Here is a copy of the memo that was issued today to all email-capable UBCP members. It reflects what vet114 mentioned above:

UBCP Members,

As you may know, the back country landing strips in what is commonly called the "Arizona Strip" are in jeopardy of being closed. This area is now part of the Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument. This new National Monument was created in January, 2000 by Presidential Proclamation and is to be managed jointly by the National Park Service and the BLM.

The Draft Environmental Impact Statement that will become the management plan for the Parashant Monument has been released. Concerning aviation, the EIS is recommending that no back country landing strips be allowed. The EIS also recommends that existing back country strips within the monument be destroyed. This will include Imlay, Pakoon, and Grand Gulch.

UBCP member Hal Hilburn in St. George has spent many hours researching the draft EIS. Hal has provided an extensive list of arguments as to why aviation is not harmful and is a legitimate activity in the monument. We have included Hal's list below.

The comment period for the EIS ends on 17 Mar. 2006. The BLM and NPS will review all public comments before implementing a final management plan. We encourage all pilots who are interested in preserving these historic landing strips to comment either via letter or e-mail.

Comments should be addressed to:

Planning Team, Arizona Strip District
345 East Riverside Drive
St. George, UT 84790

E-Mail comments to: [email protected] FAX comments to: (435)688-3388

We owe Hal a big thanks for all of the time he has spent researching the new monument. Hal truly loves these landing strips more than anyone we know. Below is Hal's report and points that you may consider when commenting on the EIS:

1. Pilots are legitimate users of public lands just like hikers, jeepers, and horseman.

2. Airplanes have the least impact of any vehicle for visiting public lands. They have no driven wheels and they never leave the “trail”.

3. Airstrips should be considered as internal “Trailheads” where the pilot users access hiking, camping, exploring, viewing nature, studying geology, archeology, history and culture among other things. (Consider the airstrips as the trail heads for back country aviation destinations

4. Preserve and protect the airstrips just like any other established trail head.

5. Back country aviators are the prime example of Camping “ Leave No Trace”

6. Airstrips do not erode like roads. They are essentially grassy spots that are level and have similar vegetative cover to the surrounding land. They are invisible from near view and are no more apparent than a road. There are 1582 miles of roads included in the preferred alternative and open roads are adjacent to all of the airstrips.

7. Aircraft are not in the same class and category as OHV, they are only mechanized on the ground, not motorized.

8. Most of the airstrips with recreational value have been in existence longer than most of the roads and certainly longer that features used by most other current forms of recreation. Some of the airstrip sites in the Arizona Strip are so old and historic, that it is amazing that they weren’t mentioned in the DEIS as sensitive Sites. The Grand Gulch Mine is a perfect example. Historical documents show that mine rails were flown to the Copper Mountain Mine strip from the old Grand Gulch Mine Strip in the 1940’s.

9. Hundreds of airstrips exist on lands containing “wilderness character” in both designated and undesignated wilderness areas, National Parks and Monuments. 19 airstrips were included in the Central Idaho Wilderness Act of 1984 after they had been in use as long 25 years, and now, 22 years later, they show that they have had no adverse affect on the lands and ecosystems that they occupy.

10. Monument managers might be preparing for a 10% population growth per year in the St. George by 2025 with the commensurate rise in use of the monument, but General Aviation is only projected to grow by 3.4% per year in the St. George area and most of this growth is due to aircraft that would never visit the Monument (Business aircraft). Therefore back country airstrip users are not BLM’s problem user group.

11. Pilots who visit these “Trailheads” by small plane are afforded a sense of accomplishment and well-being in their lives that reflects positively on the households and communities.

12. Pilots, as a user group of public lands, are the most responsible, and the most regulated of any user group. They personally undergo physicals and their aircraft have yearly maintenance inspections. They are also subject to regular flight tests and reviews. Few flyers would ever consider including alcohol along with their outings to the back country, while other user groups include alcohol as a matter of course.

13. Airplanes of all categories will be present over the monument at all times from trans-continental flights to small private airplanes traveling between Salt Lake and Phoenix or Las Vegas to Albuquerque. Backcountry pilots are just asking for a place to stop and camp.

14. Unlike all other types of motorized visitor, the backcountry airstrip visitor is not there to fly. We shut off our engines during our stay, unlike other visitors who are allowed to access the exact same piece of ground by road, and whose recreation centers around the use of their vehicles. Over flights of the Monument by aircraft are not addressed in the DEIS, but recreational opportunities for pilots while at the airstrip when the engine is off, are not currently allowed in the preferred alternative.

15. I quote from the BLM, “Recreation opportunities abound that produce a variety of personal, familial, community, economic, and environmental benefits from visitors enjoying outdoor experiences while engaged in activities such as hiking, biking, backpacking, camping, sight-seeing, driving for pleasure, hunting, wildlife viewing, geo-caching, and OHV driving on designated routes.” Flying as a means of conveyance to do these activities is just as legitimate as any other.

