----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

July 4, 2004

Signs

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sign, Sign, Everywhere a sign. 

Blockin' out the scenery.  Breakin' my mind. 

Do this.  Don't do that. 

Can't you read the sign?

(Lyrics from "Signs" by the Five Man Electrical Band)

If you haven't already guessed, the theme of this week's editorial is - SIGNS.  I hate signs.  I hate fences too but I hate signs more.  I want to be able to ride around Clear Creek the way a hiker can walk through a wilderness area, without seeing signs.  Can you imagine the uproar if the BLM or Forest Service started putting up signs every 100 yards along a wilderness trail?  It would not be pretty.

Unfortunately, it is a fact of life that we need some signs and the management plan for Clear Creek calls for limited signing.  I can live with the management plan as it is written and I wish the BLM would get off their collective asses and implement it.

There are really three facets to the issue of signs in Clear Creek.  The first is what the BLM should have done.  The second is what they have done.  The third is what they are planning to do. 

What they should have done:  Here is what the Record of Decision called for:  The route system will be managed so as to encourage use on designated numbered and/or signed routes, and to allow use on all other routes which are not physically and/or signed closed. With the approval of this ROD the BLM will designate approximately 270 miles of routes for encouraged use. These encouraged and allowed routes will be shown on a user map.   In other words, the BLM should have signed signed 270 miles of routes and all routes that are closed.  Any routes not signed are open.

According the the ROD, the designation process for the routes, barrens and natural was to have been completed by the end of 1999 and complete signing done by the end of 2001.

What they have done:  Well, without doing a formal route or barrens designation through a NEPA process as they claim they now must do, in the spring of 2002 the BLM went around Clear Creek and signed about 175 miles of routes and maybe 150-200 acres of barrens.  The barren areas that they signed were spots picked by a BLM botanist.  The OHV community has repeatedly told the BLM that these were not acceptable open use play areas. Example  At several they put kiosks and wooden "Entering" and Leaving" signs.  I asked George Hill why the BLM was putting signs up without formal designation and in areas that were not acceptable to the OHV community.  His response was that they had to show some progress to the OHV Commission and that they could always move the signs and kiosks.  In other words, we don't have time to do it right but we have time to do it twice.

Likewise, with the trails, the BLM put up signs without consulting the OHV community and without regard to the nature of the trail and whether it could sustain promoted use.   The current ROD was designed to protect the single track trails that the enduro clubs use for events.  The encourage, allow, prohibit management philosophy  included by then State Director Ed Hastey is intended to direct use on routes that could sustain frequent and heavy use and be maintained at a reasonable cost, typically with a bulldozer or trail machine.  The enduro quality trails, many of which are hand cut, single tracks, are intended to be unsigned so that use is not promoted on them but, if a visitor finds them, they can ride them.

I found several enduro trails marked with signs and removed them.  The worst example was a trail marked off of the paved KCAC road.  The BLM was promoting use up a trail in the wrong direction of travel.  Many trails that were built over the years were intended to be used in a specific direction of travel.  Promoting use in the opposite direction would eventually lead to the destruction of the trail.  Of course, the BLM did not care about this.  They had a job to do.  They had to show that they were managing our resources so they could get more money from the state. In another case they signed a trail that I have repeated recommended be closed because it crossed a riparian corridor and then turned into a deeply rutted mess.

Naturally, the BLM was upset that someone would dare to remove a sign but I was not about to let a bunch of bureaucrats who don't have a clue destroy our trails in Clear Creek.  Fortunately, they have not replaced the signs on these two routes...so far.

Around the same time, the BLM sent their maintenance workers around Clear Creek with truck loads of ugly metal signs to place along major routes.  These signs admonished the visitor to stay on designated routes and to stay off the barrens behind the signs.  The problem again is that the BLM has not designated any trails and barrens.  Plus, they put a bunch of these signs on private property.  I have repeatedly asked under what authority they placed these signs and finally in April of this year the Recreation Planner, Lesly Smith, gave me a copy of an environmental assessment that they claim justified the signs.

I wonder if they even read through this document before giving it to me?.  The document was an Environmental Assessment from 1993 that was intended to temporarily close routes until they could be repaired.  The EA says that they would consult with the OHV community on any route closures needed and it specifically names two people that they consulted with on the creation of the EA - Don Matheson of the Timekeepers and Ed Tobin of the Salinas Ramblers.

Excuse me, but I was never consulted about barrens closures.  My first thought was that this was a joke but then I came to the realization that I must be dealing with either the most incompetent or the most desperate people that God put on earth.  I can't wait for them to explain this on to a judge.

What they plan to do:  I fully expect them to try to reverse all of the OHV favorable decisions made in the last plan with this new EIS.  Everything they have said in TRT meetings points this way.  See Back to the Future on the Salinas Ramblers web site.

And why?  I think the answer is very simple.  SIGNS.  Why do I say that?  Well, I suspect that the good people in the Hollister Field Office really are trying to save us taxpayers some money by using the signs that they have already in stock.  Problem is that they ordered the signs before the ROD was finalized and the signs they bought are all intended to implement the 1995 EIS preferred alternative and not the ROD.  So what's a good bureaucrat to do???  I appears that instead of ordering new signs to match the ROD decisions and have to spend several thousands of our hard earned tax dollars, they decided it would be better to change the management plan back to the 1995 preferred alternative.

Now the BLM could not just come out and do this for fear of pissing off the OHV community so they decided to drag their feet, stall the implementation of the ROD and let a few idiots in the OHV community help stir up a major controversy with the environmentalists by trespassing in protected plant areas and pretty soon they figure they can use their SIGNS.