DOCSLIB.ORG

WMRNP Final SEIS LUPA Appendix B NEPA Process

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
WMRNP Final SEIS LUPA Appendix B NEPA Process APPENDIX B SUMMARY OF NEPA PROCESS FOR WMRNP WEST MOJAVE (WEMO) ROUTE NETWORK PROJECT SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Appendix B Summary of NEPA Process for WMRNP B.1 Notice of Intent The impact analyses are based on the Applicant’s description of their proposed Project, and that description includes, for some The planning process was initiated by a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and Proposed Plan Amendment to the 2006 WEMO Plan that was published in the Federal Register on September 13, 2011, and clarified on May 2, 2013. The clarified NOI served as notification of the intent to prepare an EIS as required in 40 CFR 1501.7, as well as of potential amendment to the CDCA Plan. The NOI served to indicate the planning- level vs non-planning level decisions, and to clarify that the plan amendment would be an EIS- level amendment, and requested comments on relevant issues, National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (16 U.S.C. 470(f) concerns, and initial planning criteria for the plan amendment. The NOI indicated that the Proposed Plan Amendment and SEIS would consider the following: Amend the Motorized-Vehicle Access (MVA) Element of the CDCA Plan to modify the language regarding the process for designating routes in the West Mojave Planning Area; Reconsider other MVA Element land-use-planning level guidance for the West Mojave Planning Area; Revisit the route designation process for the West Mojave Planning Area; Clarify the West Mojave Planning Area inventory for route designation and analysis; Establish a route network in the Planning Area consistent with current guidance and new information; Adopt travel management areas (TMAs) to facilitate implementation of the West Mojave route network; Provide or modify network-wide and TMA-specific activity-plan level minimization, mitigation, and other implementation strategies for the West Mojave Planning Area; and Respond to specific issues related to the US District Court WEMO Summary Judgment and Remedy Orders. B.2 EIS Scoping Following the NOI, BLM held two overview public scoping meetings on September 27 and 29, 2011, in Ridgecrest and Barstow, California. As part of the scoping process, the BLM hosted scoping meetings and public workshops for the public and other interested parties to learn about and submit comments on the West Mojave Route Network Project (WMRNP). The BLM advertised the scoping meetings using a variety of outreach materials including the Project website and news releases. The outreach materials provided an overview of the proposed project; APPENDIX B-1 WEST MOJAVE (WEMO) ROUTE NETWORK PROJECT SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT provided meeting locations, dates, and times; explained the purpose of the scoping meetings; identified methods for making comments; and provided contact information for questions regarding the WEMO Project. All materials provided an e-mail address for submitting comments ([email protected]) and a link to the Project website (http://www.blm.gov/ca/st/en/fo/cdd/west_mojave__wemo.html) which contained a comment form and additional project background information. The BLM held 10 public scoping meetings to initiate the BLM’s process for reconsidering motorized vehicle (OHV) route designations in the WEMO Project planning area. The BLM held two overview open house public meetings September 27 and 29, 2011, in Ridgecrest and Barstow, California, and based on scoping comments and feedback from those meetings, followed with eight public travel designation workshops, also held in Ridgecrest and Barstow, in January and February 2012. A total of 299 people, not including BLM staff, attended the scoping meetings and workshops. Prior to the meetings, the BLM posted current maps and additional project information to the Project website for public review. Table 2 of the Scoping Report provides the locations, dates, times, and number of attendees at each scoping meeting. The issues to be addressed and the areas of controversy surrounding the proposed plan amendment were similar to those identified for the 2006 WEMO Plan Amendment. In the Scoping Report for the 2011 and 2012 meetings, BLM categorized the public comments as follows: NEPA process, and requests for maximizing public involvement in the process; Effects of the proposed action on livestock grazing; Type of