CBD Trying to Close Glamis

I received this today from Daniel Patterson as an FYI. The CBD had spotters at the ISDRA on TG weekend. This is just one of their reports to him. They are taking incursions into the closures very seriously. An ASA mass-email is in the works and follows the report.

Quote:
NOTES on the DUNES
Saturday, Nov 27, 2004

1. Fifteen Desert Survivors hiked into the dunes from near Ogilby on Ogilby Road on Saturday, November 27, 2004. We hiked four miles into the Central Closure Area from east to west.

2. A large contingent of RVs and trucks were parked right at the Closure Area's eastern boundary, forming a large camping zone within one or two hundred feet of the boundary

3. The closure signs were intact where we crossed the boundary, the requisite distance apart.

4. Signs were in view at the boundary in many distances less than 100 feet from the RVs and other camping vehicles. We observed more than one hundred quads and motorbikes drive right past the signs in the two 20-minute periods during which we were close to the boundary.

5. We observed more than two hundred vehicles driving within the Closure Area during the six hours of our hike halfway across it. Most of these were within 1 1/2 miles of the eastern boundary, though we saw wheel tracks throughout the sector that we hiked. We observed four quads at the crest of the high dunes four miles into the Closure Area.

6. We observed many instances of crushed plants that had been deliberately run over. Some of these were in the low spots in between dune crests where plants take advantage of unusual moisture. Wheel tracks were not limited to the crests of loose dune sand.

7. We were not formally challenged by any dune riders. However in several instances squads of dune riders drove close to us, showing off riding techniques and deliberately running over plants. On only a few occasions were overt attempts made to avoid us or to go in the opposite direction.

8. We observed several overflights of airplanes cruising the perimeter of the Closure Area while we were near the east boundary, but saw no law enforcement vehicles patrolling the boundary or seeking to prevent entry into the Closure. A call to the dispatcher at Cahuilla Ranger Station elicited a promise to send law enforcement out after we demanded a response, but we saw no evidence of a followup and we were not contacted further by the Ranger Station about what we had reported.

9. Our conclusion was that the law on this day was not being enforced and that large numbers of riders were in violation for not honoring the closure. The BLM has also made a mistake in allowing ORV enthusiasts to camp at the boundary where entry into the Closure Area is easy. ORVs should be restricted to the open areas near Glamis and other high-use areas, and kept away from the vicinity of the Closure Areas. The east boundary should also have a campground host with the ability to call in law enforcement and with the expertise and courage to explain the law and its consequences. This campground host should be paid out of Green Sticker money that is collected as a result of State Law designed to regulate ORVs.

For further information on our findings, contact me. I took numerous photographcs (slides) and GPS readings of locations of resource damage.

Steve Tabor
Desert Survivors



Here is the ASA mass email that will go out shortly - it is self-explanatory and sends a clear message that the CBD is looking for a reason.

Quote:
Dear Fellow Sand Enthusiast,

Recently, the ASA received a copy of an email to Linda Hansen. Linda is the BLM’s Desert District Manager and the email is from the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) – the party responsible for the lawsuit that closed 49,000 acres of the Imperial Sand Dunes.

Below is the email the CBD sent to Ms. Hansen:

Quote:
<<-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel R. Patterson [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 10:04 AM
To: '[email protected]'
Subject: RE: Algodones Dunes

Linda --

Many closed dunes habitat areas were badly damaged this weekend by illegal off-roading. BLM and other law enforcement were not effective at protecting habitat. It is clear BLM has not made protection of closed habitat areas a priority.

What specifically will BLM do to ensure closed areas are protected? How many stops did BLM and other law enforcement make Nov. 24-28 for closed area violations? How many citations were issued for closed area violations? Please provide a detailed response by this Wednesday.

If not effectively addressed immediately, this unacceptable bad situation may force us move for contempt against BLM and full shut down of the dunes to motor vehicles.

Thank you,

Daniel R. Patterson
Ecologist & Desert Program Director
Center for Biological Diversity

because life is good.

POB 710 Tucson Arizona 85702 USA
520.623.5252 x306 tel / 623.9797 fax
www.biologicaldiversity.org

The Center for Biological Diversity protects endangered species and wild
places through science, policy, education, citizen activism and
environmental law. Headquarters: Tucson, Arizona. Field Offices: Pinos
Altos, New Mexico; San Diego, Idyllwild and San Francisco, California;
Phoenix, Arizona; Portland, Oregon. Environmental Law Clinic: University
of Denver, Colorado. “>>


If we are to take the CBD seriously, and there is no reason not to, we must remain clear of the TEMPORARY closures until the Imperial Sand Dunes Recreation Area (ISDRA) Recreation Area Management Plane (RAMP) is recorded and implemented.

