I just got these comments from another local club here in So Cal. I find it
quite alarming and I honestly think Feinsteins office is lying but either
way, here it is..
get all your groups writing....plaster this all over the web...
Spread the word.

-----------------------------------------------------
begin quote
-----------------------------------------------------
At our meeting last night, our political chairman said that he had
contacted Sen. Fienteins office about her not supporting Boxers Wilderness
Act. He was told that Fiensteins office had recieved over 10,000 letters in
favor of support , and about 100 against support. Let's get on the ball.
Pass the word to everyone you know. Also let the groups from other forms of
recreation you may be involved with know. Call her office, or better yet,
send a letter. She does not accept e-mails, because she gets so many off
them. At least that's the response I have always recieved.
Everyone's recreational freedom is at stake. If recreation is not your
thing, Think how bad the wildfires were last year, it's only going to get
worse without management.

Regards,
Name Deleted By Peter S. Di Primo

---------------------------------------------------------------
end quote
--------------------------------------------------------------


http://www.senate.gov/~feinstein/contact.html DO NOT SEND E-MAILS, they do not get read.... WRITE CALL OR FAX

SPREAD THE WORD TO ALL RECREATION GROUPS!!


“First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists, but I was neither, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.” -- Martin Niemoeller




:usa:

February 26, 2003

Senator Dianne Feinstein
United States Senate
331 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Fax: (202) 228-3954



Honorable Senator Feinstein,

Please oppose the Wilderness expansion proposals introduced by the Honorable Senator Boxer. These Wilderness proposals negatively impact fire protection access that we need to safeguard the scenic and resource values of the great State of California.

California (and the nation's land management agencies) can do a better job at cooperative land management, something better than designated Wilderness. We need land management where habitat protection is not gained at the expense of resource protection, or a variety of recreation opportunities.

I urge you to offer an alternative to these restrictive Wilderness proposals, with something better in the spirit of the Quincy Library Group legislation you introduced into Congress in 1998. I understand the public input and consensus agreement achieved with the QLG legislation demanded considerable resources to accomplish, but I believe the same effort applied to the lands involved in Senator Boxer's Wilderness proposals will produce a positive outcome.

The shared common goals of fostering backcountry resource and fire protection, ecological integrity of diverse habitat, assuring adequate resource and recreation access opportunity, and providing economic stability for the communities adjacent to these lands demand a flexible management plan that is less restrictive than designated Wilderness.

Please honor my request to oppose Senator Boxer's Wilderness proposals.

Sincerely,

Done. Took less than 5 minutes

Done!!!!

It's in the mail! :)

I'm seeing a chick who works at the State Capital (senitor's asst.). It is time for here to go to work, or beat it.

Open Word, copy text, paste, enter name, print, sign, fax.

Let do ity again...

Originally posted by Ed A. Stevens

Great job on the letter, that makes it IMPOSSIBLE for folks not to help. Not everyone can write like that. Thanks, and mine is already faxed! :D

-Dan

Ha... the # is busy... thats a good sign!;)

How the heel do I get rid of the black. I have fawking lotus notes not word. Notes sucks!

Printed and sent!

Will print and send tomorrow at work.

If you guys want to make a bigger impact, take Ed's great letter, and change it around a bit to make it personal. Personal letters always carry more input than form letters.

Jon

For those of voting age, don't forget to do your best to unseat one or both of these "representatives" at the earliest opportunity!!


'nuff politics.........................for now.

IN THE MAIL:flipoff2: :flipoff2: to her if she dont work for US

Is there a link to the act itself???? I'm just trying to find more info.....

I looked through her web site, and talk about an eco-freak......

EDIT:
It's not this one is it????/

Wilderness Act?? (http://boxer.senate.gov/newsroom/200212/20021220_enviro.html)

You think they'd care if I sent one from North Carolina?

Kilby: Look at it this way, it'll start in CA, and work it's way over here to the East Coast. Snub it before it gets out of control! So, whether they care or not, send it anyway!!

