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

When real humans start interacting with rrgula-de-MP it's just :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: 

Leici Hendrixwrote:

Thanks John for the photos and the further research. I see that your initial research and post was incorrect as well, as your original claim was that the RR Scenic Byway was the section of 159 from Charleston to Fort Apache, rather than the 8.8 mi section you clarified in your later comments. 

I don't understand this remark by Leici, I did not refer to Charleston or Fort Apache. I quoted the Save Red Rock proposal: "Park Entrance Stations on both ends of 159" which is a weird statement because the east end of 159 is near Downtown Las Vegas. And I further quoted SRR where they said: "If park entrance stations bookended the Red Rock Scenic Byway" which was their actual suggestion. I put an initial map together, fully admitting that the map was "my interpretation of Save Red Rock’s plan. I can only make wild guesses as to where the toll booths will actually go." That first map was almost dead-on correct however, and Fort Apache was not even on the map. From that point on, you said the information that I provided was "far from accurate" which you now acknowledge as a mistake. If you're going to admit a mistake, I can appreciate that. I can see that there have been misunderstandings on both sides, but please don't start out any explanation by saying my initial post was incorrect.

 I never said this was a NVDOT plan; I said in my first post on this subject that this was an idea of Save Red Rock that has been submitted to NVDOT though the Corridor Study. I did speak to Heather Fisher with SRR yesterday for 45 minutes, and not only do I understand better her position, she understands just how strongly some people are against her idea of toll booths on Highway 159. She said she only wanted to stimulate discussion to help generate new ideas. I told her that SRR’s comments in the NVDOT survey have the appearance of stoking controversy about two toll booths on 159 that may never materialize to make people feel better and more accepting of one toll booth at Calico, that they never wanted in the first place. She disagreed with that characterization. Then we spoke about the reservation system, and I shared with her a potential strategy to challenge it.

This whole disagreement is about something that may never happen - toll booths on Highway 159. But this is also closely related to the looming possibility of a gate on Calico Basin Road. This will be a serious blow to the Southern Nevada climbing community. It will be highly unusual as most climbers will likely face fees, reservations, quotas, and a line to get in, while some people, such as residents and their friends, will get some sort of guest list access to avoid all those hassles. At the end of each day, it’s not going to look very good if most of the climbers are forced to leave by a new closing time while residents and their friends can stay and boulder as late as they please.

I never said to you, Leici, anything about a “large conspiracy” and it’s dismissive to refer to my concerns as such. However, the only people I can think of that really want Calico Basin gated are environmentalists, the BLM and residents of Calico Basin. This is awkward because it is known that you work with your friend Alex Honnold, producing his podcast, [edit to add source: you announced that business relationship on the SNCC FB page] and he is a homeowner in Calico Basin. That’s fine and it would normally be none of my business. But we have relied on you to fight against the gating of Calico Basin, so it’s fair to wonder if you have any potential conflicting interests in this issue. If Calico Basin is locked down, the climbers will be in a dispute with the BLM and it will be some of the residents on the other side of the argument. Honnold has donated money to the Access Fund, per their financials, and helped fundraise even more, so it’s fair to ask the Access Fund if they faithfully represent the concerns of the public or the landowners in this fight because up to this point, they seem disengaged. The timing last year of the BLM’s announcement of their Calico plan which was closely followed by a SNCC/AF fundraiser featuring an Alex Honnald slideshow is what initially raised some of these questions.

I appreciate your comments, Leici, that the SNCC stands against the reservation system and the addition of toll booths. It has been hard to discern exactly where the SNCC and the Access Fund stand on these issues. A lot of communication from the Access Fund has seemed to show a disregard for our loss of access, saying it was inevitable and might actually be a good thing. I do not accuse you or anyone associated with these organizations of wrongdoing and I’m sorry if I’ve been unprofessional in any way by venting my frustrations. But I’ve been thinking that the air should be cleared a little about who is working for who. I am not the only one thinking about this, other people have contacted me about these concerns. A little disclosure and transparency now, could save us from hard feelings and confusion later. 

Tom Zwrote:

Somebody put this thread to pasture. It’s stinkier than a smelly sock. 

Well, Tom, you could take the trash out once in a while instead of putting your cat poop in it and shrugging your shoulders.

Ashortwrote:

What percentage of the BLM budget comes from recreational fees versus say oil and gas exploration? Do you think the BLM is trying to bolster their budget with recreation fees after the oil and gas leases were put under a moratorium? 

Burning man pays millions per year to BLM for using a few miles of black rock desert in northern Nevada 

Instead of toll booths they on 159, they need to invest in more infrastructure like parking lots, trail head access and trail maintenance to make room for increasing crowds.  Permits and fees doesn't solve anything.  The constant bureaucracy and development in this city is ruining why I moved here over a decade ago.

Keith Boonewrote:

Instead of toll booths they on 159, they need to invest in more infrastructure like parking lots, trail head access and trail maintenance to make room for increasing crowds.  Permits and fees doesn't solve anything.  The constant bureaucracy and development in this city is ruining why I moved here over a decade ago.

