Quick Fact
Present, Existing, Recreational Uses Of This Area Would Cease.
What the Bill Says
Section 4 (f) states:
The Secretary may issue permits for special recreation events involving motorized vehicles within the boundaries of the Monument, including the `Chile Challenge'--
(A) to the extent the events
do not harm paleontological resources; and
(B)
subject to any terms and conditions that the
Secretary determines to be necessary.
At the
S3599 testimony, the Department of Interior spokesperson,
Chad Calvert, said
there would be no
guarantee that OHV uses would continue.
National monuments by nature are managed “in a manner that conserves, protects, and enhances the resources and values of the Monument”. Since this national monument would be designated for fossilized trackways, one can not expect current recreational activities to continue.
Each February the Chile Challenge is held here in Las Cruces. Over a thousand people come here from all over the country to enjoy this world class four wheeling, as a non-competitive trail ride experience. However, this is just one week of the year that a permit is required to recreate using the designated trails.
The other 51 weeks do not require permits to use the trails. The bill says nothing about non-permitted activities continuing.
Another concern is the statement that the permit is to be issued "to the extent the events do not harm the paleontological resources".
Closure advocates would have a field day with this statement claiming that the vehicle vibrations and emissions are harming the resources.
Others would claim that just letting the vehicles drive close to the Abo redbeds is damaging these buried treasures.
These claims would have no basis in reality.
A perfect example of an indicator of things to come is the fuss they are already making over one area in Apache Canyon where the OHV trail crosses over about twenty feet of exposed red bed formation. It is located in Apache Canyon (locality AF21) and the OHV trail is named Tabasco Twister.
It is apparent in the following picture that seasonal flood waters have scoured the rocks bare. Driving this area does not have any effect on the red beds since it is in the bottom of an arroyo[1] where the most significant damage comes from periodic raging water, not soft rubber tires.
|
Even though the passage of vehicles can not and will
not do any any damage to the 200 foot high hillside here, |
|||
|
Other pictures of this "problem" area |
|||
.JPG) |
.JPG) |
.JPG) |
.JPG) .JPG) .JPG) |
| In this 2001 picture, you can see the black marks on the rocks, where we had been driving off to the right | This almost identical shot of the area in 2006 shows that all signs of past vehicle travel over the area in question have been removed by natural actions. | Typical passage of a vehicle through the area today | This is what it looks like as of February 2007. Since we do not need to, and have not driven, on the right side for many years, we have placed signs asking people to stay off of the few feet of concern |
There are 26.68 miles of trails within the boundaries of the proposed national monument and only 7.62 miles within a few hundred feet of the Abo red beds where the tracks would be found
The 1994 Smithsonian report identified 34 localities that the authors claimed to have found only tiny (micro) tracks or plant traces.
For the most part, these localities were clumped into four "hot spots" and can easily be described as a unit with their collective AF numbers:
1. AF1-9 - Quarry area.
2. AF10-15 - Patzcuarro’s Revenge Area
3. AF18-23 - Apache Canyon area (Tabasco Twister)
4. AF24-30 - Upper Apache Canyon area.
Everywhere else, the Abo outcrops are either in side canyons, the canyon walls, or high up the hillsides where no vehicle could possibly go. Also, most of the red beds are still buried under hundreds of feet of overburden or otherwise naturally protected as they have been for 280 million years.
.JPG) |
|
This is a typical Abo redbed exposed in the wall of Apache
Canyon |
Why are we so sure this area will be closed to motorized recreational use?
Just look what has happened where other monuments were created.
Monument proponents claim that they do not want to close the area to off-road vehicle use. They say that the details will be worked out with the Resource Management Plan (RMP) that the BLM develops.
The record probably shows that the same promises were made when the Vermilion Cliffs and Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monuments were being debated.
Once the monuments were designated, however, the story changed very rapidly. When the BLM tried to develop their Resource Management Plan, the following information was released by the Sierra Club, Wilderness Society, and Grand Canyon Wildlands Council as soon as the draft plan was unveiled:
Vermilion Cliffs and Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monuments:
Magnificent Resources at Risk
The draft Resource Management Plan for the Arizona Strip prioritizes off-road vehicle access at the expense of wildlife, cultural resources, and wilderness, instead of distinguishing these lands from other BLM lands. Current threats to the quiet, remote backcountry and northern watershed of the Grand Canyon include vandals, pot hunters, and off-road vehicles.
