Author Topic: What does this mean for Nevada?  (Read 1842 times)

Offline Todd Ockert

  • ghost
  • Posts: 1,797
    • Access Army
What does this mean for Nevada?
« on: January 18, 2007, 11:03:13 pm »
Found this on the web page while doing some research for other work.

White Pine County Lands Bill Passes
Legislation designates 557,000 acres of wilderness

RENO (December 10, 2006) – Early Saturday morning Congress passed the White Pine County public lands bill as part of year-end omnibus legislation.  Key conservation measures in the legislation include the designation of 557,000 acres of wilderness on lands managed by the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management in Nevada.  The Nevada Wilderness Coalition hailed these protections, and issued the following statement:

“We want to thank Senator Reid, Senator Ensign and their staff for their leadership and hard work that led to the passage of this important piece of legislation,” said John Wallin of the Nevada Wilderness project.

“The White Pine County public lands bill protects a number of unique places and important wildlife habitat,” added Shaaron Netherton, Executive Director of Friends of Nevada Wilderness. 

Netherton added, “Although the legislation did not address everything we had hoped for, overall we feel that this complex legislation represents a fair compromise that brings significant conservation gains to Nevada.”

Here is a link to the PDF file of lands added to the wilderness areas.

The way I read this, the Nevada wheelers will loose more lands to wilderness, and have gates installed.

Todd Ockert
UFWDA Member #14102
Member of Cal4Wheel, Hanford Trail Busters, Rubicon 4WDA


  • Guest
Re: What does this mean for Nevada?
« Reply #1 on: January 18, 2007, 11:37:27 pm »

I will not speak to specifics of the bill as I don't have that information available.

However, I will speak in general terms of what is happening in Nevada.

On the surface, it appears as much is being lost with this Nevada bill.  However, in reality, they are conceeding points that wold be lost anyway.

In reality, there is a loss of OHV leadership in Nevada since the Nevada United Four Wheel Drive Association elected to close their book on operations.

It is a sad loss that will be felt in coming years.

During the past few years. NUFWA has been heavily involved in working to craft lands bills that provided a balance.  Some lands were relegated to wilderness while wilderness study areas were released. 

Concidering that Nevada is more than 80% federal control, achieving WSA release is a good thing.  The unfortunate thing is most of the release has occured in Clark County - Las Vegas.

Yes, there are challenges in Nevada.  Howver, there does remain a contingent that is willing to carry on the fight for access to public lands.

If i were to possess the power to gaze into a crystal ball and determine if this lands bill were good or bad, I would find a coudy vision.

On the surface, there is loss of access.  However, much of that access is (or would habe been) lost.  This bill does contain some release language where other previously off limits areas are not open to access.

Is that good or bad??  Don't know.

I do support the concept of wilderness as defined in the Wilderness Act.  I am not comfortable with the loss of lands to wilderness that do not meet the criteria defined in the Act. 

We, as recreationist, are faced with the follwoing:  wilderness, water, wildlife, and air.

If we come down on the wrong side of those issues, we loose in the court of public opinion.

That does pose some challenges as to how we continue to promote recreation opportunities and provide for the mandated resource protection issue.

We can use the actions of today to develop our leaders of tomorrow.

When that is extrapolated across the nation, there are a host of issues that we need to work towards resolution within a framework that acknowledges OHV recreation and the increasing demand for OHV opportunities.

The challenges are there awaiting a solution.

Interested parties should inquire......

Offline Todd Ockert

  • ghost
  • Posts: 1,797
    • Access Army
Re: What does this mean for Nevada?
« Reply #2 on: January 19, 2007, 12:01:10 am »

Thanks for your explanation.  I did know that Nevada had a lot of federal lands.  I do not like to see lands sent off to the greenies for a couple of reasons. 
One is that they stand on their soup box and say they are winning the fight to keep us off the lands.
I do agree that we have to sometimes conceed some land to win access to others. 
We do have to pick and choose our battles better then the greenies. 

It is sad to see the Nevada state association close their doors.  They will have a long hard fight to keep the lands open that they do have open. 
Not too long ago one of my dads favorite areas was closed.  That was Arrow Canyon.  That bill was passed in 2002. 

Two is they will use this addition as a way to try and gain more money from their supporters.

In the club newsletter I write each month, I list some business's that support OHV access, and those provide funds to the anti-access folks.  This has been a hit with my club.  It has also been a shocker to some about who is funding what.

Thanks again John.

Todd Ockert
UFWDA Member #14102
Member of Cal4Wheel, Hanford Trail Busters, Rubicon 4WDA


  • Guest
Re: What does this mean for Nevada?
« Reply #3 on: January 19, 2007, 12:39:15 am »
One company that is in the fold of PRO-ACCESS is BF Goodrich Tires.

UFWDA and Tread Lightly! are entering the second year of a partnership to recognize Top Trails throughout the nation.

The trail nominations for 2007 are in and the trails are selected.

An official announcement will be out within 2-3 weeks.

I have been assisting BFG on this effort and look forward to the recognition events for this years trail selections.

I think you will be please as to the trail sselected and the commitment by BFG to recognize club participation in stewardship activities.

While there are a number of anti-access businesses, there are some pro-access businesses that deserve recognition.