Thanksgiving Thoughts and Best Wishes from the Recreation HQ

I believe fans of OHV recreation in general and those who ride at Carnegie SVRA specifically have a lot to be grateful for during this Thanksgiving Season.


I attended the induction of Clark Collins to the AMA Hall of Fame this weekend in Las Vegas. Collins founded the BlueRibbon Coalition in his garage in 1987. It was a one-man show at that time. He was prompted to start the BRC to fight land closures because the then Governor of Idaho told him at a land-use meeting that off-roaders were politically insignificant.

The Governor was right. At that time, OHV was not very well organized and in many cases did not even have a “seat at the table” when it came to the land-use debate. Radical environmentalists were emboldened by the passage of the 1984 Wilderness Act that created new designated Wilderness areas (remember that motorized and mechanized uses are banned there) throughout the country. Many high-quality single-track and jeep routes in the Sierra and Coast Range were closed by that legislation.

Then in the early 1990s, over 7 million acres of sand and desert riding were closed by the California Desert Protection Act.

I was there during the S21 fight and the loss of that land still stings and is a force that drives me today.

I could go on and on with a long OHV history lesson, but I won’t do it at this time. Rather, the OHV community should be proud that we no longer are viewed as a weak opponent by the radical environmental movement, land agencies, legislators, or the media.

On the federal level, anti-OHV House committee chairmen were replaced on November 2 by pro-access and pro-recreation legislators. Instead of the House holding hearings about why more lands are not being closed to motorized use, I expect to see hearings about why the agencies are closing roads and trails including the ongoing closure at Clear Creek.

I also expect to see the House try and reform the way environmental law firms are rewarded when they sue and then have their attorney fees paid for by the taxpayer.

On the state level, we have a strong OHV program (SB 742) that was put into place in 2007/2008 with a ten-year sunset. While it may continue to be attacked, the OHV community is well positioned to fend off those blows.

Be assured there will be many future battles to fight on both the state and federal levels. But on this Thanksgiving, let us be genuinely grateful for families, friends, our troops, and the fact that OHV is no longer a wallflower at the great public land-use dance, but an active and engaged participant in that venue.

S. 2921, Wilderness, and Land Use in the 21st Century

The Recreation HQ wants to expand a bit regarding BRC’s support for S. 2921 - the California Desert Protection Act of 2010 as highlighted in The General’s blog regarding the Obama Outdoor Event in LA.

Blog on Obama LA Event with CWC Mention of BRC Support for S. 2921
http://thegeneralsrecreationden.blogspot.com/2010/07/ohvers-attend-obama-outdoor-event-in-la.html

BRC Testimony/Support for S. 2921
http://www.sharetrails.org/uploads/BRC_Written_Testimony_on_S.2921_05.25.10_FINAL.pdf

At the LA event, HQ talked with a number of OHVers and other public land access interests about S. 2921. There were a lot of OHVers who support the bill as it is currently written. Other OHV groups might have supported it but were concerned the bill language would change in committee (a valid concern). Several access groups were adamantly opposed to the bill. Good news it that most of us respect the other group’s opinion and when at odds – we can respectfully agree to disagree.

HQ knows the bill is not perfect and that it is a compromise piece of legislation. If this was 1975 would OHV be supporting this bill? I don’t think so. However, a lot has changed since the old days of 1960-1980s era Big Gulp Wilderness Bills where enviros would push through land use bills that did not have consensus nor support from local stakeholders, county officials, and users.

That old Wilderness paradigm was changed in the 2006 Northern California Coastal Wild Heritage Wilderness Act. (HR 233). Just as in HR 233, proponents of S. 2921 held endless meetings with local stakeholders, participated in numerous field trips to ground-truth routes, and although it designated a lot of new Wilderness…not one legal OHV route was closed in HR 233.

HQ believes S. 2921 captured HR 233’s spirit of collaboration by designating OHV use in a number of OHV areas similar to the 2006 Cow Mountain Recreation Area where OHV use was codified.

A great read on the efforts of BRC and others to make sure OHV and access were included in HR 233 is archived at MTB Action
http://www.mbaction.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=news&mod=News&mid=9A02E3B96F2A415ABC72CB5F516B4C10&tier=3&nid=8B813024BC72495897FB8773FBFD174A

Just as with Obama’s Great Outdoor Initiative, OHV must be actively engaged in the political process. S. 2921, HR 233, and Obama’s GOA prove The General’s now famous axiom that “All land use decisions (and associated processes) are political decisions” and is a cornerstone of modern OHV advocacy.

Is S. 2921 perfect? No. Compromise bills never are. However, the other option of staying home is not viable either. Will green groups continue to push for new Wilderness and NCAs after S. 2921 is signed into law? Yes. To counter that, OHV must be just as committed to champion our access rights to public land and to stay engaged.

Thanks for your service regardless of if you support S. 2921 or not.

Time To Revive Pombo Wilderness Doctrine?

Is Big Gulp Wilderness back? As the House Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands gets ready to hear testimony on the Northern Rockies Ecosystem Protection Act (H.R. 980), I am reminded of the work that BRC and partners did on the CA Boxer/Thompson Wilderness Bill (H.R. 233) regarding the inclusion of strong protection language in the legislation that guaranteed continued motorized use on basically all OHV routes that were legally opened at the time. Also, historic commercial surf fishing rights were restored in that bill as well – a boost to the local economy for sure.

I must give credit to pro-access leaders who adhered to the “local decision-making” tenets of the Pombo Wilderness Doctrine.

I know Congressman Pombo was the enviro’s favorite whipping boy, but just because he was a target of the environmental lobby does not mean that his common sense Wilderness
criteria should be ignored or rejected by pro-access legislators of either political party.

