The tragic loss of 317 miles of roads and 120 dispersed campsites in Moab should serve as a call to action for all of us, and if we don’t rally to make a difference, it is likely the losses that lie ahead may be even worse. We have always been more concerned with losses laid out in Alternative C, but Moab’s Decision was much closer to Alternative B. Future decisions will definitely address the recreation aspects of the routes, but becoming more important are the resource impacts of each trail. We need to shift our focus to comment on the routes you love by taking note of the Resource Impacts that BLM has determined for each route. I’ll provide a link where you can find the BLM Route Reports with this information below.

Once again this will be going out again and riding the trails and documenting your findings with substantive comments.  We are working on a consolidated reporting tool to help draft your comments,  but more on that later.

So What is a Substantive Comment? A substantive comment identifies an issue you have with the document, says why it’s a problem, and offers other factual and unbiased information for BLM (or Forest Service) to consider. Substantive comments must be answered by the BLM, nonsubstantive comments are ignored.

Here are some qualities of what makes a substantive comment:

• References document pages, chapters or sections and uses objective information.
• Uses facts to question the adequacy, accuracy, methodology, or assumptions of the analysis.
• Presents traditional or ecological knowledge.
• Proposes a reasonable new alternative or revision to the alternatives presented.
• Identifies a passage in the document that is unclear or wrong.

Here’s some tips for making a substantive comment:

• Include any knowledge, experience, or evidence as it relates to your observations and comments.
• Provide GPS readings or landmarks, if possible, when referring to specific locations
• Present new information
• Share issues relevant to the environmental analysis.
• Suggest alternatives to the proposed project and the reasons why they should be considered.
• Avoid comments like “I do (or don’t like this”
• Remember that identifical comments are treated as one comment, including form letters. If you use a form letter, paste your personal comments at the very beginning of the form letter to make them stand out. Changed comments in the body of a form letter are likely to be overlooked.

Here is a list of comments that are not deemed substantive and won’t be answered

• Stating that you want your comment recorded as “substantive.”
• Crafting an emotionally compelling story without facts
• Stating only that you agree or disagree with a policy, resource decision, analysis finding, or presented alternative.
• Asking vague or open-ended questions
• Commenting on unrelated projects.

Here’s a couple good examples of substantive comments (fictitious, for example only)

Route SS1024 (Route Report Page 60) is identified for closure in Alternative B.C. This is an important connector route as listed in the Report, and leads to many activities including camping. to enable a loop route, rather than only an in and out trail. In and Out trails are far less desirable for users and the extra traffic resulting on In and Out Roads causing more of the negative impacts identified in the Route Report.

Crosses Washes or within 100 meters of an intermittent stream are listed as Resource impacts, but travel in the desert almost always involves crossing multiple washes and intermittent streams, that is the natural drainage system of the desert. Why are these crossings more impactful than others? Please clarify the potential negative impacts associated with vehicles crossing dry washes or streams.

 There are 8 Special Status Species listed in the report, but we observed none of these on our most recent trip. What mitigations have you considered to minimize these concerns; would seasonal closures minimize the impact on the species? Additionally, what mitigations have you considered for the PFYC Class 5 area of the trail? Can it be rerouted around the area of concern? Attached is a GPX file of the route we took, along with selected photos.

I disagree with closing Route SS1024 because it is the only way I have to access my private land.

Question? So What Should I Do?

1. Select an Area that has routes that are marked on the map as targeted for closure in Alternative B. Write down the route numbers.
2. Go to the BLM Route Report, for the Swell you can find it here. Just use the Search Bar on the webpage to find the Route Report for your trail, generally they will be about 4 pages long. Print it out, and try to understand what their resource concerns are. How do you determine what things mean in the Route Report? Google should be able to give you answers to abbreviations in the report. For example, I googled “What is PFYC Class 5?” and “What are abbreviation T E S T in BLM route reports for negative impacts” and it gave me all the answers.
3. Schedule time to go out and run the trail. Take your route report. Look for areas or conditions mentioned in the Route Report. Take photos along the route, especially noting any possible resource impacts they may have cited and think about alternatives when you’re on the trail.
4. When you get home, write your comments on the route. Be as specific as you can. 2 or 3 paragraphs on a route is an ideal length, include photos and gpx tracks. Videos are not recommended because of the large file size. If Archeological or Paleontology is listed, you won’t get a specific answer as to where that concern is located, but you can ask questions about possible mitigations around the concern such as rerouting the trail, informational signing, barriers to narrow trail to prevent stopping, etc. It is ok to mention how long you’ve been using the trail, with whom, etc, but this should be like the dessert to your meal, maybe delightful to you, but shouldn’t be the main course.
5. Submit Your Comments if the comment period is open. We will give you more details on how to copy us on your comments, please stand by on this until we work out the details. If the comment period is not open, get them ready to submit right after your ride while it’s clear in your mind. Again, stay tuned for more information on this.

Summary When you look at the comments required for one route, it seems like a lot, but when put in the scope of things, it might take you 20-30 minutes to write a good comment. Compare that to the fun you had running the trail, the people you enjoyed the company of on the trail, the overnight camping you did, and being able to enjoy this trail for generations to come and I hope you’ll agree it’s a good investment of your time. Please do your research and get out there and help save our trails!

Tammy Pike opened the workshop with a question… How many of you that watched the Superbowl know why the 49ers lost?

The answer was not about the skill, motivation, or talent of the players, it was because they did not understand the overtime rules.

She told us that until we take the time to read and understood the rules that BLM and Forest Service must follow when considering a Travel Management Plan, we will continue to lose.

For the next 3 hours, she told us about some of the rules contained in Title 43 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

The workshop was attended by 40 leaders from all around Utah and some surrounding states, and the questions were fast paced and the answers came back quickly. The people in the room are some of the best educated people in OHV, and we all felt like we were drinking out of a firehose. The bottom line is that we need to change how we’re playing the game if we really want to win.

At Your Leisure recorded the entire session, and is in the process of editing it into 10-15 minute segments organized by subject, but we will begin developing the new game strategy and relating it to you over the coming weeks. We ask that you stay tuned for the steps ahead, and share them with all your friends to help us keep our public lands open to all responsible users.

Our first article with steps to begin taking for protecting the San Rafael Swell and Bears Ears National Monument can be found here 

We had 2 big wins in the Utah State Legislature this last session.

S.B. 67 would have gutted the ability for Counties and Local Government to protect roads from being closed.  Class A, B, C and D roads from being closed across private land. At one point this bill had increased in size to almost 290 lines of text, barely resembling the text of the previous law. With Hurculean effort during the last hours of the bill being passed, the Senator’s office was flooded with almost 500 emails received overnight. The bill was amended the next day. You can read the text of the bill here

H.B. 471 was a bill introduced by Representative Phil Lyman and Senator Curtis Bramble. By the time the bill was passed, it had 12 CoSponsors, something very rare to have such strong support. The bill asserts ownership and exclusive jurisdiction of roads included on a county travel plan and requires due process before the federal government may close a road.
-The bill:asserts ownership and jurisdiction over roads included on a county’s class B and
class D road map or a county travel plan unless the road has been closed through
proper adjudicative proceedings;
-The bill  llows the state or a county to disregard any attempted closure of a road without due
process;
-The bill asserts that the burden of proof to show the need to close a road or to claim
ownership falls on the federal government;
-It allows the state and county to disregard the alleged closure.
This was a huge accomplishment, you can read the text of the bill here.

Many thanks to our OHV Advocate Brett Stewart for watching and influencing these bills.