The Imperial Valley Press has been hot and cold in their reporting of the issues here.
But I must say this opinion piece, written by a staff writer at the Imperial Valley Press, seems to be pretty fair:
Our Opinion: Ramping up
Wednesday, May 28, 2003 2:46 PM PDT
Neither the environmental nor the off-road community is overjoyed with the U.S. Bureau of Land Management's Recreation Area Management Plan for the Imperial Sand Dunes Recreation Area released last week, which means it probably is a good compromise.
We in Imperial County should be happy because the final version of the plan allows more visitors to the dunes, meaning more money for our local economy from those stopping to buy gas, food and other supplies. The final version increased visitor limitations in the dunes area to 80,444, up from 55,403 in the draft plan, and that could mean a big difference in our economy.
We do think too much of the information used to measure the impacts on area economies is anecdotal; a statement from a store manager here, some information from a chamber of commerce there. The federal government or some other entity needs to do a scientific study to come up with some real, quantifiable numbers.
The rollback of court-ordered environmental closures of areas in the 40 miles of dunes also will mean a more comfortable experience, and therefore a more appealing experience, for many dunes enthusiasts.
Some say overcrowding in the dunes in recent years has led to big trouble, including fatal violence. We are not sure that is the truth as much as troublemakers looking for trouble. Still, a little more space may mean a little more peace.
There are other items in the RAMP that will just have to be worked out between the parties involved, such as setting up long-term and short-term vending areas. Input from those involved is the key.
That is one thing environmentalists might learn from this process. If this plan is slightly slanted to the side of off-roaders and some of that can be attributed to the environmental politics of the Bush administration, a lot of it can be attributed to off-roaders being more willing to work with BLM officials than environmentalists.
Last summer the BLM hosted a tour of the sand dunes for the public and state Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Commissioners, who were in town for a meeting. All the commissioners attended the tour except Paul Spitler, the most outspoken environmentalist on the commission, even though he was in town for the meeting.
As far as we know, Spitler has never been to the Imperial Sand Dunes, turning down every opportunity from the BLM to tour the dunes but taking every opportunity to criticize the bureau for policies at the dunes.
Whereas off-roaders give the BLM input, environmentalists give the BLM grief, threatening lawsuits against the government at every perceived wrong. Such a confrontational attitude is anti-productive, particularly when the BLM is seeking input as it was with the RAMP plan.
What we have seen of the plan seems fair and reasonable. If environmentalists and off-roaders are not completely happy with it, that's OK because they never are.
Full Version: Opinion piece in the IV Press
Could it be that a certain Pro-access group is getting the ear of the press?
Well at least some of the press!!
Watch the papers of the next couple weeks and see if there might be some more accurate reporting.
Well at least some of the press!!
Watch the papers of the next couple weeks and see if there might be some more accurate reporting.
[quote]Could it be that a certain Pro-access group is getting the ear of the press?
Well at least some of the press!!
Watch the papers of the next couple weeks and see if there might be some more accurate reporting.[/quote]
A big thanks to you Grant, and the rest of the ASA volunteers, for the incredible strides you have all made in this battle. And the fight is nowhere near the end. I will be here supporting the ASA until the very end.
Well at least some of the press!!
Watch the papers of the next couple weeks and see if there might be some more accurate reporting.[/quote]
A big thanks to you Grant, and the rest of the ASA volunteers, for the incredible strides you have all made in this battle. And the fight is nowhere near the end. I will be here supporting the ASA until the very end.
[quote]Could it be that a certain Pro-access group is getting the ear of the press?
Well at least some of the press!!
Watch the papers of the next couple weeks and see if there might be some more accurate reporting.[/quote]
Well at least some of the press!!
Watch the papers of the next couple weeks and see if there might be some more accurate reporting.[/quote]
I'm sorry, but I must be missing something here and I hope I'm misunderstanding the hints I'm reading. If I thought DUNERS was responsible for this piece, I'd sure be wondering if we shouldn't more carefully consider the approach we're taking, as it seems to be out of line with what we're hearing from so many duners.
