Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral


  • Rank
    "Brotherhood of the Slap"
  • Birthday 04/22/1958

Profile Information

  • Location
    Huntington Beach, CA USA

Recent Profile Visitors

582 profile views
  1. Amen Bob, Amen. CORVA can use some help also. Contact CORVA and let the leadership them know how you can help or even just let them know what you think needs to be done about an issue. CORVA also offers a 90 day membership at no charge.
  2. Frankly Ben, you are right on the mark here. There is a lot of good ideas and comments to this thread. What there isn't is communication between "Joe Average Duner" and the OHV groups. It all goes back to more membership and donations. Be is paid or free membership in the case of ASA, there is still a very large percentage that don't belong - let alone, communicate with the leadership. More on this later.... I guess this is why I'm disappointed with those who single out one group when indeed we attempt to work together and not take shots at each other. The bottom line here is each the sub-committee voted to support (with conditions similar to that ASA has provided and CORVA articulated much the same at the sub-committee meeting) the new fees. While I've not spoke to Ed about this subject, I've been in a similar position several times with different agencies. You some times find your self in a "damned if you do, and damned if you don't") position. In hind sight, being what it is... perhaps it would have been best that the OHV groups came out with a single letter expressing their concerns to the DAC. Ed may have not articulated CORVA's position in the sub-committee to the DAC during his speech. I have no idea of why. My best guess was the DAC already knew (before the public meeting from members of the sub-committee) the conditions placed upon the vote of support by the sub-committee. I'm also guessing that Ed knew what BLM's position was (the BLM did not accept the conditions of the sub-committee for various reasons) and felt as if it was best to support what the sub-committee got from BLM vs. the alternative of what BLM had provided would happen if the fee increase was not put into effect. Enough on that subject. Please allow me to continue with my thoughts for the future. There is not enough interest for folks to volunteer as a leader. This "game" of land access takes years to learn. Burn-out is a real issue. Just look at the leadership that has come and gone with just ASA alone, that is focused on dune issues. Then imagine being a more statewide organization and the demands on this type of group's leadership. There are only a few of us that have stuck it out for the long run... like for 30 or more years. Folks like current president of CORVA Harry Baker, Ed Waldheim, Bob Ham - a few others, including myself. What we do is in our blood and just like every one that has worked so hard through the years, It takes a toll on our life's. To be very honest, all of the above are starting to age and there is coming a time when we might lose these folks to the aging process. We need new blood that we can work with that are willing to absorb what we have learned through the years, work with us, and move towards leadership positions for this community as one's that have background and perspective. I'm doing my part (along with a few of the other "old timers") to do just this with a wife of a former CORVA VP of Land Access - Kim Carpenter for the past few years. She is the spark plug, that among others issues, is THE person who started the process of informing the person, during a debate of candidates for CD 8, who ultimately won the election for this district, of the Johnson Valley issue. Just this past Friday, she was awarded a Woman of Distinction from CD 8 honor at a function in Apple Valley in front of a standing room only crowd. Later that evening, CORVA folks attended a fund raiser for the Congessman. We were greeted by staff we knew and were introduced to staff we didn't. I can't tell you how many times the Congressman thanked and hugged us for our support. Kim has become a real well trained leader who has done so much more than I can write here to further motorized recreational access. I am so proud of her and her accomplishments. As cited above, we cannot do this alone. Just look at the impact from my post last year about AB 1595, the ROHV industry bill. The vast majority of folks (including the leadership of most OHV groups) didn't have a clue about this bill until I posted an article intended for use in the CORVA newsletter to GD.com. Folks here raised hell with their state elected representatives. They raised hell with Assembly Member Cook's office. This caught all of the above off-guard, because they knew the industry hand delivered the bill to both ORBA and a majority of the OHV group lobbyist, the day before the bill was introduced. Nonetheless, groups like ASA were not informed. I never took ASA to task for not informing their membership when they pay the lobbyist to keep them in the loop. In fact, I feed Bob as much background via PM's and over the phone as possible. In the end, your voice was heard. Cook busted his ass to modify the legislation regarding back seat's in existing ROHV's. The "clean-up" legislation this year was an effort started by CORVA and joined by ASA as the concepts were being formulated in December of last year and January of this year. Even though not one OHV group in this state backed Cook's bid for Congress, three past presidents of CORVA did. This started a chain of events that now has a bill, passed by the House, that keeps Johnson Valley as public lands. Is this a perfect bill? No. We had to compromise to some degree. Getting things done at the legislative level is about some level of compromise. Ben, I would only hope that folks reading this thread see that the OHV groups had no chance of keeping fees from raising. Not one group should be singled out for their stance on this issue. After the tragic death of the young folks at the race in Johnson Valley a few years ago, and reports of an "out of control" environment (now in the past) at the ISDRA, our form of recreation is being monitored at the highest levels of government. Should the groups get together and work towards a better system of how fee's are used and called for by BLM? Yes, they should. Do the groups have the resources - given all the issues we face - no. Just like Grant posted. Folks need to get off their "high horse" on message boards such as this and start being a part of the solution.
