I recognize the right and duty of this generation to develop and use our natural resources, but I do not recognize the right to waste them, or to rob by wasteful use the generation that comes after us. Theodore Roosevelt
|
| Vehicle-dependent expeditions offer an enormous range of opportunities for exploration, adventure, and relaxation in North America and around the world. Used irresponsibly, off-highway vehicles also damage fragile terrain, destroy plant and animal life, and create a public perception of carelessness that taints even the most careful among us. We at Expedition Portal remain committed to protecting legitimate access to public lands for users of off-highway vehicles, while realizing that we must also preserve the primitive landscapes where vehicles simply do not belong.
This section will include news of relevance to off-highway vehicle users as well as to those interested in Wilderness legislation, outdoor pursuits such as hunting and fishing, and wildlife conservation. We believe these are all compatible goals, and welcome your comments and suggestions.
The African Conservation Fund is a fantastic organization, supported by many ExPo members.
Mission:
African Conservation Centre and African Conservation Fund assist communities in East Africa in creating economic opportunities that result in improved wildlife management and wealthier, healthier communities - like the Samburu community (three warrior members shown at left) at Il'Ngwesi, who created a community-owned ecotourism lodge in north-central Kenya with the initial assistance of African Conservation Centre.
Giving:
By Mail-
African Conservation Fund
3400 E. Speedway Blvd., Suite 118-146
Tucson, Arizona, USA 85716
By PayPal-
|
| |
|
|
In Conservation News, we will bring to you information and - we hope - spark some intelligent conversation about the latest issues of interest to those of us who enjoy vehicle-dependent exploration and adventure. We will strive to cut through the BS and bring some sanity and clear information to issues that are otherwise so scewed by both sides that it's hard to see the forest through the trees, so to speak.
Some of the topics we are working on now and hope to have up soon: the Roadless Rule and RS 2477; two-stroke engines and how they are impacting recreational four-wheel-driving; and wildcat roads (what are they, why they can be damaging to wildlife and habitats, and why they make us look bad).
- October 31, 2006 -
by Roseann Hanson
Proposed new legislation to introduce mandatory OHV registration via a new Copper Sticker is being introduced in the Arizona Senate – comments are being taken now on the DRAFT legislation (SB1508).
Copies of the draft are available in PDF on the Arizona Game & Fish website (http://www.azgfd.gov/pdfs/outdoor_recreation/ohv/SB1508_25AUG06.pdf)
Comments are also being taken on the website (http://www.zoomerang.com/survey.zgi?p=WEB225SVGPJ7FR ), and there is a series of public meetings underway as well (http://www.azgfd.gov/pdfs/outdoor_recreation/ohv/OHVPublicMtgsSched.pdf).
As many of you know, a few bad apples – or in this case a lot of bad OHV operators – give the rest of us a bad name, and we end up cleaning up after them, trying to mitigate their damage in non-roaded environments, and then getting punished when conservation groups want to ban all vehicles from areas that were once enjoyed by us all.
The OHV crowd is huge in Arizona. According to a 2002 study conducted by Arizona State Parks, more than 1.6 million Arizona residents, or 29 percent of the state’s population, participate in OHV recreation. And that’s grown even more in the last 4 years. And most of these vehicles are unregistered.
Why we—as registered 4x4 truck and SUV owners—support this legislation: It boils down to registration (to aid enforcement) and funding (to support enforcement as well as trail signage, designation, and maintenance).
New rules include:
· In order to drive on “ANY LANDS IN THIS STATE NOT REQUIRING MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION, INCLUDING ANY OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE TRAIL, ROAD OR OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE USE AREA AND EXCLUDING PRIVATE LAND AND INDIAN LAND” all Class I, II and III vehicles will be required to purchase (through Arizona Game & Fish) and display a new “Copper Sticker.” Class I and II vehicles are quads and motorcycles; Class III could include buggies and rails and any other unregistered vehicle designed for off-highway use. Note unregistered; trucks and SUVs that are registered in AZ are not required to get the sticker
· Registration will be much like current vehicle registration – name, address, DOB,all vehicle information including VIN – and they will be good for one year at a time.
