Next week, the House of Representatives will be voting on an important update to the Endangered Species Act H.R. 1897 The ESA has been another constant source of OHV closures on our public lands. Congressman Bruce Westerman will be presenting H.R. 1897 for a full House Vote next week, and we would like your support for the bill. Here’s some of the reasons we support this amendment.

First, we strongly support the bill’s emphasis on measurable species recovery outcomes rather than indefinite protection status. While the ESA has played an important role in preventing extinction, its success should ultimately be judged by its ability to recover species to the point where protections are no longer necessary. Refocusing the statute toward recovery aligns incentives, improves accountability, and better serves both wildlife and the public.

Second, we appreciate the inclusion of economic and practical considerations in decision-making. Public lands are managed for multiple uses under statutes like FLPMA, and ESA implementation should recognize real-world impacts on communities, infrastructure, and responsible recreation. A more balanced approach will foster durable conservation solutions that can be successfully implemented and sustained over time.

Third, UPLA strongly supports provisions that ensure state and local input is meaningfully considered. Counties, state agencies, and local stakeholders possess critical on-the-ground knowledge and are often best positioned to implement effective conservation strategies. Incorporating this input will improve both the quality and legitimacy of ESA decisions.

Fourth, we support the establishment of a species ranking and prioritization system. Moving away from a one-size-fits-all framework allows agencies to allocate limited resources more effectively, focusing attention where it is most needed and where recovery is most achievable. This is a practical and results-oriented improvement over the current system.

Finally, we endorse the bill’s broader and more inclusive definition of “best available science.” Recognizing credible state, local, and field-based data alongside traditional sources will strengthen decision-making by incorporating real-world observations and long-term experience from those who actively work on the landscape.

UPLA also supports efforts within the legislation to reduce excessive and repetitive litigation that can delay or undermine effective conservation outcomes. The current system too often incentivizes serial lawsuits and forum shopping, creating uncertainty for land managers, stakeholders, and conservation efforts alike. Establishing clearer standards and reducing unnecessary litigation will help ensure that resources are directed toward on-the-ground recovery actions rather than prolonged legal disputes.

UPLA believes these reforms represent a constructive path forward—one that maintains a commitment to conservation while improving effectiveness, transparency, and collaboration.

Comments are currently closed, but email me your comments and/or voice of support and I will have them inserted into the Congressional record through our lobbyist. Please be sure to include your full name, address, and Club name in the email.

Thank you for your support!

Loren Campbell
President, UPLA

Read Our Letter to the Department of the Interior and Elected Officials

 Learn More Details and Add Your Name to Take Action by Visiting BlueRibbon Coalition’s Action Alert

UPLA Letter to DOI & BLM – 2026 WEMO Route Closures (v2).pdf

NEPA rules that were proposed last summer have now been finalized, and they are very disturbing. The new rules dramatically reduce the requirement for Agencies to allow comments from the public, both in reductions in the stages or actions, the open period for comments (as little as 10 days), and revision of the Review Conferences to be conducted by the same person that signed the Decision rather than an independent person. These are only a few of our concerns, and we forwarded these comments to both Forest Service and elected officials.

There’s nothing you need to do at this time, but just want you to be aware of this and our pursuits.

UPLA Comment for USDA Forest Service Proposed Rule – Project-Level Predecisional Administrative Review Process

Our friend Brett Stewart at Utah OHV Advocates has been very active in protecting our OHV rights for several years, and he provided this brief update of activities he has worked on. Thanks so much Brett!

• Moab Town Council wanted to change speed limits and it was already a mess. They placed two different speed limit signs in their city on the same street, which is very confusing. I recommended one speed limit and sign for all motorized vehicles. I reached out to the city lobbyists and asked him what he’s doing; that didn’t go well. Then I talked with Moab city councilman Jason Taylor and Rep. Monson, who represents that district, and they were awesome to work with. Councilmember Jason Taylor agreed it was a good idea to remove the second signs and will pursue with City Council.  Stay tuned.
• HB 49 was introduced, asking for an additional $400,000 to come out of the OHV restricted account for the DNR Rangers to give them a raise after they already received $3.8 million from our OHV account. We were able to kill that bill.
• HB 545 is a bill that had some language in it that would’ve made all of our grants in the state of Utah a reimbursement, with no upfront funding, which would’ve killed our grant program. We award about $5 million per year in grants out of the OHV account, many small government agencies and nonprofits don’t have the money to upfront it and then get reimbursed? The sponsor amended that, and we eliminated that part of the bill.
• SB 190 was labeled as a Trailer Bill, but deep into the language, it included off-highway vehicles. It would have made it so when you license your OHV and pay four years’ worth of fees in advance, you would be exempt for the life of that particular vehicle, which sounds appealing, but we believe the OHV program could’ve collapsed if everybody did it all at once. We got the sponsor willing to eliminate the OHV language, and the trailer bill passed.
• HB 444 is a very good bill to further the protection on Class D roads. We worked with the sponsor of that bill, Representative Troy Shelley, and he agreed to insert language in his bill regarding the color of  OHV safety flags on specific dunes in the State. Currently, Utah law says it needs to be red or orange, and as you know, very few, including myself, fly a red or orange flag. We were successful in getting the red or orange requirement removed from the law as of May 6. Now any flag that is at least 6×12 and at least 8′ above the ground (or 18″ above helmet) are compliant, so American and club flags are ok to fly. It should be noted that on parts of Little Sahara, a Federal law still requires red or orange flags, so this does not change that requirement.

