Keep Carnegie SVRA open!

Check out this article published by The Union.com serving Western Nevada County in California entitled McClintock Blasts US Forest Service for “Abusive” “ Predatory” Fees.

Congressman Tom McClintock describes examples of cost recovery fees collected by the US Forest Service which he labels as abusive and predatory. This abuse, brought to his attention by his constituents, portrays an attitude within the service which he said requires immediate correction.

He documents examples of the U.S. Forest Service demanding excessive fees from various organizations running events in the National Forests and then pulling permits when the organizations could not afford the fees. Groups including the California
Endurance Riders Association, the Polka Dot Motorcycle Club (motorcycle clubs) and Gold Country Endurance Group (an equestrian club) were forced to cancel events that they had been holding for decades.

These along with other documented abuses caused Tom McClintock to bring concerns and complaints of arbitrary and capricious conduct to the Forest Service’s attention. “Combined, these actions evince an ideologically driven hostility to the public’s use of the public’s land – and a clear intention to deny the public the responsible and sustainable use of that land.”

He said that if the Forest Service fails to reverse these policies he will use his use his position on the National Parks, Forests and Public Lands subcommittee of the House Natural Resources Committee to press for hearings into the economic damage their actions have caused.

Finally a powerful ally willing to stand up for public access…

After injuring myself I was back on my motorcycle for the first time in over a month. I noticed a lot of changes since I was my last ride. Not good changes. Let me explain what I mean.

“Viewed from a jetliner at 35,000 feet Carnegie is indistinguishable from other geographic features like farms, shopping malls, housing tracts, and the military installation across the road from us.” Dave Duffin.

The danger lies not so much that the environmental extremists will close us down outright. They will take little chunks out of our riding experience bit by bit until we finally leave of our own accord.

Back on the ground and behind the scenes the rangers are being forced to kowtow to these extreme environmental groups and take action based on their interpretation of the Recreation Code.

The rangers are putting up more fencing and constructing trails that are finely graded and almost flat. These new trails pose no challenge to long time Carnegie riders. Some say that the many blind corners, easy terrain and increased speed pose a safety hazard on the narrow two-way trails.

“The “improvements” will add a new component to many unskilled riders’ experience – SPEED!!! This will result in accidents.” Dave Duffin.

What can we do to pressure the rangers into taking the riders needs into consideration when they make changes? Will Rodney Smith still be able to say that Carnegie is the most challenging place he had ever ridden?

“They act like we are riding on their front lawn not in our off road park.” Mark Martinez.

Someone is trying to turn Carnegie into a kind of safe amusement park like the snow coaches in Yellow Stone. Long time riders did not start riding here because they didn’t like challenging terrain. What can we do? We need to take action immediately or it will be too late.

Eight months ago we had a rally at our park to signal the last day of riding before it was due to be closed. We were in the national spotlight with TV news crews attending and articles written in the local and national press. The motives of our protagonists were not based on water quality, soils mitigation, or wildlife preservation. The burning idea in their minds was to close our park and end, by any means possible, family OHV recreation here and eventually at as many other places and State OHV Parks as possible.

After years of experience at closing other riding areas in California they finally found a way to “hack” into Carnegie and release a virus that would destroy our Off Highway vehicle lifestyle here. Our little Carnegie was to become a test case to see if their venom could be replicated at other places in the state and nation. The argument they used before a Judge in Alameda County, stated the water quality was harmed by OHV use in the park. An Appeals Court overruled this first decision and the park has thankfully remained open. The poison however, is still in the system since the Park Staff base many of their land use decisions on possible future lawsuits from these relentless, well funded, and yes selfish environmentalists.

Viewed from a jetliner at 35,000 feet Carnegie is indistinguishable from other geographic features like farms, shopping malls, housing tracts, and the military installation across the road from us. The alleged environmental groups Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) and the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance are currently probing for cracks in the wall that the Appellate Court erected. They won’t give up until this little dot on the map, Carnegie, becomes a hiking and nature area.

We have spent the months between December and August holding riders’ meetings with the intent to develop a substantial riders’ organization to represent the beliefs, aspirations and requirements of the 150 -200,000 OHV recreation enthusiasts who have come to Carnegie for over 40 years.

In the photo above we met in June with Dave Pickett AMA D.36 President and Legal Affairs Officer and Blue Ribbon Western Sates Representative Don Amador. At that meeting we decided to apply to the CA OHV Commission to have a future meeting in Tracy to discuss current issues and re-opening the application for the 4000 acres west of us – The Alameda-Tesla Expansion Project.

