BLM Public comment period for your desert


Well-Known Member
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM), California Desert District, announced its intent to prepare an environmental document to analyze a proposed plan amendment and alternatives covering the management of motorized vehicles on public lands in the West Mojave (WEMO) area.
A Notice of Intent to prepare the plan for areas in Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles and San Bernardino counties was published in the Federal Register on September 13, 2011.
By this Notice, the BLM is announcing the beginning of the scoping process to solicit public comments on:

(1) issues related to plan decisions which will guide the management of motorized vehicle access in the WEMO plan area;
(2) process and decision criteria to be used during plan implementation to designate routes;
(3) issues and concerns within each subregion;
(4) additional issues cited by the January 28, 2011 Court Order, including special status species, vegetation communities (including unique plant assemblages), special area designations, air quality, cultural resources, soils, springs and seeps and Mojave fringe-toed lizard habitat; and
(5) the "bundling of analysis areas" for route designation.

Two BLM public scoping meetings will be held: one in Ridgecrest and one in Barstow. Details on the public scoping meetings are provided below. Any additional public meetings will be announced through the local news media, newspapers, mailings, and at the BLM web page: at least 15 days prior to the event.

September 27, 2011: 6:30 pm - 9:30 pm
Kerr McGee Center
100 W. California Ave.
Ridgecrest, CA 93555
(760) 499-5151

September 29, 2011: 6:30 pm - 9:30 pm
Hampton Inn
2710 Lenwood Road
Barstow, California 92311
(760) 253-2600

Comments on issues may be submitted in writing until October 13, 2011. The public may submit comments on issues and planning criteria related to the WEMO EA for the Motorized Vehicle Access Element by any of the following methods:

1) Email:
2) Fax: (951) 697-5299
3) Mail: ATTN: Alan Stein, BLM California Desert District Office, 22835 Calle San Juan de Los Lagos, Moreno Valley, CA 92553-9046
Documents pertinent to this proposal may be examined at the California Desert District Office, address above, or the BLM's California State Office, 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, CA 95825. For further information contact: Alan Stein, (951) 697-5382.


Well-Known Member
Thanks for posting this notice. This especially vital to those of us who use the desert for more than just racing.


Thank You for caring enough to post this . and here we go again , those phuchs are relentless . and I agree with coilover . some use the dez for more than just racing . Soooo we will go ahead and do some big work to stave off the enemies .... Just think B1K then Thanksgiving and New Years just around the corner .. And some of the best two wheel riding in the world right in our own backyard, in our own country . I love Baja but we are gona have to stand and fight and stop running. IMHO...................................


Well-Known Member
I attended the Ridgecrest meeting, Here are a few public comments I made
when I had the floor, Please feel free to use these and expand on them if you so choose
and submit your comments by 13th of October, Please, again submit those comments
This is a pretty important issue, we can gain some trails, or lose big time if we snooze

There were concerns about compliance issues in the CDD by antis that were

I countered if there is more opportunity, compliance problems would be reduced

More points and Ideas on this

1) C routes area should be included to expand the Spangler area due to loss of
Christmas canyon, and losses of Clear creak, JV and other possible losses due
to wilderness re-designation

2) El Paso region should be designated as "Special management" all existing trails,
including single track should be managed as Open weather signed open or

Matter of fact, the entire concept of "Closed unless marked Open" is not a
practical one, there are too many checkerboard properties this cannot function

3) R5 and R50 in the Rands should be re opened, they were closed due to
compliance issues, those were fixed via fencing, there is no reason they
should be closed, they are major connecting routes between Cal City,
Randsburg, Spanglers and El Pasos, Those closures are putting too much
traffic and pressure on routes such as R43

4) The original ROD WEMO plan calls for an education program for the Rand
mountain management area with a small fee implemented.

The education program should stay in tact, the fee should be dropped.
The fee was never addressed in the last go around of stakeholder imput,
it was snuck in during draft of the ROD

If you submit written comments, fell free to use all of this or what ever may
fit your WEMO comment due Oct 13th

J Burleson

Well-Known Member
Thanks for posting the comments Wayne. I know for myself, and I am sure for most, it is not easy to come up with points such as these. Your knowledge is invaluable to the community! I would like to think that even if 10,000 letters come across their desks that are all the same, it will show that 10,000 people care. Thanks again to everyone who is active in keeping our lands open!


Well-Known Member
Thanks for the info Wayne. Here is the BLM WEMO page:
Thanks, I thought I had that link in my post, I have been spreading this around
a few sites. Also on this, My comments reflect the area I am familiar with, Im sure there
may be some stuff in the eastern end off the CDD we can either lose or get back in the
areas of limited use. Please take this seriously, The Organisations have some pull on this
or we would not have gotten as far as we did on this, but public participation is also valuable

There is a lot of traffic here these past few months or so, results of drama from different event issues

Maybe we can ride those coat tails from all the attention, All we need is a simple Email or letter, about the
same time frame it takes to formulate a post on RDC about an trail or area you like to save :)