The article continues with many pseudo-scientific, inflammatory, and emotional statements:
Many of these ORV routes are unsafe and lead nowhere, and disrupt the region’s wild and primitive character, threaten wildlife populations, and invite damage to cultural and archaeological resources.
Roads and ORVs cause a range of effects on wildlife, including: mortality from collisions, modifications of animal behavior, disruption of the physical environment, alteration of the chemical environment, spread of exotic species, and changes in human use of lands and water
The effects of roads and ORVs include: habitat loss and fragmentation; diminished animal use of habitats because of noise, dust, emissions, and the presence of humans; loss of forage for herbivores; interference with wildlife functions, such as courtship, nesting, and migrations; spread of non-native species that are introduced by vehicles; increased poaching or unethical hunting practices; increased recreation impacts; and degradation of aquatic habitats through alteration of stream banks and increased sediment loads.
Roads and ORVS reduce the size and number of core wildlife habitat areas. This leads to cumulative adverse effects on species that depend on natural interior landscapes, including greater competition; nest predation and parasitism; secondary extinctions from the loss of keystone species; and changing microclimates such as increased evaporation, increased temperature, increased solar radiation, and decreased soil moisture.
We can easily see this exact same article being re-published to “prove” how much damage the off-road vehicles are doing to the alleged trace fossils. Not only do they attack the use of motorized vehicles, they are calling for the monument to be treated as wilderness. They identify threats to the resources as including vandals, pot hunters, and off-road vehicles“.
This is exactly the same rhetoric we are already hearing from proponents of this monuments. They are citing vehicles as damaging the alleged trace fossils with this statement in their printed literature:
“Illegal removal of tracks can be a problem, and vehicle traffic off of the established trails can damage the tracks.”
They ignore the fact that vehicles do not drive within a mile of the discovery site.
The Wilderness Society web page about the monument also makes the claim that vehicles are a threat with this statement:
The Paleozoic Trackways Foundation formed to gather support to protect the ancient site. "If the site isn't protected, our fear is it will be lost due to mining, looting and weather," said Keith Whelpley of Las Cruces, chairman of the Paleozoic Trackways Foundation. Another concern is the threat of off-road vehicle use in the area.
What reason will it be, vibrations from the vehicles, pollution, noise, people to close to the alleged trace fossil sites?
They will come up with something!
History has proven that even when Congress has specifically allowed certain uses to continue, a way is found to circumvent the law.
A perfect example of this is when the Escalante-Grand Staircase National Monument was established, it very specifically contained wording that protected specific existing uses (like grazing). That did absolutely nothing to keep the BLM from almost immediately starting to effectively eliminate grazing from the monument by not renewing the grazing leases as they came up for renewal.
Even though this proposed monument bill specifically allows permitted events such as the Chile Challenge to continue, the BLM could just refuse to issue the permits for these events, thus ending them.
If the proposed monument wasn't going to give the Sierra Club and others additional leverage to close the area to off-road vehicles, why are they pushing so hard for the designation?
There is just too much past history of using a monument designation to close an area to existing uses to ignore. Monument status in the Robledo Mountains will also be just another excuse for the Sierra Club and others to file lawsuits to close this area to off-road vehicles.
It is especially likely in this case, since one of the main monument proponents is a board member of the local Sierra Club and already has a lawsuit in Federal District Court opposing the quarry.
Other examples of using monument status to close an area to existing uses are easily located on the Internet. In a press release dated March 27, 2002, the Sierra Club, The Wilderness Society, Friends of the Earth, National Wildlife Federation, and U.S. Public Interest Research Group again indicated how they think monuments should be managed:
THIRTY THOUSAND AMERICANS CALL FOR THE PROTECTION OF NEW NATIONAL MONUMENTS
Conservation groups
warn Secretary Norton about the threats posed by poor management
Washington, D.C. – Conservation groups sent a letter to Secretary of Interior Gale Norton today urging her to protect our nation’s newest National Monuments from risky development schemes that threaten to open them up to oil and gas drilling, mining, and off-road vehicles. The groups, which include the Sierra Club, The Wilderness Society, Friends of the Earth, U.S. Public Interest Research Group, and the National Wildlife Federation...
