Jump to content
Nugget Shooter Forums
Alwaysdirty

Bumblebee trail closures, HELP NOW! need comments by 5/22

Recommended Posts

The Arizona BLM TMP is in action and long story short is they are about to set the Bumblebee area closures. Public comments on the five different proposed plans being voted on are only being accepted until 5/22/18. Below I copied a post from 5/9/18 at  Fullsizebronco.com forum with AZ members fighting hard to keep our local trails open. These guys have prepared a pdf file with comments that can be easily filled out with just your name and address and emailed to the Black Canyon BLM office. This pdf file is geared towards offroad vehicles, but we use many of the same trails for prospecting. One of the links below gets you to an interactive map of the proposed plans and many trails I use will be affected if the BLM chooses the worst of the plans (Plan C), it looks like many of the Roadrunner claims will be affected as well as many private claims. My wife and I have both emailed the BLM this signed pdf and I hope to get some others to as well. They use a service called dropbox for the pdf, you do not need to register for dropbox to download the pdf. After filling out your info click the print button in the pdf box and select destination "save to pdf" to create a saved pdf file you can quickly email to the BLM at http://blkcanyon@blm.gov/ Lets keep these trails open! Thanks!!

 

Bare with me this is a lot of copy and paste, but needs to be put out there.

Ok my fellow off-roaders, Bronco Maniacs, and outdoor enthusiasts, the government is at it again and only allowing us till May 22, 2018 to submit public comments before they shut down a large area of trails in the Bumble Bee area of Arizona. They are not giving us any reason why, I was at the meeting tonight and they basically cannot answer anyone as to why, just that they feel like it, no environment, no archeology, or geology reports that show any determent to justify closure to our trails. Now they want us to submit a reason for each trail they want to close in the area and why, that is hundreds of trails that they will close. They have given us 5 options, option A leave it as it has been for as long as it has been which is the way we want it, or 4 other options which include different trail closures. Option C which they notated would be there preferred choice, would close 50% of the trails now open to the public and make it so you would get ticketed and fined if caught using it. They want to make it hard to argue the trail closure so they can show they tried to work with the public. I need your help to email them, call them, write them and there managers that option A is the only one we will accept. Below I have posted the proposed closure maps option A is the first map with all current trails in a purple color that are currently unrestricted with option C is the second map the trails in red are the proposed closures and green are the ones they will leave open. The BLM has stated they have never even been on some of these trails they have just taken second hand information.
Please email, call the local BLM office and state the only Option we will accept is Option A without the your support we will lose our Trails. Remember Option A is the only Option. Please share this to all your off-road social media pages, get the word out.

Brian Buttazoni, Project Manager
BLM, Hassayampa Field Office
21605 North 7th Avenue
Phoenix, Arizona 85027
(623) 580-5500
blkcanyon@blm.gov

Keith Canete 

Edit: The meeting is over and what I was told throughout the day, yesterday, by the BLM, was NOT represented in what we saw, ‘supported’, last night. The option E maps are good for our OHV community and they represent what the Tammy and Rem were telling me we would see. The issue is that the BLM supports option C. Option C is not good for the OHV community and should not be passed, as-is. We are developing comments. One of our guys worked on them for 3 hours, last night. We are double checking them today and tomorrow. Then, we will be plastering them every where to be added to the BLM comments on the new TMP. It because obvious that the BLM really didn’t walk any of our trails and laid little attention to them, when making map 3, for option C. I’m attaching two pictures of some of what we noticed last night. The list of trails are ones on E, but missing on C (we are double checking the maps for other missing trails). The other pic is of the wash we need open to access the entrance to two of our trails left open on the option C map. They show the trails as open, but only allow access from the exits of each. Trust me, the waterfalls on these, don’t make going down, a pleasure. You’ll get down them, but won’t look the same at the bottom. We are counting on folks helping to spread the word. Just give a is few days to get our propaganda machine rolling.

Original post:

I'm sharing this lengthy post here, because of the overlap. It is regarding tonight's meeting and the BB TMP issues. Sorry for the length of it.

