I'm hoping to make this thread a one-stop shopping place to jump off and provide positive comments to support good grant proposals and negative comments for bad proposals... PITCH IN AND HELP!

FWIW, there are 129 other grant submitters (not sure all actually submitted a grant in time?), more than a third of which were government organizations:

* 16 BLM Field Offices
* 2 National Parks
* 28 National Forests, 4 Patrol Districts
* 23 Sheriff’s Offices, 2 Police Departments
* 8 cities, towns, or local governmental associations
* 9 counties, various departments (DOT, Parks, Code Enforcement, Planning, Fire, etc.)


That leaves less than 40 groups that appear to be non-profits:

* American Conservation Experience * American Desert Foundation
* CA4WDC Conservation & Education Foundation * California Trail Users Coalition
* California Wilderness Coalition * Catalina Island Conservncy
* CCMA Education * Chism Motorsports Community Impact Group, Inc.
* Coachella Valley Association of Governments * Desert Daisies MC, Inc.
* Desert Group Search and Rescue Volunteer, Inc. * Desert Protective Council
* Desert Tortoise Preserve Committee, Inc. * Friends of El Mirage
* Friends of Hope Valley * Friends of Jawbone
* Friends of Oceano Dunes * Friends of Ocotillo Wells
* Friends of the Inyo * Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy
* Nevada County Woods Riders * Orange County Dualies
* Reptile Rescue & Wildlife Services * Rescue 3 Inc.
* Ritenour Environmental Consulting * Rovers Motorcycle Club
* Rubicon Trail Foundation * San Bernardino National Forest Association
* Stewards of the Sierra National Forest * Student Conservation Association
* The Student Conservation Association in Ridgecrest * The California Desert Land Conservancy (dba The Mojave Desert Land Trust)
* The Wilderness Society * Tread Lightly!, Inc.
* University of California, Davis * USFS - Cleveland OHV Volunteer Program
* Zynk Rentals

There are plenty of Friends groups and a Stewards group that need your support, and of course, the Rubicon Trail Foundation. Off the top of my head, I appreciate CTUC, the Cal4 Foundation, and Tread Lightly!, as well as the Nevada County Woods Riders, Orange County Dualies, and Rovers Motorcycle Club. The rest of these groups will take some research... Pay extra special attention to the conservancies, wilderness devotees, and other preservationists to keep them honest in their scoring. Even the folks who don't share our appreciation for OHV may get funded, so it behooves us to make solid suggestions to improve their grants, as well -- we all win when OHMVR funds a balance of strong grants. It appears that California Wilderness Coalition, and Zynk rentals didn't make the deadline on submissions.

Randii

Commenting is a bit of a pain... it is best to do it by email, which is simple enough, but viewing the grant takes some work.

There are instructions at: http://134.186.25.134/admin/ViewAppDocs.aspx?pdfappcode=000825

I’m not sure direct linking is possible, but I have included them below (I suspect these are based on my session and will not provide the same result for you, outside my session).
· You can get where you need to go by going to the OHMVR home page: http://ohv.parks.ca.gov/
· Click the GRANTS tab; it takes you here: http://ohv.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=1164
· Click the link midway down the page to the Online Grants Application program: http://134.186.25.134/User/home.aspx
· From there, you’ll need to click Review Preliminary Grant Applications
· Click the first […] button and click the GCA-08 checkbox in the resulting window (the only option that pops up).
· If necessary, click the second […] button and click the > or >>| to navigate the list of grant proposal submitters
· Click the Find button
· Click the Red ‘plus’ sign under Projects
· Click the paperclips under View to see the grant proposals

FWIW, I have sent out the PDFs as attachments to many folks… that may be easier, since can avoid OLGA altogether and just respond directly to the email of the contact person listed on the preliminary application and carbon copying (Cc) the OHVMR Division at OHVinfo@parks.ca.gov

Randii

Rubicon Trail Foundation (RTF) supports the continued oversight of El Dorado County’s Department of Transportation and has also submitted two grant proposals to the California Department of Parks and Recreation, Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation (OHMVR) Division for the 2008-09 grants cycle. RTF’s grant proposals are complementary to DOT’s proposals, though neither depends on other receiving funding.

Our General Application Requirements section (http://134.186.25.134/designer/viewPDF.aspx?ShowPDF=Y&ExtUser=Y&TempID=1&Filename=Application_1_0.PDF&cat=GCA&appid=115&fyr=2008) defines background and pre-requisite information.
Our Ground and Operations grant proposal (http://134.186.25.134/designer/viewPDF.aspx?ShowPDF=Y&ExtUser=Y&TempID=1&Filename=Application_1_G.PDF&cat=GCA&appid=163&fyr=2008) suggests acquisition, operation, maintenance, storage, and etc for vehicles and appropriate utility attachments, as well as staff to operate them, to be used in cooperation with El Dorado County for vault toilet servicing and heavy trail maintenance.
Our Education Grant Proposal (http://134.186.25.134/designer/viewPDF.aspx?ShowPDF=Y&ExtUser=Y&TempID=1&Filename=Application_1_S.PDF&cat=GCA&appid=116&fyr=2008) suggests Active Educational Outreach (Kiosk staffing, trail patrol staffing, and Mid-Trail staffing), and Passive Educational Outreach (trailhead signs, mileage signs, intersection signs, trail markers, brochures, etc.). It speaks to staff training, and part-time stipends for 3 coordinators (volunteer, kiosk, and trail patrol), two full-time camping staff at Spider/Buck, and volunteer per diem. We have dual emphasis on education AND census-counting.

If the above links don't work, you can review the grant applications submitted, by working through the process above... you may also contact me directly for more specific instructions as to how to view and respond with constructive comments.

