BLM TO CHARGE $20 TO ACCESS CALICO BASIN; WILL BUILD TOLL BOOTH

John Hegyes wrote:

Things just seem to go from bad to worse for Red Rock Canyon. Now, the local conservation group Save Red Rock, is calling for Nevada State Highway 159 to be gated at either end and having toll booths built.

As climbers, we have stood idly by as BLM has worsened regulation of the loop area. The BLM used COVID as an excuse to usher in the reservation system with strict entrance quotas and additional fees made payable the corporation the runs recreation.gov. But they left the areas outside the loop free of charge. Areas like First Creek, Mount Wilson and Oak Creek are easily accessible by simply parking along Highway 159 currently. Those days will be over soon if Save Red Rock has their way. Led by Blue Diamond resident, Heather Fisher, Save Red Rock seems to want to preserve her personal, rural lifestyle by locking the common people off of a state highway. There is some additional information on the Nevada Department of Transportation website here:

SR 160 and SR 159 Corridor Study

If only there were some sort of organization, a “FUND” maybe, that fought hard to preserve “ACCESS” to public lands for rock climbers. But, nope, the only organization I can think of, does not lift one single finger in the defense of climber’s access issues.

If you want to personally speak out against Save Red Rock’s idea to put a toll booth at either end of Highway 159, then I encourage you to send your thoughts to the State of Nevada at the following link:

CLICK HERE TO SUBMIT PUBLIC COMMENT BY APRIL 27 

As a visual reference, I whipped up this map with my interpretation of Save Red Rock’s plan. I can only make wild guesses as to where the toll booths will actually go, but it seems likely Heather’s house in Blue Diamond will be inside this zone of protection. Not only will Calico Basin residents get the gated-community atmosphere they’ve always wanted, at tax-payer expense, but now the Blue Diamond residents will get the same – I suppose they were feeling left out.

Here’s an excerpt from the email I received from Save Red Rock today, with more information.

As long as you could buy a pass to enter the highway and access to the canyons is guaranteed I don't see a problem. 

Holy crap. That’s a major thoroughfare for many people (not just climbers) and reduces congestion. Will be submitting a comment. That proposal is just plain dumb!

Welp, that is one way to guarantee access for the more affluent and punish people of less income when accessing public land :-/

Comment submitted. Thanks for the alert John. 

Tradiban wrote:

As long as you could buy a pass to enter the highway and access to the canyons is guaranteed I don't see a problem. 

Gumby King wrote:

Welp, that is one way to guarantee access for the more affluent and punish people of less income when accessing public land :-/

Is it going to push the line of cars entering out to 215 on Charleston? And out to Durango on the BD highway?

I could be considered “affluent” by climber standards and this proposal would effectively lock me out of the canyons. I can’t compete with tourists, permits, and tolls. I actually have to work!

Serious question - is it possible they are proposing something they know is over-the-top ridiculous, in the hopes that it will get watered down to what they actually want, but with less pushback?  That's probably giving them too much credit but I wonder...

Cocoapuffs 1000 wrote:

Serious question - is it possible they are proposing something they know is over-the-top ridiculous, in the hopes that it will get watered down to what they actually want, but with less pushback?  That's probably giving them too much credit but I wonder...

I've very possible.  However, if there is no pushback and there is a financial opportunity...

Tradiban wrote:

As long as you could buy a pass to enter the highway and access to the canyons is guaranteed I don't see a problem. 

The proposal by Save Red Rock is a massive change for people that enjoy Red Rock. If toll booths and gates are installed at either end of Highway 159, the access to the Red Rock escarpment outside the Loop Road (Oak Creek, Mt. Wilson, First Creek) will be seriously curtailed. One can assume (connecting the dots), that instead of the current scheme - unhindered, free, 24 hour access - you will have to get a reservation (if they are not sold out), pay for a pass, wait in line at the gate, and (most crucially) be out of there by closing time. 

The operating hours of the Red Rock Loop Road are just awful and if they are applied to all of Highway 159, this will be a major game changer. Gone will be the days of long trad routes on Mt. Wilson. The rangers will chase you out of the area in broad daylight, or leave you an expensive ticket on your parked vehicle. When the weather gets hot, hiking back to the trailhead during the later hours, after the sun goes down, is a survival strategy.

