http://wsphotofews.excite.com/017/D0/6p/dJ/ii76129.jpg

LA's closest OHV area (Azusa) is being threatened with closure! If you live in the area , please attend this meeting. The meeting will be at 7:30 the 17th at the city hall 213 east foothill.

If you cant make it you can post your opposition to the closure of the "San Gabrial Canyon OHV" here on this thread & I will take a printout there.

Martin, Give me more info on this or at least point me in the right direction...Who, Why...etc...

I might be able to get the entire VCAS club there plus a few more members...Its about 1:45 away from us...but I'll do my best to rally the troops....



:usa:

The city of Azusa is trying to shut down LA's closest offroad site! ALL OHV USERS NEED TO ATTEND (or post) the town hall meeting. They are saying that we are polluting the water, but we have water tests showing no contamination.

Please spread the word...

I will be there!! hopefully with at leats 15-20 others...How bout it guys??? lets get a roll call going...


:usa:

Martin, do you have any background somewhere that I can go over...I'm (and a few others) wondering what kind of "tone" this meeting is going to have, and if the public is even supposed to be there? Is there going to be an input session... I just don't want everyone getting worked up and showing up ready to kick ass and take names (so to speak) if this is just an input meeting....should we bring signs and put our foot down, or is this just the first of several meetings that we need to work with the city (and FS I would assume) and come to some sort of agreement... let me know what you can...

Thanks,
PSD


:usa:

TOP..any more info Martin?? anyone going???


:usa:

I went to the city of Azusa's website and saw nothing, I email the local Azusa Cyn 4wheel club with no response.

I will most likely go if the meeting is confirmed.

7:30 am or pm, thatt will probably dictate the ammount of people attending. If its in the pm (I doubt it!) Renee and I will be there.

Its on Monday, so I would assume its PM...

Martin..can you verify/confirm this for us??


:usa:

I should be able to make it....

Sorry, I didn't get right back. The hearing is to get feedback from the parties involved, which would be us offroad OHV users and the water users in Azusa. This is the 1st public meeting on the issue. I don't think signs are necessary. Hopefully, a turn at the mike will suffice.

Give em hell guys , wish I could make the drive down.
I support keeping open the San Gabrial Canyon OHV area.

Is this a county or a state run park?

The meeting tonite was truly BOGUS. After hearing some bitch from the San Gabriel Water Conservancy give $1,000,000 in a land grant to the city of Azusa for being the first to take lead in cleaning up the water supply in LA, we get railroaded as pollution "DUMPERS" & authorizes a letter to be sent to the Forest Service requesting the OHV area to be shut down! They gave 75 of us 8 minutes to talk, then they made their decision. Of course it was decided B4 the meeting ever started! They sold out to some 2bit tree huggers willing to give the city a worthless piece of land (the whole forest adjoins Azusa) to seal the decision.

Our next step is to counter with a petition to the USFS to keep Azusa canyon OHV open. All the water samples we provided for analysis were clean, we are not polluting!

:mad3: All I can say is that we were fawked going in. Plan on writing some letters to the forest service, guys. We may have lost the battle, but we WILL win the war! :nuke:

We got railroaded into whatever decision the city councel wanted. Actually, we had less than zero say in what should happen. All our comments fell on deaf ears. They blatently ignored scientific data (water samples), public comments, and over all the entire truth about OHVs.... Like JKA said, start writing letters - NOW!!! --hows that old saying go again?...oh yeah - ITS NOW OR NEVER!!!!

This started out a while ago (apparently) by them trying to use a suckerfish , then they tried to use migratory birds, then they tried silt and dust.... now they finally got what they wanted by using water quality... even though they blatenty ignored all the facts:

no MTBEs were found anywhere in the water

people do not go out there to purposely dive up the stream

there are many vehicles that are stolen and dumped in the resivoir every year, and still no contamination

the oils found on human skin are more harmful than oil or gasoline

fish scale samples indicate NO MTBEs in the water

This is a National Forest and it must have multiple use included in its usage plan

the water is not polluted

This is a National Forest and it must have multiple use included in its usage plan

the water is not polluted

This is a National Forest and it must have multiple use included in its usage plan

the water is not polluted

This is a National Forest and it must have multiple use included in its usage plan

the water is not polluted

This is a National Forest and it must have multiple use included in its usage plan

the water is not polluted

This is a National Forest and it must have multiple use included in its usage plan

the water is not polluted

and in case you missed the last two:

This is a National Forest and it must have multiple use included in its usage plan

the water is not polluted


Everyone that recreates on public land needs to write the forest service a letter right now about how the Rincon OHV area needs to remain open and how the FS is MANDATED to allow for Multiple Use in OUR National Forests....Yes they are OUR National Forests and we are losing them more and more every day.... :mad3::mad3::mad3::mad3::mad3:




:usa:

Glad to see you guys are right on top of this. I went to meeting and did not like the taste it left in my mouth. Let me know who or what to do next. I love this area and DO NOT want to lose it.