The 30-day public review and comment period for the 2008/09 Grants and Cooperative Agreement Program begins March 3, 2009, and ends April 6, 2009. This period provides an opportunity for the public to review the preliminary applications submitted to the OHMVR Division for consideration during the current grant cycle.

The public may provide comments, suggestions or letters of support for the Program, to both the applicant and the OHMVR Division by emailing: Randy Burleson, President of the Rubicon Trail Foundation at Randy.Burleson@RubiconTrailFoundation.org with a carbon-copy (cc:) to the OHVMR Division at OHVinfo@parks.ca.gov Written comments may also be mailed to RTF at PO Box 2188, Placerville, CA 95667

All comments, suggestions and letters must be received by April 6, 2009. We’d appreciate your constructive comments and suggestions!

BTW, I honestly believe in voting with email comments, in-person comments at Commission meetings, and my feet, on the-ground, with work projects.

I can vote FOR a grant, support the proposing group in email and in-person, and populate their volunteer projects....

...or I can vote against.
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?t=604800
I've attended most all of the Commission meetings since this 2006 ENF Closure Application and held their feet to the fire, and my volunteer hours since have been tracked separately and used by agencies other than the Forest.

I strongly support good agencies, but I think it is equally important to provide a negative consequence, as well. I highly respect the District Ranger Offices within the Eldorado National Forests, but the Forest itself, and its Region... not so much.

Randii (votes with his feet)

Remember the purpose of the review process at least last time I talked to the Division Chief about this, it's not a vote but a time to be sure any public "concerns" about a request are addressed. They wont consider comments about how pissed you are about the route designation process, unless they didn't do something their claiming credit for in their scoring. Only specific comments as to why you think a grant deserves a higher or low score will be considered, and within the bounds of the scoring system remember there is no more Commission allocations...TJ

Tom, that seems pretty basic, but myabe the point needs made: this isn't voting in a literal sense, at least not within the OHMVR process, and not actual 'ballots' are tallied. It is more getting your voice heard, and as noted above, providing constructive commentary to improve or comment grants.

It may not be a VOTE, but the message does indeed get HEARD. Be specific with your suggestions, especially as it relates to improving their program or changing (positive or negative) their scoring.

Randii

Bebe has a post about the Tahoe National Forest proposal:
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?t=767023

Bebe has a post about the Tahoe National Forest proposal:
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?t=767023

I also have a concern with "Friends of Hope Valley" They are asking for 36K dollars worth of OHMVR grants yet their interests are keeping OHVs out of the valley as much as possable. They would use some of the money "A field safety and avalanche awareness seminar will be conducted for skiers and snowmobile folks." yet on their website they show this is for skiers, with no mention of snowmobiles.

Anyone bother to total up the total being applied for in each category...TJ

BTT with real info...

BTW, while you're there, the El Dorado County Sheriff's Department is applying for a grant in the amount of $65,000.00 from California State Parks, Off-highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Division, for the purposes of providing a Law Enforcement Patrol on the Rubicon Trail in El Dorado County. You can comment on the OHMVR website or email to edcoes@edso.org or to El Dorado County Sheriff's Department, 300 Fair Ln, Placerville, Ca. 95667, Atten: Sgt. B. Morton

BTT with real info...

Touche' :p:D

Besides ribbing Kurt, I like this thread with notes of how others comment -- it simplifies some of my own comments.

I know that Kyra has been working to compare what the agencies claim for OHV usage in their Route Dez documents against what they claim in their grant requests... oddly, the Route Dez numbers are low, when they are trying to argue for a smaller system, but large when they apply for grants and are trying to demonstrate higher usage and higher available miles. This thread would be a GREAT place to share this sort of information...

I won't be supporting OHV grants just to support OHV grants -- I aim to make targeted comments to encourage grant projects that lean more towards Operations and Maintenance or Development projects, and less toward Law Enforcement -- all are important, but I know where I stand, and I will comment accordingly. That may take the form of a positive letter with a few suggestions for next time around, or the kind of slam that I administered last time to Eldorado National Forest after they applied for grants for a few years to retain recreational opportunity, and then killed thousands of miles of access year-round, with an extra three months of winter closure just to kick us in the nuts.

This time around, I'll be making damn sure the Eldorado is counting their usage and trail miles correctly, reflecting the thousands of miles lost in the forest AND the 25% reduction in seasonal availability, thanks to their arbitrary calendar-based winter closure. Hell, I probably oughta make sure they deduct the recreational opportunity of the two-week winter closure extension.

All that said, I believe that we need to support OHV grants where we can, but let's keep them honest, as we do so... and if we see a pile of shit, let's call it that, instead of just backing a 'company line' and supporting it because it has been labelled as an 'OHV Grant' by the agency that is trying to tease funding outta OHMVR.

Randii

I will post this here also
http://ohv.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=25740

see what comments have been submitted on the areas you have interest

I wish more people would make comments on RTF than just Amy and I (hint hint)

a big thanks to Amy and Bruce for the ones they have put in

BTT with real info...
BTT again!

Add up your comments here to help simplify the process for others to comment.

I won't be supporting OHV grants just to support OHV grants -- I aim to make targeted comments to encourage grant projects that lean more towards Operations and Maintenance or Development projects, and less toward Law Enforcement -- all are important, but I know where I stand, and I will comment accordingly.

That may take the form of a positive letter with a few suggestions for next time around, or the kind of slam that I administered last time to Eldorado National Forest after they applied for grants for a few years to retain recreational opportunity, and then killed thousands of miles of access year-round, with an extra three months of winter closure just to kick us in the nuts.

All that said, I still believe that we need to support OHV grants where we can, but let's keep them honest, as we do so... and if we see a pile of crap, let's call it out, and not just support it because it has been labelled as an 'OHV Grant' by the agency that is trying to suck the funding outta OHMVR.

Randii