January 17 is the deadline for comments on a proposed Resource Management Plan (RMP) put together by the Colorado River Valley (CRVO) Glenwood Springs field office of the federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM). After studying the plan the American Motorcyclist Association (AMA) has issued an alert stating that “The current proposed RMP calls for a significant decrease in the number of miles for off-highway vehicle use as well as a total elimination of all cross country travel,” and urging motorcyclists to register their concerns with the plan. Letters should be sent to:
BLM CO River Valley Field Office
2300 River Frontage Rd.
Silt, CO 81652
Or you can email your comments to cormpkg@ttsfo.com.
Limitations proposed by the plan include the following.
- Eliminate all cross-country travel currently allowed on 123,000 acres
- Decrease designated route mileage for full-size vehicles from 760 miles to 470 miles
- Decrease designated route mileage for ATVs from 82 miles to 62 miles
- Decrease designated single-track route mileage for motorcycles from 85 miles to 66 miles
- Closure of an additional 47,900 acres currently open to snowmobile recreation
- Closure to snowmobile usage on anything other than a trail on an additional 14,800 acres
The particular issues the AMA has with the plan, and what they consider the talking points to be raised in making comments, include the following.
- There is a lot of information provided in the plan for different uses; however it is disorganized and hard to review.
- Travel management analysis and decisions appear to have been overlooked in the development of the plan and there is no analysis offered as to why all routes closed to motorized usage are assumed to be available for non-motorized and mechanized usage going forward. The lack of analysis for travel management related issues is a violation of NEPA’s requirements for a detailed statement of high quality information of why decisions in the Plan have been made.
- Motorized users are the only loser in the plan as travel management is the first tool used to address management issues that have nothing to do with travel management, like big game hunting issues and cave management.
- Alternative D is the best alternative but it still fails to address usage trends on the CRVO.
- Alternative C is very weak scientifically and violates both state and federal planning guidelines.
- The Plan moves to a fully designated trail system for all users; however the stated benefits of the proposed changes are simply not addressed. The Plan does not analyze why this protection is not enough and further closures are necessary, when most habitat management plans never identify the need for any trail closures to protect the species.
- Loss of the Gypsum Hills Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA) is unfair and runs counter to the reason it was originally created (to off-set the impacts of two Wilderness Study Areas (WSA’s). The WSA’s are still present and the SRMA should not be removed until there is a proposal to re-open the WSAs.
- User conflicts are often overstated to obtain closures for other reasons and most user conflicts can be addressed without the closures of trails and roads.
- Closure of the Hardscrabble Area for motorized access and subsequent designation of the Hardscrabble area for targeted recreational motorsports activities is inconsistent. This plan fails to give any analysis of the existing motorized opportunities that will be lost in the Hardscrabble area.
- Many of the Wilderness characteristic areas and areas of critical environmental concern designations are inconsistent or conflicting.
- Many proposed management standards violate multiple usage requirements such as the standard of managing all big game habitats to optimum standards
Recent from National Motorcycle Examiner
Safety advocate group includes helmet laws in 15-item list
Biker Quote for Today
Life is long enough – it just isn’t wide enough. Although I do enjoy a good single track now and then!
This past May, my wife Judy asked the question, “Why do they only have that message during May? Why don’t they put that up there all year?”
This is all set in place because some years ago the motorcycling community asked for it. The general idea is that it is a good thing for everybody to have the folks riding motorcycles actually get some training so they can do it competently. The accompanying concept was that such a program could help to forestall proposals that Colorado institute a mandatory helmet law. That is to say, education and better riding skills do more to prevent traffic fatalities than wearing helmets. Or, to put it differently, crash prevention is better than having safer crashes.
At the request of 