route designation process to be used; Criterion A of 43 CFR 8342.1 (minimizing damage to air, soil, watershed, vegetation, or other resources of the public lands, and to prevent impairment of wilderness sustainability); Criterion B of 43 CFR 8342.1 (minimizing harassment of wildlife or significant disruption of wildlife habitats); Criterion C of 43 CFR 8342.1 (minimizing conflicts between off-road vehicle use and other existing or proposed recreational uses of the same or neighboring public lands); Criterion D of 43 CFR 8342.1 (prohibiting trails in officially designated wilderness areas or primitive areas); Definition of the purpose and need for the route network; The range of alternatives to be considered; The source of data for the route inventory being evaluated; Specific resource impacts, including air quality; biological resources; climate change; and cumulative impacts associated with alternative energy projects, expansion of military bases, and other planning efforts; Mitigation and minimization measures to be considered; APPENDIX B-2 WEST MOJAVE (WEMO) ROUTE NETWORK PROJECT SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Implementation and administrative actions including route signage, trail monitoring, enforcement, public education, trail enhancements, and other administrative actions; and Area and route-specific comments organized by the Travel Management Areas initially identified. Following the May 2, 2013 publication of a clarified NOI, three additional public workshops were held in January, 2014, in Barstow, Bishop, and Ridgecrest, which targeted tribal communities. The great majority of the scoping issues and comments were related to specific route designations in the Planning Area. One exception was the comment by many users to address the routes in the Ridgecrest and El Paso subregions through a separate route designation process. Many commenters also provided input on the network inventory, the needs that the network serves, and the route designation process. Primary NEPA considerations focused on cumulative effects to resource values, particularly soils and sensitive species, the cumulative effects of grazing, and to potential cumulative loss of recreational access opportunities. Primary user considerations focused on maintaining diverse recreational opportunities, providing access for specific users, including rock-hounders, motorcyclists, scientific and educational activities, and non-OHV users, dealing with conflicts between users, and maintaining commercial and private access needs. B.3 2015 Draft SEIS The Notice of Availability of the WMRNP Draft SEIS was published in the Federal Register on March 6, 2015 (FR Vol. 80, No. 44, Pgs. 12194 to 12195). The initial public review period began on March 6, 2015, and continued for 90 days until June 4, 2015. During that period, BLM held public meetings in Ridgecrest on March 31, 2015, in Victorville, on April 2, 2015, in Lone Pine, on April 7, 2015, and on April 15, 2015, in Yucca Valley. BLM received 458 public comment letters, as well as six form letters that were signed by a total of approximately 4,000 individuals, within this comment period. Based on comments requesting an extension of the public comment period, and the ability to review the Draft SEIS within the context of the DRECP, an additional public comment period was re-opened beginning on September 25, 2015. This additional comment period was open for 120 days, until January 25, 2016. During this period, two additional public meetings were held in Victorville on December 15, 2015, and in Ridgecrest on December 17, 2015. During this comment period, BLM received an additional 286 public comment letters and four form letters that were signed by a total of 74 individuals. Following each of those public comment periods, BLM sorted and reviewed the public comments. Where appropriate, changes were made in the route designation alternatives, analysis, and/or text of the SEIS. Comments that were not route-specific were organized into categories, and responses were developed to each group of comments. The response–to- comment document is provided in Appendix I of this Draft SEIS. There were approximately 11,900 route-specific comments in which a commenter requested a change to the designation of a route. Where these comments identified a specific route, requested a change in its designation, and provided rationale for the proposed change, they were reviewed by resource staff, and changes to designations were made in the Alternative 4 route network, where appropriate. APPENDIX B-3 WEST MOJAVE (WEMO) ROUTE NETWORK PROJECT SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT B.4 2018 Draft SEIS The NOA of the revised Draft SEIS was published in the Federal Register on March 16th, 2018 (FR Vol. 83, No. 52, Pgs. 11785 to 11786). The public review period began on March 16, 2018, and continued for 90 days until June 14, 2018. During that period, BLM held public meetings in Victorville on April 17, 2018, in Ridgecrest on April 18, 2018, in Lone Pine on April 24, 2018, and on April 25, 2018, in Joshua Tree. BLM received public comment letters and e-mails from 422 individuals, as well as eight form letters
