Rubicon News

[Grumpy]

CALIFORNIA - FS Approves Rubicon Trail Route Improvements
April 24, 2012 7:50 AM

Dear BRC members, supporters and action alert subscribers,

BlueRibbon Coalition is proud to mark our 12th year of helping the incredibly dedicated volunteers working on the Rubicon Trail to make it the dream trail we all want it to be. When BRC helped form Friends of the Rubicon (FOTR) in 2001, it was imminently clear that world-wide interest in the famed Rubicon Trail called for long-term, local, state, and federal cooperation with volunteers to make this icon of four-wheeling the treasure it deserves to be. Another huge step in that direction just occurred, and BRC is celebrating along with the other partners, volunteers and trail users.

Below is a story from Carlos Alcalá at the Sacramento Bee about the latest chapter in the epic Rubicon Trail. Enjoy!

Forest Service, El Dorado County come to terms on Rubicon Trail improvements
http://www.sacbee.com/2012/04/21/443122 ... ounty.html

BRC Public Lands Staff

[Grumpy]

Bookmark and Share

E-mail this page
More press releases

For Immediate Release, July 16, 2012
Contact: Karen Schambach, Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation, PEER, (530) 333-2545
Lisa Belenky, Center for Biological Diversity, (415) 385-5694

Rubicon Trail Deal Will Protect Water Quality

PLACERVILLE, Calif.— The Forest Service has agreed to increase protections for water quality in a deal with diverse interests that will allow improvements to the Rubicon trail, in El Dorado County, Calif., to move forward.

Conservation and off-road organizations, as well as El Dorado County, dropped their appeals of a U.S. Forest Service decision granting the county an easement for the route of the historic Rubicon Off-road Trail and approvals for trail improvements. Changes to the decision, negotiated and agreed to by the eight appellants, will require the county to close the trail when weather conditions are likely to result in runoff of sediment and petroleum products.

“This agreement is a win for everyone,â€

[Grumpy]

Still doesn't help the 42 other trails on the forest that Karen Schlumbuck got closed. I'm going to guess that that woman, who lives in the area, is going to keep doing all that she can to screw the access to the trail. The Rubicon, or at least part of it, is something I'd like to do while I can still grip a steering wheel, and this woman wants it closed. I've researched her. WOW...

[Grumpy]

Very good read:

http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1078516

[Grumpy]

At least some of the trails on the El Dorado are now open. Side trips off the Rubicon ain't what the y used to be, but at least there are some now Just don't be getting the notion Karen Shambach and her minions at PEER, CBD, and the rest of the exclusionists are going to take this quietly

[Grumpy]

Del Albright from BRC on how things are going on the Rubicon. This is not encouraging:

IS GOVERNMENT LISTENING TO THE USERS?

I left my leadership position in Friends of the Rubicon (FOTR) and the Rubicon Trail Foundation (RTF) a few years back, thinking that we had laid a positive foundation to continue these incredible efforts to keep the Rubicon Trail open to all of us...all year; for all types of rigs; with challenges for us all.

NOT THE CASE!!!

I am sorely disappointed in the way the trail has changed in the last few years, and I am not afraid to step up and say that government is NOT listening to the users. Not in this case. Something is wrong and we need to bring some slap down on the deaf ones who "govern" our use of public lands in the case of the Rubicon Trail.

From the blowing of the Gatekeeper, conducted like an ambush in war, unbeknownst to users and unspoken in public forums beforehand; to the resizing and near paving of Little Sluice in spite of comprehensive surveys and public input against such maneuvers behind the scenes; to the changing and possible closure of Soup (Bowl, Kitchen). It is NOT what the users have asked for and have said in public forum. Government is NOT listening.

And do we have some of our own supporting these insidious, sneaky, behind the scenes moves? I'm not sure; but I am sure that the folks I talk to, do NOT support these radical changes to the Rubicon Trail.

Oh, let's ask ourselves who has invested tens of thousand of hours in hard work, sweat, blood and back-breaking work in making this trail a trail for all? Friends of the Rubicon (FOTR), that is who. Since the first work party in the summer of 2001, and hundreds of work parties since then, every summer....FOTR has earned the key to this trail. Why does Government think they know best on this one?

FOTR earned tens of thousands of dollars in grant money for government agencies to help us manage the trail, maintain the trail, and mitigate the issues with erosion and use. So why would not government LISTEN to the users in how the trail should look in the future? YOU GOT ME.

Here's my suggestion for you if this does not wrap your winch the right way: 1) make sure your membership is current in fighting outfits like BlueRibbon Coalition and Cal4wheel; 2) make sure you're participating in Google groups for FOTR with your voice being heard; and 3) donate to those groups fighting for access THE RIGHT WAY, for you.
More on BRC here at http://www.sharetrails.org
More on Cal4 here at http://www.cal4wheel.com
More on Del at http://www.delalbright.com

Whatever you do; do NOT let your voice go unheard. Back it with donations and memberships. Be in the game. It is OUR public lands we are talking about.
Del

[tobyw]

... government is NOT listening to the users...