I've got a ton of things on my mind. Seems like I'm fighting a battle with folks on all sides of the fence. Let me clarify some things regarding the BLM TMP being presented at tonight's meeting. Feel free to share.
1) Jeff Gursh will be losing his job 5/11. This is a temporary job loss and they are working feverishly to get him back on with the BLM. This job loss is directly caused by our current President's administration and came as a shock to the local BLM office.
2) The new TMP lists a ton of our lost trails as being open. There are some that have been truncated or partially closed due to Riparian and ARC site encroachment. We can't do much about that.
3) During the early RMP time period, none of our trails were notated, because they were hidden or seen as too extreme to be driven. The RMP applied a Land with Wilderness Characteristics(LWC) designation to a significant portion of the BB area. That LWC was placed directly over two of our favorite trails, PMF and S&M. They were seen as a lost cause. I was supplied with info from Tammy Pike and Rem about how to fight for them and we fought hard. The support of local clubs like the UT and BTG supplied us with with dated videos and pictures proving the trails were used prior to the RMP and the LWC designation. It wasn't easy, but Rem, Tammy and Ron T (Rem's second in command) fought, all the way to the top, to add both PMF and S&M to the map.
4) The list of trails is not perfect. For example, the BLM doesn't know how, but Turkey Creek was left off the TMP. They will be addressing that and getting it on the map. If we want other trails added, now is the time to comment. 
5) Tammy used to own a jeep and Rem is pro-OHV. They have both come together and fought against the negative voices, as they worked on this TMP. For those of you who have not been to the meetings or put in the work, this may come as a surprise. 
6) The BLM has been very supportive of us and helped us, get our trails back, throughout this process. 4 years ago, we attended a meeting that showed maps of Bumble Bee (BB) without any of our trails on them. Back then we were told to get with Jeff Gursh and show him where the trails were, so that he could perform the EA's needed on each trail for the new TMP. We did that, at Jeff's house, over pizza. Two years later, we attended a meeting that showed the new maps and 18 of our trails were added as proposed routes. Two important ones were still missing, S&M and PMF. That took more work, but with the advice given in #3 above, we supplied them with the ammo they needed to get them added to the new proposed route inventory. 
7) There is going to be a ton of 'new', legal trails in the new TMP and the BLM is counting on us to help maintain them. We've been working towards a component of the new TMP that is not in it yet, an Adopt-a-Trail component. A few of the local clubs will be maintaining these new routes. We are still working on this component and will be announcing mtg's about it, soon. This issue will also be brought up, at tonight's meetings. If you want to help and have a rig or or club capable of making these trails, please feel free to join in the process.
�� This is not a 'done' deal. The vote still needs to come in and changes can take place. As things sit now, the plan has my support and looks good for OHV use, at BB. I hope it stays this way and will be signed, as-is or with even more access for OHV use. 
9) I'm still arguing with what I term as the 'old guard'. The folks that got burned by the Tucson BLM office and the jerk, Francisco. Rem is not Francisco and has only worked with us. His team is behind promoting OHV usage on BLM lands. So much so, that one member of the team who was against opening our trails, was veto'd so many times, that she left the meetings entirely. What I'm getting at, is that we lose everything if we hide our trails and don't move forward with the BLM. I'm also getting at the fact that I've been working with the BLM more than fighting with them and I've been fighting with wheelers more in recent days, trying to defend the plan, more than working with them.
10) For the majority of wheelers out there, you've been sitting on your hands and doing nothing. This has been an on-going battle for over four years. I know who has been to these meetings and I can count on one hand, how many, folks outside of my UT brothers, who have been there regularly. I appreciate all those who have helped along the way. I just wish some of the folks who have just arrived, take a moment to listen to those who have been in the trenches for years.
11) I appreciate your input and I appreciate your passion. Please attend the meeting and see what we've got. I also hope that when future land use issues arise, you join in the fight, sooner. The last two days of quelling rumors and trying to pass along good info, has been draining. If you feel strongly about land usage, please join in the fight and do it, in the beginning, not after the TMP has been proposed.
12) For those worried about trail closures and option 'C', tonight's meeting is the time to bring it up. I was told, directly, this morning, by Tammy that option C is not the path they are taking.

I may be optimistic in my take of what is happening. I believe that my optimism is fueled by the way the process has gone, for the past few years. I don't see Rem or Tammy changing their minds and they wouldn't be asking for our help to maintain trails, if they were planning to close them. Show up tonight. Look around and ask questions. This is your public lands we are talking about.


Attention Wheelers !!

BLM planning to close most rock crawling trails in Bumblebee area as well as many quad/rzr trails !! �� ⛰����

BLM has been closing many other areas to 4 wheeling community as well. If this continues, where do you plan to take your Razors, quads, jeeps, buggies ....??

