Special Stage Forums banner
1 - 20 of 57 Posts

·
"Go fast then bah bah bah"
Joined
·
222 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Just noticed this message on the website

"NOTICE: (October 6, 2005) - Due to issues with the Permits for the Friday night stages, several changes have to be made. There will be competition on Friday night, although reduced from the original itinerary. Further information will be posted soon."

Anyone care to comment? We are planning on making the long tow out but if the stage miles are reduced we make think again about it.

-Tim
Wazoo Racing
 

·
Big Jump 800
Joined
·
716 Posts
The USFS just dropped this on the LSPR organizers this morning. Note their local Forestry people are 100% cooperative; the orders came from the USFS chief:
http://www.fs.fed.us/emc/applit/includes/chiefs_eii_letter.pdf

Anyway... to answer Tim's question; the organizers are working on a revised plan for Friday with nearly as many miles as originally scheduled. The UP loves rally and I'm sure the State and local authorites will be cooperative.

Stay tuned for further developments.

J.B. Niday
www.nidayrallysport.com
 

·
eating dust taking photos
Joined
·
3,740 Posts
Sure.


Some agenda thumping person or group sued and won for something or another.

In accordance with the ruling certain guidlines for permit approvals were changed.

Said change was orignally applied to a localized area. Judge either was pissed that his or her ruling was mis interperted or previously mentioned agnedizers (new word time, yay!) got something in a twist and asked the judge to re-address the ruling and got a national ruling.

Since the original ruling called for changes back at the beginning of july anything approved after these chagnes were supposed to be implemented has to be reviewed and re-approved under the new guidelines causing all permits to be recalled.


I have no idea what the ruling was, but that was my take on the mess, I am fairly confident it is fundamentally correct if ineloquent.
 

·
[email protected] -> Magnetic Tree
Joined
·
438 Posts
>can anyone out there offer a plain English translation of the
>chef's bureaucratese?
>
>Dave G
>
>
>"...Embrace loose gravel, beware big trees..."

Basic gist seems to be that the Forestry Service can no longer issue permits for events without going through a full public comment and appeal process. So, any permit issued after July 7th, 2005 that did not go through a public hearing process got revoked.

Pretty good explaination at the following web site.

http://www.themountainmail.com/main.asp?SectionID=4&SubSectionID=4&ArticleID=6240&TM=43704.22

Tim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,998 Posts
The original suit is an attempt to block logging in the Sequoia National Forest. It is still in court. If you get the cite from the place JB mentioned above, you can read all about it. The order does not PREVENT getting permits, just makes it a longer process...and it's retroactive.

It also prevents things like Boy Scout troops camping in the Boundary Waters and cutting the Christmas tree for the White House lawn without the 135-day notice/appeal period.

Bruce
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,757 Posts
Great timing....I hope the organizers can recover.

If you are interested, here is the website one of the lead organizations who were plaintiffs againts the USFS:

http://www.heartwood.org/

They won about half of their points in the battle with the USFS in when to open issues to public comment and how the process works. This site has links to the actual court decisions.

What with the politics involved, one wonders if the permit process in the NF's will even become stable.

Mark B.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,757 Posts
Having just read the original ruling by the court, the original suit was not to block any and all matters from bypassing a full public comment process. It was targeted, according to the plintiffs, to prevent the USFS from bypassing comment and appeals on major land use permits and plans. It was not targeted at all activities, and the plintiffs allowed that minor activities like mowing lawns should not be subject to comment an appeals. The murkiness for us is that rallying on roads falls somehwere in-between logging and lawn mowing!

IMO, the resulting recent letter from the USFS chief was to suspend all processing of permits, etc., without a comment and appeals process until they could reach a better understanding of where they stood. (Possibly, it is also a move to raise a political backlash from other forest users, and get some political muscle raised prior to going to the next round of appeals.) In any case, we are stuck for the moment. We can only hope that driving on already established roads can somehow be put in the catagory of 'regular events' in the forests, that common sense shows has no impact on the forests, and we'll get freed from whatever comments requirements follow.

Mark B.
 