BTW: Mine's sent!

Originally posted by YotaRunner
Is there a link to the act itself???? I'm just trying to find more info.....

I looked through her web site, and talk about an eco-freak......

EDIT:
It's not this one is it????/

Wilderness Act?? (http://boxer.senate.gov/newsroom/200212/20021220_enviro.html)


The link you found is only a small part of the proposed Act. One of the problems the groups opposed to the Act have, is the poor information available regarding the extent of land included into the Act.

With the Senator's office claiming thousands of manhours of cooperative research and agreement of the Act between "all involved parties," you would think the good Senator would have detailed maps of the areas? No, Not available.

You would also think her office would include reports of where these "interest groups" came to agreement and altered the proposed areas to make concessions and compromise? No, Not available.

The California Wild Heritage Act (http://www.calwild.org/campaigns/cwhwc_act/index.php) can be found on the California Wilderness Coalition web site.

This goals of this Wilderness Act are being proposed peacemeal (through campaigns like the link you found on the Senator's website) and through the California Forest Plan Revisions in process, in addition to reintroducing the Act to Congress.

The proposed expansion of Wilderness can be found on the CWC's Wild Places web page. (http://www.calwild.org/places/index.php) They have a habit of viewing wild land as either "potential Wilderness" or "damaged land lost to development." There is no middle ground of shared use land management with these radical groups.

The drive to convert large tracts of land to Wilderness free of mankind is a major goal of the Wildlands Project, and is both Nationwide (search the Earth Island Institute and The Wildlands Project), and Worldwide (search Conservation International). Yes, they will be making exclusionary land management demands in your home state (and home country).

Happy Trails!

:eek: :eek: Holy crap......

They're perposing alot... Thanks for the links!
I sent mine today....


And BTT :D

I sent an email back in August and got this response.

I guess I was one of the hundred.


August 15, 2002


Mr. Scott Johnston
4500 Ingot Lane
Garden Valley, California 95633

Dear Mr. Johnston:

Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition to
the "California Wild Heritage Act of 2002." I appreciate hearing
from you.

The "California Wild Heritage Act of 2002" was just
introduced on May 21, 2002 and I am still reviewing the contents
of the bill. I believe however, that we must carefully weigh the
costs and benefits of wilderness designations. Please know that I
will keep your thoughts in mind as we take a close look at this bill.

Again, thank you for taking the time to contact me. I value
your opinion and I hope you will continue to keep in touch on
issues important to you. If you have any questions or need
assistance, please feel free to contact my Washington, D.C. staff at
(202) 224-3841.



Sincerely yours,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

http://feinstein.senate.gov

contents of "MY" letter

Dear Supervisors,

I am very appalled about the continued closure of off-highway vehicle (OHV) recreational areas throughout California. More and more lands that were once available for OHVs have been closed down due to a variety of reasons. In my humble opinion, most often environmental groups have used the Endangered Species Act to file lawsuits against Federal agencies. Then turn around and ignore or fail to support (financial or otherwise) those species they sought to protect.

I firmly believe that managing our Public Lands in the Court system is unfair. It takes control of those lands out of the hands of the proper Public servants (who have a lifetime of knowledge) and into the court.

But now I have learned that some of these same environmental groups along with Senator Boxer are proposing many new Wilderness Areas in California. This is of great concern to me because the primary effect of Wilderness designation is the reduction of access especially for recreation (the "no mechanized transport" rule of the Wilderness Designation Act, prevents even bicycle access).

I am not a "disabled person" but have a back injury. I cannot "backpack". I am pyhsically unable to do more than drive to edge of a vast wilderness to enjoy it. How is this fair??

Any lands proposed for Wilderness Designation must meet the suitability and manageability test. Much public land in the west has wilderness character. Just because it has a wild character does not mean that the lands are appropriate for this most restrictive management designation.