· The proceeds from sticker sales, as well as Federal and other grant funds and private donations, will be deposited into a new Copper Fund, which will be administered by Arizona Game & Fish and with a volunteer oversight committee called the Off-Highway Vehicle Advisory Group. This group will comprise seven members; Arizona Game & Fish appoints three members, Arizona State Parks appoints four. Five members will be “OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE RECREATIONISTS AFFILIATED WITH AN ORGANIZED OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE GROUP” and two will “REPRESENT THE GENERAL PUBLIC OR CASUAL OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE RECREATIONIST.
· The funds will be used to manage the program; by the State Land Department for its own impact-management and enforcement related to OHV use; and the remainder by Arizona Game & Fish for enforcement, education/outreach, and grants to cities, towns, counties or tribal areas or state or federal agencies for setting up and maintaining OHV areas, education/outreach, enforcement, signage or mitigation of impacts (restoration) among other things. The draft contains all the percentages and details.
A couple of bullet point facts:
- Most states are going to a designated trail system for OHV use. This is great, because it helps in enforcement and it helps agencies and users in ID and trail use. But unfortunately all such mandates are currently unfunded.
- Signage and paid maintenance will mean we’ll keep our trails open—they are infinitely hard to close once they are officially signed and maintained.
While this will obviously be more of a pain for law-abiding people—and it will be a financial hit, too (the current draft does not indicate a cost for the sticker yet)—in the end it will give the state what it needs: a means to more effectively manage the fastest-growing sector of off-highway vehicle users, which are currently unregistered and untrackable in our state. All watercraft are required to be registered; this should be the next step, and a no-brainer for us to support.
by Roseann Hanson
A significant number of Expedition Portal's members have explored or are planning to explore parts of Mexico - from the Baja to the Sonoran Coast to the legendary Sierra Madre and south all the way to the Yucatan, this country is truly one of our continent's most fantastic backcountry sources. Jonathan and I have been lucky enough to explore a very large portion of northern Mexico, completing some of our favorite truly expedition-quality explorations over the last 22 years.
But something recently has reminded me about what's happening to these backcountry areas in Mexico. What reminded me? Toilet paper.
Yes, as I, ahem, sat reading the latest terrific edition of 4WD Toyota Owner (don't miss the superb article by Scott Brady about a certain FJ40 owned by a certain Cool Dude to whom I happen to be married), I remembered my own several 4wd trips to the Sierra Madre, on recon for future guiding. And the massive destruction to the pine and oak forests - being clearcut, to be sent to massive pulping factories and made into paper goods for the US - mostly toilet paper and paper towels. These original North American forests, the birthplace of the oak tree (over 1200 species here!), being mowed down so we can wipe our . . . well, you get the point.
Many of you who have been lucky enough to travel Mexico's backcountry will not recognize most of it now. Drug cultivation and transportation, massive gold mines, and clear-cutting all kinds of forests in the Sierras. Coastal areas being turned into playgrounds for rich Americans - last we heard, they are now planning to create an enormous marina in Cholla Bay, turning it into an artificial island - and a paved highway linking Puerto Penasco with Kino Bay.
But what's to be done? Despite all this - the astounding wealth of natural resources - Mexico is still a country where the average person is extremely poor. The government does not take care of its own people. Local people generally grasp at economic plans that might in the long term destroy their community, but in the short run at least it puts pesos in their pockets so they can eat or afford a car. Who are we to say "No, don't pave that road! We want to be able to have fun backcountry expeditions - we don't care if you can't make a living, we want to play there!"
And to rural poor Mexicans, "backcountry" is not a recreational playground or nature preserve for us American nature nerds - it's the only place they can get firewood, thatch for roofs, herbal medicines, and meat for the pot.
Fortunately, there are some groups working in Mexico to both protect the environment while balancing the needs of local communities to sustainably develop natural resources. Saving the backcountry while helping people improve their lives. What a concept.
Here's an excerpt from a recent letter from Sergio Avila, a scientist from Mexico who is working to improve such things - especially saving habitat for jaguars (what could be more amazing that being on a backcountry expedition in the Sierra, and having a jaguar cross your path, or hearing one roar in the night?).
"A large percentage of the Mexican population lacks housing, work, and basic services; as a result, its people use natural resources to survive. They log forests to build their homes; they cut trees as fuel wood for cooking, lighting, and heating; and they use land to cultivate crops. Others hunt wildlife for food, putting many species at risk of disappearance. Finally, others participate in the illegal commercial harvest of diverse plant and animal species, driven by the strong demand coming from richer countries, and severely compromising this priceless national heritage.