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Appendix B NEPA Process
    APPENDIX B SUMMARY OF NEPA PROCESS FOR WMRNP WEST MOJAVE (WEMO) ROUTE NETWORK PROJECT SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Appendix B Summary of NEPA Process for WMRNP B.1 Notice of Intent The impact analyses are based on the Applicant’s description of their proposed Project, and that description includes, for some The planning process was initiated by a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and Proposed Plan Amendment to the 2006 WEMO Plan that was published in the Federal Register on September 13, 2011, and clarified on May 2, 2013. The clarified NOI served as notification of the intent to prepare an EIS as required in 40 CFR 1501.7, as well as of potential amendment to the CDCA Plan. The NOI served to indicate the planning- level vs non-planning level decisions, and to clarify that the plan amendment would be an EIS- level amendment, and requested comments on relevant issues, National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (16 U.S.C. 470(f) concerns, and initial planning criteria for the plan amendment. The NOI indicated that the Proposed Plan Amendment and SEIS would consider the following: Amend the Motorized-Vehicle Access (MVA) Element of the CDCA Plan to modify the language regarding the process for designating routes in the West Mojave Planning Area; Reconsider other MVA Element land-use-planning level guidance for the West Mojave Planning Area; Revisit the route designation process for the West Mojave Planning Area; Clarify the West Mojave Planning Area inventory for route designation and analysis; Establish a route network in the Planning Area consistent with current guidance and new information; Adopt travel management areas (TMAs) to facilitate implementation of the West Mojave route network; Provide or modify network-wide and TMA-specific activity-plan level minimization, mitigation, and other implementation strategies for the West Mojave Planning Area; and Respond to specific issues related to the US District Court WEMO Summary Judgment and Remedy Orders.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft DRECP and EIR/EIS – Appendix L
    El Paso/ Rands Special Recreation Management Area (SRMA) RMA/RECREATION MANAGEMENT ZONE (RMZ) OBJECTIVE(S) DECISIONS Background: The El Paso Rands SRMA consists of 3 separate Recreation Management Zones (RMZ’s) - El Paso Mountains, Rand Mountains Management Area, and Desert Tortoise Research Natural Area. These separate areas provide multiple use recreation opportunities that stretch from the northern side of California City, heading north up through the Desert Tortoise Natural Area, connecting through Rand Mountains Management Area, and ending up on the southern boundary of Inyokern California. From east to west, the El Paso Rands SRMA is sandwiched between State Highway 14 and U.S. Highway 395. These paved highways provide several ways to access these areas with multiple routes waiting for users to experience all its glorious landscapes and attractions. Recreational enthusiasts from Southern and Central California especially flock to this area each year between the months of October and May to take a trip back in time to explore the left over remnants of a society’s addiction to gold in 1895. One of the main attractions today is the “living” ghost town of Ransburg. It is known as the living ghost town due to the fact that some of the businesses are still open with a small population living in their houses that were built back in its prime. Friends and family that recreate and camp in the local area navigate to Randsburg for lunch while touring the rest of the RMZ’s. On the major holiday weekends approximately 2000 users with their off-highway vehicle are dispersed over the town visiting the open businesses and bringing in revenue to the historic town.