We need to show our support of maintaining open trails.

We ALL need to help !! ����
Even if you don't wheel Bumblebee.

Please don't be lazy or your'e going to be couch wheeling soon !!

Your assustance will make a difference.

Update⚠️Please note below⚠️

Link for comments & resources

https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front-office/eplanning/

Regarding BLM/Bumblebee..

Click ✔on first draft document and scroll to page 17/18 for clarification.
There are 5 options.

⚠️They are proposing option C at this time. Option C will close �� all but 4 trails we currently run plus it will close the roads that lead to two of the four remaining trails. Thus leaving us with 2 TRAILS !!! People have until the end of the month to contest option C. The final decison is yet to be made. One option would close ALL rock crawling trails as well as many rzr/quad trails.
Below is a link (2nd link) to view the different options. Can be found on page 17/18 on the first document.
The 1st link has a form that our leaders have already filled out. All you have to do us fill in the grey area and send.

Thank You to all who participate !!

Here is a link with the comments all completed. It’s a fillable .pdf. Please fill in the grey section and send it in. 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/87u0wl8e27dvt83/BLM%20Comment%20Feedback


Ill do my best to get the maps up today, but know this is pretty much state wide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only 69 views and no response's? Really? 

C'mon peeps...this is no joke. Trails will be closed, access will be restricted. How much all depends on us. How many people here go to Bumble to prospect? A bunch! Now help! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Word name means thing. Man woman, people person, and are things. Artificial or fictitious.

Natives on native soil can not be artificial or fictitious. Go through BP a lot, plate post says native. Do not give them a name, just say native on native soil. BP wave me thru and cops pass me by. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Alwaysdirty said:

Only 69 views and no response's? Really? 

C'mon peeps...this is no joke. Trails will be closed, access will be restricted. How much all depends on us. How many people here go to Bumble to prospect? A bunch! Now help! 

"Well, I'm your Huckleberry"".....   After you Pm'd me with this information I not only filled out the form and emailed it in to the BLM, but I was also contacted by the Roadrunner's about it, so I gave them my permission to use my name on their form regarding the same issue ( as Many of their claims will be affected by this).  Then I, (sort of figuring it was "kind of important" as well), PM'd Rob Allison on his forum about what needed to be done by his forum members (to fill out the forms)  who would be affected by this decision;  Then I also PM'd Chris Goalson on his forum about the importance of addressing this issue for him and his forum members (as I believe he has a few claims down there as well);  and then I PM'd Kevin Hoagland on the GPAA club forum and informed him of this same importance ( as there are a couple (???) of GPAA claims that will also be affected by this).  All-of-witch I did about 4-days ago,....And Low and behold????.....I have yet to hear from ANY OF THEM in a return PM to me regarding this matter!?!!  "WIERD" how subjects just get DROPPED before they even get started on these forums,...I guess if "You" think it won't affect you, then lets just sweep it under a rug and act like it won't happen.  Kind of like the Stick your head in the sand routine.  So-much-for being United as gold prospectors and protecting the rights of all for all. 

Oh Well, my comment form(s) are in, so when, and if the BLM chooses the Option C, which will very-much Restrict access and/or close a very large number of these trails in the Option C mapped area, ( which by the way includes not only the Bumble Bee area, but also the Mayer, Dewey, and New River areas,  and roughly a large chunk of the North East and South East flank of the Bradshaw mountain range) then all you "YAHOOS" have no one to blame but yourselves when you can no longer take your OHV'S off-roading and onto the affected trails.  "And by-the-way",.....If the BLM can get away with this kink of "Crap" in this designated and Targeted area, What's to prevent them from doing the same thing on other trails on the Southern Bradshaw range, and/or the Western Bradshaw range such as the Little San Domingo area, and/or the Vulture mine area, and/or the Rich Hill area, and/or the Wickenburg area, and/or the Lynx Creek area,..................JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT !!!     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are lots of people aware and working on this situation.  At least from what I've seen.

I'm a member of a couple clubs and a few on FB.  People are doing something. 

Not sure why it didn't get more discussion here....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome effort Gary!! At least you can say you tried. I have the same feelings as you about this.

Sad thing is that this is a statewide plan and closures like this are occuring at different times around the state so the areas you named will be up to bat at somepoint I bet. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LukeJ said:

There are lots of people aware and working on this situation.  At least from what I've seen.

