Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Imperial Valley Press Article
GlamisDunes.com > Sand Community Issues > Your Environmental Opinion
PWR MAD
I couldn't find anything about this posted yet.

The first few paragraphs say it all.

Our Opinion: Victims of environmentalists

Monday, January 10, 2005 3:00 PM PST
This newspaper has long advocated an intelligent mix of recreational access to such a beautiful natural resource as our desert lands with a measured eye to conservation and protecting the environment.

However, over the last few years, as more and more land has been closed, then opened, then closed, then opened and more and more lawsuits from environmental organizations such as the Sierra Club and the Center for Biological Diversity have aggressively sought to close off as much land as possible, it gets more difficult for us to remain neutral.

For one reason, we understand the economic benefits to Imperial County of keeping open huge swaths of recreational land to off-roaders. We are a poor county, often near the top of the list when it comes to being the poorest. The dollars from off-roaders, whether in the millions or more realistically in the hundreds of thousands, give the Valley a fighting chance in providing the kinds of services and financial stability we'd wish on any other area.

Newly formed groups such as United Desert Gateway, a coalition of local chambers of commerce and other groups, understand this. They understand the need to take advantage of the dunes and the desert areas for the good of our economy, both in prosperous and lean times.

In a couple weeks, Glen Haas of Colorado State University, a leading authority on natural resources who chairs the university's department of natural resource recreation and tourism, will speak to Imperial County leaders about taking full advantage of our desert lands during the Imperial Valley Economic Development Summit on Jan. 27. Summit organizers have said Haas will speak on the untapped economic wellspring we have in our own back yard, that while off-roading and other desert recreation has brought the county economic benefits, we've yet to scratch the surface.

That's why it — the well-being of the county's economy, of which we are a part — angers us to hear of more desert closures; this time it's access to thousands and thousands of acres of washes in the desert near Milpitas Wash, all for the threatened desert tortoise. On Tuesday, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management closed off thousands of miles of washes that stretch through Imperial, Riverside and San Bernardino counties on the order of San Francisco federal District Court Judge Susan Illston. The judge closed the lands until a revised biological opinion on the tortoise is issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

This latest action is a result of a lawsuit by the Center for Biological Diversity and other environmental organizations challenging the Bush administration's management of the tortoise habitat.

What this all amounts to is continued legal loggerheads between environmentalists and off-roading groups, continued on-again, off-again closures of areas of Imperial County desert and the continued potential for the county to miss out on economic opportunities afforded by fair and reasonable access to desert lands. We say fair and reasonable because over the last few years we've yet to see the environmentalists act in a fair and reasonable manner. We wonder if creating such an antagonistic environment actually helps the wonderful plants and animals such as the desert tortoise the environmentalists pledge to protect or if it just makes everyone involved resentful.

We do find it ironic — maybe even sickening — that most of those involved in trying to shut down areas of our own back yard wouldn't know El Centro from El Capitan, Brawley from Boulder, or Glamis from Glasgow. It's the Valley residents who struggle economically, not the cushy biologists filing lawsuits from on high or issuing opinions from behind desks in San Francisco and Tucson.

We've asked it before in this very space, and we're asking again — how much is enough for these environmental groups?
FunRunner
PWR MAD, I posted the article on the ASA website, and I came here to see if I could find anything regarding the article, and I found your post. I wonder if any of the other publications in that region are cognizant of the negative impact of these kind of rulings by a prejudiced judge.
PWR MAD
I got it from the BLM News Bytes listserv. Here is the release:

COURT RULING ON DESERT OHVs

"Federal Court Issues Injunction Prohibiting OHV Travel in Desert Washes" (BLM California news release, 1/4/2005)
A Federal Court in San Francisco has issued an injunction prohibiting off-highway vehicle use in wash zones within 571,000 acres of public lands in the Northern and Eastern Colorado Desert region of the California Desert to protect the threatened desert tortoise. The areas affected are public lands administered by the BLM within designated desert wildlife management areas in Imperial, Riverside and San Bernardino counties.
http://www.ca.blm.gov/news/2005/01/nr/CDDN...stonruling.html

Court Order (PDF file, 65 kb):
http://www.ca.blm.gov/pdfs/caso_pdfs/Ilsto...ng.12.30.04.pdf

BLM Restriction Order (PDF file, 49 kb):
http://www.ca.blm.gov/pdfs/cdd_pdfs/lawsui...ore/closure.pdf

Map (PDF file, 62 kb):
http://www.ca.blm.gov/pdfs/cdd_pdfs/lawsui...ore/map2-10.pdf

Detailed Wash Zone map:
http://www.ca.blm.gov/cdd/DWMA_Detailed_Wash__.html

"Tortoise protection closes big chunk of sand to off-roaders" (Palm Springs Desert Sun, 01/06/2005)
"More than a half-million acres of desert washes will be temporarily off-limits to off-road driving in response to a plea on behalf of endangered desert tortoises. The ban by a federal judge in San Francisco goes into effect immediately over a wide swath of desert in Imperial, Riverside and San Bernardino counties east of the Salton Sea and Joshua Tree National Park."
http://www.thedesertsun.com/news/stories20...106011212.shtml

"Our opinion: Victims of environmentalists" (Imperial Valley Press, 1/10/2005)
Editorial: "This newspaper has long advocated an intelligent mix of recreational access to such a beautiful natural resource as our desert lands with a measured eye to conservation and protecting the environment. However...."
http://ivpressonline.com/articles/2005/01/...pinion/ed22.txt