  3. Wow Grant! I think we may finally agree on something. Thanks for the insight.
  4. In no small part because the organizations that were supposed to represent us instead rolled over and gave support to what the BLM wanted. I.E. More money. Sorry Ben, the decision was made way up the line as in the State Office via the Washington DC office of BLM. The sub-committee did it's best to mitigate the impacts. They were successful to some degree. Please allow me to be very clear. Those on the sub-committee and the OHV groups in general had two choices. 1. Accept some form of fee increase. 2. Not support a fee increase and BLM would then start the process of limiting access or even closing the entire ISDRA for different periods of time. This came directly from BLM management's mouth to me during a telephone discussion last week. This is not direct to you Ben, but now, I read babble about unlawful actions BLM is taking in light of FERLA. If those feel strongly about this, then get off your ass and hire a law firm and sue BLM. BTW, the cost of something like this suit with a REAL law firm (not the usual players) that has the resouces to be successful if indeed there is a case here is going to take about $ 1/2 million at a minimum. This was a quote I got last week from a law firm I'm friendly with that is "state of the art" in such lawsuits. Another option is the one I cited above about working with congress. While changing the law, in the long run, would be the ultimate option... this too is damn expensive. I know full well the financial numbers for the fight to keep Johnson Valley from being taken over by the USMC. The bottom line here is money to get things done. Boat loads of it. Until that time we have the kind of funding I provided above, we are going to have to accept increase fees to access the ISDRA.
  5. You know the answers to those questions. The BLM only cares about keep a well funded budget and do you seriously think Boxer and Fienstin give to $hit about offroaders!?! If anything they would ask why it's still open. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/CA 8th — Rep. Paul Cook [R] 36th — Rep. Raul Ruiz [D] 50th — Rep. Duncan Hunter [R] 51st — Rep. Juan Vargas [D] 47th — Rep. Alan Lowenthal [D] and the list goes on. if you wite a letter they send a letter to the agency. if enough letters are sent the real questions start being asked. yep i did To a large degree you did. You went in this direction; but all I was attempting to say in my post is to take it further. Write a letter, request a meeting, talk to key staff and/or the Congress Person. Tell them of your gripe, and most important - PROVIDE A POSSIBLE SOLUTION. The agency (BLM) has made their decision. Writing them a letter at this point is moot. BTW, Rep. Juan Vargas [D] (51st CD) is a co-sponsor of the Cook bill regarding JV along with Buck McKeon - Chair of the Armed Services Committee.
  6. What say does our Arizona Congressman have in the matter? I know our local economies and businesses in Yuma, PHX and Tucson are directly impacted by the BLM's management of the dunes. I have had the opportunity to sit down and speak with my new Congressman Paul Gosar of Arizona 4th Congressional District. I explained how import the dunes are to our economy here in Yuma and other parts of the State. Thankfully, he at least took the opportunity to listen. That definately would not have happened with Representative Raul Grijalva. Obviously though, our Federal and State Representatives in Arizona are more concerned with issues that directly impact the citizens of Arizona. Your Arizona Congress Person has equal weight in Congress on any matter for federal lands. Go to him, tell him of your opinion on this matter. Present him with a solution (audit, FERLA, etc.) and most important, follow up.