I'm a member of a couple clubs and a few on FB.  People are doing something. 

Not sure why it didn't get more discussion here....

That's good to hear Luke! :thumbsupanim

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, LukeJ said:

There are lots of people aware and working on this situation.  At least from what I've seen.

I'm a member of a couple clubs and a few on FB.  People are doing something. 

Not sure why it didn't get more discussion here....

Howdy Luke,...  Yea, we all need to be a part of this, as it will be affecting all of us who gold prospect in many areas, and as Alwaysdirty said, it will go state-wide if it excallates out of control.  "GIVE THEM AN INCH AND THEY WILL TAKE A MILE!!!"  Gary

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone heard what kind of decision ( which Option) was arrived at by the BLM regarding the closing of trails around the Bumble Bee and New River areas ??????  They where supposed to make a decision today.  Gary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my letter to the BLM. By the way, the postcard I received back in April has two different dates for the deadline for comments. One line says May 22(Tonight) and the other says May 8th.

To whom it may concern,
 
Instead of choosing between 5 options of how much of my right to ingress and egress I would like to give up, I'd like to point out a few items in the laws of the US and State of Arizona that should prevent the BLM from forcing anyone to choose.
 
First I'd like to refer you to the Lode mining law of 1866, codified in the General mining law of 1872 in which a right to ingress and egress is to mineral deposits is granted to all US citizens. This right has been reaffirmed multiple times in state and federal courts up to and including the US Supreme Court.
 
Second, I'd like to refer you to a portion of the law that gave the BLM it's authority as administrator of public lands but limits it's ability to control travel; specifically 43 U.S. Code § 1732 - Management of use, occupancy, and development of public lands
"Except as provided in section 1744, section 1782, and subsection (f) of section 1781 of this title and in the last sentence of this paragraph, no provision of this section or any other section of this Act shall in any way amend the Mining Law of 1872 or impair the rights of any locators or claims under that Act, including, but not limited to, rights of ingress and egress"
 
Third, is what's commonly referred to as RS2477, part of the Mining act of 1866, stating "The right of way for the construction of highways over public lands, not reserved for public uses, is hereby granted" Although this section was repealed by the FLPMA of 1976, any public right of was existing at the time was again protected. “Nothing in this Act or any amendment made by this Act, shall be construed as terminating any valid right-of-way or other land use right or authorization existing on the date of approval of this Act.”
 
Finally, I'd like to direct you to Arizona's HB 2175, signed into law by Governor Ducey last year. HB 2175 confirms and asserts Arizona's right to control all rights of way existing prior to the passing of the FLPMA act of 1976.
 
I'd like to conclude with a message to those of you who would limit my right to access in the name of protecting the environment, animals or aesthetics; Many of our forefathers fought and died for these lands, for their natural resources and strategic value to ensure our nations survival. I doubt any of them would have done so knowing that their heirs would be locking them up and throwing away the key to protect a supposedly endangered species of plant or animal or protect someones hiking trail or view. Without rights to access, your access becomes a privilege.
 
Sincerely, Jim Pressley
Peoria AZ.

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • wow 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Jim,... I am curious, how much of the BLM'S decision (Option-wise) will affect your 5-claims (access-wise and trail closings) down around New River???  When I looked at their map encompassing Option C (which they seem t be leaning toward) , I think your 5-claims are within that area,......although I could be wrong????  Gary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, LowPoint said:

Hello Jim,... I am curious, how much of the BLM'S decision (Option-wise) will affect your 5-claims (access-wise and trail closings) down around New River???  When I looked at their map encompassing Option C (which they seem t be leaning toward) , I think your 5-claims are within that area,......although I could be wrong????  Gary

Hi Gary, option C would eliminate one of two motorized route from our claims. We have a third that stops short of the claims and becomes a hiking trail already. The BLM closed the third route to motorized travel around 10 years ago without any notice or public input. I was able to get it re-opened by simply sticking to my guns and  pointing out the same parts of the law as I did in my most recent letter, minus the recent ARS dealing with RS 2477. It took some time and effort, and they lied to me at every opportunity, from needing a notice of intent or plan of operation to maintain access to telling me they weren't the ones who placed the boulders in the road, but they did finally agree to move the boulders. Mike Rice and Roy Draper were the two I was dealing with back then. My suspicion is that these new BLM agents know little of theses laws and probably couldn't care less to know about them.