These continual land closures are really a recipe for disaster. Statistics from the California Department of Parks and Recreation show that the actual acreage available for OHV use in California has declined by 47% in recent years while registration of OHVs has practically doubled. I know that one State OHV area (Hollister Hills SVRA) has an area more than double it's current size and has not been able to develop it for the last ten or more years.

This most extreme of land designation should not be taken lightly. Wilderness has real, long-term consequences for California. Please consider this issue carefully and oppose any new Wilderness Area designations.

Thank you for consideration.

Sincerely,

Scott Johnston

Just a little FYI I heard that each letter they get they consider it equal to 300+ registered voters who feel the same way. The logic is 1 out of every 300 who feels the same way will actually write the letter. Well there's often 400+ users on the PBB at any given time and that tranlates into 120,000+ letters if we all sent one. Just a little encourage meant for the I'm too busy people out there.;)

I sent via email, postal, and FAX :D

sent one in my name and my wifes name

:flipoff2: :flipoff2: fukem if they cant take a joke

Ribz

Aint no joke ribz. Its cool that you sent for both names. :cool: ...These greenies won't take any prisoners an neither should we! If you try to be honest and polite about it, they'll eat you up as soon as you present this "weakness." IMO, you gotta fight fire with fire in this instance :mad3:

This is what we are up against. If you have not yet done so, please contact Senator Feinstein (http://www.senate.gov/~feinstein/contact.html) and tell her no more Wilderness!

Crowdog
------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.desertdispatch.com/cgi-bin/newspro/viewnews.cgi?newsid1045589559,24782,
Tuesday, February 18, 2003

Wilderness group rallies support for bill
By KELLY DONOVAN/Staff Writer

In a bill U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer is expected to introduce soon, five local areas could get enhanced environmental protection.

The California Wild Heritage Act, if passed, would designate 4 million acres of land as "wilderness" -- the highest level of protection for land, said Pat Flanagan, desert representative for the California Wilderness Coalition.

"I think the act is important, because as our population here is going up, we need to be especially diligent in protecting the natural system," she said.

Local areas that would receive the wilderness designation would be the Cady and Soda mountains east of Barstow and the Avawatz Mountains, Kingston Range Additions and Denning Springs Additions near Fort Irwin.

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management's Barstow field office is in charge of those five areas, which are currently designated as "wilderness study areas."

Because wilderness study areas are managed as though they were wilderness areas, current activities taking place on those lands will not be affected, Flanagan said.

Since 1994, she said driving has been prohibited in those areas, and that prohibition would continue under the wilderness status.

There are no active mining claims on those lands, she said, so no current mine will be affected -- although she said future mining would not be allowed. Existing cattle grazing in the Soda and Cady mountains can continue if the bill passes.

Although the legislation would have little effect on the current use of local wilderness study areas, some California groups are opposed to it, saying it will negatively impact the state in general.

Off-road vehicle supporter John Stewart wrote about his concerns about the bill in a column for 4x4wire.com.

"Wilderness designation will eliminate mountain bike and motorized recreation and reduce the recreationist dollars that support the rural communities," he said in his column.

The California Wilderness Coalition has been collecting petition signatures in support of the legislation, Flanagan said. The petition is part of the group's effort to get U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein to support the bill, she said.


Kelly Donovan can be reached at kelly_donovan@link.freedom.com or 256-4122.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coalition petitions to protect desert land
2.4M acres included in bill by Sen. Boxer
By CHUCK MUELLER, Staff Writer
A statewide coalition of environmental, business and civic groups is petitioning to protect California's wild lands and rivers, including seven proposed wilderness areas in the eastern Mojave Desert.

"It's vital to preserve these unique lands and rivers for everyone's benefit,' said Pamela Flick, administrative director of the Sacramento-based California Wild Heritage Campaign. "These lands are the source of more than 60 percent of the state's clean water.'

The coalition has collected more than 60,000 signatures supporting its effort to protect federal wilderness lands and rivers.

