SailAway

Holy moly, put away the tar and feathers!

No one, including me, said we CAN'T provide them. I merely pointed out the fact that it's been discussed and preempted the naysayers by pointing out what has already been pointed out to us before.

As I said, I like the idea of membership cards... some don't, but I do and apparently you guys do too.

VickiW

Great ideas here!

We've talked about membership cards in the past and the logistics seemed to get in the way. While we're small, printing up membership cards is a snap. But as we grow it could become very cumbersome and the question has become, "is it worth it?"

I personally like the idea of membership cards... for some reason I just like the look of them and always got a kick out of the ones I'd get from signing up with various organizations.

But... once something like that is started it must be maintained and, well, in an all-volunteer organization there is often such a flux in volunteer help that maintaining these systems can become a problem. And then there are people who will wonder how much of their donation is going to pay for those membership cards versus their 'true' value.

I'm certainly not against the idea. Like I said, I like membership cards. Just wanted to give people something to think about on the other end when considering what can and/or should be done.

And we already have the tri-fold brochure we created last year and here is the text of our welcome letter:

Welcome to Friends of Dumont Dunes!

Friends of Dumont Dunes wishes to say “THANK YOU” for making the important decision to become a supporting member of this active pro-access organization. You have just joined the ranks of a growing association of like-minded desert enthusiasts who enjoy off-road recreation at the Dumont Dunes Off Highway Vehicle Recreation Area.

This organization was created to represent all users of the Dumont Dunes and provides those Dune users with a strong, united voice to the Bureau of Land Management and other appropriate political, legislative and land management agencies, while promoting safe, responsible and proper use of the Dumont Dunes. An all-volunteer, user-based organization, Friends of Dumont Dunes is on the forefront of issues impacting the Dumont Dunes, acting as liaisons in the ongoing battle for the rights of the duning community and focusing on enhancing the off-road experience of all Dumont Dunes users.

Your annual fees will be used to support this powerful voice by funding legal and related costs incurred in efforts to maintain and expand your rights to access and enjoy the Dumont Dunes. As an all-volunteer organization (including the leadership board), all financial support goes 100% to projects such as safety and educational programs, safe duning and “rules of the dunes” brochures and pamphlets, organizing the annual Dumont Dunes clean-up and a variety of other activities, as well as administrative costs such as attendance and participation in off-road industry trade shows and events, website development and upkeep, e-mail and postal mail campaigns to promote and support pro-land access legislation.

Speaking of volunteers, Friends of Dumont Dunes encourages you to consider lending a hand. We have committees such as membership, the annual clean up and website maintenance that can always use more volunteer help. Attending off-road shows to help “work the booth,” assisting in mailings, sponsoring or attending informational meetings and rallies and pitching-in at the spring clean-up are just some of the other ways you can help your organization. Remember, Friends of Dumont Dunes is only comprised of volunteers; user participation increases our strength and we welcome any assistance you may be inclined to provide.

For more information about Friends of Dumont Dunes and how you can volunteer to help keep your Dunes open, to read about the latest issues facing or impacting the Dunes and/or to share your thoughts and comments on the topics of the day with fellow Dumont users, please visit our website at www.FriendsOfDumontDunes.org.

Thanks again for becoming a supporting member of Friends of Dumont Dunes. We appreciate your support and together, we can make a difference.

Best regards,

VickiW

Oh my goodness, I KNEW it could happen!

Friends of Dumont Dunes did not start out and never wanted to be one of those organizations where members just throw money at it and let it do whatever it's going to do.

Absolutely not.

What Dumont needs is members of the community coming together to form the future of Dumont and that is what Friends of Dumont Dunes was designed for... to be the vehicle that helps the Dumont community reach its goals.

This will take a lot more work from the community but I personally think the rewards are greater and that Dumont will be better for it.

We're at a turning point in our dunes right now. Not only are we being targeted by the anti-access bad guys, but even people from within our community... irresponsible and out of control land users... they are unwittingly targeting us too, making us vulnerable and turning away the heart and soul of our users.

