PUBLIC LAND MANAGERS SUED: Feds Ignoring Off-Road

Paige

Well-Known Member
Posts
946
Reaction
0
This was posted on the CBD's web-site - I "heard" that the Rubicon wasn't involved in this - but they have been after the Rubicon for so long - I'm sure it's in there.

CENTER FOR SIERRA NEVADA CONSERVATION
CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
CALIFORNIA WILDERNESS COALITION

NEWS RELEASE: For Immediate Release: Monday, February 11, 2002

PUBLIC LAND MANAGERS SUED: Feds Ignoring Off-Road Vehicle Laws; results in damage to soils and wildlife.

SACRAMENTO ­ A trio of conservation organizations filed a lawsuit Friday charging that Eldorado National Forest officials have failed to obey laws for managing off-road vehicles on the 786,000 acre Sierra Nevada forest between Sacramento and Lake Tahoe. As a result, ORV use off designated roads and trails is uncontrolled and causing widespread damage to soils, wildlife, and vegetation.

Eldorado County-based Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation (CSNC) and co-plaintiffs Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) and California Wilderness Coalition (CWC) charge in a lawsuit filed on Friday that the Eldorado’s Off-Road Vehicle Plan failed to analyze the effects of ORV use on the forest. It also charges the Forest with violations of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the National Forest Management Act (NFMA). The suit also challenges the Rock Creek ORV area decision, adopted in 1999, saying it failed to adequately address impacts to soils and wildlife, including the declining Pacific deer herd and California spotted owls.

According to Karen Schambach, President of the Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation, lack of the analysis renders the Forest Service unable to restrict ORV use on the Forest. “In lieu of enforceable Forest Orders, the Eldorado relies on signs that are routinely vandalized. Their law enforcement officers can’t cite riders going off designated routes; the riders know this, and the irresponsible ones are taking full advantage of the situation. You can go almost anywhere on that forest and see significant damage.”

The Eldorado’s Land Management Plan, adopted in 1989, restricts ORV use to a designated route system, but failed to analyze the impacts of the route designations to soils, fish and wildlife and other recreationists. Appeals of that decision to the Forest Service Washington DC office resulted in an order to the Eldorado to complete analysis of their trail plan by May 1997. The Eldorado has not initiated those studies, nor even indicated that it intends to do so.

Daniel R. Patterson, Ecologist with the Center for Biological Diversity said, “The Eldorado Supervisor John Berry can’t continue to dodge his responsibilities for limiting off-road vehicle harm. To protect the public-interest, we will vigorously pursue full compliance of NEPA and all other applicable conservation laws.”


(end)


<font color=yellow>Paige<font color=yellow>
 

Rodney

Well-Known Member
Posts
132
Reaction
0
I,m sure you are right...the rubicon must be included in there. I am hopeful that the administrators do not just roll over. These people never Quit!!

Winning IS everything
 

BradM

Well-Known Member
Posts
618
Reaction
0
If their lawsuit goes through and is help up by a federal judge, this will set precedent for all OHV areas. Every radical environment group in existence will jump on the band wagon. These people are cleverly finding alternative ways to eliminate public freedom. Let's hope the judges don't roll over and cave in. If so, private groups that are backed by OHV enthusiasts will have to spend millions to fight it all the way to the supreme court. Based on previous positions held by the BLM and the forest service I think it is safe to say that they will not stand up and fight it aggressively for fear of further attacks.

Support all of the organizations that fight for your rights. It is also imperative to make your voice heard through letters, emails, faxes, phone calls and personal appearances at these meetings. Otherwise, everything that we all love will be stripped away before our very eyes. Count on it.



"The only source of knowledge is experience." - Albert Einstein
 

martininsocal

Well-Known Member
Posts
22,828
Reaction
5
the California Wilderness Coalition along with the Center for Biological Diversity released their top 10 sites in California that need protection. they are
Easter Mojave desert-the tthreat of a water vased development by Cadiz Corp along with OHV use threatensthe Mojave National preserve.
Mojave Desert at Fort Irwin-the expansion threatens wilderness and the desert tortoise
Santa Ana Mountain-Urban Sprawl threatens to eliminate wildlife coridors that are essential to the mountain lion.
Palomar Mountain-same thing
South Orange County-Sprawl and a toll road will destroy the wilderness
Las Padres NF-gas and oil exploration and drilling.
Trinity Alps Wilderness-Logging
Owens River Head waters-Offroad Vehicles, a ski resort
Gaviota Coast-Urban sprawl
Medicine Lake Highlands, Modoc, and Klamath NF-Power plant
Klamath River Basin-damn farmers needing water!

it goes on and on.

martin

If your gonna go, go BIG
 
Top