    [Show full text]
  • East Kern Visions Burro Schmidt’S Tunnel: a Study in Perseverance by CHERYL MCDONALD Other Side of the Mountains
    Spotlight: Whiskey Flat and the Kern River area EEaasstt KKeeJanrurarynn 2015 VViissiioonnss Furnace Creek getaway Bakersfield Condors hockey Burro Schmidt’s tunnel EEaasstt KKeeJanrurarynn 2015 VViissiioonnss Publisher John Watkins Inside this issue Editor Burro Schmidt’s Tunnel .....................3 Whiskey Flat Days events ...............10 Aaron Crutchfield Bakersfield Condors ..........................4 California City 50th anniversary ......11 Tierra Del Sol Golf Course ................5 Furnace Creek ..................................12 Advertising Director Paula McKay Whiskey Flat Days .............................7 Movie extra casting agency .............13 Ewings on the Kern ...........................9 Upcoming theater productions .......15 Advertising Sales Rodney Preul Barbara Schultheiss On tthe cover:: The Kern Riiver,, by Wiikiimeddiiaa CCoommmmonnss uusseer Rasttrojjo Writers Cheryl McDonald Ryan Kuhn Joyce Grant Aaron Crutchfield Jessica Weston Adam Robertson For this issue, we take a look at the major festival that is Whiskey Flat Days in Kernville. We also feature restaurant Ewing’s on the Kern, a local institution that recently reopened. 2 JAnuAry 2015 EASt KErn VISIonS Burro Schmidt’s tunnel: A study in perseverance BY CHERYL MCDONALD other side of the mountains. Unfortu - For the Daily Independent nately, it took him 32 years to complete the tunnel, and by then there were faster I was flipping through the channels forms of transportation. However, dig - the other evening, on my way to the ging this half-mile tunnel probably saved News Hour, and I came across an his life. He lived to the ripe old age of 81, episode of Huell Howser’s California dying just a few days before his 82nd Gold. It was his episode on the “Califor - birthday. nia Underground.” The last half of the William got his nickname of “Burro” show was just beginning, and guess who because his only companions were two PHOTO BY CHERYL MCDONALD was on the agenda: Burro Schmidt and burros he used for hauling supplies.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Impact Statement
    APPENDIX A SCOPING REPORT WEST MOJAVE ROUTE NETWORK PROJECT Scoping Report U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management California Desert District Office 22835 Calle San Juan De Los Lagos Moreno Valley, CA 92553 June 2012 This page intentionally left blank. Scoping Report Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................1 1.1 Purpose and Need for the West Mojave Route Network Project ......................................... 5 1.2 Planning Criteria ..................................................................................................................... 5 2.0 Scoping Process .....................................................................................................................6 2.1 Purpose of Public and Agency Seeping .................................................................................. 6 2.2 Seeping Framework and Agency Consultation ................... .. ................................................. 6 2.3 Purpose of Seeping Report ..................................................................................................... 7 2.4 Notification and Seeping Meeting Advertisements ............................................................... 7 2.5 Seeping Meetings ................................................................................................................... 7 3.0 Scoping Comments .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Admin Draft WEMO Appendix B WEMO Subregion
    APPENDIX B SUBREGION DESCRIPTIONS WEST MOJAVE (WEMO) ROUTE NETWORK PROJECT SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT APPENDIX B WEST MOJAVE TRAVEL MANAGEMENT AREAS AND SUBREGIONS Introduction One of the first steps in the off-road vehicle designation process was the identification of travel management areas (TMA) for travel network. Eight travel management areas provide the geographical framework for implementation of the travel network through specific transportation and travel management (TTM) plans. The factors used in the development of boundaries for TMA are primarily natural transportation boundaries (e.g. highways, jurisdictional, geographic boundaries). Because of the size of the West Mojave (WEMO) Planning area, the eight TMA were further subdivided into 36 Subregions. The boundaries of the 36 Subregions that compose the TMA consider the natural transportation boundaries, law enforcement patrol areas, designated management areas, and issue-driven factors. By comparison, the 2006 WEMO Plan had identified 20 different Subregions, which included much but not all of the West Mojave Planning area, from which they examined 11 subregions to build the WEMO network. The 2006 WEMO Subregions are based on similarities in certain biological characteristics but do not readily lend themselves to on-the-ground implementation of the transportation network. The 2006 WEMO Subregion boundaries roughly correlate to the new Subregion boundaries as feasible. The following discussion provides a general overview of each of the Travel Management Areas and the Subregions within it. B.1 Travel Management Area (TMA) 1 Afton Canyon Subregion The Afton Canyon Subregion comprises the northeastern third of TMA 1, extending south from Interstate 15 to include both the Afton Canyon ACEC and the northern two-thirds of the Cady Mountains Wilderness Study Area.