16. Backcountry airstrips take almost no money to maintain in the rustic condition desired by most city-stressed pilots seeking an opportunity to experience adventure, a sense of discovery, and a retreat from the pressures of modern life. With the millions of dollars spent on infrastructure for other means of conveyance within the Monument, it seems like an unfair situation for the BLM to ignore one of the Monuments first and most historic means of travel—small airplanes.

17. No accumulative effects occur from aircraft landing and camping on surrounding vegetation, animal life on public resources.

18. Include airstrip in the Recreational Management Zones already established to near by roads.

19. The airstrips offer remote secure access to primitive activities.

20. Airstrips ensure safety zones to commuting aircraft traveling along the north boundary of the Grand Canyon.

21. Airstrips are often used a search and rescue hubs for health and safety issues.

22. Arriving and departing aircraft all have VHF Radios to communicate emergency needs, such as fire, search, and rescue operation.

23. Arriving aircraft serve non-commercial uses

24. Aircraft have the option of over flight prior to use and landing, thus establishing a safe choice of landing strip location and conditions.

25. The grooming and tools used in maintaining airstrips coincided with current BLM Land management practices.

26. Propose a list of airstrips to be placed on the register of historic places to insure they will be kept and managed in the their current available conditions.

27. Aviation access offer a overhead security system to proved fast and accurate information to and from some very remote area in the need of an emergency

28. The BLM recreational system recognizes the draw to some risk in adventure, such as rock climbing, repelling, exploring, gathering of ecological, scientific information, and historical data.

29. The issue of public liability in not supported... the BLM does not require ANY Assurances that vehicle operation on public lands are safe, license, or insured. All aircraft in operation are registered, licensed, and insured. There have been NO cases of the public being sued because of a pilot having a mishap on the public property....

30. The government also uses aircraft in and around the vicinity of the current airstrip scattered around the Arizona Strip Region.

31. Aircraft engines are shut down after landing and do not return to service until a departure is attempted. No noise or power source is emitted from an aircraft parked on the ground.

32. The BLM does not currently have a campaign ongoing to remove parking areas, pull outs, and camping location within the Arizona Strip Desert System. Why would they now launch a effort to do so against aviation needs?

33. Aviation is an irrefutable means of transportation.

34. No budget funds are required to maintain these desert strips in a safe condition. Prior adopt a highway programs are similar to the of the Back Country Aviation Group maintaining the airstrips.

What a wonderful set of comments on the non-adverse impacts and benefits of backcountry airstrips. There is no excuse now for not sending our comments in on these strips by March 17. Even by those of us in the east who hope to visit these strips in the near future.
Thank you punkin170b
Jim
ps. Will someone be posting this on the SuperCub.org site? I think the "Arizona Strip airstrips" thread.

Hal: Good man...I hope this works out for Grand Gulch. I am planning a trip to Overton and the Lost City Museum. They have a lot of info. on the old wagon road (Arrowhead Trail) from St. Thomas rail head to Grand Gulch Mine. The St. Thomas town site is above water now and I would like to go there. I don't know whether there is anything to see.

Hal: Despite what the Bumpkin said I meant no disrespect for the UBCP. I have a lot of respect for their efforts. I wish we would have had an group like that years ago in Ca. to save some of our remote airstrips.
( Don't tell him I said this... He will want to hug... UGH)

Bumpkin:

punkin170b wrote:if you have actually even spoken with him at all.
Your combative tone and language does not help our cause.

FYI Well ...Actually that was a quote. Anyway here is part of a letter that my "combative language" got from Inyo National Forest management regarding Coyote Flats.

You got a letter like this from the Forest Service

Bumpkin:

Diarrhea
Diarrhea is one problem you may encounter when abusing these small rodents. The main cause is meanness.

Ok gang so here it is, with Hal's outline please get to writing and remember in wiriting to express those points for Your Comments: (Do not use verbatim, use your own words. Use what means the most to you personally).
If it appears that we are just copying a form letter they will not give our letters much credit. Good luck and make it fun.

AGAIN
Written comments should be sent to

Planning Team, Arizona Strip District
345 E. Riverside Drive
St George Utah 84790

Email comments to:

[email protected]

FAX comments to: (435)688-3388

Mark Hawkins
Arizona Pilots Association
Recreational Airport Committee
[email protected]

Another comment that I used in my letter to the BLM:

The use of these strips by recreational pilots enable those pilots to be stewards as in the ability to have a birds eye view of the surrounding areas. They have reported vandalism, fire starts and unusual activities that others wouldn't be able to see.

We always pack out more than we bring in, trash, debris ect.

"punkin170b"says"
that no back country landing strips be allowed. The EIS also recommends that existing back country strips within the monument be destroyed. This will include Imlay, Pakoon, and Grand Gulch."


Vet or Hal: Help me out here... Where does the plan say anything like this

In the draft plan Chapter2 (Alternatives) PP126 under Parschant it says:

"No public airstrips on NPS lands"

"Authorized airstrips on BLM lands (Pakoon, Imlay and Whitmore - Bar Ten would continue to be managed"

These statements apply to all alternatives.

