Tweet
Originally posted by FJ Crawlin'
View Post
I think before we go spouting off and dismissing the facts of what BRC does and doesn't do, we may want to read the following response I received from Del Albright:
Your primary questions were:
1) What is the stand of BRC at the TDS Safari?
Answer: BRC is are standing firm with our partners against what CBD is trying to do.
2) Are you guys getting dirty in the fight?
Answer: As you probably know, CORVA's recent event was challenged by CBD. CORVA has an ongoing
relationship with the Eco-Logic law firm and it would be unprofessional for BRC to try to step in. In addition our attorneys often consult with each other on issues.
Also, it is our understanding that TDS moved their event, so there is no need for "getting dirty" on that. But yes, the whole Truckhaven issue is one we are all watching closely.
Right now, BRC is keeping track of the lawsuit as well as preparing to participate in the subsequent planning by the CA Parks. It will be a multi-year struggle and if more land trades occur, the situation will change.
TDS has helped BRC a lot. When they call for help, BRC will be there.
Now for more details.
BlueRibbon (BRC) is a key component in the southern CA battles. TDS is just one of those areas where we continue to help. In particular, the BRC Ambassador, Del Albright, is about the most active 4wd land use advocate anywhere. He is fully funded and supported by BRC alone. He attends TDS every year and is a key player in every access issue in CA -- to include helping clubs get involved; teaching leadership; hosting the largest land use and access web site in the world; facilitating grant funding for clubs and trails; serving as Trail Boss for Friends of the Rubicon for the last seven years and leading the efforts to save the Rubicon; and assisting with any and every issue in CA. He also serves as State Environmental Affairs Coordinator for CA4WDC.
The anti-access forces (within and beyond the agencies) are more numerous, have significantly greater resources, and,
in candor, have a much easier argument under much of the applicable law. The point is "our" side must coordinate efforts, pick battles carefully, and get maximum "bang for the buck" from limited resources. BRC focuses on issues nationwide, with emphasis on those areas where we are most needed and where local forces are too limited to be effective. But without this nation-wide focus, locals battles would be lost immediately.
I think it is appropriate to note that BRC spearheaded the only successful "OHV" intervention in the original CDCA suit, and BRC legal folks represented those parties along with Dennis Porter of Cal4. We were painfully aware of the BLM's intent to settle the case, and our clients made the difficult decision to participate in the unavoidable settlement negotiations in order to defend OHV recreation and exert as much influence on any final agreement.
We can never know how the agreement(s) would have looked without BRC's involvement, but it is plausible to suggest that significantly greater recreation opportunities would have been restricted, such as at the Imperial Sand Dunes Recreation Area where plaintiffs CBD et al effectively wanted to close the entire interior portion of the dunes. Our involvement in the settlement negotiations further addressed Surprise Canyon, and resulted in the inclusion of language clarifying that the settlement agreement could not be the basis for BLM's restriction of access to private property. I note that FOPV/Mr. Lollich's counsel reference this language in the complaint; ie BRC and its co-parties helped preserve the ability to bring the fight now being waged in the DC Court.
Cal4 leads the charge in many CA issues. Cal4 has always been BRC's main partner in the CDCA case, and has
"taken the lead" and hired BRC's legal firm directly in the latest WEMO-NECO suit.
Each group has a niche in our fight for access. The important thing to consider is that each group must consider its overall mission and vision, and fight where it fits. More importantly, "fighting smart-fighting together" is where we can make hay. That is what BRC does and what many groups do. We all can't do it all, all the time.
While we fully understand the need to prioritize fighting close to home; but home is influenced more by national politics than local efforts many times. BRC has taken significant steps to help ALL fights around the country, realizing that CA has many precedent-setting situations. BRC has joined in SoCal issues in the past, and continues to join in the battle when the criteria of our own Legal Action Review Committee are met, ie sufficient interest/$, decent case, requested to do so, etc.
Further, we have taken some steps in our legal office to be even more responsive to any CA inquiries, eg hiring a CA-licensed attorney to be part of our team, and having both Del Albright and Don Amador tuned into CA issues daily.
##
Again, thank you for bringing this to our attention so you can help us spread the word about all this.
Thanks, Del
Also, I, like many of you wheel outside of California in places such as Moab, Ut. My bang for the buck with BRC is money well spent.