·
I have a cat.
Joined
·
3,676 Posts
HEADS UP RALLY COMMUNITY! This is NATIONWIDE and has far reaching ramifications. The same order was dropped on the Michigan Cycle Conservation Club last week and they had to reroute their Fall Trail Tour around USFS land.

The plaintiffs in the case are funded by the Sierra Club, the eco-terrorist group (no, I am not being dramatic here) that is known for putting tetrahedral barbs in the Baja Peninsula in an effort to kill desert racers at high speed.

They actually won this one. If there was ever a time to ally with other land-use groups, now is the time.

The AMA is looking into it as it affects many of our races on 2 wheels, too.

http://www.ama-cycle.org/legisltn/rapidresponse.asp

This could be the beginning of the end (or just the end) of Federal land use. Unless we fight.

If the tone of this post seems alarmist, then good. Not sure how much of the rally roads we currently use are in Federal forests, but my guess is this affects far more than LSPR.

Here is the note from the AMA:

Alert -- Public Land Event Organizers May Need to Re-Permit Certain Events

Several organizers have recently been notified that their permits to hold AMA-sanctioned events on federal forests have been canceled due to a recently signed court order with alarming national consequences.

On September 23rd, acting Forest Service Chief Ann Bartuska issued a memo to the National Forests announcing that the court order, ??among other things, struck down the provisions?that excluded categorical exclusions from notice, comment and appeal?. The Acting Chief also noted that the court order must be observed ?prospectively? after July 7, 2005.

This means that any permit which was issued under a ?categorical exclusion? since July 7th is to be suspended until the proposed activities are subject to the notice, comment and appeal provisions that they would have otherwise endured. Generally, this is about a four month process.

It?s not known at this time if the Administration will request a stay or appeal the court order.

The AMA is continuing to study this matter and will publish more information as it becomes available. AMA event organizers are encouraged to review their permits with their local forest supervisor. Organizers who are forced to re-permit an event because of the new categorical exclusion rules are asked to contact Royce Wood in the AMA?s Government Relations Department at (614) 856-1900 ext. 1225.



By the way, so far I know of this ruling cancelling races and rides in Prescott Forest, AZ; Sequoia Forest, CA; Florida, and Idaho...just in the last couple weeks.
 

·
I have a cat.
Joined
·
3,676 Posts
Like I said, this is NATIONWIDE.

From Montana:

http://www.missoulian.com/articles/2005/09/30/news/mtregional/news07.txt

Oregon/Washington:

http://www.springfieldnews.com/articles/2005/10/05/local/news08.txt

Idaho...and the BRC's quotes:

POCATELLO, ID (Sept. 29) - A recent order by a federal court prohibits the U.S. Forest Service from using streamlined regulations to permit many popular recreational activities as well as projects that reduce hazardous fuels and improve wildlife habitat.

On July 2, 2005 the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California issued an Order banning the use of Categorical Exclusions (CEs). The ruling requires any forest project using a CE to include a formal public notice, be available for public comment and give the public the option of appealing the decision. The order applies to all decisions made with a CE after July 7, 2005. It also applies nationwide.

The court order is a result of a lawsuit filed by the following anti-recreation groups; the Earth Island Institute, Sequoia ForestKeeper, Heartwood, Center for Biological Diversity, and the Sierra Club against a timber project on the Sequoia National Forest.

A CE is a category of actions that do not have a significant effect on the environment and therefore do not require an Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). CEs are allowed under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). They simplify documentation -- not eliminate it -- for those actions that clearly do not have a significant effect on the environment. Such permitted activities include certain off-road vehicle events, mountain bike tours and group outings for organizations such as the Boy or Girl Scouts.

Brian Hawthorne, Public Lands Director for the BlueRibbon Coalition, states, "I think the green groups have gone too far with their anti-recreation agenda. They seek to create a virtual 'analysis paralysis' in the Forest Service to advance their agenda. Sadly, it is the responsible recreating public who will suffer because of their extreme positions."