    [Show full text]
  • Complete HAT Awards Guide
    HIGH ADVENTURE AWARDS FOR SCOUTS AND VENTURERS 2016 HIGH ADVENTURE AWARDS SCOUTS & VENTURES BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA - WESTERN REGION AUGUST 2019 CHAPTER 1 ORANGE COUNTY AWARD/PROGRAM ACTIVITY AREA AWARD PAGE 3 SAINTS AWARD ANY APPROVED WILDERNESS AREA PATCH 1-12 BACKCOUNTRY LEADERSHIP ANY APPROVED WILDERNESS AREA PATCH 1-4 BOY SCOUT TRAIL BOY SCOUT TRAIL PATCH 1-7 BRON DRAGANOV HONOR AWARD ANYWHERE PATCH 1-17 BSA ROCKETEER SANCTIONED CLUB LAUNCH PATCH 1-19 CHANNEL ISLANDS ADVENTURER CHANNEL ISLANDS PATCH 1-6 CHRISTMAS CONSERVATION CORP ANYWHERE PATCH 1-22 DEATH VALLEY CYCLING 50 MILER DEATH VALLEY PATCH 1-6 EAGLE SCOUT LEADERSHIP SERVICE ANYWHERE PATCH 1-2 EAGLE SCOUT PEAK EAGLE SCOUT PEAK PATCH 1-13 EAGLE SCOUT PEAK POCKET PATCH EAGLE SCOUT PEAK PATCH 1-13 EASTER BREAK SCIENCE TREK ANYWHERE PATCH 1-20 HAT OUTSTANDING SERVICE AWARD SPECIAL PATCH 1-16 HIGH LOW AWARD MT. WHITNEY/DEATH VALLEY PATCH 1-5 JOHN MUIR TRAIL THROUGH TREK JOHN MUIR TRAIL MEDAL 1-15 MARINE AREA EAGLE PROJECT MARINE PROTECTED AREA PATCH 1-8 MT WHITNEY DAY TREK MOUNT WHITNEY PATCH 1-9 NOTHING PEAKBAGGER AWARD ANYWHERE PATCH 1-14 SEVEN LEAGUE BOOT ANYWHERE PATCH 1-3 MILES SEGMENTS ANYWHERE SEGMENT 1-3 SANTIAGO PEAK AWARD SANTIAGO PEAK PATVH 1-9 TELESCOPE PEAK DAY TREK TELESCOPE PEAK PATCH 1-10 THREE DAY BACKPACK ANYWHERE PATCH 1-2 TOP ROPING HONOR AWARD JOSHUA TREE NATIONAL MONUMENT PATCH 1-1 TRANS CATALINA BACKPACK AWARD CATALINA ISLAND PATCH 1-22 WHITE MOUNTAIN WHITE MOUNTAIN PATCH 1-11 WILDERNESS SLOT CANYONEERING SLOT CANYON SEGMENTS PATCH 1-18 ESCALANTE CANYONEERING
    [Show full text]
  • Fall 2018, Volume 37.2
    The Bi-Annual Journal of Desert Survivors | Experience • Share • Protect | Fall 2018 | 37.2 FROM THE EDITOR: The Journal of Desert Survivors - Experience. Share. Protect. In the last issue of The Survivor Marc Eldridge wrote about a rug- ged undeveloped place in the desert of Inyo County called Con- Desert Survivors is an affiliation of desert lovers committed to experiencing, glomerate Mesa. In 2015 a Canadian mining company, Silver sharing and protecting desert wilderness wherever we find it. We recognize Standard U.S. Holdings, obtained mining rights on the mesa and the places we love to explore will not remain wild unless we give others the submitted a proposal to the U.S. Bureau of Land Management opportunity to experience them as we do and unless we remain vigilant and (BLM) to drill exploratory holes to identify gold deposits. Since active in our efforts to monitor and preserve them. 1984 no less than 9 mining concerns have come to Conglomerate Mesa to prospect for gold. These speculators ranged in size from outfits based in someone’s garage to reputable companies already A short time later, five conservation groups including the Friends operating successful mines. All of them went away without as of the Inyo and the Sierra Club requested a review of the project much as a shovel’s worth of digging. What was worrisome to con- by the BLM, citing the agency’s failure to carefully study and con- servationists in this instance was that Silver Standard was a huge sider potential impacts to ground and surface water, the region’s mining corporation, working giant open-pit gold mines in three scenic value and dark night skies.