Standing up and helping to wrestle control back into the hands of the people who love Dumont... the people who go there not just because they can but because they must... that's what the Dumont community needs to do and that's what is starting right here, right now.

Most excellent.

VickiW

The best possible scenario is collaboration between the two or more organizations, not one steamrolling the other one into submission.

Steamrolling wouldn't (or at least shouldn't) happen at Dumont... completely different situation than at Glamis... there shouldn't be any steamrolling at Glamis, but that's what it gets turned into quite often, even though there are plenty of issues to go around. Oh well, that's Glamis's loss.

Fortunately for Dumont, while there is some overlapping with other user groups (CORVA is involved in all 'California' off-road issues, for instance), there is no competition for Dumont among those user groups. What I'm saying is, for instance, CORVA focuses on a broader scale and is thrilled to know that there are tighter-focused user groups like Friends of Dumont Dunes, Friends of El Mirage, etc., taking care of the needs of those specific areas. And CORVA would never presume to force any of those areas to be 'more like CORVA' or "bend" to CORVA in any way. It just wouldn't make sense (and would be a waste of everyone's already short time).

Friends of Oceano would no more attempt to "take over" Dumont than Friends of Dumont Dunes would attempt to "take over" El Mirage. Each tightly-focused group knows their own area and the issues surrounding it and, quite frankly, we all have our hands full enough without trying to muscle in somewhere else. While there are many members of the ASA who visit Dumont (and vice-versa), the leaders of that organization have made it very clear to Terry and to me, that they have their own soup to stir and will offer any help they can, but will defer to Friends of Dumont Dunes on Dumont matters and have no desire to interfere.

In that regard it's the same all over. If there is ever anything Friends of Dumont Dunes can do for Friends of Oceano Dunes, Friends of Sand Mountain, Friends of El Mirage, the American Sand Association, etc., FoDD will answer the call... and vice versa.

Is there any "one" primary organization? Nope. Although CORVA helped to get many of the current user groups started and the BRC has been around forever, there is no real "parent" organization and my guess is there never will be. Then again, there are so many groups working together on the issues that face off-roaders today, each one keeping an eye on the big picture while focusing on their particular issues, parental leadership is not necessary.

Networking... that's a different story. There should be lots and lots of networking and sharing of ideas among the leaders of the various organizations and for the most part that's true. Not always, but then again nothing is perfect.

VickiW

What FoDD hasn't done will always be easier to reciount than what FoDD has done, although Terry made a pretty good list there.

Mostly what we haven't done is beat the bushes for membership and money. I personally think that membership is most important and, with the help of many people, we're finally in a position to start building our membership base. Like Terry said, we have decided to eliminate the membership fee for now (by the way, all current members will get a bonus for their former paid membership... more on that later) so that it should be easier to get people involved. What we're 'losing' in membership fees is a small sacrifice for getting more people informed was the train of thought we followed on that. We will consider reinstating the fees later on, but for now it's more about getting people involved. We will still want to make sure that people who are signing up with FoDD realize what it is they are signing up for... so many people see "free" and figure what the heck, why not but that's not what we want. It's a fine line but an important one.

Fundraising will be next. If the anti-access groups stay true to form, they will only increase their targeting of Dumont and I see the need for an attorney in the very near future. Fundraising will also increase with the help of many people, including those who have stepped up here in this thread.

What will the money be used for? That's an important question. I personally don't believe in building a warchest just for the sake of having one, but here are more immediate goals to consider such as State and Federal lobby representation. FoDD has done well so far due to its affiliation with other organizations and the contacts that are in place with the leadership. But we can do more and this is one cost of fighting the fight that we really need to step up to. We just can't do that without a more stable cash flow.

There's also several programs that we would like to institute at Dumont such as one focusing on getting the younger community members involved... start while they're young and being a responsible duner just comes naturally from generation to generation. While it's not an expensive program to run, there are small costs that have been borne by individual FoDD leaders in the past. As we grow, this will grow too.

So why haven't we done this yet?

Time... or lack of it would be my response. The leadership consists of working individuals, all volunteers, who have families and hobbies and work responsibilities of their own. It's not easy to work a full-time job, take care of a family and then also work a full-time job even for the most worthy of causes, Dumont. Sorry excuses, I know, but facts are facts.

