Just want to let you know that the lawsuit against the Santa Fe National Forest travel management decision is in the judge's hands. The final briefs have been filed. Now we wait and see what happens. Thanks again for ALAA's support, in our efforts to protect motorized access on public lands.
Carson National Forest Releases Draft Assessment for Forest Plan Revision
The Carson National Forest is in the early stages of revising their Forest Plan. This past week (May 19, 2015), they announced the release of their "Draft Assessment" and scheduled meetings with the public for early summer.
One of the biggest challenges for us as motorized users,(If you can't get there, You can not collect) of the Forest is to GET INVOLVED EARLY and STAY INVOLVED for the long (literally years!) process of revising the Forest Plan. Revising a Forest Plan involves a time commitment now that will only pay off in the future. The really long, slow process makes it very hard to stay focused and committed. If we lose interest and lose track of the project, it makes it really easy for the Forest Service to do whatever they (and the radical environmentalists) want to do.
We know how hard it is to keep all of these many Forest Service processes and plans straight. We know it is hard to find the time and energy to keep showing up at meetings, writing comments and staying involved. We know how frustrating it is to provide input only to see it seemingly ignored. We know it is tempting to just go play instead.
If either of these bills become law, Rockhounds should make sure that any roads or trails leading to or near collecting sites are included in the route designation established by local government agencies.
In regards to NMOHVA’s lawsuit against the travel management decision of the Santa Fe National.Forrest
Judge Johnson has rejected the request for intervener status. The request came from a combined group consisting of the Center for Biological Diversity, Wildearth Guardians and Sierra Club. This means the lawsuit is just NMOHVA and the Forest Service, and the environmental groups are not allowed to submit their own brief with arguments.
July 28,2014. Judge Johnson ruled against NMOHVA's lawsuit on the Santa Fe National Forest's travel management decision. Ironically, in his decision, Judge Johnson specifically agreed with us that the Forest Service broke the law because their "no action" alternative in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is illegal. It violated NEPA laws. This issue was NMOHVA's main point in the lawsuit. The decision is based on the EIS, and the EIS is based on the "no action alternative". Somehow, the judge decided that the "no action alternative" was illegal, but the decision was not. You can read the judge's Decision and Opinion on NMOHVA's web page at www.nmohva.org. What's next? We are meeting with our legal team to discuss the possibility of an appeal to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. The NMOHVA Board of Directors will then decide whether to appeal.
The Director’s Protest Resolution Reports analyze each unique or summarized protest issue statement received on each individual BLM Proposed Resource Management Plan to determine whether the State Director followed established procedures, considered relevant information in reaching proposed decisions, and whether the proposed decisions are consistent with the applicable statutes, regulations, and BLM policy.
The following Director’s Protest Resolution Reports are available for online viewing or download.