    [Show full text]
  • Soda Mountain Solar Project Public Scoping Report EIS/EIR
    PUBLIC SCOPING REPORT Environmental Impact Statement / Environmental Impact Report Soda Mountain Solar Project Lead Agencies: Bureau of Land Management Contact: Jeffery Childers, 951-697-5308 22835 Calle San Juan De Los Lagos Moreno Valley, California 92553-9046 San Bernardino County Contact: Nelson Miller, (760) 995-8153 15900 Smoke Tree Street Hesperia, CA 92345 JANUARY 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS Soda Mountain Solar Project Public Scoping Report EIS/EIR Page Acronyms Used in this Report iii 1.0 Overview of NEPA/CEQA Scoping Process 1-1 1.1 Introduction 1-1 1.2 Summary of NEPA/CEQA Scoping Process 1-2 1.3 Agencies, Organizations, and Persons Providing Scoping Comments 1-3 1.4 Scoping Report Organization 1-3 2.0 Summary of the Proposed Project 2-1 2.1 The BLM’s Purpose and Need 2-1 2.2 Applicant’s Project Objectives 2-1 2.3 Project Description 2-2 3.0 Summary of Scoping Comments 3-1 3.1 Project Description 3-1 3.2 Human Environment Issues 3-2 3.3 Natural Environment Issues 3-7 3.4 Cumulative Impacts 3-21 3.5 Project Alternatives 3-22 3.6 EIS/EIR Administrative and Permitting Issues 3-24 3.7 Issues Outside the Scope of the EIS/EIR 3-24 4.0 Summary of Future Steps in the Planning Process 4-1 Appendices A. Notices A-1 A-1 Notice of Intent (published in the Federal Register on October 23, 2012) A-2 Notice of Preparation (posted October 26, 2012) B. Public Notices B-1 B-1 Scoping Meeting Announcement C.
    [Show full text]
  • View Document
    California Off-Road Vehicle Association 1500 W El Camino Ave. #352· Sacramento · California · 95833-1945 Phone · 916-710-1950· [email protected] · www.corva.org Red Rock State Park Issues of Concern The following comments are based on the Preliminary Planning Concepts for the Red Rock State Park General Plan Revision that were first provided at the March 26 and 27, 2019 public meetings (Concepts document). We understand that Concepts #1-4 are preliminary, however they are not accompanied by enough resource information for the reader to provide informed comments on these concepts. In addition, the maps on which the concepts are based are incomplete and do not reflect the actual existing condition of the transportation system as depicted on Red Rock Canyon State Park maps (attached). We greatly appreciate the extension of the comment period. This has provided time for us to perform additional field work with the assistance of Parks staff, which was especially fruitful. We have also been able to locate supplemental material that has helped inform our comments. Unfortunately, much of this material is taken from previous plan revision efforts in 2002-2003 and 2008-2009, so the information is dated and does not include any additional surveys undertaken since that time. We look forward to receiving more complete surveys and information as the planning process moves along, and our comments will be revised accordingly. Since CORVA is an off-road vehicle organization that represents the interests of our members, our comments are formed using that perspective. However, we have approached this project with the understanding that Red Rock Canyon is a State Park with a mission that is different from an SVRA, and that non-SVRA state parks are operated under a mandate that emphasizes resource protection as a greater priority than off-road vehicle use.