We've spent the last nearly two years basically playing catch-up with the organization. FoDD had a good start, but it had all but disappeared just prior to the "new" regime stepping in. Since that time we've worked behind the scenes, maintaining important contacts, establishing new ones, controlling the situation from the background, and that's kept us so busy that the foreground has fallen behind. Our public presence has been played down while we have been working behind the scenes... all while juggling families and paying jobs and other obligations.

It's time to get the public presence going.

Obviously the FoDD leadership needs help with this and thankfully, so many of you have stepped up to offer it.

Together we can increase the strength of what we already have and create a new strength in those areas we are building!

VickiW

I would give to Fodd if I where to see a bigger present out at Dumont and not at Glamis.

Actually there has been 100% more FoDD presence at Dumont than at Glamis... that's because there is zero presence at Glamis. No signs, flyers, membership forms or brochures have been displayed or handed out at Glamis except one time years ago (4 years maybe?) with the former Friends of Dumont Dunes was invited to the annual Glamis cleanup to increase awareness of that area (but not to raise funds of course). Friends of Sand Mountain and Friends of Oceano Dunes were also invited.

Other than that, even though the issues are similar, Dumont and Glamis, like Glamis and Oceano and Sand Mountain and Dumont, operate very much as their own areas.

So what presence has FoDD had at Dumont? Absolutely the most high-profile and memorable is, of course, the cleanup, which has been in place since FoDD started years ago. What was added with the "new" FoDD was the tri-fold brochures handed out at the gate along with banners and signs.

VickiW

I believe that in a very general, but absolutely real way, all pro-access organizations are fighting for all recreation areas.

For instance, when Oceano Dunes takes a step forward or a step back, we all take that same step with them. What happens in each area very much has a ripple effect in the other areas.

As such, the leaders of the various organizations try very hard to work together on the issues and each of us is always available to help the others when needed.

I can personally attest to the fact that Friends of Dumont Dunes is very nicely supported not only by the leaders in CORVA (the organization that helped get FoDD started), but also by the leaders in such organizations as the American Sand Association because, well, for one thing immediately following the initial petition to list the lizard was filed, FoDD received phone calls, emails and private messages offering help in any way we might need it from those leaders.

Please... don't let some of the "word play" you witness on various forums mislead you. Yes, there is some friction but it is not between organizations, it is between individuals. Above and beyond that nonsense there is the knowledge that no one (or handful of) individual/s is going to save or destroy an area and more importantly, there is not one OHV leader in all of the numbers of the OHV leaders, who would let that happen because of conflicting personalities or friction between individuals.

Vicki

I've seen some checkered flags that also have logos on them... that might be an idea for DDR.

The "non-denominational" (for lack of a better word) checkered flag wouldn't have any particular logo or saying, but for Dumont it could be a different colored checker (to set it apart from the flags at Glamis). I don't remember what color Oceano/Pismo chose but it would be easy enough to find out.

VickiW

Crazy lady is true! I am SO GLAD IT'S FRIDAY.

I thought this...

i will be sure to check out the ASA trailer at vendors row ..thank vicki!!! see you at the TRT meeting

meant you were expecting the to see the ASA trailer at Dumont, silly you.

VickiW

I don't know that there will actually be an ASA trailer at Dumont (at Glamis vendor row is a different story). From what I understand SandBlaster will be offering a few ASA fundraising items through his business, but there won't be a separate trailer.

SandBlaster... is that your understanding too?

I cannot imagine the ASA setting up a Glamis fundraising trailer at Dumont, but I could be wrong.

VickiW

Just got off the phone with Craig/SandBlaster... excellent conversation, lots of ground covered.

He said he's happy to have Friends of Dumont Dunes membership forms available as well as the Dumont Dunes informational brochures we had printed up a while back. We haven't been focusing on fundraising so we don't have any items for sale (yet), but at this point information has its own value.

Thank you Craig, for stepping up to support Friends of Dumont Dunes' effort to fight for the Dumont Dunes community!

