"The environmental Nazis treat national parks as their own personal property and want the millions of other taxpayers who pay for these parks to be treated as interlopers, who are to be kept out if possible, and admitted if necessary, only if they conform to the vision of the environmental Nazis."

--Thomas Sowell

 Rachael Thomas sent this urgent BLUERIBBON alert for Arizona:

Arizona's most popular open riding area is at risk!
Act now to prevent closure of Cinder Hills OHV area

Background

The Walnut Canyon, Sunset Crater Volcano, and Wupatki National Monuments are jointly revising their general management plan. Adjacent to these monuments is the Coconino National Forest where the Cinder Hills OHV area is located.

The Monuments' "first cut" draft plan revision was issued in November 1998 in a newsletter format, and at least one meeting was held (December 3, 1998) in Flagstaff. The newsletters were very lightly distributed. Little notice was given of the public meeting. Our best information indicates that NO MULTIPLE USE OR OHV INTERESTS RECEIVED NOTICE.

The newsletter states, "This is the first opportunity for you to respond to different preliminary alternatives . . . A Draft General Management Plan [will be] made available for review next summer."

This "first cut" draft is available online at:

To comment deadline was Jan. 6 1999! Comments were due to: Sam Henderson, Superintendent, Coconino National Forest, telephone 520-526-1157.

Problems with the "first cut" draft

The draft plan extends monument management to the surrounding Coconino National Forest, displacing OHV recreation, access, and multiple use. Following is a key passage on page 15 under "Regional Planning Consideration":

"As mentioned earlier we are required during this planning process to look beyond park boundaries. We have received some comments urging us to consider a published recommendation by the National Parks and Conservation Association (NPCA) to expand park boundaries at Sunset Crater Volcano and Wupatki to include all the land between the two parks . . . Such an expansion would . . . Transfer from the U. S. Forest Service to the National Park Service land that is in many ways perceived as part of the parks and within which the National Park Service has de facto management. The goals of the NPCA recommendation could also be achieved through partnership with the U.S. Forest Service rather than boundary expansions.

Rather than presenting this concept as an alternative, we offer here as a regional planning consideration that could become part of any of the previous alternatives . . .

Some of the effects would be:

• Elimination of current multiple uses on this portion of the Coconino National Forest (hunting, wood cutting, off-highway vehicles, dispersed camping, grazing, mining and surface extraction, etc.)
• Zoning of the area for the same range of visitor experiences as defined in this planning process (e.g. extended learning, edited venture, natural area recreation, hiking, discovery, etc.)
• More restrictions regarding where people could go and what they could do on public land . . . Some roads would be illuminated . . ."

Pretty outrageous, don't you think?

Other passages indicate their intention to eliminate the Cinder Hills OHV area:

• "The viewshed and natural quiet, however, have been substantially impaired by nearby pumice mining at the base of San Francisco Peaks and off-road vehicle activities in the Cinder Hills area." (page 8)
• "Managing the lands around the monument for park values would necessitate relocation of the Cinder Hills off-road recreation area. (page 9)

Please help get the comment period extended! Ask these members of Congress to request extension! Fax or email to:

Congressman J. D. Hayworth
fax: 202-225-32630
email: [email protected]

Sen. John McCain
fax: 202-228-2862
email: [email protected]

Sen. Jon Kyl
fax: 202-228-1239
email: [email protected]

Congressman James Hansen, chairman
National Parks & Public Lands Subcommittee
in care of: Jim O'Toole
fax: 202-224-0539

Also call Sam Henderson, park superintendent at 520-526-4457 with a similar request.

Here are some suggested points to make:

Request a 60-day comment extension because:

• There was insufficient public notice of the need for comment. Newsletter No. 3 was poorly distributed and generally not available.
• The direction of the draft plans states its intention to extend park management into the national forest without direction from Congress.
• More time is needed to assess the legal and physical implications of the displacement of public access, recreation, and multiple uses within the adjacent National forest.
• Additionally, please investigate the special relationship between the National Parks and Conservation Association (NPCA) and monument managers to account for the prominence of NPCA's expansion plans in a public planning document.

Just in case we don't get up comment period extension -- send the following letter (revised and personalized) to:

Flagstaff Area Planning Team
National Park Service
Denver Service Center
L.A. Urbanowski
P.O. Box 25287
Denver, Colorado 80225-9901

Dear Public Servants:

I wish to comment on the proposed General Management Plan and revision for the Walnut Canyon, Sunset Crater Volcano, and Wupatki National Monuments as stated in newsletter No. 3.

I oppose the expansion of the monuments beyond the present boundaries through administrative means and without express direction from Congress. These lands serve the public for diverse needs and values as defined by the National Forests' multiple use mandate, not National Parks.

I am particularly concerned that the proposed plan revision will eliminate the Cinder Hills OHV area, one of the most popular riding areas in Arizona. It is outrageous to suggest that this unique area can be moved or replaced.

I request a 60-day comment period extension so that I can offer more detailed comments.

Sincerely,
Your Name