To understand better the differences between the practices of managing natural resources in Mexico and in the United States, we need to compare resource use as it relates to the economies of both countries. In the United States, growth of the system of protected natural areas has been extraordinary in the last 100 years, and only a small proportion of natural resources is used to meet the most fundamental needs of a population that is twice the size of Mexico's.
In Mexico the opposite is true: forest cover decreases significantly every year, and the population depends on natural areas to obtain basic resources for subsistence, extracting quantities that cannot be sustained over the long term. The use of natural resources for recreation is rarely considered: terms like “ wilderness ”, “ hiking ” and “ backpacking ” so common in English, are not readily translated into Spanish.
At the moment Mexico is advancing on the conservation front with institutions like the National Commission for the Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity (Comisión Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad [CONABIO]), which promotes action for the sustainable use of natural resources and provides financial support for the implementation of scientific research projects. The federal government, through the Secretariat for Environment and Natural Resources (Secretaría del Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales [SEMARNAT]), has fostered the sustainable use of natural resources by implementing a system of Units for Management and Use of Natural Resources (Unidades de Manejo y Aprovechamiento de los Recursos Naturales [UMAs]), which allows individuals or groups to sell, exhibit or harvest the flora and fauna present on their property, under a program of sustainable management. The National Commission for Protected Natural Areas (Comisión Nacional de Areas Naturales Protegidas [CONANP]) administers the 150 federal natural areas that cover more than 17.8 million hectares throughout the country. These sites are classified into six categories: Biosphere Reserves (Reservas de la Biosfera), National Parks (Parques Nacionales), Natural Monuments (Monumentos Naturales), Areas for the Protection of Natural Resources (Áreas de Protección de Recursos Naturales), Areas for the Protection of Flora and Fauna (Áreas de Protección de Flora y Fauna) and Sanctuaries (Santuarios). The Federal Attorney's Office of Environmental Protection (Procuraduría Federal de Protección al Ambiente [PROFEPA]) is the federal agency for the application of environmental laws, such as the General Law for Ecological Equilibrium and Environmental Protection ( Ley General del Equilibrio Ecológico y Protección al Ambiente ) and NOM-059-ECOL-2001 . Nongovernmental organizations like Naturalia, CEDO, Pronatura, Hojanay and Pro-Península, as well as universities and education centers, carry out research, conservation efforts, education and outreach on the understanding of natural resources. The Sierra Madre Alliance in Chihuahua, and Culturas Nativas in Baja California, are groups that link the preservation of indigenous cultures with the protection of the biodiversity in which they live. All these organizations are simply a few examples of the progress in Mexico's efforts to protect its natural resources. But much remains to be done on behalf of the conservation of its natural riches, as well as for the economic and social development of its inhabitants.
Conservation efforts in Mexico present a great challenge, because they must be tied to promoting opportunities for education and economic and social development in rural areas, especially. The use of natural resources in Mexico is a socioeconomic necessity both historic and current. Our knowledge about the management of natural resources must be brought up to date with sociological studies, an understanding of local and regional needs, and respect for traditional resource use in rural communities."
Here's the link for the full article: http://www.skyislandalliance.org/newsletter/06_Spring-EnglishTranslation.html
Yes, some of you will cringe - "Ew - it's a greenie left wing organization!" Well, if we are to save the backcountries of the world for future expeditions, it's my opinion that we waste significant time here in the first world griping and arguing over "lefty organizations" closing this trail or that trail, when vast areas of real value to all of us are being lost every day. Something to muse about. That and toilet paper.
by Jonathan Hanson
Several members of the Expedition Portal community recently got a close-up look at a lovely region of the Sonoran Desert, and at some of the border issues facing the U.S. and southern Arizona. The Camino del Diablo parallels the Arizona/Sonora border between Ajo and Yuma, in a couple places dipping south within a few miles of Mexico’s Highway 2 – you can climb a hill and watch Mexican semi trucks traversing in the distance.
The Cabeza Prieta Wildlife Refuge and the Luke Air Force Base gunnery range, through which the Camino runs, used to be places of vast solitude. But in the last decade, illegal immigrants and smugglers have had a dramatic impact on the habitat. The resulting heavy use by the U.S. Border Patrol brings its own problems. A few miles west of Papago Well, in what used to be pristine desert, is now a BP substation:
. . .and Border Patrol vehicular traffic is a constant presence. Protocol calls for the agents to remain on established roads unless in “hot pursuit” of suspects; in actuality this means little. I noticed evidence of dozens of off-road forays this trip, betrayed by the pattern of the issue Goodyear tires. In the flat desert pans these tracks will last for years, if not decades. In one spot the road was blocked by a BP Humvee, the driver of which would not move ahead to a wider spot where he could pull off. We were forced to drive around him through the desert.