    [Show full text]
  • Layout 1 (Page 1)
    Stargazers Dream chasers Visit and the High Desert and the High Ridgecrest Trailblazers 2 2016 RACVB Visitors Guide 2016 RACVB Visitors Guide 3 Welcome to California’s beautiful deserts Hello friends, thank you for your interest in visiting our beautiful desert. Many tourists have never experi- enced the deserts on the eastern sides of the Sierra. Visitors will find activities for all interests, and attractions to fit any theme – geological landmarks, outdoor sports, museums, wildlife, ghost towns, California history, stargazing and more. Increasingly popular among eco-tourists, the California high desert is home to exotic plant and animal life. The alien terrain is a hot spot for geo-caching, off-roading, and rock climbing. Hike the famous Pacific Crest Trail, John Muir Trail, and Mount Whitney. Cosmic enthusiasts seek out our high elevation and protected horizon for the most incredible star-gazing in California year round. We hope your visit is both exciting and comfortable. The city of Ridgecrest has 18 hotels and 65 restaurants to choose from. Nestled at the crossroads of three major highways and only 3 hours away from • Death Valley National Park •Disneyland • Yosemite National Park • Paso Robles wine country • Mammoth Mountain ski resort • Los Angeles • Las Vegas Whether you are looking for some peace and quiet, a new place to call home or are just passing through, we have what you need to make the most of your desert experience. Doug Lueck Executive Director, RACVB Table of Contents Museums 6 Membership Directory 22 Petroglyph
    [Show full text]
  • Off-Roaders in Action Spring 2018
    Off-Roaders in Action Spring 2018 2 President’s Annual Report 2018 11 CORVA 2017 Annual Awards 3 Managing Director’s Report 12 CORVA Store New Items! 4 Land Use Report 13 Red Rock and Jawbone Canyon 6 An Open Letter to Senator Glazer 13 Truckhaven Challenge 2019 7 Locked Gates Ahead 14 44th Annual High Desert Rally 9 The Ongoing Oceano Dunes Travesty 16 Red Rock and Jawbone Canyon 10 CORVA Election Results 17 Chad and Gizmo 10 Meet Wayne Ford 18 Pismo Dunes Settlement 10 Meet Charles Lowe 22 Eastern Sierra 4WD Club Earth Day 11 Meet Vinnie Barbarino DEDICATED TO PROTECTING OUR LANDS FOR THE PEOPLE, NOT FROM THE PEOPLE. PRESIDENT'S ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Ken Clarke, President It’s been a year since I was elected President of 70+ years. Now are faced with neighbors and the CORVA and I am eagerly looking forward to this next San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District Hearing year. Board, which seems determined to end off-road During my first year in office I had the honor of recreation at this historically important site for OHV assisting CORVA Board members Bob Ham, Ed Stovin enthusiasts. This is going to be tough battle but with and Bruce Whitcher, along with our Managing Director your support CORVA will do all we can do to protect Amy Granat; change SB 249 from a punitive bill that this recreation area. But this time we need OHV after- would have hurt the California OHMVR program, into market manufacturers and all OHV-related businesses a bill which made our OHMVR program a permanent to support our legal efforts.
    [Show full text]
  • Mining in the Southern California Deserts a Historic Context Statement and Research Design Bob Wick, BLM
    U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Mining in the Southern California Deserts A Historic Context Statement and Research Design Bob Wick, BLM Karen K. Swope Carrie J. Gregory Mining in the Southern California Deserts: A Historic Context Statement and Research Design Karen K. Swope and Carrie J. Gregory Submitted to Sterling White Desert District Abandoned Mine Lands and Hazardous Materials Program Lead U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management California Desert District Office 22835 Calle San Juan de los Lagos Moreno Valley, CA 92553 Prepared for James Barnes Associate State Archaeologist U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management California State Office 2800 Cottage Way, Ste. W-1928 Sacramento, CA 95825 and Tiffany Arend Desert District Archaeologist U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management California Desert District Office 22835 Calle San Juan de los Lagos Moreno Valley, CA 92553 Technical Report 17-42 Statistical Research, Inc. Redlands, California Mining in the Southern California Deserts: A Historic Context Statement and Research Design Karen K. Swope and Carrie J. Gregory Submitted to Sterling White Desert District Abandoned Mine Lands and Hazardous Materials Program Lead U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management California Desert District Office 22835 Calle San Juan de los Lagos Moreno Valley, CA 92553 Prepared for James Barnes Associate State Archaeologist U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management California State Office 2800 Cottage Way, Ste. W-1928 Sacramento, CA 95825 and Tiffany Arend Desert District Archaeologist U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management California Desert District Office 22835 Calle San Juan de los Lagos Moreno Valley, CA 92553 Technical Report 17-42 Statistical Research, Inc.
    [Show full text]