Don't get me wrong... no doubt about it, this opinion piece is certainly better than many that have come out and like I told Laura I surely appreciate the effort. But, like I also told Laura, it pretty much plays into the hands of the anti-access steam rollers.
They push for absurd visitor capacity limits so when the BLM raises them marginally above absurd we're grateful.
They illegally and without substantiation close 49,000-plus acres of our riding and camping areas for two years, so when the plan tosses back in a small portion and places unsubstantiated limitations on the rest we're grateful.
I'm glad that to some this plan seems fair and reasonable, and I would agree with that assessment for some portions of the RAMP... but in reading the posted and email gripes people are putting forth about this RAMP, I don't think I'm the only one that is having a little trouble getting too excited.
But I could be wrong. Maybe I am the only one that feels this RAMP isn't worthy of so much praise and if I am, I surely hope my fellow duners set me straight.
Please though... can someone first tell me when middle-of-the-road became the battle cry for Glamis?
Vicki
Don't get me wrong... no doubt about it, this opinion piece is certainly better than many that have come out and like I told Laura I surely appreciate the effort. But, like I also told Laura, it pretty much plays into the hands of the anti-access steam rollers.
They push for absurd visitor capacity limits so when the BLM raises them marginally above absurd we're grateful.
They illegally and without substantiation close 49,000-plus acres of our riding and camping areas for two years, so when the plan tosses back in a small portion and places unsubstantiated limitations on the rest we're grateful.
I'm glad that to some this plan seems fair and reasonable, and I would agree with that assessment for some portions of the RAMP... but in reading the posted and email gripes people are putting forth about this RAMP, I don't think I'm the only one that is having a little trouble getting too excited.
But I could be wrong. Maybe I am the only one that feels this RAMP isn't worthy of so much praise and if I am, I surely hope my fellow duners set me straight.
Please though... can someone first tell me when middle-of-the-road became the battle cry for Glamis?
Vicki
Vicki, your awsome!!!! If there were 500 people with your courage and conviction this would of been over by now. I agree, progress has been made but we still have a long way to go. I feel like this ramp is a wolf in sheeps clothing. I ALSO WANT TO THANK THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE "BEHIND THE SCENES" YOU ARE TRUE AMERICAN HEROS....
This is really the first time i've seen the IV Press print something semi truthful so i'm pleased. However, the idea that limiting the number of visitors from unlimited to 80,000 is good for the Imperial Valley is absurd. This is NOT and I repeat NOT good for the Imperial Valley. Spin SPIN spin SPIN.
[quote]"a lot of it can be attributed to off-roaders being more willing to work with BLM officials than environmentalists. "[/quote]
Which is what i've been saying all along. Contrary to what some believe about this issue it is the most important tool for getting something we desire. Of course we will never bend over and grab our ankles but, we can be more willing to listen to them and help them in ways they have never seen before.
There is ALWAYS a way to get something done. You just have to have the will. And of course the bodies to do it. The old school way of the BLM saying "NO" to everything and the OHV community, DEMANDING everything be done NOW, is gone. It didn't work then, it doesn't work now, and it will NEVER work.
[quote]"a lot of it can be attributed to off-roaders being more willing to work with BLM officials than environmentalists. "[/quote]
Which is what i've been saying all along. Contrary to what some believe about this issue it is the most important tool for getting something we desire. Of course we will never bend over and grab our ankles but, we can be more willing to listen to them and help them in ways they have never seen before.
There is ALWAYS a way to get something done. You just have to have the will. And of course the bodies to do it. The old school way of the BLM saying "NO" to everything and the OHV community, DEMANDING everything be done NOW, is gone. It didn't work then, it doesn't work now, and it will NEVER work.
[quote]The old school way of the BLM saying "NO" to everything and the OHV community, DEMANDING everything be done NOW, is gone. It didn't work then, it doesn't work now, and it will NEVER work. [/quote]
Absolutely Chuck! I totaly agree with you. Communication and cooperation are going to be the keys that are used to keep Glamis from being closed. I little cooperation goes a long way!
Absolutely Chuck! I totaly agree with you. Communication and cooperation are going to be the keys that are used to keep Glamis from being closed. I little cooperation goes a long way!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.