campgrounds.

The suit complains about new bridges being installed to keep OHVs out of the water crossings, new trail construction, and new toilets being installed where people camp. That’s right… complain about dirt bikes crossing the creek and sanitation and then when the FS/OHMVR works to address those concerns… sue them!

Again, the suit fails to acknowledge those details as well as the fact that OHV recreation has been an “authorized” and approved use of the area via the Forest Plan and the Rock Creek EIS.

The General knows OHMVR and the FS are reviewing this case and believes they too are troubled by the Center’s ongoing and unrelenting efforts to close the area for both casual riding and permitted AMA sanctioned events.

Make no mistake; this suit is a direct attack on users, the FS, and the OHV Division’s grant program. OHV legal interests should be watching this case and intervene at the appropriate time should the need arise.

HQ thanks the followers of this blog who are just as, if not more so, committed to defending our preferred form of recreation from unjust legal action by extreme environmental groups.

Thanks for your service!

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

OHV Cost Recovery Fight on Eldorado NF


The Recreation HQ has been working with AMA D36 and others to address the issue of exorbitant fees being charged to clubs for permitted events by some FS units under the guise of “cost recovery.”
*
PHOTO: The General riding one of the event trails for the 2006 Fools Gold Enduro




The Eldorado Fight was recently highlighted in this Sac Bee article
http://www.sacbee.com/2010/07/18/2897662/canceled-forest-recreation-events.html




The public process for the 2006 Cost Recovery Rule actually started back in 1999. BRC urged its members to comment as well as submitting its own formal comments.

2000 BRC Cost Recovery Article and Concerns
http://www.sharetrails.org/magazine/article/?id=1222



As some of you know, the focus of the aforementioned cancelled permitted OHV events is on the Eldorado National Forest. The General along with leaders of CERA and AMA D36 met with the Forest Supervisor to express our strong concerns and objections to the unit’s misuse of cost recovery to essentially bankrupt several OHV clubs.

The Forest did not really have an answer to our questions about why their cost recovery charges are so extreme when other federal units (Mendocino NF, Cow Mountain, Chappie-Shasta, and CCMA when it was open, etc.) with AMA-sanctioned permitted events have more reasonable charges.

The General will say what the Forest was afraid to state. HQ believes the high cost being charged to clubs is because there is a nationally-recognized anti-OHV leader who is a vexatious litigant. She lives on the Forest and uses her green legal clout as a club to beat the Forest Service into submission with legal action or threats of legal action unless the agency uses cost recovery to put the clubs out-of-business.

Description of Vexatious Litigant
http://www.gillhams.com/dictionary/145.cfm




The issue of cost recovery is complex. Riders must understand that the issuance of permits for most recreational events is totally discretionary. At the end of the day, the FS does not have to issue a permit if it does not want to. HQ does not believe that litigation regarding the Eldorado issue has judicial merit at this time. Rather, OHVers should look to resolve this issue via regulatory reform or political pressure.

Here are several suggestions.

1 – AMA, BRC, and other national groups should seek amendments or revisions to the cost recovery rule that might allow the agency more flexibility when faced with a vexatious litigant or other adverse circumstance.

2 – Congress might have a role in passing legislation to address exorbitant fees

3 – Congress should pass EAJA reform to discourage and not reward vexatious litigants
with taxpayer funded awards.

HQ is certain there are answers - albeit not easy ones - to this issue. OHV clubs that use the Eldorado NF are seeing the ugly side of OHV Wars. Enviros have perfected the fine art of green litigation to stop OHV recreation (and other uses such as farming in the Central Valley, logging on federal lands, etc.).

BRC working with other OHV partners have been and will continue to fight back. One recent victory regarding TMR is noted in the MIC press release below:

MIC News Release on recent TMR victory where trails and campgrounds were reopened
http://www.mic.org/news070210.cfm



Just how the Eldorado NF cost recovery issue is resolved is yet to be determined. One thing for sure is that the OHV community cannot give up and let the extreme enviros succeed in kicking us out of the Forest.

Thanks for your commitment and service!





Friday, February 19, 2010

Obama Administration Launches New Version of Clinton's War on the West?


As the Recreation HQ continues to review the breaking news on the Obama administration’s apparent effort to covertly plan for a massive land grab of historic proportions, The General believes this could signal a new and potentially more devastating version of Clinton’s War on the West.
*
Photo: BRC's Don Amador (The General) on Trail 4 in the Stonyford OHV Area. This designated trail is in the pathway of a proposed national monument.
*




As a soldier in that battle, The General remembers how Clinton’s agency leaders, including Mike Dombeck and Bruce Babbitt, proposed massive land closures or attacks on private property rights. Some of those onerous plans included Dombeck’s unholy triad (the Roadless Rule, The Transportation Rule, and The Planning Rule) and Babbitt’s infamous “National Biological Survey” where his office sought to empower an army of agency biologists to roam free over private property looking for endangered species.

