Excalante Draft Management Plan

[Zaronica@aol.com]

As most of you know on September 18, 1996, our President put pen to paper and
created the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Southern Utah by
Presidential Proclamation. OK folks it is time that our people got together
and let our voices be herd.  The main Ride that could be in trouble is the
Outlaw Trail Multi Day.  The BLM has a Draft Management Plan/Draft
Environmental Impact Statement for the Grand Staircase-Escalante National
Monument.  In this plan they have Plans A-E.  Plan A is called the No Action
Alternative A.  This plan would leave things as they are now.  The "preferred"
Alternative B will close more than 1,100 miles of roads, nearly all of which
have RS-2477 status.  It would ban all cross-country travel.  Vehicular travel
would be allowed only on 818 miles of designated routes, of which 591 miles
would be available to unlicensed vehicles.  Alternatives C & D are even more
extreme in their efforts to make the monument look like a National Park.  They
would totally ban the use of any unlicensed vehicles!  Alternative E is just a
bit more liberal than B. The end result could very well end up being the end
of competitive events as we make trails.  Single riders or small groups would
probably be permitted but organized events could easily become history.  The
following copy of a letter found in a newspaper can be printed and sent or
turned into your own words and sent.  Remember if we do not stick together as
a group like for "No Hands Bridge" we will loose the wonderful rides we do
have.

Mr. Pete Wilkins
Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument
337 South Main St., Suite 010
Cedar City, Utah, 84720

Dear Mr. Wilkins:

I am very disappointed with the Draft Management Plan/Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the Grand Staircase-Escalante National monument.
When the Presidential Proclamation of September 18, 1996, assigned the
Monument to the Bureau of Land management, a rare opportunity arose for a more
"user friendly" management environment.  Sadly, it seems the planning team has
chosen to ignore this mandate, producing a document more suited toward current
trends in National Park management.
I believe that the public lands should be managed for public uses and should
not be set aside to serve the agendas of special interest organizations.  The
lands of the National Monument have a long and rich tradition of multiple use
and motorized recreational access.  These rugged lands suffered no degradation
through generations of use and there is no reason to believe they will in the
future.
The Planning Team has produced a set of alternatives that are unacceptable to
me and my family.  Alternatives B through E would severely limit tradition al
and historic uses, in violation of the Presidential Proclamation.
Alternative A, the No Action Alternative, Which would adopt the status quo and
maintain current use and access patterns, solely meets the requirements of the
law.  All of the other alternatives violate the civil rights of most current
and future users of these lands.
I therefore request that Alternative A be adopted as the management paradigm
for the Monument.  

Thank You,



Perhaps we can be heard once again folks I certainly hope so.  Lovell