Friend or Foe Final Publication_Edits

We Need Your Support of the Outdoor Americans with Disabilities Act

This week legislation was introduced in the United States Senate that would guarantee motorized access to our public lands for Americans with disabilities. Senators Mike Lee (R-UT) and John Curtis (R-UT) have just introduced the Outdoor Americans With Disabilities Act SB2968, aimed at ensuring that Americans with disabilities can meaningfully access and enjoy our public lands.

One of the most common complaints we receive when public lands are closed to motorized access is that those who rely on motorized access can no longer enjoy public lands that they used to enjoy. This bill would create strong new protections for recreation access, and UPLA and BlueRibbon have been working hard with these Congressional offices to have this bill re-introduced this Congress. We’re proud to have worked closely with Senators Lee, Curtis, and other allies to shape the bill’s language, advocate for its principles, and mobilize public support. BRC’s goal has always been to ensure that access to the outdoors is not a privilege for the able-bodied but a guaranteed right for all.

What Will the Outdoor Americans With Disabilities Act Do

• Requires managers of multiple-use lands to maintain a density of roads accessible to motorized vehicles.
• Require the Departments of Interior (BLM) and Agriculture (Forest Service) to prioritize updates to travel management plans and motor vehicle use maps to maintain and improve access.
• Mandates local engagement and coordination
• When roads are proposed for closure, ensure local stakeholder input (states, counties, Tribes, local governments) is part of the decision.
• Prohibit closing roads if doing so would reduce accessibility below the threshold (except in narrow emergency cases), unless an alternative route is designated.
• Make the process for route re-designations categorically exempt from NEPA review, to prevent long bureaucratic delays from standing in the way of access protection.
• Prioritizes re-routing over closures to maintain access.

Areas excluded from the bill include:

• National Wilderness System
• Inventoried Roadless Area
• Congressionally designated primitive area
• National Park System
• National Recreation Area

By tying road-access requirements directly to disability access, this legislation ensures that access is not an afterthought, it becomes a statutory priority. The goal is simple: no American should be shut out from public land experiences because they can’t hike many miles or traverse rugged terrain on foot.

Why This Bill Matters (and Why Now)

1. Addressing Disproportionate Impacts of Closures

When land agencies close roads to reduce motorized use, they often do not consider how many people rely on motor vehicles for access especially those with disabilities. BRC has fought several times in court to warn that blanket closures can be discriminatory in effect. The Outdoor ADA seeks to correct that imbalance and enshrine protections.

2. Avoiding Confusion Across Agencies

Without consistent federal policy, rules vary wildly across BLM, Forest Service, National Park, and local lands. Under this bill, route closure decisions would need to account for accessibility across jurisdictions. That reduces confusion and ensures fairness.

3. Legal Certainty and Efficiency

By making closures and re-designations categorically exempt from NEPA, the bill avoids decades of litigation and planning delay over route changes. Accessible lands cannot be held hostage by bureaucratic backlog.

4. Aligning Policy with a Growing Recreation Reality

As needs for motorized and e-assisted recreation grows, public lands must adapt. This legislation ensures that access modernization keeps pace with technology and demographics, so that recreation isn’t left behind by regulation.

What You Can Do to Help

1. Contact your Senators and Members of Congress and urge them to support the Outdoor Americans With Disabilities Act using BlueRibbon Coalition’s Tool.
2. Call your Congressional Representative. You can find them easily by entering your address here.
3. Share this article and post with the off-road community and other allies who care about inclusive access.
4. Stay engaged! BRC will continue to provide updates, action alerts, and deeper analysis as the bill progresses.

Our public lands belong to all Americans. The Outdoor ADA is more than legislation, it’s a reaffirmation that access should never be limited by mobility. UPLA and BRC will keep fighting so that every citizen can enjoy the beauty of America’s outdoors, regardless of ability.

This article was originally published by BlueRibbon Coalition