I know that this says nothing about Grand Gulch but where in the Draft Plan does it say anything about Pakoon and Imlay being destroyed???

Chapter 3 PP102 says these (Pakoon, Imlay, Bar-10 etc) are authorized airstrips. No mention of Grand Gulch though.

I'd like to add that quantity of responses does matter, not size, not spelling or punctuation etc. If you are afraid that your letter won't be as articulate or may cover some of the same points outlined above, that doesn't matter. The key is a barrage of support. Hal and others have done a great job of pointing out the important stuff, we just need to pile it on. Every little bit helps and every letter or email will help. No matter how short, how repetitive or how poorly written, they all count and show that there is support for keeping these airstrips open.

Also, if anybody has any influence or the ear of any legislator or other government official that may have anything to do with the process, it sure doesn't hurt to politely ask if they are aware of the situation. I have been able to befriend a couple of staff of my local legislators and they are truly interested in hearing from their constituents.

If you think you don't have the time, just imagine the day when you have all the time you need to write letters because there is no place to fly to. We'd better take care of business today if we want to fly tomorrow.

Mark

Mark:

Did you see my question? Can you help me out with an answer?

Thanks, Jr.CB. I am trying to figure out who painted the target on me!

M (aka "Bumpkin")

Jr. Cub: Sorry but I misread your post at first???
I Will post it this afternoon. I PM'd it to a couple of members who wanted to see the complete text.

O.K. O.K. Bumpkin. But what about my question.

Somebody needs to come up with a good mildy deprecating pet name for Desert Rat, and all should be even.

I don't understand.... What question do you have? Your rambling on this post is incoherent and I have no idea what you're talking about.

The EIS is recommending that those strips be destroyed/rendered unusable. We as a pilot group should write letters/emails to support our cause - i.e. survival of those strips and offer a rebuttal to the EIS and those groups that would like to see them gone. I don't personally have a copy of the proposed RMP or the EIS. I am only acting on the information that I do have, and trying to help others do the same.

What the hell is your beef with me? Aren't we on the same side here? If you have a copy of the EIS or the RMP in it's current form, why don't you share it?

punkin170b wrote:I don't understand....
The EIS is recommending that those strips be destroyed/rendered unusable.

I'll make it very easy for you.

Where in the DEIS does it say that Imlay (for example) is to be destroyed??? Or Pakoon???

Please give me a chapter and page reference. I have the complete plan here in front of me.

Jr. Cub:

[img][img]http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f365/geoderrick/doc.jpg[/img][/img]

Desert Rat wrote:

punkin170b wrote:I don't understand....
The EIS is recommending that those strips be destroyed/rendered unusable.

You don't even have a copy of the DEIS..Well. What can I say. I'll make it very easy for you. Get one....

Anyone with a copy:

Where in the DEIS does it say that Imlay (for example) is to be destroyed??? Or Pakoon???

Please give me a chapter and page reference. I have the complete plan here in front of me. I can't find it.....

I did care enough (with a little help from Hal) to get a copy.

Will anyone who has actually read this DEIS document see if they can find the info.

O.K. I talked with BLM in St George.

The reason that no one here can answer my question is that there is no plan to destroy airstrips.

It is not in the plan. That may be why I can't find it. You think....

She said the BLM has rcvd. many many E-mails asking that the airstrips be left open. No problem for BLM. They were never going to be closed anyway.

Grand Gulch was left out accidently.

So people: Get a copy of the DEIS and read it. See what you think.

This will be my last post on this thread.

To imply that others don't care because they don't have an actual copy of the EIS or the RMP is asinine. As you implied, Mr. Rat, you needed Mr. Hilburn's help to get one yourself. If you care so much more than the rest of us, and have all the time in the world, why don't you study your copy and let US know what you find? Instead it sounds like you'd like to sit back and throw stones at the rest of us, YOUR ALLIES in the matter, because we don't get as riled up as you do.

The rest of us have lives too, and it may be that our priorities in those lives don't allow us to spend hours and hours online, doing research, travelling across country to BLM/National Forest public commentary meetings, etc. to forward our cause. I write letters, and volunteer time to the UBCP compiling and editing material for our publications. I attend meetings, give presentations, and LISTEN to what others (more expert than me) have to say. I have a family. My lovely bride and I both work. Don't you dare insinuate that "I don't care enough". I do what I can.

Jr. : Desert Retch... Cool

Anyway I agree with you. I have never used the letter as a "get out of free" card but a number of pilots who frequent Coyote Flats have a copy. I don't know of anyone else who has used it. It was posted on the BB at the Bishop Airport at the time.

The funny thing was one of the local CFI's told me Coyote Flats should be destroyed because it was too dangerous. Naturally he had never been there.

Jr.CubBuilder wrote:So you got all worked up and took a crap on somebody else over nothing?

Go back to the start of the thread. Wasn't me... I did send a message to the UPCP and I posted what they told me. I thought they probably knew.

I think we need to watch Grand Gulch. I am not sure what they have in mind...