U.S. seeks to reopen disputed Imperial Sand Dunes area to off-roaders

[lobsterdmb]

Article on today’s page 1 of the LA Time’s LAT Extra Section, re: reopening the Algodones Dunes/Imperial Sand Dunes to off-road vehicles:

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-0619-dunes-plan-20130619,0,6144165.story

U.S. seeks to reopen disputed Imperial Sand Dunes area to off-roaders

Bureau of Land Management draws criticism from environmentalists over a plan to allow recreational vehicles on 40,000 acres that are home to desert animals and threatened plants.

By Julie Cart, Los Angeles Times

10:31 PM PDT, June 18, 2013

A new federal plan for managing the Imperial Sand Dunes calls for reopening to off-road vehicles 40,000 acres that have been closed since 2000, when the site became embroiled in a legal battle involving threatened plant species.

Counting that acreage, 84% of the 215,000-acre dunes system would be open to motorized recreation under the Bureau of Land Management plan, released Tuesday.

The plan is the result of a 13-year process that moved in fits and starts as each iteration from the agency was challenged in court. Even this solution will remain in legal limbo for a time. A judge has ordered the BLM to keep motorized vehicles out of the closed area for 90 days to allow time for challenges to the plan.

Also known as Algodones Dunes, the region in southeastern Imperial County has for years been the focal point of legal wrangling between off-roaders seeking to keep acreage open and environmentalists demanding protection for the area's sensitive plant and animal species.

Environmental groups called the plan the largest desert conservation rollback in a decade, limiting protected space for the threatened Pierson's milk vetch and disturbing habitat for desert lizards and other animals.

It allows recreation to trump protection of "a suite of species that are found in the Algodones Dunes and not found anywhere else," said Illene Anderson, a biologist with the Center for Biological Diversity, one of the parties to the original lawsuit. Anderson said the group would challenge the new plan.

The BLM intends to set aside 9,000 acres designated as critical habitat for the milk vetch plant. But the off-limits zone is in the middle of an area otherwise open to motorized recreation, making it difficult for authorities to patrol.

"That is the challenge," said Greg Hill, the BLM project manager for the dunes plan. "Fencing it is not practical. It will be signed and patrolled."

Hill acknowledged that with only a handful of resource officers patrolling the 200-square-mile recreation area, the agency will rely on motorized recreation groups to assist in education and patrols.

Jim Bramham, a resource consultant with the California Assn. of 4WD Clubs, said off-roads groups are prepared to take on that role.

"We certainly are ready to help the bureau with that education process," he said. "These are scientifically based closures." He noted that the closed section is not prime land for off-road vehicles.

Bramham, who is a member of a committee that advises the BLM on desert issues, said the plan is "as reasonable as we could possibly expect. We want a data-driven plan. We got one."

The Imperial Sand Dunes also carry the lingering reputation as one of the most dangerous off-road recreation areas in the United States. Thanksgiving weekend gatherings draw more than 200,000 people and have led to homicides, traffic fatalities and mass arrests.

The region of wind-sculpted bowls and sandy flats draws 1 million visitors a year, providing a significant economic engine in struggling Imperial County. Officials have lobbied the federal government for more funds to manage the vast area, which on busy weekends is patrolled by federal and county law enforcement.

Although the dunes remain popular with off-roaders, visitation has declined by 8% in recent years, in part a reflection of the economic downturn, officials say.

[email protected]

Copyright © 2013, Los Angeles Times

 

[Ronbo]

This is a win for us. The article below was published by the Amercan Sand Association Inc, which is far less slanted than the nasty LA Times.

"After more than 10 years of studies and legal maneuvering the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has adopted Alternative #8 as described in the Imperial Sand Dunes Recreation Area (ISDRA) Recreation Area Management Plan (RAMP) Record of Decision (ROD) published on June 17, 2013. The BLM decision is based on 13 years of analysis and studies from both sides of the issues. In so doing, they are removing most of the "Interim Closures" put in place in August 2000, keeping only the 9,046 acres closed where scientific studies show the plants need protection, Critical Habitat designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Alternative #8 reopens the majority of the area between Interstate 8 and Highway 78. Approximately 7,500 acres east of the sand highway from Roadrunner to Gordons Well will remain closed to Off Highway Vehicle (OHV) activity. The closure in the Buttercup area will be relocated adjacent to the border of Mexico.

The new plan provides for continuous monitoring in the future and allows for adjustments to be made. A revaluation by the USFWS could potentially delist the Peirson's milk vetch. The plan is 328 pages long and is the result of many thousands of public comments, court decisions, and environmental studies.

The BLM California State Director Jim Kenna in his statement said, "This final plan benefited from thorough scientific review and important public feedback, and it will ensure the great family tradition of OHV recreation will continue at Imperial Sand Dunes as we protect key desert habitat."

So when could we see the preferred Alternative #8 implemented?
The ROD confirms that the interim closures imposed by court order in 2000 will be lifted following the 90-day court-review period, unless one of the original parties, such as the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), files an objection within the next 90 days. In which case, the Court will have to decide whether the deficiencies identified in its 2006 decision invalidating the prior RAMP have been sufficiently corrected. CBD may try to raise issues not addressed in the 2006 court decision but we and BLM will oppose such an effort as being beyond the scope of the Court's review.

In any event, the Court will likely want the parties to brief the issues presented in CBD's objection document. This will require, among other things, that BLM prepare the administrative record for the ROD. This takes a fair amount of time to complete. When that's done, the parties will write and file their briefs - a process that takes about six months. Then we will get a new hearing date with the Court and have oral arguments before the judge. Typically, the judge will take three to six months to issue a final ruling. As you can see, we still have a long road ahead of us. Until then, all closures will remain in effect."