I'm with the Roadrunners as well and we also gave input with over 300 members signatures. I read about the State GPAA and a few other groups rallying the troops as well. There are some off-road groups opposing the changes as well.

Never count out the silent majority, The roadrunners and several other groups and citizens were able to stop the Agua Fria Nation monument from claiming all the land west of I17 all the way to the Prescott NF a few years back. They would have effectively taken all granted rights of way (and escape routes from the valley) and eliminated mining claims by attrition if they had succeeded. Later...Jim P.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Jim P. said:

Here's my letter to the BLM. By the way, the postcard I received back in April has two different dates for the deadline for comments. One line says May 22(Tonight) and the other says May 8th.

To whom it may concern,
 
Instead of choosing between 5 options of how much of my right to ingress and egress I would like to give up, I'd like to point out a few items in the laws of the US and State of Arizona that should prevent the BLM from forcing anyone to choose.
 
First I'd like to refer you to the Lode mining law of 1866, codified in the General mining law of 1872 in which a right to ingress and egress is to mineral deposits is granted to all US citizens. This right has been reaffirmed multiple times in state and federal courts up to and including the US Supreme Court.
 
Second, I'd like to refer you to a portion of the law that gave the BLM it's authority as administrator of public lands but limits it's ability to control travel; specifically 43 U.S. Code § 1732 - Management of use, occupancy, and development of public lands
"Except as provided in section 1744, section 1782, and subsection (f) of section 1781 of this title and in the last sentence of this paragraph, no provision of this section or any other section of this Act shall in any way amend the Mining Law of 1872 or impair the rights of any locators or claims under that Act, including, but not limited to, rights of ingress and egress"
 
Third, is what's commonly referred to as RS2477, part of the Mining act of 1866, stating "The right of way for the construction of highways over public lands, not reserved for public uses, is hereby granted" Although this section was repealed by the FLPMA of 1976, any public right of was existing at the time was again protected. “Nothing in this Act or any amendment made by this Act, shall be construed as terminating any valid right-of-way or other land use right or authorization existing on the date of approval of this Act.”
 
Finally, I'd like to direct you to Arizona's HB 2175, signed into law by Governor Ducey last year. HB 2175 confirms and asserts Arizona's right to control all rights of way existing prior to the passing of the FLPMA act of 1976.
 
I'd like to conclude with a message to those of you who would limit my right to access in the name of protecting the environment, animals or aesthetics; Many of our forefathers fought and died for these lands, for their natural resources and strategic value to ensure our nations survival. I doubt any of them would have done so knowing that their heirs would be locking them up and throwing away the key to protect a supposedly endangered species of plant or animal or protect someones hiking trail or view. Without rights to access, your access becomes a privilege.
 
Sincerely, Jim Pressley
Peoria AZ.

 

Very nicely stated Jim and very much on point.

Often these public comment periods are used to vent or state a point of view. Sadly, although all comments are collated, only comments that rely on a point of law, right or administrative requirement will have the power to realign the agencies plans. Lucky for us we have perceptive and eloquent people like Jim to submit comments that hit on all three of the valid objections.

I think Jim may have sent this one back to their drawing board. The same tactic shut down a similar TMP by the Forest Service in southern Arizona a few years back. Luckily the unmentioned option is always the fallback to the base option which amounts to "no change". I can go with that.

Thanks again Jim, I wish there were more of you out there.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need to get to the root of the problem Is there anyway to vote these idiots out of a job:grr01:Trumps trying undo everything the last idiots did while their still trying  to close more land-where does it end :idunno:Thanks Jim :fl: Mike C...:200:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was upset about a similar situation when I found that the Hassanyumpa access was limited with road closed signs and found out the BLM basically has a TMPs for all BLM land with phase in dates, so nearly all trials will be limited similar to what we've seen though the TMPs that have been activated.  I ended up joining the AMRA after Shannon posted a response.

 

Here's a link to that thread

And a link to the eventual final product, which is set to shut down what appears to me to be 40% of the state:

https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/MAP Proposed Travel Management Plans 1 Mar 2017.pdf

Of course, when I researched this, the travel management plans were not available online.