Tracks from immigrants, and piles of trash and bottles, add to the mess, and of course it is the immigration that is the real problem.
I don’t believe we can blame the immigrants. Most of them are simply looking for work, and desperate enough to cross miles and miles of desert. We have rescued many groups near our house, fed and watered them, and sent them on their way. Other groups have asked us to call the Border Patrol; they were weak and discouraged and ready to go home, despite having traveled hundreds of miles to get here.
But despite our sympathy, we want this overwhelming influx of people to stop.
The real problem is the entrenched corruption in Mexico, which has kept a country rich in human and natural resources mired in a third-world economy. There is no other reason why Mexico should not be as wealthy and progressive as the United States.
The aesthetic problems of illegal immigration are easy to see. The effects on wildlife are more difficult to calculate. The Sonoran pronghorn, an endangered species found in the U.S. only in the Cabeza Prieta, has fluctuated dramatically in herd size recently, from a low some estimated at just 14 or 15 animals in the late 90s up to a current estimate of 50 or so. So objectively the immigration might not be affecting the pronghorn—then again, perhaps the herd might be larger yet but for the constant disturbance.
The desert bighorn sheep living on the refuge can withstand many days without water, but eventually have to drink, and rely on the natural and augmented tanks scattered throughout the refuge. If humans are around they will not come in to drink.
It’s certain the immigrant problem does no good for the wildlife of the refuge, and greatly harms the scenic value. But how to stop it?
More Border Patrol presence would essentially be a wash, if you were simply replacing immigrants with more Humvees. The other big proposal at the moment is a border wall, of some as-yet undetermined construction. Probably it would comprise barriers designed to stop vehicular traffic, but would not stop foot traffic. As Governor Napolitano of Arizona has said, “Show me a 20-foot-high wall and I’ll show you a 22-foot-tall ladder.” Indeed.
Eventually the only real solution will be to bring Mexico into the 21st century economically, a gargantuan task. We need to put pressure on our own political leaders to put pressure, real pressure, on Mexico’s leaders.
Several changes here might help. Presently if an illegal immigrant gives birth in the U.S., her child automatically becomes a citizen of the U.S. While a well-meaning custom, this is perhaps no longer a viable or desirable rule. Also, U.S. businesses that hire illegal immigrants are still subject to very little scrutiny or punishment.
The annual budget for the U.S. Border Patrol is around 1.4 billion dollars. I have suggested, tongue in cheek, that for the same money we could fly a few C-130s into Mexico once a month and shovel a hundred million dollars in cash out the back while flying parallel to the border, maybe two hundred miles south. That would not only stop the influx of immigrants, but probably reverse it.
The Cabeza Prieta Wildlife Refuge is still a place of astounding beauty, and worth visiting. But it faces real problems that are likely to worsen if we don’t act soon.
These are my thoughts and do not necessarily reflect those of other Expedition Portal moderators or members. I’d be interested to hear yours.
Sorry for the long delay in getting this page going. My wife, Roseann, and I were lucky enough to spend the a good month this summer exploring remote corners of northern Tanzania by Land Cruiser - but now we're back and ready to get down to business!
The Roadless Rule is the big topic these days, with much information and mis-information flying. It's confusing and I'd be tempted to just throw my hands up and say "whatever," except this is a very important issue to us, and much is at stake.
After the Scottdale East Valley Tribune ran an editorial against the so-called Roadless Rule, I did some research and discovered that much of what the Trib had written was utter falsehoods. They agreed to run my op ed - and did, much to their credit, with only a little bit of editing.
I've posted here the un-edited version of my rebuttal to their original editorial, which you can read on my blog here.
Please head on over to the Conservation and Land Use section in Forums for discussions about this sure-to-be-contentious subject. We'll try to throw some more light on it.
It is local control: Americans support the Roadless Rule
By Jonathan Hanson
A recent editorial in the East Valley Tribune excoriated Janet Napolitano and the other governors and state attorneys general who support the so-called Roadless Rule, which banned new road construction in about 58 million acres of our national forests, mostly in the West. The editorial accused Napolitano et al of pandering to “green extremists,” and claimed that the “controversial” rule merely locks up public land for the exclusive use of “neo-Druids” and, worse, democrats, who the Tribune apparently believes are the rule’s only supporters.