Governement not listening? Huh, I’ll be damned… I mean, I know that I voted for higher taxes, more dependence on foreign oil, lower employment rates, more government regulation on everything from what I can eat to where I can recreate, and a rampant increase in foreign production of everyday products that we used to make here in the USA. Yep, they definitely listened to me.

[iaccocca]

... government is NOT listening to the users...

Governement not listening? Huh, I’ll be damned… I mean, I know that I voted for higher taxes, more dependence on foreign oil, lower employment rates, more government regulation on everything from what I can eat to where I can recreate, and a rampant increase in foreign production of everyday products that we used to make here in the USA. Yep, they definitely listened to me.

I suspected Toby all along.

[Grumpy]

Yeah, we see how he is...

[Grumpy]

ACTION ALERT – November 2, 2012 Update on Eldorado NF SEIS – Comment Due Nov. 7!

Dear BRC Action Alert Subscribers,

Last month, the Eldorado National Forest issued formal notice that they will conduct an environmental analysis that will determine whether portions of 42 travel routes that were closed by court order will be re-opened to public wheeled motor vehicle use. (Read previous alert here)

As many of you know, portions of 42 routes on the Eldorado National Forest were closed by court order last July. These closures were far from welcome, but were a far cry from those sought by anti-access activists in their sweeping challenge of the 2008 Travel Plan. The closure of the 42 "meadow routes" is based on a technical violation of the Eldorado Forest Plan.

Our initial review of the proposed action suggests it will be a step toward restoring important access. Although the overall route mileage involved is not large, some of these routes represent the only remaining access to treasured destinations, necessary connectors in popular loop opportunities and cherry stems deliberately placed by Congress between adjacent Wilderness designations.

We remain encouraged that the Forest Service apparently sees the value in restoring sustainable public access in these circumstances. The Eldorado NF has conducted most of the required analysis mandated by the technical requirements of the Forest Plan, and now begins the public planning process that will determine the long-term status for these routes.

BRC believes it is important for access interests to make comments about specific trails related to their recreational and access values. These comments are due November 7. Upon further review of the Proposed Action, BRC has developed some key tenets to consider when making your comments.


KEY BULLET POINTS

The agency correctly states that the routes in the PA were designated for use in the 2008 EIS.
Users should appreciate the efforts the Forest Supervisor and her staff undertook in development of the SEIS including the Proposed Action.
It is critically important for the agency to restore access to the “meadow routesâ€

[Livin4Today]

Here are the two videos I mentioned at the meeting to give folks an idea of what happend to the Little Sluice portion of the trail...

A before and after look for you.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATLLYC6oKaY[/youtube]
Before


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HZLhJ5i7VQ[/youtube]
After

[Grumpy]

Quite a show...Just need to figure out why my sound ain't working!

[iaccocca]

Thanks for posting up the vids Lance. It really shows the difference well, I think. (Audio works fine for me.)

[Grumpy]

For Immediate Release: Sep 16, 2013
Contact: Kirsten Stade (202) 265-7337

AGREEMENT PAVES WAY FOR ELDORADO FOREST TRAIL DESIGNATIONS
Compromise Reopens Some Trails, Closes Some and Requires Restoration for Others

Posted on Sep 16, 2013 | Tags: California, Off-Road Wreckreation

Washington, DC — A compromise agreement reached by conservation groups, off-roaders and three rural counties settles litigation going back to the 1990’s by resolving the status of contentious trails in Northern California’s Eldorado National Forest, according to documents posted today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). Under the agreement, some trails and dirt roads would reopen, others would remain closed and still others would begin restoration of past damage.

Forty-two routes on the Eldorado Forest were closed by court order in 2012 by a federal judge who determined designating the routes through meadows violated the forest plan, which bans roads in meadows. Subsequently, Forest managers did a new analysis resulting in a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and Decision (SEIS) which would reopen all but 18 of the routes.

That SEIS Decision was appealed by nine conservation organizations, including PEER, the Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation, and the Center for Biological Diversity. The groups contended that some of the routes opened by the SEIS are causing impacts to alder wetlands and other hydrological features protected by the Forest plan, which were not addressed in the SEIS decision. The conservation groups wanted those impacts corrected.

In the agreement reached by the nine conservation groups, eight off-road groups and individuals, as well as the three counties of Alpine, Amador and El Dorado all dropped their appeals to a plan that –

Allows 24 routes to open immediately;
Closes 18 routes; and
Commits the Forest Service to review all the routes over the next three years and take corrective action to protect meadows, streams and springs.
“This settlement is not only a win for sensitive habitat and water quality, but it represents a social milestone,â€

[Grumpy]

Tuesday, September 17, 2013
Eldorado SEIS Appeal Resolution - Enviros Get Another Bite at the Apple





On September 11, 2013 the Eldorado NF reached an appeals resolution with appellants of the June 14, 2013 SEIS and Record of Decision that would have immediately reopened 24 of the “42 meadow routesâ€