HQ Closed May 17-20 - In the Field

HQ is closed May 17-20.  Will be in the field with limited cell coverage.  Will reopen May 21.

As the Stomach Turns - The CA Budget Fight

TV soap operas are where make believe people try and solve torrid love affairs, financial woes, and family tragedies.   The good news - at the end of the day - is that the aforementioned issues are all phony and are simply there for your viewing pleasure.

Unfortunately, the CA “budget soap opera” being played out in Sacramento is all too real.  As I talk with my political contacts in the Capitol, it is my fear that not only is the CA OHV Program in potentially grave trouble, but many non-park related state programs, government employees, and public services will face the budget axe in the near future as well.

HQ believes it is fool hardy for lawmakers to propose an increase in taxes as a tool by which the state can be rescued from running off the proverbial cliff.   Appropriating funds from successful self-funded user-pay/user benefit programs such as OHV is one of the surest signs that the legislature is mentally bankrupt and is not able or willing to make the cuts needed to bring California back from this fiscal crisis.

Basing California’s future on the current fiscal house of cards (increased taxes, taking money from programs such as OHV, etc.) only acts as a catalyst that motivates a growing number of residents to leave the state for greener pastures.     

Be assured that HQ is acutely aware, engaged, and monitoring Parks (will Ruth Coleman stay or be replaced and by whom) and OHMVR (will Daphne come back or who will take her spot)? Will the OHV grants program become a casualty in this budget fight?   There is a lot that will shake out in the next few days and weeks.

This political soap opera is all too real and nobody that I know of (including Donstradamus) has a crystal ball.

HQ Closed - May 9-11

HQ will be closed while it is in the field - May 9-11.  HQ will reopen on May 14.

BRC's Scoping Comments on Carson City BLM RMP

While up in the Sierra Nevada Mountain Range this last weekend,  I ran into one of my Nevada friends who asked me to post a blog on BRC’s recent land-use efforts in that state.   He felt that often times what BRC does in Nevada is not realized by a lot of general access interests.   I agree.

HQ is well aware that it is hard for the wide array of outdoor recreationists to keep up with posts on various websites and other internet venues.  So here are links to BRC’s scoping comments on the Carson City Field Office’s Resource Management Plan Revision.

BRC’s Scoping Comments on BLM RMP

http://www.sharetrails.org/uploads/Carson_BRC_Comments-CCDO_RMP_Revision_Scoping_FINAL.pdf

Also, here are BRC’s March comments regarding the Greater Sage Grouse issue.

BRC’s Sage Grouse Comments

http://www.sharetrails.org/uploads/Sage_Grouse_BRC_scoping_comments3.20.12.pdf

BRC appreciates our members and supporters in Nevada and want them to know we are fighting with them to preserve and protect responsible OHV recreation in their state.  If you are not a BRC member or want to make a donation to BRC to help us continue our efforts in Nevada or elsewhere for that matter… go online today at the link below.

BRC Online Membership and Donations

https://www.sharetrails.org/support/join-or-contribute

Thanks for your continued support!

HQ Closed - May 3-6

HQ will be closed and in the field - May 3-6.  Will reopen May 7.

OR Forest Withdraws Travel Plan

For those of us who have been following the Forest Service’s Travel Management Rule planning process for the last 7-8 years, there appears to be a growing bipartisan effort in Congress to address what amounts to landscape level closures on some units.

The most recent example of local and congressional pushback is where Monica Schwalback, Forest Supervisor for the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest, recently withdrew her travel plan that closed 3,900 miles of routes used by the public for various activities.

Article on WWNF Closure and Withdrawn Plan

http://www.lagrandeobserver.com/News/Local-News/FOREST-ROADS-PLAN-Access-to-firewood-big-fear

It appeared the Forest made an all too familiar mistake by forcing a plan on the public that ignored local input by user groups, individuals, and county government.

HQ believes that successful travel plans must include an engaged public and a will by Forest leadership to draft a plan that serves both local needs and the resource.  Plans created in a vacuum based on the presumption that massive closures are the only tool by which the agency can fulfill its mission are doomed to fail.

Has Travel Planning Become a Mental Squirrel Cage?

Bruce Babbitt, former Secretary of the Interior (Clinton Admin), once said, “The Planning Process IS the Product.”  After spending the last few weeks on various federal units working events and reviewing their OHV management prescriptions, I could not disagree more with Babbitt’s statement.

It has been my experience over the last 22 years that often times travel planning processes have and are being used as a tool to restrict or ban legitimate OHV use.  In other cases, agency staff has crafted plans in a futile effort to avoid lawsuits from environmental groups.  Sometimes, federal officers have worked hard to designate a functional trail system that both protects the resource while providing a quality OHV recreational experience, but don’t have the resources to implement the plan.

Sadly, the common thread between the aforementioned planning scenarios is that it has diverted agency staff and resources away from what I feel the goal of any travel planning process should be – on the ground management of the trail.   What good is a planning effort if there is no staff or money to maintain, construct, or reconstruct a trail? 

Sure, planning efforts are important as they help guide or direct the unit when it comes to management of the area.  However, it appears that in some cases…the planning effort has simply become a mental squirrel cage where people look busy (and they are) as the previous planning process has led to yet another planning process that drains precious staff time away from actually getting out-on-the-ground and taking care of the trail.

I think it would be wise for agency staff and stakeholders to remember that the travel planning product is on-the-ground management of our route system vs. an endless cycle of planning.

# # #