VickiW

The Checkered Flag program began many years ago by a guy named Jerry something. Not ASA co-founder Jerry Seaver, but another Jerry. VERY funny man... used to show up at events dressed as a clown (nose, hair, suit, huge shoes) and then make some funny (okay, maybe inappropriate) comments relating to the size of a man's shoe.

Schaefer... Jerry Schaefer. I knew it would come to me.

Anyway, he and his riding group started it as a way to identify each other. They were responsible duners, responsible land users, true believers in the tread lightly and pack-it-in-pack-it-out credos.

It was actually Jerry Schaefer's checkered flag pledge that came into play when the very real threat of total closure first came up at Glamis. This was before the lawsuit that shut down 50,000 acres, before the now-obsolete Recreational Area Management Plan, heck even before the ASA.

Glamis may be bad now, but it was worse back then and during one particularly bleak season some rangers were surrounded and threatened by an unruly crowd.

The group Professional Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER, one of the 3 that eventually sued and won 50,000 acres closed), a Federal employee membership organization, complained long and loud that their officers were in danger out at Glamis and the only way to ensure safety was to shut it down.

Jerry Schaefer's Checkered Flag Pledge made it under the noses of the movers and shakers in Washington DC as a way to show that what PEER was saying was a lie and that not ALL duners are bad duners. Pictures of duners sporting the checkered flag along with families and the true Glamis life were shown and it turned a terrible situation into one that could be reasoned with.

It literally saved Glamis. Imagine that, this one man with his friends could do that.

Since it's beginning it has morphed a little and is now synonymous with the American Sand Association, which is why quite often you will hear it referred to as the "ASA flag." The checkered flag is currently offered by the ASA in their fund raising efforts to protect the right to ride at Glamis

The idea behind the checkered flag program is a strong one and other sand areas have adopted it... but they've changed the colors from black and white checkers to something else just so their flags are identified with their sand areas.

It sounds like there is an interest in doing something like this at Dumont... not an impossible task at all.

VickiW

The Consumer Product Safety Commission just posted notice of a recall on something that kids may be using in their costumes tonight...

NEWS from CPSC

U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission

Office of Information and Public Affairs

Washington, DC 20207

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

October 31, 2007

Release #08-059

Firm's Recall Hotline: (800) 335-7585

CPSC Recall Hotline: (800) 638-2772

CPSC Media Contact: (301) 504-7908

Halloween "Ugly Teeth" Recalled By Amscan Inc. Due to Violation of Lead Paint Standard

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with the firm named below, today announced a voluntary recall of the following consumer product. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed.

Name of Product: "Ugly Teeth" Party Favors

Units: About 43,000

Importer: Amscan Inc., of Elmsford, N.Y.

Hazard: The surface paint on the teeth contains excessive levels of lead, violating the federal lead paint standard.

Incidents/Injuries: None reported.

Description: The fake Halloween teeth are painted white, black and orange with brown gums. They were sold as party favors in packages of eight. "Ugly Teeth," "Amscan," "Party Favors," "Value Pack Party Favors," UPC 0-48419-65002-7 and UPC 0-48419-61663-4 are printed on the packaging.

Sold at: Various retailers nationwide from January 2006 through October 2007 for about $2.

Manufactured in: China

Remedy: Consumers should immediately take the recalled Halloween teeth away from children and return them to the place where purchased for a full refund.

Consumer Contact: For additional information, contact Amscan Inc. at (800) 335-7585 between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday through Friday, or visit the firm's Web site at www.amscan.com

To see this recall on CPSC's web site, including a picture of the recalled product, please go to:

http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml08/08059.html

Geez, TOUGH CROWD!

Maybe he was just letting everyone know that sorry it's a Ford but at least it's lifted?

Anyway... doesn't matter how anyone gets there as long as many do! Attendance at this meeting is especially important because they listened to the complaints that TRT meetings are always on a weekday and moved to a Saturday at least this one time.

I haven't seen an agenda yet but that's not unusual... the meeting is a ways away just yet. When one is available it will get posted.

Someone also asked in an earlier post if this was a public meeting and if there would be time for public comment and the answer is yes to both questions, always.