I honestly feel like we're trying to swim upstream in a class V rapid.  Our opposition is well funded, but we struggle to raise $5k for a legal battle in California.  These TMPs are awesome targets for Trump's agenda to reduce regulation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jim P. said:

Hi Gary, option C would eliminate one of two motorized route from our claims. We have a third that stops short of the claims and becomes a hiking trail already. The BLM closed the third route to motorized travel around 10 years ago without any notice or public input. I was able to get it re-opened by simply sticking to my guns and  pointing out the same parts of the law as I did in my most recent letter, minus the recent ARS dealing with RS 2477. It took some time and effort, and they lied to me at every opportunity, from needing a notice of intent or plan of operation to maintain access to telling me they weren't the ones who placed the boulders in the road, but they did finally agree to move the boulders. Mike Rice and Roy Draper were the two I was dealing with back then. My suspicion is that these new BLM agents know little of theses laws and probably couldn't care less to know about them.

I'm with the Roadrunners as well and we also gave input with over 300 members signatures. I read about the State GPAA and a few other groups rallying the troops as well. There are some off-road groups opposing the changes as well.

Never count out the silent majority, The roadrunners and several other groups and citizens were able to stop the Agua Fria Nation monument from claiming all the land west of I17 all the way to the Prescott NF a few years back. They would have effectively taken all granted rights of way (and escape routes from the valley) and eliminated mining claims by attrition if they had succeeded. Later...Jim P.

Really,???  the State GPAA is rallying the troops????????  I PM'd Kevin Hoagland about the situation, but I never got a response back from him at all.  Nor did I get a response back from Chris Gholson (and I know he has a few claims down close to Bumble Bee).  Rob Allison PM'd me that he would look into the situation.  

There are also other private claims down there, and up in the Castle Creek area that will be affected too.  I haven't really heard back from the roadrunners as yet after giving them permission to use my name.  It sure seems to me that "there should-be" better Communication between the three main gold forums (members), the Roadrunner members, the GPAA members, and the private claim owners to be able to act in Unity when it comes to exercising our legal rights as prospectors on BLM land.  I have not seen this since this situation started.  Gary        

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, LowPoint said:

Really,???  the State GPAA is rallying the troops????????  I PM'd Kevin Hoagland about the situation, but I never got a response back from him at all.

I based my statement on a recent post on facebook by the NMRA referring to them speaking at a GPAA chapter meeting at the request of Kevin Hogland. 

Currently proposed Arizona road closures by BLM and what to do about them:

We are currently in Arizona and spoke at the GPAA Gold Fever West Valley Chapter last night about a new proposal by the BLM to close 505 miles of of public land roads under their Travel Management Plan. Most of these lands are used by miners, recreationalists, hikers, campers, hunters and off-roaders. What BLM is doing is proposing changes these currently accessible roads, or basically........restricts your access to your lands.

Here is the link to their plan:

https://eplanning.blm.gov/…/eplanning/planAndProjectSite.do…

Kevin Hoagland asked us to speak last night at the Chapter meeting and when Jere and I were preparing for the discussion, we decided to do a little research on the computer about RS2477 roads in Arizona and whoa did we find a gem.

First of all, RS2477 (revised statute 2477) is a part of the original 1872 mining grant. In a nutshell, it states the roads and travel routes must remain open for exploration, mining and usage. In 1976, Congress passed FLPMA, the Federal Lands Policy Management Act and claim they now can close all the roads willy-nilly at their discretion. Well, not so fast BLM and USFS. Under 2477, they cannot close any roads which predate 1976. If it is a road "created" after 1976, they can, prior to that, no they can't, it's really that simple.

Just two years ago, Utah took this issue all the way to their Supreme Court and the court ruled unanimously that RS2477 is valid and their roads must remain open and accessible for public use and for mining.

So back to Arizona and our research........ On a whim, I typed in "Arizona RS2477" just to see if there was anything out there Arizona had done on keeping the roads open to the mining community and the public at large.

What we found is, like Utah, the Arizona Congress and politic body decided to protect their roads that the public uses and took it a step further than Utah did. They passed a bill telling the Federal Government they cannot close roads under RS2477. So in clear language, Arizona told the United States government, any roads in the state which predate 1976, they will not allow the Federal Government under FLPMA to close them period. End of story

Arizona House Bill 2175 passed in April of 2015 and signed by Arizona's Governor states just that. Gotta love Arizona and these politicians who told the Federal Government if you aren't going to recognize RS2477, we will and will not allow you to close our roads. (link below)

https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/52leg/1r/bills/hb2175h.pdf

So what does all this mean? It means the Federal Government (BLM) has just given the middle finger to the state of Arizona, the residents, claim owners and folks who like to use these roads and is saying we don't care what you say, that you passed a bill and we are going to ignore a "grant" passed by Congress in 1872 and are proposing to close your roads anyway.