  7. I've had a couple of days away from this thread and some time to reflect. I contacted Mr. Zale from BLM to assess his observations of the work of the sub-committee. I learned some things and he is getting back to me with answers to some specific documentation I requested. Until that time, I'll reserve further comment about my concerns about who, what, and why of the decision of the sub committee. Please allow me to stray a bit and allow this post to come full circle. I spent considerable time yesterday with Congressman Paul Cook and his staff both at an official function and at a fund raiser. Yes, this is the same person that as an assembly person many on this forum were displeased with the ROHV legislation he carried for the ROHV industry known as AB 1595. While it is a fact that not one OHV organization or person opposed this legislation during its run through the legislative process, all hell broke loose when I posted to this forum what to expect for 2013. Mr. Cook, based upon input from the OHV community that disagreed with some of the provision of AB 1595, worked his butt off to, at the last minute, mitigate some of the concerns. I found it rather interesting that the lobbyist for many of the OHV organizations (including ASA), even though he was hand delivered AB 1595 the day before the legislation was introduced, failed to inform his clients about the same. On a side note, the concerns about the 2013 and prior ROHV's modified for rear seats was addressed by a number of us via e-mail and ultimately a bill was crafted by Senator Walters to address these concerns. CORVA and ASA are shown as official supporters of the bill. I'm happy to report that the bill is on the Gov's desk. Moving forward, last year's election comes around and not one OHV organization supports Cook's effort for Congress. The only support he got from this community was that of three past presidents of CORVA. Mr. Cook won the congressional seat by a wide margin. I got to know the man over the summer, fall, and winter. We have become quite friendly with each other. His congressional district was facing a disaster of of losing Johnson Valley to a proposal by the USMC to take the land under the Engle Act. A small and select group of us toured Mr. Cook around JV in mid December of last year. I spent considerable time with him during the tour. A long story short, Congressman Cook introduced legislation making JV a National OHV Recreation area and the USMC is allowed to do limited training in JV upon completing a public process. I'm happy to report that this bill has cleared all Committee votes by a wide margin and has been passed by the House of Representatives with over 300 bi-partisan votes. The bill will be considered in the US Senate, likely next month. So why do I post all of the above as it's technically not on topic? Rather simple. Ed, in a post above, recommends contacting freshman Congressman Vargas with your concerns as he represents the area known as the ISDRA. I suggest you contact your congress person. Share your concerns. Come to your congressperson with your concerns. But don't just bitch; come to them with a solution to the issue. If you really feel the fee increase is not justified, then it's time to get off your butt and take the next step and involve the very persons that have oversight on how BLM is doing at the ISDRA. Instead of bitching on this forum, I challenge each of you that have issues with the decision of the sub-group and CORVA to write and VISIT your congressional representative. As for their help, bring them some ideas. I've done just that for many years. I've won some and I've lost some. But I got involved and attempted to correct decisions of agencies that I disagree with. Just like one person posted to this thread, he talked with a CORVA representative and came away with a fresh perspective on the issue. It's all about communication.
  8. I didn't want to argue FLREA with Bob last night, but you are right on the mark here. I got into a FLREA battle with a Forest Service level 4 officer a few years ago while on a road "turn-out" within the Forest taking a picture. He was there to check my Adventure Pass. Long story short, I begged him to issue me a citation and mark the "go see the judge box". The officer did just that. I went to court and provided evidence that none of the requirements cited in FLREA were present and I was simply parked to take in the view from the side of the road. The judge found for me and instructed the US attorney to have his client (the Forest Service) take a course on the requirements of FLREA.