I see that Josh Travers is listed on the Save Red Rock website as a member one of their committees. He is the government employee that is driving the construction of these gates blocking off our access to Red Rock. It seems, I dunno, kind of corrupt, this circular logic: government employee joins advocacy group to petition his own government agency.

It's a sad state of affairs that the climber's representatives in this fight have been silent in our fight to defend our access to our land. The Southern Nevada Climber's Coalition and their parent organization, The "Access" Fund, raised thousands of dollars by staging massive climber's festivals in Red Rock over the years, introducing thousands of climbers to the area, thus creating the very over-crowding problems we have today. Now, the "policy analysts" in the home office in Boulder, Colorado, just sit on their hands all day, rather than do anything related to climber's access as the land managers shut us out.

As a contrast, the audacity of these other land-use groups is actually impressive. If only we climbers had people that played hard ball in our interest. For example,

Southern Nevada Mountain Bike Association: "our trails across the desert will never end."

Save Red Rock: "The view from Heather's house shall remain forever unblemished."

Access Fund: "Climbing is racist."

Proudhon predicted this a long time ago. "Property is theft!"

John Hegyes wrote:

It's a sad state of affairs that the climber's representatives in this fight have been silent in our fight to defend our access to our land. The Southern Nevada Climber's Coalition and their parent organization, The "Access" Fund, raised thousands of dollars by staging massive climber's festivals in Red Rock over the years, introducing thousands of climbers to the area, thus creating the very over-crowding problems we have today. Now, the "policy analysts" in the home office in Boulder, Colorado, just sit on their hands all day, rather than do anything related to climber's access as the land managers shut us out.

Have you contacted/talked to the Access Fund about this issue?
Not challenging you, just curious. I’d like to know their response, if any. 

From reading through the actual NDOT project study, it appears they are just looking for public comment to improve safety on these roads?  The gated access idea is a suggestion from save red rock itself (which is obviously a terrible idea).  

From save red rock:

Conditions have changed on SR 159 and SR 160. There are more motorists using these scenic roads and they are speeding and operating their vehicles in reckless ways that endanger innocent road users such as tourists, hikers, bicyclists and dog walkers.

The Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT) is conducting a project study on these two roads and there’s no time to waste to weigh in with our comments, ideas and suggestions.

Please use this link here —  ndotsr160.com/copy-of-home&…;— to read about NDOT’s corridor study and to get your points across to the state.

Comment form:  ndotsr160.com/copy-of-proje…

The deadline is APRIL 27, so please act soon. 

If you use these roads, you know that these two roads are no longer average state highways across Nevada.

They have become busy corridors and we need to advise the NDOT ASAP about our ideas.

There are many recommendations that can be offered.

For example, ideas include building scenic roundabouts to slow down speeding motorists, designating bicycle lanes, creating off-street parking at trailheads, having Red Rock entrance stations at both ends of the scenic byway, installing signage letting drivers know they are entering a conservation area and recreational corridor, putting up “Move Over A Lane For Bicyclists” signs on SR 160, and beefing up police enforcement to crack down on speeding, impaired and reckless motorists.

We’re sure you have other ideas, too, so please inform the NDOT of them by April 27 at that link. We need to be vigilant and proactive because our metro area is growing and there are more visitors using these roads to reach our scenic lands in our expanding market.

Please let your voices be heard — we know you have great ideas.

Jordan, I'll put a copy of the relevant sections of the email I got from Save Red Rock yesterday below. Please note the sections I have bold-faced.

They say that this is not done very often on state highways. But it is done for special conditions, like the state highway through the Lake Mead National Recreation Area and the state highway through Zion National Park. We believe that Red Rock Canyon is a special condition.

Red Rock is every bit as popular as those other model areas and even more heavily trafficked and vulnerable, being so close to a major metropolis. If park entrance stations bookended the Red Rock Scenic Byway, accountability could increase and crimes could decrease, such as graffiti, hit-and-run accidents, speeding, and unnecessary shortcut traffic. Also, the BLM could have more resources to manage other areas, not just the scenic loop. Calico Basin, Blue Diamond and First Creek/Oak Creek are a couple of examples of areas outside the scenic loop that also require management.

5-Increase law enforcement and/or utilize camera and radar technology on 159

Increased law enforcement and/or cameras, radars, etc. could better enforce the illegal trucking and speeding that were addressed by SB 128 in 2007 and the Red Rock Safety Zone (speed limit) in 2009.