Now it looks like Obama is planning to launch his version of the War on the West. However, unlike Clinton who attacked OHVers, loggers, miners, and ranchers in the open with Dombeck and Babbitt, Obama appears to be planning a sneak attack.

Just as Clinton’s War on the West was met with a loud and effective outcry from public land interests, The General believes that access advocates are in a better position politically to oppose Obama’s ill-advised monument plans

See Today’s BRC News Release including BRC letter to Congress on this issue
http://www.sharetrails.org/releases/?story=685&filter=media


2010 will sure be busy on the access front.

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

BRC/OHV Groups File Motion to Intervene in Eldorado Lawsuit


As BRC and its partners file a motion to intervene in the Eldorado lawsuit which was filed in the Fall of 2009 by anti-OHV groups, some of you may want to ask why do you have to file a motion to intervene v. just filing your legal intervention?
*
Photo: Single Track Trail on Eldorado NF
*
The answer is complex, but The General will try and do his best to explain. Historically, 9th District Courts have taken a position on several important points regarding OHV-related litigation. They often take the position that NEPA/APA was never created to protect the public interest as it relates to pro-OHV access and recreation. They also have created an extra legal hurdle that makes it hard for pro-OHV legal interests to intervene in lawsuits where OHV groups want to protect/defend FS and BLM recreational opportunities. Those “OHV legal positions” are not held by other federal court districts.

BRC News Release on Motion to Intervene in Eldorado Lawsuit
http://www.sharetrails.org/releases/?story=680&filter=media



________________________________________________________

*Note of interest for Carnegie folks.- Our good friend, Karen Schambach, who is at the center of the Carnegie lawsuit via her position at PEER, is also the kingpin for the Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation which filed the Eldorado lawsuit to stop OHV recreation.

Karen at PEER
http://www.peer.org/about/staff.php


_____________________________________________________________

Although enviro groups often claim to be champions of fair and open debate, isn’t it funny that those same groups are trying to prevent BRC and its partners from filing our intervention on their Eldorado lawsuit? (that is why we had to file a motion to intervene)

To join BRC and/or make a donation to our legal effort against more land closures, you can go online at: (you can direct funds to general legal or specific cases)

https://www.sharetrails.org/secure/join_or_contribute/?c=1



Stay tuned as 2010 will be a very active legal year for OHV interests.

Thanks for your service!





Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Happy Birthday - What a Ride


As The General turns 55 today, I wanted to STOP for a minute and thank my fellow riders for their continued interest in land-use issues. This truly has been a challenging year for me on any number of levels.
Photo: Don Amador working a road crossing at an off-road event several weeks ago

In my 20 years of OHV advocacy, I believe this has been the most difficult for me personally. We have a number of very complex issues in play at this time. The battle at Clear Creek, TMR gone wrong on various Forests, the grim reaper tried to get me a couple of times, Wilderness proposals, lawsuits filed by enviros (Carnegie SVRA, Eldorado NF, etc), the downturn in the economy, and personal attacks on my credibility as an effective land-use advocate (to be expected I guess).

Most, if not all, of the following trials come as part of my job and I accept that. The one factor that keeps The General going is your support and continued confidence in his leadership abilities and long-term vision for protecting our access to public lands.

While some may disagree with my tactics (that is your option and I respect your right to do so), be assured that I have my eye on the big picture and can still see the stitches on the “land-use OHV fastball” from 40 feet away.

Let’s see what next year brings. The same challenges (and new ones as well) will be there and so will The General.


Thanks for your service!


Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Green Conflict Industry in High Gear


The “Green Conflict Industry” may be a new term to recent followers of The General’s blog. GCI has been around for a long time and it is no stranger to this land-use warrior.

In March, I wrote about GCI’s attack on the mountain bike community:
http://thegeneralsrecreationden.blogspot.com/2009/03/peer-sends-love-letter-to-imba.html



Later in March, I wrote a longer blog on other examples of how GCI attacks even responsible OHV use of public and private lands:
http://thegeneralsrecreationden.blogspot.com/2009/03/rta-trojan-horse-or-skunk-at-party.html



Recently, GCI has reared its ugly head in two places:

STOCKTON RECORD ARTICLE (Sept. 29) A lawsuit filed again Carnegie State Vehicular Recreation Area (with a quote from Don Amador/BRC)
http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090929/A_NEWS/909290323/-1/A_NEWS14#STS=g06pr6xj.19tz



CBD Lawsuit Filed (Sept 9) to Close Eldorado NF OHV Routes
http://biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2009/eldorado-09-09-2009.html



OHV/BRC has fought back and won on a number of previous cases including the original Clear Creek ESA-based lawsuit and Eldorado National Forest lawsuit. More battles are assured as GCI challenges to OHV recreation continue to mount.

Our task is to never give up and let GCI get us down. Gear-up is what we need to do.