Finally we are in the last segment of establishing a Federal non-profit corporation called Carnegie Forever, Inc. The filing will take place in mid-September and we will be pleased to announce the GOOD NEWS this Fall after our corporation is approved. We desperately need this designation to effectively fight for our piece of the pie, our tiny dot on the map. At that time we will respectfully ask for your financial support with a tax deductible donation to fund the future defense fund of Carnegie.

Dave Duffin, Pete Krunich, Mark Speed, Mark Martinez and Diana Tweedy

What would you think if you could tell the Obama administration how you feel about outdoor recreation and conservation? It would be nice since wealthy lobbyists for conservation groups like the Sierra Club seem to have a stranglehold on influence in Washington. But now it is possible to speak to Washington about your concerns and to counter the ideas promoted by OHV opponents.

Blue Ribbon Coalition’s website informs us of a new law signed by Obama, “America’s Great Outdoors Initiative”, which directs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Council for Environmental Quality (CEQ) to coordinate with the Interior and Agriculture Departments on a program to promote conservation and outdoor recreation.” Go to the Blue Ribbon website to learn how you can join the discussion.

Don’t let the groups who are trying to stop OHV recreation hog all the ideas. We need to input our thoughts about the proper utilization of recreational resources. Off road recreation is not a crime. Go to: http://ideas.usda.gov/ago/ideas.nsf/ and let them know what you think.

Karen Schambach’s organization the Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation in conjunction with the Center for Biological Diversity is behind a new petition for wit of mandate to stop a Green-Sticker funded trail near her home in Georgetown.

They are suing the California Department of Parks and Recreation, Division of Off Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation along with Eldorado National Forest and The United States Forest Service to shut down the Rock Creek Development Project. They allege that 8.9 miles of new trail is a major expansion of off road vehicle use, thereby requiring an Environmental Impact Report. The project includes three new bridges and a rest room near the Rubicon. She is asking the judge to block the construction of the new trail until an EIR is approved. Think the Alameda/Tesla property.

To read the as yet unfilled writ of mandate see here.

Our own Diana Tweedy got a post published in DirtRider. Way to go!

You can read all her post on our site here.

In the Registry of Actions for the Superior Court of California County of Alameda on Thursday July 15th, Judge Roesch did not grant CSPA and PEER a new trial on all causes of action. There is certainly some ambiguity in the Judge’s order, but it appears that the first, second and third causes of action dealing with the Porter Cologne act water discharge standards were hopefully dismissed.

The actions that were most likely dismissed are as follows:
- first – closing Carnegie SVRA
- second – requiring a waste discharge report, and
- third – meeting water discharge restrictions.

The one cause of action that was not dismissed was the fourth cause of action to make the park abide by Public Resources Code section 5090.35, which requires the Park to monitor soil and wildlife habitat. A trial will be set to resolve these issues later.

Other than the ambiguity surrounding the causes of action, there’s additional ambiguity in the judge’s ruling which leaves the door open for misinterpretation and the continuation of this suit.

It is not over yet. This can be considered a possible positive outcome for the park and its users, depending on how the judge’s order is interpreted. CSPA and PEER are still wrestling with their administrative remedies at the Water Board. A battle may have been won, but the war continues.

I just learned that on June 18th 2010 CSFA and PEER filed a Motion for a New Trial in San Francisco Superior Court (asking the judge to set a date for a new trial) even though the Appellate Court had already issued an order dismissing CSFA and PEER’s First Amended Writ of Mandate, the Writ of Mandate that the “new trial” is supposed to resolve. Does that make sense? CSFA and PEER are asking the judge to set a new trial date on an action that has been dismissed (that no longer exists). Rather than going directly to the Appellate Court and asking for Reconsideration of the Order of Dismissal, CSFA and PEER are asking Judge Roesch to overrule the Appellate Court’s Order of Dismissal, by assigning a new trial date for that very same action, i.e., the action that has been dismissed. Judge Roesch has already ordered a hearing on CSFA and PEER’s Motion for New Trial for July 15th where he will either order a new trial date or not. (Are they forum shopping?) But it is not as simple as that. The plot sickens.