Those tenets that I feel should be part of any modern Wilderness proposal are: WSA review and release, Risk Assessment, Community Involvement, Property Protections, General Considerations, and coordination with Forest Planning efforts.

See a Copy of the Pombo Wilderness Doctrine Below:
http://www.sharetrails.org/uploads/Pombo_Wilderness_Policy%20pd.pdf

The General believes that Big Gulp Wilderness proposals such as H.R. 980 do a great disservice to smaller and more inclusive Wilderness bills – such as HR 233 - that are thoughtfully developed over time with input from local governments, off-roaders, and other stakeholders.

The General says it is time send “Crazy Uncle” Wilderness Bills such as H.R. 980 back to the legislative basement where they belong before any more people are put out of business.

PS - Feel free to share the Pombo policy with your pro-access elected officials to see if they would support those tenets in current and future Wilderness bills.

Pro-Access Members of Congress Vote Down S.22

Who says writing letters and making phone calls don’t work? I believe the ever growing national grassroots movement against having condescending elements of Congress or overzealous bureaucrats trying to shove “dark-of-night” legislation or regulations down our throats was best evidenced today when Pro-access and pro-business Dems and Republicans voted NO on S.22.

See BRC March 11 Alert on S.22 Vote

http://www.sharetrails.org/alerts/?alert=971

The Senate Omnibus Public Lands Management Act (S.22) failed to get the 2/3 votes needed to pass under suspension. I don’t think this was a vote against common sense Wilderness bills such as the 2006 Boxer/Thompson Wilderness Bill for Northern California (HR 233). Rather it was a vote against a misguided bill that was anti-access and anti-job.

The BlueRibbon Coalition and House Members from both parties worked hard on HR233 to see that it was fair and balanced.

See article below:
http://www.legrange.net/id94.html

House panel OKs land preserves
Wilderness measure includes Lost Coast area, adds sites for off-road motor sports.
Published Thursday, July 20, 2006

WASHINGTON -- Legislation that would add wilderness protection to more than 275,000 acres of federal land along California's North Coast cleared a key House committee Wednesday, a crucial step that virtually assures the bill will become law this year.

The measure by Rep. Mike Thompson, D-St. Helena, emerged from the House Resources Committee on a voice vote with the blessings of its California chairman, Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Tracy, after the two lawmakers, working with California's two Democratic senators, negotiated furiously over the last few weeks to compromise.

The final deal lops about 25,000 acres of land, almost all of it from the Six Rivers National Forest in Del Norte and Humboldt counties, from the original measure Thompson introduced in the House and that Sens. Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein twice moved through the Senate.

But the agreement also designates about 75,000 acres of Bureau of Land Management lands in the Cow Mountain area of Mendocino County as a "recreational management area" for off-road vehicles and mountain bikes that was not part of the original bill.

The compromise was a last-minute addition to the House panel's agenda. It could come to the floor of the House as soon as next week. That would clear the way for passage by the Senate before Congress ends for the year in early October.

In introducing the compromise Wednesday, Pombo told his committee the changes make the bill "more broadly supportable." Thompson, meanwhile, said the changes don't damage his overall goal of giving the highest level of land protection to the North Coast's most spectacular wild spots.

As wilderness, the areas will be closed to all mechanized access except firefighting equipment. Some privately owned property also will remain accessible but only to the landowners.
Among the most spectacular areas are coastal lands in the King Range National Conservation Area along California's Lost Coast. Once open to logging and farming, the BLM said the King Range additions will become the "crown jewel" of its wilderness inventory.

The original bill also called for wilderness protection for about 30,000 acres in the Cache Creek area in Lake County, a popular whitewater rafting area; a 50,000-acre expansion of the Yolla Bolly-Middle Eel Wilderness in the Mendocino National Forest; 48,000 acres of additions to Siskiyou National Forest wilderness; and 53,000 acres in the proposed Yuki Wilderness Area of the Mendocino National Forest. Other rivers would be protected under national scenic river designations.

Those areas remain in the bill, but exact acreages won't be known until maps are redrawn to reflect the compromise.

Wilderness has been controversial in Del Norte County, and designations there were slashed by 10,000 acres, to about 28,000 acres. Another 15,000 acres around Mad River Buttes, the Underwood area by the Trinity River and Orleans Mountain in the forest in Humboldt County were also dropped.

Still, Jon Owen, Washington representative for the Campaign for America's Wilderness, hailed the compromise. ""This demonstrates that wilderness truly is America's common ground," he said.

The deal also drew begrudging nods from some of the fiercest opponents of wilderness designations. "I think Representative Pombo did his best to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear," said Don Amador, spokesman for the Blue Ribbon Coalition of off-road enthusiasts. Amador said he was disappointed that the Black Sands Beach area of the King Range north of Shelter Cove was not reopened to public access, as his group had sought. But he took solace in the recreational management area for off-road vehicles in Mendocino County.

Boxer and Feinstein said they, too, were pleased with the deal, which has been six years in the making. "I am more optimistic than ever that we will soon see this bill signed into law," Boxer said.
-- 30 --
_________________________________________________________

Sure there were compromises, but I still feel today that having a vigorous debate between the various stakeholders did turn HR 233 …”into a silk purse.”

Wilderness bills are hard work and I think those politicians who stifle debate and try and cram such proposals down the throats of access minded stakeholders do themselves and their movement a great disservice.

The ongoing battle for responsible access to public lands is sure to continue, but let’s hope that debate is encouraged and time is taken to improve those Wilderness bills so that both resources and access are treated in a fair manner.
# # #