Originally posted by Yellowsub1962

Everyone that recreates on public land needs to write the forest service a letter right now about how the Rincon OHV area needs to remain open and how the FS is MANDATED to allow for Multiple Use in OUR National Forests....Yes they are OUR National Forests and we are losing them more and more every day....[/B]

YellowSub:

Can you give us a few more details on what to write and who to send it to? Maybe a skeleton letter?

Thanks,

Crowdog

Yeah guys, I'm working on a letter and trying to get it to everyone to send out....

Basically the city is writing a letter to the Forest Service recommending that all OHV activity in the San Gabriel Resivoir be ceased.... The only thing we have working in our favor is that the FS is mandated to provide for multiple use, and they are the one's making a final decision on this - That is until a lawsuit gets filed and then we are in the same boat that we are in with Glamis and Pismo. We need to Hammer this now before it gets to the same point and we have to exaust our resources on it...


The letters I was referring to need to go to the Forest Service, Angeles Crest National, in regards to thier FMP, Forest Management Plan. Every NF is open for comments till the end of the year. Everyone needs to put comments in writing and sign and mail them by Dec. 31st...


Unfortunately I can't find the meeting schedules and all the address for each NF, They got lost in my computer swap...

I'm trying my best ot get the addresses posted and a sample letter within the next two days...Any other help would be appreciated....

Thanks,
PSD


:usa:

heres a post I made about the RMP schedule, its not the meeting schedule or the addresses that I was looking for but its a start.... (http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=16308&referrerid=1494)

heres a basic timeline ...All comments need to be in by 12/31/01... I'm still working on a letter of some sort for everyone....As you can see by the dates, we have a lot of time between phases to comment, but we sat on our asses too long this time, so we have a week to get the letters in the mail....

http://www.r5.fs.fed.us/angeles/management/forest_plan_newsletter.htm


Estimated Timeline Forest Planning Process
Fall 2001 - Publish Notice of Intent (NOI)

Fall 2001 - Begin 3rd phase of public workshops - Focus on alternative development

December 31, 2001 - End input to Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) Note: Public input received after 12/31/01 will not be considered in the DEIS, but will be used in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)

Winter/Spring 2002 - Begin 4th phase of public workshops - Interaction with Forests

Fall 2002 - DEIS published

Fall 2002 - Begin 5th phase of public workshops - Focus on resolution of conflicts and issues that surfaced from DEIS; provide input to FEIS

December 31, 2002 - End public input to FEIS

September 2003 - Publish FEIS

Fall 2003 - Resolution process

February 2004 - Publish Record of Decision (ROD)

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (Voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice or TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Thanks for the research, Pete!

contact info and "Invitation to participate" (overview) (http://www.r5.fs.fed.us/angeles/management/sccsinvite.pdf)

Please Keep in mind that most of the stuff I'm posting is specific to Angeles NF, but if you just look arount the FS web site you'll find the info for your local forest....

I'm still working on a letter for you to use or you can write your own - either way - IT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT THAT YOU SEND IN A LETTER (or several) FOR EACH FOREST!!!....

we must help each other on this... besides I (as well as many of you..hint hint) recreate in ALL of the National Forest in the state...and all you out of staters plan your vacations to Ca around the ability to recreate in the states National Forests right ;)... So This involves everyone....also keep in mind all your family members, coworkers, relatives and friends need to be counted too....


:usa:

Pete, if you have something ready for the meeting on Friday, maybe we can push everybody into mailing one. I'll bring some stamps and envelopes, you bring the letters, or one we can modify on an individual basis.

Thanks, I will be submitting A.C.O.R.A.'S Forest Plan Update paperwork on time, We do need signitures and people that are not afraid to get people out of the f***ing water, give up some play time and help keep the place open, chase people out of the stream beds!Yes the water did test fine, The Los Angeles Water Quality people did meet with the District ranger at telephone point, and with only 3 trucks in the area on a weekday some dumbfuck turns into river and drives straight up it! Why! If people that visit the area are not thinking, we will continue to be labeled POPEYE (stupid and careless). WE can keep this place open if everyone steps up! I am working on more ideas with the rangers to keep everyone cool just STAY OUT OF THE WATER ,cross at a 90 degree angle, as few times as possible so that when they do test again it will be negitive again.Thank You Azusa Canyon OHV (http://www.acorausa.com)

The set-up looks to be on par with the BLM actions of late...