6-Build a separated multi-use path along 160

Please build a paved off-road path from the Red Rock legacy Trail to the Cottonwood Valley Recreation Area, Mt. Springs and Pahrump along the NDOT right of way and the Spanish Trail Route. First, a paved off-road path from Pahrump to Las Vegas would make Nevada as cool as our neighboring states that already connect communities with multi-modal alternatives. This path could connect families and recreational riders from Las Vegas to the scenic mountains, safely separated from the dangerous highway. Phase 6 of the Red Rock Legacy Trail proposes the first part of this path from 159/160 to Cottonwood Valley, but the BLM has not expressed interest in this part because they are already working on other parts of the trail. So it would be great if NDOT could work on this part or partner with Federal Highways to do it. It could fall within FLAP guidelines of connecting communities with federal lands. Second, part of this recreational path could be along the Old Spanish Trail Historic Route as the Spanish Trail Historical Society has already expressed their support for this idea. Third, the Mt. Potosi Hill Climb is one of the most popular hill climbs in Nevada and a separated bike path would mean riders could climb away from the danger and smog of cars. The downhill riders could still use the existing bike lane on the south side since it is so fast, but the uphill riders could enjoy a scenic trail up the mountain. Fourth, a popular downhill biker shuttle run in the area is one that the BLM has to close down because it was socially constructed through a bighorn sheep habitat and wilderness area. An NDOT paved off-road path could provide an alternate solution.

Finally, where there are no large available shoulders, existing tunnels and/or adjacent bridges with cement dividers could be studied and considered. In other states, flood channels and tunnels are not discounted merely because of 100 year flood risks. Instead, they are used as recreation paths with signage that warns users to use at own risk and stay away in times of flooding. And in many places in Colorado where there is no room to put them side by side, they build the bike paths above and below the highways.

7-No new driveways onto 159

We propose a moratorium on new driveways and consolidation of all entrances onto 159 into single entry points to coincide with roundabouts and/or existing entry points.As more properties are sold, more builders will want to add more entry points onto 159. This is dangerous to the bike lane, the traffic lane, and the separated bike path.

8-Repair the wildlife fencing along 159

In 2009, AB 276 state law was passed and wildlife fencing fencing was installed along SR 159. Wild burros have been getting out and getting killed in areas where the fence is down. Repairs could fix this problem.

9-Install “Move over a lane for bicyclists” Signage on 160 (Not 159)

This is Nevada State Law and many motorists aren’t aware of it. We ask for on 160 not 159 because 159 is only 1 lane each direction and is a scenic byway. We hope to keep it that way.

John Hegyes wrote:

The proposal by Save Red Rock is a massive change for people that enjoy Red Rock. If toll booths and gates are installed at either end of Highway 159, the access to the Red Rock escarpment outside the Loop Road (Oak Creek, Mt. Wilson, First Creek) will be seriously curtailed. One can assume (connecting the dots), that instead of the current scheme - unhindered, free, 24 hour access - you will have to get a reservation (if they are not sold out), pay for a pass, wait in line at the gate, and (most crucially) be out of there by closing time. 

The operating hours of the Red Rock Loop Road are just awful and if they are applied to all of Highway 159, this will be a major game changer. Gone will be the days of long trad routes on Mt. Wilson. The rangers will chase you out of the area in broad daylight, or leave you an expensive ticket on your parked vehicle. When the weather gets hot, hiking back to the trailhead during the later hours, after the sun goes down, is a survival strategy.

I see that Josh Travers is listed on the Save Red Rock website as a member one of their committees. He is the government employee that is driving the construction of these gates blocking off our access to Red Rock. It seems, I dunno, kind of corrupt, this circular logic: government employee joins advocacy group to petition his own government agency.

It's a sad state of affairs that the climber's representatives in this fight have been silent in our fight to defend our access to our land. The Southern Nevada Climber's Coalition and their parent organization, The "Access" Fund, raised thousands of dollars by staging massive climber's festivals in Red Rock over the years, introducing thousands of climbers to the area, thus creating the very over-crowding problems we have today. Now, the "policy analysts" in the home office in Boulder, Colorado, just sit on their hands all day, rather than do anything related to climber's access as the land managers shut us out.

As a contrast, the audacity of these other land-use groups is actually impressive. If only we climbers had people that played hard ball in our interest. For example,

Southern Nevada Mountain Bike Association: "our trails across the desert will never end."

