TTORA Forum banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,997 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
PLEASE HELP US KEEP THIS VERY IMPORTANT BACKCOUNTRY ROAD OPEN

It was recently learned that the Center For Biodiversity, Sierra Club,

and others are flooding BLM and Forest Service fax machines with comment


letters requesting the total closure of Furnace Creek to motorized
access.

Yesterday alone, the BLM received 500 letters supporting the closure.

This is NOT the Furnace Creek located within Death Valley but another

Furnace Creek in the White Mountains between Bishop, CA and Dyer, NV.

Thanks to Randy Banis of Death Valley Dot Com we now have our own

Internet fax software to easily send faxes to the BLM and Forest Service
to

support a modified version of Alternative #6 which would keep the long

existing road open for public use. The comment period is open until

February 17 so we have enough time to offset the closure advocates mass

faxes.

Please help us keep this fabulous backcountry experience open to the

public. Go to <http://www.deathvalley.com/action/furnace_creek.shtml>
http://www.deathvalley.com/action/furnace_creek.shtml, fill

in the appropriate blanks, scroll down the page, review the letter, and

click on the "send my fax" button. A fully customized letter with your

name and address will be automatically faxed to the BLM and Forest
Service

and a copy returned to you via e-mail for your records.

The Furnace Creek Road is an incredible 8.5 mile road on the eastern

side of the White Mountains that begins near Dyer Nevada. The road was

originally built at the turn of the last century for ranching and
mining.

It was improved with heavy equipment in the early 1950s. The road passes


old mines, old corrals, an elaborate old cow camp, and many points with

breathtaking vistas. Up until the CBD lawsuit, it was one of the best
kept

secrets and used almost exclusively by locals. Roger Mitchell, in his
1969

book, "Inyo Mono Jeep Trails", states, "Furnace Creek Road undoubtedly

offers one of the most interesting jeep trips in the county. Mitchell
goes

on to say, "Unlike many canyon roads, the jeep trail up Furnace Creek
did

not just happen. As you will soon see, the route has been carefully

constructed. In places where the canyon bottom was impassible, a-road
was

bulldozed out of the canyon wall". The road, at least the two-track

portion, ends at Tres Plumas Flat, a most beautiful aspen dotted flat

situated at 9200 ft. elevation. There are several deer hunter's camps

dispersed in the aspen groves. The view from Tres Plumas Flat is

astounding and makes one think of a calendar quality photo.

The Inyo National Forest Land Use and Management Plan designated the

entire Furnace Creek Road corridor to Tres Plumas Flat as
"Semi-Primitive

Motorized Recreation". The environmentalist have fought for 20 years to

close the road because it would be a corridor into their proposed

wilderness legislation, however, there has never been adequate resource

concerns to justify closure. There are no Threatened or Endangered flora


or fauna, no fishery, or any other identifiable significant issues. The

riparian issue is associated with only a very tiny portion of the road.
In

fact, there really isn't any creek as there is no water flow except
during

spring runoff and heavy rains.

PLEASE PASS THIS MESSAGE ON TO ANY FRIENDS OR ASSOCIATES THAT SUPPORT

PUBLIC ACCESS TO PUBLIC LANDS.









This information is provided by Ron Schiller, Chairman, High Desert
Multiple Use Coalition. As usual, please feel free to pass this
information on to any other interested parties. Anyone wishing to
receive future information regarding issues related to the management of
public lands in the California Desert should send an e-mail to
[email protected] and request to be placed on the distribution
list. Please print "PLEASE ADD TO LIST" in the subject line.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,997 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
This is the part that really pisses me off. A big :flipoff2:to CBD and the Sierra Club. Fuckers.

The environmentalist have fought for 20 years to close the road because it would be a corridor into their proposed wilderness legislation, however, there has never been adequate resource concerns to justify closure. There are no Threatened or Endangered flora or fauna, no fishery, or any other identifiable significant issues. The riparian issue is associated with only a very tiny portion of the road. In fact, there really isn't any creek as there is no water flow except during spring runoff and heavy rains.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
598 Posts
This one is easy folks, just click the link and fill in the information. Only takes a minute.

Under "organization" put Tacoma Territory Off-Roaders Association...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,124 Posts
sent my fax
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,091 Posts
I'm sure you guys read the fax you are sending but did you see that the letter you sent is still in favor of closing the roads to vehicles that are over 79" wide? Not sure if that makes a difference to you but up here SRD (Sustainable Resource Development) has done this in the past and then just changed the parameters after the fact to close it to all trucks. They've done it once on weight restrictions and once on wheelbase around here. Just a heads up though but I think the way it's written is a bad idea based on previous experiences. Hope it works out for you guys though, closures suck. ....Steve
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
598 Posts
Just for further information, I sent a modified version put together by someone at Pirate which supported the previous version which did not have the 79" limit.

The message is still clear, however, regarding peoples displeasure at losing access. The FS and BLM have set the width under 80" as sort of a standard throughout the U.S., so they didn't want to fight that designation for risk of losing everything.

My 2000 Landcruiser is a BIG vehicle and fits within the 79" designation. Don't plan on running an F350 with huge tires through there, it won't fit...

And while I don't like the idea of compromising with terrorists, I also don't want to withhold my support of these access rights enthusiasts who have dedicated tons of time to this particular fight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,091 Posts
calamaridog said:
Just for further information, I sent a modified version put together by someone at Pirate which supported the previous version which did not have the 79" limit.

The message is still clear, however, regarding peoples displeasure at losing access. The FS and BLM have set the width under 80" as sort of a standard throughout the U.S., so they didn't want to fight that designation for risk of losing everything.

My 2000 Landcruiser is a BIG vehicle and fits within the 79" designation. Don't plan on running an F350 with huge tires through there, it won't fit...

And while I don't like the idea of compromising with terrorists, I also don't want to withhold my support of these access rights enthusiasts who have dedicated tons of time to this particular fight.
I see what your saying but when if you give an inch, they'll take a mile.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
598 Posts
Yes, but if you don't sit at the table, then the FS and BLM will screw you and the land will receive a "wilderness" designation before you can move your lawsuit through the court. In this case, the greenies have been after this piece of land for several decades...

And these people are asking for support, and I don't have time to do any better, so... you get the idea.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,934 Posts
So what you're saying is that we should just quit screwing around and start dropping any enviro weenie we see on site, right? Or at least pop a cap in their knee. LOL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
598 Posts
It's funny to joke about but no, I don't REALLY advocate violence against these ignorant people.

If they plant bombs at the gates to my favorite trails, and attempt to harm people, then you can be sure they have nothing coming...
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top