It's not too late for a citizens boycott campaign to promote citizens to stop frequenting Azusa for business and recreation needs if they recommend closure of the OHV area. This targets the economic values of the City of Azusa, to reflect the needs of the greater visitors to the City or to only make decisions based on the needs of a few non-visitors (grant blackmailers).

There is no reason, unless the grant was given with conditions of use, that the City cannot take the grant money and provide for an OHV friendly position regarding the Rincon OHV Use Area. This is what you must demand as a City recommendation.

The message should be that OHV Enthusiasts (you) spend an average of $200+ per weekend in the City of Azusa, when visiting the OHV area, that will be eliminated if the actions to support closure of the area are advanced to the USFS. Use whatever dollar figure is credible, but make the point that the OHV area invites you to spend time, and money, in Azusa that will be lost opportunity and revenue if they recommend closure of the OHV open area.

Again, support the City of Azusa to accept the grant, as a reward for past actions "taking the lead" in water quality protection, but demand the funding be applied to future monitoring and mitigation of the downstream water quality impacts, if any are documented, rather than supporting closure. Demand support of cooperative solutions, rather than uncooperative closure recommendations. Demand they take the lead in the application of science to provide superior water quality, to lead research into solutions that could benefit others, not take the lead into abandonment of the potential solutions (the result of recommending closure).

Friendly residents of the City should be rallied to write letters that their next City Council vote would take these actions into consideration. Visitors should also write letters to the Mayor, City Manager, and City Council.

...

Watch for the FS planning community based "teams" to add a prescription to establish the "revised" guidelines for the Azusa Canyon OHV open area to protect the "potential" water quality impacts. They added Wilderness expansion into the plans, so I would not expect a group offering a $1m grant to lack the resources to attend and attempt to influence the FS planning.

If you get on-line in the FS Planning there is no reason why the off-road community cannot write a "Prescription" to address beneficial management guidelines for the OHV Area. The USFS will have to implement a coordinated plan that appeals to both user goals. If you do nothing the USFS will only have one "prescription" to consider (and it is not likely it will be to keep the OHV Open Area intact).

If you are talking between clubs, you better review the Plan Revision "prescriptions" and "desired conditions" for the various forest uses. The following proposed prescription for "proposed SIA's" may not mean much in the ANF, but the application of "prescription #10" in the four SoCal Forests (a goal of the coordinated planning) will impact the SBNF OHV trails significantly. Holcomb Creek, Cactus Flats, Deep Creek, and Arraste Creek will all suffer the stated ORV, OHV, and prohibitions on use.

Is it legitimate to offer a "proposed SIA" prescription that may well be accepted and applied in all four forests, in only one proposed plan?

Your answer may well reveal the need to review all four forest-plans, rather than focus only on your local forest proposed plan. Do you expect to find the OHV opposition only focused on any single forest plan (or to demand a prohibition to remain unique to any single forest)?

--------

Management Prescription #10
Theme
This prescription provides for management of existing, proposed, and potential special interest areas (SIA's), including botanical and geological areas. Management emphasis in SIA's is to promote conservation and preservation of the resources present. Where possible, foster public use and enjoyment of their significant values.

...

Dispersed Recreation
Dispersed recreation should be controlled to avoid damage to the resources present. Trail construction and improvement is allowed as needed to enhance interpretive opportunities, and direct people through the area to minimize resource damage. Within the Mt. San Antonio and Mt. Baden-Powell botanical areas, no collection of native materials for campfire fuel is allowed.
ORV Roads and Trails
SIA's are closed to ORV use.

------

This is taken from the ANF proposed Plan:

http://www.r5.fs.fed.us/sccs/forest_plans.htm

Download the RTF Versions, so you can cut and paste to make your own prescription, and get the letters sent out (both to the City of Azusa and the USFS.

All the past line of thought regarding the USFS requirement to provide "multiple use" recreation opportunity can be redirected by the Planning Team recommendations to exclude OHV recreation. If the active public demands "multiple use" opportunity to be expansion of protected riparian areas, and the elimination of OHV support, then they get what they want (bird watching is "multiple use" too).

Thank you for taking the time to read this.

Happy Trails!