So what do the folks in Arizona do?

Call the sponsors of HB2175, the bill which was passed telling the BLM they can't close these roads and ask these Congress folks what they are going to do about it. Make them stand up for you again. I would assume these politicians are going to be pretty upset the BLM is ignoring their laws they pass in this great state.

Here are the sponsors of HB2175 (the good guys who passed the bill on your behalf), call them today:

Rep Mark Finchem District 11
(602) 926-3122

Rep Bob Thorpe District 6
(602) 926-5219

Rep Brenda Barton District 6
(602) 926-4129

Senator Sonny Borelli District 5
(602) 926-5051

Rep Regina Cobb District 5
(602) 926-3126

Rep Vince Leach District 11
(602) 926-3106

Senator Steve Smith District 11
(602) 926-5685

Also as a part of our research, Jere found this statement put out by the Arizona Attorney General in which he reasserts these roads will remain open. It's a great read and goes further than any other state we have ever seen in protecting your public lands and road access. Man do we love this state.

https://www.azag.gov/sgo-op…/revised-statute-2477-rights-way

So here it is folks. Arizona passed a law saying the roads must be kept open, BLM is thumbing their nose at you and it is now up to you to call these politicians and first of all thank them for passing HR2175, and then tell them to make the BLM back off.

There it is.............don't sit there and be silent, CALL.

We will absolutely be calling the Attorney General on your behalf and will be calling each and every one of these politicians, we just ask you do the same.

Image may contain: 3 people, people smiling, people sitting, table and indoor
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple solution, have them show proof they have authority and jurisdiction over natives on native soil, they can not. 

natives seeking to do no harm require no government. Using capital letters keeps you in the corporate world. do all my writing by hand with red ink, forcing them to reply the same way. they leave me alone, when they ask me anything, native. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Jim P. said:

Arizona House Bill 2175 passed in April of 2015 and signed by Arizona's Governor states just that. Gotta love Arizona and these politicians who told the Federal Government if you aren't going to recognize RS2477, we will and will not allow you to close our roads. (link below) 

https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/52leg/1r/bills/hb2175h.pdf

So what does this mean for the trails already closed?  Arizona won't mind if you drive on the roads, but the BLM will?  When you're in the middle of nowhere and you see the brown and white or black and white BLM sign, you've all seen them, that say road closed to motorized traffic, we are OK to drive over this?  I don't think so.  I could probably go my whole life and never see anyone to ticket me for breaking the rules, but I don't think so.  I don't even trust this supposed protection for the AZ law so much that in the remote off chance of an encounter that the very, very few ticketing officers our "Off ROad" stickers pay for, will avoid ticketing one for being on a BLM closed road even though this state of AZ law says its OK. 

You may think that the federal government is "giving the middle finger" to the states, but the federal government has primacy, making it the top court in the land.  As a matter of principle, I can't be WITH the federal government on the anit-sanctuary cities and AGAINST federal government on TMPs.

I will say that Ryan Zinke is the Department of the Interior Secretary and is a former Navy Seal.  I believe he would put an end to these TMPs. These TMPs are just one of many items put into effect by the previous administration that have a lot of inertia, but are not possible to stop.  Saving Health Care is more of a priority, understandably, than keeping a few remote roads open, but I'm sure they'll put an end to these meaningless closures, especially if people like Secretary Zinke find out, but it can not just be a message from Citizen Joe Blow, it will have to a voice of a much larger group that rivals those that are trying to shut these roads down.

For more hope, Brian Steed is in charge of the BLM now.  He was a member of the Utah Senate when they passed RS2477.

With Trump, Zinke, and Steed, we have a unique opportunity to stop this travel management plan craziness.  If we wait a couple of more years, this chance may have gone by.

6 hours ago, wet/dry washer said:

Simple solution, have them show proof they have authority and jurisdiction over natives on native soil, they can not. 

natives seeking to do no harm require no government. Using capital letters keeps you in the corporate world. do all my writing by hand with red ink, forcing them to reply the same way. they leave me alone, when they ask me anything, native

You can't possibly think that this will hold up in court, prevent any fines, etc?  If you never run into an agent, which if you are small time, you never will, this may work, because you will never be challenged, but if you find the "Mother Lode," and decide to go big time, which we  all do, this sort of thinking will get you shut down big time and quickly.