Notice that off-road vehicles are again on the list of unacceptable activities for a national monument.
Petroglyph National Monument
A classic example here in New Mexico of the Sierra Club and others ignoring Congressional intent and using the courts to push their agenda is the Petroglyph National Monument outside of Albuquerque. The monument is a 17 mile long barrier along the west side of the city and contains over 25,000 petroglyphs.
In 1992, Senator Domenici, pressed for the passage of legislation in Congress that removed 8.5 acres from the Petroglyph National Monument and transferred it from federal jurisdiction to the city of Albuquerque so a freeway could be built through the monument.
It is projected that the freeway through the monument would only disturb about 50 petroglyphs. Since the freeway would ease commuter traffic on Albuquerque's east side, voters approved the $8.7 million freeway extension and funds for the extension were included in a $52.5 million road bond.
However, a lawsuit filed Feb. 17, 2005 by the Sierra Club, and others totally ignores the needs of the community and the desires of Congress while trying to stop this much needed freeway.
The proposed trackways national monument has nothing exposed that requires protection, nothing unique to see, and fails to meet the grand expectations that Americans have of a national monument. Currently any alleged trace fossils are buried, up to hundreds of feet below the surface and are well away from any vehicle routes, except for one 20 foot section of Abo red bed with only alleged trace fossils within it.
"How would limiting off road use to designated roads and trails affect the Chile Challenge off-roading event you hold each year?"
We already are limited to existing roads and trails. We just want to keep them!
The website for Las Cruces office of the BLM has this information about the trails we are discussing:
The Robledo Mountains Off-Highway Vehicle Trail System is a network of trails, including both extreme OHV and mountain bike trails, in the southern Robledo Mountains. The trails are dominated by enormous rocks, making the terrain extraordinarily challenging for riders. The extreme OHV trails require specialized vehicles, with locking differentials, winches, and expert drivers. Vehicle damage is not uncommon on these very difficult OHV trails.
The area also includes the "SST" mountain bike trail, which is open only to non-motorized uses. It also is an extremely technical trail -- traversing challenging rocky terrain, steep canyons, and mountain-top ridges -- and requires expert riding skills.
This area is referred to as The Chile Canyons OHV Trail System. Regardless of what they are called, they are a legally designated series of trails that is already limited to designated roads and trails and has undergone the stringent analysis of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
This EIS also included a public comment period and the opportunity for challenging the conclusions. This study was commenced in September 1997, three years after the RNA was established. The EIS was completed and signed, in December of 1997 and does not raise any concerns of damage to fossil resources.
There is also no record that anyone opposed the trails because they would damage fossil resources. National monument designation is not needed to protect this area from off-road use. As documented above, our concern is that this already designated trail system will be closed.
The purpose of a national monument is to protect known resources, not alleged ones. Known trackways came out of the discovery area. No other area within the proposed national monument has produced anything of that significance. Since additional trace fossil finds have yet to be made, the continued designation as a research area would be best.
According to most of the four wheel drive magazines, this is one of the top ten premier four wheeling sites in the U.S. During the rest of the year, thousands of other people drive other roads in the area for recreation, rock collecting, photography, taking their pets for a ride, getting away from town, or just sightseeing. Many off highway enthusiast plan their yearly vacation to come to Las Cruces and enjoy the world class four wheeling that is in this area while bringing hundreds of thousands of tourist dollars each year. They come back year after year and bring more friends each time.
Since most of the four wheeling takes place in arroyo or canyon bottoms, the first rain storm or wind storm erases most evidence of the activity. This four wheeling does not do a fraction of the damage that mining trackways out of the pristine hillsides would do.
[1]Aroyo is Spanish for “wash” and is usually a dry, natural drainage or gulch that temporarily fills with water after a heavy rain storm. During heavy rain storms, water can flow fast and deep enough to pick up automobile sized boulders.