No. It was a mistake paving RR and making it accessible and then marketing it as a tourist destination. More pavement never solves the problem (I am OK with bathrooms and infrastructure that actually keeps the place protected). Trail maintenance is OK solely for eliminating braided trails and erosion - the rest of the work takes care of itself. Markers might help, but I suspect the $100000 budget for more signs are for trailhead informational signs and no parking signs - not the type of thing that actually keeps people on the right track. Three years ago they re-paved the loop making it even nicer for cars, sport bikes, scooters - and more and more came. There was hardly a pothole and we lost parking for the Ledger Crags. Totally unnecessary. Multimillion dollar visitor center that is never at more than 2% capacity? Totally unnecessary (though I guess BLM employees enjoy the cushy air conditioning which is a plus since they never leave their desks anyway). They also expanded parking lots - and now even those are filled to capacity with cars. If you build it, they will come.

Please make your voice heard now as we have less than 30 days.

"Members of the public may provide input via email at blm_nv_rrsfo_businessplan@blm.gov, via comment cards available at the Red Rock Canyon Visitor Center, and postal mail at: Red Rock Business Plan, Bureau of Land Management, 4701 N. Torrey Pines Dr., Las Vegas, NV 89130. Comments will be accepted until July 22, 2022, at 4:30 p.m. Comments will be reviewed and considered for the final Red Rock Canyon Business Plan. The plan will then go before the Mojave-Southern Great Basin Resource Advisory Council for approval.

The BLM will also hold public meetings at the following times and locations:

• July 6 from 5-7 p.m. at the Rainbow Library, 3150 N Buffalo Dr, Las Vegas, NV 89128
• July 7 virtual meeting from 6-7:30 p.m. Registration for the virtual meeting can be made at blm.zoomgov.com/webinar/reg…."

https://www.blm.gov/press-release/public-input-requested-proposed-fees-red-rock-canyon

https://www.instagram.com/p/CfjW2zXr8pO/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link 

Anyone who might ever want to visit Red Rock - Please take a minute to email the BLM and state your opposition to further fees/restrictions on our land(links above)

I was at the in person meeting. Pretty sad there was only like 20 people there and maybe 8 or so climbers. Also, recreation.gov appears to be here to stay, despite everyone voicing their opposition.

Also, follow up to John's post about the SNCC. The SNCC seems to be doing a kickass job doing everything they can to oppose the changes while still maintaining a somewhat civil relationship with the BLM. All these folks bitching about the BLM on the internet should have gone to the meeting, rather than just complaining on mountain project. 

Colin Quinnwrote:

All these folks bitching about the BLM on the internet should have gone to the meeting, rather than just complaining on mountain project. 

I suppose we have many Cairns :-/

Colin Quinnwrote:

Also, follow up to John's post about the SNCC. The SNCC seems to be doing a kickass job doing everything they can to oppose the changes while still maintaining a somewhat civil relationship with the BLM. All these folks bitching about the BLM on the internet should have gone to the meeting, rather than just complaining on mountain project. 

It’s great the finally got after it. Where was this at the beginning of the slippery slope with the reservation system “due to Covid?”

I'm glad the SNCC is on it. Whether it is a "kickass job" or not will remain to be seen depending on whether real concessions are made by the BLM.

Either way I can't really blame the SNCC if no changes occur, nor can I blame those who don't attend the meetings and complain on MP. Sure, on-the-ground involvement would be great, but the reality is the BLM has a decades-long pattern of hosting public meetings to fulfill their legal obligations, "listening" to our input and concerns, and then totally ignoring it and proceeding as scheduled with their plans for Southern Nevada. If we're lucky we get some mentions in a document as to why all our suggestions aren't feasible. 

I went to many meetings like this when I first moved to Vegas, but witnessing over and over again that they are fruitless echo chambers (really no different than the MP forums), is it any wonder that I, and many others, are frustrated? A much better investment of our time, as it turns out, are trail work days, crag cleanups and graffiti removal, restocking wag bags, bolt replacement, etc.

In my opinion the BLM, when it comes to Red Rocks, has a long track record of prioritizing all the wrong things and failing to meet the responsibilities which the public has tasked them with. I don't know if these issues are with leadership or if they're systemic, but it doesn't surprise me that people have little faith or trust in the BLM. I want to point out that most individual employees or rangers I've met has been genuinely friendly and sympathetic. But when has public comment or input ever resulted in a significant victory for either conservation or access? The only thing I can remember in recent years is how a legal challenge resulted in the elimination of booking fees on recreation.gov. 

I would love for the BLM to prove me wrong with their Calico plans and restore a little faith, but until then (call me a cynic or a realist) they may as well do away with the ruse of public comment periods and meetings as far as I'm concerned.

I was also at the meeting and literally, every public comment was against the plan to gate off Calico Basin.  But it was only about a dozen comments.  I am hoping more people will take the time to email their opposition to additional fees/restrictions.  

If you are reading this thread please take one minute and email your opposition to gate and fees at Calico Basin - blm_nv_rrsfo_businessplan@blm.gov  

I have reached out to the Access Fund trying to get them to do an action alert so we can get people all outside NV involved in voicing opposition.  

I have heard back from the Access Fund and an action alert should be going out early next week :)

https://www.accessfund.org/take-action/campaigns/take-action-preserve-sustainable-access-in-red-rock-canyon

Link says cannot be found

Jason Twrote:

Link says cannot be found

It was an action alert from July 18 so they must have taken it down.