Edited by chrisski
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2011 was the last time got invited to court, gave short speech to the judge before the bar. he threw the paper's at the clerk and left the court room. me, went out to clerk's and was told, case disappeared. only say three words, with a smile, "native on native soil"😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, wet/dry washer said:

2011 was the last time got invited to court, gave short speech to the judge before the bar. he threw the paper's at the clerk and left the court room. me, went out to clerk's and was told, case disappeared. only say three words, with a smile, "native on native soil"😀

That's 4 words not 3, .....but I have seen you post this numerous times but you have never expanded on it so we can understand why it will work, so can you explain in depth to us slower people exactly why this stops them in their tracks so to speak and keeps one out of trouble but when someone else who may say something different will be in a world of trouble, I just having trouble understanding why this will work and what will happen if you run into a L.E.O. that also doesn't understand and have the knowledge of why he should walk away when you smile and say those 4 words?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

used native twice, so didn't count it, sorry. in tucson now, meeting got changed to tomorrow. truth is hidden in plain sight.

have original copy, 1828 noah webster dictionary, later dictionaries are all corrupted.

(1780-1820) around 280-300 laws-80,000 words. today around 100 million laws-280,000 words. severe mental illness and stupidity by governments.

capital punishment - death sentence - beheading. using capital letters keeps one in the federal corporate world. word, name - thing. birth-death certificate list natives as decedent's - deceased, not from mother earth, but in the artificial or fictitious corporate world.

verona treaty history, attorneys as foreign agents as privateer's free to plunder natives wealth.

phone will not let me use red ink, also keeps changing small letters to caps, so have to back click, takes longer. red is life, black is Roman death cult. thanks for your patience.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't work in this part of AZ though Bob, didn't Wickenburg take your vehicle as a result of you telling them you needed no drivers license, registration, or insurance? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They did, but me made a mistake on the plate. no name native coach. name means thing, governments have con-cept that they own and con-trol all things. court's can only rule over artificial or fictitious things, people, person, I, he, she, man, woman etc. me native male or female they have no authority or jurisdiction. new plate reads- red lake nation, native, 836186003, no expire, red letters on white, centered.

red lake nation never signed a treaty, therefore they Iran and north Korea are the only nations not controlled by the Vatican. Verona treaty history. Put on over 9,000 miles since March, carry copies, official change of address form, president-native ryder estate, chev Tahoe serial number as estate possession. Your birth certificate is proof for insurance, but the governments hides that from us.

  • Hmmmmmm 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, wet/dry washer said:

They did, but me made a mistake on the plate. no name native coach. name means thing, governments have con-cept that they own and con-trol all things. court's can only rule over artificial or fictitious things, people, person, I, he, she, man, woman etc. me native male or female they have no authority or jurisdiction. new plate reads- red lake nation, native, 836186003, no expire, red letters on white, centered.

red lake nation never signed a treaty, therefore they Iran and north Korea are the only nations not controlled by the Vatican. Verona treaty history. Put on over 9,000 miles since March, carry copies, official change of address form, president-native ryder estate, chev Tahoe serial number as estate possession. Your birth certificate is proof for insurance, but the governments hides that from us.

I don't want to veer too far off topic, but the reason our states have chosen to enact mandatory insurance laws is because there are a few people out there lacking the courtesy to provide a way to repair damages they might cause to others.  Auto accidents are the most common means -- either through negligence or inattention -- by which one person might cause major bodily harm to another in our society.  Forty or fifty bucks a month is a small price to pay to ensure that if you put someone in a wheelchair for life, they at least have their medical expenses paid -- otherwise, you're expecting society to pick up the tab for your mistakes, unless you happen to be wealthy enough to pay the bills out of pocket.  Even if a person doesn't live under a religious obligation to be responsible for harm done to others, common courtesy should still dictate that a person shouldn't undertake activities potentially harmful to others without at least trying to maintain some method of making the injured party whole.  If everyone was responsible to begin with, we'd need no insurance requirements.  I've never understood the reticence some people feel regarding being responsible.  Some laws are meant to protect us -- and those around us --  from our own selfishness. 

Back on topic, I certainly hope Chrisski is correct, and that recent federal appointees will turn the bureaucracies around and stop the TMPs and other encroachments on our right to use and enjoy the land.  It takes a lot of push to overcome inertia and reverse course for any of the alphabet soup gang.

  • Like 2
  • well done 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×