  9. I really don't enjoy when someone gets so frustrated they have to resort to personal attacks to make their point. And, for the record, I'm not (as I've said before) attempting to be "pro CORVA". The truth is what I'm looking for. The facts are the facts. Two members of the ASA BOD are/were on the subcommittee. One. Mr. Bramham representing "CA OHV", and the other, Mr. Hattaway represents "OHV Organization". And educated guess of who Mr. Hattaway is representing as part of a "OHV Organization" would lead the average person to assume ASA. Full of $hit? I've forgot more about motorized recreation issues than anyone who has posted to this thread. I've been fully and part time involved in motorized recreation groups for far more years than I care to remember. Bob and I can tussle with the alleged facts of this issue and debate in an adult like manner. I would only hope you can join in without resulting to personal attacks. I encourage you too to contact the state office of the BLM to discuss this issue and the reality of the same. PM me and I'll get you the correct person and how to contact them. The truth??? You don't want to hear the truth. Your sole purpose here is to blame the ASA and Mr Holiday. You ignore the fact that CORVA is in bed with the BLM. You refuse to listen to people that where there, that hear what was said, and make up your own truths. You speak of back room deals and of thing that didn't happen at the meeting. Your doing everything you can to divert attention away from CORVA's roll in this. Please allow me to be especially blut with you here. I want to hear the truth. I have one hell of a lot more access to what happened than just going to the DAC meeting. I, unlike you, dug deeper and questioned some of those that are a part of the sub-committee. I'm not blaming anyone here. I'm attempting to provide that you and others like you are on some sort of "which hunt" to single out CORVA in this matter when, according to members of the sub-committee and ASA's own public document (as a bottom line) supports the fee increase. I can tell you from the accounts I've received from the sub-committee members that some that made the decision to support with stipulations. One I know CORVA articulated similar concerns of ASA in their public document. Look up the word articulated as a verb. I'm in no way refusing to listen to those in attendance. I'm listening and asking questions of those in the decision making process. Something you have failed to do. I'm looking at the "big picture", not just some meeting where the sub committee presented its findings to the DAC. There is no debating you on the issues, your opinion and agenda, is perfectly clear. Much the same can be said of you. What research have you done on the matter to support your contentions other than attend a meeting where the outcome was a done deal before the meeting started? Stating that you are full of $hit not a personal. Since you want to act like your above it I will put it another way. You are being deceitful, twisting the facts and telling half truths to suit your needs and achieve your agenda. You should think about running for office on the democratic ticket. You have to be kidding me. Telling someone they are full of $hit is clear as day a personal attack. There is not one thing I posted to this thread that is "deceitful, twisting of the facts, and telling half-truths". Every eff'en thing I posted can or has been documented. When your done trying to discredit the two of us that where actually at the meeting and want to talk about something other then reassigning blame for this debacle I might readdress you. I'm not discrediting you or anyone else. I'm providing a different view from other sources at the meeting that saw things differently than you and someone else. BTW, I thought you were done with me in your last post where you posted the pig. Its sure interesting when someone posts one thing and does another. Until then you're dismissed! What? Are you attempting to say you are a superior officer that has the authority to dismiss me? You need to get a dose of something to get you off you high and mighty complex.
  10. Bob... I'll ask you the same question as I did in a previous post. Mr. Mr. Hattaway represents "OHV Organization" on the sub-committee. What would the BLM provide as the "OHV Organization" Mr. Hattaway represents? I'm happy to contact BLM to get an answer and post it here when I get a response. I'd personally be interested in the answer. The BLM can "say" he represents anyone they'd like. However, all one has to do is look at a few ASA meeting minutes, and you'll see that other than occasional sharing of info, or attempting to figure out what will happen, little time or effort is spent regarding that subgroup. It's just not going to work. The ASA as an organization put down it's position in writing, and submitted it as part of the comment period. The only way you get an official ASA approval is for the board to meet, and agree. The fact that someone happens to be a member of the org when part of another body is immaterial. This is the same thing as saying because Senator Soandso is a member of the NRA, and a bill passed further restricting a right that should not be infringed, the NRA approved it. That logic just doesn't fly. What does matter, and will stand the test of time is the written record. When you go to tell your boss you have sold the two XP1000's referenced earlier, you can be pretty sure he's going to correct you and tell you you only sold one, the one who gave you the money. ASA didn't buy this scheme unanimously without condition like CORVA did. Heck, even the BLM can see the difference. Why are you having such a hard time with that? And so what if the ASA member knew how the vote was going to go down before the vote was taken. Didn't you know Brown was gonna win before you went to the ballot box? I did, and I still voted against him. It really has nothing to do with the outcome. Bob, what I don't quite understand is Mr. Hattaway, was selected to the sub-committee to represent a "OHV Group". For the life of me, I really believe he was selected to represent ASA. I've been abound quite a few years with stuff like this. My experience has always been when BLM and/or the DAC selects a person for a position such as the above, they do so with the understanding that that person represents their group. Its a bit like going to federal Court and having a representative at the "table" while hashing out a settlement. The person from the org sitting at the table carries the voice of the organization because the Judge sure as hell is not going to allow the entire BOD at the table.