CSFA and PEER’s brief in support of their motion for new trial includes as an exhibit a copy of the State’s Appeal. It appears that the State only appealed the second cause of action requiring Carnegie to cease any new or changed pollution discharges pending submission of the Waste Discharge Repot, which the lower court judge interpreted as justification to shut down Carnegie. The State, rather than appealing the duty to prepare a Waste Discharge Report, provided one to the Californian Regional Water Quality Control Board. CSFA and PEER contend that the Regional Board responded to the State’s submission of the Waste Discharge Report and said that it was incomplete. CSFA and PEER also claim the Regional Board confirmed ongoing discharges into the creek. Although CSFA and PEER only seem to be asking the court to order a new trial on the fourth cause of action (monitoring soils wildlife, etc.), with this judge anything is possible.

In their Appeal the State (our side) failed to bring up the issue of the failure of CSFA and PEER to exhaust administrative remedies before the Regional or State Water Boards (procedures they must follow through with the water boards before asking the court for a writ of mandate). The Appellate Court used the failure to exhaust administrative remedies as the basis for its decision to dismiss the CSFA and PEER’s action, i.e., dismissal of their Writ of Mandate. This decision was based purely on an argument put forth as an Amicus Brief filed by the Water Board (who was not a party to the action). The Appellate Court did not have to pay attention to the Amicus Brief, but thank God they did.

CSFA and PEER are in the process of exhausting administrative remedies even now as we speak. Arguing failure to exhaustion administrative remedies is not foolproof since CSFA and PEER could go and exhaust administrative remedies and then go back to the court and ask for the same relief, which is what they are in the process of doing.

We don’t know what Judge Roesch will do; whether he will order a new trial on one, two, three or all four causes of action; or do as he should do, lacking jurisdiction in the matter, not order a new trial at all.

The State only appealed the second cause of action which the judge used as justification to close Carnegie until a waste discharge report is acted upon by the Water Board. CSFA and PEER contend that the Water Discharge Report submitted by the ORV State Recreation Parks Dept was deficient in several respects. At this point it can be argued that the State has not gotten approval of its waste discharge report and perhaps the lower court could include the second cause of action in the new trial, when CSFA and PEER have exhausted administrative remedies. Then Judge Roesch could issue an order closing Carnegie again (worst possible outcome imaginable).

That also leaves the other three causes of action:

1. First Cause of action – Duty to submit waste discharge report (that CSFA and PEER contend has still not been properly submitted)
2. Third Cause of Action complying with water quality objectives
3. Fourth Cause of Action – Monitor soils wildlife, shut down noncompliant areas, etc.

Our Judge could order a new trial on one, two, three or all four causes of action if he wants to. We don’t know what he will do, but if we go by the sort of decisions he has made in the past, we do know that he will bend over backwards to benefit CSFA, PEER and their cronies.

Don’t get me wrong, I am certainly not a part of this lawsuit, and not an expert on this case. But this is what I can piece together after looking at the registry of actions in this case. Go here and enter the case number RG09474549. Good luck; the documents are voluminous.

Attorney General Jerry Browns’ name is on the Appeal we supposedly won. Anything could happen. This is not real life. It has nothing to do whether there is any water in the so called creek, any fish; or any sediment killing fish in the so called creek. This is about politics. I am not an optimist and I say watch out. Of course, it goes without saying, that you should get on your bike and ride Carnegie this weekend, but don’t run over any RockFish.

The state legislature is about to pass a bill, SB624, declaring that Serpentine be removed as a state rock. It goes on to cite unscientific facts about the rock being carcinogenic. See ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES and the editorial in today’s newspaper.

This is a slippery slope and could result in even more closures. The text of SB624 declares that serpentine contains chrysotile asbestos and that exposure increases the risk of cancer mesothelioma.

As stated in a letter to the editor from John M. Stoiz, civil engineer: “This is a non-fact. Serpentine is a general name given to magnesium iron phyllosilicate minerals, and it can refer to any of twenty varieties. There are three polymorphs (or kinds) of serpentine: antigorite, chrysotile and lizardite, but only chrysotile contains asbestos”.

California has Serpentine everywhere, but no elevated disease rates from living here. There is no evidence that outdoor recreation exposure has any effect on human health. Our nonscientific state legislators are confusing daily worker exposure to processed asbestos in various products such as home insulation, insulation on ship’s boilers and insulated wiring with exposure to asbestos contained in the structure of naturally occurring rock.