Mark
Your primary questions were:
1) What is the stand of BRC at the TDS Safari?
Answer: BRC is are standing firm with our partners against what CBD is trying to do.
2) Are you guys getting dirty in the fight?
Answer: As you probably know, CORVA's recent event was challenged by CBD. CORVA has an ongoing
relationship with the Eco-Logic law firm and it would be unprofessional for BRC to try to step in. In addition our attorneys often consult with each other on issues.
Also, it is our understanding that TDS moved their event, so there is no need for "getting dirty" on that. But yes, the whole Truckhaven issue is one we are all watching closely.
Right now, BRC is keeping track of the lawsuit as well as preparing to participate in the subsequent planning by the CA Parks. It will be a multi-year struggle and if more land trades occur, the situation will change.
TDS has helped BRC a lot. When they call for help, BRC will be there.
Now for more details.
BlueRibbon (BRC) is a key component in the southern CA battles. TDS is just one of those areas where we continue to help. In particular, the BRC Ambassador, Del Albright, is about the most active 4wd land use advocate anywhere. He is fully funded and supported by BRC alone. He attends TDS every year and is a key player in every access issue in CA -- to include helping clubs get involved; teaching leadership; hosting the largest land use and access web site in the world; facilitating grant funding for clubs and trails; serving as Trail Boss for Friends of the Rubicon for the last seven years and leading the efforts to save the Rubicon; and assisting with any and every issue in CA. He also serves as State Environmental Affairs Coordinator for CA4WDC.
The anti-access forces (within and beyond the agencies) are more numerous, have significantly greater resources, and,
in candor, have a much easier argument under much of the applicable law. The point is "our" side must coordinate efforts, pick battles carefully, and get maximum "bang for the buck" from limited resources. BRC focuses on issues nationwide, with emphasis on those areas where we are most needed and where local forces are too limited to be effective. But without this nation-wide focus, locals battles would be lost immediately.
I think it is appropriate to note that BRC spearheaded the only successful "OHV" intervention in the original CDCA suit, and BRC legal folks represented those parties along with Dennis Porter of Cal4. We were painfully aware of the BLM's intent to settle the case, and our clients made the difficult decision to participate in the unavoidable settlement negotiations in order to defend OHV recreation and exert as much influence on any final agreement.
We can never know how the agreement(s) would have looked without BRC's involvement, but it is plausible to suggest that significantly greater recreation opportunities would have been restricted, such as at the Imperial Sand Dunes Recreation Area where plaintiffs CBD et al effectively wanted to close the entire interior portion of the dunes. Our involvement in the settlement negotiations further addressed Surprise Canyon, and resulted in the inclusion of language clarifying that the settlement agreement could not be the basis for BLM's restriction of access to private property. I note that FOPV/Mr. Lollich's counsel reference this language in the complaint; ie BRC and its co-parties helped preserve the ability to bring the fight now being waged in the DC Court.
Cal4 leads the charge in many CA issues. Cal4 has always been BRC's main partner in the CDCA case, and has
"taken the lead" and hired BRC's legal firm directly in the latest WEMO-NECO suit.
Each group has a niche in our fight for access. The important thing to consider is that each group must consider its overall mission and vision, and fight where it fits. More importantly, "fighting smart-fighting together" is where we can make hay. That is what BRC does and what many groups do. We all can't do it all, all the time.
While we fully understand the need to prioritize fighting close to home; but home is influenced more by national politics than local efforts many times. BRC has taken significant steps to help ALL fights around the country, realizing that CA has many precedent-setting situations. BRC has joined in SoCal issues in the past, and continues to join in the battle when the criteria of our own Legal Action Review Committee are met, ie sufficient interest/$, decent case, requested to do so, etc.
Further, we have taken some steps in our legal office to be even more responsive to any CA inquiries, eg hiring a CA-licensed attorney to be part of our team, and having both Del Albright and Don Amador tuned into CA issues daily.
##
Again, thank you for bringing this to our attention so you can help us spread the word about all this.
Thanks, Del
Also, I, like many of you wheel outside of California in places such as Moab, Ut. My bang for the buck with BRC is money well spent.
Mark
the whole del in third person seemed strange.interesting
pm me the email you sent to him which ilicited this response. i am interested in seeing it.
Comment