  11. Bob... I'll ask you the same question as I did in a previous post. Mr. Mr. Hattaway represents "OHV Organization" on the sub-committee. What would the BLM provide as the "OHV Organization" Mr. Hattaway represents? I'm happy to contact BLM to get an answer and post it here when I get a response.
  12. I really don't enjoy when someone gets so frustrated they have to resort to personal attacks to make their point. And, for the record, I'm not (as I've said before) attempting to be "pro CORVA". The truth is what I'm looking for. The facts are the facts. Two members of the ASA BOD are/were on the subcommittee. One. Mr. Bramham representing "CA OHV", and the other, Mr. Hattaway represents "OHV Organization". And educated guess of who Mr. Hattaway is representing as part of a "OHV Organization" would lead the average person to assume ASA. Full of $hit? I've forgot more about motorized recreation issues than anyone who has posted to this thread. I've been fully and part time involved in motorized recreation groups for far more years than I care to remember. Bob and I can tussle with the alleged facts of this issue and debate in an adult like manner. I would only hope you can join in without resulting to personal attacks. I encourage you too to contact the state office of the BLM to discuss this issue and the reality of the same. PM me and I'll get you the correct person and how to contact them.
  13. Come on, cut out the misdirection crap. There is NO "ASA representative" position on the subcomittee. There is an ASA BOD member, but they are not representing the ASA, they are representing the title given them by the BLM. This is a very important point. ASA decisions are completely separate from what the BOD member does on that subcomittee. And most importantly, the ASA BOD does not direct the members who happen to be appointed by the BLM on how to talk, think, or vote. Please quit looking for a nexus that does not exist. Really? As demonstrated in his own words via his post here, CORVA's spokesman at the meeting doesn't even understand FLREA, which is the law that governs fee collection. What sort of "handle" does CORVA really have on things again? In some civilizations a threat of "do this, or I'll do that" as you have written has it's own special name. It's called "blackmail". To be fair, the BLM had made this threat..that if the plan wasn't approved as it was written, it would close the dunes. Thus, I expect that almost ANY private business who makes all or a significant portion of their income from duning would not be in a position to oppose this threat. They are not really the issue here. If as you claim the ASA secretly supported the passing of this as written, it was not done in accordance with the bylaws of the organization. No motion was taken, discussed, and voted on. I know, I've been there. You are not going to be able to pull the ASA into the muck storm that CORVA so rightly deserves with their unanimous and unconditional support of a business plan based on excess and guesses. They could have very easily done the right thing and stood up for transparency, but they didn't. Politics is an ugly place..too bad it's putting such an ugly cloud over our beloved dunes. How do you expain the letter written by ASA a few day prior to the DAC meeting. Was this letter not approved by the BOD? Further, I just got an email from the person in CORVA that was at the state office of BLM today. She provides... Again Bob, with all due respect, might I suggest you make a call to the state office and listen carefully to what they have to say on this matter? I'll put you in touch with Amy who can direct you to the correct person in the BLM state office to confirm what she has written?