Save Red Rock: "The view from Heather's house shall remain forever unblemished."

Access Fund: "Climbing is racist."

  

You're not wrong with some of your concerns but it's reading more like a rant against the Access Fund. Just FYI.

Converting the whole road to Loop Road hours and conditions seems to be the idea, right? But that's just SRR's idea, it doesn't seem like the BLM has an interest in doing that, it's just an idea of that crazy lady you're talking about.

My vision would be adding gates off either side of the highway and treating it like a National Park, ala Joshua Tree. I don't think that would be too bad, and would probably help the area by adding legitimate parking, and more policing of nefarious activities.

I'm definitely on the side of not trusting non-climbers to work in our best interest and preserve access but I understand the need to slow the roll of the general public into natural areas, climbers being part of that public are best off working with it and accepting concessions like paying for access, so they can have a seat at the table for the long haul.

Tradiban wrote:

You're not wrong with some of your concerns but it's reading more like a rant against the Access Fund. Just FYI.

Converting the whole road to Loop Road hours and conditions seems to be the idea, right? But that's just SRR's idea, it doesn't seem like the BLM has an interest in doing that, it's just an idea of that crazy lady you're talking about.

My vision would be adding gates off either side of the highway and treating it like a National Park, ala Joshua Tree. I don't think that would be too bad, and would probably help the area by adding legitimate parking, and more policing of nefarious activities.

I'm definitely on the side of not trusting non-climbers to work in our best interest and preserve access but I understand the need to slow the roll of the general public into natural areas, climbers being part of that public are best off working with it and accepting concessions like paying for access, so they can have a seat at the table for the long haul.

Disclaimer: I've not officially been to Red Rock for climbing.
--
From what I gathered some of the issues are related to trash, speeding, graffiti, etc. As Tradi proposes, there are many other ways to solve these issues such as speed bumps, better parking, having a ranger, etc. LO's can do graffiti cleaning and trash pick up.

I don't know why people are quick to just tack on fines, fees, thinking money will be the solution.

John Hegyes, you might want to forward that email and your concerns to the two giant private business on that road, the gypsum mine and the manufacturing plant.  I doubt that they and the suppliers, venders, trucks that come and go from there would agree with the desirability of a gated road.  Cactus Joe's Nursery might want to hear about this too.  The traffic congestion that would result from a gate anywhere near there would undoubtably affect their businesses.

Gumby King wrote:

Disclaimer: I've not officially been to Red Rock for climbing.
--
From what I gathered some of the issues are related to trash, speeding, graffiti, etc. 

I've been climbing there since the 80s and I'm there 2-6 weeks a year.  I haven't noticed any of these issues.  Yes, the trailheads, such as at First Creek, have gotten more popular.  From what I can see when I park there and start hiking, the majority of users seem to be families with kids out for a walk, and casual hikers, not climbers.  I think it's great that more people are introducing their young ones to healthy activities.  It pisses me off to see a vested interest want to remove opportunities for free recreation from locals.

Ya but how close is the sprinter van car wash from all of this and will it affect my washes?

Yes, I'll STFU now

If anyone is interested, this was my letter:

I do not support any kind of gates or further restrictions on Highway 159.  Many solutions have been offered, but I must vehemently oppose any kinds of gates or tolls.  Access to Red Rock Canyon is already under attack by various federal organizations.  Adding another layer restriction is insult to injury.

The BLM office running Red Rock Canyon has shown itself to be bad stewards and incompetent with the money it generates.  Yet their solution is to further restrict and increase usage fees.

Please do not repeat the same mistakes.  I am confident that NDOT can come to a solution without further impeding access to the great landscapes ALL of us Nevadans call home.  Radar enforcement, bike lanes, adding lanes, adding larger shoulders for parking, are all great ideas to reduce the dangers on SR-159.  Tolls only serve the interests of the upper echelon able to afford housing along a PUBLIC road that abuts PUBLIC land.  Just like my affluent neighbors, I also pay state and federal taxes (significant amounts!).  I should not be punished and restricted from using public land simply because I live 20 minutes away.

I also think it's time to call this one home.  I'll be writing our federal government representation about the repeated issues we've had with our esteemed BLM colleague.

Marc801 C wrote:

Have you contacted/talked to the Access Fund about this issue?
Not challenging you, just curious. I’d like to know their response, if any. 

John, you still haven’t answered my question.