"Wilderness areas and wild rivers contribute to our quality of life, offering recreational opportunities to those seeking solitude in the great outdoors,' said Twentynine Palms resident Patricia Flanagan, regional organizer for the California Wilderness Coalition.

A recent poll showed that nearly 70 percent of people in the West want at least 10 percent of federal lands protected as wilderness, Flanagan said. At present, only 4.7 percent of these lands are designated as wilderness.

The California Wild Heritage Act, introduced last year by Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., would protect areas as diverse as the White Mountains, which contain the oldest living trees in the world, the southern Los Padres National Forest that is home to the endangered California Condor, and the Avawatz Mountains in the eastern Mojave, where bighorn sheep thrive.

The act would provide wilderness protection for 2.4 million acres statewide, including 90 wild lands and 24 rivers, to bring wilderness designation to 16.4 million acres in California 16 percent of the state's total area.

"Protecting our remaining wild lands and free-flowing rivers is an American concern,' said Traci Van Thull , director of the California Wild Heritage Campaign.

The Wild Heritage Act would add about 300,000 acres of wilderness in the Mojave Desert. It would designate as wilderness:


84,400 acres in the Cady Mountains, and 80,430 acres in the Soda Mountains, both east of Barstow.


61,300 acres in the Avawatz Mountains, and 39,750 acres in the Kingston Range, both east of Fort Irwin.


17,200 acres at Denning Springs, south of Death Valley, plus 40,400 adjacent acres to the northwest.


36,672 acres near Joshua Tree National Park.

Deep Creek, a wild river flowing north from the San Bernardino Mountains near Apple Valley, also is included as a wild stream worthy of preservation, Flick said.

Meanwhile, the California Wilderness Coalition is concerned that a reactivated Civil War-era ruling designed to encourage western settlement will make it easier for states and counties to convert dirt tracks and washes on public lands into roads.

Revised Statute 2477 has the potential to devastate wilderness throughout the west, including Joshua Tree National Park and Mojave National Preserve, said Keith Hammond, coalition spokesman.

http://www.sbsun.com/Stories/0,1413,208%7E12588%7E1188753,00.html

Kelso Dunes (http://www.crowley-offroad.com/closed_areas_kelso_dunes.htm) was open to OHV's before it was designated Wilderness by the California Desert Protection Act of 1994 (Thanks Feinstein :mad: ). Now Kelso Dunes is described as "a wasteland entered by only the most intrepid desert hikers". Don't let this happen again.

http://www.crowley-offroad.com/images/KelsoDunes-1.jpg

Here's a listing of current Wilderness Areas in California (http://www.backpacker.com/destinations/states/wa/0,3816,12,00.html).

Enough is enough.

Jon

Here's a recent letter to the editor:

http://www.sbsun.com/Stories/0,1413,208~12587~1204551,00.html

Threat to wilderness
I am pleased that Californians voted to add more wilderness area to the millions of acres of land already set aside either as wilderness or as a national park.
San Bernardino County Supervisor Bill Postmus is trying to undermine those efforts by opening up roads in protected wilderness areas, using RS 2477, passed by Congress in 1866 to open up the West for settlement and for mining, as his justification. Congress repealed RS 2477 in 1976.

Vast tracts of land in the California desert are designated "multiple use' and other areas exclusively are set aside for off-roading.

San Bernardino County is considering approximately 5,000 miles of old trails, Jeep tracks and abandoned roads in sensitive habitat areas and wilderness for improvement. To widen, upgrade and maintain these roads would be a huge financial burden to an already financially troubled county, as well as compromising the desert wilderness.

If these roads are opened, adjacent lands will be seriously compromised. One thing is obvious concerning off-road vehicle users: If you give them an inch, they will take a mile. And a mile-wide swath through a wilderness area means that it is no longer a wilderness, just another chunk of desert devoted to off-roaders, a small special-interest group.

---------------------------------------------------------------

I sent in a few letter's to the editor. How about you?

Jon