Much of the TEMPORARY closure will be lifted at that time, and majority of other areas will be accessible through a permit system.

It is not certain that the CBD would be successful, but we don’t need another costly legal action on our hands.

Until we have our RAMP, please do everything in your power to keep from riding, and others from riding, in the TEMPORARY closures.

It can hurt us all.

The ASA



The ball is in our court. While we don't agree with the closures, they are up - period - court ordered. Acting in an irresponsible manner to voice our disgust will not accomplish anything - in fact it does not make our case: it makes a case for the CBD. Riding the closures because a person thinks they can “get away with it” undermines all the work we have done.

The fact is this: for some reason, environmentalists cherish dunes. We have to deal with that. They have been successful in closing most of the dune sets on the West Coast. We are fighting them as hard as we know how. ISDRA is the last major set: if we loose that, we might as well pack up and sell our toys for the pennies on the dollar we can get for them at that point.

Foolish behavior will not help us in the fight - we need to be intelligent foes in this battle. I, personally, see that we can be successful - that is why I, and other close associates, have devoted the last 6 years of our lives to this ONE battle. Violating the TEMPORARY closed areas could send all that work down the drain.

Click to expand...

ShowStop said:

The message this sends is that we need to police ourselves, because the greenies are right there watching when we do something wrong...

Click to expand...

Dick Foster said:

"The fact is this: for some reason, environmentalists cherish dunes. We have to deal with that."
The fact is that they hate off roading of any kind or type, anywhere in any environment and for no specific reason. They will make up a reason if none is at hand. This is not restricted to dunes by any stretch. They are just a bunch of Sierra Club snobs whose real aim is to gain political power. They search for a few ass hats that abuse the land and if they can't find them, I am convinced that they actually manufacture damage to blame on off roaders. I wonder how much of a fight they would put up if hiking was to be included in all of the closures. That would seem to be the fair way to go to me. People can trample plant life by foot too. Don't tell me it doesn't happen either. I know better because I was a docent for the California State Parks for years and I know that idiot hikers are a problem. They have their share of ass hats as does the population in general. You are not going to get anywhere with this timid bullshit line by agreeing with them. There will always be a certian amount of jerks in any group, that is just a simple fact of life. It's time to get nasty, take the goves off and fight like you want to win. If you see an offroader doing something stupid, by all means get nasty with them too but don't bend to these enviro nitwits because you will just never win that way.
:soapbox:

Click to expand...

TheChiefSinner said:

I remember the good old days when Glamis was free. Slowly we have let environmental wackos push us around, and take what we hold dear to us. They have proven to be total morons and not truly know anything. Evidence of this can be demonstrated by their fire managment in Southern CA. In the end they are directly responsible for homes burning in my opinion.

Click to expand...

TheChiefSinner said:

The enviro wackos wont let the fire departments do controlled burns, so the chapparel gets too dense, and the leaves that shed from the chapparel build up. It is a common occurance that static electricity from eastern "santa ana" winds combined with super dry conditions (low humidity) can create a spontaneous combustion that causes many of the wildfires of Southern California. If the fire departments could take a proactive approach and do controlled burns, then they would be able to somewhat prevent these wildfires from getting so out of control. But hey, you wouldn't want to endanger some endangered cricket or grub would you? Ecological science says that chapparel should burn naturally once every seven years. It would definately burn if we didn't have fire departments. This info is always on the news every year. There is always a big wildfire, and the fire chief will be on the news explaining the need to do the controlled burns vs. environmental wackoism at the state level. I didn't just make it up. Chapparel that is 15 feet high is just a disaster waiting to happen. California democrat government officials are also a disaster waiting to happen.

Click to expand...

elgecko said:

Wouldn't that be an indirect result? Either way, you're right in the necessity for prescribed burns. It's ironic though that the need for prescribed burns is a result of years of fire management (i.e. fire suppresion). I'm not advocating letting wildfires run rampant, that'd be silly...just pointing out that the problem isn't entirely attributable to enviro whackoism.

Click to expand...

calamaridog said:

The thing that amazes me is to what lengths people will go to micro manage the use of public lands they have never personally visited or enjoyed. How often do you suppose these people actually enjoy these remote places?

I originally purchased my 4x4 as a means to access remote hiking, biking, fishing, and hunting spots. I soon discovered that getting there is often more fun. Now they want roadless wilderness which cannot be accessed by most people. Rich classist bastards.

Click to expand...