BLM embattled over Sand Mountain

[Crowdog]

The following article ran in Saturday's edition of the Lahontan Valley News. Unfortunately, the reporter failed to grasp (and the BLM is now denying) that the closure area grew by several thousand acres. The map that BLM distributed over Labor Day Weekend can be viewed online at:
http://www.sandmountain-nv.org/blm_closure_plan.htm

Letters to the Editor can be sent to:

Lahontan Valley News (Fallon)
E-Mail: lvn@cccomm.net
Fax: (775) 423-0474

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BLM embattled over Sand Mountain

September 13, 2003

By CORY MCCONNELL, Lahontan Valley News

Stuck between a flower and a four-wheeler, land managers are taking flack
from all sides over their attempt to devise a conservation plan for Sand
Mountain Recreation Area.
While off-roaders say Bureau of Land Management strategies to stop the
die-off of vegetation at Sand Mountain go way too far, conservationists say
the bureau hasn't done anything yet and the plans it has are voluntary
measures that have never worked anywhere before.
"John Singlaub is allowing himself to be a puppet of the off-road industry
and that's not going to fly," said Daniel Patterson an ecologist with the
conservationist group, Center for Biological Diversity.
"The biggest thing is, the BLM is acting as though it's just trying to avoid
litigation... it's easier to close an area than it is to manage it," said
Jon Crowley, president of the off-road enthusiast group Friends of Sand
Mountain.
Each time the BLM has submitted a plan to protect the habitat, it has taken
an outpouring of such criticism from one side, the other or both.
"What we are moving to do is protect the habitat while trying to provide a
recreation area," said BLM Associate Field Manager Elayn Briggs.
The bureau's current strategy is to post signs discouraging use of certain
trails and encouraging use of others. While Patterson says the plan is
toothless and ineffectual, Crowley says the BLM wants to "discourage" use of
an ever-growing number of trails, and that's just the beginning of a more
forceful and draconian closure plan.
"We're not going to get a ticket or anything but later environmentalists
will come along and say 'look there's tracks over there.' That's when
closures will start," Crowley said.
The two most vociferous players in lobbying BLM Sand Mountain plans are
Crowley, an off-highway vehicle parts and accessories business owner from
California; and Daniel Patterson, an ecologist and environmental activist
from Arizona.
Off-roaders have on their side the outspoken support of a Nevada congressman
and a shared sympathy with the current federal administration, which may or
may not affect decisions by the BLM's Carson City office.
Environmentalists on the other hand, have in their favor the written code by
which the BLM is supposed to manage land, a long list of judicial precedents
and the backing of an organization with a history of taking fights into
courtrooms and the resources to do it again.
While much of the debate between conservationists and off-roading
enthusiasts has centered around the Sand Mountain Blue Butterfly, the BLM is
actually mandated to protect the habitat of all land under its management.
If the bureau notices degradation of public land, it's required to restore
and protect that land.
Rather than the butterfly, the issue is actually how the BLM manages public
land, and the BLM is not managing Sand Mountain according to its mandate,
conservationists say. Off-roaders agree.
"(The BLM) could have started educating people along time ago," Crowley
said, "If they would have done their job this wouldn't even be an issue."
Armed with a similar opinion, Patterson said his organization's next step
could very well be litigation against the BLM.
"The law requires (the BLM) to protect land under its management. We are
looking into our options to make them comply," Patterson said.
Briggs said the BLM's current plan is to phase in signing at Sand Mountain
as it determines which trails should be discouraged and which shouldn't. The
bureau also plans to post some signs asking riders not to make new trails
but say on existing paths.

[daddogrider]

Within a few years there will be no free riding sand areas anywhere. the group for consumers (a lie) are closing all sand and beach areas as fast as possible, and to keep them open they are bringing up money
soon it will be like skiing, 30 dollars a day per person, no noisy pipes, no night riding, no one under 16, no alcohol, no dogs, no cats no 2 strokes and no racing. No organized drags, and no complaining about it.

and when that peters out, no QUADS AT ALL they are too dangerous, they say. Go get a horse.

all because we did not join the american sand association (the only group big enough to make a difference)

oh well, it was fun while it lasted.

We are, on every vacation we can, getting videos and visiting all the embattled sites (glamis Oregon etc. and so we will have a recored for our youngsters what it was like after they close up.

Will then have a web site with all these videos and you can then eat popcorn and dream how it used to be.

[Crowdog]

You are correct except when you say the ASA is the only organization big enough.

ORBA and CORVA have helped us and we (Friends of Sand Mountain) are trying our best.

The ASA is Glamis and I support their efforts there. I am Sand Mountain. Money from the ASA does not go to Sand Mountain.

Jon

[Crowdog]

This letter to the editor was printed in today's version of the local Fallon newspaper.


Editor:

After reading the article regarding Sand Mountain last weekend, I started to wonder if people here in Fallon really understand what the “conservationist group” Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) is really about.

Through lawsuits filed against ill prepared federal agencies like the BLM and Fish & Wildlife, the CBD has obtained federal Endangered Species Act protection for 280 species and the designation of over 38 million acres of "critical habitat". Critical habitat is just a fancy term for “public use not allowed”.

Don’t be fooled by the “conservationist group” tag. Their goal is to eliminate grazing, farming, hunting and vehicle use on public land. Sand Mountain just happens to be the first of many planned targets for Nevada. They like to pick us off one by one, so we don’t organize to defeat their socialist agenda.

If sensible use of our public land is important to you, get involved with stopping them now before you become their next target.

Danny Smith
Fallon, NV

[wilkin250r]

Unfortunately the offroad community is an easy target, because there are many avenues to attack. Environmental degradation, reckless and often illegal behavior, and generally low political involvement are all contributing factors to the easy attack on our use of Sand Mountain.

I'll admit, I don't have the time or energy to get involved in the political fight over Sand Mountian, even though it's my local sandbox. However, I'll offer my services with a rake and shovel if a plan to plant and cultivate Kearney Buckwheat ever comes to fruition.

[Flip)(stick]

Look at the good side, we all can just fly to the middle east and ride there...

[khen]

I ride at Little Sahara in Utah and sadly there is constant pressure from conservationist groups to close this area from OHV use as well. I think the easiest thing that we can do to help keep these area's open is to be respectful and responsible towards the enviornment.

I can't tell you how ashamed I am when I see how disrespectful a small percentage of OHV enthusiasts can be. I was there a few weeks back and it was a mess! People leaving behind mass amounts of garbage, mangling rare trees. I even spotted a tree decorated in half way burnt lawn chairs and misc camp furnishings!

I have to say it's hard to fight the good fight when you see this stuff going on, and It sure gives these groups a good argument too.