Richard Watts: BLM should have less-restrictive plan


BLM has drafted four plans for this area.

BLM says alternative A is the "no action alternative." This, apparently, leaves things as they are. Alternatives C and D restrict land use far more than alternative A does. Alternative B has a very large number of provisions stating that "BLM may apply COA, or conditions of approval, on a case-by-case basis based on site-specific analysis prior to authorization." In my opinion, this would give BLM enormous arbitrary power to restrict land usage.


Alternative A is also restrictive. However, in my opinion, the only way we can keep even our present level of freedom to use BLM land is to request that BLM adopt alternative A, or to request that BLM draft a less restrictive plan than Alternative A.

It is important to make it clear that we want usage of the Little Snake River area to be less restricted, not more restricted. If it is really public land, you should not have to ask for permission to use it.

The deadline for comments is Wednesday, May 16. Email and postal addresses for comments are posted on the Web site (on the page accessed by clicking on Comment on the Draft RMP/EIS).

Richard Watts


Commenting has been disabled for this item.