VickiW.

vicky you really should bring up those issues at the trt as they were running around in ranger vehicles and san bernardino county sheriffs side by sides

Yeah, I'm 95% sure this was CourtTV filming a segment of something they call "Party Police" and I personally think it was irresponsible for them to be out there on this weekend.

It sounds like they got what they were looking for, and I'm sure the show will turn out looking like we're all a bunch of backward jackasses.

Bad because of the faction that wants to shut us down adding this to their kindling, bad because of the families who will see it and may now think Dumont is NO place they want to be and bad because it will be one more excuse for a legislator who won't touch us with a 10-foot pole.

What's good? Well, until this all came up I'd never heard of "party police" and we can always hope it disappears into obscurity like so many other un-watched shows.

VickiW

Am I correct in that there is only one member from Nevada? If so, can we get additional member representation from Nevada?

Yes, there is only one from Nevada, one from California, one from the film industry, etc. I think perhaps you are missing the point of TRT representation.

The point to having a representative 'council' is so that those interested constituents can use their representative to act on their behalf. And no one TRT member has a stronger voice than another.

That means that, as a Nevada off-roader, Terry can bring your concerns to the TRT for you... just as the film industry representative brings those concerns to the table, the law enforcement representative brings those concerns to the table, so on and so forth. There will never be two film industry representatives but if there were, they would be bringing all the same issues to the table for discussion. Now... one representative may indeed bring two opposing thoughts to the table ("One guy suggested we charge additional fees for filming and another guy suggested we lower the fees for filming") because, well, they don't get to pick and choose what they bring from their constituents. If it comes to them, it goes to the TRT. It would be a waste and just plain silly to have two film industry representatives appointed and would take up a seat that might be filled by another body who has a "stake" in what happens to the area (be it Dumont or somewhere else).

That said... it is ALWAYS better to have as many members of the public on hand as possible. It lets the BLM see the community they are dealing with face-to-face.

This particular meeting has been discussed at length in prior posts here and on DumontSandDunes.com. In fact, the TRT has been a hot topic of discussion off and on, as you will find if you take a moment to acquaint yourself with the subject of TRT by doing a simple search of the forum databases. The TRT is fairly new to Dumont so now that your interest has been piqued in Dumont it won't take long to catch up on the issues. As I said, a simple search here at Dumont Dune Riders will bring a wide variety of interesting previous discussions including the battle to get a TRT meeting scheduled on a Saturday (an event we hope to repeat).

VickiW

I do not have any personal information for you, but I may have another possible lead the family can consider...l

A "camera crew" and "videotaping" has been mentioned and I believe it may have been part of a project that was originally scheduled for opening weekend (but I had heard it was canceled), a CourtTV program called "Party Police." I have not (yet) confirmed whether that project did indeed go forward but will post as soon as I am certain. If it did, and they were the ones videotaping the interviews, the Banshee rider's representatives might want a copy of it and should consider contacting CourtTV once the situation has been confirmed.

VickiW

Dose anyone know if the rangers impounded the rail or know the name of the owner to put a little pressure on him to give up the driver. the driver is a chicken s*#@ and needs to come forward and pay for this !!! ( hit and run ) you dont run for no reason was he drinking and driving. the guy on the banshee has a 3 year old that wants to see his dad . if any one has any info pics of the driver, names , anything that could help please reply @ davidhall01@msn.com or 7024013643 and ill pass any info on to the family

you gonna be there the 17th Vicki?

a friend of mine and I will be there

Yes, I plan on it. My family's a little miffed by it since they'll all be in Glamis (traditional week-long Thanksgiving trip) but I think they'll survive.

V.

Ynot (TRT) is on the TRT as the representative of Nevada off-roaders and Sandemon (John) is on the TRT as a representative of Friends of Dumont Dunes. I am president of Friends of Dumont Dunes and I try to attend the TRT meetings whenever possible, but I am not on the TRT.