"Tortoise ruling stops traffic" (Imperial Valley Press, 01/07/2005)
"The U.S. Bureau of Land Management, obeying a federal court ruling handed down last week, issued an order...prohibiting off-highway vehicles from thousands of miles of washes in a wildlife management area intended to protect the desert tortoise."
http://ivpressonline.com/articles/2005/01/07/news/news02.txt

"Off-road vehicles banned from tortoise habitat" (San Bernardino County Sun, 01/04/2005)
"A federal court decision temporarily banning off-road vehicles from desert washes in tortoise habitat was hailed Tuesday by environmental groups and assailed by OHV buffs."
http://www.sbsun.com/Stories/0,1413,208%25...2634708,00.html

"Judge blocks off-roaders" (Riverside Press-Enterprise, 01/05/2005)
"The ban will be in effect until biologists with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service reassess the impacts of off-roading on tortoises, a species threatened with extinction...."
(Free registration required.)
http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories...oad05.ef08.html

"Judge backs desert refuge" (Los Angeles Times, 01/05/2005)
"A federal judge has ordered the U.S. Bureau of Land Management to ban off-road vehicles from more than half a million acres of California desert that are home to the reclusive desert tortoise, which is protected under the Endangered Species Act."
(Free registration required.)
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-de...1,5921248.story

"Court bans off-road vehicles in favor of desert tortoise; Ruling says recovery of species was in jeopardy on 572,000 acres" (San Francisco Chronicle, 01/06/2005)
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...BAGI6ALOMR1.DTL

Hopefully the links come through, I can forward it to you if you'd like to PM me with your email address.
jhitesma
Roger, you missed the first post I made on the ASA site about that editorial that had some discussion to go along with it.

But let's not forget that the IVPress has flipflopped on this so many times it makes John Kerry seem decisive.

From an August IVPress editorial:

QUOTE

Our Opinion: Turnign purple

Monday, August 9, 2004 3:18 PM PDT
A little purple plant has been turning many people purple, blue and red with anger and frustration in recent years. A new ruling, which we think is sensible in general, may make some people happy and others angry, which seems to be the way things go with this plant.

Peirson's milk-vetch, a purple flowering desert plant, has been at the center of controversy between off-roaders, environmentalists and federal officials for the last few years.

The federal government, in concert with environmentalists, ruled four years ago that the plant was endangered and needed protection in its environment, which largely included the Imperial Sand Dunes Recreation Area. The government subsequently closed off 52,780 acres in the dunes to protect the plant, which outraged off-roaders, who want as much open space as possible to ride.

Last week, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service changed its position a bit and reduced the protected habitat for Peirson's milk-vetch to 21,800 acres, or about 40 percent of the previously designated area. Off-roaders, who had been vigilant and at times vitriolic in their rage against the closures, were ecstatic, while environmentalists were outraged.

Although off-roaders will always want unlimited dunes access and environmentalists will always want no access, we think this is a good compromise. (We also think some environmental groups will sue, because that's what they do.) The plant will be protected in a large area and off-roaders' significant anger about the closures should be lessened.

While we do think it is reflective of the anti-environmental leanings of the Bush administration and we don't believe the off-roader-funded studies that concluded the plant actually thrived in areas where it was being run over regularly by off-highway vehicles, we do laud the feds for citing an analysis that stated $2.8 million could be lost to the economies of Imperial and Yuma counties, if the designated closed areas were kept of limits to OHVs. That money is desperately needed here and in Yuma County.

Many people have used the controversy to attack the Peirson's milk-vetch itself, referring to it regularly as a "weed" or even a "stink weed." But every living thing deserves every possible chance to survive, and we as stewards of this planet need to do what we can to help those chances of survival.

At this point, we think enough land is being set aside to keep this particular plant alive.


The number of things they got wrong in that editorial boggles the mind. See the full discussion for details on everything they screwed up.


In September the IVPress had this to say:

QUOTE

While the ASA has much to contribute in the promotional, safety and cleanup programs for the dunes, and has done so in the past, we hope it tones down the anti-environmental rhetoric it sometimes spouts. The last thing the UDG needs to do is to make the environmentalists its enemies because tough and litigious enemies they can be.


And last year at this time they were bad mouthing us for air-quality:
http://www.americansandassociation.org/php...opic.php?t=9974

Articles in the IVPress vary wildly as to what side they lean towards...enough so that I'd wager a guess and say they end up evening out overall and being fairly fair.

But when you read the editorials they've run about the dunes the true feelings of the IVPress editorial staff comes across loud and clear. This latest editorial is a breath of fresh air and would lead one to hop that they're starting to see things for the way they are. But with history as a guide the more pessismistic among us will probably just view this as an attempt to get in on some of the advertising money that the UDG is spending to promote the dunes.
PWR MAD
Jason, I hate to say it, but I have to agree with you. I was hoping for the best, but just finished talking with a good friend who is also a life long El Centro resident. The IVP is well known for slanting it's view to where it thinks the meal ticket is. The only thing that could represent a "light at the end of the tunnel" is that the local business organizations are beginning to hit them where they hopefully will feel it most, their advertising. Many locals have begun using alternative media to get their products noticed.

Let's hope everyone notices and good science and good sense will prevail.
Glam_mom
We can only hope..

but best we keep making noise!

This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2012 Invision Power Services, Inc.