As a Republican, 4x4 owner, and hunter lumped in with those neo-Druids, I wonder if the Tribune could stop pandering to lumber and mining companies long enough to get the facts straight.
Far from being some last-minute Clinton plot, the Roadless Rule was adopted after a two-year process involving over 600 public meetings. The Forest Service received four million comments on the proposal—more than for any other issue in its history. American citizens who supported the plan outnumbered those who didn’t by almost two to one—a significantly greater majority than that which returned George Bush to office. According to one poll, over 80 percent of hunters and anglers supported the plan. The Outdoor Industry Association, which represents 4,000 companies involved in the $20 billion outdoor industry, supported the plan. Even the corporate headquarters of KB Homes, one of the nation’s largest builders, sent a letter of support. Information is lacking on how many neo-Druids have infiltrated executive positions at KB.
The reason for this groundswell of support is simple: Americans overwhelmingly want to preserve the last pristine wild areas with which our country is blessed, along with the wildlife that lives there. The Roadless Rule affects only a third of all national forest land. The majority is still open to logging and other resource extraction, as well as motorized recreation, along 386,000 miles of existing Forest Service roads—enough to circle the earth 15 times. If that doesn’t qualify as “multiple use,” what would? Incidentally, the Forest Service has a $10 billion backlog on maintenance for those roads—which, remember, are funded by taxpayers in the first place, not by the lumber companies that benefit hugely from them. Public lands timber sales cost the public millions of dollars every year.
The Tribune’s claim that roads provide necessary access for fire crews is either ignorant or deliberately misleading. According to the Forest Service’s own studies, large, destructive fires occur much more frequently in roaded and logged areas than in roadless areas. Human-caused fires are almost five times more likely to occur in roaded areas. One need only research recent large fires in Arizona to confirm this. Recent catastrophic fires on public land are the direct result of a century of road-building, narrow-minded logging practices, and misguided fire suppression policies, all of which added up to forests comprising mostly kindling instead of mature, fire-resistant trees.
Bush’s move to rescind the Roadless Rule doesn’t restore “local control” over national forests, as claimed by the administration and the Tribune. In fact it gives state governors only 18 months to identify and study areas they believe should remain roadless, and to then petition the under-Secretary of Agriculture to develop management strategies for those areas. The under-Secretary is free to alter or reject outright those petitions. Does that sound like local control? Since the current under-Secretary of Agriculture, Mark Rey, spent 20 years as a timber industry lobbyist, one can predict where his sympathies might lie. Rey was a chief architect of Idaho Senator Larry Craig’s version of the 1997 National Forest Management Act, which would have eliminated citizen oversight of national forest policy and made timber harvest levels mandatory and enforceable. Does that sound like local control?
America does need lumber and minerals and oil. We also need space for fans of motorized backcountry recreation. That’s why over half of all national forest land remains open for such activities. And this doesn’t count 260 million acres of BLM land, most of which is also accessible by vehicle, or millions of acres of state land.
The Roadless Rule is supported by a solid majority of Americans (and Arizonans) and backed by sound science. It might be our final opportunity to preserve the last pristine areas of our national forests, for the enjoyment of ourselves and our children.
Even those we haven’t raised as Druids.
[The opinions expressed here are strictly those of the author, and do not represent the opinions of the owners or moderators of this forum.]
|
|
2007 Expedition Trophy Registration: $75 Donation to African Conservation Fund / Overland Society
Register Now: Paypal Cart
Or, send a check to:
African Conservation Fund
3400 E. Speedway Blvd. Suite 118-146
Tucson, AZ 85716
Getting Involved will be where we'll compile as many resources as possible about how you can learn about conservation, be an advocate for conservation-minded four-wheel recreation, and find ways to share what you've learned.
|
|
 |
Travel & recreate with minimum impact
Respect the environment and the rights of others
Educate yourself, plan and prepare before you go
Allow for future use of the outdoors by leaving it better than you found it
Discover the rewards of responsible recreation |
|
|
Plan Ahead and Prepare
Travel and Camp on Durable Surfaces
Dispose of Waste Properly
Leave What You Find
Minimize Campfire Impacts
Respect Wildlife
Be Considerate of Other Visitors |
|