That said... you can come to me anytime with any thoughts and if it's something I think only the TRT can handle, that's where it will go. If it's something I can help with, I will.

vickiw@friendsofdumontdunes.org

VickiW

My concerns over this revised proposed critical habitat are shared by many in the off-road community. Yes, the overall acreage was reduced. However, additional "management recommendations" were included and, well, we all know what will happen if those recommendations aren't followed.

Now... if the PMV is somehow delisted from the Federal Endangered Species act, critical habitat would become a moot point. To an extent.

Let's not forget that the PMV is only listed as "threatened" under the Federal Endangered Species Act.

It is listed as "endangered" under the California act, and delisting from one does not automatically delist it from the other.

And although Glamis is on Federal land, it is located in the State of California and therefore governed by California regulations as well as Federal regulations. In fact, the El Centro BLM relies heavily upon the California Native Plant Society when making decisions regarding various species in the dunes.

Critical habitat aside, delisted from the ESA or not, the PMV is not leaving the radar for a very long time.

VickiW

Final out come not known, but encouraging, Date of report 7-27-07

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01...007/07-3674.htm

Summary:

Summary of Changes From Previously Designated Critical Habitat

The areas identified in this proposed rule constitute a proposed

revision of the areas we proposed to designate as critical habitat for

Astragalus magdalenae var. peirsonii on August 5, 2003 (68 FR 46143),

and designated on August 4, 2004 (69 FR 47330). The main differences

include the following:

1. This proposed revision includes 16,108 ac (6,519 ha) of land in

Imperial County, California, a reduction of 36,672 acre (14,840 ha)

from the 2003 proposed rule (68 FR 46143) and 5,728 ac (2,329 ha) from

the 2004 final critical habitat rule (69 FR 47330). The differences in

data and selection criteria between the currently designated critical

habitat and this proposed revision are described further below.

2. The reduction in total acreage from the 2003 proposed critical

habitat designation is primarily the result of a revised methodology to

delineate critical habitat.

The public hearing was held Sept. 25, 2007. As far as I can tell, they have not published their final decision. I don't expect anything soon as the plan itself has to be reviewed and then the legal challenges must be ruled on. Could be months or years before final outcome. Still leads me to have hope that things can be reversed.

Another link. Not necessarily a win yet, however with a unanimous vote by the county board of supervisors, it gives me hope and the notion that reversing prior closures is not impossible, maybe even probable.

http://kxoradio.com/local-news/county-peti...rom-list-2.html

Except that even if the PMV is delisted, those court-ordered closures will remain in effect, more so considering the recent decision on the critical habitat.

But I am glad to see such a public display of support from the Imperial County Board of Supervisors.

VickiW

Read the following links: The first is the effort to get the butterfly listed under the ESA. The second is the closure in March of 2007. The third, May 2007, is the finding by the US Fish and Wildlife stating the listing in not warranted. Whether recognized or not, this was a win for pro-access.

http://darwin.eeb.uconn.edu/uncommon-groun...mountain-b.html

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,660206255,00.html

http://www.fws.gov/nevada/highlights/news_..._050207_smb.pdf

Yeah, I read a lot of that when it was first released.

The court settlement/agreement between the BLM and the anti-access guys was not a win for us, and no amount of posturing by CBD associates will change that.

As for the listing, of course the petition was denied... only after the BLM had rolled over on everything else.

Protecting the butterfly... listing it... was never the issue. Off-road vehicle restrictions (without supporting data) was the goal and it was achieved in spades.

You want to talk about chipping away at an area, Sand Mountain is a perfect example.

And I predict here and now it won't be the last. Next time it won't be the butterfly, it will be something else, and the BLM in charge of Sand Mountain will negotiate and surrender an acre at a time once again.

VickiW

Also, for a quick reality check, here's the description of this project from the starting post on this thread:

BLM Barstow Field Office ~ Draft OHMVR 2008 Grant Application

Project Description:

This project would construct about 9 miles of post and cable barrier around portions of the Dumont Dunes OHV Recreation Area boundary. Most visitors come here to enjoy the sand, mounds and mounds of sand. The perimeter fence will have no affect on this legal OHV riding opportunity in the sand. However, public lands closed to motorized use surround the dunes, and illegal intrusions by OHVs are increasing each year. The barrier will help enforce the boundary and prevent illegal riding in closed areas.