The Blue Ribbon Coalition has reported extensively about the closure of Clear Creek OHV Park due to supposedly cancer causing asbestos contained in Serpentine. “Paul Turcke, BRC attorney and lead counsel for the recreation groups, states, ‘The BLM has previously and extensively studied the ‘asbestos issue’ and has properly concluded the naturally occurring short-fibered Coalinga chrysotile asbestos presents little or no risk to human health. Specifically, the size and nature of the particles in question allow them to be expunged from the lungs or broken down by natural body processes and rendered harmless. There is no bona fide emergency which justifies this drastic and hastily-reached decision.”

“According to a recent declaration provided by a respected scientist, this form of asbestos is innocuous and should be considered only a nuisance dust. Unfortunately, the “one fiber will kill you” zealots choose not to differentiate between different forms of asbestos…”

“The simple fact is that asbestos-related disease does not show up in any of these populations. Period.” – Don Amador.

Scientific facts to not sway our legislature in their quest to keep people from enjoying the great outdoors. The seemingly innocuous removal of Serpentine as a state rock has numerous implications. I have a sample in my rock collection and I have suffered no ill effects even though it is part of a mineral collection that has been in my bedroom for decades.

Don Amador, aka the General, is the voice of reason and an important ally in our fight to preserve OHV recreational opportunities. Check out his blog to get an idea of some of the threats we are facing. See the following which is included in Don’s blog about land closures due to illegal immigrant and drug smuggling:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/06/18/federal-lands-arizona-travel-warnings-place/
“Dennis Godfrey, a spokesman for the Bureau of Land Management’s Arizona office, said roughly a dozen signs were posted earlier this month along the Sonoran Desert National Monument advising that travel in the area is not recommended due to “active drug and human” smuggling. “It is a corridor for smugglers of all types,” Godfrey told FoxNews.com…

Similar signs have been posted at the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge and the Coronado National Forest, which covers nearly 1.8 million acres in southeastern Arizona and southwestern New Mexico…
‘This is one of those things that the Department of Interior does not want to publicize,” said Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, ranking Republican on the House ‘Parks and Public Lands Subcommittee.. ‘

Don also has a link to a speech given by Forest Service Chief detailing the four threats to our forests and grasslands, fire and fuels, invasive species, loss of open space, and unmanaged outdoor recreation.
http://www.fs.fed.us/news/2004/speeches/01/idaho-four-threats.shtml

“But Americans are faced with growing threats to their quality of life. I think Jack Troyer recently spoke to you about the four major threats—fire and fuels, invasive species, loss of open space, and unmanaged outdoor recreation.
Each year, the national forests and grasslands get hundreds of miles of unauthorized roads and trails due to repeated cross-country use. We’re seeing more erosion, water degradation, and habitat destruction. We’re seeing more conflicts between users. We have got to improve our management so we get responsible recreational use based on sound outdoor ethics.”

As Don points out, we are under constant attack from our government. From trying to protect us from ourselves with threatened closure of Forest Hill and Downieville, to the outright closure of Clear Creek, to the closure of recreation on public land due to illegal immigration and drug smuggling, to the Forest Service’s assessment that off highway vehicle recreation is one of four major threats to our forests and grasslands; we are under constant assault.

The anti OHV community is strong and powerful beyond its numbers. It is enlightening that the next to last sentence, “We have seen more conflicts between users”, is how Dale Bosworth sums up the threat posed by OHV use as one of the four great threats to out public land. These conflicts are more than likely conflicts between those folks who oppose all OHV use and our OHV community. This is the essence of our battle with the federal bureaucracy which is more in tune with city based anti access groups than with the American public, especially the locals who actually use these forests and grasslands. It is time to stay informed and band together with like minded individuals to fight these nefarious groups and their tools in Washington.

Don’s investigation into ties between our government and anti assess organizations is enlightening, especially contacts concerning supposed health risks to the public. Go to the sites that he offers and you will be just as concerned as he is. As Don says;

“What trail enthusiasts (motorized and non-motorized) should be concerned about is that there IS a well thought out strategic effort by the green/governmental complex (EPA, Cal EPA, DTSC, CBD, TWS, etc.) to close OHV trails on FS and BLM lands due to undocumented “health risks” to the public.

Has this closure effort reached the level where the HQ can claim there is a conspiracy to close OHV off public lands? That time may come very soon, but in the meantime The General believes there is a well coordinated effort by greens group and their supporters (or hostages) in the federal government to restrict or ban historic OHV and other uses on public lands.”

Visit Don’s site for more information and ways to make a difference.

Thank you.