"I believe the American public will see this for what it is - radical environmentalism run amok. If a project meets the specific and limited criteria for Categorical Exclusion and cannot have a significant effect on the environment, land managers should not be forced to complete an unnecessarily lengthy and wasteful analysis. " Hawthorne added.

This decisions impact projects such as the Capitol Holiday Tree program, which allows a tree from a different national forest to grace the lawn of the U.S. Capitol throughout the holiday season-a proud tradition for nearly 40 years. "Instead of approving such projects with a streamlined permit using CEs, the agency must now enact a lengthy 135 day notice, comment, and appeal process," Hawthorne said. "It's not just the mom and pop recreation clubs that get hurt, but great American traditions like placing the Christmas tree on the White House lawn are affected as well."

Hawthorne noted that the ruling potentially affects hundreds of projects throughout the country, including projects that will reduce hazardous fuels and improve wildlife habitat. Hawthorne added; "The effects of the decision are not yet completely understood and it will take some time to fully assess a strategy of action. BRC remains committed to protecting recreational access to public lands and will be watching the situation closely."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,812 Posts
Go underground, man!

No paperwork, no official organizers, no internet communications.

Bring back the RallyGators, the Tri-state, etc.

Yeah!

Bring it on, baby!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
660 Posts
I've said it before, but I'll say it again: Blue Ribbon Coalition

http://www.sharetrails.org/

is a great umbrella watchdog and action group for all motroized users of public lands. Might not be a bad idea for RA & NASA to sign up. We can also join as individuals (I'm a member, and I bet my dirt bike brother Lurch is also).

Jim Cox
#558
 

·
I have a cat.
Joined
·
3,676 Posts
I am a member of the Cycle Conservation Club, a club that works with the DNR and maintains trails here in MI and fights for MI land-use issues in Lansing.

www.cycleconservationclub.org

I will soon be renewing my membership in the AMA, as I am starting to do some Supermoto racing with the KTM, and that organization fights for land-use issues that greatly parallel rally issues in Washington and every state.

www.ama-cycle.org

I am not a member of BRC yet...they work mainly with BLM issues out west and don't have a lot of local impact, but I will likely join as my money working for their governmental action team is doing more good than it would if I just bought a couple six packs of stout.

www.sharetrails.org

I agree. Even as I know the rally organizations have a lot on their plates and can't put together their own teams to keep an eye on the stuffed shirts, so we should ally with other groups who have nearly identical interests in land-use. Even if that means just encouraging our fellow rallyists to join an organization where their clout will serve to keep the roads open for our sport.
 

·
Photo Monkey.
Joined
·
79 Posts
As if rally'n in the US needed another kick to the nuts... God damn hippies...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
356 Posts
"And get your petchouli stink out of my store!!!"

>As if rally'n in the US needed another kick to the nuts...
>God damn hippies...
 

·
your other left, you idiot
Joined
·
3,909 Posts
Please think before typing

Guys (of all genders)-

Yes, this is a severe setback, and we need to find ways to deal with it.

That said, please sit on your hands a bit before typing.

Remember, this is a public forum. Lots of "they" read it. It can be searched, and found, via Google, or whatever your search engine of choice is.

So, think how the U.S.F.S. or the Sierra Club or whichever group might view your post.

Let's not shoot ourselves in the foot too much.

press on (even on an abbreviated route),
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,395 Posts
RE: Please think before typing

>Bring back the Beacon Hill/Freda Cross-cut stage!
>Dave

Baraga Plains and Menge Creek.:9 Ooh, and that one that used to be stage one traditionally that was about 15 miles SW of Houghton (one of my favorite stages to take pictures on...)

Jerry
 

·
don't cut
Joined
·
2,252 Posts
RE: Please think before typing

>That said, please sit on your hands a bit before typing.
>

If I thought about stuff before I did it, I'd be a codriver! }(

I for one hope they chuck out Passmore. I've crashed out three times in the last three years on that same @$^$Q stage. Instead, bring back Menge Creek.

Aren't we already banned by state law from using state roads in MI?

Dennis Martin
[email protected]
920-432-4845
 
1 - 20 of 57 Posts
Top