The closed areas were never open to riding and include wilderness, areas of critical environmental concern, important cultural sites, sensitive biological resources and Death Valley N.P. Impacts caused by the illegal riding have reached a tipping point and action is required. The perimeter barrier is intended to allow the legal OHV riding opportunity to continue, and is a preferred alternative to possible closures and restrictions.

Perhaps it is the word "fence" that is so alarming, as it seems that everyone is in agreement that some kind of markers need to be in place. This is post and cable, not chain-link and barbed wire.

VickiW

In reading back through some of this thread, I realized I need to clarify something.

The fencing that is the subject of this thread, and for which a green sticker grant has been submitted, is to clearly delineate the boundary between certain off-limit areas and some of our open riding areas.

The fencing that is the subject of this thread is not going to encompass the entire open riding area. That subject is for a different thread altogether and should be discussed at great length within the community and its leaders.

VickiW

For some reason I'm having trouble replying with quotes so I will just have to wing it. The following responses are to statements made by rpost in what he posted at 7:03 pm yesterday.

By erecting a fence, it becomes that much harder to move the boundary back because it just become accepted as fixed. It becomes much easier to move a fence outward instead of inward.

I think I understand what you’re saying but the fact of the matter here, in this particular instance is, those closures surrounding Dumont’s open riding area aren’t going away tomorrow. Or this season or even next season. Anyone who understands how these closures are created knows the time it would take to even begin to get them lifted. Years. And in the meantime, we have a very real problem.

We don’t have years. While moving this fence inward may be possible (not probable, but possible), it would be detrimental to the Dumont community to ignore our immediate problems while holding out for that hope.

Question? Is it a wonder that this action only comes on the heals of the 'loss' the environmental protectionists took over the milk vetch and the butterfly?

There have not been any environmental protectionist losses with either the milk vetch or the butterfly that I know of. If you are referring to the “reduced” critical habitat of the peirson’s milk vetch, please do further research and you will learn that this reduction was indeed not a loss to the anti-access movement, and they have won in court at every possible turn. As for the butterfly I have to assume you are talking about Sand Mountain’s butterfly and again, the anti-access faction has not suffered even minor losses in that battle. Perhaps you are talking about another milk vetch and butterfly?

Once the fence is put up, it will make it that much harder to fight to re-open areas as the expense of putting up the fence would wasted.

I must disagree here. Lifting those closures is such a long-range goal that if and when any or all of those closed areas become open, the cost of a long-ago erected fence will not even figure into an equation.

However, some of the protections are unnecessary and discriminatory. When they inhibit the freedoms of any one group without good cause, that is injustice.

Again, I absolutely agree with this statement as it pertains to the overall pro-access movement. But again we are not talking in generalities, we are talking about a particular problem that is very much within our control to change. The only 'freedom' this fencing will inhibit is illegal riding.

There are many injustices occurring against the pro-access community but this is not one of them and it is unfair to confuse the casual reader on this issue.

However, there are several instances where individuals were ticketed on their own private property and had to go to court to dismiss the violations, there were several instances where people riding 'in-bounds' who were ticketed and had to go to court to dismiss the charges. I was also privy to a discussion where it was stated that what was needed was to quote, "harass the riding community such that they would go find somewhere else to ride".

Of this I have no doubt. It’s happening all over our ‘open’ deserts. But again, this sweeping statement does not pertain to the immediate fencing concern at Dumont.

If not here and now, where and when???

My point exactly. In the here and now, this issue must be dealt with as quickly as possible if we are going to protect what we have before it is under immediate threat. At the same time, the ‘big picture’ is been tended to... there are cleanups and flyers and information outlets (such as this message board) and meetings attended and senators getting phone calls. Everything is happening here and now, with graver attention being given to some issues, as necessary. You are right... every play matters to the overall outcome of a football game. And this proactive move is one of many field goals we need to change the outcome of our game.

You have some wonderful ideas and brother, I stand beside you in your desire to reverse the pre-existing closures. If and when you are ready to spear-head that fight, I will do everything I can to assist you.

VickiW