  14. Bob... I share the enjoyment of "our chats, on the board and off". I have a great deal of respect for you and your concepts. I'm not attempting to standing up for or against CORVA with this thread. My issue is that of fairness and the buzz word - t ransparency. The bottom line here is best explained by the Managing Director of CORVA's words If I did my math correctly, two members of the sub-committee are members of ASA's Board of Directors. They voted to support the fee increase. This being said, I find it rather difficult to comprehend that the ASA BOD did not know before the meeting what the ultimate outcome of the DAC meeting was going to be. Moreover, please allow me to post some information I obtained today from the same Managing Director who visited the state office of BLM. From what I'm finding out, the State Director of BLM is taking marching orders from BLM in DC and thus, we now have a fee increase. In the end here Bob, and with all due respect, are you telling me that the information provided above is inaccurate?
  15. I don't doubt that what you heard and are posting here (above) is correct. Mr. Stovin was on the sub-committee that made the decision to support the increase. I'm in no way attempting to "point fingers at others and makeup stuff that didn't happen". To even imply this, let alone type this demonstrates your misunderstanding of the facts of what happened and why. Allow me to quote from a CORVA officer with very high credentials and well regarded by most every leader in the OHV community. I went to the State BLM Office today to find answers to some of your questions. The economic report was redone twice to answer some of the questions regarding visitation. In the end, it was accepted by all members of the subcommittee, including ASA, CORVA, Imperial County and Cal4 [California Associations of 4 Wheel Drive Clubs]. Originally, the BLM wanted to raise the fees MORE, but the representative from CORVA was instrumental in demanding they reduce the increase. The subcommittee voted UNANIMOUSLY to support the lowered figure. Suffice it to say, the BLM State Office told the person from CORVA today that it was the effort of a representative of CORVA that got the BLM to lower the fee increase Go back and read my response above. Ed, as a member of the sub-committee representing motorized recreation and a officer of CORVA, did indeed state at the DAC meeting that CORVA supported the fee increase. But what you and others fail to understand is the groups cited above unamimously voted to support the fee increase. How in the world do you expect Ed and CORVA to backtrack in front of the DAC when the entire sub-group voted for the fee increase? My suggestion was a good faith effort to allow you and like minded folks to attempt to get the results you want. Stupid? Why don't you attempt to stay to the facts and debate them instead of attempting to take a personal swipe at someone?; We may not agree, but all I ask is to post in a civil manner With all due respect to you, I'm not concerned about your being upset about what CORVA did. And you are right, you have every right to speak out.What you said does not bother me in the least. What bothers me is you single out CORVA in this matter when indeed, ASA and others were a part of the sub-committee that voted for this increase. If you had mentioned them too, I would not be having to take the time to attempt to set the record straight. Perhaps you need to get a better grasp of how things work in government. CORVA and the other groups have a good handle on the process on what can and cannot be done I don't know an answer to your question. I do know that I've been on this forum since about 2001 or so and I've taken CORVA (and other groups) to task from time to time and have supported them when they make sound decisions. Now, please allow me some more information from the person who met with the State office of BLM today about this subject. The services that have been reduced are all those that do not affect public health and safety. All that is left is law enforcement and emergency services. Those cannot be reduced anymore because the BLM will incur too much liability. [look at the deaths in Johnson Valley and the law enforcement issue at the ISDRA in the past, and factor in that BLM national has California under the microscope] if you want fewer patrols and less available emergency services, PICK THE DAYS YOU WANT THE DUNES CLOSED! The BLM cannot reduce those services because of past experiences with gangs and number of injuries. This is a BLM managed area, BLM makes the rules. [This was the upshot of what BLM told the CORVA representative today.] If every member of the subcommittee voted against the increase, THE INCREASE WOULD STILL GO IN EFFECT. [This also was provided by BLM today] Whether ASA protested at the meeting or not, behind the scenes they agreed with everyone else, and THE VOTE WAS UNANIMOUS. CORVA wants to keep areas open, including the Dunes, and to do that sometimes we will have to contribute to keep our areas safe for our families. [Words in brackets are not a a part of the quote, but are mine to fill in the blanks] That's right folks, the BLM state office with guidence from the Washington DC office has provided that they would close down or limit visitation to the ISDRA if the fee increase was not undertaken

More Links

©2001 GlamisDunes.com.
All rights reserved.

  • Create New...